tithe

HALAKHAH: It is stated: A father and his son, a man and his relative, two brothers, two associates redeem Second Tithe for one another and give tithe of the poor to one another. Rebbi Jehudah said, a curse should come upon him who gives tithe of the poor to his father. He said, why? If they were both poor!

HALAKHAH: It is stated: A father and his son, a man and his relative, two brothers, two associates redeem Second Tithe for one another and give tithe of the poor to one another. Rebbi Jehudah said, a curse should come upon him who gives tithe of the poor to his father. He said, why? If they were both poor!

HALAKHAH: It was stated: Rebbi says, the House of Shammai said this only in the Sabbatical year, but in all other years of the sabbatical cycle, the House of Shammai say that it is subject to a fifth and subject to removal. According to that Tanna, they learned the rules of the vineyard of the fourth year only from the Second Tithe; since you say that there is no Second Tithe in the Sabbatical year, so there is no fourth year after planting in the Sabbatical year. But then should there be no holiness in it? Its holiness comes from the verse (Lev. 19:24): “Holy for praises,” it has the status of those holy fruits over which praises are said. And should it be permitted to the fresh mourner? It is stated: This implies that it is forbidden to the fresh mourner. And should it be subject to removal? Since Rebbi Simeon frees it from removal. And should it be redeemed while still connected to the ground?

HALAKHAH: It was stated: Rebbi says, the House of Shammai said this only in the Sabbatical year, but in all other years of the sabbatical cycle, the House of Shammai say that it is subject to a fifth and subject to removal. According to that Tanna, they learned the rules of the vineyard of the fourth year only from the Second Tithe; since you say that there is no Second Tithe in the Sabbatical year, so there is no fourth year after planting in the Sabbatical year. But then should there be no holiness in it? Its holiness comes from the verse (Lev. 19:24): “Holy for praises,” it has the status of those holy fruits over which praises are said. And should it be permitted to the fresh mourner? It is stated: This implies that it is forbidden to the fresh mourner. And should it be subject to removal? Since Rebbi Simeon frees it from removal. And should it be redeemed while still connected to the ground?

Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel stated: Both in the Sabbatical year and in the rest of the years of the sabbatical cycle, the House of Shammai say, there is no fifth and no removal. According to that Tanna, they did not at all learn the rules of the fourth year after planting from the Second Tithe. But then should there be no holiness in it? Its holiness comes from the verse (Lev. 19:24): “Holy for praises;” it has the status of those holy fruits over which praises are said. And should it be permitted to the fresh mourner? It is stated: This implies that it is forbidden to the fresh mourner. And should it be subject to removal? Since Rebbi Simeon frees it from removal. And should it be redeemed while still connected to the ground?

Rebbi Ayvu bar Naggari stated before Rebbi La following Rebbi Ismael (Lev. 27:31): “If a man redeems part of his tithes, he should add its fifth to it.” That excludes the fourth year after planting; one is not obligated by it for a fifth. Then he turned around and stated: There are two terms of redemption, one for the Second Tithe and one for the fourth year after planting.

There we have stated: Rebbi Jehudah says, there is no vineyard in the fourth year for the Gentile, but the Sages say there is. Rebbi Eleazar said, so says the Mishnah: There is never a vineyard in the fourth year for the Gentile. Rebbi Bibi said before Rebbi Zeïra in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: According to the opinion of Rebbi, the statement of Rebbi Jehudah turns out to be like the statement of the House of Shammai. Since the House of Shammai said that they learned the rules of the vineyard of the fourth year only from the Second Tithe; since you say that there is no Second Tithe in the Sabbatical year, so there is no fourth year after planting in the Sabbatical year. Similarly, Rebbi Jehudah said that they learned the rules of the vineyard of the fourth year only from the Second Tithe; since you say that there is no Second Tithe in Syria, so there is no fourth year after planting in Syria. He said to him, look what he said! He said only, it is not subject to a fifth and is not subject to removal, hence, it is subject to all other rules; Rebbi Jehudah says, there is no vineyard in the fourth year for the Gentile in Syria.

There we have stated: Rebbi Jehudah says, there is no vineyard in the fourth year for the Gentile, but the Sages say there is. Rebbi Eleazar said, so says the Mishnah: There is never a vineyard in the fourth year for the Gentile. Rebbi Bibi said before Rebbi Zeïra in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: According to the opinion of Rebbi, the statement of Rebbi Jehudah turns out to be like the statement of the House of Shammai. Since the House of Shammai said that they learned the rules of the vineyard of the fourth year only from the Second Tithe; since you say that there is no Second Tithe in the Sabbatical year, so there is no fourth year after planting in the Sabbatical year. Similarly, Rebbi Jehudah said that they learned the rules of the vineyard of the fourth year only from the Second Tithe; since you say that there is no Second Tithe in Syria, so there is no fourth year after planting in Syria. He said to him, look what he said! He said only, it is not subject to a fifth and is not subject to removal, hence, it is subject to all other rules; Rebbi Jehudah says, there is no vineyard in the fourth year for the Gentile in Syria.

There we have stated: Rebbi Jehudah says, there is no vineyard in the fourth year for the Gentile, but the Sages say there is. Rebbi Eleazar said, so says the Mishnah: There is never a vineyard in the fourth year for the Gentile. Rebbi Bibi said before Rebbi Zeïra in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: According to the opinion of Rebbi, the statement of Rebbi Jehudah turns out to be like the statement of the House of Shammai. Since the House of Shammai said that they learned the rules of the vineyard of the fourth year only from the Second Tithe; since you say that there is no Second Tithe in the Sabbatical year, so there is no fourth year after planting in the Sabbatical year. Similarly, Rebbi Jehudah said that they learned the rules of the vineyard of the fourth year only from the Second Tithe; since you say that there is no Second Tithe in Syria, so there is no fourth year after planting in Syria. He said to him, look what he said! He said only, it is not subject to a fifth and is not subject to removal, hence, it is subject to all other rules; Rebbi Jehudah says, there is no vineyard in the fourth year for the Gentile in Syria.

There we have stated: Rebbi Jehudah says, there is no vineyard in the fourth year for the Gentile, but the Sages say there is. Rebbi Eleazar said, so says the Mishnah: There is never a vineyard in the fourth year for the Gentile. Rebbi Bibi said before Rebbi Zeïra in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: According to the opinion of Rebbi, the statement of Rebbi Jehudah turns out to be like the statement of the House of Shammai. Since the House of Shammai said that they learned the rules of the vineyard of the fourth year only from the Second Tithe; since you say that there is no Second Tithe in the Sabbatical year, so there is no fourth year after planting in the Sabbatical year. Similarly, Rebbi Jehudah said that they learned the rules of the vineyard of the fourth year only from the Second Tithe; since you say that there is no Second Tithe in Syria, so there is no fourth year after planting in Syria. He said to him, look what he said! He said only, it is not subject to a fifth and is not subject to removal, hence, it is subject to all other rules; Rebbi Jehudah says, there is no vineyard in the fourth year for the Gentile in Syria.

