Siman 244

It is written: "Before the hoary head you shall rise, and you shall honor the face of the old," and this is a positive commandment. The verse divided it into two, for "hoary head" is according to the plain meaning of the verse, one who has reached seventy years even if he is not a talmid chakham, provided that he is not a wicked person. And thus our sages, of blessed memory, expounded in Kiddushin (Kiddushin 32b): "Before the hoary head you shall rise" – could it be even before a "zaken ashmai"? A wicked person and an ignoramus (Rashi). The verse says: "zaken." And "zaken" refers only to a sage, as it is said: "Gather for Me seventy men from the elders (zikeinei) of Israel." And this is not a complete gezeirah shavah, but rather to say: to teach that in any case not an ashmai (Tosafot). For perforce it is not a complete gezeirah shavah, since the verse divided them into two – learn from this that it is not one thing: for "hoary head" is according to its plain meaning, and "zaken" is one who has acquired wisdom, meaning: a talmid chakham. And perforce this is not included in "hoary head" but is merely an example, that at the very least he should not be a zaken ashmai. See there in section 11.

And "zaken ashmay," Rashi explained: a wicked person and an am ha'aretz. And the Tosafot raised a difficulty: if so, it should even be permitted to degrade him, etc.? Rather, it means a boor and an am ha'aretz, etc. Thus far their words. And in my humble opinion, this is also the intention of Rashi: for if it would enter your mind that it means a truly wicked person, behold, even a scholar who is wicked is forbidden to be honored, as I wrote in the previous siman. However, the intention of Rashi, of blessed memory, is this: for behold, there is an am ha'aretz regarding Torah but who fulfills the mitzvot, and dons tefillin every day and prays, and listens to the words of the sages. Regarding such a person it is said: "You shall rise before the aged." And there is an am ha'aretz who, due to his ignorance, does not don tefillin every day and treats mitzvot lightly, even though he does not do this because of his wickedness but rather because of his ignorance. And this is the intention of Rashi: a wicked person and an am ha'aretz. That is to say: because he is an am ha'aretz he performs a wicked act, and not for the sake of wickedness. And this is exactly the "boor" of which the Tosafot wrote, meaning: an empty person. And regarding this the Torah excluded him from being honored, but one should also not degrade him, since he does not do this because of his wickedness. And according to this, in our countries such a person is almost never found (so it appears in my humble opinion).

And that which is written, "and you shall honor the face of the elder" – this refers to an elder who has acquired wisdom, even if he is young and wise. So it is in the Gemara there. And they wrote that "young" means even if he has not reached the age of commandments (Beit Yosef and Taz and Shach subsection 1), that is to say: even if he has not reached seventeen years. And although it is a remote possibility, nevertheless we find in the Shas children who were great scholars, like Rabbi Ishmael ben Elisha in Gittin (Gittin 58a), and like Rabbi Chanina in Nazir (Nazir 29b). And I wonder: for it will be explained that the youth must be outstanding in wisdom, and seemingly this is not applicable to a minor. Furthermore: it will be explained that the youth must stand before the elder, and this too is not applicable to a minor who has not reached the years of adulthood. And in all the Rishonim I have not seen this, and it requires further study. (See Tosafot Gittin ibid., starting with the words "all the money," who wrote that he was outstanding in wisdom. And it appears that the intention is that he will be outstanding in wisdom. And proof is from what he said: I am certain of him that he will rule etc., that is to say: that it will be so. See there. And examine closely and you will find it simple.)

Therefore, it is a positive commandment to rise before any sage, even if he is not advanced in years, and even if he is not his teacher, provided that he is greater than him in Torah and fit to learn from. And even if he is not exceptionally distinguished in wisdom more than the other sages of his generation, for that is called "the great one of the generation" and his law is like that of one's primary teacher, as I will explain. But regarding rising, one is obligated even if he is only distinguished in wisdom in his city and greater than him, and he is fit to learn from (Shach, subsection 2). And similarly, it is a commandment to rise "before the hoary head," which is to say one who is seventy years old, even if he is seventy-five, provided that he is an observer of commandments. And from when is one obligated to rise before these? Not like one's primary teacher, which was explained in siman 242, which is from when he sees him from a distance until he is hidden from him. Rather, from when he reaches within his four amot—one must rise before him. And this is a rising that has honor, where it is recognizable that it is for him that he stands (Rashi), as it is written: "You shall rise, and you shall honor"—a rising that has honor. And one must stand his full height until he passes from before his face, and then he may sit immediately. And if he comes to his house—he stands before him and honors him to sit. And perhaps he should not sit until the sage or the elder sits; or it is possible that in his own house, where he is the master of the house, he may sit first. But in another house—certainly he should not sit until he sits.

