Jerusalem Maasrot

Mishnah

1 They declared a principle for tithes: Anything that is food, is guarded, and grows from the earth, is subject to tithes. They declared another principle: Anything that is food from start to end, even though it was kept to grow, is subject to tithes whether small or large. But anything that becomes food only at the end, is not subject to tithes until it becomes food.

Halakhah

“They declared a principle for tithes, etc.” It is written: “You should certainly tithe all produce of your seed.”Deuteronomy 14:22 I would say, everything is subject to tithes. The verse says, “all produce of your seed,” this includes other produce. Does it include garden seeds that are not eaten? It is written: “produce of your seed,” and it is written: “which your field produces every year.” How does this work? Take from among them anything that is food and is guarded.

Some want to understand it from the following: “You should certainly tithe,”Deuteronomy 14:22 a general statement. “All grain of your seed,” a detail. For every general statement followed by a detail, the general statement only implies the detail. That means, only grain. Where do legumes fit in? The verse says: “All tithe from the earth, from seeds of the earth, from the fruit of the tree, belongs to the Eternal.”Leviticus 27:30 This includes seeds of garlic, cress and rocket. I might think to add the upper part of arum and the seeds of vetch, the seeds of onions, the seeds of turnips and radishes, and all other garden seeds that are not eaten. The verse says, “from seeds of the earth,” and not all seeds of the earth. “From fruits of trees,”Leviticus 27:30 to include all fruits of trees. I might think to add acacia and ṣalmona pods, and carobs from dry land; the verse says, “from fruits of trees,” not all fruits of trees.

Where do vegetables fit in? Issy ben Judah says, tithes on vegetables are required by rabbinic decree.

Rav Ḥisda said, if somebody declared his standing grain ownerless, came back and retook possession, and illegally gave the priestly offering, the offering is valid. What is the difference between standing grain and ears of grain? Standing grain, if he illegally gave the priestly offering before declaring it ownerless, the offering is invalid. Ears, if he illegally gave the priestly offering before declaring them ownerless, the offering is valid. Rav Ḥinena in the name of Rav Ḥisda, the same applies to a dedicated crop. The rabbis’ statements disagree, since Rabbi Joḥanan said in the name of Rabbi Yannai: “The Levite will come, because he has neither part nor inheritance with you.”Deuteronomy 14:29 You are obligated to give him from what you have but he does not. This excludes gleanings to which you and he have equal access. Gleanings, forgotten sheaves, peah, and abandoned property are all equal. Rabbi Joḥanan said, the group of scholars asked: But dedications, to which you and he do not have equal access, are treated as if you and he had equal access. Rabbi Ila said, what are we talking about? If the heap was made when it was ownerless or dedicated, the Torah said “the first of your grain,”Deuteronomy 18:4 not the ownerless, “the first of your grain,” not Temple property. But we must be talking about ears that he declared ownerless and then took possession of again. If they were ownerless, he would be exempt, if dedicated, he would be obligated. If they were ownerless, he would be exempt, since Rabbi Joḥanan said in the name of Rabbi Yannai: “The Levite will come, because he has neither part nor inheritance with you.”Deuteronomy 14:29 You are obligated to give him from what you have but he does not. This excludes gleanings to which you and he have equal access. If dedicated, he would be obligated, from the following: “If somebody dedicated standing produce and redeemed it standing, it is obligated.” What is the difference between ownerless and dedicated property? Ownerless property is outside everyone’s control, dedicated property is not outside the Temple treasurer’s control. Rabbi Abin said, it did not even leave its owners’ control since the treasurer must tell the owner to redeem it first.

Rabbi Zeira, Rabbi Yasa in the name of Rabbi Eleazar: If somebody sowed an ownerless field, the crop is subject to tithes. Rabbi Jonah puts it this way: Because he acquired the ownerless field and its growth.

Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Ada asked Rabbi Joḥanan: Are truffles and mushrooms obligated for tithes? Rabbi Joḥanan said to him in the name of Rabbi Simai, it is written: “You should certainly tithe all produce of your seed.”Deuteronomy 14:22 Anything that is sown and grows. This excludes truffles and mushrooms which grow but are not sown. Rabbi Jonah puts it this way: Because the earth brings them forth.

“Even though it was kept to grow it is subject to tithes whether small or large.” Does this imply that if it was not kept to grow it is not subject to tithes whether small or large? Rabbi Immi in the name of Rabbi Simeon ben Lakish: This excludes the view of Rabban Gamliel as we learned elsewhere: “Rabban Gamliel says, flower buds of fenugreek, mustard, and white beans are subject to tithes.” Rabbi Yasa said, did Rabban Gamliel require tithes on them because they are food? If that were so, what about their greenery? But Rabban Gamliel says, they are important as food, but the rabbis say they are not important as food. In addition, consider what we learned: “Rabbi Joshua said, I never wanted to tell anyone to go and collect flower buds of fenugreek, mustard, and white beans and cook them, to exempt them from tithes.”

It was stated: “Everything that is food at the start but not at the end.” What is this? As we stated: “Anyone who keeps the castor plant for seeds, his intention has no effect; if he keeps it for individual stalks, his intention does have an effect.” Rabbi Jonah said, only if he collected greens. But if he did not collect greens, do we say that wood is subject to tithes?

“But anything that becomes food only at the end, is not subject to tithes until it becomes food.” What is that? That is what we have stated next: “From when are fruits subject to tithes? Figs from the moment they start to ripen.”

Mishnah

2 From when are fruits subject to tithes? Figs from the moment they start to ripen, grapes and wild grapes when they start to produce sap. Sumac and mulberries when they start to become red, and all red fruits when they start to become red. Pomegranates when they become soft, dates when they start to become bloated. Peaches when they get stripes, walnuts when they form a container. Rabbi Judah says, walnuts and almonds when they develop a shell. Carobs from when they become spotted, and all black ones when they become spotted. Pears, golden apples, quince, and sorbs, when their fuzz falls off, and all white ones when their fuzz falls off. Fenugreek when it can grow into a new plant. And olives when they contain a third of their oil.

Halakhah

What does ביחילו mean? Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said, if it comes alive, as you say: “And they grew tired of me.”Zechariah 11:8 Rabbi Abba bar Jacob in the name of Rabbi Joḥanan: When they start to become red outside. Do all figs become red on the outside? Rabbi Tanḥum bar Marion said in the name of Rabbi Joḥanan: He takes one and puts it somewhere. If that one ripens within 24 hours they are obligated, otherwise they are exempt.

“Grapes and wild grapes when they start to produce sap.” Rabbi Zeira said in the name of Rabbi Yasa: When they are called wretched grapes. Rabbi Ayvo bar Nagari, Rabbi Tanḥum bar Ilaї in the name of Rabbi Naḥum bar Simai: Only if their seeds are visible from the outside.

Rabbi Joḥanan said: I was riding on my grandfather’s shoulder when I heard the voice of Rabbi Simeon ben Eleazar who was sitting and stating: “One collects the insides of a sweet melon but one does not collect the insides of a watermelon.” What is the difference between the insides of a sweet melon and those of a watermelon? Rabbi Simeon ben Barsana said, the insides of a sweet melon are for eating, those of a watermelon are for sowing. If you say so, you will end up sweeping the ground on the Sabbath.

“All red fruits when they start to become red.” Miasha stated: Even if only one pomegranate was soft, all are treated as one for tithing. “A bunch of grapes one berry of which became red is treated as one for tithing.” Rabbi Ḥanina said, they made it clear to us, this refers to the entire vine, even to the entire row of vines. They added and made it clear, everything in this direction. Rabbi Yose ben Rabbi Abun said, the entire vineyard. If it was a small vineyard and he made it large, large and he made it small, one and he split it into two, two which he united?

Samuel said, if a pumpkin was punctured, all that grows in that depression is forbidden. The same holds for bunches of dates. “Rabbi Yose said, Jonathan ben Ḥarasha from Gennesaret asked Rabban Gamliel and the Sages at Yavneh: What is the status of punctured soft dates on their tree? They said to him, that entire date palm is forbidden.” Rabbi Yose said, that statement is needed if all dates are punctured; you should not say, since a snake does not usually do this, a cloud of birds rested on them and pecked at them. Rabbi Jonah in the name of Rabbi Simeon the Pious: Punctured soft dates on their tree are forbidden, but people behave as if they were permitted and they are not harmed.

“Pomegranates when they get soft.” Rabbi Zeira in the name of Rabbi Assi: When the food gets soft in his hand. Rabbi Judah bar Pazi in the name of Rabbi Joshua ben Levi: From when half the juice is in them. Rabbi Jonah asked: Maybe he understood that from teachers of homilies? “Our brothers made our hearts melt,”Deuteronomy 1:28 they split our hearts in two.

“Dates when they start to become bloated.” Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said, when the indentation is straightened out. Rabbi Jonah asked: How should we understand this? If the indentation is straightened out, it is fallen fruit! If the pit can be separated, it is fully ripe! The rabbis from Caesarea say, when they are ready to be eaten.

“Peaches when they get stripes.” Rabbi Zeira in the name of Assi: When they get red stripes.

“Walnuts and almonds when they form a container. Rabbi Judah says, walnuts and almonds when they develop a shell.” They said, the inner skin close to the edible part. The Sages agree with Rabbi Judah regarding filberts, pistachios, pine nuts, when they develop a shell.

Rabbi Ḥinena bar Pappa stated, for carob trees their forming clusters means their sprouting. “All black ones,” for example, bunches of the myrtle and bunches of senna berries. Quince, quince. Why are they called “prepared”? Because this is the only kind of tree whose fruit is used only for cooking.

“All white ones,” for example, מרפייתא. Rabbi Ḥinena bar Pappa said, when they get white bald spots. Rabbi Simeon ben Yoḥai stated, when water starts to flow in them. A case came before Rabbi Ḥanina and he wanted to follow Rabbi Ḥinena bar Pappa. He had second thoughts and said, do they get bald because of the edible part? Rather it is because a worm is in them!

“Fenugreek when it can grow into a new plant.” This is the Mishnah’s meaning: when it would grow if sown. How can one check? Rabbi Samuel bar Naḥman in the name of Rabbi Jonathan: He takes a handful and puts it into a pot full of water. If the greater part of it will sink down, it is obligated; otherwise it is exempt. Rabbi Jonah asked: In this case, should not that which sank down be obligated, what did not sink down be exempt? But it must have been said about the greater part of each single ear. Rabbi Yose ben Rabbi Abun confirmed: It has been said about the greater part of each single ear.

Rabbi Zeira said: It is written: “You must certainly tithe all your seed-yield.”Deuteronomy 14:22 Anything which will grow when sown; this excludes seeds less than one-third ripe which will not grow when sown. Rabbi Ḥinena in the name of Rabbi: The fluids from grapes or olives which are not one-third ripe will not make produce susceptible to impurity.

Rabbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rabbi Ḥanina: From when are olives subject to tithes? When the quickly growing summer fruit first ripens. If no quickly growing summer fruit ripens, when white figs first ripen. If there are no white figs to ripen, when the second batch is seen in the muqẓeh. Rabbi Eleazar ben Rabbi Yose said in the name of Rabbi Tanḥum bar Ḥiyya, when the first truly white figs ripen. Rabbi Yose ben Rabbi Abun said, this refers only to white figs of the same place.

Mishnah

3 Among vegetables, green melons, pumpkins, watermelons, sweet melons, also apples and cedrats are obligated large and small. Rabbi Simeon exempts cedrats when they are small. What is obligated among bitter almonds is exempt among sweet almonds; what is obligated among the sweet is exempt among the bitter.

Halakhah

There, we have stated: If somebody buys a vegetable field in Syria, if this was before the start of the season of tithes, he is obligated. But if it was after the start of the season of tithes, he is exempt. Yet here you say this? Ḥizqiah said, the Mishnah speaks of a field of green melons or pumpkins. Rabbi Zeira said, even if you hold this about a general field of vegetables, there still is a limit, only after it grew three twisted leaves.

