Parallel
עירובין 63:2
Soncino English Talmud · Berean Standard Bible
and elsewhere it is written: Nun his son, Joshua his son. This exposition, however, differs from that of R. Abba b. Papa, for R. Abba b. Papa stated: Joshua was punished for no other sin than that of preventing Israel or one night from the duty of propagation; for it is said in Scripture: And it came to pass, when Joshua was by Jericho, that he lifted up his eyes and looked etc. and this is followed by the text: And he said: ‘Nay, but I am captain of the host of the Lord,’ I am now come’. ‘Last evening’, he said to him [in effect]. ‘you omitted to offer up the continual evening sacrifice and now you are neglecting the study of the Torah’. ‘On account of which offence’, the other asked, ‘did you come’? — ‘Now’, he replied. ‘am I come’. Joshua, we read forthwith, went that night into the midst of the vale, a text which, R. Johanan explained, teaches that he entered into the profundities of the halachah. And we have a tradition that so long as the Ark and the Shechinah are not settled in their appointed place connubial intercourse is forbidden. R. Samuel b. Inia stated in the name of Rab: The study of the Torah is more important than the offering of the daily continual sacrifices, since he said to him, ‘now am I come’. R. Berona stated in the name of Rab: Concerning the man who sleeps in a room in which husband and wife rest Scripture says: The women of My people ye cast out from their pleasant houses. This, R. Joseph said, applies even to the time when one's wife is menstruant. Raba said: If one's wife is menstruant may a blessing come upon him. This, however, is not very logical, for who watched him until that time? There was a certain alley in which Lahman b. Ristak lived. ‘Will you let us your domain? said the other residents to him; but he would not let it to them. So they went to Abaye and reported the matter to him. ‘Renounce’, he advised them, ‘your respective domains in favour of one resident so that he would be in the position of one individual living in the same place with a heathen, and wherever one individual lives in the same place with a heathen the latter imposes no restrictions upon the former’. ‘Is not the only reason’, he was asked, ‘that it is not usual for one Israelite and one heathen to live together? And is it not a fact that these did live together?’ — ‘The renunciation of’ private domains in favour of one resident’, he replied: ‘is an unusual occurrence, and the Rabbis enacted no prohibitory measures against any occurrence that is unusual’. R. Huna son of R. Joshua proceeded to report this ruling to Raba when the latter remarked:36
—