Samuel bar Abba asked: Since the House of Shammai said that they learned the rules of the vineyard of the fourth year only from the Second Tithe; since you say that there is no Second Tithe in the Sabbatical year, there is no fourth year after planting in the Sabbatical year. Similarly, in the third and sixth years of the sabbatical cycle, since there is no Second Tithe, there should not be any fourth year after planting. Rebbi Yose said, even though there is no Second Tithe in the third and sixth years, there is the tithe for the poor. In the Sabbatical year, there are no tithes at all.

Samuel bar Abba asked: Since the House of Shammai said that they learned the rules of the vineyard of the fourth year only from the Second Tithe; since you say that there is no Second Tithe in the Sabbatical year, there is no fourth year after planting in the Sabbatical year. Similarly, in the third and sixth years of the sabbatical cycle, since there is no Second Tithe, there should not be any fourth year after planting. Rebbi Yose said, even though there is no Second Tithe in the third and sixth years, there is the tithe for the poor. In the Sabbatical year, there are no tithes at all.

Samuel bar Abba asked: Since the House of Shammai said that they learned the rules of the vineyard of the fourth year only from the Second Tithe; since you say that there is no Second Tithe in the Sabbatical year, there is no fourth year after planting in the Sabbatical year. Similarly, in the third and sixth years of the sabbatical cycle, since there is no Second Tithe, there should not be any fourth year after planting. Rebbi Yose said, even though there is no Second Tithe in the third and sixth years, there is the tithe for the poor. In the Sabbatical year, there are no tithes at all.

Samuel bar Abba asked: Since the House of Shammai said that they learned the rules of the vineyard of the fourth year only from the Second Tithe; since you say that there is no Second Tithe in the Sabbatical year, there is no fourth year after planting in the Sabbatical year. Similarly, in the third and sixth years of the sabbatical cycle, since there is no Second Tithe, there should not be any fourth year after planting. Rebbi Yose said, even though there is no Second Tithe in the third and sixth years, there is the tithe for the poor. In the Sabbatical year, there are no tithes at all.

Samuel bar Abba asked: Since the House of Shammai said that they learned the rules of the vineyard of the fourth year only from the Second Tithe; since you say that there is no Second Tithe in the Sabbatical year, there is no fourth year after planting in the Sabbatical year. Similarly, in the third and sixth years of the sabbatical cycle, since there is no Second Tithe, there should not be any fourth year after planting. Rebbi Yose said, even though there is no Second Tithe in the third and sixth years, there is the tithe for the poor. In the Sabbatical year, there are no tithes at all.

Ḥeipha asked: Since Rebbi Jehudah said that they learned the rules of the vineyard of the fourth year only from the Second Tithe; since you say that there is no Second Tithe in Syria, there is no fourth year after planting in Syria. Similarly, they learned the rules of the heave of the thanksgiving sacrifice only from the heave of the tithe; since you say that there was no heave of the tithe in the desert, will it follow that there was no heave of the thanksgiving sacrifice in the desert? Rebbi Yose said, they learned from it only in regard of quantities.

Ḥeipha asked: Since Rebbi Jehudah said that they learned the rules of the vineyard of the fourth year only from the Second Tithe; since you say that there is no Second Tithe in Syria, there is no fourth year after planting in Syria. Similarly, they learned the rules of the heave of the thanksgiving sacrifice only from the heave of the tithe; since you say that there was no heave of the tithe in the desert, will it follow that there was no heave of the thanksgiving sacrifice in the desert? Rebbi Yose said, they learned from it only in regard of quantities.

Ḥeipha asked: Since Rebbi Jehudah said that they learned the rules of the vineyard of the fourth year only from the Second Tithe; since you say that there is no Second Tithe in Syria, there is no fourth year after planting in Syria. Similarly, they learned the rules of the heave of the thanksgiving sacrifice only from the heave of the tithe; since you say that there was no heave of the tithe in the desert, will it follow that there was no heave of the thanksgiving sacrifice in the desert? Rebbi Yose said, they learned from it only in regard of quantities.

Ḥeipha asked: Since Rebbi Jehudah said that they learned the rules of the vineyard of the fourth year only from the Second Tithe; since you say that there is no Second Tithe in Syria, there is no fourth year after planting in Syria. Similarly, they learned the rules of the heave of the thanksgiving sacrifice only from the heave of the tithe; since you say that there was no heave of the tithe in the desert, will it follow that there was no heave of the thanksgiving sacrifice in the desert? Rebbi Yose said, they learned from it only in regard of quantities.

Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah stated: Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon said, Israel did become obligated for the fourth year after planting only after 14 years, seven during which they conquered and seven during which they divided up the land. Rav Ḥisda said, it turns out that the argument of Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah is identical with that of his father Rebbi Jehudah. Just as Rebbi Jehudah said that they learned the rules of the vineyard of the fourth year only from the Second Tithe, since you say that the Second Tithe started only after 14 years, similarly there was no fourth year after planting until after 14 years. Rebbi Yose said, he follows his son’s argument; Syria was inferred from “after 14 years;” “after 14 years” was not inferred from Syria.

Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah stated: Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon said, Israel did become obligated for the fourth year after planting only after 14 years, seven during which they conquered and seven during which they divided up the land. Rav Ḥisda said, it turns out that the argument of Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah is identical with that of his father Rebbi Jehudah. Just as Rebbi Jehudah said that they learned the rules of the vineyard of the fourth year only from the Second Tithe, since you say that the Second Tithe started only after 14 years, similarly there was no fourth year after planting until after 14 years. Rebbi Yose said, he follows his son’s argument; Syria was inferred from “after 14 years;” “after 14 years” was not inferred from Syria.

Rebbi Jeremiah asked before Rebbi Zeïra: According to those who declare it his property, should it not be subject to tithes? He said to him, according to what Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said, as Rebbi Abin said in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi, not only this practice, but in any practical question which is weak in court and you do not know how to decide, go out and see how the public acts, and act accordingly. And we see that they do not give. Rebbi Mana said, that is, if the practice would follow the House of Shammai. But is there any public that acts according to the House of Shammai? Rebbi Abin said, they learned the rules of the vineyard of the fourth year only from the Second Tithe; just as you say that the Second Tithe is not subject to tithes, so the yield of the fourth year is not subject to tithes.

Rebbi Jeremiah asked before Rebbi Zeïra: According to those who declare it his property, should it not be subject to tithes? He said to him, according to what Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said, as Rebbi Abin said in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi, not only this practice, but in any practical question which is weak in court and you do not know how to decide, go out and see how the public acts, and act accordingly. And we see that they do not give. Rebbi Mana said, that is, if the practice would follow the House of Shammai. But is there any public that acts according to the House of Shammai? Rebbi Abin said, they learned the rules of the vineyard of the fourth year only from the Second Tithe; just as you say that the Second Tithe is not subject to tithes, so the yield of the fourth year is not subject to tithes.

Rebbi Abba, Rebbi Ḥiyya, in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: A dough of Second Tithe in Jerusalem, following Rebbi Meïr, is free from ḥallah, following Rebbi Jehudah it is subject to ḥallah. Rebbi Jonah said, they said this only for Jerusalem, but not for the countryside.

MISHNAH: They can be trusted about gleanings, forgotten sheaves, and peah at harvest time, and about the tithe of the poor its entire year; the Levite can always be trusted. But they can be trusted only about things that people are in the habit of doing.

Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya said, the Levite may be trusted if he says, this is certainly tithe, to free it from Second Tithe. But if he says: It was given to me, or if he says that it is from his own crop, they cannot be trusted. That is the Mishnah: But they can be trusted only about things that people are in the habit of doing. So is the Mishnah: But they can be trusted only about things that people are in the habit of giving.

Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya said, the Levite may be trusted if he says, this is certainly tithe, to free it from Second Tithe. But if he says: It was given to me, or if he says that it is from his own crop, they cannot be trusted. That is the Mishnah: But they can be trusted only about things that people are in the habit of doing. So is the Mishnah: But they can be trusted only about things that people are in the habit of giving.

MISHNAH: They are trustworthy about wheat but not flour or bread. They are trustworthy about panicles of rice but not if it is either raw or cooked. They are trustworthy about beans but not bean groats, either raw or cooked. They are trustworthy about oil if they say it is from the tithe of the poor, but not if they say it is made from picked olives. They are trustworthy in regard to fresh vegetables but not for cooked ones except if it was a small amount, since it is the way of householders to bring out from their pans.

HALAKHAH: A student of Rebbi had 199 denar; Rebbi used to let him receive the tithe of the poor once every three years. His students cast an evil eye on him and completed for him. The next time, when he wanted to let him receive, he said: My teacher, I have the measure. He said, this one was hit by a beast of prey. He gave a hint to his student who took him to a store, made him spend a carat, then he (Rebbi) let him receive as he was used to do.

It was stated: It may be eaten in strict mourning but not in impurity. What is the difference between strict mourning and impurity? Rav Naḥman said, impurity is frequent, strict mourning is infrequent. They made a decree for a frequent situation, they did not decree for an infrequent situation. Rebbi Yose said, they did not even make it similar to a doubt of ṭevel. Since for a doubt of ṭevel, whether Second Tithe was given in order, or maybe Second Tithe was not given in order, is that not forbidden for the strict mourner? But here, it is permitted to the mourner.

It was stated: It may be eaten in strict mourning but not in impurity. What is the difference between strict mourning and impurity? Rav Naḥman said, impurity is frequent, strict mourning is infrequent. They made a decree for a frequent situation, they did not decree for an infrequent situation. Rebbi Yose said, they did not even make it similar to a doubt of ṭevel. Since for a doubt of ṭevel, whether Second Tithe was given in order, or maybe Second Tithe was not given in order, is that not forbidden for the strict mourner? But here, it is permitted to the mourner.

There, we have stated: “Heave, the heave of the tithe, and the heave of the tithe of demay.” And here you say so! Rebbi Zeïra said, there we have stated heave of the tithe of demay but here Second Tithe of demay. Rebbi Immi said, the Mishnah does not stop to deal with the heave of the tithe of demay. What is that? There it is Rebbi Meïr, but here the rabbis. Rebbi Zeïra said in the name of the rabbis: It would have been logical that for the heave of the tithe of demay one would not have to add a fifth; why did they say that one has to add a fifth? Because of a fence for it, for if you tell him that he does not have to add, he will not treat it as holy. It would have been logical that for the Second Tithe of demay one would have to add a fifth; why did they say that one does not have to add a fifth? Because of a fence for it, for if you tell him that he has to add, he will not separate it at all.

There, we have stated: “Heave, the heave of the tithe, and the heave of the tithe of demay.” And here you say so! Rebbi Zeïra said, there we have stated heave of the tithe of demay but here Second Tithe of demay. Rebbi Immi said, the Mishnah does not stop to deal with the heave of the tithe of demay. What is that? There it is Rebbi Meïr, but here the rabbis. Rebbi Zeïra said in the name of the rabbis: It would have been logical that for the heave of the tithe of demay one would not have to add a fifth; why did they say that one has to add a fifth? Because of a fence for it, for if you tell him that he does not have to add, he will not treat it as holy. It would have been logical that for the Second Tithe of demay one would have to add a fifth; why did they say that one does not have to add a fifth? Because of a fence for it, for if you tell him that he has to add, he will not separate it at all.

There, we have stated: “Heave, the heave of the tithe, and the heave of the tithe of demay.” And here you say so! Rebbi Zeïra said, there we have stated heave of the tithe of demay but here Second Tithe of demay. Rebbi Immi said, the Mishnah does not stop to deal with the heave of the tithe of demay. What is that? There it is Rebbi Meïr, but here the rabbis. Rebbi Zeïra said in the name of the rabbis: It would have been logical that for the heave of the tithe of demay one would not have to add a fifth; why did they say that one has to add a fifth? Because of a fence for it, for if you tell him that he does not have to add, he will not treat it as holy. It would have been logical that for the Second Tithe of demay one would have to add a fifth; why did they say that one does not have to add a fifth? Because of a fence for it, for if you tell him that he has to add, he will not separate it at all.

There, we have stated: “Heave, the heave of the tithe, and the heave of the tithe of demay.” And here you say so! Rebbi Zeïra said, there we have stated heave of the tithe of demay but here Second Tithe of demay. Rebbi Immi said, the Mishnah does not stop to deal with the heave of the tithe of demay. What is that? There it is Rebbi Meïr, but here the rabbis. Rebbi Zeïra said in the name of the rabbis: It would have been logical that for the heave of the tithe of demay one would not have to add a fifth; why did they say that one has to add a fifth? Because of a fence for it, for if you tell him that he does not have to add, he will not treat it as holy. It would have been logical that for the Second Tithe of demay one would have to add a fifth; why did they say that one does not have to add a fifth? Because of a fence for it, for if you tell him that he has to add, he will not separate it at all.

There, we have stated: “Heave, the heave of the tithe, and the heave of the tithe of demay.” And here you say so! Rebbi Zeïra said, there we have stated heave of the tithe of demay but here Second Tithe of demay. Rebbi Immi said, the Mishnah does not stop to deal with the heave of the tithe of demay. What is that? There it is Rebbi Meïr, but here the rabbis. Rebbi Zeïra said in the name of the rabbis: It would have been logical that for the heave of the tithe of demay one would not have to add a fifth; why did they say that one has to add a fifth? Because of a fence for it, for if you tell him that he does not have to add, he will not treat it as holy. It would have been logical that for the Second Tithe of demay one would have to add a fifth; why did they say that one does not have to add a fifth? Because of a fence for it, for if you tell him that he has to add, he will not separate it at all.

There, we have stated: “Heave, the heave of the tithe, and the heave of the tithe of demay.” And here you say so! Rebbi Zeïra said, there we have stated heave of the tithe of demay but here Second Tithe of demay. Rebbi Immi said, the Mishnah does not stop to deal with the heave of the tithe of demay. What is that? There it is Rebbi Meïr, but here the rabbis. Rebbi Zeïra said in the name of the rabbis: It would have been logical that for the heave of the tithe of demay one would not have to add a fifth; why did they say that one has to add a fifth? Because of a fence for it, for if you tell him that he does not have to add, he will not treat it as holy. It would have been logical that for the Second Tithe of demay one would have to add a fifth; why did they say that one does not have to add a fifth? Because of a fence for it, for if you tell him that he has to add, he will not separate it at all.