And it is forbidden to shut his eyes from him before he comes within his four amot. And regarding this it is stated in this verse: "And you shall fear your God." That is to say: before people you could say that you did not notice him, but before the Omnipresent you cannot say so. And regarding any matter entrusted to the heart, it is stated: "And you shall fear, etc." And it appears that the same law applies that it is forbidden for him to stand up beforehand intentionally and go to another place, if his entire intention is in order not to stand before him. For it is the same reason.

And since the rising is only in a place where there is honor, therefore one does not stand before them in a bathroom or in a bathhouse. And specifically in the inner room of a bathhouse where everyone stands naked, but in the outer room where everyone stands dressed – one must stand before them. And some say that even in the middle room, where some stand dressed and some naked – one is obligated to stand before them, because there is the greeting of peace there, as I wrote in Orach Chaim siman 88 (Shach subsection 3). But if so, why was this not mentioned in the Gemara (Kiddushin 33a)? And similarly our teacher, the Rema, in section 4 (Shulchan Aruch Yoreh Deah 244:4), why did he mention only the "outer room"? But also the opposite is difficult: why did they mention only the "inner room" in the places where one does not need to stand, and they did not mention the "middle room"? And it appears clear to me that they intentionally did not mention this, for since the reason that there is no honor in it is because they go naked. Therefore, in the middle room where they dress there, where some are dressed and some are naked, it therefore depends: if he is standing then naked – he should not rise before them. And if he is standing dressed – he should rise before them. And therefore they did not mention this, because there is no fixed law in this. And these laws also apply to one's primary teacher (Lechem Mishneh).

It is a simple matter that because of a blind talmid chacham, or a blind elder – one is obligated to stand. And some say that even the blind person is obligated to stand, if he knows that a talmid chacham or an elder is coming toward him (Be'er Heitev). And before the wife of a talmid chacham one must also stand during the lifetime of the chacham, and after his death one should show her some hiddur. And our sages, of blessed memory, said in Kiddushin there (Kiddushin 33a): Artisans are not obligated to stand before a talmid chacham while they are engaged in their work. And the reason: for the Torah only obligated a general hiddur, which does not involve a monetary loss. Therefore, if they would desist from their work to stand before them and a loss would reach them – the Torah did not obligate them in this, and a general hiddur is sufficient. However, if they wish to stand – they may stand when they are engaged in their own work. But when they are engaged in the work of others – it is forbidden for them to stand when there is a neglect of work involved. And when they are engaged in Torah – certainly one must stand, even though he interrupts his study somewhat, like all the mitzvot for which one interrupts Torah study to perform mitzvot (Gemara ibid.).

Our sages, of blessed memory, said there: From where do we derive that an elder should not cause trouble? The verse states: "And you shall fear your God." That is to say: since there is great trouble for the entire public to stand before the talmid chakham, therefore it is also incumbent upon the talmid chakham that whenever it is not very necessary – he should prevent himself from passing before the public, so as not to trouble them to stand before him. And if he needs to walk before the public, and he has another way to go around where they will not see him – it is a merit for him. And so too, when he has a short way to walk before some of the public, and a long way to walk before all of the public – it is better to take the short way. And there is one who says that now in our countries, where they sit on chairs – trouble is not applicable in this. For specifically when they sat on the ground there was trouble to stand, and not in this time of ours in our country (Shach subsection 4). And it appears to me that also regarding the craftsmen that was explained – it was only in their time when they sat on the ground, and there is in this a neglect of work. But in sitting on a chair – this is only a fleeting moment, and neglect of work is not applicable in this. Nevertheless, any talmid chakham who prevents himself from walking without great need before the congregation, so as not to trouble them – shall receive a good reward from Heaven. And they wrote concerning the Maharil that when he would walk in the beit knesset for donations, he would carry a Sefer Torah with him, so that they would stand because of the Sefer Torah and not because of him. And this he did when he circled in the beit knesset to each and every person according to their custom. But in his coming to the beit knesset or in his leaving – this is not applicable. And there are some of the rabbis who are accustomed when they go up to the Torah – they carry a Chumash with them in their ascent and in their descent from the bimah.

