Commentary page

Beitzah 13b

This page gathers the commentary on one source unit: the classic commentaries as they are printed, the sources the text cites, the sages named in it and direct links back to the text.

Read the full text in the reader

Babylonian Talmud · folio map

Beitzah 13b

Beitzah 13b. The full printed text of this folio side — 15 numbered segments, about 324 words — with the classic commentaries printed on the page.

Original text

Segment 1

אֶלָּא מִן הַגּוֹרֶן וּמִן הַיֶּקֶב, כָּךְ תְּרוּמַת מַעֲשֵׂר אֵינָהּ נִיטֶּלֶת אֶלָּא מִן הַגּוֹרֶן וּמִן הַיֶּקֶב.

but only from the granary and the winepress, so too, teruma of the tithe is separated only from the granary and the winepress.

Segment 2

מְחַשֵּׁב? הָא מְדִידָה בָּעֵי!

The Gemara asks: If the mishna is referring to produce from which teruma gedola has not been separated, it is appropriate to use the term: Calculates. However, according to the suggestion that it is referring to a first tithe, from which teruma of the tithe must be separated, why does the mishna state: Calculates? The tanna of the mishna should have said: Measures. The amount of teruma gedola to be separated is calculated by estimation, as there is no fixed amount for this teruma according to Torah law. With regard to the teruma separated from first tithe, however, the Torah established the fixed amount of one-tenth, and one is required to measure precisely.

Segment 3

הָא מַנִּי אַבָּא אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן גִּימֶל הִיא, דְּתַנְיָא: אַבָּא אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן גִּימֶל אוֹמֵר: ״וְנֶחְשַׁב לָכֶם תְּרוּמַתְכֶם״ — בִּשְׁתֵּי תְרוּמוֹת הַכָּתוּב מְדַבֵּר, אַחַת תְּרוּמָה גְּדוֹלָה וְאַחַת תְּרוּמַת מַעֲשֵׂר. כְּשֵׁם שֶׁתְּרוּמָה גְּדוֹלָה נִיטֶּלֶת בְּאוֹמֶד וּבְמַחְשָׁבָה — כָּךְ תְּרוּמַת מַעֲשֵׂר נִיטֶּלֶת בְּאוֹמֶד וּבְמַחְשָׁבָה.

The Gemara explains: In accordance with whose opinion is this mishna? It is in accordance with the opinion of Abba Elazar ben Gimmel, as it is taught in a baraita : Abba Elazar ben Gimmel says: The verse states: “And your teruma shall be reckoned to you as though it were the corn of the granary and as the fullness of the winepress” (Numbers 18:27). The verse speaks of two terumot . One is teruma gedola , and the other one is teruma of the tithe. Just as teruma gedola is separated by estimation and is not measured exactly, and it is enough to separate it by thought, as the word “reckoned” implies that the mere intention to separate a particular portion serves to remove the rest of the produce from its untithed state, so too, teruma of the tithe can also be separated by estimation and by thought.

Segment 4

גּוּפָא, אָמַר רַבִּי אֲבָהוּ אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ: מַעֲשֵׂר רִאשׁוֹן שֶׁהִקְדִּימוֹ בְּשִׁבֳּלִין — שְׁמוֹ טוֹבְלוֹ לִתְרוּמַת מַעֲשֵׂר. מַאי טַעְמָא? אָמַר רָבָא: הוֹאִיל וְיָצָא עָלָיו שֵׁם מַעֲשֵׂר.

§ Since it was mentioned incidentally, the Gemara discusses the matter itself: Rabbi Abbahu said that Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said: With regard to first tithe, in a case in which the Levite preceded the priest while the grain was still on the stalks, its name renders it untithed produce, until he separates from it the teruma of the tithe. The Gemara asks: What is the reason for this halakha ? Rava said: Since the name of the first tithe was called upon it, the obligation of the teruma of the tithe takes effect as well.

Segment 5

אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ: מַעֲשֵׂר רִאשׁוֹן שֶׁהִקְדִּימוֹ בְּשִׁבֳּלִין — פָּטוּר מִתְּרוּמָה גְּדוֹלָה.

The Gemara cites a similar halakha that Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said: With regard to first tithe, in a case in which the Levite preceded the priest while the grain was still on the stalks, before it was threshed and turned into a pile, the owner separated first tithe before teruma . In that case, the separated tithe is exempt from teruma gedola . Although teruma gedola should have been separated from the produce first, and it should have included some of the produce taken as the first tithe, the Levite is nevertheless exempt from separating this teruma .