“Nehorai bar Shania said in the name of Rabbi Simeon: Small apples are exempt, large apples are obligated. Honey apples are obligated large or small.” How should we understand the Mishnah? One may say that small apples are disputed, or that everyone agrees about honey apples.

Rabbi Akiva says an unripe cedrat is not a fruit, but the Sages say it is a fruit. Rabbi Hila, Rabbi Yasa, in the name of Rabbi Eleazar: It follows that Rabbi Simeon follows the argument of his teacher, Rabbi Akiva. Just as Rabbi Akiva said it is not a fruit, so Rabbi Simeon said it is not a fruit. Rabbi Yasa said, is everything usable for lulab subject to tithes and everything not usable for lulab not subject to tithes? Did they not object, there is the spotted one, there is one that grew in a mold or one shaped like a ball; it is not usable for lulab but subject to tithes! It is reasonable to conclude that Rabbi Simeon agrees with Rabbi Akiva but Rabbi Akiva does not agree with Rabbi Simeon. Rabbi Simeon agrees with Rabbi Akiva since it is written “fruit”Leviticus 23:40 and it is not a fruit. Rabbi Akiva does not agree with Rabbi Simeon, there is the spotted one, one that grew in a mold, or one shaped like a ball; it is not usable for lulab but subject to tithes.

“What is obligated among bitter almonds is exempt among sweet almonds,” small ones; “what is obligated among the sweet is exempt among the bitter,” large ones. “Rabbi Ishmael ben Rabbi Yose stated in the name of his father: Bitter almonds are exempt; sweet ones are not obligated before the outer shell separates.” Rabbi Ḥanina instructed in Sepphoris following that statement of Rabbi Ishmael ben Rabbi Yose. What did he instruct about? The people of Sepphoris said, about bitter ones. Rabbi Zeira said, about sweet ones. Rabbi Joḥanan said, if they came down here they would become obligated. If they are brought up, they are already exempt. Rabbi Phinehas instructed: After one saw three with detached outer shells, he gives the priestly offering for the entire box. Rabbi Mana said, only he may not give the priestly offering from one box for another.

Mishnah

4 What is their threshing floor for tithes? Green melons and pumpkins from when they are cleaned; if they are not cleaned, when one makes a heap. Water melons, when they are cleaned; if they are not cleaned, when he puts them in storage. Vegetables sold in bundles, when they are bundled. When he makes no bundles, when he is finished filling the vessel; if he does not fill the vessel, when he is finished harvesting. A fig basket when he covers it; if he does not cover it, when the vessel is completely filled. If he does not completely fill the vessel, when he has collected all he wants. When has this been said? When he brings it to market. But if he brings it to his house, he may eat snacks from it until he reaches his house. Dried pomegranate cells, raisins, and carob when he makes them into a pile. Onions when they are cleaned, if he does not clean them, when he makes them into a pile. Grain when it is in smooth piles, if he does not smooth it, when he makes it into a pile. Legumes when they are sifted, if he does not sift them, when he makes smooth piles. Even though he made smooth piles, he may take from the broken ones, from the sides, and from what is in the chaff and eat. Wine after he cleaned it. Even after he cleaned it he may collect from the upper part of the winepress or the pipe and drink. Oil after it descended into the barrel. Even after it descended, he may take from the press, the weight, and between the beams and put it on a pizza or into a bowl but he should not add it to a hot pan or pot. Rabbi Judah says, he may put it anywhere except into anything containing vinegar or fish sauce.

Halakhah

When its peksos is removed, when its šelqoq is removed. “When he continued removing peksos or šelqoq, it becomes ṭevel only when he finished with all he needs.” When he removed peksos or šelqoq when it was property of the Temple and redeemed it, if he made a large bundle in the field. But if he made a small bundle for the market, it became ṭevel. Rabbi Ezra asked: The work on the field is not yet finished and you say so? But this must be the meaning: If he made a large bundle in the field and he intends later to make it into small bundles for the market, it became ṭevel.

“If he had one basket and he intended to fill half of it, it became ṭevel once it was half filled. If he intended to fill it completely, it does not become ṭevel until it is completely filled. If there were two and he intended to fill both of them, they do not become ṭevel until he filled both of them. When has this been said? When he brings it to market. But if he brings it to his house, he may eat snacks from it until he reaches his house.” What is the difference between someone who brings to market and someone who brings to his house? When he brings to his house, it depends on his intention. But if he brings to market, it does not depend on his intention but on that of his customers. Maybe he will find a customer; therefore, it becomes ṭevel immediately.

It was stated: When he makes a pile on his rooftop. Rabbi Jonah asked: Therefore, not on his field? Rabbi Ḥinena said, it tells you something additional: even if he makes a pile on his rooftop.

“Onions when they are cleaned,” when he removes what is clinging to them.

“Grain when it is in smooth piles.” Rabbi Ḥanania in the name of Rabbi Joḥanan: When he straightens his heap. But did not Rabbi Jacob ben Sisin state: “When does he start to give the priestly offering from his threshing floor? When he removes the pitchfork.” Here he intends to smooth the pile, while there he does not intend to smooth it. It was stated: “He sifts part and gives the priestly offering from the sifted part for what is not sifted.” Rabbi Ila said, for this is the way of householders to bring it into their houses. What is the reason? “The bulls and young donkeys which work the soil will eat sour fodder.”Isaiah 30:24 If he sifted grain dedicated to the Temple and then redeemed it, since he was able to eat from it as a snack and now he cannot eat, it is as if he did it with the permission of the Temple and he is obligated. Rabbi Ḥinena objected: Did we not state, “if he took out and cleaned what was dedicated to the Temple, he is exempt?” Rabbi Yudan said, there it is not impossible for him not to preserve or not to cook a long time. But here it is impossible for him not to smooth it, as Rabbi Ila said, the bulls and young donkeys, etc.

We have stated: “But he collects from under the sieve and eats.” Rav Ḥisda said, because it still needs the action of the wind. Rabbi Ila in the name of Rabbi Yasa: It still needs to rest. But did we not state: “Wine after he cleaned it?” For the one who says it still needs to rest, it is understandable. For the one who says it still needs the action of the wind, it still needs removal of its yeast. Rabbi Benjamin ben Gidul objected: Did we not state: “Oil after it descended into the barrel?” For the one who says it still needs to rest, it is understandable. For the one who says it still needs the action of the wind, it still needs clearing up.

“If he was eating when night fell Friday evening or when he gave it to another person it did not become ṭevel.” Rabbi Jeremiah wanted to say, when it was put on pitta bread or into a bowl, but when it was in a flask it became ṭevel. Rabbi Yose said, even in a flask it did not become ṭevel. Rabbi Jeremiah said to him, does not the Sabbath create ṭevel? He answered him, does not buying create ṭevel? He retorted, following what Rabbi Yose said in the name of Rabbi Zeira, Rabbi Jonah, Rabbi Zeira in the name of Rabbi Eleazar, even what is in a flask did not become ṭevel, in case it was not fully processed, since he would in the end return it. The support for Rabbi Jeremiah’s view is from the following: “In addition, Rabbi Eliezer said a person may stand near the muqẓeh on a Friday of a Sabbatical year and say, from here I will eat tomorrow.” He mentioned only the Sabbatical year; that excludes the other years of the Sabbatical cycle. How does Rabbi Jeremiah explain this? You cannot return it to its place as muqẓeh, therefore it creates ṭevel. A baraita disagrees with Rabbi Jeremiah: There are no snacks on the Sabbath. He explains it, anything that has muqẓeh. In the opinion of Rabbi Jeremiah, whether it has muqẓeh or does not have muqẓeh.

Rabbi Mana asked: If it was a full flask put between two beams did it become ṭevel? Or perhaps since it was deposited at a place where processing was not finished did it not become ṭevel?

To what temperature? Rabbi Judah bar Pazi, Rabbi Simon, in the name of Rabbi Yose bar Ḥanina: To the point where he would burn his hand if he put it in. Everybody agrees that a second vessel is permitted. What is the difference between first and second vessels? Rabbi Yose bar Abun said, here the hand holds, there the hand does not hold. Rabbi Jonah said, in both cases the hand does not hold but they decreed removal for a first but not a second vessel. Rabbi Mana said, that platter of rice supports my father’s view, and that platter of grits supports my father’s view since you remove it from place to place and it is still boiling.

May one put spices at the bottom and pour on them from above? Rabbi Jonah said, it is forbidden and pouring has the same effect as a first vessel. Rabbi Jonah’s support comes from this: “Both vessels used for cooking and vessels into which boiling liquid was poured.” Yet here you say this? Rabbi Yose said, there a pottery vessel absorbs; spices are not cooked. Rabbi Yose bar Rabbi Abun objected: Did we not state, “the same holds for brass vessels.” Can one say that brass vessels absorb?

Can one pour in from a stream? Rabbi Ḥanina, the son of Rabbi Hillel, said, this is the disagreement between Rabbi Jonah and Rabbi Yose. Rabbi Isaac bar Gufta asked Rabbi Mana: If he did this on the Sabbath, is he guilty because of cooking? If he did this with meat and milk, is he guilty because of cooking? He said to him, parallel to what Rabbi Zeira said, when is it certainly a cooked dumpling? Only if fire burned underneath it. So here also, what is certainly a cooked dish? Only if fire burned underneath it.

In the opinion of Rabbi Judah, salt is like fish sauce and wine like vinegar.

Mishnah

5 The round fig cake when he smoothes it. One may smooth ṭevel figs and grapes, Rabbi Judah forbids it. If one smoothes grapes they are not made susceptible to impurity; Rabbi Judah says, they are made susceptible to impurity. Dried figs when he presses them and in a bin if he planes with a roller. If, while he presses in an amphora or planes in a bin, the amphora broke or the bin collapsed, he may not eat from the contents as a snack, but Rabbi Yose permits it.

Halakhah

Ḥananiah the son of Rabbi Yasa said, where do Rabbi Judah and the rabbis disagree? If it is ṭevel by rabbinic decree. But for ṭevel by biblical decree, the rabbis will also agree.

Rabbi Mana said it without attribution, Rabbi Abun said it in the name of Rabbi Joḥanan: Rabbi Judah maintains his opinion, the rabbis maintain their opinion, as we have stated: “Olives which somebody crushed with impure hands are not made susceptible to impurity, if he crushes them to let them soak up salt, they are made susceptible to impurity, if he crushes them to find out whether they contain sap, they are not made susceptible to impurity; Rabbi Judah says they are made susceptible to impurity.” The rabbis say, he checks their sap. Rabbi Judah says, he checks their body. Here, the rabbis say he polishes with their sap, Rabbi Judah says, he polishes with what he has.

Rabbi said to his son Rabbi Simeon, climb up and bring us dried figs from the barrel. He said to him, is it not forbidden because of muqzeh? He retorted, do you still maintain that? Nothing but figs and grapes can be forbidden because of muqzeh! Rabbi Samuel bar Sisarta: Because they smell bad during the process. Rabbi Zeira asked Rabbi Assi: Is it not reasonable to conclude that the case involved split dates? He said to him, that is my opinion also. Rabbi Yose ben Rabbi Abun, Rabbi Isaac bar Bisna in the name of Rabbi Joḥanan: The case involved split dates.

“He said to him, nothing but figs can be forbidden because of muqzeh!” Rabbi Jacob bar Zavdi in the name of Rabbi Abbahu: that is, regarding the Sabbath. But concerning tithes, everything may pass through a stage of muqzeh. Rabbi Yose said, the Mishnah said so: “Dried figs when he presses them and in a bin if he planes with a roller.”

