mishnah

MISHNAH: The House of Shammai say that one washes his hands and after that he mixes the cup, but the House of Hillel say that one mixes the cup first and then he washes his hands.

Rebbi Vivan in the name of Rebbi Yoḥanan: It turns out that the House of Shammai is consistent with Rebbi Yose and the House of Hillel with Rebbi Meïr, since we have stated there (Mishnah Kelim 25:7): “Rebbi Meïr said, for impure and pure hands. Rebbi Yose said, they spoke only about pure hands.”

How does one treat watchmen in gardens and orchards, as before them, as after them? Let us hear it from this (Mishnah Ḥallah 2:3): “A woman may sit down naked and separate her ḥallah because she can cover herself, but a man may not.” Is that woman not sitting inside her house and you say that one does not bother her? Also here, one does not bother him.

MISHNAH: The House of Shammai say, one dries his hands with a towel and puts the latter on the table; the House of Hillel say, on the pillow.

HALAKHAH: The Mishnah deals with a table of marble or one of parts screwed together that cannot become impure. What is the reason of the House of Shammai? That the fluids on the towel should not become impure from the pillow and in turn defile his hands.

There (Mishnah Idiut 4:6) we have stated: “Someone who rubbed himself with pure oil, then he became impure, he descended and immersed himself. The House of Shammai say, he is pure even if it drips, but the House of Hillel say impure. But if the oil was impure to start out with, the House of Shammai say, up to the anointing of a small limb; but the House of Hillel say, moist fluid. Rebbi Yehudah says in the name of the House of Hillel, moist and making moist.” The opinions of the House of Hillel are reversed! There they say “impure” and here they say “pure.” There it is visible, here it is absorbed in the towel.

MISHNAH: The House of Shammai say, one sweeps the house and after that one washes his hands. But the House of Hillel say, one washes his hands and after that he sweeps the house.

MISHNAH: The House of Shammai say: Light, Grace, spices and Havdalah. But the House of Hillel say, Light, spices, Grace, and Havdalah. The House of Shammai say: “He Who created illumination by fire.” But the House of Hillel say, “He Who is creating illuminations by fire.”

MISHNAH: One does not recite a benediction over a lamp and spices of Gentiles, or over lamp and spices for the dead, or over lamp and spices set before an idol. Also, one does not recite the benediction over a lamp unless he has profited from its light.

“One does not recite the benediction over a lamp unless one has profited from its light.” Rav says y’utu, and Samuel says y‘utu. He who says y’utu, (Gen. 34:15) “But with this we shall be agreeable (nē’ôt) to you.” He who says y‘utu, (Is. 50:4) “To know, to inform (lā‘ût) the weary of wisdom.” There (Mishnah Erubin 5:1) we have stated: How does one complete cities? Rav says m’abbrin, and Samuel says m‘abberin. He who says me’abberin, one adds a limb (אבר) to it. And he who says me‘abberin, like a pregnant (עוברה) woman. There (Mishnah Avodah Zarah 1:1) we have stated: Before the holidays of the Gentiles. Rav says ‘êdêhen and Samuel says ’êdêhen. He who says ’êdêhen, (Deut. 32:35) “For the day of their misfortune (אידם) is near.” He who says ‘êdêhen, (Is.44:9) “They are their witnesses (עידיהם), may they neither see nor know, so that they may come to naught.” How does Samuel deal with Rav’s reason? They are their witnesses, in the future they will bring to naught their worshippers on the day of judgment.

“One does not recite the benediction over a lamp unless one has profited from its light.” Rav says y’utu, and Samuel says y‘utu. He who says y’utu, (Gen. 34:15) “But with this we shall be agreeable (nē’ôt) to you.” He who says y‘utu, (Is. 50:4) “To know, to inform (lā‘ût) the weary of wisdom.” There (Mishnah Erubin 5:1) we have stated: How does one complete cities? Rav says m’abbrin, and Samuel says m‘abberin. He who says me’abberin, one adds a limb (אבר) to it. And he who says me‘abberin, like a pregnant (עוברה) woman. There (Mishnah Avodah Zarah 1:1) we have stated: Before the holidays of the Gentiles. Rav says ‘êdêhen and Samuel says ’êdêhen. He who says ’êdêhen, (Deut. 32:35) “For the day of their misfortune (אידם) is near.” He who says ‘êdêhen, (Is.44:9) “They are their witnesses (עידיהם), may they neither see nor know, so that they may come to naught.” How does Samuel deal with Rav’s reason? They are their witnesses, in the future they will bring to naught their worshippers on the day of judgment.

MISHNAH: He who ate, forgot, and did not recite Grace. The House of Shammai say, he should return to his place and recite. The House of Hillel say, he should recite at the place where he remembers it. How long may he recite? Until the food is digested in his bowels.

MISHNAH: If wine was brought to them after the meal and there was only one cup. The House of Shammai say, he recites the benediction over wine and afterwards says Grace, but the House of Hillel say, he recites Grace and afterwards the benediction over wine. One answers “Amen” after a Jew but one does not answer “Amen” after a Samaritan unless one has heard the entire benediction.

