ז׳
א׳מִי שֶׁהָיוּ לוֹ מֵאָה לוֹג שֶׁל יַיִן טָבוּל מִן הַתּוֹרָה וְאָמַר שְׁנֵי לוֹגִין שֶׁאֲנִי עָתִיד לְהַפְרִישׁ מֵהֶן הֲרֵי הֵן תְּרוּמָה וַעֲשָׂרָה מַעֲשֵׂר רִאשׁוֹן וְתִשְׁעָה מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי. לֹא יַתְחִיל וְיִשְׁתֶּה עַד שֶׁיַּנִּיחַ בְּסוֹף שִׁעוּר תְּרוּמָה וּמַעַשְׂרוֹת. אֶלָּא יַפְרִישׁ וְאַחַר כָּךְ יִשְׁתֶּה. וְאֵין אוֹמְרִין זֶה שֶׁהִנִּיחַ בַּסּוֹף כְּאִלּוּ נִבְרַר תְּחִלָּה מִפְּנֵי שֶׁחִיּוּב תְּרוּמָה וּמַעַשְׂרוֹת מִן הַתּוֹרָה וְאֵין אוֹמְרִין בְּשֶׁל תּוֹרָה נַחְשֹׁב כְּאִלּוּ נִבְרַר עַד שֶׁיִּבְרֹר:
1[The following laws apply when a person has a 100 log of wine that are tevel according to Scriptural Law.1One might argue that this law does not apply at present. And indeed, did not apply throughout the entire Second Temple period. As explained in Hilchot Terumah 1:26 and notes, from the time of the exile of the tribes of Reuven and Gad towards the end of the First Temple period, the mitzvah to separate tithes was no longer required by Scriptural Law. On the other hand, since the source of the mitzvot are Scriptural, even though their observance now is Rabbinic, we follow stringencies as if the Scriptural mitzvah still applies. If he says: "The two lugim that I will separate are terumah;2I.e., he is giving one fiftieth which is the ordinary measure separated as terumah (ibid. 3:2). the ten are the first tithe, and the nine are the second tithe,"3For the second tithe is given as a tenth of the new total once the first tithe has been separated. he should not begin drinking and leave over the quantity designated as terumah and the tithes at the end. Instead, he should make the separations and then drink. We do not say that the wine he left over at the end is retroactively considered as if it was set aside in the beginning.4See Chapter 9, Halachah 10. [The rationale for this stringency is that] the obligation [to separate] terumah and the tithes is Scriptural in origin, and with regard to [matters of] Scriptural Law, we do not say that we will consider it as if a separation has been made unless it actually has been made.5There is a difference of opinion among the Sages of the Talmud if this principle, referred to as bereirah should be applied or not (see Beitzah 37b). Because the matter is not resolved, with regard to questions of Scriptural Law, we are stringent, but with regard to matters of Rabbinic Law, we rule leniently.
ב׳הַקּוֹבֵעַ מַעַשְׂרוֹתָיו בְּפִי הֶחָבִית לֹא יִשְׁתֶּה מִשּׁוּלֶיהָ. בְּשׁוּלֶיהָ לֹא יִשְׁתֶּה מִפִּיהָ. מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהַמַּשְׁקִין מְעֹרָבִין. אֲבָל הַקּוֹבֵעַ בְּפִי הַמְּגוּרָה אוֹכֵל מִשּׁוּלֶיהָ. קָבַע בְּשׁוּלֶיהָ אוֹכֵל מִפִּיהָ:
2When a person specifies that his tithes were located at the opening of a jug [of wine], he should not drink from the bottom of the barrel. If he specifies that they are at the bottom, he should not drink from the top. [The rationale is that] the liquids intermingle.6And there is no way one can drink from the top without drinking from the bottom or drink from the bottom without drinking from the top. If, by contrast, one specified [that the tithes for produce] were at the opening of a storage container, one may eat from the bottom.7This does not represent a contradiction to the previous halachah. In that instance, the person had not separated the terumah and the tithes. He had merely stated that he would. In this instance, he has made a separation even though he did not physically remove it. If one specified that they were located at the bottom, one may eat from the top.8For the produce will not become intermingled.
ג׳וְיֵשׁ לָאָדָם לִקְבֹּעַ מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי וּפוֹדֵהוּ וְעוֹשֵׂהוּ מַעֲשֵׂר רִאשׁוֹן עַל אוֹתָן הַפֵּרוֹת אוֹ תְּרוּמַת מַעֲשֵׂר לְמָקוֹם אַחֵר:
3A person can designate certain produce as the second tithe and then redeem it.9See Hilchot Ma'aser Sheni, ch. 4, which describes how the second tithe can be redeemed for silver coinage. [Afterwards,] he may designate that same produce as the first tithe10I.e., this is referring to a situation where the person did not make the separations in the desired sequence. This is undesirable, as stated in Hilchot Terumah 3:23. for this batch of produce or terumat ma'aser for other produce.11He may not, however, separate it as terumat m'aser for this batch of produce, for it is not proper to separate terumat ma'aser before one separates the tithes themselves. See Chapter 9, Halachah 5.The Ra'avad states that one may use it as terumat ma'aser for other produce, but not as ordinary terumah.
ד׳הַמַּנִּיחַ פֵּרוֹת לִהְיוֹת מַפְרִישׁ עֲלֵיהֶן מַעַשְׂרוֹת מַפְרִישׁ עֲלֵיהֶן בְּחֶזְקַת שֶׁהֵן קַיָּמִין וְאוֹכֵל וְשׁוֹתֶה עַד שֶׁיֵּעָשׂוּ כָּל אוֹתָן הַפֵּרוֹת שֶׁהִנִּיחַ מַעֲשֵׂר וְנוֹתֵן לַלֵּוִי. מְצָאָן שֶׁאָבְדוּ הֲרֵי זֶה חוֹשֵׁשׁ לְכָל שֶׁהִפְרִישׁ וְאֵינוֹ מְעַשֵּׂר וַדַּאי:
4When a person sets aside produce to use them for the separation of tithes,12I.e., he puts aside this batch of produce. Whenever he has new produce, he measures it and calculates a tenth. Afterwards, he considers that quantity of the produce set aside as tithes. When that entire batch of produce has been designated as tithes, he gives it to a Levite. See also (Hilchot Terumah 5:26). he may continue to separate tithes relying on this produce on the assumption that it is intact, eating and drinking [from the produce from which he intended to separate tithes] until the entire quantity that was set aside has become tithes. He then gives that to a Levite. [If later] he discovers that the produce that he set aside [for tithes] has been lost, he must show concern for all the tithes that he set aside.13I.e., he must separate tithes again, lest he had made the original separation after the produce which he designated for his tithes was lost. The Mishnah (Gittin 3:8) mentions the opinion of Rabbi Elazar who maintains that one shows concern only for the separations made within the last 24 hours. Other Sages differ, however, and maintain that one must show concern for all produce separated (Kessef Mishneh; see Rav Kapach's edition of the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah).Tosafot Yom Tov (Gittin, loc. cit.) states that the Rambam's wording implies that one should separate tithes for one's produce even if that produce has already been eaten. Other authorities, however, do not accept this deduction. He should not, however, tithe [the second time] with certainty.14For perhaps, the produce that he had set aside was intact at the time he made the separation.
ה׳הַמַּלְוֶה מָעוֹת אֶת הַכֹּהֵן וְאֶת הַלֵּוִי וְאֶת הֶעָנִי לִהְיוֹת מַפְרִישׁ עַל אוֹתָן הַמָּעוֹת מֵחֶלְקוֹ מַפְרִישׁ עֲלֵיהֶן בְּחֶזְקַת שֶׁהֵן קַיָּמִין וְאֵינוֹ חוֹשֵׁשׁ שֶׁמָּא מֵתוּ הַכֹּהֵן אוֹ הַלֵּוִי אוֹ הֶעֱשִׁיר הֶעָנִי:
5When a person lends money to a priest,15Who is entitled to receive both terumah and the tithes. a Levite,16Who is entitled to receive the tithes. or a poor person,17Who is entitled to receive the tithe for the poor. so that he can separate [produce] for the money [they owe] from the portions due them,18I.e., the lender lent a Levite 100 zuz, but did not require him to pay it. Instead, he said that he would continually deduct the money in exchange for the produce he would set aside as tithes until the debt was paid, as described in the following halachah. he may continue to separate tithes on their behalf on the assumption that they are alive. He need not show concern that the priest or Levite died or the poor man became wealthy.19In which instance, they - and therefore, the lender - would not be entitled to the crops separated for these purposes.
