Talmud su Pe'ah 4:5

שָׁלשׁ אַבְעָיוֹת בַּיּוֹם, בַּשַּׁחַר וּבַחֲצוֹת וּבַמִּנְחָה. רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר, לֹא אָמְרוּ אֶלָּא כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יִפְחֲתוּ. רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר, לֹא אָמְרוּ אֶלָּא כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יוֹסִיפוּ. שֶׁל בֵּית נָמֵר הָיוּ מְלַקְּטִין עַל הַחֶבֶל, וְנוֹתְנִים פֵּאָה מִכָּל אֻמָּן וְאֻמָּן:

[Ci sono] tre "accattonaggio" [cioè accesso al campo] volte al giorno: all'alba, a mezzogiorno e nel tardo pomeriggio. Rabban Gamliel dice: Hanno solo detto [cioè, specificato quel numero] in modo che [i tempi di accattonaggio] non debbano essere ridotti. Il rabbino Akiva dice: hanno detto solo che [i tempi di accattonaggio] non dovrebbero essere aumentati. La gente di Beit Nameir avrebbe raccolto ciò che era sulla [segnata] dalla corda e avrebbe dato Peah da ogni fila.

Jerusalem Talmud Maasrot

Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish objected to Rebbi Joḥanan¹⁰⁶The argument makes sense only as objection from R. Joḥanan to R. Simeon ben Laqish. It seems that Maimonides read in the first paragraph “Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish objected to Rebbi Joḥanan” and in the second “Rebbi Joḥanan objected to Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish” since in his Code (Ma‘serot 3:7) he follows R. Joḥanan which probably he would not have done if R. Joḥanan disagreed with R. Yose, the preeminent Tanna.: Did we not state¹⁰⁷Mishnah Peah 4:5 (Note 81), about a field dedicated to the Temple and then redeemed.: “But if he dedicated it before it was finished, the treasurer finished it, and then the owner redeemed it, it is free.” Is not the treasurer a different person and you say what he did is valid? He said to him, this follows him who says the treasurer has the status of owner and against Rebbi Yose since Rebbi Yose said, the treasurer is a different person.

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Versetto precedente Capitolo completo Versetto successivo