There, we have stated: “Heave, the heave of the tithe, and the heave of the tithe of demay.” And here you say so! Rebbi Zeïra said, there we have stated heave of the tithe of demay but here Second Tithe of demay. Rebbi Immi said, the Mishnah does not stop to deal with the heave of the tithe of demay. What is that? There it is Rebbi Meïr, but here the rabbis. Rebbi Zeïra said in the name of the rabbis: It would have been logical that for the heave of the tithe of demay one would not have to add a fifth; why did they say that one has to add a fifth? Because of a fence for it, for if you tell him that he does not have to add, he will not treat it as holy. It would have been logical that for the Second Tithe of demay one would have to add a fifth; why did they say that one does not have to add a fifth? Because of a fence for it, for if you tell him that he has to add, he will not separate it at all.

MISHNAH: He who buys as seeds or animal fodder, flour for tanning, oil for lighting, or oil to rub on vessels, is free from demay. From Akhzib and further he is free from demay. Ḥallah of the am haäreẓ, food containing heave, food bought with money of the Second Tithe, and the remainders of flour sacrifices are free from demay. Sweet oil, the House of Shammai declare it obligated but the House of Hillel declare it free.

They said that Rebbi Joḥanan was putting in order everything he ate, even red meat, even an egg. His students said to him: Did our teacher not teach us (Deut. 14:22): “You shall certainly tithe all the yield of your field.” He was worried about the fluids in it.

It was stated: “All of these, if he gave a name to their heave of the tithe or Second Tithe, what he did is done.” According to R. Joḥanan, this is fine. According to R. Hoshaia, they are in order, and you say so? Because of one who is unscrupulous about sacred things. It was stated: “All of these, if he gave a name to their heave of the tithe or Second Tithe, what he did is done, because of one who does not put in order.”

It was stated: “All of these, if he gave a name to their heave of the tithe or Second Tithe, what he did is done.” According to R. Joḥanan, this is fine. According to R. Hoshaia, they are in order, and you say so? Because of one who is unscrupulous about sacred things. It was stated: “All of these, if he gave a name to their heave of the tithe or Second Tithe, what he did is done, because of one who does not put in order.”

It was stated: “All of these, if he gave a name to their heave of the tithe or Second Tithe, what he did is done.” According to R. Joḥanan, this is fine. According to R. Hoshaia, they are in order, and you say so? Because of one who is unscrupulous about sacred things. It was stated: “All of these, if he gave a name to their heave of the tithe or Second Tithe, what he did is done, because of one who does not put in order.”

It was stated: “All of these, if he gave a name to their heave of the tithe or Second Tithe, what he did is done.” According to R. Joḥanan, this is fine. According to R. Hoshaia, they are in order, and you say so? Because of one who is unscrupulous about sacred things. It was stated: “All of these, if he gave a name to their heave of the tithe or Second Tithe, what he did is done, because of one who does not put in order.”

It was stated: “All of these, if he gave a name to their heave of the tithe or Second Tithe, what he did is done.” Rebbi Eleazar said, with the exception of the remainders of flour sacrifices. Rebbi Jeremiah said, the rest is in dispute. Rebbi Yose asked, what dispute? Where are we standing, if according to Rebbi Meïr, both for tithes and for the remainders of flour sacrifices, he did not do anything. If according to Rebbi Jehudah, what he did is done. Rebbi Mana said, I went to Caesarea and heard Rebbi Ḥizqiah who was sitting there, stating: “If a priest marries by means of his share in the holiest sacrifices or simple holy sacrifices, the marriage is not valid.” Rebbi Eleazar said, that is everybody’s opinion. Rebbi Joḥanan said, it is in dispute. I said to him, from whom did the rabbi hear this, and he said, from Rebbi Jeremiah. I said, this explains the matter! Rebbi Jeremiah, who heard that Rebbi Eleazar said, it is everybody’s opinion, he says it is in dispute. Rebbi Yose, who did not hear that, asked which dispute? If according to Rebbi Meïr, both for Second Tithe and for the remainders of flour sacrifices, he did not do anything, if according to Rebbi Jehudah, what he did is done.

It was stated: “All of these, if he gave a name to their heave of the tithe or Second Tithe, what he did is done.” Rebbi Eleazar said, with the exception of the remainders of flour sacrifices. Rebbi Jeremiah said, the rest is in dispute. Rebbi Yose asked, what dispute? Where are we standing, if according to Rebbi Meïr, both for tithes and for the remainders of flour sacrifices, he did not do anything. If according to Rebbi Jehudah, what he did is done. Rebbi Mana said, I went to Caesarea and heard Rebbi Ḥizqiah who was sitting there, stating: “If a priest marries by means of his share in the holiest sacrifices or simple holy sacrifices, the marriage is not valid.” Rebbi Eleazar said, that is everybody’s opinion. Rebbi Joḥanan said, it is in dispute. I said to him, from whom did the rabbi hear this, and he said, from Rebbi Jeremiah. I said, this explains the matter! Rebbi Jeremiah, who heard that Rebbi Eleazar said, it is everybody’s opinion, he says it is in dispute. Rebbi Yose, who did not hear that, asked which dispute? If according to Rebbi Meïr, both for Second Tithe and for the remainders of flour sacrifices, he did not do anything, if according to Rebbi Jehudah, what he did is done.

It was stated: “All of these, if he gave a name to their heave of the tithe or Second Tithe, what he did is done.” Rebbi Eleazar said, with the exception of the remainders of flour sacrifices. Rebbi Jeremiah said, the rest is in dispute. Rebbi Yose asked, what dispute? Where are we standing, if according to Rebbi Meïr, both for tithes and for the remainders of flour sacrifices, he did not do anything. If according to Rebbi Jehudah, what he did is done. Rebbi Mana said, I went to Caesarea and heard Rebbi Ḥizqiah who was sitting there, stating: “If a priest marries by means of his share in the holiest sacrifices or simple holy sacrifices, the marriage is not valid.” Rebbi Eleazar said, that is everybody’s opinion. Rebbi Joḥanan said, it is in dispute. I said to him, from whom did the rabbi hear this, and he said, from Rebbi Jeremiah. I said, this explains the matter! Rebbi Jeremiah, who heard that Rebbi Eleazar said, it is everybody’s opinion, he says it is in dispute. Rebbi Yose, who did not hear that, asked which dispute? If according to Rebbi Meïr, both for Second Tithe and for the remainders of flour sacrifices, he did not do anything, if according to Rebbi Jehudah, what he did is done.

MISHNAH: With demay, one may make eruv, participate, recite grace, and recite grace in a group. One may separate it while naked or at twilight. And if one lifted the Second Tithe before the First, it is also acceptable. The oil the weaver puts on his hands is obligated for demay, that which the carder puts on wool is free from demay.

Rebbi Ḥalaphta ben Shaul stated: One may redeem demay in the bathhouse since it does not need a benediction. Hence, if the produce is certain it needs a benediction. Rebbi Mana asked before Rebbi Judan, what does he recite? If it was produce, “on the redemption of Second Tithe,” if it was money, “on turning Second Tithe profane.”

Rebbi Ḥalaphta ben Shaul stated: One may redeem demay in the bathhouse since it does not need a benediction. Hence, if the produce is certain it needs a benediction. Rebbi Mana asked before Rebbi Judan, what does he recite? If it was produce, “on the redemption of Second Tithe,” if it was money, “on turning Second Tithe profane.”

