cellio | daf bit: Shekalim 13

R. Abba bar Zamina taught in the name of R. Zeira: if the ancients were angels, we are mortal men; if they were mortal men, we are donkeys. R. Mana added: we are not even comparable to the donkey of R. Pinchas b. Yair. What is this donkey he refers to? The g'mara gives us the story:

R. Pinchas's donkey was stolen by thieves in the night. It spent three days with them but did not eat. After three days they returned it, saying: "take it out of here, lest it die with us". The donkey then stood at its master's gate, braying. Pinchas told them: "open the gate, for it hasn't eaten in three days -- give it something to eat." They set barley before it but it would not eat. They said: "Rabbi, the beast does not want to eat." He said to them: "is the produce properly tithed?" "Yes." "And did you remove the extra that must be taken when the tithe is doubtful?" "No -- didn't you teach us that food for beasts is exempt?" R. Pinchas said: "what shall we do for this unfortunate creature who imposes a strict rule upon itself?" They removed the extra for the doubtful tithe and the beast ate. (5.1 Yerushalmi, daf 13b)

It strikes me that, from this telling, R. Pinchas appears to disapprove of his donkey's extra stringency, but the rabbis citing the story seem to consider it meritorious. Perhaps this is a function of the translation I'm using and the original Aramaic is more nuanced, or perhaps not. (R. Pinchas apparently also knew that the thieves weren't stringent, since he knew that the donkey hadn't eaten in three days.)