ו׳כֵּיצַד מַפְרִישׁ עֲלֵיהֶן. מַפְרִישׁ תְּרוּמָה אוֹ מַעֲשֵׂר רִאשׁוֹן אוֹ מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי מִפֵּרוֹתָיו וּמְזַכֶּה בָּהֶן עַל יְדֵי אַחֵר לְאוֹתוֹ כֹּהֵן אוֹ הַלֵּוִי אוֹ הֶעָנִי שֶׁהִלְווּם. וְאִם הָיוּ רְגִילִין לִטּל מִמֶּנּוּ וְהוּא רָגִיל שֶׁלֹּא יִתֵּן אֶלָּא לָהֶן אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ לְזַכּוֹת עַל יְדֵי אַחֵר. וְאַחַר שֶּׁמַּפְרִישׁ מְחַשֵּׁב כַּמָּה שָׁוֶה זֶה שֶׁהִפְרִישׁ וּמְנַכֶּה מִן הַמִּלְוֶה עַד שֶׁיִּפְרַע כָּל חוֹבוֹ וּמוֹכֵר הַתְּרוּמָה לְכָל כֹּהֵן שֶׁיִּרְצֶה וְאוֹכֵל הַמַּעַשְׂרוֹת:
6How should he make these separations on their behalf? He should separate terumah, the first tithe, or the tithe for the poor20There is obviously a printing error in the standard published text of the Mishneh Torah. and give it to another person for the sake of the priest, Levite, or poor person to whom he lent money.21In this way, the produce separated formally becomes the property of the debtor. Even though ultimately the lender will be receiving the produce, he must make the separations so that the main batch of produce will not be tevel. If [the debtors] would frequently take these separations from him or if he was accustomed to give these separations to them alone, he need not give them to another person on their behalf.22He must, however, make these separations. He need not give them to another person, because since these individuals are accustomed to receiving this produce, it is considered as if he already received them (Rashi, Gittin 30a).After [the lender] makes these separations, he calculates the worth of the produce he separated and deducts it from the loan. [He continues doing this] until he repays the entire debt. He may sell the terumah to any priest of his choice and may partake of the tithes [himself].
ז׳כְּשֶׁהוּא מְחַשֵּׁב מַה שָּׁוִים הַפֵּרוֹת שֶׁהִפְרִישׁ יֵשׁ לוֹ לְחַשֵּׁב כַּשַּׁעַר הַזּוֹל וְאֵינוֹ חוֹשֵׁשׁ מִשּׁוּם רִבִּית. וְאֵין הַשְּׁבִיעִית מְשַׁמֶּטֶת חוֹב זֶה. וְאִם בָּא בַּעַל הַבַּיִת לַחֲזֹר אֵינוֹ חוֹזֵר. אֲבָל אִם רָצוּ אֵלּוּ שֶׁלָּקְחוּ הַמָּעוֹת לַחֲזֹר חוֹזְרִין. נִתְיָאֲשׁוּ מֵהֶן הַבְּעָלִים אֵין מַפְרִישִׁין עֲלֵיהֶן שֶׁאֵין מַפְרִישִׁין עַל הָאָבוּד. מֵת הַכֹּהֵן אוֹ הַלֵּוִי אוֹ הֶעָנִי שֶׁהִלְווּם אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לְהַפְרִישׁ עֲלֵיהֶן מֵחֶלְקָן כַּדֶּרֶךְ הַזּוֹ עַד שֶׁיִּטּל רְשׁוּת מִן הַיּוֹרְשִׁין. וְהוּא שֶׁיַּנִּיחַ לָהֶן קַרְקַע אֲפִלּוּ מְלֹא מַחַט. אֲבָל אִם הִנִּיחַ כְּסָפִים אֵין רְשׁוּת הַיּוֹרֵשׁ מוֹעֶלֶת. וְאִם הִלְוָם בְּבֵית דִּין עַל מְנָת שֶׁיַּפְרִישׁ עַל מָעוֹת אֵלּוּ מֵחֶלְקָם אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ לִטּל רְשׁוּת מִן הַיּוֹרְשִׁין. הֶעֱשִׁיר הֶעָנִי אֵין מַפְרִישִׁין עָלָיו אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהִלְווּהוּ בְּבֵית דִּין זוֹכֶה הַלָּה בְּמַה שֶּׁבְּיָדוֹ:
7When he calculates the worth of the produce that he set aside, he has the right to consider their value according to the lower market price.23I.e., whenever produce is sold, there is a buyer's bid and a seller's bid. The buyer's bid is always lower than the seller's. The lender may price the produce according to the buyer's bid. This is not considered as interest.24Despite the fact that he is receiving an advantage - considering the produce's worth at a lower price - for having made the loan. The Sabbatical year does not remit such a debt.25Although the Sabbatical year remits debts (Hilchot Shemitah, ch. 9), it remits only those debts for which a person must demand payment. In this instance, it is as if the payment has already been arranged (Meiri, Gittin 30a).If the lender desires to nullify this arrangement, he may not.26Our Sages ordained this measure for the sake of the recipients (Gittin, loc. cit.). But if [the borrowers] seek to do so, they may. If the owner despaired of receiving payment from them, he can no longer make these separations on their behalf. For we may not make separations because of [a debt that] was lost.27Rashi (Gittin, loc. cit.) explains that we are speaking about a situation where the lender stipulated that he would receive payment for the loan from the terumah or tithes from a particular year. That year was a year of drought and his harvest appeared lost entirely. He made a public statement of despair, acknowledging that he no longer expected to be able to collect the debt, because his fields would not grow enough crops. If, despite this condition, his fields produced crops, he is not entitled to keep the terumah and/or tithes for himself. The rationale is that he has already given up hope of their recovery.If the priest, Levite, or poor person who borrowed money dies, he cannot continue to separate on their behalf unless he receives permission from the heirs.28I.e., the arrangement to pay the debt is not automatically transferred to the heirs of the estate. They must agree to it. [Moreover, even if permission is granted,] it is effective only when [the deceased] left the heirs [a tract of] land at least the size of a needle.29As long as the testator possesses land, his estate is responsible for the debt, because the land is on lien to it. Hence, his heirs can continue the arrangement if they so choose. If, however, he left them only money, permission from the heir is not effective.30If the deceased left only movable property, the debt does not create a lien on the estate. There is a mitzvah for them to pay the debt, but no binding obligation. Hence, they cannot have terumah or tithes separated for the sake of paying the debt. If he made the loan in court on the condition that he will make the separations on their behalf for this money, it is not necessary for him to receive permission from the heirs.31For it is as if the court agreed that all the priests and/or Levites would accept responsibility for the debt in the event of the debtor's death.If the poor person became wealthy, he may no longer separate [the tithe for the poor] on his behalf.32For a wealthy person cannot be a recipient of the tithes for the poor. Even though he made the loan in court, [the recipient] may retain the funds in his possession.33For it is as if the lender specified that he would accept this method as payment for the debt. If that method is no longer viable, he must suffer the loss.
ח׳יִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁאָמַר לְבֶן לֵוִי כּוֹר מַעֲשֵׂר יֵשׁ לְךָ בְּיָדִי רַשַּׁאי בֶּן לֵוִי לַעֲשׂוֹתוֹ תְּרוּמַת מַעֲשֵׂר עַל מָקוֹם אַחֵר אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא מָשַׁךְ. וְאִם נְתָנוֹ הַיִּשְׂרָאֵל לְלֵוִי אַחֵר אֵין לוֹ עָלָיו אֶלָּא תַּרְעֹמֶת:
8When an Israelite tells a Levite: "I am in possession of a kor34A measure of volume. of tithes for you," the Levite has the right to designate that produce as terumat ma'aser for other produce even if he did not draw it into his possession.35I.e., and thus, he has not formally acquired it as his own. Nevertheless, he can rely on the assumption that a Jew will not act unfaithfully and will keep his word (Bava Metzia 49a). If the Israelite gives it to another Levite, the first individual has nothing more than complaints against him.36The fact that by changing his mind and failing to keep his word, the Israelite caused a spiritual difficulty for the first Levite - for he caused him to violate a transgression by partaking of tithes for which terumat ma'aser was not separated - does not create a financial liability.
ט׳מִי שֶׁהָיוּ לוֹ פֵּרוֹת בִּמְגוּרָה וְנָתַן סְאָה לְלֵוִי וּסְאָה לְעָנִי לֹא יַפְרִישׁ שְׁמֹנֶה סְאִין מִן הַמְּגוּרָה וְיֹאכְלֵם. אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן יוֹדֵעַ שֶׁשְּׁתֵּי סְאִין שֶׁל מַעַשְׂרוֹת קַיָּמִין. אֲבָל אִם אָכְלוּ מֵהֶן הַלֵּוִי וְהֶעָנִי אֵינוֹ מַפְרִישׁ עֲלֵיהֶן אֶלָּא לְפִי חֶשְׁבּוֹן הַנִּשְׁאָר מִשְּׁתֵּי הַסְּאִין:
9When a person has produce in a silo and gives a se'ah to a Levite37As the tithes.and a se'ah to a poor person,38As the tithe for the poor. As the Rambam writes in his Commentary to the Mishnah (Terumot 4:2), he does not have to separate a full se'ah as the tithes for the poor, for once the first tithe has been separated, all that is necessary is to separate a tenth from the new total and this will be slightly less than a se'ah. he should not set aside eight se'ah from the silo and partake of it39I.e., he is thinking that the tithes will have been separated for these eight se'ah. unless he knows with certainty that the two se'ah of the tithes are still intact. If, however, the Levite and/or the poor person partook of them, he may set aside only an amount of grain proportionate to what remains from the two se'ah.40I.e., the produce possessed by each of the recipients should be one tenth of the amount of produce that he uses. We do not say that the produce that he originally separated can serve as the tithes for the produce he will set aside afterwards unless it is intact. See Halachah 4.
