← 经卷总目·第四章 城中的居民
这不是译本，是辅读层。中文承载文本本身，并逐句标出哪些是塔木德自己的话、 哪些是 施泰因扎尔茨 补入的解释，以及哪些地方翻译必然有所流失。
谢法利亚 的 威廉·戴维森 版用 <b> 标出塔木德原文，其余为
施泰因扎尔茨 补入。下面的比例是逐句从这个标记算出来的，不是判断。
这一面每读 7 句，只有一句以塔木德自己的话为主。把这件事藏起来， 读者会以为自己读的是塔木德；标出来，他才知道自己站在哪里。
（续上）……照 拉夫帕皮 的说法裁定是合理的，因为 拉比约书亚·本·利未 说会堂可以改作学堂；结论正是如此。
……照 拉夫帕皮 的意见裁定是合理的，因为 拉比约书亚·本·利未 说：会堂准许改作学堂。
It stands to reason to rule in accordance with the opinion of Rav Pappi, as Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: It is permitted for a synagogue to be made into a study hall.
革玛拉总结：确实，从这里可以学到 拉夫帕皮 的意见是对的。
The Gemara concludes: Indeed, learn from it that the opinion of Rav Pappi is correct.
巴尔·卡帕拉 讲解列王纪下 25:9：耶和华的殿是圣殿，王宫是王的宫殿，耶路撒冷的房屋照字面理解。至于「大房屋」，一说指使妥拉为大的学堂，一说指使祷告为大的会堂。
巴尔·卡帕拉 讲解一节经文：经上写着：「焚烧耶和华的殿、王宫和耶路撒冷的一切房屋，又用火焚烧一切大房屋」（列王纪下 25:9），这是什么意思？
§ Bar Kappara interpreted a verse homiletically: What is the meaning of that which is written: “And he burnt the house of the Lord, and the king’s house, and all the houses of Jerusalem, and every great house he burnt with fire” (II Kings 25:9)?
和合本作「用火焚烧耶和华的殿和王宫，又焚烧耶路撒冷的房屋，就是各大户家的房屋」。讲法系于「大房屋」（בית גדול）一语，故照革玛拉读法译。
他解释说：「耶和华的殿」，这是圣殿。
He explained: “The house of the Lord”; this is the Holy Temple.
「王宫」，这是王的宫殿。
“The king’s house”; these are the king’s palaces [palterin].
「耶路撒冷的一切房屋」，照字面理解。
“And all the houses of Jerusalem”; as understood in its literal sense.
至于末一句「又用火焚烧一切大房屋」，拉比约哈难 和 拉比约书亚·本·利未 对「大房屋」的意思有争论：一位说，这是指使妥拉为大的地方，就是学堂；另一位说，这是指使祷告为大的地方，就是会堂。
With regard to the final phrase: “And every great house he burnt with fire,” Rabbi Yoḥanan and Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi disagree about the meaning of “great house”: One of them said: It is referring to a place where the Torah is made great, i.e., the study hall; and the other one said: It is referring to a place where prayer is made great, i.e., the synagogue.
说是学堂的，依据以赛亚书 42:21「使律法为大」；说是会堂的，依据列王纪下 8:4「以利沙所行的一切大事」，而以利沙使孩子复活是靠祷告。
革玛拉解释他们各自的意见：说是指使妥拉为大之处的那位，是根据一节把研读妥拉说成为大的经文，因为经上写着：「耶和华因自己公义的缘故，喜欢使律法为大，为尊」（以赛亚书 42:21）。
The Gemara explains their respective opinions: The one who said that the reference is to where the Torah is made great bases his opinion on a verse that describes Torah study as great, as it is written: “The Lord was pleased, for His righteousness’ sake, to make Torah great and glorious” (Isaiah 42:21).
和合本的「律法」，原文即妥拉（תורה）。
说是指使祷告为大之处的那位，是根据一节把祷告说成大事的经文，因为经上写着：「请你将以利沙所行的一切大事告诉我」（列王纪下 8:4），而以利沙所行的，就是使一个男孩复活，是借着祷告行的。
And the one who said that the reference is to where prayer is made great bases his opinion on a verse that describes prayer as great, as it is written: “Tell me, I pray you, all the great things that Elisha has done” (II Kings 8:4), and that which Elisha did, i.e., restored a boy to life, he did through prayer.
