Berachos on 6b states the reward for various Mitzvot with seemingly little connection.  The first three however could be tied in with the gatherings of 2, 3, and 10.  And indeed the Gemara eluded to this earlier.  It said the Mishnah began with the evening and then talked about morning, and while it was talking about morning it began the next Mishnah with morning, and then went into evening.  Now the Gemara began with 2, 3, 10 (because this is the beginning or evening, going into the end or morning.  Additionally, the morning prayers only begin when ten arrive.)  And now it goes in the reverse order, 10, 3, 2.  And what lies at 1?  A deep secret regarding the power of Torah.

’The reward from a lecture is running to hear it (because when ten gather, Hashem is there from the start and waiting, as though He ran to the shul.)’

‘The reward from a kellala is in getting squished (because when the judges sit in judgement, the pressure is heavy for those in attendance.)’

‘The reward from learning Halacha is the effort to understand it, (corresponding to a group of two, because as it is said, with two, it will be inscribed in the book of remembrance, i.e. because they understand it.)’

All three refer to Halacha, likely to imply that Halacha is the hardest form of study, to show we are not talking about the reward for scholars, but for average people.

But what do these mean, you get rewarded for these things, why does it need to say it?  With groups of two, three, and ten, the Shechina rests upon them because of their Torah, from where do we know the Shechina rests upon these groups, even if one of the members does not understand it?  From here, it is not the Torah they learn, rather it is the Torah they perform.

This is a nice Chidush, but what of the remaining three verses?

‘The reward from a fast is charity (Rashi comments that one who intends to fast, would give food to the poor prior to the fasting.  Perhaps Rashi is saying deeper, that just like someone who gives bread with salt to the poor man, a fast gives the poor men the means to sustain themselves, i.e. those lacking in Torah.  Furthermore, when one studies alone, and does not eat, it is like he eats his bread with salt.)

The last two phrases appear to talk about sadness and joy.  But how could sadness be a reward?  Furthermore, why are sadness and joy grouped together right after fasting?  Perhaps, it is to say that when one engages in Teshuva, he will feel the sadness of his wailing, but ultimately will come to feel the joy and closeness of his Creator as though they were wed, and ultimately will be rewarded with the secrets of the words of Torah, i.e. the manipulation of letters.

‘The reward from delivering a eulogy is wailing (And who died?  The fast of the poor man serves as an atonement akin to death.)’

’The reward from attending a wedding is the words (What happens after you complete atonement?  You will be wed to Him with a binding contract, of which you will be able to comprehend.)’

An idea regarding a clay oven:  I heard someone say in minyan, a chidush from Kabbalah, that Torah breaks a person to pieces.  There is a famous argument in the Gemara about the extent one must break a clay oven in order for it to become Tahor.  This is also connected with the previous idea I mentioned above.  A person who sits and learns Torah is like he is fasting, and providing himself bread with salt.  And what does the fasting accomplish?  It brings him to wail, and it brings him to a covenant.  What is the wail?  That is the breaking to pieces.  

Why is one who sits and learns Torah like one who is fasting?  Because we can derive direct connections to the other three phrases, the only group left where the Shechina rests is a group of one.  Therefore, one who learns Torah, is like one who is fasting.

What does this mean?  To become pure, one needs only cleanse himself of half his sins?  Perhaps, one need only recite the eulogy, but need not wail.  In other words, a person can become completely Tahor, so long as they repent, even if they lack conviction.  

The other side says no, that if one lacks conviction they will ultimately slip back into depravity, and so while he is Tahor for the moment, he is not completely Tahor.  i.e. similar to the case of a Sorer Umorer, a wayward son.

Over there, it should be viewed not as a son, but as the mindset one developed from eloping with the Yetzer Harah.  This is because of its proximity to the Pasuk regarding a beloved wife, and a hated wife (who was betrothed through warfare.)  

A Sorer Umorer, we learn, should be put to death before he kills someone, because his actions will inevitably lead to his standing at the side of the road, and taking lives.  So too, when one learns Torah (equivalent to breaking himself, as with a fast), and lacks the will to kill the wayward son (his clouded mindset that will ultimately lead back to sin), he will ultimately stand at the side of the road and kill (return to sin, killing his state of Tahorah), and so we must put him to death (Heaven will send additional punishment to lead to the forced removal of his clouded mind through suffering, and he had never entered a state of Tahorah.)  

The other opinion is thus, he need only learn Torah, and become Tahor.  I.e. Even without conviction, and so he is regarded as pure while learning Torah.  

Looking deeper, one might say that with the latter opinion, that one need only rebuke the wayward son, and need not kill him, how could you say such a thing, it seems to go against the Torah!?  

Because, therein lies a secret of Kabbalah, the way in which the Mashiach will cleanse the nation debased in the 50th gate of Darkness.  

Instead of killing the wayward son, he will take the evil and convert it into good directly, because they are the same.  There is a way to somehow convert an evil essence into that of a good essence, and so bypass the killing of the wayward son (the forced removal of his tainted mind by the hand of Heaven), by turning him into a good son.  

Still, both are correct.  The difference is also regarding practical Halakha, right now you must enter the state of repentance with the conviction to change.  But in the future, the Mashiach will show a way to take the Tumah clouding the minds of the generation, and convert it into Tahorah, while the people still lack the conviction to change.  

In other words, nowadays, a person who learns Torah is like one who breaks himself to pieces with a fast, but is only pure during this time if he went into learning with thoughts of atonement.  In the future, he would not need to go into learning Torah with thoughts of atonement in order to be Tahor, because using some unknown method, his tainted mind would become a clean mind, and then when learning Torah he would be Tahor.  How then could this be called breaking half of the vessel?  Because the method involved to convert the Tumah into Tahorah, must be one the person would not notice.