The Rambam wrote: One who is an elderly man, advanced in age, even if he is not a sage—one stands before him. And even a sage who is a youth stands before the elderly man advanced in age. And he is not obligated to stand his full height, but rather enough to show him honor. And even an elderly star-worshipper—one honors him with words and gives him a hand to support him. As it is said: "Before the hoary head you shall rise"—any hoary head is implied. Thus far his words. And the Tur wrote that this is only regarding a youth who is a sage, for since one must also treat him with respect, therefore he should not be belittled, and honoring is sufficient. But any other person is obligated to stand before an elderly man his full height, just as before a sage; see there. And he wrote further: That this also stands to reason regarding two sages or two elderly men, that one does not need to rise before his fellow, but rather shall perform an act of honoring for him. Thus far his words. And our teacher, the Rema, wrote in section 8 (Shulchan Aruch Yoreh Deah 244:8) that even the teacher to his student shall perform a bit of honoring for him. Thus far his words. And according to this, also the elderly man—it is simple that he is obligated to perform an act of honoring before the youth who is a sage, and perhaps a full rising.

And behold, according to what has been explained, one must stand before a seventy-year-old elder with a full standing. This is the implication of the plain meaning of the verse, "Before the hoary head you shall rise, and you shall honor the face of the elder." And even though in the Gemara we expound "you shall rise and you shall honor" regarding both of them, see there, nevertheless, in any event, the verse juxtaposed rising with the hoary head. And it seems to me that the custom is not so, for before a talmid chakam one stands to his full height, and before an elder of advanced age one does not stand, but rather gives him honor by rising slightly, and not a full standing. And perhaps they would explain in the Rambam that what he wrote—that one is not obligated to stand to his full height—refers to every person and not to a young sage alone, and not like the words of the Tur. Or it is possible that they relied on the words of Targum Onkelos, who translated regarding "Before the hoary head you shall rise": "Before one who is knowledgeable in the Torah etc.", and regarding "elder" he explained: "an old man," see there. And according to this, the custom of the world is well-settled, because the verse juxtaposed rising with a talmid chakam and honor with an elder in years. However, the words of Onkelos are against the sugya of the Shas in Kiddushin there (see the Ran who stood upon this), and yet Onkelos received it from the mouths of his teachers, Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua.

It appears to my humble opinion to explain the Gemara with another explanation according to the Targum, and based on this, our custom emerges into the light according to the essence of the law. And thus it is stated there: Our Rabbis taught: "Before the hoary head you shall rise" – could it be even before an unlearned elder? The verse teaches: "elder." And "elder" refers only to a sage, as it is said: "Gather for Me seventy men from the elders of Israel." Rabbi Yose HaGelili says: "elder" refers only to one who has acquired wisdom, etc. Is Rabbi Yose HaGelili not the same as the first Tanna? There is a difference between them regarding a young sage. The first Tanna holds a young sage is not included, and Rabbi Yose HaGelili holds even a young sage is included. See there. And one must examine: granted that there is an "elder" whose meaning is a sage or one who has acquired wisdom, nevertheless, there are many more instances where "elder" is a literal elder, and the entire Tanakh is full of this. Furthermore: what proof is brought from elderhood to hoary head? However, it appears that this is the explanation: for the Tanna compels that the verse is not according to its literal meaning, for elderhood is at sixty years, and hoary head is at seventy, as we learned at the end of Avot. And how can it say hoary head and elderhood in one matter? Rather, certainly it comes to reveal that it does not deal with the matter of years at all but rather with wisdom, and this is what the verse says: "Before the hoary head you shall rise" – in which hoary head? Not in years, but rather "and you shall honor the face of an elder" – one who has acquired wisdom. And the end of the verse is the explanation of the beginning. And only the first Tanna holds that in any case, since the verse expressed it in the language of elderhood and hoary head – we require both: an elder and a sage. And Rabbi Yose HaGelili holds that it does not deal with elderhood at all, only with Torah. And according to the words of these Tannaim, there is no mitzvah here to honor an elder in years if he is not a talmid chacham.