Rabbi Joḥanan said: The words of the first teacher imply that the bottom does not need the top, and the top does not need the bottom. The words of the last teacher, the bottom needs the top but the top does not need the bottom. Rabbi Eleazar said, that is Rabbi Meir’s opinion. He said to him, this is so that you should not think it is an anonymous opinion and, against Rabbi Yose, practice follows the anonymous opinion. Therefore, one needs to say that this is Rabbi Meir’s opinion and between Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yose practice follows Rabbi Yose.

Mishnah

1 If somebody passed by the marketplace and said: “take some figs,” one may eat without tithing. Therefore, if they bring them to their houses, they must remove the offerings as for certainly untithed produce. “Take some figs and bring them home,” one should not eat them as a snack. Therefore, if they bring them to their houses, they have to remove the offerings only as for demai. If they were sitting in a gate or in a store and he said, take some figs, they may eat and are exempt, but the owners of the gate or the store are obligated. Rabbi Judah exempts them unless they turn their faces away or change their places.

Halakhah

Samuel said, this is Rabbi Meir’s opinion since Rabbi Meir says a gift is not like a sale. Rabbi Yose said, it is the opinion of everybody. This was asked of those from Rabbi Yannai’s house and they said, we used to give gifts to one another in the fields and ate without removing the required offerings. How can this be? This follows the view that they accepted tithes voluntarily.

Our Mishnah deals with the case that most people bring produce to their houses but in case most people bring produce directly to market one has to remove the offerings only as for demai. If we were dealing with the case that most people bring produce to their houses, is that not what we have stated: “‘Take some figs and bring them home,’ one should not eat them as a snack?” Since he said, “take some figs and bring them home,” it is as though he said, “take, I am taking care of the tithes for you.” But if most people bring produce directly to market he is not trusted if he says to somebody, I did tithe, nor is he trusted if he says to him, I am bringing mine to my house.

If he gave much, even if he said, take and eat, it is as if he said, take and store. If he gave him anything that usually is not eaten raw, even if he said, take and eat, it is as if he said, take and store. If the recipient was an important person who does not usually eat in public, if he said, take and eat, it is as if he said, take and store. If there were two people, and to one he said, take and eat, and to the other he said, take and store, then the one to whom he said, take and eat, is exempt; the one to whom he said, take and store, is obligated. Rabbi Yose said, is that not a Mishnah: “They eat and are exempt but the owners of the gate or the store are obligated?” Rabbi Jonah said, it is everybody’s opinion; here it concerns demai, there it concerns certainly untithed produce.

“‘Go and collect for yourself 20 figs from my tree and I will eat my fill from yours,’ the person who eats his fill is exempt and the person who eats a fixed number is obligated.” Rabbi Abun bar Ḥiyya asked Rabbi Zeira: Can a person not eat one by one with permission and be exempt? He said to him, yes. Then why is he obligated here? He said to him, when he takes them together. If he takes them together, even the person who eats his fill should be obligated! Is he not forbidden because of barter? Rabbi Shammai said, there is no barter since this man only wanted to stimulate his appetite so that he would eat.

“‘Go and collect for yourself 20 figs from my tree,’ he eats as usual and is exempt. ‘Go and fill a basket,’ he should not eat before tithing. When has this been said? About an ordinary person. But from a fellowship member he can eat and does not have to tithe, the words of Rabbi. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, when has this been said? About an ordinary person. But from a fellowship member he has to remove the offerings as for certainly untithed produce since fellowship members are not suspected of tithing what is not earmarked. Rabbi said, I prefer my words to those of Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel. It is preferable that they should tithe what is not earmarked than to feed ṭevel to the ordinary person.” Rabbi Zeira said, from both of their opinions it follows that even a fellowship member who sends to another fellowship member must tithe. They ventured to say, according to the one who said that fellowship members are not suspected of tithing what is not earmarked, when somebody is a fellowship member he has to tithe. And according to the one who said, it is better to tithe what is not earmarked than to feed ṭevel to the ordinary person, if he is a fellowship member he has to tithe. Rabbi Jonah asked: Here you declare him to be a fellowship member, there you declare him to be an ordinary person. Rabbi Yose said, in both cases, he is an ordinary person. But because of the rare one who removes the required offerings he is called a fellowship member.

Rabbi Yose in the name of Rabbi Sheshet, Rabbi Eleazar in the name of Rabbi Yose in the name of Rabbi Abin: If somebody says to another I will tithe for you, he does not have to be with him. There, we have stated: “If he put it in a tree, higher than ten handbreadths it is not an eruv, lower than ten handbreadths it is an eruv.” Rabbi Eleazar said, he has to be with him. Yet here you say this? Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Ada said, here it concerns an adult, there it concerns a minor. Rabbi Ḥananiah said in the name of Rabbi Ḥanina, you may even say in both cases we deal with an adult or in both cases we deal with a minor. There, when he says, make an eruv for me! But here, he says I will tithe for you. Each case teaches us about the other. This case teaches us about the other: if he says I will make an eruv for you, he does not have to be with him. The other case teaches us about this one: if he says tithe for me, he has to be with him.

“‘Go and collect for yourself 20 figs from my tree,’ he eats one after the other and is exempt. ‘Go and fill a basket.’” Rabbi says, I say that he has to show him the basket. What is the measure of a basket? Rabbi Samuel bar Naḥman in the name of Rabbi Jonathan: A standard basket is four qab, a large one a seah, a small one three qab. Rabbi Jonah asked: Has this been said for tithes or for contract law? If you say for tithes, then certainly also for contracts. If for contracts, then not for tithes. It was obvious to Rabbi Yose that this was said for tithes, and certainly also for contracts.

That means that the house creates ṭevel for its owner but not for others. Rabbi Eleazar said, Rabbi Judah and Rabbi Neḥemiah said the same thing as we have stated: “Rabbi Neḥemiah says, every courtyard in which a person does not feel embarrassed to eat obligates.” Rabbi Yose said, we thought that Rabbi Neḥemiah and the other rabbis disagree about a courtyard in which he would feel embarrassed to eat anywhere. That means, not one in which he would feel embarrassed at some place but not at another. Since Rabbi Eleazar said Rabbi Judah and Rabbi Neḥemiah said the same thing, this implies that a place where he would feel embarrassed is exempt and one where he would not feel embarrassed is obligated.

Rabbi Joḥanan said, Rabbi Judah implies that they made it like a branch hanging into the courtyard. In Rabbi Joḥanan’s opinion, this applies if he eats them one at a time, eats in a public place, and leaves some over. In Rabbi Eleazar’s opinion, this applies even if he does not eat them one at a time, even if he does not eat in a public place and leaves none over.

Mishnah

2 If somebody brings fruits from Galilee to Judea or if he is on a pilgrimage to Jerusalem, he may eat until he reaches his destination; the same holds for the return journey. Rabbi Meir says, until he reaches the place where he stays for the Sabbath. Peddlers who travel around the villages may eat until they come to the place where they will stay for the night. Rabbi Judah says, the first house is his house.

Halakhah

When fruits were collected not for use on the Sabbath and the Sabbath began, Rabbi Joḥanan said, the Sabbath makes it ṭevel, Rabbi Simeon ben Lakish said, the Sabbath does not make it ṭevel. Rabbi Simeon ben Lakish objected to Rabbi Joḥanan, since you say the Sabbath makes it ṭevel, did we not state: “If somebody brings fruits from Galilee to Judea or if he is on a pilgrimage to Jerusalem, he may eat until he reaches his destination; the same holds for the return journey?” We stated about this: Even if he stayed overnight, even if he stayed over the Sabbath! He said to him, when he wants to stay for the Sabbath. You should know that this is so since we have stated about this: “Even if he stayed for the Sabbath on Monday.” Can you have the Sabbath on a Monday? It must be that he wants to stay for the Sabbath; here too, if he wants to stay for the Sabbath.

Everybody agrees that staying overnight does not make produce ṭevel. What is the difference between staying overnight and staying during the Sabbath? A person may happen to stay overnight, but nobody stays for the Sabbath by chance. A person will stay anywhere overnight, but will not stay just anywhere for the Sabbath.

It was stated: “It happened that Rabbi Joshua went to Rabban Joḥanan ben Zakkai in Bene Ḥayil, and some local people brought them fruits. Rabbi Joshua said to them, if we stay overnight, we are obligated to tithe; otherwise, we are not obligated to tithe.” Rabbi Zeira said, Rabbi Joshua insists on cleanliness. Rabbi Mana said to him, are all the others unreasonable? But Rabbi Joshua, who was frequently served, says that staying overnight makes produce ṭevel. For all others, who are not frequently served, staying overnight does not make produce ṭevel. But did we not state: “Peddlers who travel around the villages may eat until they come to the place where they will stay for the night.” Where is their overnight stay? In their house! Rabbi Simeon ben Lakish in the name of Rabbi Ḥanina: Like those of Kefar Ḥanina who go out, trade in four or five villages, return, and sleep in their houses.

Rabbi Ḥalafta ben Shaul stated: A person wants to unload his wares in the first house he encounters and stay overnight there.

Mishnah

3 Fruits from which he gave the priestly offering before they were completely processed, Rabbi Eliezer prohibits eating snacks from them but the Sages permit it except for harvesting baskets of figs. Rabbi Simeon permits eating from a harvesting basket of figs from which the priestly offering was taken but the Sages forbid. If somebody says to another person, here take this as-coin and give me five figs for it, he should not eat before he tithed, the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Judah says, if he eats them singly he is exempt, if he takes them together he is obligated. Rabbi Judah said, there is a story that a rose garden was in Jerusalem whose figs were sold three or four for an as-coin and nobody ever gave the priestly offering or tithes for them.

Halakhah

What case are we discussing? If we are discussing a harvesting basket of figs, everybody agrees that it is forbidden. If we are discussing oil olives and wine grapes, everybody agrees that it is permitted. But we are discussing dates intended for pressing, dried figs intended for pressing. Rabbi Eliezer says, the priestly offering makes fruits ṭevel when they are not completely processed but the Sages say, the priestly offering does not make fruits ṭevel when they are not completely processed.

Can First Tithe make produce ṭevel? What case are we discussing? If we are discussing a grain heap that was smoothed, everybody holds that it is forbidden. If First Tithe was given from ears, everybody agrees that it is permitted. But we are discussing dates intended for pressing, large figs intended for pounding, of which he gave the primary priestly offering and then changed his mind to store them as they were. Then he violated the rule and gave First Tithe. If you say that ṭevel was created retroactively, the priestly offering makes the produce ṭevel. If you say that ṭevel is created from that point on, the First Tithe makes the produce ṭevel.

“If somebody buys dates to press them, dried figs to pound them, he may not eat a snack from them and must tithe as demai, the words of Rabbi Meir. But the Sages say, he may eat a snack from them and must give tithes as for certainly untithed produce, the words of Rabbi Yose.” Rabbi Hilai, Rabbi Lazar in the name of Hilfai. Rabbi Jonah said, it was found on the writing tablet of Hilfai: He may eat a snack from them and gives tithes as for certainly untithed produce. This is difficult! If he may eat a snack from them, he should give tithes as for certainly untithed produce. If he tithes as demai, he should be forbidden to eat them as a snack! Rabbi Yose in the name of Rabbi Hila: He may eat them as a snack because their processing is not finished; he gives tithes as for certainly untithed produce since the seller knows that his house makes produce ṭevel, he will separate the priestly offering from the start.

Rabbi Eleazar said, the Mishnah deals with any harvesting basket. “Rabbi Simeon permits by an argument from the lesser to the greater: Since you say it is permitted if it carries the potential obligation of three tithes, all the more if it carries only the potential obligation of two tithes.” Does the First Tithe create ṭevel for the Second? Since you say it is permitted if it carries the potential obligation of two tithes, all the more if it carries only the potential obligation of one tithe.

