Márá deátrá

It is taught in the baraita that Rabbi Yehuda says: One relies on these signs only when there is an Elder or a rabbinic scholar who can testify about the matter, as not all are well versed in this matter, and perhaps the field was not plowed at all. Abaye said: Learn from this statement of Rabbi Yehuda that when there is a Torah scholar in the city, all affairs of the city are thrust upon him, i.e., are his responsibility. Consequently, he is expected to know what has happened in the city.

One of the residents of a courtyard or the residents of an alleyway who sought to become a teacher of children, his neighbors cannot object to him. And similarly, a teacher of children whose colleague came and opened a house to teach children beside him, in order that other children should come to him or in order that the children who are with this one should come to that one, they cannot object to him, as it is stated: "Hashem desires, for the sake of His righteousness, that the Torah be made great and glorious" (Yeshayahu 42:21). [Rema]: A rabbi who sits in the city and teaches the masses, another sage can come and teach there as well, even if he somewhat cuts off the livelihood of the first, such as when the community accepted the first as their rabbi and takes a fee from them for this, even so, the second can come to reside there and to maintain authority in every matter, like the first, if he is great and fit for this. (Mahari"v, Siman 151 and Mahara"i in his Psakim, Siman 158, see there the responsa of the great ones). But if a visiting sage came to the city, he may not cut off the salary of the rabbi who resides there to perform weddings and to collect the fee that comes from them, since it is the salary of the resident rabbi; but he is permitted to perform the wedding and to give the fee to the established rabbi. And similarly, he is permitted to judge between two litigants in the city who come before him to judge, for perhaps the rabbi in the city is not suitable for them. But he may not teach matters of prohibition and permissibility, or to preach to act with authority, in the place of his fellow. (Mahari"k, Shoresh 170 and Mahar"d in a responsa 22). One who was established as a rabbi in the city, even if he established himself in some authority, he may not be removed from his greatness even though another came there who is greater than he. (Rivash, Siman 271). Even his son and his grandson forever precede others, as long as they fill the place of their fathers in piety and they are somewhat wise. (Rambam, Chapter 1 of Hilchos Melachim). And in a place where there is a custom to accept a rabbi for a set time, or that it is customary to choose whomever they desire, they have the authority, (Kol Bo). But anyone whom the community accepted upon themselves, and all the more so if they did so with the consent of the authority, no great one in the world may usurp authority over him and remove him. (Ibid. in Rivash).

When a king is appointed, he is anointed with oil reserved for this purpose, as I Samuel 10:1 states: 'And Samuel took the cruse of oil and poured it over his head. Then, he kissed him.'
Once a king is anointed, he and his descendents are granted the monarchy until eternity, for the monarchy is passed down by inheritance, as Deuteronomy 17:20 states 'Thus, he the king and his descendents will prolong their reign in the midst of Israel.'
If the king leaves only a young son, the monarchy should be held for him until he matures, as Yehoyada did for Yoash. The order of inheritance of the monarchy is the same as that governing the inheritance of property. An older son is given precedence over a younger one.
Not only the monarchy, but all other positions of authority and appointments in Israel, are transferred to one's children and grandchildren as inheritances forever.
The above applies if the knowledge and the fear of God of the son is equivalent to that of his ancestors. If his fear of God is equivalent to theirs but not his knowledge, he should be granted his father's position and given instruction. However, under no circumstance should a person who lacks the fear of God be appointed to any position in Israel, even though he possesses much knowledge.
Once David was anointed king, he acquired the crown of kingship. Afterwards, the kingship belonged to him and to his male descendents forever, as II Samuel 7: 16 states: 'Your throne shall be established forever.' Nevertheless, his acquisition of the monarchy was conditional, applying only to the righteous among his descendents, as Psalms 132:12 states: 'If your children will keep My covenant... their children shall also sit on your throne forever.'
Despite this condition, God assured David that the monarchy would never be taken from his descendents forever, as Psalms 89:31-38 states: "lf his children will forsake My Torah and cease walking in My statutes ... I will punish their transgressions with the rod and their sins with plagues. Nevertheless, I will not utterly remove My grace from him.... His throne shall be ... established forever.'

The Gemara rejects this: Rather, what will you say, that Rav really did retract? If so, let him prohibit them for consumption without sending them to Shmuel. Rather, he sent the birds to Shmuel because it was Shmuel’s place, and although Rav disagreed with Shmuel, it would be improper to issue a contradictory ruling.

The Gemara relates: There was this student who issued a ruling in the city of Ḥarta De’argiz that items that are set aside are permitted, in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon, and Rav Hamnuna excommunicated him. The Gemara asks: Don’t we hold that the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon? Why, then, did Rav Hamnuna excommunicate him? The Gemara answers: This incident was in the place of Rav and the student should not have done this; even if the accepted ruling is lenient, the city was under Rav’s jurisdiction, and the student’s public ruling, contrary to Rav’s opinion, was a blatant display of disrespect. Incidentally, the Gemara relates a story involving these two students: One would rescue from a fire with one vessel and one would rescue with four and five vessels, as it is permitted to rescue one’s belongings from a fire on Shabbat. They disagreed with regard to whether it is preferable to carry just one vessel and go back and forth several times, or to carry several vessels and go back and forth fewer times. And they disagree with regard to the same issue that was the subject of the dispute of Rabba bar Zavda and Rav Huna elsewhere.

...

And Rava said: If there is a teacher of children who teaches a few subjects, and there is another who teaches more subjects than him, one does not remove the first teacher from his position to hire the second, as perhaps the other teacher will come to be negligent due to the lack of competition. Rav Dimi from Neharde’a said: On the contrary, all the more so is it the case that he will teach in a better manner if he knows that he is the sole instructor in the place, as jealousy among teachers increases wisdom. The one who was dismissed will try to refine his skills so that he will be rehired, and this will prevent negligence on the part of the other teacher.

If there is a teacher here who teaches children, and another comes who is better than he, they dismiss the first on account of the second.