Avot309

1:
Having completed the number of mishnayot that were prompted by the number 10, our chapter now moves on to the number 7. Unlike the previous mishnah, our present mishnah is simple.

2:
The sage here described is the ideal sage who takes part in the discussions of the Sanhedrin and the prior lessons with his teachers. It is much more difficult to identify his counterpart. In his commentary on our present mishnah Rambam gives a description of the various types that are mentioned in our classical sources. He defines first the ignoramus (bur) and the am ha-aretz; then he defines the "unscholarly" (golem) of our present mishnah. He describes the golem thus:

That is to say that the "unscholarly" person is quite capable of logical reasoning, at least to a certain extent, and is quite capable of understanding the difference between right and wrong. However, since these characteristics have not been honed to perfection in him his behaviour in a learning situation leaves much to be desired.

3:
In the Sanhedrin the sages sat in a strictly arranged order, with those recognized as the greatest in the front, nearest the President, and the rest behind them in strict order of perceived status. During the discussions in the Sanhedrin no one would speak unless he was given leave to do so by the president, who always spoke first. But this deference to one's superiors held not only in the Sanhedrin but also in the classroom – indeed, in any place where one's teachers were present. Our mishnah states that the sage "does not speak before one who is greater than he". The word "before" must be understood both in its temporal sense and in its local sense: the sage would never have his say before his superiors had spoken; nor would he speak in their presence (when before them) without their permission.

4:
This deference does not stop at those recognized as superiors. Although the sage is not required to give deference to his colleagues (perceived to be of the same rank) he will not interrupt a colleague, but wait patiently for him to finish what he has to say before giving his own opinion.

5:
When the opportunity arrives for him to have his say the sage person will not jump at it: he will act with reserve, only speaking after due consideration. That consideration might come after he has clarified issues that were not clear to him. In such cases his queries will be "to the point": that is to say he will phrase his query in such a manner as to make his difficulty quite clear. If he is required to respond to a query raised against him he will do so "properly", answering the question as directly as he can.

6:
When he speaks – either to give his opinion or to respond to questions – he will do so in an orderly manner, so that his train of thought is quite clear to his interlocutors. And should he be proven wrong he will readily admit his error because he "admits the truth".

7:
In Avot 127 we noted that Rabbi Eli'ezer, the arch conservative, "proudly maintained that he never uttered an halakhic opinion that he had not already heard from his teachers". In the era of the Oral Tradition, before the Unwritten Torah was written down in the time of Rabbi Yehudah the President (around 200 CE), it was very important that students pass on with perfect accuracy what they had learned from their teachers. Obviously new matters had to be dealt with. This was done with reference to ones "superiors": see the baraita on this matter quoted in Sanhedrin 022.