← 小节期卷总目·第一章 浇灌水田
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 5 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）……在朝圣节前夕都许娶妻。这对各家之说都是难处：婚宴通常延续七日，大半会落在节期里。
「……在朝圣节的前夕都许娶妻。」
are permitted to marry on the eve of the pilgrimage Festival.
这对所有的意见都是难处，因为婚礼的庆贺通常延续七日，庆贺的大半会与节期重叠。
This poses a difficulty to all of the opinions, as a wedding celebration ordinarily extends for seven days, and the majority of the celebration will coincide with the Festival.
答：这条 《巴拉伊塔》 与各家之说都可调和。照「不可把一样欢喜与另一样欢喜相混」或「不可撇下节日的欢喜去与妻子同乐」的说法，婚礼主要的欢喜只有一日，此后就不影响节日的欢喜。
革玛拉回答：这不是难处，因为这条 《巴拉伊塔》 可以与所有的意见调和。
The Gemara answers: This is not difficult, as this baraita can be reconciled with all of the opinions.
照那说节中日不可结婚是因为欢喜的——就是因为不可把一样欢喜与另一样欢喜相混，或是因为不可撇下节日的欢喜、去忙着与妻子同乐——这不是难处，因为婚礼主要的欢喜只有一日，此后婚礼的欢喜就不会影响节日的欢喜。
According to the one who said that one may not get married on the intermediate days of a Festival because of joy, i.e., because one must not mix one joy with another, or because one may not put aside the rejoicing of the Festival and occupy himself with rejoicing with his wife, this is not difficult, as the primary joy of a wedding is only one day, and after that, the joy of the wedding will not affect the joy of the Festival.
照「过度劳力」之说，主要的劳力只有一日；照「荒废生养诫命」之说也无须顾虑：可在节前结婚省下筵席钱的只有节日前夕一日，人不会为此拖延婚期，怕有意外误了那一日。所以照各种理由，都不必禁止在节日前夕结婚。
照那说节中日不可结婚是因为婚礼的预备需要过度劳力的，这也不是难处，因为主要的劳力只有一日。
And according to the one who said that one may not marry on the intermediate days of a Festival due to the excessive exertion that the wedding preparations demand, it is not difficult, as the primary exertion is only one day.
婚礼之后，就不需要过度的劳力了。
After the wedding, excessive exertion is not required.
照那说理由是因为会荒废生养众多之诫命的，也无须顾虑：既然他能结婚又省下筵席之钱的只有一日，就是节日的前夕，人就不会为了在那日结婚而拖延婚期，免得有什么意外的事临到，叫他那日结不成婚。
And according to the one who said that the reason is due to the neglect of the mitzva to be fruitful and multiply, there is no room for concern: Since there is only one day, the eve of the Festival, when he can get married and save money on the feast, a man will not delay his wedding in order to get married then, lest some unforeseen circumstance arise that will prevent him from getting married on that day.
所以，照所提出的一切理由，都不必禁止在节日前夕结婚。
Therefore, according to all the reasons offered, there is no need to prohibit weddings on the eve of a Festival.
问：不可把一样欢喜与另一样欢喜相混，这原则从哪里来？答：经上记所罗门献殿时「守节七日，又七日，共十四日」；若可以相混，他该等到 住棚节 那第二个七日，为献殿与节期一并设七日的筵席。他没有这样做，可见不可相混。
革玛拉问：关于不可把一样欢喜与另一样欢喜相混这条原则，我们是从哪里推出来的？
§ The Gemara asks: With regard to the principle that one may not mix one joy with another joy, from where do we derive it?
革玛拉解释说，出处是经上关于献殿所写的：「那时，所罗门 和以色列众人，就是从哈马口直到埃及小河所有的以色列人，都聚集成为大会，在耶和华我们神面前守节七日，又七日，共十四日」（列王纪上 8:65）。
The Gemara explains that the source is as it is written with regard to the dedication of the Temple: “So Solomon held the feast at that time, and all Israel with him, a great congregation, from the entrance of Hamath to the Brook of Egypt, before the Lord our God, seven days and seven days, fourteen days” (I Kings 8:65).
假如真可以把一样欢喜与另一样欢喜相混，他就该等到 住棚节，就是第二个七日，为这事和那事——就是为献殿和 住棚节 一并——设七日的筵席。
And if it is so that one may in fact mix one joy with another joy, he should have waited until the festival of Sukkot, which was the second set of seven days, and made a feast of seven days for this and for that, i.e., for the dedication of the Temple and for the festival of Sukkot together.