可以断定说「大房屋」指学堂的是 拉比约书亚·本·利未，因为他说过会堂可以改作学堂，可见他认为学堂更圣。
革玛拉评说：可以断定，说「大房屋」是指使妥拉为大之处的，正是 拉比约书亚·本·利未，因为 拉比约书亚·本·利未 在别处说过：会堂准许改作学堂。
The Gemara comments: Conclude that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi is the one who said that “great house” is referring to a place where the Torah is made great, as Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said elsewhere: It is permitted for a synagogue to be made into a study hall.
这项裁定表明，他认为学堂的神圣等级高于会堂。
This ruling indicates that he holds that a study hall has a higher degree of sanctity than a synagogue.
所以他认为「大房屋」专指学堂，是合理的。
It is therefore reasonable that he assumes that “great house” is referring specifically to a study hall.
革玛拉总结：确实，从这里可以学到，说这个词是指使妥拉为大之处的，正是他。
The Gemara concludes: Indeed, learn from it that he was the one who said the term is referring to a place where the Torah is made great.
密释纳说：卖妥拉书卷所得的钱不可买先知书和圣录的书卷，凡圣物所得的钱都不可买较低等的东西。疑难：卖旧妥拉书卷买新的可以吗？没有往上升，也许不可；可是也没有更高的等级可升，也许可以。
密释纳说：但若他们卖了妥拉书卷，就不可用卖得的钱购买先知书和圣录的书卷。
§ The mishna states: However, if they sold a Torah scroll, they may not use the proceeds to purchase scrolls of the Prophets and the Writings.
同样，任何圣物卖得的钱，都不可用来购买神圣等级较低的物品。
Similarly, the proceeds of the sale of any sacred item may not be used to purchase an item of a lesser degree of sanctity.
众贤面前提出一个疑难：卖一卷旧的妥拉书卷来买一卷新的，是否准许，哈拉哈 如何？
A dilemma was raised before the Sages: What is the halakha with regard to whether it is permitted to sell an old Torah scroll in order to purchase a new one?
革玛拉解释这疑难的两面：一方面，既然这样做并没有把所得的钱提升到更高的神圣等级，也许是禁止的；或者，在这情形里，既然没有可能把它提升到另一个更高的神圣等级，就可以，应当准许？
The Gemara explains the sides of the dilemma: On the one hand, since the proceeds are not raised to a higher degree of sanctity by doing so, maybe it is prohibited; or, perhaps in this case, since there is no possibility of raising it to another, higher degree of sanctity, it seems well and should be permitted?
试从密释纳推论：只禁止买先知书和圣录，买新妥拉书卷就可以。驳：密释纳讲的是已经卖了的事后情形，疑难问的却是能否按理这样卖。
来听，从密释纳可以解决这个疑难：但若他们卖了妥拉书卷，就不可用卖得的钱购买先知书和圣录的书卷。
Come and hear a resolution to this dilemma from the mishna: However, if they sold a Torah scroll, they may not use the proceeds to purchase scrolls of the Prophets and the Writings.
可以推知：不可用这钱买的，只是先知书和圣录的书卷；至于用旧妥拉书卷卖得的钱买新的妥拉书卷，那就可以，是准许的。
One may infer: It is only scrolls of the Prophets and the Writings that may not be purchased with the proceeds, but to purchase a new Torah scroll with the proceeds of an old Torah scroll seems well and is permitted.
革玛拉驳回这证明：密释纳讨论的 哈拉哈，只适用于妥拉书卷已经卖出之后的事后情形。
The Gemara rejects this proof: The mishna discusses the halakha that applies only after the fact that a Torah scroll was sold.
也许只有在那种情形下，卖得的钱才可以用来买另一卷妥拉书卷。
Perhaps it is only in that case where the proceeds may be used to purchase another Torah scroll.
