Arakhin

the other in public.1 R. Samuel b. Elnadab asked of R. Hanina, or as others say. R. Samuel b. Nadab, the son-in-law of R. Hanina, asked of R. Hanina; or, according to still others, asked of R. Joshua b. Levi: Wherein is the leper different that the Torah said: He shall dwell alone; without the camp shall his dwelling be?2 He separated a husband from his wife, a man from his neighbour, therefore said the Torah: ‘He shall dwell alone’. R. Joshua b. Levi said: Wherein is the leper different that the Torah said: Two living clean birds3 [he should bring] so that he may become pure again? The Holy One, blessed be He, said: He did the work of a babbler, therefore let him offer a babbler as a sacrifice. 4 Our Rabbis taught: Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thy heart.5 One might have believed one may only not smite him, slap him, curse him, therefore the text states: ‘In thy heart’; Scripture speaks of ‘hatred in the heart’. Whence do we know that if a man sees something unseemly in his neighbour, he is obliged to reprove him? Because it is said: Thou shalt surely rebuke.6 If he rebuked him and he did not accept it, whence do we know that he must rebuke him again? The text states: ‘surely rebuke’ all ways. One might assume [this to be obligatory] even though his face blanched, therefore the text states: ‘Thou shalt not bear sin because of him’. 6 It was taught [in a Baraitha]: R. Tarfon said, I wonder whether there is any one in this generation who accepts reproof, for if one says to him: Remove the mote from between your eyes, he would answer: Remove the beam from between your eyes! R. Eleazar b. Azariah said: I wonder if there Is one in this generation who knows how to reprove! R. Johanan b. Nuri said: I call heaven and earth to witness for myself that often was Akiba punished7 through me because I used to complain against him before our Rabban, Gamaliel Beribbi,8 and all the more he showered love upon me, to make true what has been said: Reprove not a scorner, lest he hate thee; reprove a wise man and he will love thee.9 R. Judah son of R. Simeon b. Pazzi asked of R. Simeon b. Pazzi: What is preferable: reproof with honest purpose or false modesty?10 — He answered: Won't you agree that true modesty is better,11 for a Master said: Modesty is the greatest of them all? Thus also is false modesty preferable. For Rab Judah said in the name of Rab: By all means let a man engage in the study of the Torah and in good deeds, even if not for their own sake, because through the work for an ulterior purpose he will arrive at the stage of doing [good] for its own sake.12 What is honest reproof and what is false modesty? — For instance the case of R. Huna and Hiyya b. Rab who were sitting before Samuel, when Hiyya b. Rab said: Sir, look how he is vexing me greatly. He [R. Huna] undertook not to vex him any more. After he [the former] left, he [R. Huna] said: He did this and that [unseemly] thing. Whereupon Samuel said: Why did you not tell him that to his face? He replied: Forbid that the seed of Rab should be put to shame through me!13 How far shall reproof be administered? Rab said: Until he [the reprover] be beaten. Samuel said: Until he be cursed. R. Johanan sad: Until he be rebuked. This is a point at issue between Tannaim. R. Eliezer said: Until he be beaten. R. Joshua said: Until he be cursed. Ben ‘Azzai said: Until he be rebuked. Said R. Nahman b. Isaac: All the three expounded one Scriptural verse; [It is written:] Then Saul's anger was kindled against Jonathan and he said unto him: Thou son of perverse rebellion, do not I know that thou hast chosen the son of Jesse to thine own shame, and unto the shame of thy mother's nakedness?14 And it is written: And Saul cast his spear at him to smite him.15 The one who said [above] ‘Until he be beaten’ [said so] because it is written: ‘to smite him’; the other who said: ‘Until he be cursed’ [said so] because it is written: ‘to thine own shame and to the shame of thy mother's nakedness’; the other, who said: ‘Until he be rebuked’ [said so] because it is written: ‘Then Saul's anger was kindled’. But according to him who says: ‘Until he be shouted at’, does not Scripture mention ‘beating’ and ‘cursing’? — That was different, because for his great love of David, Jonathan risked his life even further. How far shall a man suffer before changing his lodging? — Rab said: Until he is beaten, Samuel said: Until they throw his bundles over his shoulder. Where he himself is beaten there is no dispute [that it is proper for him to leave]; similarly if they threw his bundles over his shoulder, there is likewise no dispute. They are of conflicting opinion only in case his wife is beaten, one holding: ‘As long as he himself is not vexed what difference does it make’?16 The other's view being: ‘It will end in a quarrel [ultimately]’. Why all that [deliberation]?17 — Because a Master said: A boarder [constantly changing his lodging] discredits others and himself.18 R. Judah in the name of Rab said: Whence is derived from the Torah the view that a man should not change his lodging? Because it is said: [And he went] unto the place where his tent had been at the beginning.19 R. Jose b. Hanina said: [It is derived] from here: And he went on his [former] journeys.20 What is the practical difference between them? — There is this difference: the case of a casual lodging. R. Johanan said: Whence do we know that a man should not change his occupation and that of his forebears? As it is said: And King Solomon sent and fetched Hiram out of Tyre. He was the son of a widow of the tribe of Naphtali,21 and his father was a man of Tyre, a worker in brass;22 and a Master said: His mother was of the house of Dan;23 and it is written: And I behold I have appointed him with Ohaliab, the son of Ahisamach, of the tribe of Dan.24 At what stage do [Divine] visitations commence?25 — R. Eleazar said: If a man had, for example, a garment woven for him to wear and it does not fit him. Raba the younger (or, as others say. R. Ze'ira; or again. as others say. R. Samuel b. Nahmani) demurred to this: But more than that was said. ‘Even if it had been intended to serve him [the wine] hot, and it was served cold to him; or it was intended to be served cold, and it was served hot to him [is accounted as a divine visitation]’, and you say [only] at that stage? Mar, the son of Rabina, said: Even if his shirt gets turned inside out. Raba (or, as others say, R. Hisda, or again, as some say. R. Isaac, or as it was said, it was taught in a Baraitha): Even if he puts the hand into his pocket to take out three [coins] and he takes out but two. Now this is only in the case [where he intended to take out] three, and [took out] two, but not if [he meant to take] two and three came into his hand, because it is no trouble to throw it back. But why all this [information]? — Because the School of R. Ishmael taught: Anyone upon whom forty days have passed without [divine] visitation, had received his world. In the West [Palestine] they say: robe, emitting sound, procures atonement for the act of sound which is his sin. babbling. reproof, even though it was not accepted when administered first. deters him from doing his duty in this respect. unseemly behaviour (whatever it was), but he would not disgrace him by direct reproach, while reporting his misbehaviour in his absence. act? hard-to-please, as well as upon the lodging place, which will be regarded as unsatisfactory. ‘his tent’ suggests a certain permanency. whereas he who emphasized the Biblical ‘he went on his journeys’ would want to see the place of any of his journeys revisited. existence, in which one will derive but the fruits of one's good deeds on earth, having received the punishments for misdeeds whilst yet on earth. Everything below the stage of chastisement is but unimportant annoyance of no compensating quality.