Kiddushin 33a (לג.) — the Talmud in English

The Merciful One should have written

“You shall rise before the aged and show deference to the old.”

For the verse is speaking of two people, and with regard to each one it should have stated both rising and showing deference!

And since it did not write this,

and from the fact that the verse did not say so,

infer from it that they are one.

The verse is speaking of one person: the aged person is an elder [a sage].

The Gemara explains the continuation of the beraita:

The Master said

in the beraita:

One might have thought that he should show him deference with money; therefore the verse states: “You shall rise and show deference”—just as rising does not involve monetary loss, so too showing deference does not involve monetary loss.

And we question this:

And

that is,

does rising not

mean that there

is monetary loss?!

Are we not dealing with a case where he is perforating a pearl,

for does the verse not also speak of a person who is perforating pearls, whose wages are substantial, and

in the meantime he stands before him,

while at that moment an elder passes by and he must rise before him,

and he is prevented from doing his work

and loses a great deal of money?! It follows that rising, too, involves monetary loss!

And we resolve this:

Rather,

this is how we derive that showing deference does not involve monetary loss:

First,

we juxtapose rising with showing deference,

and learn “rising” from “showing deference”:

Just as showing deference

that is, honoring with words or with money, is something

that does not involve neglecting

one’s work, then

so too

with

rising,

the verse is speaking specifically of a case

that does not involve neglecting

one’s work.

And

afterward,

we likewise juxtapose showing deference with rising,

and learn “showing deference” from “rising”:

Just as rising

refers, as explained above, to a case in which one does not neglect his work, and it follows that

it involves no monetary loss,

then

so too

with

showing deference,

the verse is speaking of a case

that involves no monetary loss.

From here the Sages said

that

craftsmen

who are engaged in the work of others

are not permitted to stand before Torah scholars while they are engaged in their work.

And we question this:

Is that so?!

Are craftsmen not permitted to do so?!

And

one cannot prove from the following Mishna [Bikkurim 3:3] that they are permitted to stand! As follows:

We learned

there: When those bringing the first fruits passed through Jerusalem,

all the craftsmen would stand before them, inquire after their welfare, and say to them: “Our brothers, inhabitants of such-and-such a place, may you come in peace.”

Thus it is clear from the Mishna that the craftsmen would rise before those bringing the first fruits even though they were thereby prevented from working. How, then, did we say above that craftsmen are not permitted to stand before Torah scholars? ,

And we resolve this:

Rabbi Yoḥanan said:

It was specifically

before them,

those bringing the first fruits, that the craftsmen would

stand

to honor them, so that they would become accustomed to coming, but

before Torah scholars, they do not stand.

From the words of the Gemara here we can determine whether this refers specifically to those bringing the first fruits, or to all those performing a mitzva while fulfilling it.

Rabbi Yosei bar Avin said: Come and see how beloved

and how greatly we must cherish

a mitzva at the time of its performance,

for before them,

those bringing the first fruits,

they stand,

whereas

before Torah scholars, they do not stand.

It follows that Rabbi Yosei bar Avin understood that one must rise before all those performing a mitzva at the time of its performance, and not specifically before those bringing the first fruits.

And we reject this: It is impossible to prove from those bringing the first fruits with regard to those performing another mitzva. For

perhaps,

perhaps craftsmen never rise before other people performing mitzvot, and

the case there is different:

those bringing the first fruits differ from other people performing mitzvot because

if

you say that one should not rise before them,

you will cause them to falter in the future,

as they will no longer bring first fruits, saying: “We are despised in the eyes of the people of Jerusalem.” But as for other people performing mitzvot, who fulfill the mitzva in their own cities, the local residents recognize their importance. There is no concern that they might refrain from fulfilling the mitzva thereafter. ,

The Gemara explains the continuation of the beraita:

The Master said

in the beraita:

One might have thought that one should stand before him in a bathroom or bathhouse;

therefore the verse states: “You shall rise and show deference.” I said “rising” only where there is showing of deference.

And we question this:

Is that so?!

Is it not necessary to rise before the sage in a bathhouse?!