而我们提出的疑难，是关于按理是否准许为了买一卷妥拉书卷而卖另一卷。
When the dilemma was raised to us, it was with respect to permitting the sale of one Torah scroll in order to purchase another ab initio.
再引一段 《巴拉伊塔》：包布可以往神圣等级高的书卷上用，不可往低的用：妥拉书卷可用五经单卷的包布，五经单卷可用先知书、圣录的包布，反过来都不可。
来听，从一段 《巴拉伊塔》 可以解决这个疑难：妥拉书卷可以用五经单卷所用的包布来卷裹。
Come and hear a resolution to this dilemma from a baraita: A Torah scroll may be rolled up in wrapping cloths that are used for scrolls of one of the five books of the Torah.
五经单卷可以用先知书或圣录书卷所用的包布来卷裹，因为每种情形下，包布都是用于神圣等级更高的东西。
And scrolls of one of the five books of the Torah may be rolled up in wrapping cloths that are used for scrolls of the Prophets or Writings, since in each case the wrapping cloths are being used for something with a greater degree of sanctity.
但先知书或圣录的书卷不可用五经单卷所用的包布来卷裹，五经单卷也不可用妥拉书卷所用的包布来卷裹。
However, a scroll of the Prophets or Writings may not be rolled up in wrapping cloths that are used for scrolls of one of the five books of the Torah, and scrolls of one of the five books of the Torah may not be rolled up in wrapping cloths that are used for a Torah scroll.
由前半段推知：妥拉书卷只可用五经单卷的包布，不可用另一卷妥拉书卷的包布；那么更不可卖一卷去买另一卷。
革玛拉解释这证明：无论如何，这段 《巴拉伊塔》 教导：妥拉书卷可以用五经单卷所用的包布来卷裹。
The Gemara explains the proof: In any event, the baraita is teaching: A Torah scroll may be rolled up in wrapping cloths that are used for scrolls of one of the five books of the Torah.
可以推知：妥拉书卷只可以用五经单卷所用的包布来卷裹；至于用另一卷妥拉书卷的包布来卷裹，不行，那是不准许的。
One may infer: A Torah scroll may be rolled up only in wrapping cloths that are used for scrolls of one of the five books of the Torah; but to roll it up in wrapping cloths of another Torah scroll, no, it is not permitted.
由此推广，当然不可卖一卷妥拉书卷去买另一卷。
By extension, one Torah scroll may certainly not be sold in order to purchase another.
驳：由后半段可以推出相反的结论，即一卷妥拉书卷可用另一卷的包布。两个推论互相矛盾，这段 《巴拉伊塔》 推不出基本意思以外的东西。
革玛拉驳回这证明：这样的推论若成立，人也可以引后半段，从中作类似的推论。
The Gemara rejects the proof: If this inference is valid, one should be able to say the latter clause and make a similar inference from it.
后半段教导：五经单卷不可用妥拉书卷所用的包布来卷裹。
The latter clause teaches: And scrolls of one of the five books of the Torah may not be rolled up in wrapping cloths that are used for a Torah scroll.
由此可以推知：只有用妥拉书卷所用的包布来卷裹五经单卷才是禁止的；至于用一卷妥拉书卷的包布来卷裹另一卷妥拉书卷，那就可以。
It may be inferred from this that it is prohibited only to roll up scrolls of one of the five books of the Torah in wrapping cloths that are used for a Torah scroll, but to roll up one Torah scroll in the wrapping cloths of another Torah scroll seems well.
由此推广，应当准许卖一卷妥拉书卷去买另一卷。
By extension, one should be permitted to sell a Torah scroll to purchase another.
所以必定要断定：从这段 《巴拉伊塔》 推不出它基本意思以外的任何东西，因为两个推论互相矛盾。
Rather, perforce one must conclude that no inference beyond its basic meaning can be deduced from the baraita, as the inferences are contradictory.
