Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility Skip to content

Today's Daf Yomi

April 12, 2016 | 讚壮 讘谞讬住谉 转砖注状讜

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Joanna Rom and Steven Goldberg in loving memory of Steve's mother Shirley "Nana" Goldberg (Sura Tema bat Chaim v'Hanka)

Kiddushin 32

How does one honor a parent in death? 聽What聽is the difference between fear and honor of parents? 聽Is the financial responsibility also on the child? 聽Or is one to take money from the parent? 聽If a parent or a teacher or a nasi or a king is willing to forego respect for him/herself, can he/she? 聽The obligation to respect elders – is it those who are Torah scholars or those who are old in years? or those who are both?

诪砖诇 诪讬 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 诪砖诇 讘谉 专讘 谞转谉 讘专 讗讜砖注讬讗 讗诪专 诪砖诇 讗讘 讗讜专讜 诇讬讛 专讘谞谉 诇专讘 讬专诪讬讛 讜讗诪专讬 诇讛 诇讘专讬讛 讚专讘 讬专诪讬讛 讻诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 诪砖诇 讗讘

From whose funds must one give his father food and drink? Rav Yehuda says: From the money of the son. Rav Natan bar Oshaya said: From the money of the father. The Sages gave this following ruling to Rav Yirmeya, and some say they gave this following ruling to the son of Rav Yirmeya: The halakha is like the one who says it must be paid from the money of the father.

诪讬转讬讘讬 谞讗诪专 讻讘讚 讗转 讗讘讬讱 讜讗转 讗诪讱 讜谞讗诪专 讻讘讚 讗转 讛壮 诪讛讜谞讱 诪讛 诇讛诇谉 讘讞住专讜谉 讻讬住 讗祝 讻讗谉 讘讞住专讜谉 讻讬住 讜讗讬 讗诪专转 诪砖诇 讗讘 诪讗讬 谞驻拽讗 诇讬讛 诪讬谞讬讛 诇讘讬讟讜诇 诪诇讗讻讛

The Gemara raises an objection from the following baraita: It is stated: 鈥淗onor your father and your mother鈥 (Exodus 20:11), and it is stated: 鈥淗onor the Lord with your wealth鈥 (Proverbs 3:9), which teaches the following verbal analogy: Just as there one honors God 鈥渨ith your wealth,鈥 i.e., through monetary loss, so too here one must honor his father through monetary loss. And if you say that one honors him from the money of the father, what difference does it make to the son, i.e., what monetary loss does he suffer? The Gemara answers: It makes a difference to him with regard to the neglect of his work. Although he is not required to spend his own money, the son must leave aside his work to honor his father, which will cause him some financial loss.

转讗 砖诪注 砖谞讬 讗讞讬诐 砖谞讬 砖讜转驻讬谉 讛讗讘 讜讘谞讜 讛专讘 讜转诇诪讬讚讜 驻讜讚讬谉 讝讛 诇讝讛 诪注砖专 砖谞讬 讜诪讗讻讬诇讬谉 讝讛 诇讝讛 诪注砖专 注谞讬

The Gemara suggests: Come and hear a proof from a baraita: Two brothers, or two partners in the ownership of produce, or a father and son, or a rabbi and his student, may redeem the second tithe for each other without adding one-fifth, as one who redeems the tithe of another, including these individuals, is not required to add one-fifth. And they may feed each other the poor man鈥檚 tithe. If one of them is poor, the other may give him the poor man鈥檚 tithe that he separated from his produce, and it is not considered as though the pauper ate the poor man鈥檚 tithe from his own produce.

讜讗讬 讗诪专转 诪砖诇 讘谉 谞诪爪讗 讝讛 驻讜专注 讞讜讘讜 诪砖诇 注谞讬讬诐 诇讗 爪专讬讻讗 诇讛注讚驻讛

The Gemara explains the proof from this baraita. And if you say that the obligation to honor one鈥檚 father is from the money of the son, one finds that this son repays his obligation from the produce of the poor, as he is taking care of his father with produce that should go to the poor. The Gemara rejects this proof: No, it is necessary to state this halakha in a case where he has covered all of his father鈥檚 basic needs with his own money. At this stage, if his father needs surplus money, he may give it to him from the poor man鈥檚 tithe.

讗讬 讛讻讬 讛讬讬谞讜 讚拽转谞讬 注诇讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 转讘讗 诪讗讬专讛 诇诪讬 砖诪讗讻讬诇 讗转 讗讘讬讜 诪注砖专 注谞讬 讜讗讬 诇讛注讚驻讛 诪讗讬 谞驻拽讗 诪讬谞讛 讗驻讬诇讜 讛讻讬 讝讬诇讗 讘讬讛 诪讬诇转讗

The Gemara asks: If so, consider that which is taught with regard to this baraita. Rabbi Yehuda says: May a curse come upon one who feeds his father the poor man鈥檚 tithe. And if this halakha, that one may feed his father the poor man鈥檚 tithe, was said with regard to a surplus, what difference is there? Since the son has fulfilled his obligation and simply adds something so that his father will have more, why is this person cursed? The Gemara answers: Even so, it is a disrespectful matter for one to feed his father with money that has been designated as charity for the poor.

转讗 砖诪注 砖讗诇讜 讗转 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 注讚 讛讬讻谉 讻讬讘讜讚 讗讘 讜讗诐 讗诪专 诇讛诐 讻讚讬 砖讬讟讜诇 讗专谞拽讬 讜讬讝专拽谞讜 诇讬诐 讘驻谞讬讜 讜讗讬谞讜 诪讻诇讬诪讜 讜讗讬 讗诪专转 诪砖诇 讗讘 诪讗讬 谞驻拽讗 诇讬讛 诪讬谞讬讛 讘专讗讜讬 诇讬讜专砖讜

The Gemara further suggests: Come and hear: They asked Rabbi Eliezer how far one must go in honoring his father and mother. Rabbi Eliezer said to them: Such that the father takes a purse and throw it into the sea in front of his son, and the son does not embarrass him. And if you say that the son honors him from the money of the father, what difference does it make to the son? Why would the son care if his father throws away his own purse? The Gemara answers: This is referring to a son who is fit to inherit from him. Since the son thinks that the money will eventually belong to him, he has cause for anger.

讜讻讬 讛讗 讚专讘讛 讘专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讚专讘 讛讜谞讗 拽专注 砖讬专讗讬 讘讗谞驻讬 专讘讛 讘专讬讛 讗诪专 讗讬讝讜诇 讗讬讞讝讬 讗讬 专转讞 讗讬 诇讗 专转讞 讜讚诇诪讗 专转讞 讜拽注讘专 讗诇驻谞讬 注讜专 诇讗 转转谉 诪讻砖诇 讚诪讞讬诇 诇讬讛 诇讬拽专讬讛

And this is as reflected in an incident involving Rabba bar Rav Huna, when Rav Huna tore silk garments in front of his son Rabba. Rav Huna had said to himself: I will go and see if he becomes angry or does not become angry, i.e., he wanted to test him and see whether his son Rabba would honor him. The Gemara asks: But perhaps his son would become angry and Rav Huna would thereby violate the prohibition of: 鈥淣or put a stumbling block before the blind鈥 (Leviticus 19:14), as by testing his son Rav Huna would have caused him to sin. The Gemara answers: It was a case where the father had forgone his honor from the outset. Consequently, even if the son grew angry with him, he would not have violated the mitzva.

讜讛讗 拽注讘专 诪砖讜诐 讘诇 转砖讞讬转 讚注讘讚 诇讬讛 讘驻讜诪讘讬讬谞讬 讜讚讬诇诪讗 诪砖讜诐 讛讻讬 诇讗 专转讞 讚注讘讚 诇讬讛 讘砖注转 专讬转讞讬讛

The Gemara asks: But by tearing his clothes, he violates the prohibition: Do not destroy (see Deuteronomy 20:19). The Gemara answers that Rav Huna made a tear at the seam, so that the garment could be repaired. The Gemara asks: Perhaps it was due to that reason that the son did not become angry, because he saw that his father caused no actual damage? The Gemara answers: He did this when the son was already angry for some other reason, so that he would not notice this detail.