MISHNAH: He who sees a place where wonders were done for Israel, says: Praise to Him Who did wonders for our forefathers at this place. At a place from which paganism was uprooted, one says: Praise to Him Who uprooted paganism from our Land.

HALAKHAH: The Mishnah deals with wonders of Israel. But for wonders of a single person that happened to him, one does not have to recite a benediction.

Our Mishnah if it was uprooted from all places of the Land of Israel, but if it was uprooted only from one place, he says: “Praise to Him Who uprooted paganism from this place.” If it was uprooted from one place but established at another place, there where it was reestablished he says: “Praise to Him Who is patient.” Where it was uprooted from, he says: “Praise to Him Who uprooted paganism from this place. May it be Your pleasure, our God and God of our fathers, that just as You uprooted it from this place, so uproot it from all other places and turn the heart of its worshippers to worship You.” Does he not pray for pagan worshippers? It was stated: Rebbi Simeon ben Gamliel says, also outside of the Land he must say this.

MISHNAH: On ziqin, earthquakes, lightning, thunder, and hurricanes, one says: Praise to Him Whose power fills the world. On mountains, hills, seas, rivers, and deserts, one says: Praise to the Maker of Creation. Rebbi Yehudah says, he who sees the ocean says: Praise to Him Who made the ocean; if he sees it at intervals. On rains and good tidings one says: Praise to Him Who is good and does good. On bad news, one says: Praise to the True Judge.

“On winds what does he say? Praise to Him, Whose power and might fill the world.” The Mishnah if they come destructively. But if they come quietly, one says: Praise to the Maker of Creation.

MISHNAH: If one built a new house or bought new garments, he says: Praise to Him Who let us reach this time. One recites the benediction for bad news containing good and for good ones containing bad. But if one cries about the past, that is a vain prayer. How is that? If his wife was pregnant and he said: May it be (God’s) pleasure that my wife would give birth to a male, that is a vain prayer. If he came from a trip, heard wailing in town, and said: May it be (God’s) pleasure that this should not be in my house, that is a vain prayer.

MISHNAH: He who enters a fortified place prays two prayers, one when he enters and one when he leaves. Ben Azai said four, two when he enters and two when he leaves. He gives thanks for the past and implores for the future.

MISHNAH: One is required to recite a benediction for bad things the same way it is said for good things, as it is written (Deut. 6:5): “You must love the Eternal, your God, with all your heart, all your soul, and all your force.” “With all your heart,” with your two instincts, the goodinstinct and the bad instinct. “With all your soul,” even if He takes your soul. “With all your force,” with all your money. Another explanation: “With all your force,” for every measure that He measures for you, for everything thank him very much. A person should not behave improperly before the Eastern gate, which lies in a straight line with the Holiest of Holies. And one should not enter the Temple Mount with his walking stick, sandals, money belt, or dust on his feet. Also one should not use it as a short cut, and certainly not spit there. All endings of benedictions in the Temple were “from eternity.” When heretics did err and said that there was only one world, they ordained that one should say “from eternity to eternity.” They also instituted that one should greet his friend by the Name, as it was said (Ruth 2:4): “Lo, Boaz came from Bethlehem and said to the harvesters: The Eternal be with you!” And it says (Pr. 23:22): “Be not contemptuous because your mother got old.” (Ps. 119:126) “It is time to work for the Eternal; they violated Your Torah.” Rebbi Nathan says, they violated Your Torah, it is time to work for the Eternal.

MISHNAH: These are the matters that have no measure: Peah, first fruits, appearance, works of kindness, and Torah study. These are the matters whose product a person eats in this world and whose capital remains for him in the future world: Honoring father and mother, works of kindness, making peace between people; the study of Torah is worth all of these.

Rebbi Berekhiah asked: Why did we not state the dust for the straying? Why did we not state the ashes of the heifer? Why did we not state the spittle of the sister-in-law? Why did we not state the blood of the bird for the “leper”? Our Mishnah deals only with things to which he may add and adding is a worthy deed. As for those, even though he may add to them, doing so is no worthy deed.

“Appearance”. Our Mishnah is about appearance with a sacrifice, but appearance in person has a measure. This agrees with what R. Joḥanan said: “One silver obolus and two silver coins are words of the Torah”.

MISHNAH: One never gives peah less than one in sixty. Even though they said that peah has no measure, everything is according to the size of the field, the poor, and the humility.

HALAKHAH: It was stated: One does not say to him, bring camels and load up. The baraita speaks if he wants to give more than the measure, but if he gives according to the measure then one says to the poor to bring camels and load up. If his field is large and the poor few, he gives according to the field. His field is small and the poor many, he gives according to the poor. Rebbi Simeon explained two things to make it easy for the owner: If his field is large and the poor few, he gives according to the poor; if his field is small and the poor many, he gives according to the field. The Mishnah does not say so, but “everything is according to the size of the field, the poor, and the humility (yield).”

MISHNAH: One may give peah from the head of the field and from its middle. Rebbi Simeon says, only on condition that he give the measure at the end. Rebbi Jehudah says, if he left one stalk standing he adds to it for peah; otherwise, he gives only as abandoned property.

