Mishnah
Mishnah

Talmud sur Zevahim 10:5

כָּל הַחַטָּאוֹת שֶׁבַּתּוֹרָה, קוֹדְמוֹת לָאֲשָׁמוֹת, חוּץ מֵאֲשַׁם מְצֹרָע, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא בָא עַל יְדֵי הֶכְשֵׁר. כָּל הָאֲשָׁמוֹת שֶׁבַּתּוֹרָה בָּאִין בְּנֵי שְׁתַּיִם וּבָאִין בְּכֶסֶף שְׁקָלִים, חוּץ מֵאֲשַׁם נָזִיר וַאֲשַׁם מְצֹרָע, שֶׁהֵן בָּאִין בְּנֵי שְׁנָתָן וְאֵינָן בָּאִין בְּכֶסֶף שְׁקָלִים:

Tous les chata'ot de la Torah précèdent les Ashamim, à l'exception des Asham des Metzora [l'un rendu gravement impur par une maladie de peau disgracieuse. Lors de la guérison et de la purification, il doit apporter des offrandes] puisque cela vient lui permettre [de manger de la viande sacrificielle]. Tous les Ashamim de la Torah doivent avoir deux ans [béliers] et avoir une valeur de [deux] shekels d'argent, à l'exception de l' Asham d'un Nazir et de celui d'un Metzora , car ceux-ci ont un an et n'ont pas besoin d'être [deux] d'argent shekels en valeur.

Jerusalem Talmud Nazir

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said: “The ram he shall offer, etc.206Num. 6:17.” Why does the verse say, “he shall offer”? Start the procedure with it207In Sifry zuṭa 17, this argument is tannaïtic and attributed to R. Jehudah. It seems that he contrasts the imperfect used for sacrificing the well-being offering with the perfect used for the other offerings, to indicate beginning of an action. In the Babli and Sifry Num. 35, the preferred treatment of the well-being offering is deduced from v. 18.. Rebbi Ḥinena objected before Rebbi Mana208The R. Mana quoted in this Halakhah is neither R. Mana I, of the first, nor R. Mana II, of the fifth generation. Either there exists a third, otherwise unkown, Amora of this name or “Mana” is erroneous for “Yasa”, or “Ze‘ira” is erroneous for “Ezra”.: But is it not written: “He shall offer his flour offering and his libation206Num. 6:17.”? Should he not start with them? How is that? Rebbi Ḥinena in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: If he shaved for any of the three, he satisfied his obligation209Flour offerings and libations are mentioned last in v. 17. They accompany both the well-being offering (v. 17) and the elevation offering, mentioned in v. 16 together with the purification offering which needs neither flour nor wine. It is inferred that the order of the sacrifices is irrelevant.. Rebbi Ze‘ira asked before Rebbi Mana: Who is the Tanna of: “All purification offerings in the Torah precede the reparation offerings”? Rebbi Eleazar said, it is everybody’s opinion, “all purification offerings in the Torah precede the reparation offerings.210Mishnah Zebaḥim 10:5. No reparation offering is due from the pure nazir.”
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Verset précédentChapitre completVerset suivant