诪转谞讬 诇讬讛 专讘 讬讞讝拽讗诇 诇专诪讬 讘专讬讛 讛谞砖专驻讬诐 讘谞住拽诇讬诐 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讗讜诪专 讬讚讜谞讜 讘住拽讬诇讛 砖讛砖专讬驻讛 讞诪讜专讛

The Gemara cites another story involving the mitzva of honoring one鈥檚 father and mother. Rav Ye岣zkel taught his son Rami: If people sentenced to be burned became mingled with those sentenced to be stoned Rabbi Shimon says: All of them are judged with the punishment of stoning, as the punishment of burning is more severe. Since the death penalty of each is uncertain, all of them are treated leniently.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讘专讬讛 讗讘讗 诇讗 转讬转谞讬讬讗 讛讻讬 诪讗讬 讗讬专讬讗 砖专讬驻讛 讞诪讜专讛 转讬驻讜拽 诇讬 讚专讜讘讗 谞住拽诇讬诐 谞讬谞讛讜 讗诇讗 讛讻讬 讗讬转谞讬讬讗 讛谞住拽诇讬诐 讘谞砖专驻讬诐

Rav Yehuda, who was also Rav Ye岣zkel鈥檚 son, said to him: Father, do not teach the mishna this way, as, according to this version, why is this the halakha specifically because burning is more severe than stoning? Let him derive it from the fact that the majority are sentenced to be stoned. The wording of the baraita, which states that those who were supposed to be burned became mixed up with those who were to be stoned, indicates that the people sentenced to stoning are the majority. If so, one should simply follow the majority. Rather, I will teach it this way: If those who are sentenced to be stoned became mixed up with those who are sentenced to be burned, they are all judged with the punishment of stoning even though this is the minority, as they are all treated leniently.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗讬 讛讻讬 讗讬诪讗 住讬驻讗 讜讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 讬讚讜谞讜 讘砖专讬驻讛 砖讛住拽讬诇讛 讞诪讜专讛 诪讗讬 讗讬专讬讗 讚住拽讬诇讛 讞诪讜专讛 转讬驻讜拽 诇讬 讚专讜讘讗 谞砖专驻讬诐 谞讬谞讛讜

Rav Ye岣zkel said to him: If so, say the latter clause of the mishna: And the Rabbis say that they should be judged with the punishment of burning, as the punishment of stoning is more severe. According to your version, why is this the halakha specifically because stoning is more severe? Let him derive it due to the fact that the majority of people are sentenced to be burned, and one follows the majority.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 讛转诐 专讘谞谉 讛讜讗 讚拽讗诪专讜 诇讬讛 诇专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讚拽讗诪专转 砖专讬驻讛 讞诪讜专讛 诇讗 住拽讬诇讛 讞诪讜专讛

His son Rav Yehuda said to him: The statement of the Rabbis is not difficult, as there the Rabbis are saying to Rabbi Shimon as follows: That which you said, that burning is more severe, is not the case; rather, stoning is more severe. In other words, the Rabbis were specifically responding to Rabbi Shimon鈥檚 reasoning, and therefore they stated the opposite claim and ignored the issue of which group is in the majority.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 砖诪讜讗诇 诇专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 砖讬谞谞讗 诇讗 转讬诪讗 诇讬讛 诇讗讘讜讱 讛讻讬 讚转谞讬讗 讛专讬 砖讛讬讛 讗讘讬讜 注讜讘专 注诇 讚讘专讬 转讜专讛 讗诇 讬讗诪专 诇讜 讗讘讗 注讘专转 注诇 讚讘专讬 转讜专讛 讗诇讗 讗讜诪专 诇讜 讗讘讗 讻讱 讻转讜讘 讘转讜专讛 讻讱 讻转讜讘 讘转讜专讛 爪注讜专讬 拽讗 诪爪注专 诇讬讛 讗诇讗 讗讜诪专 诇讜 讗讘讗 诪拽专讗 讻转讜讘 讘转讜专讛 讻讱

Later, Shmuel said to Rav Yehuda: Big-toothed one, do not speak to your father like that, as it is disrespectful. As it is taught in a baraita: If one鈥檚 father was transgressing a Torah matter, he should not say to him explicitly: Father, you transgressed a Torah matter. Rather, he should say to him: Father, so it is written in the Torah. The Gemara asks: If he says to him directly: This is what is written in the Torah, he will cause him suffering. Rather, he should say to him: Father, this verse is written in the Torah, and he should proceed to quote the verse, from which his father will understand on his own that he has acted improperly.

讗诇注讝专 讘谉 诪转讬讗 讗讜诪专 讗讘讗 讗讜诪专 讛砖拽讬谞讬 诪讬诐 讜诪爪讜讛 诇注砖讜转 诪谞讬讞 讗谞讬 讻讘讜讚 讗讘讗 讜注讜砖讛 讗转 讛诪爪讜讛 砖讗谞讬 讜讗讘讗 讞讬讬讘讬诐 讘诪爪讜讛 讗讬住讬 讘谉 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 讗诐 讗驻砖专 诇诪爪讜讛 诇讬注砖讜转 注诇 讬讚讬 讗讞专讬诐 转讬注砖讛 注诇 讬讚讬 讗讞专讬诐 讜讬诇讱 讛讜讗 讘讻讘讜讚 讗讘讬讜 讗诪专 专讘 诪转谞讛 讛诇讻讛 讻讗讬住讬 讘谉 讬讛讜讚讛

Elazar ben Matya says: If my father says: Give me water, and there is a mitzva for me to perform at the same time, I set aside the honor of my father and perform the mitzva, as my father and I are both obligated in the mitzva. Isi ben Yehuda says: If it is possible for this mitzva to be performed by others, let it be performed by others, and he should go and attend to the honor due to his father, as the honor of his father is his obligation alone. Rav Mattana says: The halakha with regard to this matter is in accordance with the opinion of Isi bar Yehuda.

讗诪专 专讘 讬爪讞拽 讘专 砖讬诇讗 讗诪专 专讘 诪转谞讛 讗诪专 专讘 讞住讚讗 讛讗讘 砖诪讞诇 注诇 讻讘讜讚讜 讻讘讜讚讜 诪讞讜诇 讛专讘 砖诪讞诇 注诇 讻讘讜讚讜 讗讬谉 讻讘讜讚讜 诪讞讜诇

Rav Yitz岣k bar Sheila says that Rav Mattana says that Rav 岣sda says: With regard to a father who forgoes his honor, his honor is forgone, and his son does not transgress if he does not treat him in the proper manner. By contrast, with regard to a rabbi who forgoes his honor, his honor is not forgone.

讜专讘 讬讜住祝 讗诪专 讗驻讬诇讜 讛专讘 砖诪讞诇 注诇 讻讘讜讚讜 讻讘讜讚讜 诪讞讜诇 砖谞讗诪专 讜讛壮 讛诇讱 诇驻谞讬讛诐 讬讜诪诐 讗诪专 专讘讗 讛讻讬 讛砖转讗 讛转诐 讛拽讚讜砖 讘专讜讱 讛讜讗 注诇诪讗 讚讬诇讬讛 讛讜讗 讜转讜专讛 讚讬诇讬讛 讛讬讗 诪讞讬诇 诇讬讛 诇讬拽专讬

And Rav Yosef says: Even with regard to a rabbi who forgoes his honor, his honor is forgone, as it is stated: 鈥淎nd the Lord went before them by day鈥 (Exodus 13:21). God Himself, the Teacher of the Jewish people, had forgone the honor due Him and took the trouble to guide the people. Rava said: How can these cases be compared? There, with regard to the Holy One, Blessed be He, the world is His and the Torah is His, and therefore He can forgo His honor.