“If one lifted the Second Tithe before the First, it is also acceptable.” Hence, one should not do it on purpose. Rebbi Abba, son of Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba, Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, one may make the Second precede the First in demay. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa bar Idi in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: One should not do it, but if he did, what he did is valid.

Ulla bar Ismael in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: A person may free his ṭevel with one seah of ṭevel. How does he do it? He brings one seah of ṭevel and declares it to be Second (Tithe), redeems it, and returns to make it heave of the tithe for any other place. Ulla descended there and said this in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, but they united against him. Rav Sheshet objected, does not a Mishnah contradict: “If there were before him two baskets full of figs.” And we have stated about this: “He takes from the second basket two figs and two tenths, and a tenth of a tenth.” Why can he not take two figs, declare them to be Second (Tithe), redeem them, and return to make them heave of the tithe for any other place? Rebbi Mana said, is not the Second Tithe in the first basket containing First Tithe of the second basket? Rebbi Ḥananiah said, there it is ṭevel for the First and Second. But here, Second Tithe that was put in order after First, can you return and make it First?

Ulla bar Ismael in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: A person may free his ṭevel with one seah of ṭevel. How does he do it? He brings one seah of ṭevel and declares it to be Second (Tithe), redeems it, and returns to make it heave of the tithe for any other place. Ulla descended there and said this in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, but they united against him. Rav Sheshet objected, does not a Mishnah contradict: “If there were before him two baskets full of figs.” And we have stated about this: “He takes from the second basket two figs and two tenths, and a tenth of a tenth.” Why can he not take two figs, declare them to be Second (Tithe), redeem them, and return to make them heave of the tithe for any other place? Rebbi Mana said, is not the Second Tithe in the first basket containing First Tithe of the second basket? Rebbi Ḥananiah said, there it is ṭevel for the First and Second. But here, Second Tithe that was put in order after First, can you return and make it First?

Ulla bar Ismael in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: A person may free his ṭevel with one seah of ṭevel. How does he do it? He brings one seah of ṭevel and declares it to be Second (Tithe), redeems it, and returns to make it heave of the tithe for any other place. Ulla descended there and said this in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, but they united against him. Rav Sheshet objected, does not a Mishnah contradict: “If there were before him two baskets full of figs.” And we have stated about this: “He takes from the second basket two figs and two tenths, and a tenth of a tenth.” Why can he not take two figs, declare them to be Second (Tithe), redeem them, and return to make them heave of the tithe for any other place? Rebbi Mana said, is not the Second Tithe in the first basket containing First Tithe of the second basket? Rebbi Ḥananiah said, there it is ṭevel for the First and Second. But here, Second Tithe that was put in order after First, can you return and make it First?

Ulla bar Ismael in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: A person may free his ṭevel with one seah of ṭevel. How does he do it? He brings one seah of ṭevel and declares it to be Second (Tithe), redeems it, and returns to make it heave of the tithe for any other place. Ulla descended there and said this in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, but they united against him. Rav Sheshet objected, does not a Mishnah contradict: “If there were before him two baskets full of figs.” And we have stated about this: “He takes from the second basket two figs and two tenths, and a tenth of a tenth.” Why can he not take two figs, declare them to be Second (Tithe), redeem them, and return to make them heave of the tithe for any other place? Rebbi Mana said, is not the Second Tithe in the first basket containing First Tithe of the second basket? Rebbi Ḥananiah said, there it is ṭevel for the First and Second. But here, Second Tithe that was put in order after First, can you return and make it First?

Ulla bar Ismael in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: A person may free his ṭevel with one seah of ṭevel. How does he do it? He brings one seah of ṭevel and declares it to be Second (Tithe), redeems it, and returns to make it heave of the tithe for any other place. Ulla descended there and said this in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, but they united against him. Rav Sheshet objected, does not a Mishnah contradict: “If there were before him two baskets full of figs.” And we have stated about this: “He takes from the second basket two figs and two tenths, and a tenth of a tenth.” Why can he not take two figs, declare them to be Second (Tithe), redeem them, and return to make them heave of the tithe for any other place? Rebbi Mana said, is not the Second Tithe in the first basket containing First Tithe of the second basket? Rebbi Ḥananiah said, there it is ṭevel for the First and Second. But here, Second Tithe that was put in order after First, can you return and make it First?

Ulla bar Ismael in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: A person may free his ṭevel with one seah of ṭevel. How does he do it? He brings one seah of ṭevel and declares it to be Second (Tithe), redeems it, and returns to make it heave of the tithe for any other place. Ulla descended there and said this in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, but they united against him. Rav Sheshet objected, does not a Mishnah contradict: “If there were before him two baskets full of figs.” And we have stated about this: “He takes from the second basket two figs and two tenths, and a tenth of a tenth.” Why can he not take two figs, declare them to be Second (Tithe), redeem them, and return to make them heave of the tithe for any other place? Rebbi Mana said, is not the Second Tithe in the first basket containing First Tithe of the second basket? Rebbi Ḥananiah said, there it is ṭevel for the First and Second. But here, Second Tithe that was put in order after First, can you return and make it First?

Ulla bar Ismael in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: A person may free his ṭevel with one seah of ṭevel. How does he do it? He brings one seah of ṭevel and declares it to be Second (Tithe), redeems it, and returns to make it heave of the tithe for any other place. Ulla descended there and said this in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, but they united against him. Rav Sheshet objected, does not a Mishnah contradict: “If there were before him two baskets full of figs.” And we have stated about this: “He takes from the second basket two figs and two tenths, and a tenth of a tenth.” Why can he not take two figs, declare them to be Second (Tithe), redeem them, and return to make them heave of the tithe for any other place? Rebbi Mana said, is not the Second Tithe in the first basket containing First Tithe of the second basket? Rebbi Ḥananiah said, there it is ṭevel for the First and Second. But here, Second Tithe that was put in order after First, can you return and make it First?

Who is a trader? Everyone who brought, repeated, and came a third time. Rebbi Jonah asked, if he brought three loads together, is he not a trader; one after the other, is he a trader? Rebbi Jonah asked, does he become a trader retroactively or only for the future? What is the difference? If someone came and brought his things in order, if you say only for the future, can he tithe from one on the other! Rebbi Mana asked: Can he, his son, and his worker combine for three loads? Rebbi Jonah asked, a ship that comes from Rome and carries many kinds, do you count this only as one?

It was stated: “He who is trustworthy for purity is trustworthy for tithes.” Rebbi Yannai ben Rebbi Ismaël stated it and explained his reason: That means, if one is a guest of his, but for the public he is not trustworthy until he accepts it publicly. Rebbi Ammi in the name of Rebbi Yannai: Even I am not trustworthy until we accept it in public. Rebbi Zeïra, Rebbi Yasa, in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Even a ḥaver who sent to another ḥaver, the recipient must tithe. Rebbi Zeïra asked before Rebbi Yasa, for example, I to Rebbi Samuel ben Rav Isaac, and Rebbi Samuel ben Rav Isaac to me? He answered him, what do you want from Rebbi Samuel ben Rav Isaac, because all he eats, he eats from the market.

