Avot160

1:
Rabbi Neĥunya ben-Hakanah was a contemporary of Rabban Yoĥanan ben-Zakkai. That is to say that the period of his activity spanned the time before and the time after the destruction of the Bet Mikdash in the year 70 CE. It seems that he was a very respected figure in his time and in our sources quite a few halakhot are quoted in his name. In the Gemara [Shevu'ot 26a] we find the rather amazing claim that in the area of exposition apparently he managed to explicate the whole Torah using only the hermeneutic rule of kelal u-ferat (see Avot 055). His most famous student was Rabbi Yishma'el ben-Elisha, the great protagonist in midrash ha-Torah of Rabbi Akiva. (The student managed to expand the teacher's one rule of explication to thirteen!)

2:
Rabbi Neĥunya ben-Hakanah was elevated by the medieval kabbalists into one of the great heroes of Jewish mysticism. There is no mention in the classical sources (Mishnah, Tosefta, Talmuds) of any such inclination.

3:
It is not so easy to render our present mishnah into another language because the Hebrew terms are rather idiomatic. For example, the Hebrew term which I have here rendered as 'government' could also mean 'royalty' or ’empire'. And the term which I have rendered as 'making a living' elsewhere also bears the connotation of politeness. But I believe that the above translation reflects the intentions of Rabbi Neĥunya ben-Hakanah.

4:
I do not think that he was so naive as to think that the reward for immersing oneself wholeheartedly in the study of Torah and obedience to its commands is somehow being miraculously relieved of duties to the secular government and the need to earn a living: after all, he and his students must have known from practical experience that this is not the case. One way of understanding his teaching is that of an ideal: in the perfect Jewish society all those who devote themselves totally to Torah study and observance should be relieved of mundane cares (and be supported by the community at large). Somehow I don't think this was his intention because apparently he was well off financially.

5:
I think that his intention was to teach that when one becomes wholeheartedly engaged in the study of Torah and Torah observance one enters a different realm, a realm where God is King and supreme benefactor. When one reaches such heights of devotion the "slings and arrows of outrageous fortune" somehow seem unimportant, irrelevant.

6:
In similar vein, well-known is the innovative play on words that the sages made with a phrase in Exodus 32:16:

The Hebrew word for 'incised' can, with a change of vocalization. mean 'liberty'. This prompted the sages [Exodus Rabbah 41:7] to creative invention:

7:
I think that it is most pertinent that in his commentary on our present mishnah Rambam seeks to limit the implications of 'rejecting the yoke of Torah'. This does not necessarily imply non-obedience to the commands of the Torah (non-obedience being semantically different from disobedience). Rambam says that 'rejection' here refers to the negation of the essential validity of Torah:

In Avot 156 we mentioned the use of a didactic midrash within the mishnah. Ed Frankel writes:

I am intrigued by the use of a didactic midrash here. There are midrashim throughout Mishnah, but the use of midrash is a relative rarity compared to the amount of mishnayot stated without attributing thoughts to any source. I wonder, therefore, why here? Had there not been a biblical source for the statements, they would still have offered the same teaching. Is the purpose of the midrash here to try to suggest that this is not an individual's view, but reflects a standard demanded of all Israel by the Tanach?

I respond:

I think that in this kind of homily the sages were always anxious to attach their teachings to a biblical text. One reason certainly might be the one suggested by Ed above. Another might be that by associating the homily with a biblical verse it may cause it to be better remembered and more widely recognised.