י׳עֲנִיִּים שֶׁהֶחְלִיפוּ מַתְּנוֹתֵיהֶן עִם בַּעַל הַבַּיִת כְּגוֹן שֶׁנָּתְנוּ לוֹ סְאָה שֶׁל לֶקֶט אוֹ שִׁכְחָה וּפֵאָה וּמַעֲשֵׂר עָנִי וְנָטְלוּ סְאָה מִן הַגֹּרֶן. זֶה שֶׁנָּטַל מֵהֶם פָּטוּר מִן הַמַּעֲשֵׂר אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁנַּעֲשָׂה בִּרְשׁוּת בַּעַל הַבַּיִת. וְזֶה שֶׁנָּטְלוּ מִמֶּנּוּ חַיָּב אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא חֵלֶף מַתְּנוֹתֵיהֶן הַפְּטוּרִין:
10[The following laws apply when] poor people exchange the presents given them with the owner of the field, i.e., they gave him a se'ah of leket, shichachah, peah or the tithes for the poor and they took a se'ah of grain from the grain pile.41I.e., the owner acted generously with the poor people, taking a se'ah of their presents - which is usually produce of inferior quality - and exchanging it for a se'ah of quality produce from the grain pile. [The grain] he takes from them is exempt from the tithes,42For there is no obligation to separate tithes from the presents of the poor (Hilchot Terumah 2:9). even though it was prepared in the domain of the owner. [Tithes] must be separated from [the grain] they take from him even though it was given in exchange for their presents that are exempt.
י״אמִי שֶׁהָיוּ לְפָנָיו שְׁתֵּי כַּלְכָּלוֹת שֶׁל טֶבֶל שֶׁנִּטְּלָה תְּרוּמָתָן וְאָמַר מַעַשְׂרוֹת זוֹ בָּזוֹ הָרִאשׁוֹנָה מְעֻשֶּׂרֶת. אָמַר מַעַשְׂרוֹת זוֹ בָּזוֹ וְזוֹ בָּזוֹ הָרִאשׁוֹנָה מְעֵשֶּׂרֶת שֶׁהֲרֵי קָבַע מַעַשְׂרוֹתֶיהָ בַּשְּׁנִיָּה. וְאֵין הַשְּׁנִיָּה מְעֵשֶּׂרֶת שֶׁאֵין מַפְרִישִׁין מַעֲשֵׂר מִן הָרִאשׁוֹנָה שֶׁכְּבָר נִפְטְרָה עַל הַשְּׁנִיָּה שֶׁעֲדַיִן הִיא חַיֶּבֶת בְּמַעֲשַׂר שְׁתֵּיהֶן:
11[The following laws apply when] there are two baskets of tevel from which terumah was separated in front of a person and he says: "Let the tithes from this one be in the other one." The tithing of the first basket is effective. If he says, "Let the tithes from this one be in the other one and [the tithes for] the second one be in this one," the tithing of the first basket is effective, for he has established its tithes within the second basket. The tithing of the second basket is not effective because tithes cannot be set aside from the first basket because the obligation to tithe has already been discharged for the second basket from which the tithes from both must be separated.43As stated in Chapter 1, Halachah 6, one may not separate tithes from produce that is exempt from the mitzvah of tithing or for which the obligation to tithe has already been discharged.
י״באָמַר מַעַשְׂרוֹת שְׁתֵּי כַּלְכָּלוֹת אֵלּוּ מַעֲשֵׂר כָּל אַחַת מֵהֶן קָבוּעַ בַּחֲבֶרְתָּהּ קָרָא שֵׁם וּכְבָר קָבַע מַעַשְׂרוֹתֵיהֶן בָּהֶן וּמוֹצִיא הַמַּעַשְׂרוֹת שֶׁלָּהֶן וְאֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לְהוֹצִיא עֲלֵיהֶן מַעַשְׂרוֹת מִמָּקוֹם אַחֵר:
12If one says: "With regard to the tithes for these two baskets. The tithes for each one are established in the other," he has designated the tithes by name and has established the tithes within them. He therefore separates the tithes from them. He may not separate the tithes from another source.44For he has designated the tithes as coming from those baskets.
י״גוְכֵיצַד מְעַשְּׂרָן. מוֹצִיא מַעֲשַׂר שְׁתֵּיהֶן מֵאַחַת מֵהֶן אוֹ מְעַשֵּׂר כָּל אַחַת מֵהֶן מִמֶּנָּה אִם הָיוּ שָׁווֹת. וְאִם הָיְתָה אַחַת גְּדוֹלָה מֵחֲבֶרְתָּהּ מַפְרִישׁ מִן הַקְּטַנָּה מַעֲשַׂר הַגְּדוֹלָה וּמִן הַגְּדוֹלָה מַעֲשַׂר הַקְּטַנָּה:
13How are the tithes separated [in the above situation]? One may separate the tithes for both of them from one of them or he should separate the tithes from each one of them from itself if they were of equal [size].45From the Tosefta (Demai 8:12), it appears that if the piles of produce are equal, it makes no difference to the person from which pile he makes the separations. Thus he can separate them as he desires (Radbaz). If one of them was larger than the other, one should separate the tithes for the larger one from the smaller one and the tithes for the smaller one from the larger one.46For his statements indicate that he desired to separate the tithes for one pile from the other.
ח׳
א׳הַפֵּרוֹת שֶׁהוּרַם מֵהֶן תְּרוּמָה גְּדוֹלָה וּתְרוּמַת מַעֲשֵׂר הֵן הַנִּקְרָאִין חֻלִּין. וְאִם הִפְרִישׁ מֵהֶן שְׁאָר מַעַשְׂרוֹתֵיהֶן הֵן הַנִּקְרָאִין חֻלִּין מְתֻקָּנִין בְּכָל מָקוֹם:
1Produce from which the great terumah and terumat ma'aser have been separated are referred to as "ordinary produce."1I.e., because the elements of the produce that are sacred have been removed from it [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Demai 7:7)]. Terumat ma'aser should not be separated before the tithes themselves. Nevertheless, if one made such a separation, it is acceptable (Chapter 9, Halachah 5). When the other tithes have been separated from it, it is universally called "ordinary produce that has been made acceptable."
ב׳טֶבֶל שֶׁנִּתְעָרֵב בְּחֻלִּין מְתֻקָּנִין מִין בְּמִינוֹ שֶׁאִי אֶפְשָׁר לְהַלֵּךְ אַחַר הַטַּעַם. אִם יֵשׁ לוֹ פֵּרוֹת אֲחֵרוֹת מוֹצִיא עַל אוֹתוֹ טֶבֶל תְּרוּמָה וּמַעַשְׂרוֹת לְפִי חֶשְׁבּוֹן. וְאִם אֵין לוֹ פֵּרוֹת אֲחֵרוֹת לְהוֹצִיא עַל אוֹתוֹ טֶבֶל הֲרֵי הַכּל אָסוּר עַד שֶׁיַּפְרִישׁ. וּכְשֶׁהוּא מַפְרִישׁ מַפְסִיד מִן הַחֻלִּין הַמְתֻקָּנִין כְּדֵי תְּרוּמַת מַעֲשֵׂר שֶׁבַּטֶּבֶל:
2[The following laws apply when] tevel2In this instance, the term tevel refers to produce from which the tithes and terumat ma'aser have not been separated. Although the term has a more inclusive meaning, from the continuation of the Rambam's words, this appears to be the intent here. becomes mixed together with the same species of ordinary produce that has been made acceptable in which instance, [the tevel cannot be considered insignificant] because its flavor [cannot be detected].3I.e., were the tevel to be of another type of produce than the ordinary produce, the question of whether or not it is considered insignificant would depend on whether its flavor is detectable. In this situation, however, the two collections of produce are of the same species, so taste is not a factor and the tevel cannot be considered as insignificant.When tevel is mixed with its own species, it is never nullified even if it is mixed with far more than its own size. The rationale is that it is a devar sheyeish lo matirin, i.e., the prohibition can be corrected by making the appropriate separations (Hilchot Issurei Ma'achalot 15:6). If he has other produce, he should separate the terumat [ma'aser] and the tithes for the tevel according to the appropriate reckoning.4I.e., if he knows how much produce was mixed in, he can make the appropriate separations even if the produce itself is not distinct. If he does not have other produce from which to make the separations for that tevel, the entire mixture is forbidden until he makes separations from it. When he makes these separations, he forfeits a portion from the ordinary produce that has been made acceptable that is equivalent to the terumat ma'aser that must be separated from the tevel.5I.e., one hundredth of the tevel. The Rambam explains what he means by forfeiting this amount and why one must do so in the following halachah.