Rabbi Zeira in the name of Rabbi Joḥanan, Rabbi Hila in the name of Rabbi Eleazar: They disagree if he gathers and delivers. But if he gathers for his own food, everybody agrees that he eats one by one and is exempt, but if he takes them together he is obligated.

Rabbi Hila in the name of Rabbi Eleazar: Just as they differ here they differ about a secure courtyard since Rabbi Joḥanan said that the rules of buying, courtyard, and Sabbath are not biblical requirements. Rabbi Immi in the name of Rabbi Simeon ben Lakish, the most reasonable of these is the secure courtyard.

The colleagues in the name of Rabbi Joḥanan: This is how Rabbi Judah refuted Rabbi Meir’s argument: Do you not concede to me that one who gives to his son is exempt? What is the difference between gathering and giving to his son or gathering and giving to another person? Rabbi Yudan asked: Why did you say “if he gathers and delivers,” can we not say “if he gathers and eats”? Rabbi Mana said, there cannot be “if he gathers and eats,” only “if he gathers and delivers,” because of that rose garden. Can you say the rose garden is a case of gathering and eating? No, it is a case of gathering and delivering! There also, he gathers and delivers because he would say to him, if you enter you will damage its roses! A baraita disagrees with Rabbi Mana’s argument: “‘I am selling you the vineyard,’ this is a valid sale even if there are no vines since he sells him the real estate by description. ‘I am selling you the orchard,’ this is a valid sale even if there are no trees since he sells him the real estate by description. ”

Mishnah

4 If somebody says to another person, here take this as-coin for twenty figs that I will choose, he chooses and eats. For the bunch of grapes that I will choose, he selects individual grapes and eats. For the pomegranate that I will choose, he picks individual seeds and eats. For the watermelon that I will choose, he bites off and eats. But if he said, for these twenty figs, for these two bunches, for these two pomegranates, for these two watermelons, he eats as usual and he is exempt since he bought when it was still attached to the ground. If somebody hires a worker to slice figs, if that one told him, on condition that I may eat from the figs, he eats and is exempt; on condition that I and my son will eat, or that my son may eat instead of my wages, he may eat and is exempt, and his son may eat but is obligated; on condition that I may eat while cutting and after cutting, while cutting he eats and is exempt, after cutting he eats and is obligated since he does not eat under the Torah’s rule. That is the principle: Anyone who eats under the Torah’s rule is exempt; if he does not eat under the Torah’s rule he is obligated. If he was working with lĕbāsîm he should not eat benôt ševaʿ and vice versa. But he may hold back until he reaches the place of good ones and eat there. If somebody switches with another person so that each one eats directly, or each one cuts, or one eats and one cuts, he is obligated. Rabbi Judah says, he who exchanges to eat is obligated, to cut is exempt.

Halakhah

Rabbi Yose in the name of Rabbi Joḥanan: He plucks single berries and eats. Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said, that is what my teacher did. It was stated in the name of Rabbi Yose: If he bit off even the smallest piece from a watermelon, he acquired it. Rabbi Jonah asked, does this also hold for a pomegranate?

Why do I need “on condition”? Even without “on condition”! Rabbi Avin in the name of Rabbi Shammai: It is necessary, even if he says “on condition”!

There, we have stated: “If he worked with his hands but not with his feet, with his feet but not with his hands, even on his shoulder, he eats.” We have stated about this, with his hands he makes bundles, with his feet he creates support, even on his shoulder he carries. “Rabbi Yose ben Rabbi Judah says, only if he works with his hands, feet, and body,” just as in threshing he works with his hands, feet, and body, so in every case he must work with his hands, feet, and body. Just as threshing specifically applies to plucked grain, so the rule applies to anything plucked. This excludes anyone who thins among garlic and onions, makes supports for vines, and weeds under an olive tree. Just as threshing specifically applies to growth from the earth, so the rule applies to anything growing from the earth. This excludes anyone who milks, makes cheese, or churns milk. Just as threshing takes place before processing is complete, so the rule applies to anything before processing is complete. This excludes anyone who separates dates or dried figs, wine after it is fermented and olive oil when it descends into the vat. Just as threshing takes place before tithes become obligatory, so the rule applies to anything before tithes become obligatory. This excludes anyone who kneads dough, separates, or bakes.

It is written: “If you come into your neighbor’s standing grain.”Deuteronomy 23:25 I might think that this means everybody; the verse says “do not swing a sickle over your neighbor’s standing grain,” the one who has permission to swing a sickle, that means the laborer. Issy ben Aqabiah says, the verse speaks about everybody. Why does the verse say, “do not swing a sickle over your neighbor’s standing grain?” He has no right except at the time of swinging the sickle. It was stated: Rabbi Simeon ben Yoḥai says, how carefully the Torah guards against robbery, since it ruled between a person and his neighbor over a swing of the sickle! How great is labor, since the generation of the Flood was destroyed only because of robbery, but the laborer does his work, eats, and is free of any charge of robbery!

It is written: “Do not muzzle an ox while he is threshing.”Deuteronomy 25:4 Is there only an ox among harvested crops and a human among standing crops? May a human eat from harvested crops? If an ox which does not eat from standing crops may eat from harvested crops, a human who may eat from standing crops should all the more be able to eat from harvested crops. The verse says, “do not muzzle an ox while he is threshing.” “Do not muzzle” applies to an ox. It does not apply to a human. May an ox eat from standing crops? If a human who does not eat from harvested crops may eat from standing crops, an ox which may eat from harvested crops should all the more be able to eat from standing crops. This means, if “do not muzzle” applies to one case, it also should apply to the other. The verse says, “do not muzzle an ox while he is threshing.” You may not muzzle him when he is threshing but you may muzzle him for what is standing on the ground.

From here they said, “a person may waive the right to eat for himself, his adult son or daughter, or his adult male or female slave, or his wife, because they can consent. But he may not renounce for his minor son or daughter, or his minor male or female slave, or his animal, because they cannot consent.”

Someone who eats by biblical decree, should he not be obligated? Rabbi Jonah said, the Torah exempted him.

There, we have stated: “When he is working on figs he should not eat grapes, on grapes he should not eat figs.” On that, we stated: If he is working on one branch, he should not eat from another branch. Also, we have stated: “When he is working with lĕbāsîm he should not eat benôt ševaʿ and vice versa.” This is needed, even if both are on the same branch.

It is written: “If you come into your neighbor’s vineyard.”Deuteronomy 23:24 I might think that this means everybody; the verse says: “Do not put into your own vessel,” but you may put into somebody else’s vessel. Who is this? This is the laborer. “You may eat grapes.” Do we not know that in a vineyard there is nothing to eat but grapes? Why does the verse say, you may eat grapes? From here it follows that if he works on fig trees he cannot eat grapes, if he works on vines, he cannot eat figs. “All your soul’s desire,” whatever you desire. “All your soul’s desire,” anything that is exempt from tithes. What you eat without obligation also the laborer may eat without obligation. “All your soul’s desire,” from this we learn that the laborer should not eat more than the value of his wages. From this Rabbi Eleazar Ḥisma deduced that the laborer should not eat more than the value of his wages, but the Sages permit it. How do we know that his wages are called his soul? Rabbi Abbahu in the name of Rabbi Yose ben Ḥanina, it says here “his soul” and it says at another place “his soul” as it is written: “For it he risks his life.”Deuteronomy 24:15 Just as “his soul” there means his wages, so here “his soul” means his wages. “Until you are full,” that he should not eat and vomit. “Until you are full,” that he should not peel figs or suck out grapes.

“The laborers are permitted to dip their bread in sauce so that they will eat more grapes. The employer is permitted to give them wine to drink so that they will eat fewer grapes. The owner of a cow is permitted to starve her through the night so that she will eat a lot while threshing. The employer is permitted to feed her bundles of straw so that she will not eat much while threshing.” Rabbi Abbahu said, give citrus to the animals! Rabbi Ḥanania fed them fig cake. Rabbi Mana fed them carrots.

Rabbi Ḥiyya stated: The laborer may eat the first bunch of grapes. It was stated, the last bunch. Rabbi Samuel in the name of Rabbi Hila: If he put it in the basket it is forbidden. Rabbi Yose said, that needs to be said if he harvests and another transports. But if he harvests and transports at first he eats according to local custom. At the end he eats because of the rule that “the laborers eat when they go from one row to the next and when they return to the winepress, and the donkey until it is unloaded.”

It was stated: A person may use a trick so that his workers will eat ten and cut one. Some Tannaim stated: That they will cut ten and eat one. We understand “that they will eat ten and cut one.” But “that they will cut ten and eat one”? Rabbi Abin said, this is so that you should not say it is as if done after the end of their work, and tithing should be obligatory.

We understand that eating may require tithing, but should cutting require tithing? Rabbi Eleazar said, this is Rabbi Meir’s opinion, since Rabbi Meir says trade makes incompletely processed produce ṭevel. Rabbi Eleazar said, Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Eliezer both said the same. As Rabbi Eliezer said, the priestly offering makes incompletely processed produce ṭevel so Rabbi Meir said trade makes incompletely processed produce ṭevel.

Mishnah

1 If somebody transports figs through his courtyard to cut them into pieces, his children and companions may eat and they are exempt; the same holds for laborers who work for him as long as they cannot claim their meals from him. But those who can claim their meals from him may not eat. If somebody takes his workers out to the field, if they have no claim to meals from him, they eat and are exempt. But if they can claim meals from him they may eat single fruits from the fig tree but not from the basket or the box or the muqẓeh. If somebody hires a laborer to work with him on olive trees and said to him “on condition that I may eat olives,” he eats one by one and if he takes them together he is obligated. To thin out onions, if he said to him “on condition that I may eat vegetables” he snips off leaf by leaf and eats but if he takes them together he is obligated.

Halakhah

May he himself eat? Rav said, he is forbidden to eat; Ulla ben Rabbi Ishmael said in the name of Rabbi Eleazar, this one is permitted to eat. Rav follows Rabbi Meir, Rabbi Eleazar the rabbis. Does Rav follow Rabbi Meir? Then even his children and household members should be forbidden! But Rav follows Rabbi, Rabbi Eleazar the rabbis. As Rabbi Simon said in the name of Rabbi Joshua ben Levi, Rabbi Yose ben Shaul in the name of Rabbi: The Sages say, one eats from what is going to the muqẓeh only in its place. Rabbi Jacob ben Idi in the name of Rabbi Joshua ben Levi: one eats from what is going to the muqẓeh in its place and in other places. Rabbi Yose ben Shaul objected to Rabbi: Did we not state, “carob pods until he collected them on top of his roof?” He said to him, do not object to me about carobs. Carobs are animal feed.

According to Rav, what is the difference between himself and his children? He is forbidden because he depends on muqẓeh. His children who do not depend on muqẓeh are permitted. We understand his children, but his wife? Does she not have a claim to food from him? This follows the view that a wife’s right to food is not a Torah requirement. This follows what we learned: “The court will not assign a wife’s maintenance from Sabbatical money, but she may be given Sabbatical produce to eat in her husband’s home.” Can she not be considered like a worker whose work is not worth a peruṭah? It implies that she is not considered like a worker whose work is not worth a peruṭah. Even according to the one who says, a wife’s right to food is not a Torah requirement, does she not have a claim to a dwelling? This follows what we learned: “If men participate with food without the knowledge of their wives, the participation is valid. But if wives participate without the knowledge of their husbands, the participation is invalid.”

It was stated: All that was brought from the field to town became ṭevel. The baraita is Rabbi’s, as it was stated: “If somebody brought figs from the field to eat them in his unprotected courtyard, then forgot and brought them into his house or the children brought them, he may bring them back to their intended place and eat.” They said this only when it happened by mistake. Therefore, if it was intentional, it is forbidden. Who stated this? Rabbi! As it was stated: “If somebody brought figs from the field to eat them on his roof, Rabbi obligates, Rabbi Yose ben Rabbi Judah exempts.” It is as it was stated, “if somebody transports figs through his courtyard to cut them into pieces,” therefore, if it is not to cut into pieces he is obligated.