再引 《托塞夫塔》：妥拉书卷可以叠在另一卷妥拉书卷上，也可以叠在五经单卷上，五经单卷可以叠在先知书、圣录上，反过来不可。可见一卷妥拉书卷可为另一卷所用，那么卖一卷买一卷也该可以。
来听，从 《托塞夫塔》（《经卷》3:12）可以解决这个疑难：一卷妥拉书卷可以放在另一卷妥拉书卷上面，妥拉书卷可以放在五经单卷上面，五经单卷可以放在先知书或圣录的书卷上面。
Come and hear a resolution to this dilemma from the Tosefta (Megilla 3:12): A Torah scroll may be placed upon another Torah scroll, and a Torah scroll may be placed upon scrolls of one of the five books of the Torah, and scrolls of one of the five books of the Torah may be placed upon scrolls of the Prophets or Writings.
但先知书或圣录的书卷不可放在五经单卷上面，五经单卷也不可放在妥拉书卷上面。
However, scrolls of the Prophets or Writings may not be placed upon scrolls of one of the five books of the Torah, and scrolls of one of the five books of the Torah may not be placed upon a Torah scroll.
从前半段看来，一卷妥拉书卷可以为另一卷所用。
From the first clause, it is apparent that one Torah scroll may be used for the sake of another.
由此推广，应当准许卖一卷妥拉书卷去买另一卷。
By extension, it should be permitted to sell one Torah scroll to purchase another.
驳：书卷叠放不同，放进经柜时只能一卷叠一卷；正如卷起妥拉书卷时，羊皮纸也必定一张压一张。无可避免的事准许，不能据此推论。
革玛拉驳回这证明：你能从一卷妥拉书卷放在另一卷上面的 哈拉哈 来作证明吗？
The Gemara rejects this proof: Can you say a proof from the halakha of placing one Torah scroll upon another?
书卷互相叠放的 哈拉哈 不同，因为没有别的方法放置它们：放进经柜的时候，必须一卷叠在另一卷上面。
The halakha of placing scrolls upon one another is different, because it is impossible to place them in any other way, as they must be laid one atop the other when placed in the ark.
因为你若不这样说，就是说在无可避免的情形下确是准许的，那我们怎么能卷起妥拉书卷呢？
As, if you do not say so, that it is indeed permitted when in an unavoidable situation, how could we furl a Torah scroll at all?
岂不是一张羊皮纸压在另一张上面吗？
Does one sheet of parchment not rest upon another?
其实，既然没有别的方法卷起书卷，这就是准许的。
Rather, since it is impossible to furl the scroll in any other way, it is permitted.
这里也是一样，既然没有别的方法把书卷放进经柜，这就是准许的。
Here too, since it is impossible to place the scrolls in the ark in any other way, it is permitted.
再引 拉班西缅·本·迦玛列 的话：人不可卖旧妥拉书卷去买新的。
来听，从一段 《巴拉伊塔》 可以解决这个疑难：因为 拉巴·巴尔·巴尔·哈纳 说，拉比约哈难 奉 拉班西缅·本·迦玛列 之名说：人不可卖一卷旧的妥拉书卷去买一卷新的。
Come and hear a resolution to this dilemma from a baraita: As Rabba bar bar Ḥana said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said in the name of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel: A person may not sell an old Torah scroll in order to purchase a new one.
驳：那里禁止是怕疏忽，旧的卖了新的却没买；这里新书卷已经写好，只等用卖得的钱赎取，问题仍在。
革玛拉驳回这证明。
The Gemara rejects this proof.
在那里，就是 《巴拉伊塔》 的情形，禁止是出于顾虑疏忽。
There, in the case of the baraita, it is prohibited because of a concern for negligence.
旧的可能卖掉了，新的却始终没有买。
The old one might be sold and a new one never bought.
但我们所说的，是新书卷已经写好、只等用卖得的钱立即赎取的情形。
However, when we speak, it is of a case where the new scroll is already written and waiting to be redeemed immediately with the proceeds of the sale.
所以问题仍在：这情形 哈拉哈 如何？
Therefore, the question remains: What is the halakha in this case?
