Avot250

9:
Throughout Jewish history great store has been set by the honour that accrues to those whom Torah law and precedent has singled out for great honour by virtue of the position that they hold. In our present mishnah the designation 'crown' is, of course, a figure of speech and refers to the honour that these entities confer in rabbinic tradition.

10:
The earliest of these honours is the 'crown of priesthood'. According to the Written Torah, priesthood in Israel was invested in Moses' brother, Aaron, and in his male descendents in perpetuity. In the Torah [Exodus 28:1] Moses is instructed as follows:

And at the very end of the biblical period great honour still accrues to the priesthood. The last of the prophets [Malachi 2:4-7] says of Levi, the progenitor of all priests:

And this encomium was uttered at a time when venality had already entered into the priesthood, a venality against which this prophet railed with all his might.

11:
And therein lies the worm nestling in the rose. While it is a great honour to be a priest in Israel because it was an hereditary office it was quite possible that unworthy people would wear the crown of priesthood. The earliest example of such unworthiness is what happened at the Shrine at Shiloh, where the young Samuel was apprenticed to Eli, the High Priest. In the bible [1 Samuel 2:12-17] we read of Ĥofni and Pinĥas, Eli's sons and heirs:

To be continued.

In Avot 248 we quoted the statement of Rabbi Shim'on ben-Yoĥai that every good thing that the Romans gave to Judea was for selfish and ulterior motives.

Jacob Chinitz writes:

The criticism of Roman civilization by Shimon Bar Yochai, in that he claimed they did it for selfish and materialistic reasons, stands in contradiction to the basis of modern capitalism. It is precisely the selfish and profit motive that is considered to be the driving force, good and dependable, behind progress, industry, prosperity. Is it far fetched to compare this attitude to the statement by Chazal that Mitokh Shelo Lishma Ba Lishma, that activity not ideally motivated can lead to salutary benefits for society. Also the idea of the benefits of scholarly rivalry: Kinat Sofrim Tarbeh Chokhmah, would indicate that the morality of the Rabbis stands on two levels: the ideal, and the real. The real is not negated because it is not ideal. It may even lead to the advancement of the ideal. It can also be the implied meaning of the dictum that we must serve God with our two natures: Bishnei Yitzrekha. If we had to rely on the Yetzer Tov alone we would lose the benefits that flow from the instigation of the Yetzer Hara. In fact, the story in the Agadah has it that when they abolished the Yetzer Harah, social activity stopped and life could not continue.

I respond:

While there is much to what Jacob has written I cannot accept his basic thesis with regards to Rabbi Shim'on ben-Yoĥai. Jacob bases his idea on the rabbinic dictum mitokh shelo lishmah ba lishma. But this dictum is not a general dictum but a specific one: it is better that a person observe a mitzvah even for an unworthy reason, because the observance itself may ultimately lead the person to altruistic observance. Rabbi Shim'on ben-Yoĥai was not referring to a Jew and he was not referring to observance of a mitzvah: he was talking about non-Jews who were imposing their civilization on Jews – as does any colonial power – and in his eyes the moral detriment far outweighed any material benefits that Roman civilization brought to Judea.