(Fol. 67, b) We are taught that R. Akiba said: "Why did the Scripture say if the thief slaughtered and sold the animal that he must pay four and five fold? Because the sin was deeply rooted in him." Raba said: "Because he repeated his sin [slaughtered after he had stolen]."
(Fol. 69) We are taught in a Mishna: A vineyard in the fourth year of its planting [the fruit of which must be redeemed before using] would be marked with clods [of earth]. This means just as from the earth one may derive benefit after he has tilled it, so also may one derive benefit from the fruit of a vineyard in the fourth year, after redeeming its fruit. In the third year of its planting, however, [in which the fruit must be destroyed] it would be marked with fragments of broken clay vessels, for a sign that just as from these fragments no benefit can be had, so also none must he had from the fruit. Graves were marked with limestone [to warn passersby not to step on them lest they become unclean], which is white, for a sign that therein were interred [human bones], which are also white; and the limestone was dissolved and spread upon the graves, to be more visible.
(Fol. 79 b) The disciples questioned R. Jochiman b. Zakkai: "Why did the Scripture treat more rigorously with the thief than with the robber?" To which he replied: "Because the robber put the honor of his Creator at least on the same level with that of His servant, while the thief did not do so, but, on the contrary, considered the eye and ear of Heaven as if it would not see and hear; as it is said (Is. 29, 15) Woe unto them that seek deep to hide their counsel from the Lord, and their works are in the dark, and they say, 'Who seeth us? etc;' and it is also written (Ps. 94, 7) And they say, 'The Lord will not see; neither will the God of Jacob give heed;' and it is also written (Ezek. 9, 9) For they say, 'The Lord hath forsaken the land, and the Lord seeth not.' " We are taught that R. Maier said: "The following parable was related in the name of R. Gamaliel: 'To what is the above equal? To two persons who lived in one and the same town. One made a feast and invited all the inhabitants of the town, but not the princes; the other one made a feast and invited neither the inhabitants nor the princes. Whose punishment ought to be severer? Surely that of the first one.'" Said R. Maier: "Come and see the greatness of labor: In case of stealing an ox which he prevented from laboring, the thief pays five; in case of a sheep which does not perform any work, he pays only four." R. Jochanan b. Zakkai said: "Come and see how great is human dignity! For an ox which walks on his feet, he pays five; but for a sheep, for which he (the thief) had to humiliate himself by carrying it on his shoulders, he pays only four."
(Fol. 82, b) Our Rabbis were taught: During the civil war of the Maccabees, Hurkanoth was within and Aristobulos was without the city wall, and every day those within lowered dinars in a basket, from the top of the wall to those outside, in return for which the latter sent them up cattle for the daily sacrifices. Among the outsiders was an old man who was learned in Greek science, and he said to them: "So long as your enemies continue to perform the holy service [of the sacrifices] you will not subdue them." On the next day, when the basket of dinars was lowered, they sent them up a swine. When the swine reached the centre of the wall he fastened his feet in the wall, and Palestine trembled for a distance of four hundred square parsas. At that time it was declared that cursed be he who raised swine and cursed be he who taught his son Greek science. Concerning this time we are taught that the omar was brought from the gardens of Zriphin and the two loaves from the valley of Ein Socher. (Fol. 83) But is then the study of Greek science prohibited — are we not taught in the following Baraitha that Rabbi said: "In Palestine there is no use for the Syriac language, which is not clear, when there are the Hebrew language and the Greek language;" and R. Jose said: "In Babylon there is no use for the Aramean language, for there are the Hebrew language and the Persian language?" [Hence the Greek language is permitted] . I will tell thee: The Greek language is one thing and Greek science is another. But is, then, the study of Greek science prohibited? Has not R. Juda said in the name of Samuel, who quoted R. Simon b. Gamaliel: "Concerning the passage (Lam. 3, 51) My eye affected my soul because of all the daughters of my city. There were a thousand young men in my father's house, five hundred of whom studied Scripture and five hundred Greek science, and of all of them only two remained: I myself here and my nephew in Assia." [Hence even Greek science was permitted]? R. Gamaliel's house was an exception, because of their association with the government, as we are taught in a Baraitha: He who cuts his hair in Roman fashion, imitates the ways of the Amorites, [which are prohibited. Lev. 18, 3]. Abtulmus b. Reuben, however, was allowed to wear his hair in Roman fashion, because he associated with the government people. The house of R. Gamaliel was also permitted to study Greek science for the same reason."
Our Rabbis were taught: No one should raise a dog unless he is kept on a chain. However, in a town adjoining the frontier, one is permitted to raise it. In the latter instance, he should keep it on a chain in the daytime and without a chain only in the nighttime.