However, afterwards it says there: Issi ben Yehuda says: "Before the hoary head you shall rise" – even any hoary head is implied. Rashi explained: even an ignorant elder. And afterwards it says there (Kiddushin 33a): Rava said: The halacha is like Issi. Rabbi Yochanan would stand before Aramean elders. He said: How many adventures have passed over these. Rava would not stand, but he would show them splendor. Abaye would give his hand to the elders, etc., see there. And according to the words of the Targum, we shall explain that which Issi said, "even any hoary head is implied" – it does not refer to an ignorant elder, for it is far-fetched that the Torah would command to show splendor to the face of an ignorant person. Rather, this is the explanation: that according to what we explained for the first Tanna and Rabbi Yosei HaGelili, there is no mitzvah at all regarding an elder who is not a talmid chacham. And Issi says that even any hoary head is implied, meaning: even if he is not a talmid chacham. And Rabbi Yochanan ruled accordingly as halacha. And the Shas says that Rabbi Yochanan was so stringent in this that he would even stand before Aramean elders, not because of the law, but because of the reason that "how many adventures, etc." And afterwards it says: Rava would not stand, but he would show them splendor. Abaye would give his hand to the elders, etc. And it does not refer to Arameans, for it says "to the elders" without qualification; rather, it means: that Abaye and Rava disagree with Rabbi Yochanan, who ruled like Issi, but they would show splendor to those of hoary head who are not talmidei chachamim. Or, they would explain the words of Issi thus: that his intention in saying "even any hoary head is implied" is not regarding actual standing like a talmid chacham, but regarding mere splendor. And this is the explanation of the verse: "Before the hoary head you shall rise and you shall show splendor" – meaning that there is a hoary head for actual standing, and there is a hoary head for mere splendor; and that is: a talmid chacham with standing and an am ha'aretz with splendor. And "elder" clarifies that it refers to the "hoary head" in the Torah. And according to this, the law is as the Targum wrote, and he explained "elder" as "saba" according to the plain meaning of the verse, and so as not to be lengthy. But for the law, it fits well with the discussion of the Shas. And it is possible that in the Rambam it should also be explained thus, see there carefully.

One who sees a sage passing by or riding—for riding is considered like walking—does not stand until he reaches within his four amot, and does not sit until he passes four amot from him. And if he is his primary teacher—he stands before him from as far as his eyes can see, and does not sit until he is hidden from his eyes, or until he sits in his place. And a great man who is exceedingly wise more than the other sages of his generation, and is famous in his generation for this, even if he is not his teacher—his law is like that of his primary teacher. And we have already written that even one who is occupied with Torah must stand. And it is a simple matter that a sage who is a man of strife, and causes provocation and dispute not for the sake of Heaven—it is not fitting to stand before him. So wrote the poskim.

The Tur wrote that one who is a chasid and a man of deeds—everyone must stand before him, even those who are much greater than him in wisdom. Thus far his words. However, our teacher, the Beit Yosef, in section 12 wrote: A sage, even if he is preeminent in wisdom, is permitted to stand before one who is a man of deeds. Thus far his words, and he did not write that it is an obligation like the Tur. He follows his own reasoning in his great work, for we do not find an obligation to rise before a man of deeds. Rather, in any event, he is permitted to stand, meaning: a sage who is great in Torah is not permitted to disparage the honor of his Torah and rise before another, but before a man of deeds he may rise, and it is not called "an elder and it is not according to his honor." But the great later authorities disagree with him, and ruled like the Tur that there is an obligation to stand before a man of deeds. And the Ran also wrote so, and this is his wording: For the Torah did not command regarding wisdom except because wisdom leads to deeds, etc. Thus far his words. (The Bach and the Taz and the Shach in subsection 10 ruled like the Tur, see there.)

