Negaim 2:5
Should an expert be allowed to treat himself?
讻诇 讛谞讙注讬诐 讗讚诐 专讜讗讛, 讞讜抓 诪谞讙注讬 注爪诪讜. 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讗讜诪专, 讗祝 诇讗 谞讙注讬 拽专讜讘讬讜. 讻诇 讛谞讚专讬诐 讗讚诐 诪转讬专, 讞讜抓 诪谞讚专讬 注爪诪讜. 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专, 讗祝 诇讗 谞讚专讬 讗砖转讜 砖讘讬谞讛 诇讘讬谉 讗讞专讬诐. 讻诇 讛讘讻讜专讜转 讗讚诐 专讜讗讛, 讞讜抓 诪讘讻讜专讜转 注爪诪讜.
A person [i.e., a priest] may examine anyone鈥檚 skin afflictions, except for his own. Rabbi Meir adds, nor [may he inspect] the afflictions of his relatives. A person [i.e., a sage] may release anyone from faulty vows, except for his own vows. Rabbi Yehudah adds, nor may he [release] the vows between his wife and others. A person [i.e., an animal specialist] may inspect anyone鈥檚 firstborn animals except for his own firstborn.
Comments
The three cases cited in this mishnah all describe situations in which an expert is disqualified from diagnosing his own situation. Negaim, or skin afflictions, are specific types of discolorations on a person or his possessions that can have major ritual and financial consequences. Nedarim, or vows, are promises that can sometimes be disqualified based on technical flaws in their execution. Bekhorot, or firstborn animals, must be turned over to the kohen unless they bear certain permanent blemishes, in which case they may be kept by the owner. Obviously the thematic connection is that an expert may not rule on cases affecting him.
Questions
- Do you think that the mishnah鈥檚 concern is primarily technical (i.e., it is hard to evaluate one鈥檚 own situation), or moral (i.e., it will be tempting for the expert to be either too lenient or, perhaps, too severe with himself)?
- Is this teaching comparable to the medical adage that a 鈥減hysician who treats himself has a fool for a patient鈥�? What is the primary hesitation regarding doctors treating themselves or their relatives?