讛讻讗 转讜专讛 讚讬诇讬讛 讛讬讗 讛讚专 讗诪专 专讘讗 讗讬谉 转讜专讛 讚讬诇讬讛 讛讬讗 讚讻转讬讘 讜讘转讜专转讜 讬讛讙讛 讬讜诪诐 讜诇讬诇讛

By contrast, here, is it his Torah, that the teacher can forgo its honor? Rava then said: Yes, if he studies, it is his Torah, as it is written: 鈥淔or his delight is the Torah of the Lord, and in his Torah he meditates day and night鈥 (Psalms 1:2). This indicates that at first it is 鈥渢he Torah of the Lord,鈥 but after he studies, it becomes 鈥渉is Torah.鈥

讗讬谞讬 讜讛讗 专讘讗 诪砖拽讬 讘讬 讛诇讜诇讗 讚讘专讬讛 讜讚诇 诇讬讛 讻住讗 诇专讘 驻驻讗 讜诇专讘 讛讜谞讗 讘专讬讛 讚专讘 讬讛讜砖注 讜拽诪讜 诪拽诪讬讛 诇专讘 诪专讬 讜诇专讘 驻谞讞住 讘专讬讛 讚专讘 讞住讚讗 讜诇讗 拽诪讜 诪拽诪讬讛 讗讬拽驻讚 讜讗诪专 讛谞讜 专讘谞谉 专讘谞谉 讜讛谞讜 专讘谞谉 诇讗讜 专讘谞谉

The Gemara asks: Is that so? But Rava served drinks to the guests at his son鈥檚 wedding celebration, and he poured a cup for Rav Pappa and Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, and they stood before him when he approached them. When he poured a cup for Rav Mari and for Rav Pine岣s, son of Rav 岣sda, they did not stand before him. Rava became angry and said: Are these Sages, i.e., Rav Mari and Rav Pine岣s, Sages, and are those Sages, who stood to honor me, not Sages? Do you think you are so great that you are not required to honor a Sage?

讜转讜 专讘 驻驻讗 讛讜讛 诪砖拽讬 讘讬 讛诇讜诇讗 讚讗讘讗 诪专 讘专讬讛 讜讚诇讬 诇讬讛 讻住讗 诇专讘讬 讬爪讞拽 讘专讬讛 讚专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讜诇讗 拽诐 诪拽诪讬讛 讜讗讬拽驻讚 讗驻讬诇讜 讛讻讬 讛讬讚讜专 诪讬注讘讚 诇讬讛 讘注讜

And furthermore, it happened that Rav Pappa was serving drinks to the guests at the wedding celebration [hillula] of Abba Mar, his son, and he poured a cup for Rav Yitz岣k, son of Rav Yehuda, and he did not stand before him, and Rav Pappa became angry. These anecdotes indicate that even when a rabbi forgoes the honor due to him by serving drinks to his guests, his honor is not forgone. The Gemara answers: A rabbi can forgo the full measure of honor due to him, but even so, others are required to perform some act of reverence, such as preparing to stand before him.

讗诪专 专讘 讗砖讬 讗驻讬诇讜 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讛专讘 砖诪讞诇 注诇 讻讘讜讚讜 讻讘讜讚讜 诪讞讜诇 谞砖讬讗 砖诪讞诇 注诇 讻讘讜讚讜 讗讬谉 讻讘讜讚讜 诪讞讜诇 诪讬转讬讘讬 诪注砖讛 讘专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讜专讘讬 讬讛讜砖注 讜专讘讬 爪讚讜拽 砖讛讬讜 诪住讜讘讬谉 讘讘讬转 讛诪砖转讛 讘谞讜 砖诇 专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讜讛讬讛 专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 注讜诪讚 讜诪砖拽讛 注诇讬讛诐 谞转谉 讛讻讜住 诇专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讜诇讗 谞讟诇讜 谞转谞讜 诇专讘讬 讬讛讜砖注 讜拽讬讘诇讜 讗诪专 诇讜 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 诪讛 讝讛 讬讛讜砖注 讗谞讜 讬讜砖讘讬谉 讜专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讘专讬讘讬 注讜诪讚 讜诪砖拽讛 注诇讬谞讜

Rav Ashi said: Even according to the one who says that if a rabbi forgoes the honor due him, his honor is forgone, if a Nasi forgoes the honor due him, his honor is not forgone. The Gemara raises an objection: There was an incident involving Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua and Rabbi Tzadok, who were reclining at the wedding of Rabban Gamliel鈥檚 son. And Rabban Gamliel, who was Nasi of the Sanhedrin at the time, was standing over them and serving them drinks. He gave the cup to Rabbi Eliezer and he would not accept it; he gave it to Rabbi Yehoshua and he accepted it. Rabbi Eliezer said to him: What is this, Yehoshua? We sit and the esteemed Rabban Gamliel stands over us and serves us drinks?

讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪爪讬谞讜 讙讚讜诇 诪诪谞讜 砖砖诪砖 讗讘专讛诐 讙讚讜诇 诪诪谞讜 讜砖诪砖 讗讘专讛诐 讙讚讜诇 讛讚讜专 讛讬讛 讜讻转讜讘 讘讜 讜讛讜讗 注诪讚 注诇讬讛诐 讜砖诪讗 转讗诪专讜 讻诪诇讗讻讬 讛砖专转 谞讚诪讜 诇讜 诇讗 谞讚诪讜 诇讜 讗诇讗 诇注专讘讬讬诐 讜讗谞讜 诇讗 讬讛讗 专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讘专讬讘讬 注讜诪讚 讜诪砖拽讛 注诇讬谞讜

Rabbi Yehoshua said to him: We found one greater than him who served his guests, as our forefather Abraham was greater than him and he served his guests. Abraham was the greatest man of his generation and it is written about him: 鈥淎nd he stood over them under the tree, and they ate鈥 (Genesis 18:8). And lest you say: His guests appeared to him as ministering angels, and that is why he honored them, in fact they appeared to him only as Arabs. And if so, should not the esteemed Rabban Gamliel stand over us and serve us drinks?

讗诪专 诇讛诐 专讘讬 爪讚讜拽 注讚 诪转讬 讗转诐 诪谞讬讞讬诐 讻讘讜讚讜 砖诇 诪拽讜诐 讜讗转诐 注讜住拽讬诐 讘讻讘讜讚 讛讘专讬讜转 讛拽讚讜砖 讘专讜讱 讛讜讗 诪砖讬讘 专讜讞讜转 讜诪注诇讛 谞砖讬讗讬诐 讜诪讜专讬讚 诪讟专 讜诪爪诪讬讞 讗讚诪讛 讜注讜专讱 砖讜诇讞谉 诇驻谞讬 讻诇 讗讞讚 讜讗讞讚 讜讗谞讜 诇讗 讬讛讗 专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讘专讬讘讬 注讜诪讚 讜诪砖拽讛 注诇讬谞讜

Rabbi Tzadok said to them: For how long will you ignore the honor due to the Omnipresent, and deal with the honor of people? You could cite a proof from God Himself. After all, the Holy One, Blessed be He, makes the winds blow, and raises the clouds, and brings the rain, and causes the earth to sprout, and sets a table before each and every creature. And should not the esteemed Rabban Gamliel stand over us and serve us drinks? This discussion indicates that even a Nasi may forgo the honor due him.

讗诇讗 讗讬 讗讬转诪专 讛讻讬 讗讬转诪专 讗诪专 专讘 讗砖讬 讗驻讬诇讜 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 谞砖讬讗 砖诪讞诇 注诇 讻讘讜讚讜 讻讘讜讚讜 诪讞讜诇 诪诇讱 砖诪讞诇 注诇 讻讘讜讚讜 讗讬谉 讻讘讜讚讜 诪讞讜诇 砖谞讗诪专 砖讜诐 转砖讬诐 注诇讬讱 诪诇讱 砖转讛讗 讗讬诪转讜 注诇讬讱

Rather, if it was stated, it was stated as follows: Rav Ashi said: Even according to the one who says that if a Nasi forgoes the honor due him, his honor is forgone, if a king forgoes the honor due him, his honor is not forgone. As it is stated: 鈥淵ou shall set a king over you鈥 (Deuteronomy 17:15), which indicates that his fear should be upon you. The people are commanded to fear a king, and therefore it is not permitted for him to forgo the honor due to him.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 诪驻谞讬 砖讬讘讛 转拽讜诐 讬讻讜诇 讗驻讬诇讜 诪驻谞讬 讝拽谉 讗砖诪讗讬 转诇诪讜讚 诇讜诪专 讝拽谉 讜讗讬谉 讝拽谉 讗诇讗 讞讻诐 砖谞讗诪专 讗住驻讛 诇讬 砖讘注讬诐 讗讬砖 诪讝拽谞讬 讬砖专讗诇 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讛讙诇讬诇讬 讗讜诪专 讗讬谉 讝拽谉 讗诇讗 诪讬 砖拽谞讛 讞讻诪讛 砖谞讗诪专 讛壮 拽谞谞讬 专讗砖讬转 讚专讻讜

