Gittin 118

בור שהוא קרוב לאמה מתמלא ראשון מפני דרכי שלום

THE PIT WHICH IS NEAREST THE [HEAD OF THE] WATERCOURSE<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., nearest the river which feeds the watercourse. ');">¹</span>

מצודות חיה ועופות ודגים יש בהן משום גזל מפני דרכי שלום ר' יוסי אומר גזל גמור

IS FILLED FROM IT FIRST,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And meanwhile he owner of the pit has the right to dam the watercourse. ');">²</span>

מציאת חרש שוטה וקטן יש בהן משום גזל מפני דרכי שלום ר' יוסי אומר גזל גמור

IN THE INTERESTS OF PEACE. [THE TAKING OF] BEASTS, BIRDS AND FISHES FROM SNARES [SET BY OTHERS] IS RECKONED AS A KIND OF ROBBERY,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And whatever is taken has to be returned to the one who laid the snare, though according to the Torah the latter has not acquired ownership till it has actually come into his possession. ');">³</span>

עני המנקף בראש הזית מה שתחתיו גזל מפני דרכי שלום ר' יוסי אומר גזל גמור

IN THE INTERESTS OF PEACE. R. JOSE SAYS THAT IT IS ACTUAL ROBBERY.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And the culprit becomes disqualified from giving evidence. ');">⁴</span>

אין ממחין ביד עניי עובדי כוכבים בלקט שכחה ופאה מפני דרכי שלום:

[TO TAKE AWAY] ANYTHING FOUND BY A DEAF-MUTE, AN IDIOT OR A MINOR IS RECKONED AS A KIND OF ROBBERY,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Although these cannot legally acquire ownership. ');">⁵</span>

<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> מנה"מ אמר רב מתנה דאמר קרא (דברים לא, ט) ויכתוב משה את התורה הזאת ויתנה אל הכהנים בני לוי אטו אנא לא ידענא דכהנים בני לוי נינהו אלא כהן ברישא והדר לוי

IN THE INTERESTS OF PEACE. R. JOSE SAYS: IT IS ACTUAL ROBBERY. IF A POOR MAN GLEANS ON THE TOP OF AN OLIVE TREE, [TO TAKE THE FRUIT] THAT IS BENEATH HIM<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That has fallen as a result of his gleaning. ');">⁶</span>

רבי יצחק נפחא אמר מהכא (דברים כא, ה) ונגשו הכהנים בני לוי אטו אנן לא ידעינן דכהנים בני לוי נינהו אלא כהן ברישא והדר לוי

IS COUNTED AS A KIND OF ROBBERY.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Although he does not become owner till he has actually handled it. ');">⁷</span>

רב אשי אמר מהכא (דברי הימים א כג, יג) בני עמרם אהרן ומשה ויבדל אהרן להקדישו קדש קדשים

R. JOSE SAYS IT IS ACTUAL ROBBERY. THE POOR OF THE HEATHEN MAY NOT BE PREVENTED FROM GATHERING GLEANINGS,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XIX, 9ff. ');">⁸</span>

ר' חייא בר אבא אמר מהכא (ויקרא כא, ח) וקדשתו לכל דבר שבקדושה תנא דבי רבי ישמעאל וקדשתו לכל דבר שבקדושה לפתוח ראשון ולברך ראשון וליטול מנה יפה ראשון

FORGOTTEN SHEAVES,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XXIV, 19. ');">⁹</span>

א"ל אביי לרב יוסף מפני דרכי שלום דאורייתא היא א"ל דאורייתא ומפני דרכי שלום

AND THE CORNER OF THE FIELD,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XIX, 9ff. ');">¹⁰</span>

כל התורה כולה נמי מפני דרכי שלום היא דכתיב (משלי ג, יז) דרכיה דרכי נועם וכל נתיבותיה שלום

IN THE INTERESTS OF PEACE.

אלא אמר אביי לכדמר דתניא שנים ממתינין זה לזה בקערה שלשה אין ממתינין הבוצע הוא פושט ידו תחלה ואם בא לחלוק כבוד לרבו או למי שגדול ממנו הרשות בידו

<b><i>GEMARA</i></b>. [A PRIEST IS CALLED UP FIRST TO READ THE LAW]. What is the warrant for this? — R. Mattenah said: Because Scripture says, And Moses wrote this law and gave it to the priests the sons of Levi.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XXXI, 9. ');">¹¹</span>

ואמר מר עלה לא שנו אלא בסעודה אבל בבהכ"נ לא דאתו לאינצויי

Now do we not know that the priests are the sons of Levi? What it means therefore is that the priests [are first] and then the sons of Levi. R. Isaac Nappaha said: We derive it from this verse, viz., And the priests the sons of Levi shall draw near.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XXI, 5. ');">¹²</span>

אמר רב מתנה הא דאמרת בבהכ"נ לא לא אמרן אלא בשבתות וימים טובים דשכיחי רבים אבל בשני ובחמישי לא

Now do we not know that the priests are the sons of Levi? What it signifies therefore is that the priests are first and then the sons of Levi. R. Ashi derived it from this verse, The sons of Amram were Aaron and Moses, and Aaron was separated to sanctify him as most holy.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I Chron. XXIII, 13. ');">¹³</span>

איני והא רב הונא קרי בכהני בשבתות ויו"ט שאני רב הונא דאפילו רבי אמי ורבי אסי כהני חשיבי דא"י מיכף הוו כייפי ליה