Segment 6

שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וַהֲרֵמוֹתֶם מִמֶּנּוּ תְּרוּמַת ה׳ מַעֲשֵׂר מִן הַמַּעֲשֵׂר״, מַעֲשֵׂר מִן הַמַּעֲשֵׂר אָמַרְתִּי לְךָ, וְלֹא תְּרוּמָה גְּדוֹלָה וּתְרוּמַת מַעֲשֵׂר מִן הַמַּעֲשֵׂר.

This is because it is stated: “And you shall set apart from it a teruma for the Lord, even a tenth part of the tithe” (Numbers 18:26), which indicates: A tenth part of the tithe, i.e., the teruma of the tithe, I, God, said to you that you must separate it, and you are not obligated in both teruma gedola and teruma of the tithe from the first tithe.

Segment 7

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב פָּפָּא לְאַבָּיֵי: אִי הָכִי, אֲפִילּוּ הִקְדִּימוֹ בִּכְרִי נָמֵי! אֲמַר לֵיהּ: עָלֶיךָ אָמַר קְרָא: ״מִכֹּל (מַעְשְׂרוֹתֵיכֶם) תָּרִימוּ אֵת כׇּל תְּרוּמַת ה׳״.

Rav Pappa said to Abaye: If so, if there is a source for this halakha in the Torah, even if the Levite preceded the priest, i.e., first tithe was separated after the grain had been threshed and the kernels of grain placed in a pile, then it should also be exempt from teruma gedola . Abaye said to Rav Pappa: With regard to your claim, the verse states: “From all that is given you, you shall set apart that which is the Lord’s teruma ” (Numbers 18:29). This verse indicates that God’s teruma , i.e., teruma gedola , must be taken from all the produce, including the tithe.

Segment 8

וּמָה רָאִיתָ? הַאי אִדְּגַן, וְהַאי לָא אִדְּגַן.

The Gemara asks: And what did you see that led you to require the separation of teruma gedola from first tithe that was taken from processed grain piled in the granary but not from first tithe that was taken from grain on stalks? Abaye answers: This, grain that has been threshed and placed into piles, is completely processed and has become grain, and that, grain that remains on the stalk, has not yet become grain. Until the grain is threshed and assembled in a pile, the obligation to separate teruma does not take effect, as it is not considered grain. When such unprocessed grain is designated first tithe, it ceases to be untithed produce and the opportunity to separate teruma from it has been missed. However, once the grain has been processed, and the obligation to separate teruma has taken effect, it is as if the teruma is already mixed in, and the obligation to separate it cannot be overridden by the fact that this produce has been designated first tithe.

Segment 9

תְּנַן הָתָם: הַמְקַלֵּף שְׂעוֹרִין, מְקַלֵּף אַחַת אַחַת וְאוֹכֵל. וְאִם קִלֵּף וְנָתַן לְתוֹךְ יָדוֹ — חַיָּיב. אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: וְכֵן לְשַׁבָּת.

§ We learned in a mishna there ( Ma’asrot 4:5): One who peels grains of barley to eat them raw may peel them one by one and eat them immediately without tithing them, as this is considered a casual manner of eating. But if he peeled and placed several of them into his hand, he is obligated to separate tithes. Rabbi Elazar said: And a similar halakha applies to Shabbat. Peeling grains of barley one by one is not considered threshing, and it is permitted; if a whole handful of grains are peeled together, this does constitute the prohibited labor of threshing.

Segment 10

אִינִי? וְהָא רַב מְקַלְּפָא לֵיהּ דְּבֵיתְהוּ כָּסֵי כָּסֵי! וְרַבִּי חִיָּיא מְקַלְּפָא לֵיהּ דְּבֵיתְהוּ כָּסֵי כָּסֵי! אֶלָּא אִי אִתְּמַר, אַסֵּיפָא אִתְּמַר: הַמּוֹלֵל מְלִילוֹת שֶׁל חִטִּים, מְנַפֵּחַ עַל יָד עַל יָד וְאוֹכֵל. וְאִם נִפַּח וְנָתַן לְתוֹךְ חֵיקוֹ — חַיָּיב. אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: וְכֵן לְשַׁבָּת.

The Gemara asks: Is that so? But didn’t Rav’s wife peel for him barley on Shabbat by the cupful? And likewise Rabbi Ḥiyya’s wife would peel barley for him on Shabbat by the cupful. Rather, if Rabbi Elazar’s comment was stated in this context, it was stated with regard to the latter clause of that same mishna ( Ma’asrot 4:5): With regard to one who husks kernels of wheat by hand, he may blow onto the chaff to disperse it a little at a time and eat the kernels without separating tithes. But if he blows on the kernels and puts a large amount of them into his lap, he is obligated to separate tithes from the food. It was with regard to this teaching that Rabbi Elazar said: And a similar halakha applies to Shabbat.