MISHNAH: They established a principle for peah: Everything that is food, is treated as private property, grows from the earth, is harvested at one time, and is stored, is subject to peah. Grain and legumes are included. And among trees sumac and carob, walnut and almond, vine and pomegranate, olive and date palm are subject to peah.

MISHNAH: Forever he gives as peah and it is free from tithes until he smoothes. He may take from the threshing floor and sow and it is free from tithes until he smoothes. And he feeds domestic animals, wild animals, and fowl and is free from tithes until he smoothes, the words of Rebbi Aqiba. If a Cohen or a Levite bought all the grain of a threshing floor, the tithes belong to them until it was smoothed. He who dedicates to the Temple and then redeems is obligated for tithes unless it was smoothed by the Temple administrator.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Yose, Rebbi Jacob bar Zabdi in the name of Rebbi Abbahu, Rebbi Nehemiaḥ bar Uqban turned it in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: If someone separated first fruits from a smoothed heap, it is free from the great terumah. Rebbi Ḥaggai said before Rebbi Yose: Does not the Mishnah say so: “Forever he gives peah and it is free from tithes until he smoothes.” Hence, if he smoothed he is obligated, but this does not apply to terumah? It should say that he also is obligated for first fruits even though he did not smooth yet! But he is the one who said this: “Why are they called firstlings? Because they are first before everything else.” And anything which precedes something else, the latter is obligated for it.

Our Mishnah is from the House of Shammai, since the House of Shammai say (Mishnah 6:1): “Property abandoned to the poor is ownerless property.”

Our Mishnah is from the House of Shammai, since the House of Shammai say (Mishnah 6:1): “Property abandoned to the poor is ownerless property.”

MISHNAH: The following separate regarding peah: The river, the water canal, a private road, a public road, a private path or a public path open both summer and winter, a fallow field, a ploughed field and [another kind of] seed. He who cuts for animal feed makes a separation, the words of Rebbi Meïr; but the sages say it does not create a separation unless he ploughed.

It cannot be connected. If you would say that it is connected, it should separate even a field of trees, but we have stated there (Mishnah 3): “Everything separates for seeds but only a fence separates for trees.” Hence, by a fence it is connected and not connected! If you say it is connected, even hair pressing down does not separate, since we have stated: “Hair pressing down does not separate but he gives one peah for all!” That means that it is not connected. If you say it is connected then it should separate if it is one-sided, as we have stated: “If the hair was pressing down from both sides it does not separate.” Hence, from one side only it separates

Rebbi Zeïra asked before Rebbi Yasa: If he intended to let them acquire from the boundary strip? He avoided answering him. The opinions of Rebbi Yasa are contradictory since we have stated there (Mishnah 3:2): “The sages agree with Rebbi Aqiba about someone who sowed dill or mustard in three places.” (The Mishnah means: dill in three places or mustard in three places.) Samuel said, because the first of them does not wait for the last. Rebbi Yasa in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Because they are usually sown in separate beds. And here he says so? It is obvious for him that it separates. What he could not decide is whether it does become sanctified as peah or maybe it does not become sanctified! Rebbi Hoshaiah stated: If someone gave peah from one field for another one, it does not acquire holiness. One understands that this means even the boundary strip.

Rebbi Zeïra asked before Rebbi Yasa: If he intended to let them acquire from the boundary strip? He avoided answering him. The opinions of Rebbi Yasa are contradictory since we have stated there (Mishnah 3:2): “The sages agree with Rebbi Aqiba about someone who sowed dill or mustard in three places.” (The Mishnah means: dill in three places or mustard in three places.) Samuel said, because the first of them does not wait for the last. Rebbi Yasa in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Because they are usually sown in separate beds. And here he says so? It is obvious for him that it separates. What he could not decide is whether it does become sanctified as peah or maybe it does not become sanctified! Rebbi Hoshaiah stated: If someone gave peah from one field for another one, it does not acquire holiness. One understands that this means even the boundary strip.

MISHNAH: An irrigation canal that cannot be harvested together, Rebbi Jehudah says it separates. For all hills subject to weeding, even if cattle can not pass by with their implements, he gives one peah for everything.

MISHNAH: Everything separates for seeds but only a fence separates for trees. But if hair was pressing down it does not separate and he gives one peah for all. : But for carob trees all that see one another. Rabban Gamliel said, in my father’s house they used to give one peah for the olive trees they had in every direction and for all carobs that saw one another. Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Ẓadoq said in the former’s name: also for all carob trees they had in the entire town.

MISHNAH: He who sows one species on his field gives one peah even though he works at two different threshing floors. If he sows two species, he gives two peot even though he threshes them together. He who sows two different kinds of wheat on his field gives one peah if he processes them together, two peot if he threshes them separately. It happened that Rebbi Simeon from Miẓpah sowed before Rabban Gamliel; they ascended to the stone hall and asked. Naḥum the scribe said: I have the tradition from Rebbi Miasha, who received it from my father, who received it from the pairs, who received if from the prophets, a practice going back to Moses on Sinai, that he who sows two different kinds of wheat on his field gives one peah if he stores them together, two peot if he stores them separately.

