Mishnah
Mishnah

Talmud sur Arakhin 8:6

חֶרְמֵי כֹהֲנִים אֵין לָהֶם פִּדְיוֹן, אֶלָּא נִתָּנִים לַכֹּהֲנִים. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה בֶן בְּתֵירָא אוֹמֵר, סְתָם חֲרָמִים לְבֶדֶק הַבַּיִת, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שם כז), כָּל חֵרֶם קֹדֶשׁ קָדָשִׁים הוּא לַה'. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, סְתָם חֲרָמִים לַכֹּהֲנִים, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שם), כִּשְׂדֵה הַחֵרֶם לַכֹּהֵן תִּהְיֶה אֲחֻזָּתוֹ. אִם כֵּן, לָמָּה נֶאֱמַר כָּל חֵרֶם קֹדֶשׁ קָדָשִׁים הוּא לַה'. שֶׁהוּא חָל עַל קָדְשֵׁי קָדָשִׁים וְעַל קָדָשִׁים קַלִּים:

Les choses interdites [à l'usage des] prêtres ne peuvent pas être rachetées mais doivent être données aux prêtres. Le rabbin Judah ben Batera dit: les choses proscrites sans spécification tombent au [fonds pour] les réparations du temple, comme il a été dit: «Toute chose proscrite est très sainte pour le Seigneur» (Lévitique 27:25). Mais les Sages disent: les choses proscrites sans spécification vont aux prêtres, comme il est dit: «Comme un champ proscrit: sa possession appartient au prêtre» (Lévitique 27:21). Si tel est le cas, pourquoi est-il dit: «Toute chose proscrite est très sainte pour le Seigneur»? Cela enseigne que cela s'applique [aussi] aux kodshai kodashim [sacrifices du plus haut degré de sainteté, ils ne peuvent être abattus que dans le coin nord-ouest de l'autel, et consommés uniquement dans l'enceinte du Temple par des prêtres mâles, ou entièrement brûlés] et kodashim kalim [sacrifices d'un moindre degré de sainteté, ils peuvent être massacrés n'importe où dans la cour du Temple et consommés par presque tout le monde, n'importe où à Jérusalem].

Jerusalem Talmud Nedarim

“But the Sages say, indeterminate heave in Judea is prohibited, in Galilee permitted, since Galileans do not know of Temple heave.” But if they did know it, the indeterminate would be forbidden66The meaning of vows has to be determined by popular usage. Since learned people are not supposed to make vows, it is clear that the interpretation of vows depends on the meaning of the words in the vernacular, independent of the place where the vow was made.. “Indeterminate bans in Judea are permitted, in Galilee prohibited, since Galileans do not know of priest’s bans.” But if they did know it, the indeterminate would be permitted. Here you say permitted, but there you say forbidden67This is an attempt to explain the rules in legal terminology, without appeal to the vernacular. The indeterminate vow would be a case of doubt; in one case one rules that doubt removes the vow, in the other that it confirms the vow. This is the attitude of the Babli, 19b.. Rebbi Eleazar says, these are statements of two Tannaïm68This is the solution of the Babli and Tosephta 1:6 which ascribe the statement on bans to R. Eleazar ben R. Ṣadoq. This solution is appropriate for the Yerushalmi, the Munich and Cambridge mss. of the Babli, and the quotes in many Medieval authors, which ascribe both statements to “the Sages” who would be free to rule in one case with R. Jehudah and in the other with R. Eleazar ben R. Ṣadoq. But in the printed Babli which, together with most independent Mishnah mss., attributes the statement of the Sages to R. Jehudah, the two-Tanna solution, rejected in the Yerushalmi but given in the Babli in the name of the Fourth Century Amora Abbai, is rather forced.. Rebbi Jeremiah said, all is from one Tanna, following the one who said69Mishnah Arakhin 8:6, opinion of R. Jehudah ben Bathyra.: “indeterminate bans are for the upkeep of the Temple.” But for the one who said70The anonymous Sages. The Babli, Arakhin 29a, states that in the absence of a Temple, bans for the upkeep of the Temple can be redeemed by pennies., “indeterminate bans are for priests,” even in Galilee they would be permitted. In Galilee where they are used to invoke Akhan’s ban71Jos. 7:25–26, the expression of an absolute and irredeemable prohibition of all use., you have to say forbidden; in Judea where they are not used to invoke Akhan’s ban, you have to say permitted.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Verset précédentChapitre completVerset suivant