The Sages taught with regard to the verse: 鈥淏efore the hoary head you shall stand and you shall revere the face of an elder, and you shall fear your God鈥 (Leviticus 19:32): One might have thought that it is obligatory to stand before a simple [ashmai] elder. Therefore, the verse states: 鈥渆lder,鈥 and an 鈥渆lder鈥 means nothing other than a wise man, as it is stated: 鈥淕ather unto Me seventy men of the Elders of Israel, whom you know to be the Elders of the people鈥 (Numbers 11:16). Rabbi Yosei HaGelili says: An 鈥渆lder [zaken]鈥 means nothing other than one who has acquired wisdom. He interprets the word zaken as a contraction of the phrase zeh kanna, meaning: This one has acquired. Elsewhere the word kanna is used in reference to wisdom, as it is stated that wisdom says: 鈥淭he Lord acquired me [kanani] at the beginning of His way鈥 (Proverbs 8:22).

讬讻讜诇 讬注诪讜讚 诪驻谞讬讜 诪诪拽讜诐 专讞讜拽 转诇诪讜讚 诇讜诪专 转拽讜诐 讜讛讚专转 诇讗 讗诪专转讬 拽讬诪讛 讗诇讗 讘诪拽讜诐 砖讬砖 讛讬讚讜专

The baraita continues: One might have thought that one must stand before an elder as soon as he sees him, even from a distance. Therefore the verse states: 鈥淵ou shall stand and you shall revere鈥 (Leviticus 19:32), which teaches: I said that one is obligated to stand only in a place where there is reverence. If he stands while the elder is still far away, it is not clear that he is doing so in his honor.

讬讻讜诇 讬讛讚专谞讜 讘诪诪讜谉 转诇诪讜讚 诇讜诪专 转拽讜诐 讜讛讚专转 诪讛 拽讬诪讛 砖讗讬谉 讘讛 讞住专讜谉 讻讬住 讗祝 讛讬讚讜专 砖讗讬谉 讘讜 讞住专讜谉 讻讬住 讬讻讜诇 讬注诪讜讚 诪驻谞讬讜 诪讘讬转 讛讻住讗 讜诪讘讬转 讛诪专讞抓 转诇诪讜讚 诇讜诪专 转拽讜诐 讜讛讚专转 诇讗 讗诪专转讬 拽讬诪讛 讗诇讗 讘诪拽讜诐 砖讬砖 讛讬讚讜专

The baraita continues: One might have thought that he should revere him through money, i.e., that one is required to give an elder money in his honor. Therefore, the verse states: 鈥淵ou shall stand and you shall revere.鈥 Just as standing includes no monetary loss, so too, reverence is referring to an action that includes no monetary loss. One might have thought that one should also stand before him in the lavatory or in the bathhouse. Therefore, the verse states: 鈥淵ou shall stand and you shall revere,鈥 which indicates: I said the mitzva of standing only in a place where there is reverence. It is inappropriate to show respect for someone in places of this kind.

讬讻讜诇 讬注爪讬诐 注讬谞讬讜 讻诪讬 砖诇讗 专讗讛讜 转诇诪讜讚 诇讜诪专 转拽讜诐 讜讬专讗转 讚讘专 讛诪住讜专 诇诇讘 谞讗诪专 讘讜 讜讬专讗转 诪讗诇讛讬讱

The baraita continues: One might have thought that one may close his eyes like one who does not see the elder. Therefore, the verse states: 鈥淏efore the hoary head you shall stand and you shall revere the face of an elder, and you shall fear your God鈥 (Leviticus 19:32). With regard to any matter given over to the heart, it is stated: 鈥淎nd you shall fear your God.鈥 This phrase is referring to a situation where it is impossible to prove whether one purposefully made it appear as if he were not aware that he was obligated to perform a mitzva, as only that individual and God know the truth.

专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讗诇注讝专 讗讜诪专 诪谞讬谉 诇讝拽谉 砖诇讗 讬讟专讬讞 转诇诪讜讚 诇讜诪专 讝拽谉 讜讬专讗转 讗讬住讬 讘谉 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 诪驻谞讬 砖讬讘讛 转拽讜诐 讗驻讬诇讜 讻诇 砖讬讘讛 讘诪砖诪注

The baraita continues: Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: From where is it derived that an elder should not trouble others to honor him? The verse states: 鈥淎nd you shall revere the face of an elder, and you shall fear your God.鈥 The phrase 鈥渁n elder, and you shall fear,鈥 read by itself, without the rest of the verse, indicates that an elder is also commanded to fear God, and not purposefully act in a manner to cause others to have to honor him. In conclusion, the baraita cites another opinion. Isi ben Yehuda says that the verse: 鈥淏efore the hoary head you shall stand,鈥 indicates that even any person of hoary head is included in this mitzva, not only a Sage.

专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讛讙诇讬诇讬 讛讬讬谞讜 转谞讗 拽诪讗 讗讬讻讗 讘讬谞讬讬讛讜 讬谞讬拽 讜讞讻讬诐 转谞讗 拽诪讗 住讘专 讬谞讬拽 讜讞讻讬诐 诇讗 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讛讙诇讬诇讬 住讘专 讗驻讬诇讜 讬谞讬拽 讜讞讻讬诐

The Gemara analyzes this baraita. Apparently the opinion of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili is the same as that of the first tanna, as they both say that an elder is a Torah scholar. What does Rabbi Yosei HaGelili add? The Gemara answers: There is a difference between them with regard to one who is young and wise. The first tanna maintains: One who is young and wise is not considered an elder, as the mitzva applies only to one who is both elderly and wise. Rabbi Yosei HaGelili maintains: It is even a mitzva to honor one who is young and wise. According to Rabbi Yosei HaGelili, the mitzva is not referring to old age at all, but only to wisdom.

诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讚专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讛讙诇讬诇讬 讗诪专 诇讱 讗讬 住诇拽讗 讚注转讱 讻讚拽讗诪专 转谞讗 拽诪讗 讗诐 讻谉 谞讻转讜讘 专讞诪谞讗 诪驻谞讬 砖讬讘讛 讝拽谉 转拽讜诐 讜讛讚专转 诪讗讬 砖谞讗 讚驻诇讙讬谞讛讜 专讞诪谞讗 诇诪讬诪专 讚讛讗讬 诇讗讜 讛讗讬 讜讛讗讬 诇讗讜 讛讗讬 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 讗驻讬诇讜 讬谞讬拽 讜讞讻讬诐

The Gemara asks: What is the reasoning of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili? He could have said to you that if enters your mind to explain as the first tanna says, that for the obligation to honor another be in effect that person must be both elderly and wise, if so, let the Merciful One write: Before the hoary head of an elder you shall stand and you shall revere. What is the difference between the two terms 鈥渉oary head鈥 and 鈥渆lder,鈥 that the Merciful One separates them? This serves to say that this term is not the same as that one, and that term is not the same as this one, i.e., an elder is not required to have a hoary head. Learn from the verse that even one who is young and wise is called an elder.

讜转谞讗 拽诪讗 诪砖讜诐 讚讘注讬 诇诪讬住诪讱 讝拽谉 讜讬专讗转 讜转谞讗 拽诪讗 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讗讬 住诇拽讗 讚注转讱 讻讚拽讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讛讙诇讬诇讬 讗诐 讻谉 谞讻转讜讘 专讞诪谞讗

And the first tanna would say that the verse is written this way because the Torah wants to juxtapose 鈥渆lder鈥 with 鈥渁nd you shall fear,鈥 in accordance with Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar鈥檚 statement above that an elder should not trouble others to honor him. The Gemara asks: And what is the reasoning of the first tanna? Why does he maintain that one is obligated to stand only before an elder, wise man? The Gemara answers: The first tanna maintains that if it enters your mind to explain as Rabbi Yosei HaGelili says, let the Merciful One write:

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Joanna Rom and Steven Goldberg in loving memory of Steve's mother Shirley "Nana" Goldberg (Sura Tema bat Chaim v'Hanka)

Want to explore more about the Daf?

