וְאֵין הַשְּׁבִיעִית מְשַׁמַּטְתָּה, וְאֵין הַבְּכוֹר נוֹטֵל בָּהּ פִּי שְׁנַיִם.

and the Sabbatical Year does not abrogate them; and the firstborn does not take a double portion of them.

נִגְבֵּית בְּבֵית דִּין, מַאי טַעֲמָא? כְּמִלְוֶה דָּמְיָא. וְאֵין בָּהּ מִשּׁוּם רִבִּית – דְּלָאו אַדַּעְתָּא דְּהָכִי יְהַב לֵיהּ. וְאֵין הַשְּׁבִיעִית מְשַׁמַּטְתָּהּ – דְּלָא קָרֵינָא בֵּיהּ ״לֹא יִגֹּשׂ״.

The baraita states that gifts of groomsmen are collectible in court. What is the reason for this? It is that they are considered similar to a loan. The baraita states: And they are not subject to the prohibition of interest. The reason is that it was not with that in mind that he gave him baraita states: And the Sabbatical Year does not abrogate them. The reason is that one cannot read the verse concerning the abrogation of debts during the occurrence of the Sabbatical Year: “He shall not exact it with regard to gifts of groomsmen. Since one cannot choose to exact the gifts until the time of one’s own wedding, they are not addressed by this verse.

וְאֵין הַבְּכוֹר נוֹטֵל פִּי שְׁנַיִם – דַּהֲוָה לֵיהּ רָאוּי, וְאֵין הַבְּכוֹר נוֹטֵל בְּרָאוּי כִבְמוּחְזָק.

The baraita states: And the firstborn does not take a double portion from them. The reason is that they constitute potential inheritance, and the firstborn does not take in inheritance the property due the deceased as he does the property the deceased possessed.

אֲמַר רַב כָּהֲנָא, כְּלָלָא דְּשׁוּשְׁבִינוּתָא: הֲוָה בְּמָתָא – אִיבָּעֵי לֵיהּ לְמֵיתָא. שְׁמַע קַל טַבְלָא – אִיבָּעֵי לֵיהּ לְמֵיתָא. לָא שְׁמַע קַל טַבְלָא – אִיבָּעֵי לֵיהּ לְאוֹדוּעֵיהּ, תַּרְעוֹמֶת אִית לֵיהּ, שַׁלּוּמֵי מְשַׁלֵּם.

§ Rav Kahana said: The principle with regard to the reciprocation of gifts of groomsmen is: If the recipient was in town when his groomsman wed, he should have come to the wedding, and even if he did not come, he is obligated to send the gifts of groomsmen. If he was not in town, but he was nearby and he heard the sound of the drum announcing the wedding, he should have come. If he was far away and did not hear the sound of the drum, the betrothed man should have informed him. If he did not inform him, the recipient has a grievance against the betrothed man because he did not inform him about the wedding, but he still repays the gifts of groomsmen.

וְעַד כַּמָּה? אֲמַר אַבַּיֵי: נָהֲגוּ בְּנֵי גְנָנָא, עַד זוּזָא – אַיְיתָא בְּכַפֵּיהּ אָכְלֵיהּ בִּכְרֵסֵיהּ, עַד אַרְבָּעָה – מְשַׁלֵּם פַּלְגָּא, מִכָּאן וְאֵילָךְ – אִינִישׁ אִינִישׁ כַּחֲשִׁיבוּתֵיהּ.

In this case, since he did not partake of the wedding feast, he is entitled to deduct a sum from the reciprocal gift. The Gemara asks: And up to how much can he deduct? Abaye said: The members of a wedding feast were accustomed to deduct according to the following principle: If the gift of groomsmen that the reciprocal giver received was up to a dinar, he now pays nothing, because what a person brings in his hand he consumes in his stomach. If the gift of groomsmen was up to four dinars, he now pays half. From that sum onward, each person deducts according to his prominence, i.e., in accordance with the outlay that would have been required to honor the reciprocal giver properly, had he participated in the wedding feast.