Rebbi Zeïra said in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: If you come to notice a practice of which you do not know the reason, do not push it aside as something alien since many practices were shown to Moses on Sinai and all of them were absorbed into the Mishnah. Rebbi Abin said, that is correct! If Naḥum had not come and explained it to us about the two kinds of wheat, could we have known?

Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said: On them, and on them; all, like all; words, the words; Bible, Mishnah, Talmud, and Aggadah. Even what a competent student will discover before his teacher was said to Moses on Sinai. What is the reason? (Eccl. 1:10) “There is something about which one would say, look, this is new!” His colleague will answer, “it already has been forever.”

Rebbi Zeïra in the name of Samuel: One makes inferences neither from practices, nor from homiletics, nor from extraneous sources, but only from study. Rebbi Ḥalaphta ben Shaul stated: The case of two kinds of wheat is the same as the case of two kinds of barley. Rebbi Zeïra said, that was part of the original practice and it was forgotten: The case of two kinds of wheat is the same as the case of two kinds of barley. But did we not state (Mishnah 3:3): “He who strips moist onions for the market and stores dry ones;” can you say about market and storage that this was of the original practice and was forgotten?

MISHNAH: A field harvested by Gentiles or robbers, undermined by ants, ruined by a storm or animals, is free. If he harvested half of it and robbers harvested the other half, it is free since the obligation of produce is when it is standing. If robbers cut half of it and he harvested the other half, he must give peah from what he cut. If he harvested half and sold half, the buyer gives peah for everything. If he cut half and dedicated half, he who redeemed it from the treasurer gives peah for everything.

HALAKHAH: The Mishnah, if they cut for themselves, but if they cut for a Jew it is obligated. And we have formulated regarding this: One does not hire Gentile workers because they do not know about gleanings.

The Mishnah, if they cut to destroy it. But if they do not cut to destroy it, it is obligated. Rebbi Hoshaia ben Shammai said, even if you say that they do not cut to destroy it, it is free since peah is given from standing produce and real estate cannot be robbed.

May the seller get the peah which permits the sheaves? Let us hear it from the following (Mishnah 5:4): “ Rebbi Jehudah said: When is this, if he received it for a half, a third, or a quarter.” What is the difference between this and the first case? It must be, “if you cut it, a third will be yours.” Rebbi Abin bar Ḥiyya said, this implies that the seller may get the peah which permits the sheaves. Rebbi Yose said, there the obligation of the field did not come during his ownership, but here the obligation of the field started during his ownership. It is correct that if he cut half of the field and sold what he cut, the buyer is allowed gleanings, forgotten sheaves, and peah. May the buyer get the peah which permits the sheaves of the seller? That is the disagreement of Rebbi and Rebbi Jehudah the Prince.

MISHNAH: Rectangles of grain between olive trees: The House of Shammai say, peah from each single one, the House of Hillel say, from one for all of them. They agree that one gives one peah for all of them if the edges of the rows are touching. If someone harvests his field in spots and leaves moist stalks, Rebbi Aqiba says, peah from each spot, but the Sages say, from one for all of them. The Sages agree with Rebbi Aqiba that he who sows dill or mustard at three different places gives peah from each spot.

HALAKHAH: We have stated: “between olive trees.” In the House of Rebbi they stated “between fruit trees.” Our Mishnah needs the one of the House of Rebbi and that of the House of Rebbi needs our Mishnah. If we had stated, but not the House of Rebbi, we would say that it said only “between olive trees”, which in themselves are subject to peah, but for those which are free from the obligation of peah even the House of Shammai will agree that he gives one peah for all of them. Hence, our Mishnah needs that of Rebbi. Or if there were the declaration of the House of Rebbi but we had not stated ours, we would say that it refers only to those which are between trees free from the obligation of peah, but for trees which in themselves are subject to peah even the House of Hillel will agree that he gives peah from each single one. Hence, both our Mishnah and the baraita of the House of Rebbi are needed.

HALAKHAH: We have stated: “between olive trees.” In the House of Rebbi they stated “between fruit trees.” Our Mishnah needs the one of the House of Rebbi and that of the House of Rebbi needs our Mishnah. If we had stated, but not the House of Rebbi, we would say that it said only “between olive trees”, which in themselves are subject to peah, but for those which are free from the obligation of peah even the House of Shammai will agree that he gives one peah for all of them. Hence, our Mishnah needs that of Rebbi. Or if there were the declaration of the House of Rebbi but we had not stated ours, we would say that it refers only to those which are between trees free from the obligation of peah, but for trees which in themselves are subject to peah even the House of Hillel will agree that he gives peah from each single one. Hence, both our Mishnah and the baraita of the House of Rebbi are needed.