再引 拉比梅伊尔 的话：只有为研读妥拉或娶妻需要钱，才可以卖妥拉书卷。
来听，从一段 《巴拉伊塔》 可以解决这个疑难：因为 拉比约哈难 奉 拉比梅伊尔 之名说：人只有在需要钱来研读妥拉或娶妻的时候，才可以卖妥拉书卷。
Come and hear a resolution to this dilemma from a baraita: As Rabbi Yoḥanan said in the name of Rabbi Meir: A Torah scroll may be sold only if the seller needs the money in order to study Torah or to marry a woman.
由此似可推知：以妥拉换妥拉是可以的。驳：研读妥拉引向遵行诫命，娶妻成全创造的目的，两者都极其重要；卖旧妥拉书卷买新的未必可比。
从这段 《巴拉伊塔》 可以学到：拿一件属妥拉的事物，就是妥拉书卷，换另一件属妥拉的事物，就是研读妥拉，是可以的；由此推广，应当准许卖一卷妥拉书卷去买另一卷。
Learn from this baraita that exchanging one entity of Torah, i.e., a Torah scroll, for another entity of Torah, i.e., Torah study, seems well, and by extension, it should be permitted to sell one Torah scroll to purchase another.
革玛拉驳回这证明：也许研读妥拉不同，因为研读妥拉引向行动，就是遵行诫命；也许只因研读妥拉极其重要，才准许为它卖妥拉书卷。
The Gemara rejects the proof: Perhaps Torah study is different, as the study of Torah leads to action, i.e., the fulfillment of the mitzvot, and perhaps it is only due to its great importance of Torah study that it is permitted to sell a Torah scroll for it.
同样，娶妻也是极其重要的事，因为论到创造，经上说：「并非使地荒凉，是要给人居住」（以赛亚书 45:18）。
Similarly, marrying a woman is also of utmost importance, as it is stated with regard to Creation: “He created it not a waste; He formed it to be inhabited” (Isaiah 45:18).
这表明娶妻生子成全了创造的一个首要目的。
This indicates that marrying and having children fulfills a primary goal of Creation.
但卖一卷旧妥拉书卷去买一卷新的，未必准许。
But selling an old Torah in order to buy a new Torah might not be permitted.
一段 《巴拉伊塔》：人不可卖妥拉书卷，即使用不着它。拉班西缅·本·迦玛列 说：人即使穷得没有饭吃而卖了妥拉书卷或卖女为婢，所得的钱也不会带来福气。
论同一题目，众贤在一段 《巴拉伊塔》 中教导：人不可卖妥拉书卷，即使他并不需要它。
On the same topic, the Sages taught in a baraita: A person may not sell a Torah scroll, even if he does not need it.
再者，拉班西缅·本·迦玛列 说：即使人没有东西吃，因为穷乏而卖了妥拉书卷，或卖了女儿作婢女，他从这两种买卖所得的钱里，都看不到一点蒙福的迹象。
Furthermore, Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said: Even if a person has nothing to eat, and out of his need he sold a Torah scroll or he sold his daughter to be a maidservant, he never sees a sign of blessing from the proceeds of either sale.
显然，无论为了什么目的，卖妥拉书卷都不合宜。
Clearly, it is never appropriate to sell a Torah scroll for any purpose.
密释纳说：出售圣物的余款也受同样限制。拉瓦 说：这只指卖了圣物、买了更圣之物后剩下的钱；为买圣物向众人募集、买后剩下的钱，从未成圣，可作任何用途。
密释纳说：同样，出售圣物所得的任何余款，也适用同样的限制。
The mishna states: And similarly, the same limitation applies to any surplus funds from the sale of sacred items.
拉瓦 说：他们所教余款带有神圣，只是指这种情形：群体卖了一件圣物，然后用所得的钱买了神圣等级更高的东西，还剩下钱。
Rava said: They taught that the surplus funds have sanctity only in a case where the community sold a sacred object and then used the proceeds to purchase something with a greater degree of sanctity, and there was money left over.
但若群体向成员收钱，要买一件圣物，买了以后，超出该物价钱还剩下钱，这多余的钱准许作任何用途，因为这钱始终没有成圣。
However, if the community collected money from its members in order to purchase a sacred object, and there was extra money left over beyond the price of the object, that extra money is permitted to be used for any purpose, as the money was never sanctified.