他没有这样做，表明不可把一样欢喜与另一样欢喜相混。
The fact that he did not do so indicates that one must not mix one joy with another.
问：或许由此只能推出不可特意把婚礼拖到节期，就像所罗门没有把献殿拖到节期；但若碰巧赶上，仍可设筵一并庆贺？答：若是这样，他该留下圣殿一小部分不完工，等到节期，好把献殿与 住棚节 一并庆贺。
革玛拉提出问题：然而，或许由此只能推出：我们不可把婚礼拖延到节日，正如 所罗门 王没有把献殿拖延到节日；但若碰巧是这样，我们确实可以设筵一并庆贺两件事。
The Gemara raises a question: Perhaps, however, it may be derived from here only that we may not delay a wedding to be on a Festival, just as King Solomon did not delay the Temple dedication to be on the Festival, but nevertheless, where it happens to occur that way, we may indeed prepare a feast to celebrate both occasions together.
革玛拉回答：假如这是许可的，所罗门 就该留下圣殿的一小部分不完工，等到节日，这样就安排了献殿与 住棚节 一并的庆贺。
The Gemara answers: If this were permitted, Solomon should have left a small part of the Temple unfinished until the Festival, and thereby arranged for a joint celebration of the dedication of the Temple and the festival of Sukkot.
驳：圣殿的建筑不可留下任何部分不完工，因为诫命当尽快完成。革玛拉改口说：那么所罗门该把殿顶上一肘宽、驱逐乌鸦的钉板留着不装；那不算建筑本身，延后安装就可延后献殿的庆贺。
革玛拉回应说：圣殿的建筑不可留下任何部分不完工，因为一件诫命应当尽快完成。
The Gemara responds: One may not leave any part of the building of the Temple undone, as a mitzva should be completed as quickly as possible.
革玛拉修正先前的意见：所罗门 该把那些一肘宽、带尖钉、为驱逐乌鸦而设的钉板留着不完工。
The Gemara modifies its previous opinion: Solomon should have left the cubit-wide plates with spikes, which were designed to eliminate the ravens, unfinished.
注：「驱逐乌鸦的一肘钉板」，原文 אַמָּה כָּלְיָא עוֹרֵב。
圣殿的殿顶上装有锐利的金属尖钉，好叫那些被祭肉气味吸引来的乌鸦不能栖落在那里。
The roof of the Temple was fitted with sharp metal spikes to deter the ravens, who were attracted by the smell of the sacrificial meat, from perching there.
这些虽不算建筑本身的一部分，延后安装它们，却可以让 所罗门 延后献殿的庆贺。
Although this was not considered a part of the building itself, delaying its installation would have allowed Solomon to delay the celebration of the Temple dedication.
驳：驱鸦钉板也是圣殿建筑必需的部分，同样不可延后。证据其实在经文的重复：既写了「十四日」，何必又写「七日，又七日」？可见献殿的七日与节期的七日须各自分开，因为不可把一样欢喜与另一样欢喜相混。
革玛拉也驳回这个意见：那一肘宽驱逐乌鸦的钉板是圣殿建筑必需的部分，因此 所罗门 也不可延后建造它。
The Gemara rejects this opinion as well: The cubit-wide plates with spikes to eliminate the ravens was a necessary element in the building of the Temple, and consequently Solomon could not delay its construction either.
其实，证据是从经文的重复来的。
Rather, the proof is from the redundancy in the verse.
既然经上写了「十四日」，我为什么还需要经文明说「七日，又七日」呢？
Since it is written “fourteen days,” why do I need the verse to specify “seven days and seven days”?
由此可以学到：庆贺献殿的这七日必须独立分开，同样，庆贺节日的这七日也必须独立分开，这是由于不可把一样欢喜与另一样欢喜相混这条原则。
Learn from it that these seven days of celebrating the Temple dedication must be discrete, and similarly, these seven days of celebrating the Festival must be discrete, due to the principle that one may not mix one joy with another.
