(Fol. 63a) Rabina, while sitting before R. Ashi observed a man tying an ass to a tree on the Sabbath. Rabina admonished the man but the latter paid no attention to him, whereupon Rabina said: "Thou art under ban for this." Rabina then said to R. Ashi: "Can this action of mine be regarded as disgraceful?" [Because I have done it in the presence of you, my teacher.] R. Ashi answered: "There us no wisdom nor understanding nor counsel against the Lord (Pr. 21, 30), i.e., whenever the desecration of the name of the Lord is threatened, no regard must be paid to a teacher." Raba said: "In the presence of his teacher, it is prohibited [for a disciple to decide a legal question] and it involves capital punishment; but in the absence of his teacher [if a disciple does so] it is, of course, prohibited but no capital punishment is involved." And in the absence of his teacher, you say, it does not involve capital punishment. Behold! It is taught that R. Elazar says: "The sons of Aaron did not die for any other sin than that they decided questions of law in the presence of their teacher, Moses. What verse did they interpret? [without asking Moses their teacher:] And the sons of Aaron the priest, shall put fire upon the latter (Lev. 1, 7). Thus they said to themselves: 'Although fire is to descend from heaven [upon the altar], it is nevertheless, a virtuous act to bring common fire.'" There was a disciple of R. Elazar. who decided legal questions in the presence of the latter. Whereupon R. Elazar said unto Ema Salmon, his wife: "I wonder if this disciple will live through this year." And the disciple died within that year. So his wife said to R. Elazar: "Art thou a prophet?" "Neither a prophet nor the son of a prophet," was his answer, "but I have a tradition that whoever decides a legal question in the presence of his teacher is guilty of capital punishment." And Rabba b. Chana said that this disciple was Juda b. Guriah and he was three miles away from his teacher, R. Elazar. [Hence it shows that even in the absence of his teacher, deciding legal questions involves capital punishment.'] It was in his teacher's presence. But R. Jachanan said he was three miles away from his teacher! And according to your own opinion [is there not an objection to be raised]? Wherefore was it necessary to state the disciple's name and his father's name? We must say (that these names are given) that we should not construe the above story as a mere parable. [Therefore it stated all the facts and it was indeed decided in the presence of R. Elazar.] R. Chiya b. Abba, in the name of R. Jochanan, said: "Whoever decides a legal question in the presence of his teacher, deserves to be bitten by a serpent, for it is said (Job 32, 6.) And Elihu, the son of Barachel, the Buzite, commenced, and said: 'Young am I in days, and ye are very old; therefore I hesitated and feared to show you what I Icnoiv.' It is written here vachalei (I feared). and it is written there (Deu. 32. 24.) With the power of serpents (Zochalei) that crawl in the dust." R. Zera said in the name of R. Chanina: "He is to be called sinner, as it is said (Ps. 119, 11.) In my heart have I treasured up thy saying, in order that I may not sin against thee." R. Humnuna raised the following contradictory point: "It is written (Ib.) In my heart, have I treasured up thy saying, and it is written (Ib. 40, 10.) I announce Thy righteousness in the great assembly"; and he himself explained it: "The former was said when Ira, the Yairite [his teacher], was living, [therefore David did not teach others]; and the latter refers to the time when Ira, the Yairite, was dead." R. Abba b. Zabda said: "He who sends his [priestly] gifts unto one priest will bring a famine into the world, for it is said (II Sam. 20, 26.) and Ira, the Yairite, was a priest unto David, etc. Was he a priest unto David only? Behold he was a priest unto all Israel also! We must therefore say that it means 'All the priestly gifts were given unto him by David, and immediately following this it is written (Ib. 21, 1.) And there was a famine for three years in the days of David." R. Elazar said: "He [who decides a legal question in the presence of his teacher] will be deposed from his honorable position, as it is said (Num. 31, 21.) And Elazar, the priest, said unto the men of the army," etc. And although he said that the law was taught to his uncle and not to him, still he was deposed from his honorable position, as it is written (Ib. 27, 28.) And before Elazar, the priest, shall he (Joshua) stand and he shall ask of him after the Judgment of the Urim before the Lord, etc. We, however, do not find an instance where Joshua ever availed himself of Elazar's help."