R. Hiyya b. Abba derived it from the following, And thou shalt sanctify him,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXI, 8. ');">¹⁴</span>

אמר אביי נקטינן אין שם כהן נתפרדה חבילה ואמר אביי נקטינן אין שם לוי קורא כהן

This implies, [Give him precedence] in every matter which involves sanctification. A Tanna of the school of R. Ishmael taught: 'And thou shalt sanctify him', to wit, [give him precedence] in every matter involving sanctification, to open proceedings, to say grace first, and to choose his portion first.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Where he has to divide an article with a lay Israelite. ');">¹⁵</span>

איני והאמר רבי יוחנן כהן אחר כהן לא יקרא משום פגמו של ראשון לוי אחר לוי לא יקרא משום פגם שניהם כי קאמרינן באותו כהן

Said Abaye to R. Joseph: Is this rule only [a Rabbinical one] in the interests of peace? It derives from the Torah? — He answered: It does derive from the Torah, but its object is to maintain peace. But the whole of the Law is also for the purpose of promoting peace, as it is written, Her ways are ways of pleasantness and all her paths are peace?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Prov. III, 17. ');">¹⁶</span>

מ"ש לוי אחר לוי דאיכא פגם שניהם דאמרי חד מינייהו לאו לוי הוא כהן אחר כהן נמי אמרי חד מינייהו לאו כהן הוא כגון דמוחזק לן באבוה דהאי שני דכהן הוא

— No, said Abaye; we have to understand it in the light of what was said by the Master,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' His teacher, Rabbah b. Nahmani. ');">¹⁷</span>

ה"נ דמוחזק לן באבוה דהאי שני דלוי הוא אלא אמרי ממזרת או נתינה נסיב ופסליה לזרעיה הכא נמי אמרי גרושה או חלוצה נסיב ואחליה לזרעיה

as it has been taught: Two persons wait for one another with the dish,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [When one interrupts his eating, the other must wait till he resumes. This was according to the old custom when all guests ate from the same dish.] ');">¹⁸</span>

סוף סוף לוי מי קא הוי

but if there are three they need not wait.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If one of them interrupts his eating. ');">¹⁹</span>

ולמאן אי ליושבין הא קא חזו ליה אלא ליוצאין

The one who breaks bread<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And says the Grace, generally the host. ');">²⁰</span>

שלחו ליה בני גלילא לרבי חלבו אחריהן

helps himself to the dish<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'stretches forth his hand'. ');">²¹</span> first, but if he wishes to pay respect to his teacher or to a superior he may do so.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. 'Er. 47a. ');">²²</span> Commenting on this, the Master said: This applies only to the table,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'meal'. ');">²³</span> but not to the synagogue, since there such deference<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By a priest to a teacher or a superior, because it might be misunderstood by other people. Hence here the rule of the Torah requires to be reinforced. ');">²⁴</span> might lead to quarrelling. R. Mattenah said: What you have said about the synagogue is true only on Sabbaths and Festivals, when there is a large congregation, but not on Mondays and Thursdays.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' On which days the Torah is also read, v. B.K. 82a. ');">²⁵</span> Is that so? Did not R. Huna read as kohen<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., first, although only a lay Israelite; v. Glos. ');">²⁶</span> even on Sabbaths and Festivals? — R. Huna was different, since even R. Ammi and R. Assi who were the most distinguished kohanim of Eretz Israel paid deference to him. Abaye said: We assume the rule to be that if there is no kohen there, the arrangement no longer holds.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'the bundle is separated,' i.e., it is not necessary to call up a Levite first; (v. Rashi). ');">²⁷</span> Abaye further said: We have it on tradition that if there is no Levite there, a kohen reads in his place. Is that so? Has not R. Johanan said that one kohen should not read after another, because this might cast a suspicion on the first,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This is explained immediately. ');">²⁸</span> and one Levite should not read after another because this might cast a suspicion on both? — What we meant was that the same kohen [should read in the place of the Levite]. Why just in the case of the Levites should there be a reflection on both of them? Because, [you say,] people will say that one [or other] of them is not a Levite? If one kohen reads after another, they will also say that one of them is not a kohen? — We assume that it is known that the father of the second was a kohen.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And therefore it is only the first on whom suspicion falls. ');">²⁹</span> But in the same way we may say that it is known that the father of the second [Levite] was a Levite?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And the second Levite was called up not as Levi but as Yisrael. The order of calling up is, Kohen, Levi, Yisrael. ');">³⁰</span> — They might say that he [the father] married a bastard or a nethinah<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A descendant of the Gibeonites, v. Sanh. (Sonc. ed.) p. 340, n. 12. ');">³¹</span> and disqualified his offspring. In the same way they might say that [the father of the second priest] married a divorced woman or a <i>haluzah</i><span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Glos. ');">³²</span> and disqualified his offspring? — In any case [if he were suspect] would he read as Levi?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If he was disqualified from being called up first qua kohen, he would not be called up earlier than third. ');">³³</span> And who would suspect him? Those who remain in the synagogue?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Till the reading of the law is finished. ');">³⁴</span> They see [that he counts as one of the seven]!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And therefore know that the reason why another priest or Levite was called up was not because he was disqualified. ');">³⁵</span> — It must be then, those who go out of synagogue.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Before the reading of the Law is concluded. ');">³⁶</span> The Galileans sent to inquire of R. Helbo: After them [the kohen and levi,]