ג׳כֵּיצַד. מֵאָה סְאָה שֶׁל טֶבֶל שֶׁנִּתְעָרֵב בְּמֵאָה סְאָה שֶׁל חֻלִּין מְתֻקָּנִין מַפְרִישׁ מִן הַכּל אֶחָד וּמֵאָה. וְכָל שֶׁהִפְרִישׁ טֶבֶל וְיִשָּׁאֵר צ"ט חֻלִּין מְתֻקָּנִין נִמְצָא מַפְסִיד סְאָה אַחַת. וְכֵן אִם הָיָה אוֹתוֹ טֶבֶל טָבוּל לִתְרוּמָה מַפְסִיד מִן הַחֻלִּין הַמְתֻקָּנִין כְּדֵי תְּרוּמָה וּתְרוּמַת מַעֲשֵׂר. וְלָמָּה מַפְסִיד סְאָה זוֹ כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יֹאמַר מֵאָה שֶׁהִפְרִישׁ הֵן מֵאָה שֶׁל חֻלִּין וְהַמֵּאָה שֶׁנִּשְׁאֲרוּ הוּא הַטֶּבֶל. וְכֵן אִם הָיָה הַטֶּבֶל פָּחוֹת מִן הַחֻלִּין אוֹ מְרֻבֶּה עַל הַחֻלִּין מַגְבִּיהַּ הַטֶּבֶל וּכְדֵי תְּרוּמַת מַעֲשֵׂר שֶׁבַּטֶּבֶל מִן הַחֻלִּין אוֹ כְּדֵי תְּרוּמָה וּתְרוּמַת מַעֲשֵׂר אִם הָיָה הַטֶּבֶל טָבוּל לִתְרוּמָה:
3What is implied? If 100 se'ah of tevel is mixed with 100 se'ah of ordinary produce that has been made acceptable, he should separate 101 [se'ah] from the entire mixture. Everything that he sets aside is considered as tevel. Thus 99 se'ah of ordinary produce that has been made acceptable remain. He has thus lost a se'ah [of the ordinary produce].6I.e., it is considered as if the se'ah of terumat ma'aser fell into the ordinary produce in which instance, it would be necessary to remove one se'ah from the mixture [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Demai 7:7)]. Similarly, if terumah had also not been separated from the tevel, he must forfeit an amount from the ordinary produce that has been made acceptable that is equivalent to the terumah and terumat ma'aser [to be separated from the tevel].7I.e., three se'ah, two se'ah for the great terumah and one se'ah for the terumat ma'aser.Why must he forfeit this se'ah?8For the se'ah that will ultimately be separated from the tevel can be considered as the se'ah that must be removed from the ordinary produce (ibid.). So that he will not say: "The 100 se'ah that I set aside are ordinary produce and the 100 that remain are tevel."9For the opposite is true, the produce that remains is the ordinary produce (ibid.). Similarly, if the amount of the tevel exceeded or was less than ordinary produce, one should separate [an amount equivalent] to the tevel and [an amount] from the ordinary produce [equivalent] to the terumat ma'aser [to be separated from the tevel] or equivalent to the terumah and terumat ma'aser [to be separated] if it was tevel from which terumah was not separated.
ד׳וְכֵן אִם נִתְעָרֵב מַעֲשֵׂר טָבוּל בְּחֻלִּין מְתֻקָּנִין אוֹסֵר בְּכָל שֶׁהוּא. אִם יֵשׁ לוֹ מַעֲשֵׂר אַחֵר מוֹצִיא אוֹתוֹ עַל מַעֲשֵׂר הַטָּבוּל תְּרוּמַת מַעֲשֵׂר לְפִי חֶשְׁבּוֹן. וְאִם אֵין לוֹ מַעֲשֵׂר מַגְבִּיהַּ הַמַּעֲשֵׂר שֶׁנִּתְעָרֵב וּמַפְסִיד מִן הַחֻלִּין הַמְתֻקָּנִין כְּדֵי תְּרוּמַת מַעֲשֵׂר שֶׁבַּמַעֲשֵׂר הַטָּבוּל:
4Similarly, if tithes10I.e., produce that had been separated as the tithes. Beforehand, terumah had been separated. that were tevel11I.e., a person separated tithes and gave them to a Levite who did not separate terumat ma'aser from them as of yet. became mixed with ordinary produce that has been made acceptable, even the slightest amount causes the mixture to be prohibited. If the person has other tithes, he should make a separation for the terumat ma'aser for the tithes that require this according to the appropriate proportion.12Setting aside one tenth of the quantity of the tithes. This is the desired approach, because then the necessary separations are being made without losing anything. If he does not have other tithes,13And thus cannot exercise the above option. he should remove the tithes and forfeit from the ordinary produce that has been made acceptable an amount equal to the terumat ma'aser in the tithes.14I.e., one tenth of the tithes.
ה׳כֵּיצַד. מֵאָה מַעֲשֵׂר שֶׁנִּתְעָרֵב בְּמֵאָה חֻלִּין מְתֻקָּנִין מַפְרִישׁ מִן הַכּל מֵאָה וְעֶשֶׂר וְכָל שֶׁהִפְרִישׁ מַעֲשֵׂר וְהַתִּשְׁעִים הַנִּשְׁאָרוֹת הֵן חֻלִּין כְּשֶׁהָיוּ. וְכֵן אִם הָיוּ הַחֻלִּין מְרֻבִּין עַל הַמַּעֲשֵׂר הַטָּבוּל אוֹ פְּחוּתִים מִמֶּנּוּ מַפְרִישׁ הַמַּעֲשֵׂר וּכְדֵי תְּרוּמַת מַעֲשֵׂר שֶׁבַּמַעֲשֵׂר הַטָּבוּל מִן הַחֻלִּין:
5What is implied? 100 [se'ah of] tithes become mixed with 100 [se'ah of] ordinary produce that has been made acceptable. He should separate 110 se'ah from the entire mixture. Everything that he separates is considered as the tithes. The 90 [se'ah] that remain are ordinary produce as before. Similarly, if the amount of the ordinary produce exceeds or is less than that of these tithes, he should separate the tithes and from the ordinary produce, an amount equivalent to the terumat ma'aser in the tithes.15In his Commentary to the Mishnah (op. cit.), the Rambam explains that this ruling is given because the situation at hand is an intermediate level between an instance where terumat ma'aser becomes mixed with ordinary produce (in which instance 101 times the amount of terumat ma'aser would be necessary) and a situation where the terumat ma'aser need not be considered at all. There is a basis for such leniency, since ultimately, no separation had been made and terumat ma'aser was never mixed with the produce. On the other hand, since a tenth of the tithes is fit to be separated as terumat ma'aser, some recognition should be made. Hence our Sages arrived at the above compromise.