R. Levi said: "Whoever decides a legal question in the presence of his teacher, will die childless, for it is written (Num. 11, 28.) And Joshua ben Nun, the servant of Moses from his youth, answered and said: 'My Lord Moses, forbid them,' (Ib. b) and it is written (I. Chr. 6, 27.) Nun, his son, Joshua, his son [showing that Joshua had no children]." This is in contradiction to the opinion of R. Abba b. Papa, for R. Abba b. Papa said: "Joshua would not have been punished had it not been for the sin that he neglected his family duties for one night, as it is said (Jos. 5, 13.) And it came to pass, when Joshua was in Jericho, etc., and it is written (Ib. ib. 14.) And he said. No; for I am a captain of the host of the Lord; now am I come, i.e., the angel said to him 'Yesterday you neglected to bring the perpetual afternoon offering and now you are neglecting the study of the Torah.' So Joshua asked the angel. In regard to which one did you come?' Whereupon the angel said, 'Now I am come' [i.e., for the neglect of this moment] . Immediately following And Joshua lodged that night among the people (Ib. 8, 9); and it is also written (Ib. ib. 13.) And Joshua went that night into the midst of the valley; and R. Jochanan said: 'We infer [from the expression 'of the valley'] that Joshua lodged within the profoundness of the law [he studied over night]. And we have a tradition that whenever the holy ark and the Shechina rest without its proper place, the Israelites are forbidden to live together with their families. [Hence the sin of neglecting family duties.] R. Samuel b. Avia, in the name of Rab, said: "To study the Torah is a virtue greater than the offering of the perpetual sacrifices, for it is said Now I am come [showing he came on account of the latter's sin which was the neglect of studying the Torah]."
(Fol. 64a) R. Juda, in the name of Samuel, said: "He who drinks one-fourth of a Lug of wine should not decide any legal question." "This tradition is not a good one," said R. Nachman, "for I know that unless I do drink a quarter of a Lug of wine, I feel that my head is not clear." "Why," said Raba to him, "should the master express himself so? Has not R. Acha, the son of R. Chanina, said, 'What is meant by the passage (Pr. 29, 3.) But he that keepeth company with harlots will lose (his) wealth.' This means that whoever says one Halacha (Law) is beautiful and that the other Halacha is not beautiful will lose the wealth of the Torah (he will forget it)." "I take it back," R. Nachman said to him. Rabba b. R. Huna said: "One who is tipsy should not pray; but if he does pray, his prayer will nevertheless be acceptable. If one is intoxicated, he should not pray; and if he does pray his prayer shall be considered an abomination." When can one be termed tipsy and when intoxicated? This we learn from the incident of R. Abba b. Shumni, and R. Menashia, the son of R. Jeremiah of Diphti, who were taking leave of one another when they were on the boat which crossed the river of Yuphthi. They agreed to let each one say an Halacha which should be new to the hearer; for R. Mari, the grand-son of R. Huna b. Abba, said, "A man must not leave his associate otherwise than with a word of Halacha; by which he may remember him." So one began thus: "When can one be termed tipsy and when intoxicated? If one would have enough sense to speak to a king, he is merely tipsy; but one who would not have enough sense to converse with a king is called intoxicated." The other replied and said: What shall he who takes possession of the estate of a proselyte [who has no heirs-in-law] do [with the wealth] in order that it may endure with him? Let the possessor buy a Torah (a scroll)."
(Ib. b) We are taught: It once hap- pened that while Rabban Gamaliel was travel- ing between Achu and Chezib, mounted on an ass, and R. Ilai was walking behind him, the former saw some loaves lying on the, road, and said: Ilai, pick up these loaves from the road. Afterward meeting a Gentile, Rabban Gamaliel said to him: 'Mabagai, take the loaves away from Ilai.' When R. Ilai became acquainted with the Gentile, he asked him: "Whence art thou?" The Gentile answered, "I am from the cities of Burganin." "And what is thy name?" "Mabagai, is my name." "Does R. Gamaliel know thee?" "No," replied the Gentile. From this we understand that Rabban Gamaliel knew the name of the Gentile by Divine Vision, and that three things may be inferred, first, that bread must not be passed by; secondly, that we are guided by the legal status of the majority of wayfarers; and thirdly, the leavened bread belonging to a Gentile, even if it remained over the Passover, may be made use of by Israelites after the Passover. Upon his arrival at Chezib, a man came to Rabban Gamaliel and asked him to nullify a vow. Whereupon R. Gamaliel said to his companions: "Have we drunk one-fourth of a lug of Italian wine?" And they answered: "Yea, we did." "If so," said R. Gamaliel, "then let him follow us, until the effect of the wine shall have passed away." And the man followed them for three mies until they reached a big mountain. As soon as they reached this mountain, Rabban Gamaliel dismounted from the ass, wrapped himself, sat down and nullified the man's vow. From these actions we learn many things, namely: one-fourth of a lug of Italian wine intoxicates a man; that when a man is intoxicated, he must not decide any legal questions; that walking on the road causes the effect of the wine to pass away; and that a vow may not be nullified while riding or walking or standing but only sitting.