See insights from our partners, contributors and community of women learners

Sorry, there aren't any posts in this category yet. We're adding more soon!

Kiddushin 32

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Kiddushin 32

诪砖诇 诪讬 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 诪砖诇 讘谉 专讘 谞转谉 讘专 讗讜砖注讬讗 讗诪专 诪砖诇 讗讘 讗讜专讜 诇讬讛 专讘谞谉 诇专讘 讬专诪讬讛 讜讗诪专讬 诇讛 诇讘专讬讛 讚专讘 讬专诪讬讛 讻诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 诪砖诇 讗讘

From whose funds must one give his father food and drink? Rav Yehuda says: From the money of the son. Rav Natan bar Oshaya said: From the money of the father. The Sages gave this following ruling to Rav Yirmeya, and some say they gave this following ruling to the son of Rav Yirmeya: The halakha is like the one who says it must be paid from the money of the father.

诪讬转讬讘讬 谞讗诪专 讻讘讚 讗转 讗讘讬讱 讜讗转 讗诪讱 讜谞讗诪专 讻讘讚 讗转 讛壮 诪讛讜谞讱 诪讛 诇讛诇谉 讘讞住专讜谉 讻讬住 讗祝 讻讗谉 讘讞住专讜谉 讻讬住 讜讗讬 讗诪专转 诪砖诇 讗讘 诪讗讬 谞驻拽讗 诇讬讛 诪讬谞讬讛 诇讘讬讟讜诇 诪诇讗讻讛

The Gemara raises an objection from the following baraita: It is stated: 鈥淗onor your father and your mother鈥 (Exodus 20:11), and it is stated: 鈥淗onor the Lord with your wealth鈥 (Proverbs 3:9), which teaches the following verbal analogy: Just as there one honors God 鈥渨ith your wealth,鈥 i.e., through monetary loss, so too here one must honor his father through monetary loss. And if you say that one honors him from the money of the father, what difference does it make to the son, i.e., what monetary loss does he suffer? The Gemara answers: It makes a difference to him with regard to the neglect of his work. Although he is not required to spend his own money, the son must leave aside his work to honor his father, which will cause him some financial loss.

转讗 砖诪注 砖谞讬 讗讞讬诐 砖谞讬 砖讜转驻讬谉 讛讗讘 讜讘谞讜 讛专讘 讜转诇诪讬讚讜 驻讜讚讬谉 讝讛 诇讝讛 诪注砖专 砖谞讬 讜诪讗讻讬诇讬谉 讝讛 诇讝讛 诪注砖专 注谞讬

The Gemara suggests: Come and hear a proof from a baraita: Two brothers, or two partners in the ownership of produce, or a father and son, or a rabbi and his student, may redeem the second tithe for each other without adding one-fifth, as one who redeems the tithe of another, including these individuals, is not required to add one-fifth. And they may feed each other the poor man鈥檚 tithe. If one of them is poor, the other may give him the poor man鈥檚 tithe that he separated from his produce, and it is not considered as though the pauper ate the poor man鈥檚 tithe from his own produce.

讜讗讬 讗诪专转 诪砖诇 讘谉 谞诪爪讗 讝讛 驻讜专注 讞讜讘讜 诪砖诇 注谞讬讬诐 诇讗 爪专讬讻讗 诇讛注讚驻讛

The Gemara explains the proof from this baraita. And if you say that the obligation to honor one鈥檚 father is from the money of the son, one finds that this son repays his obligation from the produce of the poor, as he is taking care of his father with produce that should go to the poor. The Gemara rejects this proof: No, it is necessary to state this halakha in a case where he has covered all of his father鈥檚 basic needs with his own money. At this stage, if his father needs surplus money, he may give it to him from the poor man鈥檚 tithe.

讗讬 讛讻讬 讛讬讬谞讜 讚拽转谞讬 注诇讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 转讘讗 诪讗讬专讛 诇诪讬 砖诪讗讻讬诇 讗转 讗讘讬讜 诪注砖专 注谞讬 讜讗讬 诇讛注讚驻讛 诪讗讬 谞驻拽讗 诪讬谞讛 讗驻讬诇讜 讛讻讬 讝讬诇讗 讘讬讛 诪讬诇转讗

The Gemara asks: If so, consider that which is taught with regard to this baraita. Rabbi Yehuda says: May a curse come upon one who feeds his father the poor man鈥檚 tithe. And if this halakha, that one may feed his father the poor man鈥檚 tithe, was said with regard to a surplus, what difference is there? Since the son has fulfilled his obligation and simply adds something so that his father will have more, why is this person cursed? The Gemara answers: Even so, it is a disrespectful matter for one to feed his father with money that has been designated as charity for the poor.

转讗 砖诪注 砖讗诇讜 讗转 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 注讚 讛讬讻谉 讻讬讘讜讚 讗讘 讜讗诐 讗诪专 诇讛诐 讻讚讬 砖讬讟讜诇 讗专谞拽讬 讜讬讝专拽谞讜 诇讬诐 讘驻谞讬讜 讜讗讬谞讜 诪讻诇讬诪讜 讜讗讬 讗诪专转 诪砖诇 讗讘 诪讗讬 谞驻拽讗 诇讬讛 诪讬谞讬讛 讘专讗讜讬 诇讬讜专砖讜

The Gemara further suggests: Come and hear: They asked Rabbi Eliezer how far one must go in honoring his father and mother. Rabbi Eliezer said to them: Such that the father takes a purse and throw it into the sea in front of his son, and the son does not embarrass him. And if you say that the son honors him from the money of the father, what difference does it make to the son? Why would the son care if his father throws away his own purse? The Gemara answers: This is referring to a son who is fit to inherit from him. Since the son thinks that the money will eventually belong to him, he has cause for anger.

讜讻讬 讛讗 讚专讘讛 讘专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讚专讘 讛讜谞讗 拽专注 砖讬专讗讬 讘讗谞驻讬 专讘讛 讘专讬讛 讗诪专 讗讬讝讜诇 讗讬讞讝讬 讗讬 专转讞 讗讬 诇讗 专转讞 讜讚诇诪讗 专转讞 讜拽注讘专 讗诇驻谞讬 注讜专 诇讗 转转谉 诪讻砖诇 讚诪讞讬诇 诇讬讛 诇讬拽专讬讛

And this is as reflected in an incident involving Rabba bar Rav Huna, when Rav Huna tore silk garments in front of his son Rabba. Rav Huna had said to himself: I will go and see if he becomes angry or does not become angry, i.e., he wanted to test him and see whether his son Rabba would honor him. The Gemara asks: But perhaps his son would become angry and Rav Huna would thereby violate the prohibition of: 鈥淣or put a stumbling block before the blind鈥 (Leviticus 19:14), as by testing his son Rav Huna would have caused him to sin. The Gemara answers: It was a case where the father had forgone his honor from the outset. Consequently, even if the son grew angry with him, he would not have violated the mitzva.

讜讛讗 拽注讘专 诪砖讜诐 讘诇 转砖讞讬转 讚注讘讚 诇讬讛 讘驻讜诪讘讬讬谞讬 讜讚讬诇诪讗 诪砖讜诐 讛讻讬 诇讗 专转讞 讚注讘讚 诇讬讛 讘砖注转 专讬转讞讬讛

The Gemara asks: But by tearing his clothes, he violates the prohibition: Do not destroy (see Deuteronomy 20:19). The Gemara answers that Rav Huna made a tear at the seam, so that the garment could be repaired. The Gemara asks: Perhaps it was due to that reason that the son did not become angry, because he saw that his father caused no actual damage? The Gemara answers: He did this when the son was already angry for some other reason, so that he would not notice this detail.