ו׳טֶבֶל שֶׁנִּתְעָרֵב בְּמַעֲשֵׂר טָבוּל אִם הָיָה הַטֶּבֶל כַּמַעֲשֵׂר מַפְסִיד מִן הַטֶּבֶל כְּדֵי תְּרוּמַת מַעֲשֵׂר שֶׁבּוֹ. כֵּיצַד. מֵאָה סְאָה טֶבֶל שֶׁנִּתְעָרֵב בְּמֵאָה סְאָה מַעֲשֵׂר מַפְרִישׁ אֶחָד וּמֵאָה וְזֶה שֶׁהִפְרִישׁ מַעֲשֵׂר וְתִשְׁעִים וְתֵשַׁע הַנִּשְׁאָרוֹת טֶבֶל. הָיָה הַטֶּבֶל מְרֻבֶּה עַל הַמַּעֲשֵׂר מַפְרִישׁ הַמַּעֲשֵׂר בִּלְבַד. וְלֹא יַפְסִיד מִן הַטֶּבֶל כְּלוּם שֶׁאִם יִקְרָא שֵׁם לִתְרוּמַת מַעֲשֵׂר שֶׁנִּטְבַּל נִמְצָא הַמַּעֲשֵׂר מְדֻמָּע בִּתְרוּמַת מַעֲשֵׂר שֶׁל טֶבֶל שֶׁעָלְתָה עִמּוֹ. הָיָה הַמַּעֲשֵׂר מְרֻבֶּה עַל הַטֶּבֶל קוֹרֵא שֵׁם לִתְרוּמַת מַעֲשֵׂר [שֶׁבַּטֶּבֶל] וּמַפְרִישׁ הַטֶּבֶל וּכְדֵי תְּרוּמַת מַעֲשֵׂר שֶׁל טִבְלוֹ אֶחָד מִמֵּאָה מִן הַמַּעֲשֵׂר וְיִהְיֶה הַטֶּבֶל כֻּלּוֹ מְדֻמָּע וְיִמְכְּרֶנָּה לְכֹהֵן חוּץ מִדְּמֵי שְׁתֵּי תְּרוּמוֹת שֶׁבּוֹ וְנִמְצָא מַפְסִיד מִן הַמַּעֲשֵׂר אֶחָד מִמֵּאָה שֶׁבּוֹ שֶׁהוּא כְּמוֹ תְּרוּמַת מַעֲשֵׂר שֶׁבַּטֶּבֶל. כֵּיצַד. מֵאָה טֶבֶל עִם מָאתַיִם מַעֲשֵׂר מַפְרִישׁ מֵאָה וְשָׁלֹשׁ וְהַשָּׁלֹשׁ הֵן תְּרוּמַת מַעֲשֵׂר שֶׁל מֵאָה טֶבֶל וְשִׁעוּר תְּרוּמַת מַעֲשֵׂר מִמָּאתַיִם כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יָבוֹא לִטְעוֹת אִם נִתְעָרְבוּ בִּכְמוֹתוֹ וְיִשָּׁאֵר קצ"ז וְהֵם מַעֲשֵׂר כְּשֶׁהָיוּ:
6[The following laws apply when] tevel becomes mixed together with tithes16I.e., produce that had been separated as the tithes. Beforehand, terumah had been separated. that were tevel.17I.e., a person separated tithes and gave them to a Levite who did not separate terumat ma'aser from them as of yet. If the amount of tevel was equivalent to the amount of the tithes, he must forfeit from the tevel an amount equivalent to the terumat ma'aser it contains.18I.e., 1/100th of the tevel.What is implied? There were 100 se'ah of tevel that became mixed with 100 se'ah of tithes. He should separate 101 [se'ah]; they are considered as tithes.19The se'ah of terumat ma'aser from the tevel that is added is considered as mixed in with the tithes (ordinary) produce and therefore betal, subsumed, in it. Hence the person can make use of the produce in the ordinary manner. The 99 remaining are considered as tevel.20The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam. The commentaries justify the Rambam's view.If there was more tevel than tithes, he should separate the tithes alone and he does not forfeit anything from the tevel. For if he would designate the terumat ma'aser of the tevel,21And thus separate an additional amount. the tithes would be meduma,22A mixture of terumah and ordinary produce. An ordinary person cannot benefit from such a mixture. Instead, it must be sold to a priest at the price of terumah with the exception of the price of the portion that is terumat ma'aser, as the Rambam continues to explain. The tithes would be meduma, because there would not be enough ordinary produce for the terumat ma'aser to be subsumed within them. a mixture of [the tithes]23Which are ordinary produce. and the terumat ma'aser from the tithes which are separated together.If there were more tithes than tevel, he should designate the terumat ma'aser in the tevel, setting aside the tevel and an amount equivalent to the terumat ma'aser for the tevel, i.e., one one-hundredth of the tithe. The tevel should be considered as if it is all meduma and sold to a priest with the exception of the worth of the two [portions of] terumah in it. Thus he will forfeit one hundredth of the tithes which is equivalent to the terumat ma'aser in the tevel.What is implied? If there were 100 [se'ah] tevel with 200 [se'ah] of the tithes, he should set aside 103. The three [se'ah] are the terumat ma'aser of the 100 [se'ah] of tevel and the measure of terumat ma'aser for the 200 [se'ah of the tithes]. [This separation is necessary] so that people will not come to err if [the tithes] became mixed with an equivalent amount [of tevel]. Therefore he should leave 197 [se'ah] which will remain tithes as they were.24In this way, he is forfeiting from the tithes the amount of terumat ma'aser in the tithes and the amount of terumat ma'aser in the tevel. The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam and the commentaries support the Rambam's decision.
ז׳מִי שֶׁהָיוּ לוֹ עֶשֶׂר שׁוּרוֹת שֶׁל עֶשֶׂר עֶשֶׂר כַּדֵּי יַיִן וְקָבַע כַּד אֶחָד מִשּׁוּרָה הַחִיצוֹנָה מַעֲשֵׂר עַל מָקוֹם אַחֵר וְאֵין יָדוּעַ אֵי זוֹ שׁוּרָה הַחִיצוֹנָה הִיא. נוֹטֵל שְׁתֵּי חָבִיּוֹת בַּאֲלַכְסוֹן וּמְעָרֵב שְׁתֵּיהֶן וּמַפְרִישׁ מֵהֶן:
7[The following laws apply when a person] has [a stack with] ten lines, each containing ten barrels of wine and [the owner] allocated25The commentaries explain that we are not speaking about an instance where he actually set aside the barrel as tithes, for the Rambam concludes the halachah by saying that he should set aside the tithes. Instead, he merely pledged to separate a barrel from that surface for ten barrels of other wine. one barrel of the outer line26I.e., one of the external surfaces of the cube that is the pile [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Demai 7:8)]. as tithes for other wine,27The Rambam mentions this point, because otherwise, one could rightly ask: Why does the Mishnah (ibid.) speak about only one barrel of wine as tithes for 100 barrels (Radbaz)? but he does not know which outer line [he intended]. He should take two barrels from [the corners] on a diagonal,28Our translation is taken from the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (ibid.). The intent is that each of the barrels on the corners is part of two surfaces. Since he is taking a barrel from opposite corners, he will have certainly taken a barrel from the surface he intended. Nevertheless, since he does not know which one of the two is appropriate, he should mix them together. mix them, and separate [the tithes] from them.29Preferably, he should also use the remaining amount as tithes for other produce. Thus the barrel separated will be used entirely as tithes (Kin'at Eliyahu).
ח׳קְבָעָהּ בַּחֲצִי שׁוּרָה הַחִיצוֹנָה וְאֵין יָדוּעַ אֵי זוֹ חֲצִי שׁוּרָה הִיא נוֹטֵל אַרְבַּע חָבִיּוֹת מֵאַרְבַּע זָוִיּוֹת. קְבָעָהּ בְּשׁוּרָה אַחַת מֵהֶן וְאֵין יָדוּעַ אֵי זוֹ שׁוּרָה הִיא נוֹטֵל שׁוּרָה אַחַת בַּאֲלַכְסוֹן. קְבָעָהּ בַּחֲצִי שׁוּרָה וְאֵין יָדוּעַ אֵי זוֹ חֲצִי שׁוּרָה הִיא נוֹטֵל שְׁתֵּי שׁוּרוֹת בַּאֲלַכְסוֹן שֶׁהֲרֵי נָטַל חָבִית מִכָּל חֲצִי שׁוּרָה וּמְעָרֵב וּמַפְרִישׁ:
8If he allocated [one barrel from] the half30These and the following bracketed additions are made on the basis of the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (loc. cit.). of an outer row [as tithes], but does not know from which [outer] half a row, he should take four barrels, [one] from each of the corners.31Each of the barrels is part of two outer half rows, so that the barrel he intended to allocate is certainly among these four barrels. If he allocated [a barrel from] one row, but does not know which row, he should take [a barrel] from a diagonal row.32By doing so, he will have taken a barrel from every row. If he allocated [a barrel from] half a row, but does not know which half a row, he should take [a barrel] from two diagonal rows.33In a criss-cross as depicted in the accompanying diagram. Thus he will be taking a barrel from each half row. He should then mix them together and separate [the tithes].
ט׳קָבַע הַמַּעֲשֵׂר בְּכַד אַחַת מֵהֶן וְאֵין יָדוּעַ אֵי זוֹ הִיא נוֹטֵל מִכָּל כַּד וְכַד מִן הַמֵּאָה וּמְעָרֵב וּמַפְרִישׁ כְּדֵי כַּד אַחַת וּמְעַשֵּׂר:
9If he allocated one barrel as tithes but does not know which barrel it is, he should take [some wine] from each of the 100 barrels, mix it together, and separate enough for one barrel as tithes.
ט׳
א׳בִּימֵי יוֹחָנָן כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל שֶׁהָיָה אַחַר שִׁמְעוֹן הַצַּדִּיק שָׁלְחוּ בֵּית דִּין הַגָּדוֹל וּבָדְקוּ בְּכָל גְּבוּל יִשְׂרָאֵל וּמָצְאוּ שֶׁהַכּל זְהִירִים בִּתְרוּמָה גְּדוֹלָה וּמַפְרִישִׁין אוֹתָהּ. אֲבָל מַעֲשֵׂר רִאשׁוֹן וּמַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי וּמַעֲשַׂר עָנִי הָיוּ עַמֵּי הָאָרֶץ מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל מְקִלִּין עַל עַצְמָן וְלֹא הָיוּ מַפְרִישִׁין אוֹתָן. לְפִיכָךְ גָּזְרוּ שֶׁלֹּא יְהֵא נֶאֱמָן עַל הַמַּעַשְׂרוֹת אֶלָּא אֲנָשִׁים נֶאֱמָנִים. אֲבָל עַמֵּי הָאָרֶץ פֵּרוֹתֵיהֶן סָפֵק וְאֵין נֶאֱמָנִין לוֹמַר מְעֵשָּׂרִין הֵן. וְזֶהוּ הַנִּקְרָא דְּמַאי:
1In the age of Yochanan the High Priest who served after Shimon the Just,1I.e., not the Hasmonean High Priest of that name who became a Sadducee (Kessef Mishneh). the High Court sent emissaries who searched throughout the entire territory of Israel. They discovered that everyone was careful with regard to the great terumah2Since it is punishable by death at the hand of heaven, people were meticulous in separating it [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Demai 1:1). and would separate it. But with regard to the first tithe, the second tithe, and the tithe for the poor, the common people among Israel would be lax and would not separate it.3The majority of the common people would separate the tithes as well. Nevertheless, because there was a significant minority who did not, our Sages imposed this stringency. Therefore [the Sages] decreed that only the word of trustworthy people4See Chapter 10, Halachot 1-2. would be relied upon with regard to tithes.5I.e., if such people say that their produce was tithed, we accept their word. [The status of the produce of] the common people, by contrast is doubtful. We do not rely on them if they say that they separated the tithes. This is called demai.6The name demai is a composite of the Aramaic words da mai, meaning "This, what is its status?" (Radbaz).See also Hilchot Berachot 1:20 which states that it is necessary to recite a blessing before partaking of demai. That indicates that although our Sages ordained that one should separate the tithes before partaking of it, they did not consider partaking of it an outright prohibition. For if so, reciting a blessing would not be in place.
