Joodse traditie als permanent leren

188.

ye abhor the teachers of My statutes". Whoever contemns the sages will have no portion in the world to come, and is included in the censure "For the word of the Lord hath he despised" (Num. 15:31). ((6.1-11))

((Regels 6:12-14 en 7:1-12)) 6. 12 Although one who contemns the sages forfeits his portion in the world to come, yet if witnesses came forward and testified that a certain individual reviled a sage, even if only in words, the offender has incurred the penalty of excommunication. The Court (if he is found guilty) publicly excommunicates him and also imposes upon him a fine of one litra in gold, a penalty of uniform amount in all places, and this is given to the sage (Litra in gold = 25 gold denarii). Whoever reviles a Chacham in words, even after the latter's decease, is excommunicated by the Court, which lifts the ban after he repents. If the sage who has been reviled is living, the offender is only released with the concurrence of the person on whose account the ban had been imposed. To safeguard his honour, the Chacham may himself excommunicate a boor who treated him disrespectfully. For this, neither witnesses nor a previous warning are necessary. The ban is not removed till the offender has appeased the Chacham. If he died before this was done, three men constitute themselves a quorum and remove the ban. If the Chacham desires to forgive the offender, and does not excommunicate him, he is at liberty to do so.

6. 13 When a teacher, to safeguard the honour due to him, excommunicated any person, it is the duty of all his disciples to treat that person as under the ban. But when a disciple excommunicated anyone, for his own honour's sake, the teacher is not bound to respect the ban, but the people must do so. Similarly, anyone whom the Nasi (Patriarch of Palestine) excommunicated is to be treated by all Israel as under the ban. But if all Israel excommunicated a person, the Nasi need not treat him as excommunicated. Whoever has been placed under a ban of excommunication in his own city, is to be so regarded in another city. But one,, who has been placed under such a ban in another city than his own, is not under a ban in his own city.