诪转谞讬 诇讬讛 专讘 讬讞讝拽讗诇 诇专诪讬 讘专讬讛 讛谞砖专驻讬诐 讘谞住拽诇讬诐 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讗讜诪专 讬讚讜谞讜 讘住拽讬诇讛 砖讛砖专讬驻讛 讞诪讜专讛

The Gemara cites another story involving the mitzva of honoring one鈥檚 father and mother. Rav Ye岣zkel taught his son Rami: If people sentenced to be burned became mingled with those sentenced to be stoned Rabbi Shimon says: All of them are judged with the punishment of stoning, as the punishment of burning is more severe. Since the death penalty of each is uncertain, all of them are treated leniently.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讘专讬讛 讗讘讗 诇讗 转讬转谞讬讬讗 讛讻讬 诪讗讬 讗讬专讬讗 砖专讬驻讛 讞诪讜专讛 转讬驻讜拽 诇讬 讚专讜讘讗 谞住拽诇讬诐 谞讬谞讛讜 讗诇讗 讛讻讬 讗讬转谞讬讬讗 讛谞住拽诇讬诐 讘谞砖专驻讬诐

Rav Yehuda, who was also Rav Ye岣zkel鈥檚 son, said to him: Father, do not teach the mishna this way, as, according to this version, why is this the halakha specifically because burning is more severe than stoning? Let him derive it from the fact that the majority are sentenced to be stoned. The wording of the baraita, which states that those who were supposed to be burned became mixed up with those who were to be stoned, indicates that the people sentenced to stoning are the majority. If so, one should simply follow the majority. Rather, I will teach it this way: If those who are sentenced to be stoned became mixed up with those who are sentenced to be burned, they are all judged with the punishment of stoning even though this is the minority, as they are all treated leniently.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗讬 讛讻讬 讗讬诪讗 住讬驻讗 讜讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 讬讚讜谞讜 讘砖专讬驻讛 砖讛住拽讬诇讛 讞诪讜专讛 诪讗讬 讗讬专讬讗 讚住拽讬诇讛 讞诪讜专讛 转讬驻讜拽 诇讬 讚专讜讘讗 谞砖专驻讬诐 谞讬谞讛讜

Rav Ye岣zkel said to him: If so, say the latter clause of the mishna: And the Rabbis say that they should be judged with the punishment of burning, as the punishment of stoning is more severe. According to your version, why is this the halakha specifically because stoning is more severe? Let him derive it due to the fact that the majority of people are sentenced to be burned, and one follows the majority.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 讛转诐 专讘谞谉 讛讜讗 讚拽讗诪专讜 诇讬讛 诇专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讚拽讗诪专转 砖专讬驻讛 讞诪讜专讛 诇讗 住拽讬诇讛 讞诪讜专讛

His son Rav Yehuda said to him: The statement of the Rabbis is not difficult, as there the Rabbis are saying to Rabbi Shimon as follows: That which you said, that burning is more severe, is not the case; rather, stoning is more severe. In other words, the Rabbis were specifically responding to Rabbi Shimon鈥檚 reasoning, and therefore they stated the opposite claim and ignored the issue of which group is in the majority.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 砖诪讜讗诇 诇专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 砖讬谞谞讗 诇讗 转讬诪讗 诇讬讛 诇讗讘讜讱 讛讻讬 讚转谞讬讗 讛专讬 砖讛讬讛 讗讘讬讜 注讜讘专 注诇 讚讘专讬 转讜专讛 讗诇 讬讗诪专 诇讜 讗讘讗 注讘专转 注诇 讚讘专讬 转讜专讛 讗诇讗 讗讜诪专 诇讜 讗讘讗 讻讱 讻转讜讘 讘转讜专讛 讻讱 讻转讜讘 讘转讜专讛 爪注讜专讬 拽讗 诪爪注专 诇讬讛 讗诇讗 讗讜诪专 诇讜 讗讘讗 诪拽专讗 讻转讜讘 讘转讜专讛 讻讱

Later, Shmuel said to Rav Yehuda: Big-toothed one, do not speak to your father like that, as it is disrespectful. As it is taught in a baraita: If one鈥檚 father was transgressing a Torah matter, he should not say to him explicitly: Father, you transgressed a Torah matter. Rather, he should say to him: Father, so it is written in the Torah. The Gemara asks: If he says to him directly: This is what is written in the Torah, he will cause him suffering. Rather, he should say to him: Father, this verse is written in the Torah, and he should proceed to quote the verse, from which his father will understand on his own that he has acted improperly.

讗诇注讝专 讘谉 诪转讬讗 讗讜诪专 讗讘讗 讗讜诪专 讛砖拽讬谞讬 诪讬诐 讜诪爪讜讛 诇注砖讜转 诪谞讬讞 讗谞讬 讻讘讜讚 讗讘讗 讜注讜砖讛 讗转 讛诪爪讜讛 砖讗谞讬 讜讗讘讗 讞讬讬讘讬诐 讘诪爪讜讛 讗讬住讬 讘谉 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 讗诐 讗驻砖专 诇诪爪讜讛 诇讬注砖讜转 注诇 讬讚讬 讗讞专讬诐 转讬注砖讛 注诇 讬讚讬 讗讞专讬诐 讜讬诇讱 讛讜讗 讘讻讘讜讚 讗讘讬讜 讗诪专 专讘 诪转谞讛 讛诇讻讛 讻讗讬住讬 讘谉 讬讛讜讚讛

Elazar ben Matya says: If my father says: Give me water, and there is a mitzva for me to perform at the same time, I set aside the honor of my father and perform the mitzva, as my father and I are both obligated in the mitzva. Isi ben Yehuda says: If it is possible for this mitzva to be performed by others, let it be performed by others, and he should go and attend to the honor due to his father, as the honor of his father is his obligation alone. Rav Mattana says: The halakha with regard to this matter is in accordance with the opinion of Isi bar Yehuda.

讗诪专 专讘 讬爪讞拽 讘专 砖讬诇讗 讗诪专 专讘 诪转谞讛 讗诪专 专讘 讞住讚讗 讛讗讘 砖诪讞诇 注诇 讻讘讜讚讜 讻讘讜讚讜 诪讞讜诇 讛专讘 砖诪讞诇 注诇 讻讘讜讚讜 讗讬谉 讻讘讜讚讜 诪讞讜诇

Rav Yitz岣k bar Sheila says that Rav Mattana says that Rav 岣sda says: With regard to a father who forgoes his honor, his honor is forgone, and his son does not transgress if he does not treat him in the proper manner. By contrast, with regard to a rabbi who forgoes his honor, his honor is not forgone.

讜专讘 讬讜住祝 讗诪专 讗驻讬诇讜 讛专讘 砖诪讞诇 注诇 讻讘讜讚讜 讻讘讜讚讜 诪讞讜诇 砖谞讗诪专 讜讛壮 讛诇讱 诇驻谞讬讛诐 讬讜诪诐 讗诪专 专讘讗 讛讻讬 讛砖转讗 讛转诐 讛拽讚讜砖 讘专讜讱 讛讜讗 注诇诪讗 讚讬诇讬讛 讛讜讗 讜转讜专讛 讚讬诇讬讛 讛讬讗 诪讞讬诇 诇讬讛 诇讬拽专讬

And Rav Yosef says: Even with regard to a rabbi who forgoes his honor, his honor is forgone, as it is stated: 鈥淎nd the Lord went before them by day鈥 (Exodus 13:21). God Himself, the Teacher of the Jewish people, had forgone the honor due Him and took the trouble to guide the people. Rava said: How can these cases be compared? There, with regard to the Holy One, Blessed be He, the world is His and the Torah is His, and therefore He can forgo His honor.