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: עָשָׂה עִמּוֹ בְּפוּמְבֵּי, וּבִקֵּשׁ לַעֲשׂוֹת עִמּוֹ בְּצִנְעָא – יָכוֹל לוֹמַר לוֹ: בְּפוּמְבֵּי אֶעֱשֶׂה עִמְּךָ, כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁעָשִׂיתָ עִמִּי; עָשָׂה עִמּוֹ בִּבְתוּלָה, וּבִקֵּשׁ לַעֲשׂוֹת עִמּוֹ בְּאַלְמָנָה – יָכוֹל לוֹמַר לוֹ: בִּבְתוּלָה אֶעֱשֶׂה עִמְּךָ, כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁעָשִׂיתָ עִמִּי.

The Sages taught (Tosefta 10:9): If one served as groomsman for his friend at a public [pumbei] wedding, and when the groomsman himself wed, he requested that his friend reciprocate by serving as a groomsman for him at a private wedding, the friend can say to him: I am willing to reciprocate and serve as groomsman for you only at a public wedding, where the rejoicing is greater, in the manner you served as a groomsman for me. If one served as a groomsman for his friend when he married a virgin, and he requested that his friend reciprocate by serving as a groomsman for him when he marries a widow, the friend can say to him: I shall serve as a groomsman for you only when you marry a virgin, in the manner you served as a groomsman for me.

עָשָׂה עִמּוֹ בִּשְׁנִיָּה, וּבִקֵּשׁ לַעֲשׂוֹת עִמּוֹ בְּרִאשׁוֹנָה – יָכוֹל לוֹמַר לוֹ: לִכְשֶׁתִּשָּׂא אִשָּׁה אַחֶרֶת אֶעֱשֶׂה עִמְּךָ. עָשָׂה עִמּוֹ בְּאַחַת, וּבִקֵּשׁ לַעֲשׂוֹת עִמּוֹ בִּשְׁתַּיִם – יָכוֹל לוֹמַר לוֹ: בְּאַחַת אֶעֱשֶׂה עִמְּךָ, כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁעָשִׂיתָ עִמִּי.

If one served as a groomsman for his friend when he married a second wife, and he requested that his friend reciprocate by serving as a groomsman for him when he marries a first wife, the friend can say to him: When you marry another woman I will serve as a groomsman for you. If one served as a groomsman for his friend when he married one woman, and he requested that his friend reciprocate by serving as a groomsman for him when he marries two women, can say to him: I will serve as a groomsman for you when you marry one woman, in the manner you served as a groomsman for me.

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: עַתִּיר נְכָסִין עַתִּיר פּוּמְבֵּי – זֶה הוּא בַּעַל הֲגָדוֹת, עַתִּיר סְלָעִים עַתִּיר תְּקוֹעַ – זֶהוּ בַּעַל פִּלְפּוּל, עַתִּיר מְשַׁח עַתִּיר כְּמָס – זֶהוּ בַּעַל שְׁמוּעוֹת, הַכֹּל צְרִיכִין לְמָרֵי חִטַּיָּא – תַּלְמוּד.

§ The Sages taught in a baraita: There are different types of Torah scholars. There is a scholar who is wealthy in figurative property and wealthy in public renown; this is the master of homiletics. There is a scholar who is wealthy in coins and wealthy in houses; this is the master of dialectics. There is one who is wealthy in oil and wealthy in hidden stores; this is the master of halakhic traditions. Everyone is dependent on the owner of wheat; this is the master of Talmud, who understands the reasons behind the rulings and traditions.

אָמַר רַבִּי זֵירָא אָמַר רַב, מַאי דִּכְתִיב: ״כָּל יְמֵי עָנִי רָעִים״ זֶה בַּעַל תַּלְמוּד, ״וְטוֹב לֵב מִשְׁתֶּה תָמִיד״ – זֶה בַּעַל מִשְׁנָה.

