Ketubot

not all of them went up. Come and hear: A presumption for the priesthood [is constituted by] the 'lifting up of the hands' and taking a share at the threshing floors and testimony.  Now is testimony a presumption?  Hence he means thus: The 'lifting up of the hands is like a testimony'; as a testimony [raises one] to the status of a priest, so the 'lifting up of the hands' [raises one] to the status of a priest!  — No. [what it means is] a testimony that comes on the strength of a presumption  is like a presumption. as when a man came once before R. Ammi [and] said to him: I am convinced that he  is a priest. So he said to him: What have you seen? And he answered him: He read first in the Synagogue.  — As  priest or as prominent man?  — After him a Levite read.  And R. Ammi raised him to the priesthood on the strength of his testimony. Someone came before R. Joshua b. Levi, [and] said to him: am convinced that he  is a Levite. He said to him: What have you seen? He answered him: He read second in the Synagogue. As Levite or as a prominent man? — A priest read before him.  And R. Joshua b. Levi raised him to the status of Levite  on the strength of his testimony. Someone came once before Resh Lakish [and] said to him: I am convinced that he  is a priest. He 'said to him: What have you seen? [He answered him:] He read first in the Synagogue. He  asked him: Have you seen him take a share at the threshing floors?  — Said R. Eleazar to him. And does the priesthood cease if there Is no threshing floor there?  — Once they sat before R. Johanan [and] there came such a case before them. Resh Lakish asked him:  Have you seen him take a share at the threshing floor? So R. Johanan said to him: And does the priesthood cease if there is no threshing floor there? — He  turned round, looked at R. Eleazar with displeasure  and said: You have heard something from the smith's son  and you did not say it to us in his name. Rabbi and R. Hiyya, one raised a son to the priesthood on the testimony of his father, and one raised a brother to the state of Levite on the testimony of his brother. It can be proved that it was Rabbi who raised the son to the priesthood on the testimony of his father, for it has been taught: If one comes and says: 'This Is my son and he is a priest,' he is believed with regard to allowing him to eat terumah, but he is not believed with regard to allowing him to marry a woman.  This is the opinion  of Rabbi. Said R. Hiyya to him: If you believe him so as to allow him to eat terumah, believe him [also] so as to allow him to marry a woman, and if you do not believe him so as to allow him to marry a woman, do not believe him also as to allow him to eat terumah. He answered him: I believed him so as to allow him to eat terumah because it is In his hands to let him eat terumah,  but I do not believe him so as to allow him to marry a woman because it is not in his hands to let him marry a woman.  It' is proved.  And since it was Rabbi who raised the son to the priesthood on the testimony of his father, [it follows that] it was R. Hiyya who raised the brother to the status of Levite on the testimony of his brother, But [according to] R. Hiyya, why is the son different that [he is] not [raised]?  Because he is related to his father. A brother. too, is related to his brother?  —