Rabbi Ulla ben Rabbi Ishmael in the name of Rabbi Eleazar: Rabbi and Rabbi Yose ben Rabbi Judah brought the harvesting basket over the backs of the roofs. Rabbi Judah ben Rabbi Ilai saw them and said, look what the difference is between you and the earlier generations. Rabbi Akiva bought three different kinds for a peruṭah in order to tithe every kind separately but you bring the harvesting basket over the backs of the roofs! Why go over the backs of the roofs? Even bringing them into his courtyard with the intention of eating them on the roof would be permitted! Is that not the opinion of Rabbi Yose ben Rabbi Judah? It was because Rabbi was with him. An old man saw them and said to them, would you give me some of these? They said, yes. He said to them, you did not give to your father in Heaven, only to me!

Rabbi Joḥanan follows Rabbi, Rabbi Simeon ben Lakish Rabbi Yose ben Rabbi Judah. Does Rabbi Joḥanan follow Rabbi? Even if he agreed with Rabbi Yose ben Rabbi Judah, the Sabbath is more powerful since windfallen fruit that drops by itself is forbidden. Does Rabbi Simeon ben Lakish follow Rabbi Yose ben Rabbi Judah? Even if he followed Rabbi, since a secure courtyard is more powerful, as Rabbi Joḥanan said, buying, courtyard, and Sabbath are not biblical requirements. Rabbi Immi in the name of Rabbi Simeon ben Lakish, the most reasonable of these is the secure courtyard.

Rabbi Joḥanan in the name of Rabbi Simeon ben Yoḥai: If someone had two courtyards, one in Magdala and one in Tiberias, and transported produce to the one in Magdala intending to eat them in Tiberias; since he transported it in a way that was permitted it is permitted. It turns out that Rabbi Simeon ben Yoḥai agrees with Rabbi Yose ben Rabbi Judah but goes further than the latter since Rabbi Yose ben Rabbi Judah speaks about an exempt place but Rabbi Simeon ben Yoḥai about a place of obligation, but since he transported it in a way that was permitted it is permitted. Rabbi Eliezer’s statement goes further than either of theirs, since Rabbi Eliezer said, since he started in a permitted way it is permitted.

We understand “not from the basket or the box,” but “or the muqẓeh?” Is it not the rule that “he eats one by one and if he takes them together he is obligated”? Rabbi Isaac said, they considered muqẓeh as being taken together.

The house of Rabbi stated: He eats normally and is exempt. Rabbi Jonah asked, what case are we discussing? If he hired him to work with him on the olives, everybody agrees that he eats normally and is exempt. If he hired him to work the olive trees, everybody agrees that he eats one by one and if he takes them together he is obligated. But we must be discussing a case where he hired him to thin out the olives. Since the latter part is about thinning out onions, if he said to him “on condition that I may eat vegetables” he tears them out leaf by leaf and eats but if he takes them together he is obligated.

Rabbi Ḥaggai asked the colleagues: What is the reason we stated here that “he is exempt”? They said to him, because he is eating a snack in the field and is exempt. He said to them, is our Mishnah needed for that, because he is eating a snack in the field and is exempt? It must be because of abandoned property since if he brings it to his house he still is exempt. As it is stated: “If somebody found a harvesting basket covered with leaves, that is forbidden because of robbery and is subject to tithes.” It is forbidden because of robbery since it is something with distinguishing marks. It is subject to tithes since the owners still have it in mind. How far does this go? Could he give the priestly offering from abandoned property? He cannot give the priestly offering from abandoned property! “He assesses its monetary value and eats.”

Rabbi Jonah asked: Does the fixing of the price create ṭevel in a sale? Or maybe, since the owners can take it back there is no ṭevel? Rabbi Mana asked: Consider a case where he put one in his mouth! Is it not unappetizing? Can he give it back? If you say so, is he not eating ṭevel retroactively? That means, the fixing of the price is like a sale.

“If he found a harvesting basket in a place where most people bring to market, it is forbidden to eat a snack from them and he must remove the offerings as for demai. In a place where most people bring to their houses, it is permitted to eat a snack from them and he must remove the offerings as for certainly untithed produce. Half and half, he removes the offerings as for demai but if he brings it to his house he must remove the offerings as for certainly untithed produce.” Rabbi Jonah asked, does treating it as demai create a definite obligation to tithe? If you say so, does he not invert the order? Rabbi Yose ben Rabbi Abun, Rabbi Joḥanan in the name of Rabbi Simeon ben Jehozadak, he must spell out a condition and say: “If this is from those who bring to market, what I did is valid, otherwise, I did not do anything,” so that the priestly offering from the tithe should not contain ṭevel of the primary priestly offering. “Half and half on the field he removes the offerings as for demai but if he brings it to his house he must remove the offerings as for certainly untithed produce.” Should one not be afraid that it was from those who bring to their houses and its primary priestly offering would contain ṭevel of the priestly offering from the tithe? Rabbi Mattaniah said, this applies if he designates his tithes.

So far we have discussed produce that has no threshing floor. But from produce that has a threshing floor, one separates the priestly offering from the tithe and does not need to give the primary priestly offering as it was stated: “If he found cleaned grain on the field, in a heap it is forbidden because of robbery. If it is dispersed, it is permitted as far as robbery is concerned. In any case it is subject to tithes but exempt from the primary priestly offering because no threshing floor is cleared unless the primary priestly offering was taken.”

Where are tithes taken, from the house or from the field? Let us learn from the following: If a fellowship member died and in his estate was a chest full of grain, even if he filled it the same day it is presumed to have had its offerings removed. Could his mind not have been clouded for at least an hour? Rabbi Abun bar Ḥiyya said, explain it if he died with a clear mind. Rabbi Ḥananiah in the name of Rabbi Phinehas understood it from the following: “One tenth which I will separate in the future is given to Akiva ben Joseph so that he can distribute it to the poor.” That means, from the house. Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba understood it from the following: “If somebody’s produce was in a storage bin and he gave a seah to a Levite and a seah to a poor person,” that means, from the house. Rabbi Abba Mari understood it from the following: “‘From the house’Deuteronomy 26:13, that is ḥallah.” That means, from the field.

Mishnah

2 If he found single fruits on the road, even next to a field from which the single fruits may have come, or a fig tree that extends over the road and he found figs under it they are permitted as far as robbery is concerned and exempt from tithes. Olives and carobs are obligated. If he found dried figs, if most people are pressing theirs he is obligated, otherwise he is exempt. If he found slices of a fig cake it is clear that processing is complete. Carobs, as long as he did not make heaps on his roof he may take them down for his animals and is exempt because he will return the excess.

Halakhah

Rabbi Jonah said, only on a road, not between one person’s property and his neighbor’s. Rabbi Jonah said, only olives under an olive tree, carobs under a carob tree, but not olives under a carob tree, carobs under an olive tree.

Are they not pressed in the houses? Rabbi Abun bar Ḥiyya said, explain it where most people press in the fields. Rabbi Zeira asked: Is it not recognizable whether it is pressed or not? Rabbi Saul said, sometimes it jumps from under the roller, then it is pressed and looks as if it has not been pressed. Sometimes a foot squeezes it, then it is not pressed and looks as if it has been pressed. Rabbi Eleazar said, that is, at a place where most people are not pressing in the fields. But at a place where most people are pressing in the fields, those who pressed and the minority who will press in the future are added together.

Some Tannaim state: Because it is not proper for a learned person to eat in public. As for example, Rabbi Eleazar ben Rabbi Simeon who was eating in public and was seen by Rabbi Meir who asked him, are you eating in public? He lowered himself out of sight.

Mishnah

3 Which courtyard is obligated for tithes? Rabbi Ishmael says, a Tyrian courtyard in which vessels are guarded. Rabbi Akiva says, one where one person opens and another one locks it, is exempt. Rabbi Neḥemiah says, a courtyard where one does not feel embarrassed to eat is obligated. Rabbi Yose says, one into which anybody may enter and nobody asks, what are you doing here, is exempt. Rabbi Judah says, if one courtyard is inside another, the inner one is obligated, the outer one is exempt. Roofs are exempt even if they are in an obligated courtyard. A porter’s lodge, a covered walkway, and a gallery are like the courtyard: obligated if the latter is obligated and exempt if the latter is exempt. Sheds, watchtowers, and summer shelters are exempt. Gennesaret huts even though they contain a hand mill or chickens are exempt. Potter’s huts, the inner one is obligated, the outer one exempt. Rabbi Yose says, any which is not a dwelling in summer and winter is exempt. During the festival, Rabbi Judah treats a festival hut as creating an obligation to tithe, but the Sages exempt it.

Halakhah

Which courtyard is obligated? It was stated: Rabbi Ishmael says, any with a watchman sitting and watching at the door.

Rabbi Samuel ben Naḥman in the name of Rabbi Jonathan: All of them learned it from the house. The house creates ṭevel by biblical decree; it says “I removed the holy food from the house.”Deuteronomy 26:13

They heard Rabbi Joḥanan tell them, practice follows the stricter ruling in each of their opinions. Why do they not say it in his name? So that one statement of Rabbi Joḥanan would not contradict another of his statements. It was stated: “Rabbi Simeon ben Eleazar said in the name of Rabbi Akiva, one where one person opens and another one locks it is exempt; two partners but not two tenants.” What is the difference between a partner and a tenant? Just as a partner may object so a tenant may object! Rabbi Jonah said, the Mishnah refers to a landlord and his tenant. The landlord may object to the tenant, the tenant may not object to the landlord. About that they heard Rabbi Joḥanan say, practice follows Rabbi Simeon ben Eleazar in the name of Rabbi Akiva. Rabbi Jonah said, Zeira and Rabbi Immi in the name of Rabbi Joḥanan: Practice follows Rabbi Simeon ben Eleazar in the name of Rabbi Akiva. Rabbi Immi said, the house of Rabbi Yannai instructed that practice follows Rabbi Simeon ben Eleazar in the name of Rabbi Akiva.

Rabbi Abun bar Ḥiyya asked Rabbi Zeira: What does Rabbi Judah add to the words of his teacher Rabbi Akiva? He said to him, nothing.

Rabbi Eleazar said, the Mishnah deals with a roof surrounded by the airspace of the courtyard. Did the produce not become ṭevel when it was transported through the courtyard? Explain it either according to Rabbi Yose ben Rabbi Judah or Rabbi, when he wanted to cut them up for drying and then changed his mind not to cut.

Rabbi Abin said, only if the roof is at least four cubits square. Just as a house does not make produce ṭevel unless it is at least four cubits square, so the roof does not exempt unless it is at least four cubits square, as it is stated: A house less than four cubits square is exempt from the obligations of mezuzah and the parapet, from the obligation of eruv, does not make produce ṭevel, is not counted as a connection to a town. Someone who vows not to be in a house may sit there. One does not give it four cubits in front of its entrance; it does not remain with the buyer in the Jubilee; it cannot become impure by scale disease, and its owner does not return from the army because of it.

Do they make produce ṭevel for someone who lives in a watchtower? Consider what was taught: An elementary school and a Talmud school make produce ṭevel for the elementary and the Mishnah teacher, but not for others. That means, they make produce ṭevel for someone who lives in a watchtower.

Rabbi says, four cubits even though there are not four walls. Rabbi Simeon says, four walls even though there are not four cubits. Rabbi Judah says, four walls and four cubits. Similarly, Rabbi Judah requires it to have a mezuzah. It is reasonable that Rabbi Judah agrees with these rabbis, but these rabbis will not agree with Rabbi Judah: Even if it has four cubits and four walls it is not required to have a mezuzah and it does not create ṭevel for tithes.