It was stated: “A ḥaver should not serve as waiter at the wedding feast of an am haäreẓ or the dinner of an am haäreẓ except when everything was in order and tithed under his control, even the wine ladle. But if a ḥaver acted as waiter at the wedding feast of an am haäreẓ or the dinner of an am haäreẓ this is prima facie evidence for tithes. If one saw him lying on a couch it would not be prima facie evidence, since I say that he is lying on the couch after making the required mental stipulations. If his son is lying down next to him, he has to tithe for him; he does not have to tithe for another ḥaver.”

It was stated: “A ḥaver should not serve as waiter at the wedding feast of an am haäreẓ or the dinner of an am haäreẓ except when everything was in order and tithed under his control, even the wine ladle. But if a ḥaver acted as waiter at the wedding feast of an am haäreẓ or the dinner of an am haäreẓ this is prima facie evidence for tithes. If one saw him lying on a couch it would not be prima facie evidence, since I say that he is lying on the couch after making the required mental stipulations. If his son is lying down next to him, he has to tithe for him; he does not have to tithe for another ḥaver.”

MISHNAH: The sages did not obligate bakers to separate more than the heave of the tithe and ḥallah. Grocers are not permitted to sell demay. All who sell wholesale in large quantities may sell demay. The following sell wholesale in large quantities, for example grain buyers and sellers.

HALAKHAH: There, we have stated: “If one buys from the baker, how does he tithe?” There you say, the buyer separates, and here you say, the baker separates. Rebbi Jonah said, Rebbi Eleazar and Rebbi Joḥanan disagree. One says, here if he works in purity, there if he works in impurity. The other says, here in retail, there in wholesale. We did not know who said what. Since Rebbi Joḥanan said, because of purity, it follows that Rebbi Eleazar is the one who said, here in retail, there in wholesale. It is difficult for Rebbi Joḥanan, if he works in purity, let him separate everything. It would be logical that he should not give anything because one does not deliver certain grain to the am haäreẓ. It is difficult for Rebbi Eleazar, if it is in retail, let him separate everything. Grocers are not permitted to sell demay!

The colleagues in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Because of the children lest they should eat ṭevel. Rebbi La in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, in retail, because the seller takes the large margin, the seller separates. In wholesale, because the buyer will take the large margin, the buyer separates. One statement supports one and another statement supports the other. A statement supports the colleagues: “Rebbi Neḥemiah said, that which is connected to a retail outlet is like retail, connected to a wholesale outlet it is wholesale.” A statement supports Rebbi La. It was stated: “Rebbi Ismael ben Rebbi Joḥanan ben Beroqa said, if he measured with a retail measure, he is obligated. Even if he did measure only one seah and a quarter qab, he must tithe the quarter qab.” Rebbi Zeïra said, computation of gain is between them. If he measured for him the seah at the rate of quarter qabs, since the seller takes the large margin, the seller separates. If he measures the quarter qab at the rate of seahs, since the buyer will take the large margin, the buyer separates.

Rebbi Joḥanan in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Yoẓadaq: It is a condition imposed by the Court that the heave of the tithe is on the seller and Second Tithe on the buyer. Where do we stand? If in retail, because the seller takes the large margin, the seller separates. If in wholesale, because the buyer will take the large margin, the buyer separates. Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya said, explain it if he says it is of his own harvest. Rebbi Yose said, even if you say it is not his own harvest, if he says in my opinion it was brought in order, even so they tell him that it is a condition imposed by the Court that the heave of the tithe be on the seller and Second Tithe on the buyer.

Rebbi Joḥanan in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Yoẓadaq: It is a condition imposed by the Court that the heave of the tithe is on the seller and Second Tithe on the buyer. Where do we stand? If in retail, because the seller takes the large margin, the seller separates. If in wholesale, because the buyer will take the large margin, the buyer separates. Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya said, explain it if he says it is of his own harvest. Rebbi Yose said, even if you say it is not his own harvest, if he says in my opinion it was brought in order, even so they tell him that it is a condition imposed by the Court that the heave of the tithe be on the seller and Second Tithe on the buyer.

Rebbi Joḥanan in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Yoẓadaq: It is a condition imposed by the Court that the heave of the tithe is on the seller and Second Tithe on the buyer. Where do we stand? If in retail, because the seller takes the large margin, the seller separates. If in wholesale, because the buyer will take the large margin, the buyer separates. Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya said, explain it if he says it is of his own harvest. Rebbi Yose said, even if you say it is not his own harvest, if he says in my opinion it was brought in order, even so they tell him that it is a condition imposed by the Court that the heave of the tithe be on the seller and Second Tithe on the buyer.

Rebbi Joḥanan in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Yoẓadaq: It is a condition imposed by the Court that the heave of the tithe is on the seller and Second Tithe on the buyer. Where do we stand? If in retail, because the seller takes the large margin, the seller separates. If in wholesale, because the buyer will take the large margin, the buyer separates. Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya said, explain it if he says it is of his own harvest. Rebbi Yose said, even if you say it is not his own harvest, if he says in my opinion it was brought in order, even so they tell him that it is a condition imposed by the Court that the heave of the tithe be on the seller and Second Tithe on the buyer.

MISHNAH: One lets the poor and the stranger eat demay. Rabban Gamliel let his laborers eat demay. The House of Shammai say, the administrators of charity give the tithed food to those who do not tithe, and the untithed food to those who tithe, so that it turns out that everybody eats produce that is in order. But the Sages say, one collects without asking and one distributes without asking, and he who wants to put in order should put in order.

MISHNAH: One lets the poor and the stranger eat demay. Rabban Gamliel let his laborers eat demay. The House of Shammai say, the administrators of charity give the tithed food to those who do not tithe, and the untithed food to those who tithe, so that it turns out that everybody eats produce that is in order. But the Sages say, one collects without asking and one distributes without asking, and he who wants to put in order should put in order.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Jonah said, our Mishnah speaks about poor ḥaverim, and about guests following Rebbi Joshua. It was stated: “It happened that Rebbi Joshua went to Rabban Joḥanan ben Zakkai in Beror Ḥayil, and some local people brought them fruits. Rebbi Joshua said to them, if they stay overnight, we are obliged to tithe; otherwise, we are not obliged to tithe.” Rebbi Yose said, the Mishnah speaks about am haäreẓ poor. If you restrict to poor ḥaverim, you lock the door before am haäreẓ poor. How does Rebbi Yose hold about “the stranger?” Following what was stated: “(Lev. 25:45) ‘Those who dwell among you,’ to include the stranger; Rebbi Eliezer said, that means the Gentile stranger.”

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Jonah said, our Mishnah speaks about poor ḥaverim, and about guests following Rebbi Joshua. It was stated: “It happened that Rebbi Joshua went to Rabban Joḥanan ben Zakkai in Beror Ḥayil, and some local people brought them fruits. Rebbi Joshua said to them, if they stay overnight, we are obliged to tithe; otherwise, we are not obliged to tithe.” Rebbi Yose said, the Mishnah speaks about am haäreẓ poor. If you restrict to poor ḥaverim, you lock the door before am haäreẓ poor. How does Rebbi Yose hold about “the stranger?” Following what was stated: “(Lev. 25:45) ‘Those who dwell among you,’ to include the stranger; Rebbi Eliezer said, that means the Gentile stranger.”

Rebbi Mana said, this means that he who gives in his home may not give from Sabbatical value because he would pay his debt with Sabbatical value. As it was stated: “Neither Sabbatical produce nor Second Tithe may be used to satisfy a loan or a debt. One does not use them for best men’s meals. One does not pay with them obligatory payments. One does not use them to pledge for charity in the synagogue. But one may use them for goodwill; then one has to notify.”

