and does not grip the box of the phylacteries, which he may not touch while impure. This is the statement of Rabbi Ya’akov. And the Rabbis say: A person may take a brief nap with his phylacteries, but substantial sleep is not permitted, and he will thereby avoid a seminal emission while donning phylacteries. And how long is the duration of a brief nap? It is equivalent to the time required for walking one hundred cubits.

Apropos the duration of a brief nap, the Gemara cites that Rav said: It is prohibited for a person to sleep during the day longer than the duration of the sleep of a horse. One who sleeps for longer is derelict in the study of Torah. And how long is the duration of the sleep of a horse? It is sixty breaths long.

Abaye said: The sleep of the Master, Rabba, is like that of Rav, and that of Rav is like the sleep of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. And that of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi is like that of King David, and that of King David is like that of a horse. And that of a horse is sixty breaths.

The Gemara relates: Abaye would sleep during the day for a period equivalent to the time it takes to enter from Pumbedita to Bei Kuvei. Rav Yosef read the following verse as pertaining to Abaye: “How long will you sleep, sluggard? When will you arise from your sleep?” (Proverbs 6:9). Rav Yosef considered this dereliction in the study of Torah.

The Sages taught in a baraita: With regard to one who enters his bed to sleep during the day, if he wishes, he may remove his phylacteries, and if he wishes, he may leave them in place. One who enters to sleep at night removes his phylacteries and may not leave them in place. This is the statement of Rabbi Natan. Rabbi Yosei says: The young men must always remove them and not leave them in place while sleeping because they are accustomed to impurity, as they are more likely to experience a seminal emission.

The Gemara asks: Let us say that Rabbi Yosei holds that it is prohibited for one who experienced a seminal emission to don phylacteries. Abaye said: This is not so; rather, we are dealing with young men whose wives are with them, and the concern is lest they overlook the fact that they are donning phylacteries and inadvertently come to engage in matters to which they are accustomed, i.e., relations with their wives, which is certainly demeaning to the phylacteries.

The Sages taught in a baraita: If one forgot that he was donning phylacteries and engaged in relations with his phylacteries in place, he may grip neither the strap nor the box until he washes his hands, and only then may he remove the phylacteries. This is because the hands are active and tend to inadvertently touch parts of the body that are unclean.

MISHNA: Apropos eating in the sukka, which is discussed in the previous mishna, this mishna relates: An incident occurred where they brought a cooked dish to Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai for him to taste, and to Rabban Gamliel they brought two dates and a bucket of water. And they each said: Take them up to the sukka and we will eat them there.

In contrast, the mishna relates: And when they gave Rabbi Tzadok less than an egg-bulk of food, he took the food in a cloth for cleanliness; he did not wash his hands because in his opinion, one is not required to wash his hands before eating less than an egg-bulk. And he ate it outside the sukka and did not recite a blessing after eating it. He holds that one is not required to recite a blessing after eating less than an egg-bulk, as it is not satisfying, and it is written: “And you shall eat and be satisfied and bless the Lord your God” (Deuteronomy 8:10). The Gemara will explain the halakhic rationale for each of these actions described.

GEMARA: The Gemara wonders: Is the mishna citing an incident to contradict the halakha cited in the previous mishna that one may eat or drink in the context of a casual meal outside the sukka? The incident involving Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai and Rabban Gamliel indicates that one may eat nothing outside the sukka. The Gemara answers: The mishna is incomplete, as it is lacking a significant element, and it teaches the following: If one seeks to impose a stringency upon himself and eat nothing outside the sukka, he may be stringent, and there is no element of presumptuousness in adopting that stringency. And there was also an incident supporting that ruling: They brought a cooked dish to Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai for him to taste, and to Rabban Gamliel they brought two dates and a bucket of water,