Mishnah

4 From a fig tree standing in a courtyard, one may eat one by one and if he took them together he is obligated. Rabbi Simeon says, one in his right hand, one in his left hand, and one in his mouth. If he climbed to the top of the tree he may fill the fold of his toga and eat. From a vine planted in a courtyard one may take an entire bunch; the same holds for a pomegranate and a watermelon, the words of Rabbi Tarfon. Rabbi Akiva says, he takes individual grapes, individual pomegranate seeds, and picks from the watermelon. Of coriander sown in the courtyard he snips off leaf by leaf and eats; when he takes them together they are obligated. Calamint, hyssop, and thyme in the courtyard are obligated if they are guarded. If a fig tree was standing in a courtyard but its crown was hanging over a vegetable garden, one eats as usual and is exempt. If it was standing in a vegetable garden but its crown was hanging over a courtyard, one eats one by one and if he takes them together he is obligated. If it was standing in the Land and hanging beyond the Land or standing outside the Land and hanging over the Land, everything is determined by the trunk. For houses of walled cities, everything is determined by the trunk. For cities of refuge, everything is determined by the crown, for Jerusalem everything is determined by the crown.

Halakhah

It was stated: One gives him time to hit it a first, second, and third time. Rabbi Jonah in the name of Rabbi Zeira: If he collected the second one during the time allowed for the first, both became ṭevel.

Rabbi Jeremiah asked: If he threw the first higher in the air than 10 handbreadths and it did not descend below 10 handbreadths when he collected the second one, did both of them become ṭevel?

Rabbi Eleazar ben Rabbi Simeon says, three in his right hand, three in his left hand, and three in his mouth. Since Rabbi Eleazar ben Rabbi Simeon was a glutton, he made his estimate according to his own capacity. Rabbi Eleazar ben Rabbi Simeon went to his father-in-law Rabbi Simeon ben Rabbi Yose ben Laqonia who repeatedly mixed wine for him which he gulped down. He said to him, did you not hear from your father how one swallows from a cup? He said to him, one gulp if it is unmixed, two gulps if mixed with cold water, three with hot water. But the Sages did not estimate this with your wine which is good, or with your cup which is small, or with my belly which is large.

Rabbi Joshua ben Qorḥah called him “vinegar son of wine.” He said to him, why do you call me that? He said to him, you should have gone to Laodicea. He said to him: Am I not cutting down thorns that need cutting from the garden? He said to him, you should have gone to the end of the world to let the owner of the garden cut his thorns.

If it rolled away by itself, can he bring it back as you say there, may he bring them back to their intended place and eat? Is it the same here? There, he brings it back to an exempt place but here he brings it back to a place of obligation. What do you compare someone standing in the crown of a fig tree to? To one who stands in town or in a field? It refers to the following: If he stood in town and said: I know that the workers are forgetting a sheaf at a certain place; if they forgot it is not a forgotten sheaf. If he stood in a field and said: I know that the workers are forgetting a sheaf at a certain place; if they forgot it is a forgotten sheaf, since it says: “In your field and you forget a sheaf.”Deuteronomy 24:19 In the field you forget, but in town you do not forget.

There, we have stated: “If he was eating a bunch of grapes and entered into the courtyard from the garden. Rabbi Eliezer said, he should finish, but Rabbi Joshua said, he should not finish.” Rabbi Zeira in the name of Rabbi Joḥanan: Either Rabbi Tarfon speaks according to Rabbi Eliezer or Rabbi Tarfon says, one treats the cutting of the food as part of the initial act. Rabbi Illa, Rabbi Assi in the name of Rabbi Joḥanan: Either Rabbi Tarfon follows Rabbi Eliezer or Rabbi Tarfon makes one snack containing two or three snacks equal to one snack. What is Rabbi Eliezer’s reason? Because he started with permission. It was stated: “Rabbi Nathan said, Rabbi Eliezer did not say this because he started with permission. Rather, Rabbi Eliezer holds he should wait until the end of the Sabbath or he should leave the courtyard again and finish.”

It was stated in the name of Rabbi Neḥemiah: “A courtyard which regularly is being weeded is like a vegetable garden.” Rabbi Simlai said, practice follows Rabbi Neḥemiah. It was stated: If most of it was sown it is obligated, if planted it is exempt. Rav Ḥisda said, only if he planted to beautify the courtyard. Each case teaches us about the other. From that case we learn: if most of it was sown, it is obligated if it is weeded. From this case we learn: if it was weeded it is acceptable only if most of it was weeded.

This means “one eats as usual and is exempt,” when he is standing in the garden; this means “if one eats one by one he is exempt but if he takes them together he is obligated” if he stands in the courtyard.

Rabbi Jeremiah asked Rabbi Zeira: If it was taken with a dwqny? Example: Rabbi Zeira, Rabbi Abba bar Kahana, and Rabbi Levi were sitting together when Rabbi Zeira was goading those of Agadah and called them books of sorcery. Rabbi Abba bar Kahana said to him, why are you goading us? Ask and they will answer you. He said to him, what does the following verse mean: “For the anger of man brings You praise, You will wrap Yourself in the remaining anger?”Psalms 76:10 He said to him, for the anger of man brings You praise in this world, You will wrap Yourself in the remaining anger in the future world. He said to him, why can we not say, for the anger of man brings You praise in the future world, You will wrap Yourself in the remaining anger in this world? Rabbi Levi said, when You awaken Your anger on the wicked, they will see what You are doing and they will praise Your name. Rabbi Zeira said, it keeps going around and around, and one understands nothing from it. Jeremiah my son, go to Tyre, wrap your dwqny because it is better than anything.

There, we have stated: “Everything inside the wall is like houses of a walled city except fields. Rabbi Meir says, including fields.” “What is the reason of the rabbis? ‘The house remains.’Leviticus 25:30 Not only houses. How do we include oilpresses, cisterns, ditches, caves, bathhouses, dovecots, and towers? The verse says, ‘which is in the city.’ I might think, also fields? The verse says, ‘the house.’ The house is special in that it is a dwelling, that excludes fields which are not for dwelling. What is the reason of Rabbi Meir? ‘The house remains.’ Not only houses. How do we include oilpresses, cisterns, ditches, caves, bathhouses, dovecots, towers, and fields? The verse says, ‘which is in the city.’”

“ ‘Which has a wall,’Leviticus 25:30 this excludes a house which is built as a wall, the words of Rabbi Judah. Rabbi Simeon says, its outer wall is the city wall.” Rabbi Judah explains “which has a wall”; Rabbi Simeon explains “which has no wall.”

Rabbi Ḥinena said, this is only if he entered by the crown. But if he entered by the trunk, the trunk already brought him into the courtyard.

Our Mishnah follows the House of Shammai who say, all has the status of inside. It was stated: If he turned the crown toward the inside, all is counted as inside. The earlier Tannaim follow the House of Shammai.

Mishnah

1 Anyone who pickles, cooks, or salts in the field is obligated. Anyone who stores in the ground is exempt. Anyone who dips in the field is exempt. Anyone who pounds olives to remove the resin is exempt. Anyone who squeezes olives onto his skin is exempt but if he squeezed and put into his hand he is obligated. Anyone who prepares wine sauce for a dish is exempt but in a pot it is obligated for it is like a small cistern.

Halakhah

Fire creates ṭevel, buying creates ṭevel, salt creates ṭevel, the priestly offering creates ṭevel, the Sabbath creates ṭevel, a secure courtyard creates ṭevel, but Rabbi Joḥanan said that buying and Sabbath are not biblical requirements. Rabbi Immi in the name of Rabbi Simeon ben Lakish, the most reasonable of these is the secure courtyard.

Does pickling count only if he pickles it completely? Does cooking count only if he cooks it thoroughly? Let us learn from the following: If one singes ears of grain in the fire they become ṭevel. Without that, would they not need to be processed by fire? There is a difference here, because that is the end of their processing. What case are we discussing? If one plucks out kernels from ears destined for dough, if it is to eat them rolled they are ṭevel, but to make dough they are not ṭevel.

If he pickled or cooked without the owners’ knowledge, there is a difference between Rabbi Joḥanan and Rabbi Simeon ben Lakish since they disagree as follows: If somebody made a heap of somebody’s grain without the latter’s knowledge, Rabbi Joḥanan said, it is ṭevel, Rabbi Simeon ben Lakish said, it is not ṭevel. Rabbi Yudan said, there he must eventually make a heap, here he does not necessarily have to pickle it.

If he cooked it while it was property of the Temple, redeemed it, and brought it into a secure courtyard, what is its status? In the opinion of Rabbi Simeon ben Lakish it became ṭevel; this is biblical, that is not biblical. If he brought it into a secure courtyard, redeemed and then cooked it, everybody agrees that it became ṭevel, for what processing did he do while it was Temple property? If he dedicated it, cooked it, brought it into a secure courtyard, redeemed it, and cooked it again, everybody agrees that it became ṭevel. If he redeemed it and put it out to dry, what is its status? If you say that fire creates ṭevel, fire exempts it from ṭevel; if you say that fire does not create ṭevel, fire does not exempt it from ṭevel.

Rabbi Jeremiah asked: If he fried in the field, what is its status? Does not the fire create ṭevel in any case? Is it impossible to fry without oil?

Rabbi Yose used to ask in the name of Kahana: Rabbi Jonah said, Rabbi Ḥalafta ben Shaul stated: If someone organized a meal in a circle in the field he created ṭevel. If one did not organize a meal in a circle he did not create ṭevel. What kind of organizing a meal in a circle creates ṭevel? Any meal in a circle with wine. If people prepared to eat in a circle but then did not?

It was stated: “Garlic, garden cress, and mustard seed which were prepared in the field became ṭevel.” That means, ṭevel garlic with ordinary oil. Ordinary garlic with ṭevel oil?

Rabbi Zeira, Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Ashi in the name of Rav: A bunch of grapes which he squeezed into a cup became ṭevel; into a tamḥui it did not become ṭevel.

Does not the fire make the produce ṭevel in any case? Explain it if the dish was cold. “In a pot it is obligated,” Rabbi Eleazar said, that refers to an empty pot. The Mishnah does not say so, but “anyone who prepares wine sauce for a dish is exempt but in a pot it is obligated for it is like a small cistern.”

Mishnah

2 If children hid figs for the Sabbath and he forgot to tithe them they may not be eaten after the Sabbath until they are tithed. The House of Shammai exempt a Sabbath basket, but the House of Hillel require tithing. Rabbi Judah says, also one who fills a harvesting basket to send to a friend may not eat from it unless he tithed. Anyone who takes olives from the vat may dip them singly into salt and eat them, but if he salted them as a dish he is obligated. Rabbi Eliezer says, from a pure vat he is obligated but from an impure one he is exempt because he might put the leftovers back into the vat. One may drink from the winepress whether warm or cold and is exempt, the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Eleazar ben Rabbi Zadok declares him obligated. But the Sages say, for warm drink he is obligated, cold he is exempt.

Halakhah

Rav Hamnuna said, if a child covered a harvesting basket for transport to the market, it became ṭevel; in any situation in which the intent of an adult has an effect, the action of a minor has an effect. Rabbi Zeira asked: Since the intent of an adult does not have an effect until he opens the basket at the market, the action of a minor should not have an effect until he opens the basket at the market! The Mishnah disagrees with Rav Hamnuna: “If children hid figs for the Sabbath and he forgot to tithe them they may not be eaten after the Sabbath until they are tithed.” Rabbi Zeira in the name of Rav Hamnuna: Explain it as a case where they collected close to sundown when their action was proof of their intent!