Rabbi Zeira says that Rav says: What is the meaning of that which is written: “All the days of the poor are terrible; and for the good-hearted it is always a feast” (Proverbs 15:15)? “All the days of the poor are terrible”; this is referring to the master of Talmud, who is wearied by the difficulty of his Talmud study. “And for the good-hearted it is always a feast”; this is referring to the master of Mishna, who recites the mishnayot by rote and is not wearied thereby.

רָבָא אָמַר: אִיפְּכָא. וְהַיְינוּ דְּאָמַר רַב מְשָׁרְשִׁיָּא מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרָבָא, מַאי דִּכְתִיב: ״מַסִּיעַ אֲבָנִים יֵעָצֵב בָּהֶם בּוֹקֵעַ עֵצִים יִסָּכֵן בָּם״? ״מַסִּיעַ אֲבָנִים יֵעָצֵב בָּהֶן״ – אֵלּוּ בַּעֲלֵי מִשְׁנָה, ״בּוֹקֵעַ עֵצִים יִסָּכֶן בָּם״ – אֵלּוּ בַּעֲלֵי תַלְמוּד.

Rava says: The opposite is true. And this is consistent with that which Rav Mesharshiyya says in the name of Rava: What is the meaning of that which is written: “He who quarries stones shall be hurt by them; and he that chops wood shall be warmed thereby” (Ecclesiastes 10:9). “He who quarries stones shall be hurt by them”; these are the masters of Mishna. They exert themselves to memorize the mishnayot, but since one cannot reach practical conclusions from the mishna, they are comparable to one who carries a heavy load without benefiting from it. “He that chops wood shall be warmed thereby”; these are the masters of Talmud, who attain the benefit of their exertions in the form of practical conclusions.

רַבִּי חֲנִינָא אָמַר: ״כָּל יְמֵי עָנִי רָעִים״ – זֶה שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ אִשָּׁה רָעָה, ״וְטוֹב לֵב מִשְׁתֶּה תָמִיד״ – זֶה שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ אִשָּׁה טוֹבָה. רַבִּי יַנַּאי אָמַר: ״כָּל יְמֵי עָנִי רָעִים״ – זֶה אִיסְטְנִיס, ״וְטוֹב לֵב מִשְׁתֶּה תָמִיד״ – זֶה שֶׁדַּעֲתוֹ יָפָה.

The Gemara cites other interpretations of this verse. Rabbi Ḥanina says: “All the days of the poor are terrible”; this is referring to one who has a wicked wife. “And for the good-hearted it is always a feast”; this is referring to one who has a good wife. Rabbi Yannai says: “All the days of the poor are terrible”; this is referring to one who is delicate [istenis] and overly sensitive, because he constantly encounters unpleasant situations. “And for the good-hearted it is always a feast”; this is referring to one who is relaxed and not particular with regard to his food or his surroundings.

רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: ״כָּל יְמֵי עָנִי רָעִים״ – זֶה רַחֲמָן, ״וְטוֹב לֵב מִשְׁתֶּה תָמִיד״ – זֶה אַכְזָרִי. וְרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי אָמַר: ״כָּל יְמֵי עָנִי רָעִים״ – זֶה שֶׁדַּעֲתוֹ קְצָרָה, ״וְטוֹב לֵב מִשְׁתֶּה תָמִיד״ – זֶה שֶׁדַּעֲתוֹ רְחָבָה.

Rabbi Yoḥanan says: “All the days of the poor are terrible”; this is referring to an empathetic person, because he is constantly affected by the suffering in the world. “And for the good-hearted it is always a feast”; this is referring to a cruel person, who is not pained by the suffering of others. And Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says: “All the days of the poor are terrible”; this is referring to a person of impatient disposition. “And for the good-hearted it is always a feast”; this is referring to a person of patient disposition.