Talmud sur Bekhorot 5:4

הָיָה בְכוֹר רוֹדְפוֹ, וּבְעָטוֹ וְעָשָׂה בוֹ מוּם, הֲרֵי זֶה יִשְׁחוֹט עָלָיו. כָּל הַמּוּמִין הָרְאוּיִין לָבוֹא בִידֵי אָדָם, רוֹעִים יִשְׂרָאֵל נֶאֱמָנִים, וְרוֹעִים כֹּהֲנִים אֵינָן נֶאֱמָנִים. רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר, נֶאֱמָן הוּא עַל שֶׁל חֲבֵרוֹ וְאֵינוֹ נֶאֱמָן עַל שֶׁל עַצְמוֹ. רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר, הֶחָשׁוּד עַל דָּבָר, לֹא דָנוֹ וְלֹא מְעִידוֹ:

Si quelqu'un est poursuivi par un premier-né, et que l'on lui donne un coup de pied et provoque une tache, on peut l'abattre sur cette [base]. On fait confiance aux bergers israélites [concernant] toutes les imperfections qui pourraient survenir par [causalité] humaine, mais les prêtres [qui sont] bergers ne sont pas dignes de confiance. Rabban Shim'on ben Gamliel dit: [Le prêtre] est digne de confiance en ce qui concerne [le premier-né de] un ami, mais on ne le fait pas en ce qui concerne [le prêtre]. Le rabbin Meir dit: Celui qui est soupçonné de quelque chose ne peut pas juger [les cas concernant] cela et ne peut pas en témoigner.

Jerusalem Talmud Demai

It was stated⁸⁹Tosephta Demay 5:4: “He who enters a town with heave in his hand, does not know anybody there, [or stands by a threshing floor with heave in his hand] {and wants to give the heave to a trustworthy Cohen,} and does not know anybody there, may ask either ḥaverim or amē haäreẓ, the words of Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel. Rebbi says, about heave one may only ask a ḥaver.” One has to interpret the baraita in the Yerushalmi similarly, that the question is about heave. But the interpretation of the Yerushalmi, given by R. Jonah, is the opposite, that the stranger wants to know whether he may take without worry, not to whom to give.
The phrase in brackets is not in the Vienna ms. of the Tosephta and R. S. Liebermann explains this as scribal omission. However, while the thrust of the Tosephta is not that of the Yerushalmi, a Yerushalmi version would not have the phrase, or does not have the phrase, as asserted by R. Jonah at the end of this paragraph. The Vienna scribe probably did not make an error here.: “He who enters a town and does not know anybody there, or stands by a threshing floor and does not know anybody there, may ask either a ḥaver or an am haäreẓ, the words of Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel. Rebbi says, about heave one only may ask a ḥaver.” It turns out that Rebbi follows Rebbi Meïr and Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel follows his own reasoning. As we have stated there⁹⁰Mishnah Bekhorot 5:4. The firstborn of a cow, sheep, or goat must be given to a Cohen. If it is without blemish, it is dedicated as sacrifice from birth. If it develops a defect, the Cohen may slaughter and eat it at home (Deut. 15:19–23). Hence, the Cohen has a monetary interest in finding a defect in such a firstborn.: “About any bodily defects that may be caused by humans, laymen shepherds are trustworthy, Cohen shepherds are not. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel said, he is trustworthy about another’s flock but not his own. Rebbi Meïr said, whoever is suspect⁹¹And this includes absolutely all Cohanim in matters regarding firstborn animals. in a matter may neither judge nor testify about it.” Rebbi Jonah said, they disagree only if it is a matter of taking, but in distributing even Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel agrees. What is the difference between taking and distributing? A distribution is public knowledge⁹²Since a distribution of tithes is publicly announced, even the stranger would find enough information about the person who is making the distribution..

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Verset précédent Chapitre complet Verset suivant