Babylonian Talmud

Rodkinson 1918 — source 5, scan section 32

ter his Passover sacrifice, or to circumcise his son, or to eat the betrothal-meal at the house of his father-in-law, and on the road recollects that he has left leaven in his house: if he can return home, remove it, and then go back and accomplish any of the acts mentioned, he should do so and remove the leaven ; but if he cannot, he should in his mind renounce (the use of the leaven). If his object in leaving home was to aid persons to escape from armed foes, from inundation, robbers, or fire, or to rescue persons from beneath the ruins of fallen buildings, he should in his mind renounce the leaven; but if his object in leaving home was to secure his sabbatical resting-place for his private purposes (in order to obtain his right to the legal limits), he must immediately return and remove the leaven. Likewise, if a person on leaving Jerusalem remembers having in his pos- session consecrated flesh : if he had gone beyond (the hill) Zophim, he may burn it wherever he may be; but if he had not gone beyond it, he must return and burn it before the sanctu- ary, with wood of the altar. What is the quantity (of conse- crated flesh or leaven) which makes it obligatory for a man to return? R. Meir says: " Either must be of the size of an egg." R. Jehudah says: " Of the size of an olive"; but the sages say: "Consecrated flesh if of the size of an olive and leaven if of the size of an egg." GEMARA: There is a contradiction: (We have learned): " One who goes to eat the betrothal-meal at the house of his father-in-law or to secure his sabbatical resting-place for his pri- vate purposes, should, if he remembered having leaven in his house, return immediately and remove it." Said R. Hisda: " The point of difference between this teaching and the Mishna is only concerning the second meal (after the betrothal) ; but as for the first, all agree, that it is a religious duty and the man need not return." We have learned in a Boraitha: " R. Jehudah said: ' I only heard concerning the actual betrothal-meal, but not concerning the meal at which the bridal gifts are bestowed.' Said R. Jose to him: ' I heard concerning both.' " We have learned in a Boraitha: R. Simeon said: " A meal which is not served on account of some religious duty should not be enjoyed by a Talmud-chacham (scholar)." What kind of a meal is referred to as not being served on account of a religious duty ? Said R. Johanan : " The betrothal-meal served 8o THE BABYLONIAN TALMUD. when an ordinary Israelite weds the daughter of a priest, or when a common person weds the daughter of a Talmud-chacham (scholar)" ; for R. Johanan would always maintain, that such alliances do not end well. This is not so! Did not R. Johanan say elsewhere, that he who would become rich should ally him- self to the descendants of Aaron, when the union of prestige and learning will make him rich ? This presents no difficulty. For a scholar it is beneficial to wed a priest's daughter, but not for one of the common people. R. Jehoshua wedded the daughter of a priest. Subsequently he became ill, and said: " Is then Aaron not contented to have his descendants receive me as a son-in-law ? " R. Idi bar Abhin also wedded a priest's daughter, and they brought forth two sons, both of whom were admitted to fellow- ship [i.e., vvere entitled to be ranked as rabbis). They were R. Shesheth and R. Jehoshua. R. Papa said: " If I had not wedded a priest's daughter I should never have become rich;" but R. Kahana said: " If / had not married a priest's daughter I should never have gone into exile";* and he was asked: "What hast thou suffered thereby; didst thou not flee to a place of learning?" and he answered: " I did not go into exile voluntarily (to improve my learning or to better my condition), but was compelled to flee from the persecution of the government." R. Itz'hak said : " One who enjoys a meal which is not served for the sake of a religious duty finally incurs the penalty of exile, as it is written [Amos vi. 4] : ' That eat lambs out of the flock, and calves out of the midst of the stall,' and further, it is said [ibid. 7] : ' Therefore now shall they go into exile.' " The rabbis taught: "A scholar who indulges in too many meals destroys his home, makes his wife a widovv', his children orphans, his knowledge vanishes; he becomes involved in strife, his words are disregarded, he profanes the name of Heaven, puts to shame the name of his teacher and the name of his father, and leaves behind him an ill-repute for himself, and his children unto the end of his generations." The rabbis taught: "A man should sell all his possessions and wed the daughter of a scholar; for should he die or be forced to go into exile he will be assured that his sons will be scholars, and he should not wed a daughter of the common people; for * R. Kahana was forced to flee from Babylon to Palestine. TRACT PESACHIM (PASSOVER). 8i should he die or be forced to go into exile, his children will be common persons." The rabbis taught: " A man should sell all his possessions in order to secure a scholar as a husband for his daughter. This can be compared to grapes which are planted among other grapes in a vineyard, where they are readily assimilated and present a good appearance. If, however, a common person is secured as a husband, it is like planting grapes among thorns, where they cannot thrive." The rabbis taught: "A man should sell all his possessions and secure the daughter of a scholar for a wife, and if he cannot secure the daughter of a scholar he should try to obtain a daughter of one of the most prominent men of the age. If he cannot succeed in that, he should endeavor to obtain a daughter of the most prominent men in his community; and failing in that, should seek the daughter of a man known to be charitable; and if he cannot succeed even in this, he should try and obtain the daughter of a teacher of children ; only should he avoid wedding the daughter of a common person." We have learned in a Boraitha : R. Aqiba said : When I was still a common (ignorant) man, I used to say: " If I could lay my hands on a scholar I would bite him like an ass," and his disciples said to him : " Rabbi, say * like a dog,' an ass does not bite," and he replied: " When an ass bites he generally breaks the bones of his* victim, while a dog only bites the flesh." We have learned in a Boraitha: R. Meir said: " One who gives his daughter to a common person virtually casts her to a lion ; for as a lion tears and devours his victim without shame, so does a common person beat his wife, then they come together again and he is not ashamed." We have learned in a Boraitha: R. Eliezer said: "If the common people did not require us for their own welfare, they