ב׳וְהִתְקִינוּ שֶׁלֹּא יְהֵא אָדָם מַפְרִישׁ מִן הַדְּמַאי אֶלָּא תְּרוּמַת מַעֲשֵׂר מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא עֲוֹן מִיתָה. וּמַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי שֶׁאֵין בָּזֶה הֶפְסֵד שֶׁהֲרֵי בְּעָלָיו אוֹכְלִין אוֹתוֹ. אֲבָל מַעֲשֵׂר רִאשׁוֹן וּמַעֲשַׂר עָנִי אֵין מַפְרִישׁ מִן הַדְּמַאי מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא סָפֵק וְהַמּוֹצִיא מֵחֲבֵרוֹ עָלָיו הָרְאָיָה. לְפִיכָךְ אוֹמֵר לַלֵּוִי אוֹ לֶעָנִי הָבֵא רְאָיָה שֶׁאֵינוֹ מְעֵשָּׂר וְטֹל מַעַשְׂרוֹת:
2They ordained that a person should separate only terumat ma'aser from the demai, for it is a transgression punishable by death and the second tithe, for there is no loss in doing so since the owner partakes of it. One need not, however, separate the first tithe or the tithe for the poor from demai because [the obligation] is doubtful and [whenever one desires] to expropriate property from a colleague, the burden of proof is on him. Therefore he tells the Levite or the poor person:7I.e., to whom these tithes would be given. "Bring proof that it is not tithed," and then take the tithes.
ג׳אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין מַפְרִישִׁין מַעֲשַׂר עָנִי מִן הַדְּמַאי צָרִיךְ לִקְרוֹת לוֹ שֵׁם וְאֵינוֹ מַפְרִישׁ וְאוֹמֵר עִשּׂוּר מַה שֶּׁיֵּשׁ כָּאן מַעֲשַׂר עָנִי כְּדֵי לִקְבֹּעַ מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי שֶׁמַּעֲשַׂר עָנִי בִּשְׁלִישִׁית וְשִׁשִּׁית בִּמְקוֹם מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי שֶׁל שְׁאָר שְׁנֵי הַשָּׁבוּעַ:
3Even though one does not separate the tithe for the poor from demai, it is necessary to designate it without separating it. One says: "A tenth of what is here is the tithe for the poor. [This is done] to firmly establish [the obligation of] the second tithe.8I.e., the Sages ordained this stringency with regard to the tithe for the poor, so that the people will be careful in their observance of the second tithe. For the tithe for the poor is given in the third and sixth years instead of the second tithe given in the other years of the Sabbatical cycle.
ד׳כְּשֶׁמַּפְרִישִׁין מִן הַדְּמַאי תְּרוּמַת מַעֲשֵׂר וּמַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי אֵין מְבָרְכִין עֲלֵיהֶן לְפִי שֶׁהוּא סָפֵק. לְפִיכָךְ מֻתָּר לְהַפְרִישׁ כְּשֶׁהוּא עֵרוֹם:
4When terumat ma'aser and the second tithe are separated from demai, a blessing is not recited, because [the obligation was instituted because] of a doubt.9Although one's observance fulfills a decree of our Sages and blessings are recited for the observance of Rabbinic commandments, e.g., the recitation of Hallel, lighting Shabbat and Chanukah candles, washing hands, and the like, a blessing is not recited in this instance, because this obligation was instituted only because of doubt, not as a practice with inherent positive virtue. Therefore it is permitted to separate it when one is naked.10I.e., were a blessing required, one would be forbidden to separate it in such a state, because a blessing could not be recited [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Demai 1:4)].
ה׳כֵּיצַד מְעַשְּׂרִין אֶת הַדְּמַאי. מַפְרִישׁ כְּדֵי תְּרוּמַת מַעֲשֵׂר שֶׁהוּא אֶחָד מִמֵּאָה מִן הַכּל וּמַנִּיחָהּ בְּצַד הַפֵּרוֹת וְאוֹמֵר זֶה מַעֲשֵׂר וּשְׁאָר מַעֲשֵׂר סָמוּךְ לוֹ. וְאַחַר כָּךְ אוֹמֵר זֶה שֶׁאָמַרְתִּי עָלָיו שֶׁהוּא מַעֲשֵׂר הֲרֵי הוּא תְּרוּמַת מַעֲשֵׂר עַל שְׁאָר הַמַּעֲשֵׂר הַסָּמוּךְ לוֹ. וְנוֹטֵל אוֹתָהּ וְנוֹתְנָהּ לַכֹּהֵן שֶׁאֵינוֹ רַשַּׁאי לְהַפְרִישׁ תְּרוּמַת מַעֲשֵׂר קֹדֶם הַמַּעֲשֵׂר לְכַתְּחִלָּה. וְאַחַר כָּךְ מַפְרִישׁ מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי:
5How should tithes be separated from demai? One should set aside an amount equivalent to the measure of terumat ma'aser, i.e., one hundredth of the entire amount, and place it next to the produce and say: "This is the tithe as is the remainder of the tithes that are adjacent to it." He then says: "This [portion] which I [first] set aside as the tithes, is terumat ma'aser for the remainder of the tithes that are adjacent to it."11The Radbaz emphasizes that he need not set the remainder of the tithes aside. Indeed, he continues, doing so would be an indication that he should give this produce to the Levite. He then takes it and gives it to a priest.12As a present. There is reason to say that since the matter is one of doubt, one is not required to give it to the priest, but instead, could sell it to him, our Sages ordained that it be given away. See the commentaries to Sotah 48a. This order is required, because idealy, it is forbidden to separate terumat ma'aser before the tithes themselves.13See Hilchot Terumot 3:23. Afterwards, he should separate the second tithe.
ו׳וּמֻתָּר לְהַפְרִישׁ מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי קֹדֶם הָרִאשׁוֹן בִּדְמַאי. וְאִם רָצָה אוֹמֵר מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי שֶׁל פֵּרוֹת אֵלּוּ בִּצְפוֹנָם אוֹ בִּדְרוֹמָם וַהֲרֵי הוּא מְחֻלָּל עַל הַמָּעוֹת. וְכֵן הַלּוֹקֵחַ כִּכָּר מִן הַנַּחְתּוֹם מַפְרִישׁ מִמֶּנָּה כְּדֵי תְּרוּמַת מַעֲשֵׂר וְחַלָּה וְאוֹמֵר אֶחָד מִמֵּאָה מִמַּה שֶּׁיֵּשׁ כָּאן הֲרֵי הוּא מַעֲשֵׂר וּשְׁאָר מַעֲשֵׂר סָמוּךְ לוֹ וְזֶה שֶׁעָשִׂיתִי מַעֲשֵׂר עָשׂוּי תְּרוּמַת מַעֲשֵׂר עַל הַשְּׁאָר הַסָּמוּךְ לוֹ וְהַיֶּתֶר עַל אֶחָד מִמֵּאָה שֶׁיֵּשׁ בָּזֶה שֶׁהִפְרַשְׁתִּי הֲרֵי הוּא חַלָּה וּמַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי בִּצְפוֹנָהּ אוֹ בִּדְרוֹמָהּ וַהֲרֵי הוּא מְחֻלָּל עַל הַמָּעוֹת וְאוֹכֵל:
6It is permissible to set aside the second tithe before the first tithe [when tithing] demai.14Generally, the tithes must be separated in the appropriate order (ibid.). An exception is made with regard to demai, for the obligation to separate it is only a Rabbinic stringency (the Jerusalem Talmud, Demai 1:4). See also Hilchot Ma'aser Sheni 11:13. If one desires,15i.e., if rather than partaking of the produce in Jerusalem as is required with regard to the second tithe, he chooses to redeem it, transferring its holiness to money. That money should be taken to Jerusalem and used to purchase food there. See Hilchot Ma'aser Sheni, chs. 4-5. he should say: "The second tithe of this produce is located in the northern portion - or the southern portion - of the produce and its [holiness] is transferred to this money."16I.e., it is not necessary to actually take this produce to Jerusalem and partake of it as the second tithe. Instead, its holiness could be transferred to money and used to purchase food there.Similarly, a person who purchases a loaf of bread from a baker17I.e., a baker who is a common person in whose instance the precautions concerning demai must be taken. should separate18In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Demai 5:1), the Rambam states that one should separate this portion from the loaf. Instead, one should slice a piece from the loaf, without cutting the slice away entirely. The commentaries question whether this is the intent here or that here, the Rambam changed his mind and is speaking of a complete separation. from it the amount to be separated as terumat ma'aser and as challah,19As stated in Hilchot Bikkurim 5:1-2, before one is permitted to partake of bread, one must separate a portion as challah. According to Scriptural Law, there is no minimum amount required for this separation. According to the Rabbis, a private person must separate one twenty-fourth of the loaf and a baker one forty-eighth. In this instance, the latter amount should be separated together with one hundredth for terumat ma'aser. and say: "The one hundredth of [the total] that is here is [part of] the tithes as well as the remainder of the tithes that are next to it.20As in Halachah 5. May this portion that I set aside as tithes, serve as terumat ma'aser for the remainder of the tithes that are next to it. The remainder of what I set aside that exceeds one hundredth of the total is challah and the second tithe in its northern - or southern - portion, and its [holiness] is transferred to this money." He may then partake [of the bread].