拉比帕尔纳赫 引 拉比约哈难 说：那一年以色列人没有守 赎罪日，因为献殿的七日筵席正赶上那日。百姓忧虑说：或许「以色列的仇敌」（婉辞）因在那日吃喝而该受 剪除 之罚；有天上的声音出来对他们说：你们都已定为得来世的生命。
革玛拉借着 所罗门 献殿庆贺的讨论，记述 拉比帕尔纳赫 说 拉比约哈难 说：那一年，犹太百姓没有守 赎罪日，因为献殿七日的庆贺正与 赎罪日 相逢，那七日每日都有筵席。
§ Apropos the discussion of the celebration at Solomon’s dedication of the Temple, the Gemara relates that Rabbi Parnakh said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: That year, the Jewish people did not observe Yom Kippur, as the seven-day celebration of the dedication of the Temple coincided with Yom Kippur and all seven days were celebrated with feasting.
百姓就忧虑，说：或许以色列的仇敌——这是指犹太百姓自己的婉辞——已经因在 赎罪日 吃喝的罪而该被除灭，那罪是要受 剪除 之罚的。
And the people were worried and said: Perhaps the enemies of the Jewish people, a euphemism for the Jewish people themselves, have become liable to be destroyed for the transgression of eating on Yom Kippur, which is punishable by karet.
有天上的声音出来，对他们说：你们众人都已定为得享来世的生命。
A Divine Voice issued forth and said to them: All of you are designated for life in the World-to-Come.
问：他们凭什么推断可以在 赎罪日 吃喝？答：凭由轻推重：会幕献殿时，会幕的圣洁不是永久的，个人的供物（众首领的供物）尚且胜过安息日之禁，那是要受石刑的；圣殿的圣洁是永久的，所献的是公众的供物，岂不更该胜过只受 剪除 之罚的赎罪日之禁？
革玛拉问：他们是凭什么推论断定可以在 赎罪日 吃喝的呢？
The Gemara asks: What derivation led them to conclude that it was permitted for them to eat on Yom Kippur?
革玛拉解释说：他们的裁定是根据一个由轻推重：若在会幕献殿时，会幕的圣洁不是永久的圣洁，一个人的供物，就是众首领之一的供物，尚且胜过 安息日 的禁令——因为众首领的供物每日都献，连 安息日 也献，虽然这牵涉违犯一条该受石刑的禁令；那么论到圣殿的献殿，圣殿的圣洁是永久的圣洁，那里所献的又是公众的供物，岂不更显然，圣殿的献殿胜过 赎罪日 的禁令吗？违犯这禁令所受的，只是较轻的 剪除 之罚。
The Gemara explains that they based their ruling on an a fortiori inference: If at the dedication of the Tabernacle, whose sanctity is not a permanent sanctity, an individual’s offering, i.e., an offering of one of the tribal princes, overrides the prohibition of Shabbat, as the princes’ offerings were brought every day including Shabbat despite the attendant transgression of a prohibition that is punishable by stoning; then with regard to the dedication of the Temple, whose sanctity is a permanent sanctity and the offerings brought there were communal offerings, is it not all the more so clear that the dedication of the Temple overrides the prohibition of Yom Kippur, a violation that is punishable by the less severe punishment of karet?
问：既有可靠的根据，他们为何忧虑？答：这由轻推重可以驳倒：会幕献殿时干犯安息日只为献祭给至高者的事奉；圣殿献殿时干犯赎罪日却是为凡人的吃喝。那么他们该只献祭、不吃喝？答：没有吃喝就没有完全的欢喜。
革玛拉问：可是他们的作为若有可靠的根据，为什么还忧虑呢？
The Gemara asks: But if they had firm basis for their behavior, why were they worried?
革玛拉回答：这个由轻推重可以这样驳倒：在那里，会幕献殿时，干犯 安息日 只是为了在上之神的圣殿事奉所需，就是献上供物。
The Gemara answers that one can refute this a fortiori inference as follows: There, at the dedication of the Tabernacle, Shabbat was desecrated only for the necessities of the Temple service to God on High, i.e., by sacrificing offerings.
在这里，圣殿献殿时，他们却以吃喝干犯了 赎罪日，那是为了凡人的需要。
Here, at the dedication of the Temple, they desecrated Yom Kippur by eating and drinking, which was for the need of common mortals.
革玛拉根据这个分别提出：那么在这里，圣殿献殿时，他们也该只行献供物的礼仪，而不该吃喝。
Based on this distinction the Gemara suggests: Here too, at the dedication of the Temple they should have performed the rites of the sacrificial offerings and they should not have eaten or drunk.
革玛拉回答：没有吃喝，就没有完全的欢喜。
The Gemara answers: There is no complete rejoicing without eating and drinking.