HALAKHAH: We have stated: “between olive trees.” In the House of Rebbi they stated “between fruit trees.” Our Mishnah needs the one of the House of Rebbi and that of the House of Rebbi needs our Mishnah. If we had stated, but not the House of Rebbi, we would say that it said only “between olive trees”, which in themselves are subject to peah, but for those which are free from the obligation of peah even the House of Shammai will agree that he gives one peah for all of them. Hence, our Mishnah needs that of Rebbi. Or if there were the declaration of the House of Rebbi but we had not stated ours, we would say that it refers only to those which are between trees free from the obligation of peah, but for trees which in themselves are subject to peah even the House of Hillel will agree that he gives peah from each single one. Hence, both our Mishnah and the baraita of the House of Rebbi are needed.

HALAKHAH: We have stated: “between olive trees.” In the House of Rebbi they stated “between fruit trees.” Our Mishnah needs the one of the House of Rebbi and that of the House of Rebbi needs our Mishnah. If we had stated, but not the House of Rebbi, we would say that it said only “between olive trees”, which in themselves are subject to peah, but for those which are free from the obligation of peah even the House of Shammai will agree that he gives one peah for all of them. Hence, our Mishnah needs that of Rebbi. Or if there were the declaration of the House of Rebbi but we had not stated ours, we would say that it refers only to those which are between trees free from the obligation of peah, but for trees which in themselves are subject to peah even the House of Hillel will agree that he gives peah from each single one. Hence, both our Mishnah and the baraita of the House of Rebbi are needed.

Rebbi Abba, Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: “Rebbi Meïr follows the argument of his teacher Rebbi Aqiba. Just as Rebbi Aqiba says that moist and dry are two different kinds, so Rebbi Meïr says that moist and dry are two different kinds.” The colleagues said before Rebbi Yose: Why should he argue like Rebbi Aqiba? He could argue even like the Rabbis since we have stated there (Mishnah 3:3): “He who rips out moist onions for the market and keeps dry ones for storage!” Rebbi Yose answered: We understand that market and storage make two kinds, are moist and dry two kinds?

MISHNAH: He who rips out moist onions for the market and keeps dry ones for storage gives peah for each batch separately; the same applies to peas and vineyards. He who thins out gives peah for what is left. He who rips out with one hand gives from the remainder for everything.

MISHNAH: Mother onions are subject to peah, Rebbi Yose frees. Rectangles of onions among vegetables, Rebbi Yose says peah from each single one, but the Sages say from one for everything.

MISHNAH: Brothers who split give two peot. When they later form a cooperative, they give one peah. Two people who together bought a tree give one peah. If one bought the North side and the other the South side, each gives peah for himself.

MISHNAH: He who sells tree trunks in his field gives peah from each single one. Rebbi Jehudah says, when? If the owner of the field did not retain anything, but if he retained his field, he gives peah for all of them.

HALAKHAH: So far when he started harvesting beforehand; even if he did not start to harvest? Let us understand it from the following (Mishnah Ḥulin 11:2): “If he bought the shearings of another man’s sheep, if the seller retained anything, the seller is liable, otherwise the buyer is liable.” Rebbi Jeremiah in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: This is Rebbi Jehudah’s. Is there a difference? There, both if he started to shear or if he did not start to shear, and here there will be no difference whether he started harvesting beforehand or did not start beforehand.

MISHNAH: Rebbi Eliezer says, a plot of a bet rova‘ is obligated for peah. Rebbi Joshua says, if its yield is two seah. Rebbi Ṭarphon says, six by six hand-breadths. Rebbi Joshua ben Bathyra said, if it is enough to cut and cut a second time; practice follows his words.

MISHNAH: Rebbi Aqiba says: Any real estate is subject to peah and first fruits, to write a prozbol based on it, and to acquire simultaneously non-guaranteed property with money or contract or possession. If someone signs over his properties when bedridden and reserved for himself any real estate, his gift is permanent; if he did not reserve any real estate for himself, his gift is not permanent. If he signs over his properties to his sons and signs over some real estate for his wife, she lost her ketubah. Rebbi Yose says, if she accepted it, even if it was not in a written document, she lost her ketubah.

MISHNAH: He who writes over his properties to his slave makes him free. If he reserved any real estate, he does not make him free. Rebbi Simeon says, the slave always becomes free unless the master says, all my properties are given to my slave X except one tenthousandth of them.

MISHNAH: Peah is given connected to the ground. From a climbing vine and a date palm, the owner brings it down and divides it up among the poor. Rebbi Simeon says, also for smooth nut trees. Even if 99 poor people say to distribute and one says to grab, one listens to him whose request is in keeping with practice. But for a climbing vine and a date palm it is not so; even if 99 say to grab and one says to distribute, one listens to him whose request is in keeping with practice.

MISHNAH: If he took some of the peah and threw it on the rest, he has nothing of it. If he fell on it or spread his talith on it, one removes him from it. The same is valid for gleanings and the forgotten sheaf.

Rebbi Jacob bar Idi objected before Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish. Did we not state: (Mishnah Baba Meẓi‘a 1:4) “If somebody saw a find and fell on it, when another person came and grabbed it, he who grabbed it had the rights to it?” He answered him: Explain it if the first one did not say that his four cubits should acquire it for him. But did we not state: “If he fell on it or spread his talith on it, one removes him from it?” He said to him, that is the same, if he did not say that his four cubits should acquire it for him. But did not Rebbi Ḥiyya state: (Tosephta Peah 2:2) “If two were pushing one another because of a sheaf and another poor person came and grabbed it from before them, he is entitled to it. He said to him, it is the same, he did not say that his four cubits should acquire it for him.