In the time of the Shas, there was a Nasi over all of Israel, and after him there was an Av Beit Din over all of Israel. It has already been explained that for a chacham—one stands from the time he reaches his four amot. An Av Beit Din is more stringent than him, and his law is like that of one's primary teacher, for one stands before him from the time he sees him from a distance as far as his eyes can see. However, when he has passed him, his law is like that of any other chacham, for once he has passed four amot—one sits. A Nasi is even more stringent, for even when he has passed him—one does not sit until the Nasi sits in his place, or until he is hidden from his sight, like one's primary teacher. And all of them who wish to waive their honor—their honor is waived. Nevertheless, it is a mitzvah to honor them and to rise slightly before them. Specifically regarding their honor are they able to waive, but not regarding a matter of disgrace. And now, in our many iniquities, we have neither a Nasi nor an Av Beit Din, and we only have the law of a chacham and the law of a primary teacher. Even the Rav in his city does not have the law of a Nasi or an Av Beit Din (see Shach, subsection 11). And it requires deliberation whether perhaps his law is like that of a primary teacher, as I wrote in siman 242, section 29; see there.

Our sages, of blessed memory, further said (Horayot 13b) that they had three levels of honor regarding entry into the beit midrash. For when the Nasi enters the beit midrash, everyone stands, and they do not sit until he says to them, "Sit." And when the Av Beit Din enters—they make for him rows upon rows from here and from there until he sits in his place, and afterwards everyone sits. And when the Chakham enters—whoever he reaches within his four amot stands before him; this one stands and this one sits until he sits in his place. Sons of Chakhamim and sons of talmidei chakhamim—one does not stand before them, but in this they have an advantage: for other people may not step over the heads of the holy people. That is to say: since they sat on the ground, one who enters afterwards must of necessity step over their heads. And one whom the holy people need—he may step over the heads of the holy people, but one whom the holy people do not need—he may not step over their heads (Yevamot 105b). Therefore, these sons, when the public needs them, whether for words of Torah or for some matter of a mitzvah—they may step over their heads; whether upon their entry to the beit midrash when they were previously occupied with that which the public needs, or whether they left the beit midrash to occupy themselves with this and returned and entered (Taz subsection 7). And certainly a talmid chakham has the ability to step over their heads upon their entry to the beit midrash. Nevertheless, it is not the praise of a talmid chakham to arrive last to the beit midrash such that he will need to step over them, unless he was occupied with a matter of a mitzvah. And so too if he left for his needs, whether for small or for large—he enters and steps over and returns to his place, for it is an unavoidable circumstance.

It is a simple matter that everyone should sit in his place according to his standing, and the sons of talmidei chachamim do not have permission to sit next to their father when the place is too great for their standing. However, regarding the sons of talmidei chachamim whose fathers are appointed as parnasim over the community—the sages gave them an advantage (ibid.), that if they only have the intellect to hear and understand words of Torah—they enter and sit before their father, and turn their faces toward their father even though their backs are toward the people. And if they do not have the intellect to hear—they sit with their faces toward the people. And this was in their time, but in our time this order does not exist at all, as is known.

It is stated in Bava Batra (Bava Batra 120b): In a gathering, follow age; in a session, follow wisdom. That is to say: if there were together a sage who is preeminent in wisdom and he is young in years, and an elder who is preeminent in age and he is somewhat of a sage, if they sit together in a session of Torah or of law – they follow wisdom. And this is to seat him at the head, and to speak first before the elder. And if they sat in a gathering of a feast or of a wedding – they follow age, to seat him before the sage. And if the sage is preeminent in wisdom, and the elder is not preeminent in age – in every place they follow wisdom. And so too the opposite: if the elder is preeminent in age, and the sage is not preeminent in wisdom – in every place they follow age, since he is also somewhat of a sage. And if this one is not preeminent in wisdom, and this one is not preeminent in age – the elder comes first in every place. (See Shach, sif katan 13, in the name of the Bach, that regarding two brothers, where the younger is preeminent in wisdom and the older is not preeminent in wisdom – they must marry off the older first, see there. And certainly it is so, but what relevance is it to these matters? And see Shach, sif katan 14, and see Pitchei Teshuvah, sif katan 4, in the name of the Chavot Yair, that the sage should play music in the house of the feast for the honor of the groom and bride, see there. Certainly if his intention is only for the sake of Heaven – how good, and like that of Rav Shmuel in Ketubot 17. But it is remote, and it is better to desist from this. And it is stated in the Tosefta Sanhedrin at the end of the seventh chapter: A sage who enters – they do not ask him until his mind is settled. If he entered and found them occupied with a halacha – he should not be jumping into their words until he knows which matter they are occupied with. And if he did so, regarding this it is said: "Seven things are in a golem," see there.)