问：会幕献殿的供物胜过安息日，从哪里推出？若从「头一日」「第七日」，或许只是献供的第七日，安息日跳过了。拉夫纳赫曼·巴尔·以撒 说：经上又说「在第十一日的那日」，正如一日是连续的一段，那十一日也是连续的，中间连安息日也没有间断。
革玛拉就这证据本身问：我们从哪里推出会幕献殿时所献的供物胜过 安息日 呢？
With regard to the proof itself, the Gemara asks: And from where do we derive that the offerings brought at the dedication of the Tabernacle overrode Shabbat?
若说是根据经上论众首领所献供物所写的：「头一日」（民数记 7:12）和「第七日」（民数记 7:48），这不是确证，因为这或许不是指一周的第七日，而是指献供的第七日。
If we say it is as it is written with regard to the offerings brought by the tribal princes: “On the first day” (Numbers 7:12) and “on the seventh day” (Numbers 7:48), this is not a conclusive proof, as perhaps this refers not to the seventh day of the week but to the seventh day of sacrificial offerings.
或许他们跳过了 安息日，那日没有献与会幕献殿有关的供物。
Perhaps they skipped Shabbat and did not sacrifice offerings connected to the dedication of the Tabernacle on that day.
拉夫纳赫曼·巴尔·以撒 说：经上又说：「在第十一日的那日」（民数记 7:72）。
Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: The verse also states: “On the day of the eleventh day” (Numbers 7:72).
注：民数记 7:72 和合本作「第十一日」，革玛拉读法系于原文 בְּיוֹם עַשְׁתֵּי עָשָׂר יוֹם「在第十一日的那日」，「日」字出现两次，故照革玛拉读法译。
「日」字的重复表明：正如一日是一整段连续的时间，照样，那十一日也是一整段连续的时间，中间没有间断，连 安息日 也没有。
The repetition of the word day indicates that just as a day is all one continuous period of time, so too, the eleven days were all one continuous period of time, with no break in the middle, even for Shabbat.
问：或许这只是指适合献个人供物的日子，连续十一日，却不含安息日？答：另一节经写着「在第十二日的那日」，可见那十二日也是连续的一段。
革玛拉问：可是这或许只是指适合献个人供物的日子，就是说，供物是在适合献个人供物的连续十一日里献上的，却不在 安息日。
The Gemara asks: But perhaps this refers only to days that are fit for an individual’s offerings, i.e., the offerings were sacrificed on eleven consecutive days that were suitable for sacrificing the offerings of an individual, but not on Shabbat.
革玛拉回答：另一节经上写着：「在第十二日的那日」（民数记 7:78），表明正如一日是一整段连续的时间，照样，那十二日也是一整段连续的时间。
The Gemara answers: In another verse it is written: “On the day of the twelfth day” (Numbers 7:78), indicating that just as a day is all one continuous period of time, so too, the twelve days were all one continuous period of time.
注：民数记 7:78 和合本作「第十二日」，照革玛拉读法译，理由同上段。
再问：这里或许也是指适合献个人供物的日子？驳：若是这样，何必用两节经教导同一原则？妥拉在两节经里都用重复的措辞，表明那些日子都是连续的，没有为安息日间断。
革玛拉又问：可是这里或许也是指适合献个人供物的日子？
The Gemara asks again: But perhaps here too this is referring to days that are fit for sacrificing the offerings of an individual?
革玛拉驳回这个意见：若是这样，我为什么需要两节经——论第十一日的那节和论第十二日的那节——来教导同一条原则呢？
The Gemara rejects this opinion: If so, why do I need two verses, the verse with regard to the eleventh day and the verse with regard to the twelfth day, to teach the same principle?
妥拉在两节经里都用重复的措辞，这表明那些日子都是连续的，没有为 安息日 间断。
The fact that the Torah uses repetitive phraseology in both verses indicates that all the days were consecutive, without a break for Shabbat.
问：圣殿献殿的筵席胜过赎罪日、百姓不必禁食，从哪里推出？若从「十四日」，或许只指适合设筵的日子，不含赎罪日。答：由此处的「日」与会幕献殿处的「日」作同辞类推：那里的日子连续、不为安息日间断，这里也连续、不为赎罪日间断。
革玛拉问：我们从哪里推出圣殿献殿时的筵席胜过 赎罪日，以致百姓不必禁食呢？
The Gemara asks: And from where do we derive that the feasting at the time of the dedication of the Temple overrides Yom Kippur, so that the people did not have to fast?