阿巴耶 引一段 《巴拉伊塔》 质疑 拉瓦：密释纳的话只适用于没有约定可以随意处置余款的情形；若有约定，连用于 城中骑哨 也可以。
阿巴耶 用一段 《巴拉伊塔》 质疑 拉瓦：密释纳这话是指什么情形说的？
Abaye raised an objection to Rava from a baraita: In what case is this statement of the mishna said?
是指他们没有明确约定，要照自己看为合宜的方式处置余款的情形。
When they did not explicitly stipulate that they would do with the surplus funds as they see fit.
但若他们作了这样的约定，那么即使把钱用于 城中骑哨，也是准许的。
However, if they made such a stipulation, then even to use the money for a dukhsusya is permitted.
革玛拉稍后会解释 城中骑哨 这个词的意思。
The Gemara will explain the meaning of the term dukhsusya.
阿巴耶 解释：约定救不了卖圣物所剩的钱，所以 《巴拉伊塔》 必是指募来的余款，而这钱只因有约定才可随意使用，与 拉瓦 所说相左。
阿巴耶 解释这诘难：这约定是在什么情形下作的？
Abaye explains the challenge: What are the circumstances of this stipulation?
若说他们卖了一件圣物，用所得的钱买了另一件圣物之后还剩下钱，那么即使他们作了约定，又有什么用呢？
If we say that they sold a sacred object and after using the proceeds to purchase another sacred object there was money left over, then even when they made a stipulation, of what avail is it?
约定怎能使这钱失去神圣呢？
How can a stipulation desanctify the money?
其实，密释纳必定是指这种情形：他们收钱要买一件圣物，买了以后还剩下钱。
Rather, the mishna must be referring to a case where they collected money to purchase a sacred object and there was money left over after they made the purchase.
在这种情形下，多余的钱之所以准许作任何用途，是因为他们作了明确的约定。
In such a case, the reason that it is permitted to use the extra money for any purpose is that they made an explicit stipulation.
但若他们没有作约定，不行，那就不准许。
However, if they did not make a stipulation, no, it would not be permitted.
拉瓦 答：《巴拉伊塔》 讲的仍是卖圣物所剩的钱，意思是：城中七位代表若在居民集会上约定可随意使用，连用于 城中骑哨 也可以。
拉瓦 驳回这论证：其实你可以解释说，密释纳是指他们卖了一件圣物、买了新的之后还剩下钱的情形，而 《巴拉伊塔》 是这样说的：密释纳这话是指什么情形说的？
Rava rejects this argument: Actually, you can explain that the mishna is referring to a case where they sold a sacred object and there was money left over after purchasing a new one, and this is what the baraita is saying: In what case is this statement of the mishna said?
是指城中七位代表没有在城中居民的集会上明确约定，他们可以照自己看为合宜的方式使用这钱。
In a case where the seven representatives of the town did not explicitly stipulate that they could use the money as they see fit, in an assembly of the residents of the town.
但若城中七位代表在城中居民的集会上作了这样的约定，那么即使把钱用于 城中骑哨，也是准许的。
However, if the seven representatives of the town made such a stipulation in an assembly of the residents of the town, then even to use the money for a dukhsusya would also be permitted.
阿巴耶 向一位在 拉夫舍舍特 面前编排密释纳的贤者打听 城中骑哨 的意思；答：就是替城里放哨、传递公文的骑士。
阿巴耶 对一位在 拉夫舍舍特 面前编排密释纳的贤者说：关于 城中骑哨 这个词是什么意思，你从 拉夫舍舍特 那里听到过什么吗？
Abaye said to one of the Sages who would arrange the Mishna before Rav Sheshet: Did you hear anything from Rav Sheshet with regard to what the meaning of the term dukhsusya is?
城中骑哨（דוכסוסיא）新立为 C1647，定名「城中骑哨」，依本段 拉夫舍舍特 的解释。
他对他说：拉夫舍舍特 是这样说的：就是城里的骑士，他为城里的人放哨，也替公众传送文书。
He said to him: This is what Rav Sheshet said: It is the town horseman who would serve the townspeople as a sentry and for public dispatches.