R. Shesheth said, in the name or R. Elazar b. Azaria: (Fol. 65a) "I can (by my plea) release the entire world (of Israel) from Divine Judgment, since the destruction of the Temple to this very day, for it is said (Is. 51, 21.) Therefore hear now this, O thou afflicted, and drunken, but not with wine. [Hence if all are drunk then they are not responsible.] An objection was made from the following: 'A drunken man's purchase is a valid purchase; his selling is a valid sale; if he has committed a crime which involves capital punishment, he should be executed; if he has committed a crime involving punishment by straps, he should be given lashes; as a general rule, he is, in all respects, considered a sober man with the exception that he is to be free from prayer." [This is in contradiction to the opinion of R. Shesheth, who said in the name of R. Elazar b. Azaria, that a drunken man cannot be judged]. R. Shesheth will say that his statement, 'I can exempt the world from Divine Judgment', also means 'Judgment caused through prayer.'R. Chanina said: "All the above is said concerning a man who is not as drunk as was Lot, but if he is as drunk as Lot was, then he is exempt from everything."
R. Chiya b. Ashi, in the name of Rab, said: "Whoever has his mind not thoroughly at ease, should not pray, for it is said, In his affliction shall he not judge." On a day when he was in a bad humor, R. Chanina would not pray, saying: "It is written, In his affliction shall he not judge." Mar Ukba would not leave for his judicial chamber on a day when a hot southerly wind was blowing. R. Nachman b. Isaac said: "To decide legal questions, one needs a mind as clear as the day when a north wind is blowing." Abaye said: "When my mother asked me to bring her a certain mess only, she would confuse me the entire day [and prevent me from studying]." Raba said: "Even if a flee bit me I could learn no longer." The mother of Mar, the son of Rabina, made her son seven suits of garments, one for each day. R. Juda said: "The night was created, only for sleep." But Resh Lakish said: "The night was created only for studying the Torah." The Rabbis praised R. Zeira because his teachings possessed a special brilliance, and he replied: "It is because they were all studied during the day." The daughters of R. Chisda said to their father: "Why does not the master take a nap for a while?" And R. Chi *** (Page 246) replied: "Very long days will yet come when they will be short for study, but long for sleep." R. Nachman b. Isaac said: "We are all day-laborers."' R. Acha b. Jacob would borrow [hours from the day] and repay them [at night.]
R. Elazar said: "Whoever comes from the road, should not pray for three days for it is said (Ezra 8, 15.) And I gathered them together to the river that runneth into the Ahava and we encamped there three days; and I looked about among the people. [Only after three days, was he able to look about among the people]." The lather of Samuel upon coming from a journey would not pray for three days [because his mind was not sufficiently clear]. Samuel himself, would not pray within a house where there was beer, [for the smell of it would confuse his mind]. R. Papa would not pray within a house where there was a mess made of a certain fish [that gives forth a liquid smell]. R. Chanina said: "A man who becomes appeased when under the influence of wine, possesses the qualities of his Creator, for it is said (Gen. 8, 21.) And the Lord smelled the sweet flavor," etc. R. Chiya said: "Whoever remains clear-minded when drinking, possesses the qualities of the seventy sages.'" The word Yayin (wine) aggregates the number of seventy and Sod (secret) aggregates also the number seventy, i.e., as soon as wine enters, the secrets escape. R. Chanan said: "Wine was created in this world for no other purpose than to comfort the mounrners, and wherewith to pay the wicked their reward for any good deeds they may have done, as it is said (Pr. 31, 6.) Give strong drink unto him that is ready to perish, and wine unto those who have an embittered soul." R. Chanina b. Papa said: "Any house where wine is not poured like water, cannot be classed among those that are called blessed houses, for it is said (Ex. 23, 25.) And he will bless thy bread and thy water. Bread and water are placed on a par; just as bread mentioned here can be bought with money belonging to the Tithes, so also the water should be of the same kind that can be bought with money belonging to the Tithes. It must therefore, refer to wine; [for water cannot be bought] yet the passage calls it water (Ib. b) to hint that, if it flows in his house like water, then it may be called a blessed house, otherwise it cannot be called so." R. Ilayi said: "On three occasions a man's character can be recognized; by his wine-cup (when he drinks); by his purse (dealing honestly); and by his anger (seldom getting excited), and according to others, by his laughter also."
(Fol. 85b) Buneis, the son of Buneis, once called on Rabbi. "Make way for one worth one hundred manehs," exclaimed Rabbi. Presently another visitor came in and Rabbi said: (Fol. 86a) "Make way for one worth two hundred manehs." So R. Ishmael pleaded with him saying: "Rabbi, the father of the first-comer, owns a thousand ships at sea and a thousand towns ashore!" "Well," replied Rabbi, "when thou seest his father, tell him not to send his son around the next time with such poor clothes." Rabbi honored the rich and so also did R. Akiba honor the rich. As Raba b. Mari once preached: "May he abide forever before God; ordain that kindness and truth may guard him. (Ps. 61, 8). When May he abide forever before God? At the time that kindness and truth may guard them."