若说是从经上所写的「十四日」推出来的，这或许是指适合设筵的日子，不包括 赎罪日。
If we say it is derived from that which is written: Fourteen days, perhaps this is referring to days that are fit for feasting, to the exclusion of Yom Kippur.
革玛拉回答：这是借着同辞类推得出来的，就是在这里提到的「日」字，与在那里、论会幕献殿时所提到的「日」字。
The Gemara answers: This is derived by means of a verbal analogy between the word “day” mentioned in this context and the word “day” mentioned there, with regard to the dedication of the Tabernacle.
正如在那里，那些日子是连续的，没有为 安息日 间断；照样，在这里，那些日子也是连续的，没有为 赎罪日 间断。
Just as there the days were consecutive, without a break for Shabbat, so too here, the days were consecutive, without a break for Yom Kippur.
上文说天上的声音宣告他们都得来世的生命。问：从哪里推出神赦免了他们这罪？答：贤者 塔赫利法 在一条 《巴拉伊塔》 里教导，经上说：「第八日，王遣散众民……回自己的帐棚去，……是因耶和华向他仆人大卫和他民以色列所施的一切恩惠」。
上文说：有天上的声音出来，对他们说：你们众人都已定为得享来世的生命。
It was stated above that a Divine Voice issued forth and said to them: All of you are designated for life in the World-to-Come.
革玛拉问：我们从哪里推出神赦免了他们这罪呢？
The Gemara asks: And from where do we derive that God pardoned them for this sin?
革玛拉回答：贤者 塔赫利法 在一条 《巴拉伊塔》 里教导说，经上说：「第八日，王遣散众民；他们为王祝福，就欢喜、心中愉快，回自己的帐棚去，是因耶和华向他仆人 大卫 和他民以色列所施的一切恩惠」（列王纪上 8:66）。
The Gemara answers: The Sage Taḥlifa taught in a baraita that the verse states: “On the eighth day he sent the people away, and they blessed the king, and went to their tents joyful and glad of heart for all the goodness that the Lord had done for David His servant and for Israel His people” (I Kings 8:66).
注：列王纪上 8:66 和合本作「第八日，王遣散众民；他们为王祝福，因见耶和华向他仆人大卫和他民以色列所施的一切恩惠，就都心中喜乐，各归各家去了」。下段逐字释经，系于原文 לְאׇהֳלֵיהֶם「回自己的帐棚」、שְׂמֵחִים「欢喜」、וְטוֹבֵי לֵב「心中愉快」、עַל כׇּל הַטּוֹבָה「为一切恩惠」，故照革玛拉读法译。
这节经可以这样解：「回自己的帐棚」——他们回去，见妻子都在洁净中；「欢喜」——他们享受了舍金纳的荣光；「心中愉快」——各人的妻子都怀了男胎；「为一切恩惠」——有天上的声音宣告：你们都已定为得享来世的生命，那是至高的恩惠。
这节经可以这样解释：「回自己的帐棚」一语，表明他们回去，见他们的妻子都在洁净之中，因为帐棚和房屋这两个词常用来指人的妻子。
This verse may be expounded as follows: The words “to their tents” indicate that they went and found their wives in a state of purity, as the terms tent and house often denote one’s wife.
「欢喜」一词，是指他们享受了舍金纳的荣光，因为在圣殿里献供物的时候，舍金纳曾经显现。
The term “joyful” is referring to the fact they had enjoyed the splendor of the Divine Presence, as there was a revelation of the Divine Presence when the offerings were sacrificed in the Temple.
「心中愉快」一语，是指他们每人的妻子都怀了男胎。
The phrase “and glad of heart” refers to the fact that each of their wives conceived a male child.
「为一切恩惠」这几个字，表明有天上的声音出来，对他们说：你们众人都已定为得享来世的生命，那是至极的恩惠。
The words “for all the goodness” indicate that a Divine Voice issued forth and said to them: All of you are designated for life in the World-to-Come, which is the ultimate good.