But

there is proof that one must rise before a sage even in a bathhouse, as follows:

Rabbi Ḥiyya was sitting in the bathhouse,

he was sitting in the bathhouse,

and Rabbi Shimon bar Rabbi passed by,

walking past him,

Rabbi Shimon bar Rabbi

before him,

and he did not rise

Rabbi Ḥiyya

before him [

before him],

and he became angry,

taking offense at the matter.

And he came

and Rabbi Shimon came to his father, Rabbi, and

said to his father [

to Rabbi]:

I taught him two-fifths of the Book of Psalms,

I taught him the aggadic interpretations of two of the five sections of the Book of Psalms,

and he did not stand before me!

And furthermore,

another similar incident:

Bar Kappara—and some say

that it was

Rabbi Shmuel bar Rabbi Yosei—was sitting in the bathhouse,

he was sitting in the bathhouse,

when

he entered and

Rabbi Shimon bar Rabbi

went there,

and he did not rise before him,

before him,

and he became angry,

Rabbi Shimon bar Rabbi taking offense at the matter.

And he came and said to his father,

he came and reported to his father, Rabbi:

I taught him two-thirds of a third [

two portions of one third of the book]

in Torat Kohanim

and he did not stand before me.

And he said to him,

Rabbi:

Perhaps in them

in those beraitot that you taught him, he was

sitting and contemplating,

and because he was concentrating deeply on them, he did not notice that you were passing before him.

Certainly, Rabbi Shimon bar Rabbi held that one must rise before a sage even in a bathhouse, for this was why he took offense at those who did not rise before him, as stated above.

And there is proof that his father, Rabbi, held likewise:

For

the reason,

Rabbi’s entire reason for judging them favorably was only

because “

perhaps

he is sitting and contemplating them,”

and it implies:

were it not for this, no,

if he had not been sitting and contemplating them, Rabbi would not have judged the matter favorably.

If so, it is difficult: How can we have learned in the beraita above that one need not rise before the sage in a bathhouse?

And we resolve this:

It is not difficult. This

the beraita above, which says that one need not rise before a sage in a bathhouse, is speaking

in the inner rooms,

the inner rooms of the bathhouse, where people stand naked. Rising there does not constitute showing deference.

Whereas

these

incidents involving Rabbi Shimon bar Rabbi took place

in the outer rooms,

the outer rooms of the bathhouse, where people stand clothed, and rising there constitutes showing deference.

The Gemara proves that the incident involving Rabbi Shimon bar Rabbi indeed took place in the outer rooms of the bathhouse.

This is also reasonable,

it is indeed reasonable that this was the case,

for

after all,

Rabba bar bar Ḥana said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: “Everywhere it is permitted to contemplate

Torah matters

except in a bathhouse and a bathroom.”

But if you say that the incident took place in the inner rooms of the bathhouse, how could Rabbi have said to him, “Perhaps he is sitting and contemplating them”? Surely it is prohibited to contemplate Torah there.

Rather, it must be that the incident took place in the outer rooms of the bathhouse. Since the people standing there are not naked, it is not prohibited to contemplate Torah matters there.

And we reject the proof: It is possible that the incident actually took place in the inner rooms of the bathhouse, and nevertheless Rabbi said, “Perhaps he is sitting and contemplating them,” without his having committed a transgression, because

perhaps it is different when one is compelled,

perhaps he had considered the matter before entering the bathhouse, and because he was preoccupied with it, he involuntarily considered it in the bathhouse. He was under duress and did not transgress by doing so.

We learned in the continuation of the beraita:

One might have thought that he may close his eyes as though he had not seen him;

therefore the verse states: “You shall rise and fear.” And so on.

And we question this:

Are we dealing with wicked people,

that we need the verse to teach us not to close our eyes? Obviously, one who does this is wicked! And we resolve this: It is impossible to interpret the beraita according to its plain meaning;

rather,

this is how it should be understood:

One might have thought that he may close his eyes before the time when the obligation arrives,

that perhaps we should say that a person is permitted to close his eyes while the sage has not yet reached within four cubits of him, since he is not yet obligated to rise before him, as explained below, and by doing so he causes it

that when the time of obligation arrives, he will not see him,

so that when the sage enters within his four cubits, which is the time when the obligation takes effect, he will not see him and the obligation to honor him will not apply to him.