MISHNAH: One does not harvest peah with sickles and one does not uproot it with axes so that they should not injure one another. Three investigation periods are there during the day, in the morning, at noontime, and in the evening. Rabban Gamliel says, they decreed this only to say that one may not do less. Rebbi Aqiba says, they decreed this only to say that one may not do more. In Bet Namer they insisted on collecting along a rope and were giving peah from every strip.

MISHNAH: A Non-Jew who harvested his field and later converted is free from gleanings, forgotten sheaves, and peah. Rebbi Jehudah obligates him for forgotten sheaves because that applies only at the time of binding the sheaves.

MISHNAH: If somebody dedicated standing produce and redeemed it standing, it is obligated; in sheaves and redeemed in sheaves, it is obligated; standing and redeemed in sheaves it is free since at the time of obligation it was free. Parallel to this, if somebody dedicated his produce before the time of tithes and redeemed it, it is obligated; after the time of tithes, it is obligated. But if he dedicated it before it was finished, the treasurer finished it, and then the owner redeemed it, it is free since at the time of obligation it was free.

Our Mishnah is from Rebbi Aqiba since Rebbi Aqiba said that you go after the first third. And they differed: A field that was one-third ripened in the possession of a Gentile, and a Jew bought it after that time, Rebbi Aqiba said it is free, but the Sages say he is obligated for the additional growth. How is that? Explain it for Rebbi Aqiba (after smoothing) [in a disagreement], or according to everybody if he harvested immediately.

MISHNAH: He who collected peah and said: “This is for X, the poor man,” Rebbi Eliezer says, he made him acquire it; but the Sages say, he should give it to the first poor person he meets. Gleanings, forgotten sheaves, and peah of a Non-Jew are obligated for tithes, except if the Non-Jew declared it to be abandoned property.

Rebbi Zeïra said: Rebbi Eleazar (about one’s friend), Rebbi Joḥanan, and Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said the same thing. Rebbi Eleazar, as Rebbi Zeïra said in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: A man may acquire a find for his friend. Rebbi Joḥanan, as we have stated there (Mishnah Baba Meẓiah 1:5): “The finds of his minor sons and daughters, of his Gentile slaves and slave girls, and of his wife, belong to him. The finds of his adult sons and daughters, of his Jewish slaves and slave girls, and of his divorced wife in case that he had not yet paid her ketubah, belong to them. Rebbi Joḥanan said, if they are not dependents. But if they are dependent on their father, their finds belong to him. Rebbi Joshua ben Levi, as Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said: They disagree about a rich owner. But if the owner is poor, since he has the right to take it, the other person acquired it.

A Mishnah disagrees with him who says that he who may take may acquire, since we have stated: “Give this divorce document to my wife …,” because he may receive the divorce document of his minor daughter. “And the document of manumission to my slave …,” since he may receive his own document of manumission. But did we not state: “Receive this divorce document for my wife or bring this divorce document to my wife; if he wants to change his mind … he may not do so.” Is a slave empowered to bring a divorce document? Explain it by different cases.

The following Mishnah disagrees with him who says that he who may take may acquire, since we have stated there: “One tithe that I will measure in the future is given to Aqiba ben Joseph that he should let the poor acquire it, and its place is rented to him.” But is Rebbi Aqiba entitled to take? Explain it, before he got rich. And even if you say, after he became rich, when he was an administrator, and the hand of the administrator is equal to the hand of the poor.

MISHNAH: : What are gleanings? That which falls down at harvest time. If in harvesting he cut what his hands grabbed, or he uprooted a handful, when he was stung by a thorn and it fell to the ground, this belongs to the owner. From inside the hand and/or inside the sickle it belongs to the poor. From the back of his hand or the back of the sickle, it belongs to the owner. From fingertips and the tip of the sickle, Rebbi Ismael says, to the poor, Rebby Aqiba says, to the owner. Antholes inside the standing produce belong to the owner. In those appearing after the harvesters left, the tops are for the poor and the bottoms for the owner. Rebbi Meïr says, everything is for the poor because gleanings in doubt are gleanings.

MISHNAH: For a grain stack under which gleanings were not collected, all ears that touch the ground are for the poor. If the wind dispersed any sheaves, one estimates what amount of gleanings that would have yielded, and he gives that to the poor. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, he gives to the poor the average fall.

MISHNAH: : A single ear on the field to be harvested and its head reaches to the grain that is still standing, if it can be cut together with standing grain, it belongs to the owner, otherwise it is for the poor. An ear of gleanings that was mixed up in a stack of grain, he gives tithes for one ear and gives it to him. Rebbi Eliezer said, how can the poor man exchange something that never was in his possession? But he has to give the poor rights to the entire stack; then he gives tithes for one ear and gives it to him.