经上说耶和华向他仆人和他民以色列施了一切恩惠。问：向以色列所施的恩惠，是赦免他们那年在赎罪日吃喝的罪；向他仆人大卫所施的恩惠又是什么？
上文那节经说：「是因耶和华向他仆人 大卫 和他民以色列所施的一切恩惠。」革玛拉问：经上提到神向他民以色列所施的恩惠，固然是指他赦免了他们那年在 赎罪日 吃喝的罪；可是神向他仆人 大卫 所施的恩惠是什么呢？
The aforementioned verse stated: “For all the goodness that the Lord had done for David His servant and for Israel His people.” The Gemara asks: Granted, when the verse mentions the goodness that God did for Israel His people, this is referring to the fact that He pardoned them the sin of eating on Yom Kippur that year; but what is the goodness that God performed for David His servant?
拉夫犹大 引 拉夫 说：所罗门要把约柜抬进圣殿时，殿门彼此粘住，打不开。他说了二十四首颂歌，没有得着应允；又说「众城门哪，你们要抬起头来……那荣耀的王将要进来」，仍没有得着应允，殿门依然关闭。
拉夫犹大 说 拉夫 说：所罗门 要把约柜抬进圣殿的时候，殿门彼此粘住，打不开。
Rav Yehuda said that Rav said: When Solomon sought to bring the Ark into the Temple the gates clung together and could not be opened.
所罗门 说了二十四首颂歌，他的祷告却没有得着应允。
Solomon uttered twenty-four songs of praise, and his prayer was not answered.
他开口说：「众城门哪，你们要抬起头来！永久的门户，你们要被举起！那荣耀的王将要进来！」（诗篇 24:7）可是他的祷告仍没有得着应允，殿门依然关闭。
He began and said: “Lift up your heads, O you gates, and be lifted up, you everlasting doors; and the King of glory shall come in” (Psalms 24:7), but once again his prayer was not answered, and the Temple gates remained closed.
及至他说「耶和华神啊，求你不要厌弃你的受膏者，要记得你仆人大卫所施的慈爱」，就立刻得着应允。那时，这位先王仇敌的脸黑如锅底，众人都知道圣者已赦免了他拔示巴那件罪，因为殿门只是凭他的功德才开的。
及至他说：「耶和华神啊，求你兴起，和你有能力的约柜同入安息之所！耶和华神啊，愿你的祭司披上救恩，愿你的圣民蒙福欢乐！
Once he said: “Now therefore arise, O Lord God, into your resting place, You, and the Ark of Your strength; Let your priests, O Lord God, be clothed with victory and let Your pious ones rejoice in goodness.
注：历代志下 6:41「欢乐」，英译作 rejoice in goodness，和合本作「蒙福欢乐」，照和合本。
耶和华神啊，求你不要厌弃你的受膏者，要记得你仆人 大卫 所施的慈爱」（历代志下 6:41–42），他就立刻得着应允。
O Lord God, do not turn away the face of Your anointed; remember the faithful love of David Your servant” (II Chronicles 6:41–42), he was immediately answered.
那时，大卫 仇敌的脸变黑，好像烧焦的锅底；众人都知道那圣者——愿他受称颂——已赦免了他牵涉 拔示巴 的那件罪，因为他们看见殿门只是凭他的功德才打开的。
At that moment the faces of David’s enemies turned dark like the charred bottom of a pot, and all knew that the Holy One, Blessed be He, forgave him for that sin involving Bathsheba, as they saw that it was only in his merit that the gates of the Temple opened.
拉比约拿单·本·阿斯迈 和 皈依者之子拉比犹大 在 拉比西缅·本·约哈伊 的学堂里学誓言篇。学完后，二人傍晚向老师辞别，却没有离城；早晨又回去再辞别一次。老师问：你们昨天傍晚不是已经辞别过了么？
革玛拉记述：拉比约拿单·本·阿斯迈 和 皈依者之子拉比犹大 在 拉比西缅·本·约哈伊 的学堂里研习论誓言的那一篇。
The Gemara relates that Rabbi Yonatan ben Asmai and Rabbi Yehuda, son of converts, studied the portion dealing with oaths in the study hall of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai.
注：原文 רבי יהודה בן גרים，照 9之间 写作 皈依者之子拉比犹大（之间2906）；与 之间652 皈依者之子犹大（安息日卷 33之间）或为同一人，待考。
学完之后，两位门徒在傍晚向他们的老师辞别，却还没有离开那城。
After completing their studies, the disciples took leave of their master in the evening, but did not yet leave the city.
到早晨，他们又回去，第二次向他辞别。
In the morning they went back and took leave of him a second time.
他对他们说：你们昨天傍晚不是已经向我辞别了么？
He said to them: Did you not already take leave of me yesterday in the evening?