ז׳וְכֵן הַמַּזְמִין אֶת חֲבֵרוֹ שֶׁיֹּאכַל אֶצְלוֹ וְהוּא אֵינוֹ מַאֲמִינוֹ עַל הַמַּעַשְׂרוֹת אוֹמֵר מֵעֶרֶב שַׁבָּת מַה שֶּׁאֲנִי עָתִיד לְהַפְרִישׁ לְמָחָר הֲרֵי הוּא מַעֲשֵׂר וּשְׁאָר מַעֲשֵׂר סָמוּךְ לוֹ. וְזֶה שֶׁעָשִׂיתִי מַעֲשֵׂר עָשׂוּי תְּרוּמַת מַעֲשֵׂר עַל שְׁאָר הַסָּמוּךְ לוֹ וּמַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי בִּצְפוֹנוֹ אוֹ בִּדְרוֹמוֹ וַהֲרֵי הוּא מְחֻלָּל עַל הַמָּעוֹת. מִפְּנֵי שֶׁמֻּתָּר לְאָדָם לְהַתְנוֹת תְּנָאִים אֵלּוּ עַל הַדְּמַאי אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵינוֹ בִּרְשׁוּתוֹ. אֲבָל בְּוַדַּאי אֵינוֹ מַתְנֶה אֶלָּא עַל דָּבָר שֶׁבִּרְשׁוּתוֹ:
7Similarly, if a person invites a colleague to dine with him [on the Sabbath]21When it is forbidden to separate tithes (Hilchot Shabbat 23:14). and [the guest] does not trust [the host] with regard to the separation of the tithes,22Although a person who is meticulous in his observance of the tithes should not eat in a common person's home (Chapter 10, Halachah 1), it can be explained that this is speaking about an instance where the person accepted the invitation without knowing that the host was not meticulous in his observance of the mitzvah. We are, however, speaking about a situation where the guest merely suspects that his host is not meticulous in his observance. If he is certain that he is not meticulous, different rules apply, as the Rambam states in the final clause of the halachah. The leniencies to follow were granted only for the sake of the Sabbath, but not during the week. [the guest should do the following]: On Friday, he should say: "[The produce] that I will separate tomorrow is [part of] the tithes, as is the remainder of the tithes which are adjacent to it. That portion which I [first] designated as the tithes is terumat ma'aser for the remainder which is adjacent to it. The second tithe in its northern - or southern - portion, and its [holiness] is transferred to [this] money."[This is permitted,] because a person may make such stipulations with regard to demai even though it is not in his possession.23This leniency is granted because the obligation to make these separations is Rabbinic in origin. When, however, we are certain [that the tithes have not been separated,] he may make stipulations only concerning produce that is in his possession.
ח׳כֵּיצַד. הָיוּ לוֹ מֵאָה תְּאֵנִים שֶׁל טֶבֶל בְּבֵיתוֹ וְהוּא בְּבֵית הַמִּדְרָשׁ אוֹ בַּשָּׂדֶה וּמִתְיָרֵא שֶׁמָּא תֶּחְשַׁךְ וְאֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לְעַשֵּׂר בְּשַׁבָּת אוֹמֵר שְׁנֵי תְּאֵנִים שֶׁאֲנִי עָתִיד לְהַפְרִישׁ הֲרֵי הֵן תְּרוּמָה. וְעֶשֶׂר שֶׁאֲנִי מַפְרִישׁ אַחֲרֵיהֶן מַעֲשֵׂר רִאשׁוֹן. תֵּשַׁע שֶׁאֲנִי מַפְרִישׁ אַחֲרֵיהֶן מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי. וּלְמָחָר מַפְרִישׁ וְאוֹכֵל:
8What is implied?24I.e., how can a stipulation be made before the Sabbath for produce that we know is tevel to be tithed on the Sabbath? If, [on Friday,] he had 100 figs that were tevel in his home and he is in the house of study or in the field25And thus he cannot physically separate them before the onset of the Sabbath. and he is afraid that night will fall and he will not be able to tithe the produce on the Sabbath, he should say: "The two figs that I will separate are terumah. The ten that I will separate after them are the first tithe. And the nine that I will separate after them are the second tithe." On the morrow, he makes these separations and may then partake [of the figs].26He may not, however, partake of the figs and then leave the tithes. The rationale is that in questions of Scriptural Law, the principle of bereirah is not applied and we do not consider it as if the separation that he will ultimately make was made from the outset [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Demai 7:5)]. See also Chapter 1, Halachah 9.
ט׳וְצָרִיךְ לִרְחשׁ בִּשְׂפָתָיו בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁמַּפְרִישׁ זוֹ אַחַר זוֹ וְאֵינוֹ כִּמְתַקֵּן בְּשַׁבָּת שֶׁהֲרֵי הִקְדִּים תְּנָאוֹ. וְטֶבֶל שֶׁיֵּשׁ עָלָיו תְּנַאי זֶה מֻתָּר לְטַלְטְלוֹ בְּשַׁבָּת קֹדֶם שֶׁיַּפְרִישׁ. וְנוֹתֵן עֵינָיו בְּצַד זֶה וְאוֹכֵל אֶת הַשְּׁאָר:
9He must whisper inaudibly [the appropriate statements]27Stating that he had made a stipulation on the previous day. when he is making these separations one after the other. He is not considered as making an article fit for use on the Sabbath,28The reason it is forbidden to separate tithes on the Sabbath. because he made the stipulation previously.When such a stipulation has been made concerning tevel, it is permitted to move it on the Sabbath,29If, however, such a stipulation was not made before the onset of the Sabbath, it is forbidden to move the tevel. Since it is forbidden to partake of it on the Sabbath, it is comparable to a stone (Hilchot Shabbat 25:19). [even] before the separations were made.30Since after the separations will be made, it will be permitted to partake of it, one never diverted his attention from using it on the Sabbath. He should focus his attention on [a portion of the produce, designating it as terumah and tithes] and partake of the remainder.31Even if the tithes have not been taken away from the produce, since they have already been separated and their place is distinct, it is as if they have been separated already. We do not have to rely on the principle of bereirah (Radbaz).
י׳נָתַן לוֹ עַם הָאָרֶץ כּוֹס לִשְׁתּוֹתוֹ אוֹמֵר מַה שֶּׁאֲנִי עָתִיד לְשַׁיֵּר בְּשׁוּלֵי הַכּוֹס הֲרֵי הוּא מַעֲשֵׂר וּשְׁאָר מַעֲשֵׂר סָמוּךְ לוֹ וְזֶה שֶׁעָשִׂיתִי מַעֲשֵׂר עָשׂוּי תְּרוּמַת מַעֲשֵׂר עַל הַשְּׁאָר הַסָּמוּךְ לוֹ וּמַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי בְּפִי הַכּוֹס וַהֲרֵי הוּא מְחֻלָּל עַל הַמָּעוֹת וְשׁוֹתֶה וּמַנִּיחַ כְּדֵי תְּרוּמַת מַעֲשֵׂר בְּשׁוּלֵי הַכּוֹס:
10If a common person gave him a cup [of wine] to drink [on the Sabbath], he should say:32This is an extension of the principles stated in Halachah 7. In this instance as well, the common person had invited him to dine with him on the Sabbath and thus he was unable to make the separations before the Sabbath. "What I will leave in the bottom of the cup is [part of] the tithes,33Since demai is a Rabbinic decree, we may rely on the principle of bereirah, that a separation made afterwards is retroactively considered as if was made beforehand. Thus the wine in the cup is not considered as tevel even though the tithes were not actually separated until later [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Demai 72:2)]. as is the remainder of the tithes which are adjacent to it. That portion which I [first] designated as the tithes is terumat ma'aser for the remainder which is adjacent to it. The second tithe is located at the brim of the cup and its [holiness] is transferred to the money."34I.e., the money he has set aside at home for the redemption of the second tithe. He may then [drink] the cup, leaving a portion equivalent to [the amount to be separated as] terumat ma'aser351/100th of the cup. in the bottom of the cup.
