Perhaps the Yad Ramah (25b) in Sanhedrin can help us understand this assumption. The Gemara in Sanhedrin (ibid.) stated that originally the Rabanan did not see anything wrong with tax collecting. The Yad Ramah explains that as we Pasken like Shmuel that "Dina de'Malchusa Dina" - "the (monetary, in many cases) law of the kingdom is Halachic law," there seems to be nothing wrong with such an occupation. The Gemara then states that when the Rabanan saw that the collectors were taking more than they were supposed to, they realized that the collectors were Gazlanim (thieves). The Yad Ramah explains that the tax collectors were in the habit of extorting more money from the poor than they owed, and less money from the rich. Although the Yad Ramah does not explain, it appears that the tax collectors suffered from two pressures. They were being pressured by the rich to give them a break, and they were probably heavily pressured by the king's demands to come up with all of the tax money owed to the kingdom. The "only choice" (in lieu of getting another job) left was for them to raise taxes on the poor, the only ones who could not pressure the collectors, and whose money would relieve the tax collectors' pressures. This is probably why Chazal decided that we can automatically assume that tax collectors, even if they are Chaveirim, are stealing.

All the best,

Yaakov Montrose

==================================================

Insights to the Daf

Bechoros 31

1) A "CHAVER" APPOINTED AS A TAX COLLECTOR QUESTION: The Gemara cites a Beraisa that states that, originally, the Chachamim said that a Chaver who became a "Gabai" loses his status of being a Chaver. RASHI (DH Gabai) explains that a "Gabai" is a tax collector appointed by the king to collect taxes from the Jews.

The Beraisa continues and says that even if he quits his job as Gabai, he is re-accepted as a Chaver. However, the Chachamim later retracted their ruling and said that if he quits his job as Gabai, then he is re-accepted as a Chaver.

Rashi's explanation of a Gabai as a tax collection seems problematic in light of the Mishnah in Demai (2:3). In the Mishnah there, Rebbi Yehudah states that one who accepted upon himself the responsibilities of being a Chaver is not permitted to raise Behemah Dakah (small, domesticated animals, such as sheep and goats). The BARTENUA explains that it is forbidden to raise such animals in Eretz Yisrael, because they tend to enter the fields of others and eat the produce there, and this is considered as though the owner of the animals is stealing from the owners of the fields. The Chachamim replied to Rebbi Yehudah that the fact that a person raises Behemah Dakah does not disqualify him as a Chaver. The Bartenura explains that the suspicion that his animals might be grazing in other fields has no connection with the responsibilities of being a Chaver, since those responsibilities involve only scrupulousness with regard to Taharah. Therefore, a Chaver is not disqualified from his status if he raises Behemah Dakah.

The Mishnah there implies that even though the Chaver raises Behemah Dakah, he is still considered a valid Chaver, according to the Chachamim, whom the Halachah follows, even though the RAMBAM (Hilchos Edus 10:4) refers to those who raise Behemah Dakah as "Resha'im" and rules that they are invalid as witnesses in Beis Din. Furthermore, the Rambam (Hilchos Metamei Moshav u'Mishkav 10:9) rules that an Am ha'Aretz who accepted upon himself to be a Chaver and then was suspected of transgressing a certain Aveirah is suspected only of that particular Aveirah, but he remains a Chaver.

Why, then, is a Chaver who becomes a tax collector disqualified from hisstatus of being a Chaver? If he remains a Chaver even though he raises Behemah Dakah, then he should also remain a Chaver even though he is a taxcollector!

ANSWER: The SHEMEN ROKE'ACH answers based on the Gemara in Sanhedrin (25b). The Gemara there says that the reason why tax collectors are disqualified as serving as witnesses is because they tend to take more taxes from the public than they are authorized by the king to take. Their actions constitute theft mid'Oraisa, and one who is suspected of transgressing an Isur d'Oraisa is certainly suspected of transgressing an Isur d'Rabanan (such as matters pertaining to Taharah). The Mishnah earlier (30a) states clearly that one who is suspected of transgressing the laws of Shevi'is and Ma'asros is certainly not trustworthy with regard to questions of Taharos. The Gemara there explains that since he is not trustworthy with regard to a Mitzvah d'Oraisa (such as Shevi'is), he is certainly suspected of transgressing Mitzvos d'Rabanan, such as the laws of Taharos.

Accordingly, a Chaver who was appointed as a Gabai is disqualified from being a Chaver, because, as a tax collector, he is likely to transgress the Isur d'Oraisa of taking more money than he is entitled to take. In contrast, one who raises Behemah Dakah in Eretz Yisrael transgresses only an Isur d'Rabanan. (See Bava Kama 79b and Rashi there, who explains that the reason for the Isur against raising Behemah Dakah is to protect the settlement of Eretz Yisrael from the animals that will destroy the fields). Since this is only an Isur d'Rabanan, one who transgresses this Isur is not suspected of transgressing a different Isur d'Rabanan (of Taharos). (This is the opinion of the Chachamim earlier (30b), who maintain that one is suspect only for this particular transgression but not for other Isurim d'Rabanan.) Therefore, the Mishnah in Demai states that even if a Chaver raises Behemah Dakah, he still retains his status of a Chaver. (D. Bloom)