Does this not disagree with Rabbi Joḥanan since Rabbi Joḥanan said, the Sabbath makes produce ṭevel? Because they collected for the Sabbath; therefore, not if they did not collect for the Sabbath! Rabbi Jonah in the name of Rav Hamnuna: Even if they collected for the Sabbath one may eat a snack from them on Friday evening. It does not even disagree with Rabbi Simeon ben Lakish. Are they not children and even if they collected for the Sabbath it is as if they had not collected for the Sabbath! Rabbi Yose in the name of Rabbi Hila: Explain it as a case where they collected close to sundown when their action was proof of their intent!

Rabbi Eleazar in the name of Rabbi Hoshaiah: The Mishnah speaks of a harvesting basket of figs. In the House of Rabbi Yannai they said, even a branch. Rabbi Eleazar ben Antigonos in the name of Rabbi Eleazar ben Rabbi Yannai: Explain it for a fig tree reserved for the Sabbath. Example: Rabbi Ḥiyya, Rabbi Assi and Rabbi Ammi were sitting together when somebody passed by with a harvesting basket of figs. He said to him, we want to buy! He answered, the Sabbath basket is not for sale.

Rabbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rabbi Joḥanan: Rabbi Judah spoke only about a Sabbath basket. Maybe Rabbi Judah spoke about someone who collected a harvesting basket full to send to his friend, and cared for it as if it were a Sabbath basket?

Does this not disagree with Rav? Since Rav said, it is forbidden to eat. Explain it if he makes his vat in the field. It is still difficult: If salting makes produce ṭevel, why do we need taking together, if taking them together makes produce ṭevel, why do we need salting? Both must be required.

What case are we discussing? If there are two vats, everybody agrees that it is forbidden. If there is only one vat, everybody agrees that it is permitted. We must be discussing a case where he has a pure vat and his friend an impure one. Rabbi Eliezer says, a person may return olives to his friend’s vat but the rabbis say, a person does not return olives to his friend’s vat.

Rabbi Joḥanan said, for warm cider he is obligated because that is not a snack; cold is exempt because it is a snack and he may put it back. This follows what Rabbi Yose said in the name of Rabbi Zeira, Rabbi Jonah, Rabbi Zeira in the name of Rabbi Eleazar, even what is in a flask did not become ṭevel, in case it was not fully processed, since he would put it back in the end.

Mishnah

3 If somebody peels barley, he may peel one by one and eat but if he peeled and collected in his hand he is obligated. If somebody rolls wheat grains he may blow away the chaff from his hand and eat but if he blew away and stored in the fold of his toga, he is obligated. If coriander is sown for its seed, its greenery is exempt. If it was sown as a vegetable, seeds and greenery are obligated. Rabbi Eliezer said, dill is tithed for its seeds, greenery, and perianths. But the Sages say, only cress and wild rocket are tithed for their seeds and greenery.

Halakhah

Rabbi Zeira said, I may peel two by two. It is stated so: “Barley, two are exempt, three obligated; wheat, three are exempt, four obligated.” Huna bar Ḥinena and Rav Taḥlifa bar Immi were sitting before Rabbi Eleazar. Rabbi Jonah said, either all are “bar Immi” but this one “bar Rav Immi” or all are “bar Rav Immi.” He had grains up to the knuckles of his fingers. They were taking from him. He turned his face to the wall and showed them his handful. It is stated so: Only he should not sift into a reed basket or into a wide basket. For the Sabbath, up to the volume of a dried fig. Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Ada asked Rabbi Mana: Here, they said for barley, two are exempt, three obligated; yet there you say this? He said to him, there is a difference; here you say that he may put the remainder back. It was stated so: When has this been said, when he is not close to the threshing floor. But when he was close to the threshing floor he can have even more since he may put the remainder back.

Mishnah

4 Rabban Gamliel says, the budding fruits of fenugreek, mustard, and white beans are subject to tithes. Rabbi Eliezer says, the caper tree is subject to tithes for its budding fruits and capers. Rabbi Akiva says, only the berries are subject because they are fruit.

Halakhah

Ḥizqiah said, if he collected two or three modii from it, it is classified as a vegetable. Also for seeds it is so: If he withheld from it two or three morbiot, it is classified as seed. If one sowed it for seeds it is tithed for the previous year; if he sowed it as a vegetable it is tithed for the coming year. If he sowed it for both seeds and greenery, or if he sowed for seeds and then wanted it as a vegetable, one may tithe from its seed for its greenery and from its greenery for its seeds, on condition that it was collected before the New Year; but if some of it was collected after the New Year, its seed is tithed for the previous year and its greenery is tithed at the moment of its being harvested if it was one-third ripe before the New Year. But if it only became one-third ripe after the New Year, both seed and greenery are tithed for the coming year.

It was stated: “Dill sown for its seeds is tithed for seeds but not vegetable. If sown as vegetable, it is tithed for seeds and vegetable but not perianths. If sown for perianths, it is tithed for seeds, vegetable, and perianths.” But we have stated: “Only cress and wild rocket are tithed for seeds and vegetable!” This is the Mishnah’s meaning: The only things sown for seeds which are tithed for seeds and vegetable are cress and wild rocket.

Where do they disagree? When he sowed it for its seeds. But if he sowed it as a vegetable, even the rabbis agree. It was stated so: “In Bethany they used to permit its greenery, the words of Rabbi Eliezer.” He said only “the words of Rabbi Eliezer,” therefore, everybody else says it is obligated.

It was stated: “If one sowed lima beans, barley, or fenugreek as vegetables, his intention is disregarded; the seeds are obligated but the greenery is exempt.” Rabbi Jeremiah said, that also is from the words of Rabbi Eliezer.

Samuel said, capers are forbidden because of skins. It was stated so: “You must treat the covering of its fruit as foreskin,”Leviticus 19:23 anything that envelops the fruit. Rav instructed those of the House of Ati, Rav Hamnuna instructed the colleagues: Tell your wives that when they come to preserve capers to throw away the calyx. Rabbi Abba said, Rabbi Zeira explained to me that all skins grow with the fruit but there, the fruit is on top and the skins below.

Capers and budding fruits are one kind; one tithes from capers for budding fruit and from budding fruit for capers but not from both for ripe fruits or from ripe fruits for them. For the ripe fruits, one applies the stricter rules of both trees and vegetables. In which respect? If it is at the transition from the second year to the third, he separates, redeems, and gives it to the poor.

The caper bush. The House of Shammai say, it is kilaim in a vineyard but not with grains. The House of Hillel say, it is never kilaim, neither in a vineyard nor with grains. Both agree that it is subject to orlah. Rabbi Ḥanina bar Papa stated: Any plant that branches out from its stem is a tree; one that branches from its roots is a vegetable. They objected: But cabbage forms its leaves from its stem! Here it is certain, there it is doubtful.

Mishnah

1 If somebody lifts out plants from his own property and replants them in his own property, it is exempt. If somebody bought standing produce, it is exempt. If somebody collected produce to send to a friend, it is exempt. Rabbi Eleazar ben Azariah says, if similar produce is sold on the market, he is obligated. Someone who uproots turnips or radishes in his own property and replants them in his own property for seeds is obligated because that was their threshing floor. Onions which developed roots in storage became pure and cannot become impure again. If a mudslide fell on them and they are uncovered they are as though planted in the field.

Halakhah

“If somebody lifts out plants from his own property,” etc. Rabbi Abbahu in the name of Rabbi Simeon ben Lakish: This is Rabbi Akiva’s opinion. As we have stated there, “He may take from the threshing floor and sow and it is exempt from tithes until he smoothes, the words of Rabbi Akiva.” Rabbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rabbi Joḥanan, it is the opinion of everybody. The Sages agree with Rabbi Akiva in the matter of young plants. What is the difference between wheat and young plants? For wheat, it was the end of processing; for plants it is not the end of processing. Rabbi Akiva agrees with the Sages in the matter of turnips and radishes because they spoil. Does wheat not also spoil? Wheat can undergo another threshing-floor stage, these have no other threshing floor.

“If somebody collected in order to send to a friend, it is exempt.” Rav said, he is forbidden to eat. Rabbi Shammai said before Rabbi Yose in the name of Rav Aḥa: Rav said this in case he brought it into a secure courtyard, following Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Mana said, our Mishnah implies this: “If somebody bought standing produce, it is exempt.” Therefore, after it was cut it is obligated. Who is the person who holds that a sale makes ṭevel of produce not fully processed? Is this not Rabbi Meir? Rabbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rabbi Joḥanan, this is Rabbi Judah’s opinion. It was stated so: “Rabbi Judah says in the name of Rabbi Eleazar ben Azariah, also anyone who sends to his friend olives from the press, young plants, and bundles of fenugreek, should not eat before he tithed since people usually send these things to their friends as ṭevel.” Rabbi Simeon ben Lakish said, even if a fellowship member sent to a fellowship member, he has to tithe. The colleagues asked, we can understand an ordinary person who is suspect; is a fellowship member suspect? Rabbi Yose said, is the ordinary person not like a fellowship member in matters of the priestly offering? It really is so: People usually send these things as ṭevel to their friends.

There is no difference, whether for sowing seeds, to abandon property, or to plant outside the Land. There, we have stated: “He can always give it as peah and it is exempt from tithes until he smoothes.” Yet here you say this? There, he abandons everything, here he abandons only the future growth. But did we not state “outside the Land?” There is a difference. Outside the Land, both the existing plant and its future growth are exempt. Is there not a difference here between the existing plant and its future growth?

According to Rabbi Simeon ben Lakish who said, ṭevel is nullified by a majority, it is understandable. According to Rabbi Joḥanan who said, ṭevel is not nullified by a majority, he should wait until it is fully grown and tithe for everything. Or might we say that Rabbi Joḥanan and Rabbi Simeon ben Lakish disagree about ṭevel which has this status by a Torah requirement but for ṭevel which has this status by rabbinic decree everybody agrees that ṭevel is nullified by a majority. Rabbi Abba bar Cohen objected: Did we not state: “Similarly, olives for pressing which were mixed with picked olives, harvest grapes with grapes of gleanings”? Is that not ṭevel by rabbinic decree? Rabbi Mana said, I explained this as follows: Oil from olives for pressing which was mixed with oil from picked olives.

Rabbi Mana said, they taught only “for seeds”; therefore, for eating he is exempt. Rabbi Ḥiyya said in the name of Rabbi Joḥanan: There is no difference; he is obligated for seeds or for consumption because this is their threshing floor. Rabbi Ḥanina said, because he would transfer it from Second Tithe to the poor person’s tithe, or from the poor person’s tithe to Second Tithe.

Rabbi Joḥanan in the name of Rabbi Yannai: If a heap of onions produced roots, if one takes from them on the Sabbath he is exempt since he does not want their growing roots. Rabbi Simeon ben Lakish said to him: Why worry about the Sabbath when discussing tithes? Did we not state: “He does not have to worry either because of kilaim, or because of the Sabbatical year, or because of tithes, and they may be removed on the Sabbath.” Rabbi Zeira said to Rabbi Abbahu: Look, what did he say! He said only, why worry about the Sabbath when discussing tithes? So he would worry about the Sabbatical year, for if he wanted them to grow roots they would be forbidden because of aftergrowth; otherwise they are permitted because of aftergrowth. Rabbi Maisha said to Rabbi Zeira, is that the strongest example? If he had stated about a single onion in the hand it would be fine.

“If they grew roots in a box they are in their previous state for tithes and the Sabbatical year and if they were impure they did not lose their impurity. If they grew roots in storage they are in their previous state for tithes and the Sabbatical year and if they were impure they lost their impurity.” They are in their previous state and you say they lost? Rabbi Yose in the name of Rabbi La: The Torah emphasized the purity of growing plants: “If from their carcass anything fell on any sown seed which may be sown, it is pure.”Leviticus 11:37

In addition, it was stated: “He should not take out.” What if he violated the rule and took them out? There are Tannaim who state “he is guilty” and there are Tannaim who state “he is permitted.” Could the one who says “it is forbidden” permit? Could the one who says “guilty,” declare him exempt from punishment? It is clear that it should not be: “permitted.” Rabbi Simeon ben Lakish holds that he is guilty.

