A Torah scholar is permitted to stand before his teacher only once in the morning and once in the evening, so that the teacher’s honor should not be greater than the honor of Heaven, as one recites the Shema, which is tantamount to greeting God, once in the morning and once in the evening. The Gemara raises an objection from an aforementioned opinion. Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: From where is it derived that an elder should not trouble others to honor him? The verse states: “An elder, and you shall fear” (Leviticus 19:32). The collocation of these words comes to teach that the elder, too, must fear God.

The Gemara explains the objection: And if you say one may stand only in the morning and evening, why does the baraita say an elder should not trouble others? Standing for an elder only twice a day is an obligation for the people, not an imposition. Rather, is it not correct to say that one is obligated to stand before one’s teacher at any point during the day? The Gemara answers: No; actually one is obligated to stand only in the morning and evening, and even so, as much as it is possible for the elder, he should not trouble the people to stand.

§ Rabbi Elazar said: Any Torah scholar who does not stand before his teacher is called wicked, and he will not live a long life, and his studies will be forgotten, as it is stated: “But it shall not be well for the wicked, neither shall he prolong his days, which are as a shadow, because he does not fear before [millifnei] God” (Ecclesiastes 8:13). This fear mentioned in the verse, I do not know what it is. When the verse states: “And you shall revere the face [penei] of an elder, and you shall fear your God” (Leviticus 19:32), one can deduce that this fear mentioned in the verse is referring to standing. Consequently, this verse teaches with regard to one who does not stand that he is called wicked, he will not live a long life, and his studies will be forgotten, as indicated by the phrase: “It shall not be well.”

The Gemara asks: But why not say that this is referring to fear of God stated with regard to interest (Leviticus 25:36), or the fear of God stated with regard to weights (Deuteronomy 25:13–16), as the fear of God is mentioned with regard to these prohibitions as well. The Gemara answers: Rabbi Elazar derives this halakha through a verbal analogy of “penei” and “penei,” as explained previously, not from a verbal analogy of the term “fear.”

A dilemma was raised before them: With regard to one who is both a man’s son and his teacher, what is the halakha as to whether that son must stand before his father? The Gemara answers: Come and hear, as Shmuel said to Rav Yehuda: Big-toothed one, stand before your father. Although Rav Yehuda was a great Torah scholar and taught his father, he was still required to stand before him. The Gemara answers: Rav Yeḥezkel, Rav Yehuda’s father, is different, as he was a man of good deeds, and even Mar Shmuel himself would stand before him.

The Gemara asks: Rather, what is Shmuel saying to Rav Yehuda? If he is not teaching him that one who is his father’s teacher must stand before his father, why did Shmuel say this to Rav Yehuda? The Gemara answers that this is what Shmuel said to him: Sometimes your father comes from behind me and I do not see him or stand before him. Nevertheless, you should stand before him and do not be concerned about my honor.

Another dilemma was raised before them, with regard to one who is both a man’s son and his teacher, what is the halakha as to whether the father must stand before his son? The Gemara answers: Come and hear, as Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says: It is not appropriate for me to stand before my son solely due to his greatness in Torah, as I am greater than him. But due to the honor of the household of the Nasi I do stand before him, as his son was a son-in-law of the Nasi.

It may be inferred from here that if his son were not in the household of the Nasi he would not stand for him, and the reason was that he could claim: I am his teacher and therefore I am not obligated to stand before him. Accordingly, Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi is indicating that if he were my teacher I would stand before him. The Gemara rejects this proof: This is what Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi is saying: It is not appropriate for me to stand before my son, even if he were my teacher, as I am his father. But due to the honor of the household of the Nasi I do stand before him.

A dilemma was raised before them: If one’s teacher is riding on an animal, is that considered like walking, and therefore one must stand before him, or is he not obligated to stand before him, since he is stationary relative to the animal? Abaye said: Come and hear a resolution from a different issue (Nega’im 13:7): If a leper, who is ritually impure and transfers impurity through a tent, i.e., anyone who enters the location of the leper is rendered impure, is sitting under the branches of a tree, which form a tent over him, and a pure person is standing under that tree, the pure person is rendered impure.

If the impure person is standing under the tree and the pure person is sitting there, he remains pure. In this case, as the impure person is not settled there, he does not impart ritual impurity in a tent. But if the impure person sat and established his place there, the pure individual is rendered impure.

That mishna adds: And the same halakha applies with regard to a stone afflicted with a leprous sore (see Leviticus, chapter 14), which also imparts impurity of a tent. If one carrying a stone of this kind sits under a tree, a pure person standing under the tree is rendered impure, whereas if the person carrying the stone stands, he does not render the other individual impure. And Rav Naḥman bar Kohen says: That is to say that riding is considered like walking, as although the stone is stationary relative to the person, it is considered to be moving. Conclude from it that in all cases riding is like walking.

A dilemma was raised before them: What is the halakha as to whether one should stand before a Torah scroll? Rabbi Ḥilkiya and Rabbi Simon and Rabbi Elazar say that this dilemma can be resolved by an a fortiori inference: If one stands before those who study the Torah, is it not all the more so true that one should stand before the Torah itself?

The Gemara relates: Rabbi Elai and Rabbi Ya’akov bar Zavdi were sitting and studying Torah. Rabbi Shimon bar Abba passed before them and they stood before him. Rabbi Shimon bar Abba said to them: You are not obligated to do this, for two reasons. One reason is that you are ordained scholars and I am only an associate, i.e., he had not been ordained. And furthermore, does the Torah stand before those who study it? Since you are engaged in Torah study at the present moment you are not required to stand before a Torah scholar.

The Gemara comments: Rabbi Shimon bar Abba holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Elazar, as Rabbi Elazar says: A Torah scholar may not stand before his teacher when he is studying Torah, because he is engaged in honoring the Torah itself. The Gemara adds: Even so, Abaye cursed anyone who acted in accordance with this ruling, as he would give the appearance of one who disrespected his teacher.

§ The Gemara continues to discuss the mitzva of standing before a Torah scholar. With regard to the verse: “And they looked after Moses until he was gone into the tent” (Exodus 33:8), Rabbi Ami and Rabbi Yitzḥak Nappaḥa disputed its correct interpretation. One said that this is stated unfavorably, and one said that it is meant favorably. The one who said it was stated unfavorably explains the verse as it is interpreted in the midrash. The one who said it was stated favorably interprets the verse in accordance with that which Ḥizkiyya says.

As Ḥizkiyya says: Rabbi Ḥanina, son of Rabbi Abbahu, said to me that Rabbi Abbahu says that Rabbi Avdimi of Haifa says: If a Torah scholar is passing, one stands before him if he passes within four cubits of him, and once he passes four cubits from him he sits. If the president of the court is passing, one stands before him as soon as he comes within his range of vision. And once he passes four cubits from him, he sits. If the Nasi is passing, one stands before him as soon as he comes within his range of vision, and he does not sit until the Nasi sits in his place, as it is stated: “And they looked after Moses until he was gone into the tent,” and only afterward did they sit. According to this interpretation, the verse is praising the behavior of the Jews.

§ The mishna teaches that women are exempt from all positive, time-bound mitzvot. The Sages taught: What is a positive, time-bound mitzva? Examples include residing in a sukka, and taking the lulav, and blowing the shofar on Rosh HaShana, all of which can be performed only at specific times of the year. And another example is donning ritual fringes, as the mitzva applies only during the daytime due to the verse which states: “Fringes, that you may look upon them” (Numbers 15:39), indicating that the fringes should be seen.