MISHNAH: He who buys produce from a person who is not trustworthy for tithes and forgot to tithe them may ask the seller on the Sabbath and eats on the seller’s information. At nightfall, when Sabbath ends, he may not eat until he tithed. If he did not find the seller, but another person who is not trustworthy for tithes told him that it is tithed, he may eat on that information. At nightfall when Sabbath ends, he may not eat until he tithed. Heave of the tithe that returned to its origin. Rebbi Simeon from Shezur said, even on weekdays he asks the seller and eats on his information.

MISHNAH: He who buys produce from a person who is not trustworthy for tithes and forgot to tithe them may ask the seller on the Sabbath and eats on the seller’s information. At nightfall, when Sabbath ends, he may not eat until he tithed. If he did not find the seller, but another person who is not trustworthy for tithes told him that it is tithed, he may eat on that information. At nightfall when Sabbath ends, he may not eat until he tithed. Heave of the tithe that returned to its origin. Rebbi Simeon from Shezur said, even on weekdays he asks the seller and eats on his information.

It was stated only for someone acting in error, not intentionally, as we have stated: If he forgot to tithe, if he had made no previous stipulation. But with a stipulation, one eats even on the stipulation by a friend.

May one eat on the question of another person? How is that understood? If two persons bought at the same time from him, if one of them asked him, the other may not eat until he tithed or also asked; I say he tithed one batch, but not the other. If one person bought from him two fig cakes and asked him about one of them, he may not eat from the second cake until he tithed or asked him; I say that he tithed one but not the other. At nightfall when Sabbath ends, he tithes from one on the other. According to him who says that it is because of the glory of the Sabbath, this is fine. According to him who says that the fear of the Sabbath is on him, why should he be able to tithe from one on the other?

A holiday next to the Sabbath, be it before the Sabbath or after the Sabbath, and likewise the two holidays of the diaspora, according to him who says they are one sanctity, he may eat; according to him who says that they are two sanctities, he may not eat. Even according to him who says that they are two sanctities, he may eat as long as there was no possibility to tithe between them. It was stated: “If he asks him on the holiday, he eats on the Sabbath; if he asks him on the Sabbath, he eats on the holiday.” Rebbi Jonah in the name of Rebbi Zeïra, explain it regarding produce he had intended to use on Sabbath eve. But produce he had not intended on Sabbath eve (to use during the Sabbath) is not included. Rebbi Mana said, the words of the rabbis support Rebbi Jonah, my father, since we have stated there: “He who takes a vow regarding his friend that he will eat at his place but he does not trust him with the tithes.” Rebbi Yannai ben Rebbi Ismaël in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: On the Sabbath of the preliminary marriage they permitted because of hatred. Is the Sabbath of the preliminary marriage not comparable to produce that on Sabbath eve he intended to use (later on the Sabbath)? Nevertheless, he only said “because of hatred.”

It was stated: “Heave of the tithe from demay that returned to its origin makes dema‘, not to its origin does not make dema‘. Rebbi Simeon from Shezur said, both at its origin and not at its origin it does not make dema‘.” Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya asked before Rebbi Zeïra: For one who says, it makes dema‘, it makes dema‘; for one who says, it does not make dema‘, it does not make dema‘; this is reasonable. But if one says, in its origin it makes dema‘, not in its origin it does not make dema‘; what is the difference between in its origin and not in its origin? Rebbi Ḥaggai came up. They said, this one will say, “by Moses, I shall explain the reason.” He said, by Moses, I shall explain the reason: He who says, it makes dema‘, because it permits the rest to be eaten. He who says, it does not make dema‘, because it does not permit the rest to be eaten. Rebbi La taught according to that of Rebbi Ḥaggai. Rebbi Zeïra said: A case came before Rebbi Ḥanina and he taught according to Rebbi Simeon from Shezur. Rebbi Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Jonathan: Practice does not follow Rebbi Simeon from Shezur.

“In addition, Rebbi Simeon from Shezur said: If he separated the heave of the tithe and it was burned, he asks the seller and eats on his information.” Did Rebbi Zeïra not say that a similar case came before Rebbi Ḥanina and he taught according to Rebbi Simeon from Shezur? Rebbi Avin said, this question does not compare to the first question. There it was, not that I suspect you, but since I bought wheat from you yesterday and I saw a multitude with you, I said maybe you forgot to put them in order. Were they put in order? But here, because I suspected you, I put them in order but they went up in fire. Were they put in order? Rebbi Samuel, the son of Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said that Bar Kappara stated: The fear of dema‘ is on him and he will tell the truth.

MISHNAH: Rebbi Eliezer says, nobody has to give a name to the tithe of the poor from demay. But the Sages say, he has to give a name but does not have to separate. He who gave a name to his heave of the tithe of demay, or to the certain tithe of the poor, should not separate them on the Sabbath. But if a Cohen or a poor person were used to eat from his food at his table, they may come and eat it on condition that he inform them.

MISHNAH: Rebbi Eliezer says, nobody has to give a name to the tithe of the poor from demay. But the Sages say, he has to give a name but does not have to separate. He who gave a name to his heave of the tithe of demay, or to the certain tithe of the poor, should not separate them on the Sabbath. But if a Cohen or a poor person were used to eat from his food at his table, they may come and eat it on condition that he inform them.

MISHNAH: Rebbi Eliezer says, nobody has to give a name to the tithe of the poor from demay. But the Sages say, he has to give a name but does not have to separate. He who gave a name to his heave of the tithe of demay, or to the certain tithe of the poor, should not separate them on the Sabbath. But if a Cohen or a poor person were used to eat from his food at his table, they may come and eat it on condition that he inform them.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Abba bar Huna in the name of Rav: He who eats his produce without having separated the tithe of the poor commits a deadly sin. What is the reason of Rebbi Eliezer? Because he knows that it would be a deadly sin, he will separate it. What is the reason of the rabbis? He only has to give a name but does not have to separate it.

It was stated: He is trustworthy if they saw him separate the Second Tithe. It was stated: For the Second, he is trustworthy for the First, the words of Rebbi Eliezer. But the Sages say, if he trustworthy for the First, he is trustworthy for the Second. He who is trustworthy for the Second is not trustworthy for the First. What is the reason of Rebbi Eliezer? Is it because he is not suspected of advancing the tithe, or because if he separated the Second it is a standing presumption that he separated the First? But did we not state: “Rebbi Eliezer says, nobody has to give a name to the tithe of the poor from demay.” Hence, for the Second it is needed. Since he has to separate the Second, on which the owner earns no goodwill he certainly will separate the First, on which he earns goodwill!

It was stated: He is trustworthy if they saw him separate the Second Tithe. It was stated: For the Second, he is trustworthy for the First, the words of Rebbi Eliezer. But the Sages say, if he trustworthy for the First, he is trustworthy for the Second. He who is trustworthy for the Second is not trustworthy for the First. What is the reason of Rebbi Eliezer? Is it because he is not suspected of advancing the tithe, or because if he separated the Second it is a standing presumption that he separated the First? But did we not state: “Rebbi Eliezer says, nobody has to give a name to the tithe of the poor from demay.” Hence, for the Second it is needed. Since he has to separate the Second, on which the owner earns no goodwill he certainly will separate the First, on which he earns goodwill!