Therefore the verse states: “You shall rise and fear.”

You ought to fear the Creator of humanity, who knows your thoughts, because you are seeking devices to exempt yourself from His mitzva.

We learned in the beraita: One might have thought that one should stand before him from a distance; therefore the verse states: “You shall rise and show deference.” I said “rising” only where there is showing of deference.

With regard to this,

a tanna

taught in another beraita:

What is rising that involves showing deference?

You must say that it is

within

four cubits

of the sage.

Abaye said: We said [

we said] that the obligation to rise applies only within four cubits,

only with regard to one’s non-primary teacher; but with regard to one’s primary teacher,

one must stand before him

from the moment he comes within sight

as soon as one sees him. ,

The Gemara cites two incidents concerning rising before one’s primary teacher:

1.

As soon as Abaye saw the ear of Rav Yosef’s donkey approaching, he would stand.

When Abaye saw the ear of Rav Yosef’s donkey, and understood that Rav Yosef was approaching, he would immediately stand at that moment [because Rav Yosef was his primary teacher].

2.

Abaye was riding a donkey and proceeding along the bank of the Sagya River;

Abaye was riding a donkey and traveling along the bank of the Sagya River.

Rav Mesharsheya and the Sages were sitting on the other side,

Rav Mesharsheya and the other students of Abaye were sitting across the Sagya River, with the river separating them.

And they did not rise before him

before him.

He said to them [

to them]:

And

that is,

am I not a primary teacher?!

Surely, even when you are farther than four cubits from me, you should have risen!

They said to him: We did not take it to heart;

we were preoccupied with something else and did not remember to stand. We learned in a beraita:

Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: From where is it derived that an elder should not cause inconvenience?

The verse states: “Old, and you shall fear.”

Abaye said: We have received

this tradition,

that if he takes the long way around, he lives.

If the sage lengthens his own route and goes around the public so as not to inconvenience them by requiring them to stand, because of this merit he is granted a longer life.

Abaye

would

go around

the public. And likewise

Rabbi Zeira

would

go around.

Ravina was sitting before him

he was sitting before

Rabbi Yirmeya of Difti

his teacher.

A certain man passed before him and did not cover his head,

one man passed before them without covering his head in their honor.

He said

Ravina:

How insolent this man is,

how insolent this person is!

He said to him

Rabbi Yirmeya of Difti:

Perhaps he is from Mata Meḥasya, where the rabbis are familiar,

perhaps he is from Mata Meḥasya, where the people are accustomed to seeing Torah scholars. Therefore, they are too familiar with them and do not honor them.

We learned in a beraita:

Isi ben Yehuda says: “You shall rise before the aged,” and even every form of old age is included.

That is, even an ignorant elder.

Rabbi Yohanan said: The halakha is in accordance with Isi ben Yehuda.

And even Isi ben Yehuda required one to rise before an ignorant elder only when he is a Jew; but a gentile elder is not included in the mitzva of “You shall rise before the aged.”

Nevertheless,

Rabbi Yohanan would stand before the elders of gentiles,

he would stand before the elders of gentiles, because

he said: “How many experiences have passed over them.”

How many events had they lived through, and they had witnessed many miracles and wonders.

Rava would not stand,

Rava would not stand to his full height before the elders of gentiles, but

he would show them honor,

he would fulfill the practice of showing them honor; that is, he would move slightly toward them and make it appear as though he wished to stand before them.

Abaye would extend his hand to the elders,

Abaye would extend his hand to the elders of gentiles when they passed before him, so that they could lean upon him.

Rava would send his agents,

he would send agents to extend a hand to them, but he himself did not do so.

Likewise,

Rav Naḥman would send servants,

he would send his servants to extend a hand to them, but he himself did not do so, because

he said: “Were it not for Torah”

that I had studied,

how many Nahman bar Abba are there

there are

in the marketplace.

That is, my importance is not because I am Nahman bar Abba, but because of the Torah that I have studied; therefore, it would not be proper for me to demean my honor.

And the Gemara cites a statement concerning the honor due to one’s teacher, to which it raises an objection from the beraita cited above: