your youth” (Proverbs 5:18). Rav Yitzḥak, his son, said to him: Such as whom? Rav Yehuda said to him: Such as your mother.

The Gemara wonders: Is that so? But didn’t Rav Yehuda once read to Rav Yitzḥak, his son, from the verse: “And I find more bitter than death the woman whose heart is snares and nets” (Ecclesiastes 7:26)? And Rav Yitzḥak said to him: Such as whom? And Rav Yehuda said to him: Such as your mother. The Gemara responds: This is not a contradiction. Granted, she is difficult and angry, but afterward she is conciliatory, so she is both more bitter than death and a source of calmness and joy for him, at different times.

Rav Shmuel bar Unya says in the name of Rav: A woman is raw material, like a vessel that has not been completed, and makes a covenant, becoming truly connected, only to the one who made her a vessel through her first act of sexual intercourse, as it is stated: “For your Maker is your husband, the Lord of hosts is His name” (Isaiah 54:5).

It is taught in a baraita: A man dies only to his wife, i.e., it is primarily she who suffers the pain and sadness resulting from his death, and a woman dies only to her husband. A man dies only to his wife, as it is stated: “And Elimelech, Naomi’s husband, died” (Ruth 1:3), and a woman dies only to her husband, as it is stated in Jacob’s parting words to Joseph: “And as for me, when I came from Paddan, Rachel died on me” (Genesis 48:7).

§ The mishna teaches: One may not see the king when he is having his hair cut. The Sages taught in a baraita: A king has his hair cut every day. A High Priest waits from the eve of Shabbat to the eve of Shabbat between haircuts. An ordinary priest has his hair cut once every thirty days.

The Gemara explains: A king has his hair cut every day, as it is stated: “Your eyes should see the king in his beauty” (Isaiah 33:17), so his beauty must be tended to daily. A High Priest waits from the eve of Shabbat to the eve of Shabbat, as Rav Shmuel bar Naḥman says that Rabbi Yoḥanan says: Since new priestly watches begin every week on the eve of Shabbat, the High Priest must have his hair cut in order to look his best when the new watch arrives.

The Gemara continues its explanation of the baraita: An ordinary priest has his hair cut once every thirty days, as it is written with regard to the priests: “They shall not shave their heads, and long hair they shall not grow out; they shall trim only their heads” (Ezekiel 44:20), and derive by verbal analogy “long hair” in this verse from “long hair” in the verse written with regard to the nazirite. It is written here, with regard to the priests: “And long hair they shall not grow out,” and it is written there, with regard to the nazirite: “Long hair growing on his head” (Numbers 6:5). Just as there, nazirite hair growth is at least thirty days, so too here, it is thirty days, and the priest must cut his hair before it is called long. And we also learn in a mishna (Nazir 5a): A term of naziriteship of unspecified length is thirty days.

The Gemara asks: And there, in the verse about the nazirite, from where do we derive that thirty days is the minimum length of a term? Rav Mattana says: As the verse states: “He shall be [yihye] holy” (Numbers 6:5): The word “yihye” has the numerical value of thirty.

Rav Pappa said to Abaye: Say that the priests should not grow their hair at all, but shave their heads instead. Abaye said to him: Had it been written: They shall not grow long hair, it would be as you said, but now that it is written: “And long hair” (Ezekiel 44:20), it can be somewhat long hair, but they should not grow it out very long.

The Gemara asks: If so, that the restriction on priests growing long hair is a mitzva by Torah law and not just a regulation for its time, now too, after the destruction of the Temple, priests should be required to have their hair cut every thirty days. The Gemara responds: The prohibition against priests growing long hair is similar to the prohibition against their drinking wine. Just as with regard to wine, only at the time of their entering the Temple is it forbidden to the priests, but when it is not the time of their entering the Temple it is permitted, so too, with regard to those with long hair, at the time of their entering the Temple, growing their hair long is prohibited, but when it is not the time of their entering the Temple, it is permitted.

The Gemara challenges this comparison: And is wine permitted when it is not the time of their entering the Temple? But isn’t it taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: I say that actually, it is always prohibited for priests to drink wine, even since the destruction of the Temple, but what can I do, as his repair is his ruin, meaning that it is the same destruction of the Temple that ruined and confused all priestly regulations and that also improved priests’ lifestyle by enabling them to drink. And Abaye said: In accordance with whose opinion do priests drink wine nowadays? In accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. The Gemara concludes by inference that if Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi is singled out as a lone opinion, then the Rabbis prohibit it.

The Gemara responds: There, with regard to drinking wine, this is the reason for the prohibition: The Temple will speedily be built, and we need a priest who is fit for the Temple service; and if the priests drink wine there are none. Therefore, none of them may drink wine. The Gemara objects: If so, here too, with regard to growing hair long, I need a priest who is fit for performing the Temple service as soon as the Temple is rebuilt, and if the priests grow their hair long, there are none.

The Gemara responds: Here it is possible for him to cut his hair and enter the Temple immediately. The Gemara objects: There too, it is possible for him to sleep a little and go in, as Rav Aḥa says: Walking the distance of a mil or sleeping even a minimal amount will dispel the effect of wine that one has drunk. The Gemara responds: But wasn’t it stated with regard to Rav Aḥa’s statement: Rav Naḥman says that Rabba bar Avuh says: They taught that the wine’s effect is dispelled in such a way only when he drank a quarter-log, at most, but if he drank more than a quarter-log, all the more so that walking that distance disturbs him and sleep makes him more drunk, unless he sleeps for a long time.

Rav Ashi said: The difference between drinking wine and growing hair is this: Concerning priests drunk on wine, who desecrate the Temple service when they perform it while intoxicated, the Sages decreed about them not to drink even after the Temple was destroyed. With regard to long-haired priests, who do not desecrate Temple service by performing it with hair that is too long, the Sages did not decree about them not to grow their hair long after the Temple was destroyed.

The Gemara raises an objection to Rav Ashi’s distinction from a baraita (Tosefta, Karetot 1:2): And these are they who are sentenced to death at the hand of Heaven: Priests who enter the Temple with long hair or drunk on wine.

The Gemara comments: Granted, priests entering the Temple drunk on wine are liable for death, as it is written: “Drink no wine nor strong drink, you, nor your sons with you, when you go into the Tent of Meeting, that you not die; it shall be a statute forever throughout your generations” (Leviticus 10:9). But as for priests with long hair, from where do we derive that they are punished with death at the hand of Heaven?

The Gemara responds: It is from the fact that priests drunk on wine were juxtaposed to those with long hair. It is written: “They shall not shave their heads, and long hair they shall not grow out” (Ezekiel 44:20), and it is written in the next verse: “Neither shall any priest drink wine when they enter the inner court” (Ezekiel 44:21). Just as priests drunk on wine are liable to receive death at the hand of Heaven, so too, those with long hair are liable to receive death at the hand of Heaven.

And if so, from this very juxtaposition one may learn that just as priests drunk on wine desecrate the Temple service, so too, those with long hair desecrate the Temple service, which poses a difficulty for Rav Ashi’s statement. The Gemara acknowledges: This poses a difficulty.

Ravina said to Rav Ashi: This halakha, until Ezekiel came and taught it, who said it? How can a halakha by Torah law be derived from the juxtaposition of verses in Ezekiel? Rav Ashi responds: And according to your reasoning, then, with regard to this statement that Rav Ḥisda says: We did not learn this following matter from the Torah of Moses, our teacher, until Ezekiel came and taught it to us: “No stranger, uncircumcised in heart and uncircumcised in flesh, shall enter into My Sanctuary to serve Me” (Ezekiel 44:9), until Ezekiel came and taught it, who said it? Rather, this halakha is learned as a tradition and therefore was observed for generations, and Ezekiel came and gave it support by writing a verse. Here too, this halakha is learned as a tradition, and Ezekiel came and gave it support by writing a verse.

The Gemara comments: And when they learned this halakha, it was to teach that a priest who violates the restriction is liable to receive death at the hand of Heaven. But the fact that it is considered desecration of the Temple service is not learned as a tradition.

The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of “they shall trim only their heads” (Ezekiel 44:20)? The Sages taught in a baraita: Like a lulyanit haircut. The Gemara asks: What is a lulyanit haircut? Rav Yehuda says that Shmuel says: A unique haircut. The Gemara asks again: What is it like? Rav Ashi says: The hair is cut so that the head of the hair in this row is at the side of the bottom of that row.

The Sages asked Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi: What was the haircut of the High Priest? He said to them: Go out and see the haircut of ben Elasa, who was the son-in-law of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, and who sported the High Priest’s hairstyle. It is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: Not for nothing did ben Elasa disburse his money on his haircuts, but in order to demonstrate on himself the haircut of the High Priest.