Mishnah

2 A person should not sell his produce after it reached the period of tithing to anybody not trustworthy in matters of tithe, or in the Sabbatical year to anybody suspected of violating Sabbatical rules. If some were ripened early he takes the early ripe fruit and sells the remainder. A person should not sell his chaff or his oil cakes or his grape husks to somebody not trustworthy in matters of tithe if the latter wants to extract fluids from it. If he extracted, he is obligated for tithes but exempt from the priestly offering since everybody giving the priestly offering also thinks of broken grain, what is left on the sides, and what remains in the chaff. If somebody bought a vegetable field in Syria before it reached the time of tithes he is obligated, after it reached the time of tithes he is exempt and he can harvest continuously. Rabbi Judah says, he may even hire workers and harvest. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel said, where has this been said? When he bought the field. But if he did not buy the field he is exempt even after it reached the time of tithes. Rabbi said, it all depends on the calculation.

Halakhah

This is the Mishnah’s wording: A person should not sell his field. Rabbi Simeon permits since he may say to him, I sold mine, go and demand what is yours. If he violated the rule and sold it, he tithes what he eats but he does not have to tithe for what he sold since we are not responsible for the dishonest.

It was stated: He should not give the priestly offering. If he violated the rule and gave the priestly offering, Rabbi Berekhia said, his action is valid. Rabbi Mana said, his action is invalid; the priestly offering he gave creates ṭevel for tithe.

Rabbi Ḥanina, the colleague of the rabbis, asked: If he gave the priestly offering one in sixty, which is one in sixty-one including broken grain, what is left on the sides, and what remains in the chaff? Rabbi Yose said, is that not the Mishnah: “Since everybody giving the priestly offering also thinks of broken grain, what is left on the sides, and what remains in the chaff.” Is that not needed only for the excess?

It was stated: If a field became one-third ripe in the possession of a Gentile and a Jew bought it from him, Rabbi Akiva says the additional growth is exempt. But the Sages say, the additional growth is subject to tithes. Rabbi Abina, Ulla ben Rabbi Israel in the name of Rabbi Eleazar: Also the Sages required tithing only according to the previous year; if it was subject to Second Tithe, it remains subject to Second Tithe. If it was subject to the poor person’s tithe, it remains subject to that tithe. It was stated: Rabbi Jonathan ben Rabbi Yose says, how do we know that grain one-third ripe before New Year’s day may be brought in during the Sabbatical? The verse says: “You may gather its yield,”Leviticus 25:3 even in the Sabbatical year. Rabbi Abina, Ulla ben Rabbi Israel in the name of Rabbi Eleazar: Rabbi Jonathan ben Rabbi Yose follows the argument of his teacher Rabbi Akiva. Just as Rabbi Akiva said, you follow the first third, so Rabbi Jonathan ben Rabbi Yose said, you follow the first third. Rabbi Zeira said to Rabbi Abina, you say two things which contradict one another. Here you teach that the Sages also required tithing only according to the previous year; if it was subject to Second Tithe, it remains subject to Second Tithe. If it was subject to the poor person’s tithe, it remains subject to that tithe. There, you teach that Rabbi Jonathan ben Rabbi Yose follows the argument of his teacher Rabbi Akiva. If Rabbi Jonathan ben Rabbi Yose follows the argument of his teacher Rabbi Akiva then just as Rabbi Akiva says the prohibition of aftergrowth is a Torah requirement, so Rabbi Jonathan ben Rabbi Yose must say, the prohibition of aftergrowth is a Torah requirement. If it had grown less than one-third ripe before the Sabbatical, in the Sabbatical it is forbidden as aftergrowth but the sanctity of the Sabbatical did not apply to it since it was grass on which the sanctity of the Sabbatical cannot apply. If it had grown less than one-third ripe before the eighth year, in the eighth year it is permitted as aftergrowth but the sanctity of the Sabbatical applies to it. Rabbi Joḥanan and Rabbi Simeon ben Lakish both teach that the Sages agree with Rabbi Akiva in the order of years; if it was subject to Second Tithe, it remains subject to Second Tithe. If it was subject to the poor person’s tithe, it remains subject to that tithe.

Rabbi Joḥanan said, abandonment, dedication, and Syria are in dispute between Rabbi Akiva and the Sages. Rabbi Simeon ben Lakish said, Rabbi Akiva agrees with the Sages about budding and growing roots. If somebody sowed a dry spot, it grew one-third ripe, and he made a roof over it: according to Rabbi Akiva any later growth is obligated; according to the Sages any later growth is exempt. If he sowed in a house, removed the roof, and then made a roof over it: according to Rabbi Akiva any later growth is exempt; according to the Sages any later growth is obligated.

Is there a dispute between Rabbi Akiva and the Sages even for ḥallah? What do you want from Rabbi Akiva, since Rabbi Akiva said, produce from outside the Land which was imported into the Land is obligated for ḥallah? If Rabbi Akiva agreed with Rabbi Eliezer, your question would be correct.

Rabbi Abun bar Ḥiyya asked Rabbi Zeira: He sowed in a flowerpot without a hole and made a hole? He said to him, now it has a hole.

Rabbi Abun said, Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel follows the argument of his ancestor Rabban Gamliel. As we stated there: “Jews who were sharecroppers for Gentiles in Syria, Rabbi Eliezer obligates their produce for tithes and the Sabbatical but Rabban Gamliel exempts them.”

Rabbi said, it all depends on the calculation, this refers to the first part of the Mishnah.

Mishnah

3 Anyone who makes after-wine and pours in a measured amount of water, if he found the same amount he is exempt. Rabbi Judah declares him obligated. If he found more than his measure he gives proportionally from another place. The ants’ holes which were next to a heap subject to tithes overnight are obligated since it is obvious that they were dragging from what was processed all night. Baalbek garlic, Rikhpa onion, Cilician grits, and Egyptian lentils, Rabbi Meir says also colocasia, Rabbi Yose says also qrṭnym are exempt from tithes and may be bought from everybody during the Sabbatical. The seed of the upper part of arum, the seeds of leeks, seeds of onions, seeds of turnips and radishes, and other garden seeds which are not eaten are exempt from tithes and may be bought from everybody during the Sabbatical and these may be eaten if their parent plant was a priestly offering.

Halakhah

Rabbi Abbahu said, sometimes in the name of Rabbi Eleazar, sometimes in the name of Rabbi Yose ben Ḥanina: Only if it fermented. There, we have stated: “After-wine before it fermented cannot be bought with money of Second Tithe and makes a miqweh invalid; after it fermented it may be bought with money of Second Tithe and does not make a miqweh invalid.” That Mishnah is Rabbi Judah’s since we stated: “Anyone who makes after-wine and pours in a measured amount of water, if he found the same amount he is exempt. Rabbi Judah declares him obligated.” Rabbi Abbahu said, sometimes in the name of Rabbi Eleazar, sometimes in the name of Rabbi Yose ben Ḥanina: Only if it fermented. Rabbi Yose said, it is the opinion of everybody since even salt water may be bought with money of Second Tithe.

What does he give? Tithes! That means, not the priestly offering since everybody giving the priestly offering also thinks of broken grain, what is left on the sides, and what remains in the chaff.

If somebody made a heap of somebody’s grain without the latter’s knowledge: Rabbi Joḥanan and Rabbi Simeon ben Lakish. Rabbi Joḥanan said, it is ṭevel, Rabbi Simeon ben Lakish said, it is not ṭevel. Rabbi Joḥanan objected to Rabbi Simeon ben Lakish, did we not state: “And similarly women who gave to a baker to make sourdough for them, if not one of them had the required amount it is exempt from ḥallah.” But all of them had the required amount? He said to him, because if somebody makes dough in order to distribute it, the dough is exempt from ḥallah. But we have stated: “A baker who made sourdough for distribution is obligated for ḥallah.” He said to him, do not raise an objection about a baker. For a baker, it does not depend on his intention but on his customers’ intentions; maybe he will find a customer and it will become ṭevel immediately. He said to him, but was it not stated: “The ants’ holes which were overnight near an obligated heap are obligated,” therefore, near an exempt heap they are exempt. Rabbi Jonah, Rabbi Abbahu in the name of Rabbi Joḥanan: Because the owner has given up hope of recovering it. Samuel ben Abba said, only if they dragged tips of ears.

Rabbi Simeon ben Lakish objected to Rabbi Joḥanan: Did we not state: “But if he dedicated it before it was finished, the treasurer finished it, and then the owner redeemed it, it is exempt.” Is not the treasurer a different person and you say what he did is valid? He said to him, this follows the one who says the treasurer has the status of owner, and goes against Rabbi Yose since Rabbi Yose said, the treasurer is a different person.

Rabbi Ḥananiah the colleague of the rabbis asked: And even if all were of full measure it should be like something not completely processed, since Rabbi Yose said in the name of Rabbi Zeira, Rabbi Jonah, Rabbi Zeira in the name of Rabbi Eleazar, even what is in a flask did not become ṭevel, in case it was not fully processed, since he would eventually return it.

“What is Baalbek garlic? Any with only one hole surrounding the stem. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, any with only one skin. What is Rikhpa onion? Any whose pointed tip sinks into it. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, any that has no poison.”

These are Cilician grits, these are square. It was stated: “Rabban Gamliel says, nothing square has existed since the six days of Creation.” Rabbi Berekhiah objected: Did we not state: “The body of baheret is like a square Cilician grit.” Rabbi Bisna said, that in itself says that there is no square. Why did we state that? So that he should make it square. But there are noxious insects! They are full of knots. But there is the bunch of pila! It is round below. Some want to say, Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel spoke only about animals. It was stated so: There are square forms in foods, but there are no square forms in animals.

“These are Egyptian lentils: All whose spheres are sharp-edged. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, any that have no pebbles. What are colocasia? All whose pointed tips are short and their extensions are many.” What resembles it? Rabbi Yose said, like these qonyata.

Rabbi Jeremiah asked: Is crocus permitted as aftergrowth? Rabbi Tanḥum bar Jeremiah asked, did we not state: “One does not buy flax from anybody suspected of violating Sabbatical rules, not even combed?” Is flax not like wood chips? Rabbi Ḥinena said, because of its seed. Rabbi Mana said, if it were because of its seed, did we not state: “One does not buy water or salt from anybody suspected of selling the priestly offering as ordinary produce?” Can you say, water or salt because of their seeds? No, as a fine. Here too, it is a fine.

Menaḥem ben Maximus the brother of Jonathan Caiphas in the name of Rabbi Ammi: Flax may be bought from everybody during the Sabbatical. That is, if you do not know whether he is under suspicion or not. Therefore, if it is clear that he is under suspicion, it is forbidden. Zeugos, the relative of Rabbi Abba bar Zavda, in the name of Rabbi Abbahu: Vetch may be bought from anybody during the Sabbatical. Rabbi Yose said: Does our Mishnah say so? “The upper seed of arum, the seeds of leeks, seeds of eggplants, seeds of turnips and radishes, and other garden seeds which are not eaten.” We have stated on this: Seeds of indigo, seeds of madder, and seeds of vetch. That implies, not vetch itself. Maybe if you do not know whether he is under suspicion or not. Therefore, if it is clear that he is under suspicion, it is forbidden.

This is the Mishnah’s wording: The seeds on the stem of arum. Some woman had purslane set aside as the priestly offering on a block. They fell into a garden and sprouted. The case came before Rabbi Joḥanan who permitted it. Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said to him, is this not the Mishnah: “And these may be eaten if their parent plant was a priestly offering?” He said to him, Babylonian, when you cleared a potsherd for yourself, you found a pearl! You said, is that not the Mishnah!