Rebbi Hoshaia said, when I was mashing olives with the great Rebbi Ḥiyya, he said to me: Any olive that you can reach when stretching out your hand is not forgotten. Rebbi Joḥanan said, if he passed it over and forgot it, it is forgotten. The Mishnah disagrees with Rebbi Hoshaia: A single ear on the field to be harvested and its head reaches to the grain. Can you not stretch out your hand and take a single ear on the harvested field? Rebbi Illai in the name of Rebbi Hoshaia: They said that about the second row.

Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, this follows Rebbi Yose, as we have stated there: “For Rebbi Yose says that everything whose replacement is in the hand of the Cohen is freed from the obligatory gifts, but Rebbi Meïr obligates him.” Rebbi Abba said, the words of Rebbi Yose imply that he has to empower the priest. Rebbi Yose said, the statement of Rebbi Abba contradicts Rebbi Simeon bar Laqish since we have stated here: “He has to give the poor rights to the entire stack; then he gives tithes for one ear and gives to him.” Rebbi Abba said, the words of Rebbi Yose imply that he has to empower the priest, hence this is not from the words of Rebbi Yose. Rebbi Mana said, the Mishnah itself testifies that it is by Rebbi Yose. The first Tanna wants to say that he transfers as property to the poor not the entire stack but only one ear. The other Tanna wants to say that he transfers the entire stack as property to the poor. The first Tanna wants to say that this is like the transfer of property from one’s right hand to his left hand; it is no transfer. The other Tanna wants to say that it is not transferring property from one’s right hand to his left hand; it is transfer.

MISHNAH: One does not use a waterwheel with buckets, the words of Rebbi Meïr. But the Sages do permit it, because it is impossible. A householder wandering from one place to another who was in need of taking gleanings, forgotten sheaves, peah, and tithes of the poor should repay them once he comes home, the words of Rebbi Eliezer. But the Sages say, he was poor at that moment.

MISHNAH: If he switches with the poor, what he receives is exempt but what the poor get is obligated. If two persons received a field as sharecroppers, one gives his part and his tithes of the poor to the other one, and vice-versa. He who receives a field to harvest is barred from its gleanings, forgotten sheaves, and peah. Rebbi Jehudah said, when is this so? When he received it for one-half, one third, or one quarter; but if he told him, one third of what you will harvest will be yours, he may take gleanings, forgotten sheaves, and peah but not the tithes of the poor.

MISHNAH: If someone sells his field, the seller is permitted but the buyer is barred. Nobody should hire a worker on condition that his son may collect gleanings after him. He who does not let the poor collect gleanings, or who lets one person collect but not the other, or helps one of them, robs the poor. On him it was said (Prov. 22:28, 23:10): “Do not displace an eternal boundary.”

HALAKHAH: Our Mishnah is about someone who sold the field with the standing crop. But if someone sold the standing crop and retained the field for himself, for him I read “your field”, for the other one I read “your harvest.”

MISHNAH: A sheaf forgotten by the workers but not by the owner, by the owner but not by the workers, or the poor stood before it or covered it with straw, is not a forgotten sheaf.

MISHNAH: He who makes sheaves as helmets, round bundles, wheels, and small sheaves is not subject to the law of forgotten sheaves. If he takes them from there to the threshing-floor, the rules on forgotten sheaves apply. If he makes sheaves for a stack, it is subject to the rules on forgotten sheaves. If he takes them from there to the threshing-floor, the rules on forgotten sheaves do not apply. This is the principle: Everybody who makes sheaves for a place that is the end of his work is subject to the rule on forgotten sheaves, from there to the threshing-floor is not subject to the rule on forgotten sheaves. To a place that is not the end of his work it is not subject to the rule on forgotten sheaves, from there to the threshing-floor is subject to the rule on forgotten sheaves.

MISHNAH: The House of Shammai say, property abandoned to the poor is abandoned, but the House of Hillel say, it is not abandoned unless it is abandoned also to the rich, as in a Sabbatical year. If all sheaves of a field are of one qab each, except one which is of four qab and they forgot about that one, the House of Shammai say, it cannot be a forgotten sheaf, but the House of Hillel say, it can be a forgotten sheaf.

How do the House of Hillel deal with the reason of the House of Shammai? “Relinquish them” is a restriction, these are for the poor, not for the rich, but what is spoken of elsewhere is for poor and rich alike. How do the House of Shammai deal with the reason of the House of Hillel? “Let it drop and abandon it” is a restriction, this abandoning is for poor and rich alike, but what is spoken of elsewhere is for the poor but not for the rich. Rebbi Avin said, the Mishnah supports Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: “Abandoned also to the rich, as in the Sabbatical year.”

MISHNAH: A sheaf that was near a closure, a stack, cattle, or vessels, if it was forgotten, the House of Shammai say, it is not a forgotten sheaf, but the House of Hillel say, it is a forgotten sheaf.

“By its place, if it was standing beside the wine press or beside a breach in the fence.” This Mishnah follows the House of Shammai, since the House of Shammai say, it is not a forgotten sheaf. Rebbi Yose said, it is everybody’s opinion. There a stationary object is beside a stationary one, but here a movable object is beside a stationary one.