讛讻讗 转讜专讛 讚讬诇讬讛 讛讬讗 讛讚专 讗诪专 专讘讗 讗讬谉 转讜专讛 讚讬诇讬讛 讛讬讗 讚讻转讬讘 讜讘转讜专转讜 讬讛讙讛 讬讜诪诐 讜诇讬诇讛

By contrast, here, is it his Torah, that the teacher can forgo its honor? Rava then said: Yes, if he studies, it is his Torah, as it is written: 鈥淔or his delight is the Torah of the Lord, and in his Torah he meditates day and night鈥 (Psalms 1:2). This indicates that at first it is 鈥渢he Torah of the Lord,鈥 but after he studies, it becomes 鈥渉is Torah.鈥

讗讬谞讬 讜讛讗 专讘讗 诪砖拽讬 讘讬 讛诇讜诇讗 讚讘专讬讛 讜讚诇 诇讬讛 讻住讗 诇专讘 驻驻讗 讜诇专讘 讛讜谞讗 讘专讬讛 讚专讘 讬讛讜砖注 讜拽诪讜 诪拽诪讬讛 诇专讘 诪专讬 讜诇专讘 驻谞讞住 讘专讬讛 讚专讘 讞住讚讗 讜诇讗 拽诪讜 诪拽诪讬讛 讗讬拽驻讚 讜讗诪专 讛谞讜 专讘谞谉 专讘谞谉 讜讛谞讜 专讘谞谉 诇讗讜 专讘谞谉

The Gemara asks: Is that so? But Rava served drinks to the guests at his son鈥檚 wedding celebration, and he poured a cup for Rav Pappa and Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, and they stood before him when he approached them. When he poured a cup for Rav Mari and for Rav Pine岣s, son of Rav 岣sda, they did not stand before him. Rava became angry and said: Are these Sages, i.e., Rav Mari and Rav Pine岣s, Sages, and are those Sages, who stood to honor me, not Sages? Do you think you are so great that you are not required to honor a Sage?

讜转讜 专讘 驻驻讗 讛讜讛 诪砖拽讬 讘讬 讛诇讜诇讗 讚讗讘讗 诪专 讘专讬讛 讜讚诇讬 诇讬讛 讻住讗 诇专讘讬 讬爪讞拽 讘专讬讛 讚专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讜诇讗 拽诐 诪拽诪讬讛 讜讗讬拽驻讚 讗驻讬诇讜 讛讻讬 讛讬讚讜专 诪讬注讘讚 诇讬讛 讘注讜

And furthermore, it happened that Rav Pappa was serving drinks to the guests at the wedding celebration [hillula] of Abba Mar, his son, and he poured a cup for Rav Yitz岣k, son of Rav Yehuda, and he did not stand before him, and Rav Pappa became angry. These anecdotes indicate that even when a rabbi forgoes the honor due to him by serving drinks to his guests, his honor is not forgone. The Gemara answers: A rabbi can forgo the full measure of honor due to him, but even so, others are required to perform some act of reverence, such as preparing to stand before him.

讗诪专 专讘 讗砖讬 讗驻讬诇讜 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讛专讘 砖诪讞诇 注诇 讻讘讜讚讜 讻讘讜讚讜 诪讞讜诇 谞砖讬讗 砖诪讞诇 注诇 讻讘讜讚讜 讗讬谉 讻讘讜讚讜 诪讞讜诇 诪讬转讬讘讬 诪注砖讛 讘专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讜专讘讬 讬讛讜砖注 讜专讘讬 爪讚讜拽 砖讛讬讜 诪住讜讘讬谉 讘讘讬转 讛诪砖转讛 讘谞讜 砖诇 专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讜讛讬讛 专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 注讜诪讚 讜诪砖拽讛 注诇讬讛诐 谞转谉 讛讻讜住 诇专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讜诇讗 谞讟诇讜 谞转谞讜 诇专讘讬 讬讛讜砖注 讜拽讬讘诇讜 讗诪专 诇讜 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 诪讛 讝讛 讬讛讜砖注 讗谞讜 讬讜砖讘讬谉 讜专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讘专讬讘讬 注讜诪讚 讜诪砖拽讛 注诇讬谞讜

Rav Ashi said: Even according to the one who says that if a rabbi forgoes the honor due him, his honor is forgone, if a Nasi forgoes the honor due him, his honor is not forgone. The Gemara raises an objection: There was an incident involving Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua and Rabbi Tzadok, who were reclining at the wedding of Rabban Gamliel鈥檚 son. And Rabban Gamliel, who was Nasi of the Sanhedrin at the time, was standing over them and serving them drinks. He gave the cup to Rabbi Eliezer and he would not accept it; he gave it to Rabbi Yehoshua and he accepted it. Rabbi Eliezer said to him: What is this, Yehoshua? We sit and the esteemed Rabban Gamliel stands over us and serves us drinks?

讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪爪讬谞讜 讙讚讜诇 诪诪谞讜 砖砖诪砖 讗讘专讛诐 讙讚讜诇 诪诪谞讜 讜砖诪砖 讗讘专讛诐 讙讚讜诇 讛讚讜专 讛讬讛 讜讻转讜讘 讘讜 讜讛讜讗 注诪讚 注诇讬讛诐 讜砖诪讗 转讗诪专讜 讻诪诇讗讻讬 讛砖专转 谞讚诪讜 诇讜 诇讗 谞讚诪讜 诇讜 讗诇讗 诇注专讘讬讬诐 讜讗谞讜 诇讗 讬讛讗 专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讘专讬讘讬 注讜诪讚 讜诪砖拽讛 注诇讬谞讜

Rabbi Yehoshua said to him: We found one greater than him who served his guests, as our forefather Abraham was greater than him and he served his guests. Abraham was the greatest man of his generation and it is written about him: 鈥淎nd he stood over them under the tree, and they ate鈥 (Genesis 18:8). And lest you say: His guests appeared to him as ministering angels, and that is why he honored them, in fact they appeared to him only as Arabs. And if so, should not the esteemed Rabban Gamliel stand over us and serve us drinks?

讗诪专 诇讛诐 专讘讬 爪讚讜拽 注讚 诪转讬 讗转诐 诪谞讬讞讬诐 讻讘讜讚讜 砖诇 诪拽讜诐 讜讗转诐 注讜住拽讬诐 讘讻讘讜讚 讛讘专讬讜转 讛拽讚讜砖 讘专讜讱 讛讜讗 诪砖讬讘 专讜讞讜转 讜诪注诇讛 谞砖讬讗讬诐 讜诪讜专讬讚 诪讟专 讜诪爪诪讬讞 讗讚诪讛 讜注讜专讱 砖讜诇讞谉 诇驻谞讬 讻诇 讗讞讚 讜讗讞讚 讜讗谞讜 诇讗 讬讛讗 专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讘专讬讘讬 注讜诪讚 讜诪砖拽讛 注诇讬谞讜

Rabbi Tzadok said to them: For how long will you ignore the honor due to the Omnipresent, and deal with the honor of people? You could cite a proof from God Himself. After all, the Holy One, Blessed be He, makes the winds blow, and raises the clouds, and brings the rain, and causes the earth to sprout, and sets a table before each and every creature. And should not the esteemed Rabban Gamliel stand over us and serve us drinks? This discussion indicates that even a Nasi may forgo the honor due him.

讗诇讗 讗讬 讗讬转诪专 讛讻讬 讗讬转诪专 讗诪专 专讘 讗砖讬 讗驻讬诇讜 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 谞砖讬讗 砖诪讞诇 注诇 讻讘讜讚讜 讻讘讜讚讜 诪讞讜诇 诪诇讱 砖诪讞诇 注诇 讻讘讜讚讜 讗讬谉 讻讘讜讚讜 诪讞讜诇 砖谞讗诪专 砖讜诐 转砖讬诐 注诇讬讱 诪诇讱 砖转讛讗 讗讬诪转讜 注诇讬讱

Rather, if it was stated, it was stated as follows: Rav Ashi said: Even according to the one who says that if a Nasi forgoes the honor due him, his honor is forgone, if a king forgoes the honor due him, his honor is not forgone. As it is stated: 鈥淵ou shall set a king over you鈥 (Deuteronomy 17:15), which indicates that his fear should be upon you. The people are commanded to fear a king, and therefore it is not permitted for him to forgo the honor due to him.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 诪驻谞讬 砖讬讘讛 转拽讜诐 讬讻讜诇 讗驻讬诇讜 诪驻谞讬 讝拽谉 讗砖诪讗讬 转诇诪讜讚 诇讜诪专 讝拽谉 讜讗讬谉 讝拽谉 讗诇讗 讞讻诐 砖谞讗诪专 讗住驻讛 诇讬 砖讘注讬诐 讗讬砖 诪讝拽谞讬 讬砖专讗诇 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讛讙诇讬诇讬 讗讜诪专 讗讬谉 讝拽谉 讗诇讗 诪讬 砖拽谞讛 讞讻诪讛 砖谞讗诪专 讛壮 拽谞谞讬 专讗砖讬转 讚专讻讜

The Sages taught with regard to the verse: 鈥淏efore the hoary head you shall stand and you shall revere the face of an elder, and you shall fear your God鈥 (Leviticus 19:32): One might have thought that it is obligatory to stand before a simple [ashmai] elder. Therefore, the verse states: 鈥渆lder,鈥 and an 鈥渆lder鈥 means nothing other than a wise man, as it is stated: 鈥淕ather unto Me seventy men of the Elders of Israel, whom you know to be the Elders of the people鈥 (Numbers 11:16). Rabbi Yosei HaGelili says: An 鈥渆lder [zaken]鈥 means nothing other than one who has acquired wisdom. He interprets the word zaken as a contraction of the phrase zeh kanna, meaning: This one has acquired. Elsewhere the word kanna is used in reference to wisdom, as it is stated that wisdom says: 鈥淭he Lord acquired me [kanani] at the beginning of His way鈥 (Proverbs 8:22).