י״אוְכֵן אִם זִמְּנוֹ חֲבֵרוֹ לִשְׁתּוֹת בְּשַׁבָּת מַתְנֶה כִּתְנַאי זֶה מֵעֶרֶב שַׁבָּת עַל כָּל מַה שֶּׁיִּרְצֶה שֶׁיִּסְעֹד אֶצְלוֹ. וְכֵן פּוֹעֵל שֶׁאֵינוֹ מַאֲמִין לְבַעַל הַבַּיִת נוֹטֵל גְּרוֹגֶרֶת אַחַת וְאוֹמֵר זוֹ וְתֵשַׁע הַבָּאוֹת אַחֲרֶיהָ עֲשׂוּיוֹת מַעֲשֵׂר עַל הַמֵּאָה שֶׁאֲנִי עָתִיד לֶאֱכל וְזוֹ הָאַחַת תְּרוּמַת מַעֲשֵׂר עַל הָעֶשֶׂר הַבָּאוֹת אַחֲרֶיהָ וּמַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי הוּא הָעֶשֶׂר הָאַחֲרוֹנוֹת וַהֲרֵי הוּא מְחֻלָּל עַל הַמָּעוֹת וְנוֹתֵן הַגְּרוֹגֶרֶת שֶׁהִפְרִישׁ לַכֹּהֵן. וְהַפּוֹעֵל מַפְרִישׁ לְעַצְמוֹ דְּמֵי מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי. שֶׁתְּנַאי בֵּית דִּין הוּא שֶׁתִּהְיֶה תְּרוּמַת מַעֲשֵׂר מִשֶּׁל בַּעַל הַבַּיִת וּמַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי מִשֶּׁל פּוֹעֵל:
11Similarly, if a colleague invites him to drink on the Sabbath,36The Radbaz questions why the Rambam deviates from the wording used by the Mishnah (Demai 7:1) which speaks of a person inviting a colleague to dine. he should make such a stipulation on Friday with regard to everything that he will desire to partake of at his [home].Similarly, when a worker does not trust his employer [with regard to the tithing of the food that he is given],37We are speaking about a situation in which the worker is entitled to partake of the produce as a result of a contractual stipulation and not because the Torah gives him the right to do so. See Chapter 5, Halachah 9. he should take one fig and say:38In contrast to the previous halachot, this is not speaking about a situation where the person partakes of the food on the Sabbath. Instead, it is speaking about a situation during the week and the separation is made at the time the tithes are designated. "This and the nine which follow are considered as tithes for the 100 that I will eat. This one is considered as terumat ma'aser for the ten39Actually, the nine. that follow. The ten40Here also, the intent is nine. See Chapter 7, Halachah 1. that follow after that are considered as the second tithe and their [holiness] is transferred to [this] money." He then takes the fig that he set aside and gives it to the priest.The worker should separate the money for the second tithe from his own [funds].41Since he will use this money for food in Jerusalem, he will not suffer a loss by separating it from his own. For it is a condition of the court that the terumat ma'aser should come from the employer42I.e., the worker is entitled to take an extra fig from the employer as reimbursement for the produce he gives the priest as terumat ma'aser. and the second tithe from the worker.
י״בהַנַּחְתּוֹמִים לֹא חִיְּבוּם חֲכָמִים לְהַפְרִישׁ מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי מִן הַדְּמַאי אֶלָּא תְּרוּמַת מַעֲשֵׂר בִּלְבַד כְּדֵי שֶׁיַּפְרִישֶׁנָּה בְּטָהֳרָה עִם הַחַלָּה. וְהַלּוֹקֵחַ מַפְרִישׁ מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי. בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים בְּמוֹכֵר בַּחֲנוּתוֹ אוֹ עַל פֶּתַח חֲנוּתוֹ. אֲבָל הַמּוֹכֵר לְפַלְטֵר אוֹ בַּחֲנוּת הַסְּמוּכָה לְפַלְטֵר חַיָּב לְהַפְרִישׁ אַף מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי:
12[Our Sages] did not obligate bakers to separate the second tithe [from grain] that is demai,43In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Demai 2:4, based on Yoma 9a), the Rambam writes that this leniency was instituted because the local officials would keep steady watch over the bakers and regulate their sales, preventing them from charging higher prices. In consideration of their position, our Sages did not require them to separate the second tithe. only terumat ma'aser. It is separated in a state of ritual purity together with the challah. The purchaser must separate the second tithe.44For he will not be suffering a loss, for he will use the money from the second tithe to purchase food in Jerusalem. For the baker, however, making this separation would be a severe loss, for he would never spend all the money for the grain he uses on his own provisions in Jerusalem.When does the above apply? To one who sells in his store or at the entrance to his store. If, however, he sells it to a wholesale baker or to a store adjacent to a wholesale baker,45In which instance, the initial baker is not pressured to lower his price to the same degree. he is obligated to separate the second tithe as well.
י״גשְׁנַיִם שֶׁבָּצְרוּ כַּרְמֵיהֶן בְּתוֹךְ גַּת אַחַת וְהָאֶחָד מֵהֶם אֵינוֹ נֶאֱמָן עַל הַמַּעַשְׂרוֹת. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁעִשֵּׂר זֶה הַנֶּאֱמָן עַל חֶלְקוֹ כְּשֶׁהוּא נוֹטֵל חֶלְקוֹ מִן הַיַּיִן חַיָּב לְהַפְרִישׁ מִמֶּנּוּ מַעֲשֵׂר דְּמַאי עַל חֵלֶק עַם הָאָרֶץ. כֵּיצַד. הָיוּ מֶחֱצָה לְמֶחֱצָה וְנוֹטֵל בְּחֶצְיוֹ מָאתַיִם לוֹג יַיִן הֲרֵי זֶה מַפְרִישׁ מִמֶּנּוּ לוֹג אֶחָד תְּרוּמַת מַעֲשֵׂר וְעֶשֶׂר מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי כְּנֶגֶד הַמֵּאָה לוֹג שֶׁהֲרֵי הִפְרִישׁ הַמַּעֲשֵׂר שֶׁל וַדַּאי תְּחִלָּה עַל חֲצִי כָּל שֶׁדְּרָכוֹ בַּגַּת. וְכֵן אִם הָיָה שְׁלִישׁ אוֹ רְבִיעַ מַפְרִישׁ לְפִי חֶשְׁבּוֹן:
13[The following rules apply when] two people harvested their vineyards into a common vat, and one of them is not trusted with regard to the tithes. Even though the one who is trusted [with regard to the tithes] already tithed his own produce,46I.e., they divided the grapes originally and he tithed his grapes before they were crushed and made into wine. when he takes his portion of the wine, he is obligated to separate tithes as one does for demai for the portion of the common person.47I.e., he must separate tithes for the share of his partner.What is implied? If they were equal partners and one takes 200 log as his portion, he should separate one log as terumat ma'aserand ten48Actually, the nine. log as the second tithe for the 100 log [of the common person]. [This is all that is required,] for he already separated the tithes for the produce that was definitely not tithed for half of the entire quantity in the vat.49We assume that each drop of wine is equally blended between the tithed portion and the portion that is demai. Thus the share to be tithed is no more than half the amount the person is taking, for he already separated the tithes for his own share.In his gloss to this halachah, the Ra'avad questions the Rambam's ruling, noting that the restrictions regarding demai are Rabbinic in origin and that the principle of bereirah can be applied in questions of Rabbinic Law. Hence, based on this principle, we could say that retroactively, it could be considered that when the person separated the tithes for his portion, he was separating the tithes for the portion that he would ultimately receive.The Ra'avad explains that it is possible to say that this principle is not applied as a penalty to the person. He is penalized, because he should not have mixed his produce with that of a common person. The Radbaz amplifies this explanation, stating that by mixing his produce together with that of a common person he caused the terumat ma'aser that will be separated to become impure. The Kessef Mishneh explains that initially when the separation was first made, the two batches of produce were not mixed together. Hence, it is not appropriate to say that the separation he is making now will affect the entire quantity.If, however, they were full partners and did not make a division until the wine was produce, the person who is conscientious in his observance need not separate more than the tithes for his own portion. There is no need for him to be concerned about the share of the common person. For within this context, we apply the principle of bereirah and assume that retroactively, each one is receiving his own share and hence has no responsibility for the share of his colleague. Similarly, if his share was a third or a fourth, he must separate [the tithes from the produce he takes] proportionately.50If his share of the produce was one-third, he would have separated that amount of the total yield. Thus he would have to tithe two-thirds of the produce he receives.