他们说：老师教导过我们，门徒辞别老师后若仍在同城过夜，须再辞别一次，因为献殿末了经上说「第八日，王遣散众民」，别处又说「七月二十三日，王遣散众民」；第八日是第八日严肃会，就是提斯利月二十二日，经上却说他次日才遣散众民。
他们对他说：我们的老师，你曾教导我们：门徒向老师辞别以后，若仍在同一城里过夜，就必须再向他辞别一次，因为论献殿的末了经上说：「第八日，王遣散众民；他们为王祝福」（列王纪上 8:66），而别处又写着：「七月二十三日，王遣散众民」（历代志下 7:10）。
They said to him: You have taught us, our teacher, that a disciple who takes leave of his teacher and then stays overnight in the same city must take leave of him an additional time, as it is stated at the conclusion of the dedication of the Temple: “On the eighth day he sent the people away, and they blessed the king” (I Kings 8:66), and elsewhere it is written: “And on the twenty-third day of the seventh month he sent the people away” (II Chronicles 7:10).
经上的第八日，是指第八日严肃会，就是 提斯利月 二十二日，经上却说他是在次日，就是那月二十三日，遣散众民的。
The eighth day in the verse is referring to the Eighth Day of Assembly, the twenty-second of the month of Tishrei, yet it says that he sent the people away on the next day, the twenty-third of the month.
由此可以推出：门徒辞别老师后若仍在同城过夜，须再辞别一次，正如以色列人在节后次日，提斯利月二十三日，又向所罗门辞别一次。
所以，由此可以推出：门徒向老师辞别以后，若仍在同一城里过夜，就必须再向他辞别一次，正如犹太百姓在节后的次日，就是 提斯利月 二十三日，又向 所罗门 辞别了一次。
Rather, it can be derived from here that a disciple who takes leave of his teacher and then stays overnight in the same city must take leave of him an additional time, just as the Jewish people took leave of Solomon an additional time on the day after the Festival, on the twenty-third of Tishrei.
拉比西缅·本·约哈伊 对儿子说：这两位是有尊贵品貌的人，去请他们为你祝福。儿子去时，见他们正在辨析经文间的矛盾：箴言说「要修平你脚下的路」，可见遇有多件诫命须衡量轻重；另一处又说「免得你修平生命的道」，可见诫命一临到就当遵行，不必衡量轻重。
拉比西缅·本·约哈伊 对他儿子说：这两个人，就是 拉比约拿单·本·阿斯迈 和 皈依者之子拉比犹大，是有尊贵品貌的人，就是有智慧、有学问的人；你到他们那里去，好叫他们为你祝福。
Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai said to his son: These two people, Rabbi Yonatan ben Asmai and Rabbi Yehuda, son of converts, are men of noble form [tzura] i.e., wise and learned individuals; go to them so that they will bless you.
注：「品貌」，原文 צוּרָה。
他去了，见他们正深入讨论，提出经文之间看似矛盾的地方如下：经上写着：「要修平你脚下的路，坚定你一切的道」（箴言 4:26），表明人若有机会行不止一件诫命，就必须衡量哪一件最重要。
He went and found them deep in discussion, raising apparent contradictions between verses as follows: It is written: “Make level the path of your feet, and let all your ways be established” (Proverbs 4:26), indicating that when one has the opportunity to perform more than one mitzva, he must evaluate which of them is most important.
而另一处写着：「免得你修平生命的道」（箴言 5:6），表明人应当在每件诫命的机会临到时就去遵行，不必考虑它相对的轻重。
And elsewhere it is written: “Lest you level out the path of life,” (Proverbs 5:6), indicating that one must perform each mitzva as the opportunity arises, without considering its relative importance.
注：箴言 5:6 和合本作「以致她找不着生命平坦的道」，革玛拉把 פֶּן תְּפַלֵּס 读作「免得你修平」，指向读者，故照革玛拉读法译。
他们解释说这并不矛盾：前一节经是论可由别人去行的诫命，所以人须衡量哪一件最值得自己去行、哪一件留给别人（下接叶九背）。
他们解释说，这并不矛盾：这里，就是上面所引的第一节经，是论一件可以由别人去行的诫命，所以人必须考虑，哪一件最值得自己去行，哪一件留给别人去行。
They explained that it is not difficult: Here, in the first verse cited above, it is discussing a mitzva that can be done by others, and therefore one must consider what is most worthwhile for him to perform himself and what he will leave to others.