Segment 11

מַתְקֵיף לַהּ רַבִּי אַבָּא בַּר מֶמֶל: וְרֵישָׁא, לְמַעֲשֵׂר אִין לְשַׁבָּת לָא? וּמִי אִיכָּא מִידֵּי דִּלְעִנְיַן שַׁבָּת לָא הָוֵי גְּמַר מְלָאכָה, וּלְמַעֲשֵׂר הָוֵי גְּמַר מְלָאכָה?

Rabbi Abba bar Memel strongly objects to this: And with regard to the first clause of the mishna, one should conclude: Yes, if one peeled a handful of barley, it is considered prepared with regard to tithes, but no, it is not considered threshing with regard to Shabbat? But is there anything that, with regard to Shabbat, is not considered the completion of the labor and may be performed; and yet, with regard to tithes, it is considered the completion of the labor? Isn’t the prohibition against work on Shabbat far more stringent than tithes in all its details?

Segment 12

מַתְקֵיף לַהּ רַב שֵׁשֶׁת בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב אִידִי: וְלָא, וְהָא גׇּרְנָן לְמַעֲשֵׂר, דִּתְנַן: אֵיזֶהוּ גׇּרְנָן לְמַעֲשֵׂר? הַקִּשּׁוּאִין וְהַדִּלּוּעִין — מִשֶּׁיְּפַקְּסוּ. וְשֶׁלֹּא פִּקְּסוּ — מִשֶּׁיַּעֲמִיד עֲרֵמָה. וּתְנַן נָמֵי גַּבֵּי בְצָלִים — מִשֶּׁיַּעֲמִיד עֲרֵמָה. וְאֵלּוּ גַּבֵּי שַׁבָּת — הַעֲמָדַת עֲרֵמָה פָּטוּר.

Rav Sheshet, son of Rav Idi, strongly objects to this claim: And is there no example of a halakha in which tithes are treated more stringently than Shabbat? And is there not the halakha of their granary for tithes, as we learned in a mishna ( Ma’asrot 1:5): What is the equivalent of their granary, i.e., the point at which the processing of various vegetables is completed so that they become obligated in tithes? With regard to cucumbers and gourds, they become obligated from when one trims the thin hairs that cover them [ misheyefaksu ], and for those he did not trim, from when he assembles them in a pile. And we also learned in a mishna ( Ma’asrot 1:6), with regard to onions, that it is from when one assembles them in a pile. Whereas with regard to Shabbat, one who assembles produce in a pile is exempt, as this is not a prohibited labor on Shabbat.

Segment 13

אֶלָּא מַאי אִית לָךְ לְמֵימַר: מְלֶאכֶת מַחְשֶׁבֶת אָסְרָה תּוֹרָה, הָכָא נָמֵי: מְלֶאכֶת מַחְשֶׁבֶת אָסְרָה תּוֹרָה.

Rather, what have you to say? Why is one exempt if he forms a pile on Shabbat? The Torah prohibited only planned, constructive labor on Shabbat, the type of work that involves the creation of something new, and the formation of a pile is not considered that kind of labor. Here too, with regard to peeling barley, the Torah prohibited creative work. Although collecting the peeled barley in one’s hand is considered the completion of the labor in respect to tithes, it is not prohibited labor on Shabbat.

Segment 14

כֵּיצַד מוֹלֵל? אַבָּיֵי מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרַב יוֹסֵף אָמַר: חֲדָא אַחֲדָא. וְרַב אַוְיָא מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרַב יוֹסֵף אָמַר: חֲדָא אַתַּרְתֵּי. רָבָא אָמַר: כֵּיוָן דִּמְשַׁנֵּי — אֲפִילּוּ חֲדָא אַכּוּלְּהוּ נָמֵי.

Apropos husking kernels on Shabbat, the Gemara asks: How may one husk grain on a Festival? Abaye said in the name of Rav Yosef: One finger on another, i.e., one may place the kernels between two fingers and rub. And Rav Avya said in the name of Rav Yosef: One may even do so one on two, i.e., between the thumb and two fingers. Rava said: Since he alters the manner in which he performs the activity, he may even do so with one finger on all the rest.

Segment 15

כֵּיצַד מְנַפֵּחַ? אָמַר רַב אַדָּא בַּר אַהֲבָה אָמַר רַב: מְנַפֵּחַ

The Gemara further asks: How may one blow on the grain, to winnow it in a permitted manner on Shabbat? Rav Adda bar Ahava said that Rav said: One blows

Beitzah 13b

Beitzah 13b

Rashi

Tosafot

Rabbeinu Chananel

Rashba

Meiri

Maharsha (Chidushei Halachot)

Maharam

Shita Mekubetzet

Penei Yehoshua

What this page contains

Continue the sequence

Parallel sources

Lessons and study tools

Sages named on this page

Original text