MISHNAH: Heads of rows, the sheaf next to it proves, and a sheaf that was taken up to be brought to town and then was forgotten, they all agree that they never are forgotten sheaves. The following describe heads of rows: Two who started in the middle of the row, one turned North and the other turned South, and they forgot before them or after them. The one before them is a forgotten sheaf, the one after them is not a forgotten sheaf. A single person who started at the head of a row and forgot before and after himself. The one before him is not a forgotten sheaf, but the one after him is a forgotten sheaf because it falls under (Deut. 24:19) “do not return to take it.” This is the principle: Anything that falls under “do not return to take it,” is a forgotten sheaf, but anything that does not fall under “do not return to take it,” is not a forgotten sheaf.

MISHNAH: Two sheaves may qualify as forgotten sheaves, three may not. Two heaps of olives or carob may qualify as “forgotten sheaves”, three may not. Two plants of hemp may qualify as “forgotten sheaves”, three may not. Two berries may qualify as dropped berries, three may not. Two stalks may be gleanings, three may not, following the House of Hillel. About all of these, the House of Shammai say three are for the poor and four for the proprietor.

MISHNAH: A sheaf containing two seah that was forgotten is not a “forgotten sheaf.” Two sheaves that together are two seah, Rabban Gamliel says, they are for the proprietor, but the Sages say, they are for the poor. Rabban Gamliel said to them: Does large size of the sheaves increase or decrease the power of the proprietor? They said to him, it increases it. He said to them: Since a sheaf containing two seah that was forgotten is not “forgotten sheaf,” it is only logical that two sheaves that together are two seah should not be “forgotten sheaf” either. They said to him, if they said that about one sheaf that is like a stack, do you want to say the same about two sheaves that are like bundles? Standing produce of two seah which was forgotten is not “forgotten sheaf.” If it does not have two seah but it might bring two seah, even if it were oats it is considered like barley grains.

MISHNAH: Standing produce saves sheaves and standing produce. But a sheaf saves neither sheaves nor standing produce. What is standing produce that saves sheaves? Everything that is not forgotten, even if it is only one stalk. A seah of uprooted grain and a seah of not uprooted grain, also trees, garlic and onions do not combine. Rebbi Yose says, if a poor man’s right comes in the middle, they do not combine, otherwise they do combine.

Hence, if all is cut it is for the proprietor. Our Mishnah follows Rabban Gamliel.

MISHNAH: Grain cut for animal feed or to bind sheaves, and similarly garlic used to bind as well as bundles of garlic and onions are not subject to “forgotten sheaves.” Anything hidden in the ground, such as luf, garlic, and onions, Rebbi Jehudah says, they are not subject to “forgotten sheaves”, but the Sages say, they are subject to “forgotten sheaves.”

MISHNAH: He who harvests at night or removes the stacks, or a blind person, are subject to the law of forgotten sheaves. But if he intended only to take the large pieces, he is not subject to the law of forgotten sheaves. If he said: “I harvest on the understanding that I shall take what I might forget,” he is subject to the law of forgotten sheaves.

HALAKHAH: So is the Mishnah: He who harvests at night or removes the stacks at night, or a blind person day or night.

MISHNAH: Every olive tree that has a special name on the field, for example “a dripping olive tree” in its time, if it was forgotten, is not subject to the law of the forgotten sheaf. When does this apply? For its name, its production, and its place. By its name, if it was dripping or from Beth Shean. By its production, if it produced much. By its place, if it stood next to the wine-press or near a hole in the wall. For all other olive trees, two are subject to the law of the forgotten sheaf, three are not. Rebbi Yose says, there is no law of the forgotten sheaf for olive trees.

“By its place, if it stood next to the wine-press or near a hole in the wall.” Is our Mishnah following the House of Shammai, since the House of Shammai say, property abandoned to the poor is abandoned? Rebbi Yose said, it is everybody’s opinion; there it is movable near immovable, here it is immovable near immovable.

MISHNAH: An olive tree standing between three rows of two rectangles, when forgotten, is not subject to the law of forgotten sheaves. An olive tree which yields two seah, when forgotten, is not legally forgotten. When does this apply? Only if he did not start with it, but if he started harvesting it, even a dripping olive tree in its time, when forgotten, is subject to the law of the forgotten sheaf. Whenever he has under it, he has at its crown. Rebbi Meïr says, from the moment that the maḥba is used.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Eleazar said, so says the Mishnah: “of two rectangles” and he forgot it. What are we dealing with? If it is because it is marked, are there not other olive trees? If it is because it is in a row, it is considered a row in itself. It must be because of row and of rows.

Rebbi Yose said, the Mishnah deals with an olive tree that can be shaken. Rebbi Yose said, not only one that can be shaken; since olive trees usually are first checked by shaking, none can be under the law of forgotten sheaves.

Hence, if it yields two seah, if it was forgotten it is not legally forgotten. It does not refer to this but to the first Mishnah: “Every olive tree that has a special name on the field, for example ‘a dripping olive tree’ in its time, if it was forgotten, it is not legally forgotten. Hence, if it yields two seah, if it was forgotten …”