הַמּוֹכֵר אֶת שָׂדֵהוּ, הַמּוֹכֵר מֻתָּר וְהַלּוֹקֵחַ אָסוּר. לֹא יִשְׂכֹּר אָדָם אֶת הַפּוֹעֲלִים עַל מְנָת שֶׁיְּלַקֵּט בְּנוֹ אַחֲרָיו. מִי שֶׁאֵינוֹ מַנִּיחַ אֶת הָעֲנִיִּים לִלְקֹט, אוֹ שֶׁהוּא מַנִּיחַ אֶת אֶחָד וְאֶחָד לֹא, אוֹ שֶׁהוּא מְסַיֵּעַ אֶת אֶחָד מֵהֶן, הֲרֵי זֶה גּוֹזֵל אֶת הָעֲנִיִּים. עַל זֶה נֶאֱמַר (משלי כב) אַל תַּסֵּג גְּבוּל עוֹלִים:
Si quelqu'un vend son champ, le vendeur est autorisé [à Leket , Shikcha et Peah ] et l'acheteur est interdit. Un homme ne peut embaucher un ouvrier à la condition que son fils [le travailleur] puisse glaner après lui. Celui qui ne permet pas aux pauvres de glaner, ou qui autorise l'un et pas l'autre, ou qui aide l'un d'entre eux - il vole les pauvres. À ce sujet, il est dit: «N'empiète pas sur la frontière de ceux qui montent [pour glaner»] (Proverbes 22:28).
Tosefta Peah
Two gavels separated from one another are [considered to be] Shikcha (forgotten sheaves), [but] three [gavels] are not [considered to be] Shikcha. Two sheaves separated from one another are [considered to be] Shikcha (forgotten sheaves), [but] three [sheaves] are not [considered to be] Shikcha. Two grapevines separated from one another (i.e. from separate tree trunks) are [considered to be] Shikcha (forgotten sheaves), [but] three [grapevines] are not [considered to be] Shikcha. Two [grape] berries [lying next to each other on the ground] are [considered to be] Peret (individual fallen grapes), [but] three [grape berries lying next to each other on the ground] are not [considered to be] Peret. Two stalks [of grain] separated from one another in the usual fashion are [considered to be] Leket (fallen stalks), [but] three [stalks of grain] are not [considered to be] Leket. These are the words of Bet Hillel. Rebbi Yossi says, “Chananyah, the son of the brother of Rebbi Yehoshua says, ‘Any [type of produce] where the property of the poor person (i.e. some kind of gift to the poor) can come in the middle [of two sets of produce, one standing and one detached, both of which are one Seah in volume], for example grain and vineyard, does not combine [to form two Seahs and therefore both parts are still considered to be Shikcha]. However, any [produce] where the property of the poor person (i.e. some kind of gift to the poor) cannot come in the middle [of two sets of produce, one standing and one detached, both of which are one Seah in volume], for example fruits of a tree, does combine [to form two Seahs and therefore both parts are not considered to be Shikcha].’”
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