讬讻讜诇 讬注诪讜讚 诪驻谞讬讜 诪诪拽讜诐 专讞讜拽 转诇诪讜讚 诇讜诪专 转拽讜诐 讜讛讚专转 诇讗 讗诪专转讬 拽讬诪讛 讗诇讗 讘诪拽讜诐 砖讬砖 讛讬讚讜专

The baraita continues: One might have thought that one must stand before an elder as soon as he sees him, even from a distance. Therefore the verse states: 鈥淵ou shall stand and you shall revere鈥 (Leviticus 19:32), which teaches: I said that one is obligated to stand only in a place where there is reverence. If he stands while the elder is still far away, it is not clear that he is doing so in his honor.

讬讻讜诇 讬讛讚专谞讜 讘诪诪讜谉 转诇诪讜讚 诇讜诪专 转拽讜诐 讜讛讚专转 诪讛 拽讬诪讛 砖讗讬谉 讘讛 讞住专讜谉 讻讬住 讗祝 讛讬讚讜专 砖讗讬谉 讘讜 讞住专讜谉 讻讬住 讬讻讜诇 讬注诪讜讚 诪驻谞讬讜 诪讘讬转 讛讻住讗 讜诪讘讬转 讛诪专讞抓 转诇诪讜讚 诇讜诪专 转拽讜诐 讜讛讚专转 诇讗 讗诪专转讬 拽讬诪讛 讗诇讗 讘诪拽讜诐 砖讬砖 讛讬讚讜专

The baraita continues: One might have thought that he should revere him through money, i.e., that one is required to give an elder money in his honor. Therefore, the verse states: 鈥淵ou shall stand and you shall revere.鈥 Just as standing includes no monetary loss, so too, reverence is referring to an action that includes no monetary loss. One might have thought that one should also stand before him in the lavatory or in the bathhouse. Therefore, the verse states: 鈥淵ou shall stand and you shall revere,鈥 which indicates: I said the mitzva of standing only in a place where there is reverence. It is inappropriate to show respect for someone in places of this kind.

讬讻讜诇 讬注爪讬诐 注讬谞讬讜 讻诪讬 砖诇讗 专讗讛讜 转诇诪讜讚 诇讜诪专 转拽讜诐 讜讬专讗转 讚讘专 讛诪住讜专 诇诇讘 谞讗诪专 讘讜 讜讬专讗转 诪讗诇讛讬讱

The baraita continues: One might have thought that one may close his eyes like one who does not see the elder. Therefore, the verse states: 鈥淏efore the hoary head you shall stand and you shall revere the face of an elder, and you shall fear your God鈥 (Leviticus 19:32). With regard to any matter given over to the heart, it is stated: 鈥淎nd you shall fear your God.鈥 This phrase is referring to a situation where it is impossible to prove whether one purposefully made it appear as if he were not aware that he was obligated to perform a mitzva, as only that individual and God know the truth.

专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讗诇注讝专 讗讜诪专 诪谞讬谉 诇讝拽谉 砖诇讗 讬讟专讬讞 转诇诪讜讚 诇讜诪专 讝拽谉 讜讬专讗转 讗讬住讬 讘谉 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 诪驻谞讬 砖讬讘讛 转拽讜诐 讗驻讬诇讜 讻诇 砖讬讘讛 讘诪砖诪注

The baraita continues: Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: From where is it derived that an elder should not trouble others to honor him? The verse states: 鈥淎nd you shall revere the face of an elder, and you shall fear your God.鈥 The phrase 鈥渁n elder, and you shall fear,鈥 read by itself, without the rest of the verse, indicates that an elder is also commanded to fear God, and not purposefully act in a manner to cause others to have to honor him. In conclusion, the baraita cites another opinion. Isi ben Yehuda says that the verse: 鈥淏efore the hoary head you shall stand,鈥 indicates that even any person of hoary head is included in this mitzva, not only a Sage.

专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讛讙诇讬诇讬 讛讬讬谞讜 转谞讗 拽诪讗 讗讬讻讗 讘讬谞讬讬讛讜 讬谞讬拽 讜讞讻讬诐 转谞讗 拽诪讗 住讘专 讬谞讬拽 讜讞讻讬诐 诇讗 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讛讙诇讬诇讬 住讘专 讗驻讬诇讜 讬谞讬拽 讜讞讻讬诐

The Gemara analyzes this baraita. Apparently the opinion of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili is the same as that of the first tanna, as they both say that an elder is a Torah scholar. What does Rabbi Yosei HaGelili add? The Gemara answers: There is a difference between them with regard to one who is young and wise. The first tanna maintains: One who is young and wise is not considered an elder, as the mitzva applies only to one who is both elderly and wise. Rabbi Yosei HaGelili maintains: It is even a mitzva to honor one who is young and wise. According to Rabbi Yosei HaGelili, the mitzva is not referring to old age at all, but only to wisdom.

诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讚专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讛讙诇讬诇讬 讗诪专 诇讱 讗讬 住诇拽讗 讚注转讱 讻讚拽讗诪专 转谞讗 拽诪讗 讗诐 讻谉 谞讻转讜讘 专讞诪谞讗 诪驻谞讬 砖讬讘讛 讝拽谉 转拽讜诐 讜讛讚专转 诪讗讬 砖谞讗 讚驻诇讙讬谞讛讜 专讞诪谞讗 诇诪讬诪专 讚讛讗讬 诇讗讜 讛讗讬 讜讛讗讬 诇讗讜 讛讗讬 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 讗驻讬诇讜 讬谞讬拽 讜讞讻讬诐

The Gemara asks: What is the reasoning of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili? He could have said to you that if enters your mind to explain as the first tanna says, that for the obligation to honor another be in effect that person must be both elderly and wise, if so, let the Merciful One write: Before the hoary head of an elder you shall stand and you shall revere. What is the difference between the two terms 鈥渉oary head鈥 and 鈥渆lder,鈥 that the Merciful One separates them? This serves to say that this term is not the same as that one, and that term is not the same as this one, i.e., an elder is not required to have a hoary head. Learn from the verse that even one who is young and wise is called an elder.

讜转谞讗 拽诪讗 诪砖讜诐 讚讘注讬 诇诪讬住诪讱 讝拽谉 讜讬专讗转 讜转谞讗 拽诪讗 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讗讬 住诇拽讗 讚注转讱 讻讚拽讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讛讙诇讬诇讬 讗诐 讻谉 谞讻转讜讘 专讞诪谞讗

And the first tanna would say that the verse is written this way because the Torah wants to juxtapose 鈥渆lder鈥 with 鈥渁nd you shall fear,鈥 in accordance with Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar鈥檚 statement above that an elder should not trouble others to honor him. The Gemara asks: And what is the reasoning of the first tanna? Why does he maintain that one is obligated to stand only before an elder, wise man? The Gemara answers: The first tanna maintains that if it enters your mind to explain as Rabbi Yosei HaGelili says, let the Merciful One write:

Scroll To Top