阿巴耶 由此得出：年轻学者听到不懂的话，该去问常在众贤跟前的人，那人必定从哪位大人物那里听过。
革玛拉插入一段附带的评论：阿巴耶 说：由此可以从这件事学到：这样的年轻妥拉学者，听到了什么却不知道它的意思，就该向常在众贤面前的人请教，因为这样的人不可能没有从哪位大人物那里听到过一些。
The Gemara introduces a parenthetical comment: Abaye said: Accordingly, one can learn from this incident that with regard to this young Torah scholar who has heard something and does not know the meaning of it, he should inquire of its meaning before somebody who is frequently before the Sages, as it is impossible that such a person did not hear something about it from some great man.
拉比约哈难 奉 拉比梅伊尔 之名说：全城居民到别的城去，被当地济贫司事要求认捐，须当场交付，免受食言之嫌；回家时钱退还他们，用来供养本城的穷人。
拉比约哈难 奉 拉比梅伊尔 之名说：一座城的居民一同去到另一座城，在那里，那城的济贫司事要他们认捐一笔济贫款，他们必须把所认的数目交给那城的济贫司事，免得被人怀疑食言。
§ Rabbi Yoḥanan said in the name of Rabbi Meir: In the case of residents of a town who collectively went to another town and, while there, the charity collectors in that town made them pledge a certain sum for charity, they must give the promised sum to the town’s charity collector, so as not to be suspected of reneging.
但他们回家的时候，钱要还给他们，他们就带回去，用它供养自己城里的穷人。
But when they go home, their money is returned to them, and they bring it back with them, and with it they finance the poor of their own town.
一段 《巴拉伊塔》 也这样教导，并补充：一个人独自到别的城去被要求认捐，就把钱给那城的穷人。
革玛拉评说：一段 《巴拉伊塔》 也是这样教导的：一座城的居民一同去到另一座城，在那里，当地的济贫司事要他们认捐一笔济贫款，他们必须把所认的数目交给那城的济贫司事。
The Gemara comments: That is also taught in a baraita: In the case of residents of a town who collectively went to another town and, while there, the local charity collectors made them pledge a certain sum for charity, they must give the promised sum to the town’s charity collector.
但他们回家的时候，钱要还给他们，他们就带回去。
But when they go home, their money is returned to them, and they bring it back with them.
至于一个人从他的本城去到另一座城，在那里，当地的济贫司事要他认捐一笔济贫款，他就该把钱给那城的穷人。
But in the case of an individual who went from his hometown to another town and, while there, the local charity collectors made him pledge a certain sum for charity, he should give it to the poor of that town.
拉夫胡纳 宣布禁食日，拉夫哈拿·巴尔·哈尼莱 带全城的人来，被摊派济贫款并交了；回家时他们请求把钱退还，好供养本城的穷人。
革玛拉记述：拉夫胡纳 有一次宣布了一个禁食日。
The Gemara relates: Rav Huna once decreed a fast day.
禁食那天，拉夫哈拿·巴尔·哈尼莱 和他城里的众人都来到 拉夫胡纳 那里。
On the day of the fast, Rav Ḥana bar Ḥanilai and all the people of his town came to Rav Huna.
他们被摊派了一笔济贫款，他们就交了。
A certain sum of charity was imposed upon them and they gave it.
他们要回家的时候，对 拉夫胡纳 说：愿夫子把我们交的济贫款给我们，我们回去，用它供养我们自己城里的穷人。
When they wanted to go home, they said to Rav Huna: May our Master give to us the charity that we gave, and we will go back, and with it we will finance the poor of our own town.
拉夫胡纳 引一段 《巴拉伊塔》 答复：人离开时钱要退还，这只适用于没有……（下接 27之间）
他对他们说：有一段 《巴拉伊塔》 教导：这话，就是人们离开时钱要还给他们，是指什么情形说的？
He said to them: It was taught in a baraita: In what case is this statement, that the money is returned when the people leave, said?
是指没有……
When there is no