It was stated: He is trustworthy if they saw him separate the Second Tithe. It was stated: For the Second, he is trustworthy for the First, the words of Rebbi Eliezer. But the Sages say, if he trustworthy for the First, he is trustworthy for the Second. He who is trustworthy for the Second is not trustworthy for the First. What is the reason of Rebbi Eliezer? Is it because he is not suspected of advancing the tithe, or because if he separated the Second it is a standing presumption that he separated the First? But did we not state: “Rebbi Eliezer says, nobody has to give a name to the tithe of the poor from demay.” Hence, for the Second it is needed. Since he has to separate the Second, on which the owner earns no goodwill he certainly will separate the First, on which he earns goodwill!

“If somebody brought out Second Tithe from his house to somebody and said: ‘It is redeemed,’ he is trustworthy; ‘redeem for me and yourself,’ he is not trustworthy.” The baraita is Rebbi Eliezer’s, since Rebbi Eliezer said, he who is trustworthy for the Second is trustworthy for the First. Rebbi Yose said, everybody agrees, they made it like additions to First Fruits. Just as additions to First Fruits are eaten in purity and are free from demay, so this is eaten as Second Tithe and is free from the First. Rebbi Ḥananiah confirmed in the name of Rebbi Issi: it is Rebbi Eliezer’s.

“If somebody brought out Second Tithe from his house to somebody and said: ‘It is redeemed,’ he is trustworthy; ‘redeem for me and yourself,’ he is not trustworthy.” The baraita is Rebbi Eliezer’s, since Rebbi Eliezer said, he who is trustworthy for the Second is trustworthy for the First. Rebbi Yose said, everybody agrees, they made it like additions to First Fruits. Just as additions to First Fruits are eaten in purity and are free from demay, so this is eaten as Second Tithe and is free from the First. Rebbi Ḥananiah confirmed in the name of Rebbi Issi: it is Rebbi Eliezer’s.

MISHNAH: He who buys from the baker, how does he tithe? He takes the heave of the tithe and ḥallah and says: One percent here on that side is tithe, the rest of the tithe is adjacent to it. That which I turned into tithe is made heave of the tithe for it and the rest is ḥallah. The Second Tithe is North (or South) of it and is redeemed by coins.

MISHNAH: He who buys from the baker, how does he tithe? He takes the heave of the tithe and ḥallah and says: One percent here on that side is tithe, the rest of the tithe is adjacent to it. That which I turned into tithe is made heave of the tithe for it and the rest is ḥallah. The Second Tithe is North (or South) of it and is redeemed by coins.

MISHNAH: He who buys from the baker, how does he tithe? He takes the heave of the tithe and ḥallah and says: One percent here on that side is tithe, the rest of the tithe is adjacent to it. That which I turned into tithe is made heave of the tithe for it and the rest is ḥallah. The Second Tithe is North (or South) of it and is redeemed by coins.

MISHNAH: He who buys from the baker, how does he tithe? He takes the heave of the tithe and ḥallah and says: One percent here on that side is tithe, the rest of the tithe is adjacent to it. That which I turned into tithe is made heave of the tithe for it and the rest is ḥallah. The Second Tithe is North (or South) of it and is redeemed by coins.

MISHNAH: He who buys from the baker, how does he tithe? He takes the heave of the tithe and ḥallah and says: One percent here on that side is tithe, the rest of the tithe is adjacent to it. That which I turned into tithe is made heave of the tithe for it and the rest is ḥallah. The Second Tithe is North (or South) of it and is redeemed by coins.

MISHNAH: He who buys from the baker, how does he tithe? He takes the heave of the tithe and ḥallah and says: One percent here on that side is tithe, the rest of the tithe is adjacent to it. That which I turned into tithe is made heave of the tithe for it and the rest is ḥallah. The Second Tithe is North (or South) of it and is redeemed by coins.

MISHNAH: He who buys from the baker, how does he tithe? He takes the heave of the tithe and ḥallah and says: One percent here on that side is tithe, the rest of the tithe is adjacent to it. That which I turned into tithe is made heave of the tithe for it and the rest is ḥallah. The Second Tithe is North (or South) of it and is redeemed by coins.

Rebbi Abin, Rebbi Shammai, in the name of Rebbi Aḥa, understood this from the following. “He who wants to separate heave and the heave of the tithe together.” As you will say there, except for that which may become sanctified as heave, here also except for that which may become sanctified as ḥallah.

We have stated ḥallah between First and Second Tithes. Rebbi Jonah in the name of Rebbi Zeïra: This means that ḥallah is not subject to “do not give too late.” Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Zeïra: The Mishnah is not formulated in sequence, do we not deal with demay? Did not Rebbi Abba, son of Rebbi Ḥiyya, say in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan that the Mishnah deals with demay; hence, not with certain produce? And here we deal with demay. Rebbi Ḥiyya stated: Also for certain. On that, Rebbi Jonah in the name of Rebbi Zeïra said, this means that ḥallah is not subject to “do not give too late.” Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Zeïra: The Mishnah is not formulated in sequence, should not ḥallah precede the First Tithe? Then ḥallah should be subject to tithes but not tithes to ḥallah, because everything that precedes another, the other is obligated for it. And we have stated in this respect: “He who makes dough from ṭevel, whether he takes ḥallah before heave or heave before ḥallah, what he did is done. Ḥallah should not be eaten until he take heave for it, heave should not be eaten until he separate ḥallah for it.” But why does First Tithe have precedence? Because it started at the threshing floor. But does the Second Tithe not start at the threshing floor? Rebbi Mattaniah said, it would have been logical that ḥallah should precede everything else. Why does First Heave have precedence? Because it started at the threshing floor and it is called “beginning.” Second Tithe, even though it started at the threshing floor, is not called “beginning.”

We have stated ḥallah between First and Second Tithes. Rebbi Jonah in the name of Rebbi Zeïra: This means that ḥallah is not subject to “do not give too late.” Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Zeïra: The Mishnah is not formulated in sequence, do we not deal with demay? Did not Rebbi Abba, son of Rebbi Ḥiyya, say in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan that the Mishnah deals with demay; hence, not with certain produce? And here we deal with demay. Rebbi Ḥiyya stated: Also for certain. On that, Rebbi Jonah in the name of Rebbi Zeïra said, this means that ḥallah is not subject to “do not give too late.” Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Zeïra: The Mishnah is not formulated in sequence, should not ḥallah precede the First Tithe? Then ḥallah should be subject to tithes but not tithes to ḥallah, because everything that precedes another, the other is obligated for it. And we have stated in this respect: “He who makes dough from ṭevel, whether he takes ḥallah before heave or heave before ḥallah, what he did is done. Ḥallah should not be eaten until he take heave for it, heave should not be eaten until he separate ḥallah for it.” But why does First Tithe have precedence? Because it started at the threshing floor. But does the Second Tithe not start at the threshing floor? Rebbi Mattaniah said, it would have been logical that ḥallah should precede everything else. Why does First Heave have precedence? Because it started at the threshing floor and it is called “beginning.” Second Tithe, even though it started at the threshing floor, is not called “beginning.”