MISHNAH: He who pickles, cooks, or salts in the field is obligated. He who stores in the ground is free. He who dips in the field is free. He who pounds olives to remove the resin is free. He who squeezes olives on his skin is free but if he squeezed and put into his hand he is obligated. He who prepares wine sauce for a dish is free but in a pot it is obligated for it is like a small cistern.
HALAKHAH: Fire creates ṭevel , buying creates ṭevel , salt creates ṭevel , heave creates ṭevel , the Sabbath creates ṭevel , a secure courtyard creates ṭevel , but Rebbi Joḥanan said that buying and Sabbath are not biblical. Rebbi Immi in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, the most reasonable of these is the secure courtyard.
He who pickles, only if he pickles completely only if the pickling is completed, or at least if the brine is strong enough that the vegetables would be completely cured if left in the brine for a sufficient time? ? He who cooks, only if he cooks thoroughly? Let us hear from the following: If one singes ears of grain in the fire they become ṭevel . Without that, would they not need to be worked over by fire? There is a difference here, because that is the end of their processing. Where has this been said? If one plucks out kernels from ears destined for dough, if it is to eat them rolled they are ṭevel , but to make a dough they are not ṭevel 13a reads: If somebody brought ears from the field, if it is to make them into dough [and the ears must be threshed and milled] he may eat a snack from them, if to roll them [and eat them raw], Rebbi declares obligated but Rebbi Yose ben Jehudah declares them to be free [since they are called “grain”, subject to tithes, only after threshing.] The baraita here follows R. Yose ben R. Jehudah. All the argument here proves is that it is possible that pickling and preserving by cooking makes ṭevel only if the intent was to do a thorough job. .
If he pickled or cooked without the owners’ knowledge, there is a difference between Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish since these differ: If somebody made a heap [of somebody’s grain] without the latter’s knowledge, Rebbi Joḥanan said, it is ṭevel , Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, it is not ṭevel . Rebbi Yudan said, there it is impossible for him not to make a heap. Fragments of this discussion are in Chapter 1, cf. Notes 22, 138. , here it is possible for him not to pickle.
If he cooked it while it was property of the Temple, redeemed it, and brought it into a secure courtyard, what is its status? In the opinion of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish by biblical law after redemption when the preserve is now fully profane. it became ṭevel ; this is biblical, that is not biblical. If he brought it into a secure courtyard, redeemed and then cooked it, everybody agrees that it became ṭevel , what did he process while it was property of the Temple? If he dedicated it, cooked it, brought it into a secure courtyard, redeemed it, and cooked it again, everybody agrees that it became ṭevel . If he redeemed it and put it out to dry, what is its status? If you say that fire creates ṭevel , fire frees from ṭevel ; if you say that fire does not create ṭevel , fire does not free from ṭevel ; therefore, being cooked while Temple property does not count and the later drying is the final processing of profane food. .
Rebbi Jeremiah asked: If he fried in the field, what is its status? Does not the fire create ṭevel anyhow, the answer seems obvious. ? Is it impossible not to use oil, the question of R. Jeremiah is already answered. ?
Rebbi Yose used to asked in the name of Cahana: Rebbi Jonah said, Rebbi Ḥalaphta ben Shaul stated: If someone organized a meal in a circle in the field he created ṭevel . If one did not organize a meal a circle he did not create ṭevel . What organizing in a circle creates ṭevel ? Any meal in a circle with wine. If people prepared to eat in a circle but then did not?
It was stated: “Garlic, garden cress, Rashi קרש״ון French cresson ; Maimonides Arabic رشاد Lepidium sativum , garden peppergrass. , and mustard seed which were prepared in the field became ṭevel ” That means, ṭevel garlic with profane oil. Profane garlic with ṭevel oil. ?
Rebbi Zeïra, Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Ashi in the name of Rav: A bunch of grapes which he squeezed into a cup became ṭevel ; into a tamḥui 8, Note 83 . it did not become ṭevel .
Does not the fire induce ṭevel anyhow sauce on any hot dish, the entire dish becomes ṭevel . ? Explain it if the dish was cold. “In a pot it is obligated;” Rebbi Eleazar said, that refers to an empty pot. The Mishnah does not say so, but “he who prepares wine sauce for a dish is free but in a pot it is obligated for it is like a small cistern.”
MISHNAH: If children hid figs for the Sabbath. While children have no legal standing, their actions can show their intent which then is determining. and he forgot to tithe them they may not be eaten after the Sabbath until they are tithed. A Sabbath basket even before the Sabbath. the House of Shammai free but the House of Hillel obligate. Rebbi Jehudah says, also one who fills a harvesting basket to send to a friend may not eat from it unless he tithed. He who takes olives from the vat may dip them singly into salt and eat them, but if he salted them as a dish he is obligated 35a reads (in most mss.) “if he salted ten together”; this is against the Yerushalmi which forbids even two together. . Rebbi Eliezer says, from a pure vat he is obligated 35a ) explains that the person taking the olives is presumed to be impure. This is understood also in the Halakhah here. but from an impure one he is free because he might put the leftovers back [into the vat]. One may drink from the winepress both warm or cold and is free, the words of Rebbi Meïr. Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Ẓadoq declares him obligated. But the Sages say, for warm drink he is obligated, cold he is free 11b , Eruvin 99b ) and one Mishnah ms. the reading is: “he is free because he may return it.” In that version, Mishnah 4 is parallel Mishnah 3 and cider, cooked or mixed with warm water, is considered completely processed because returning it would spoil the wine. Maimonides, both in his Commentary and his Code ( Ma‘serot 5:15) holds that heating induces ṭevel in all cases. .
HALAKHAH: Rav Hamnuna said, if a child covered a harvesting basket for transport to the market, it became ṭevel ; in any situation in which the intent of an adult has an effect, the action of a minor has an effect. Rebbi Zeïra asked: Since the intent of an adult does not have an effect until he opens on the market, the action of a minor should not have an effect until he opens on the market! The Mishnah disagrees with Rav Hamnuna: “If children hid figs for the Sabbath and he forgot to tithe them they may not be eaten after the Sabbath until they are tithed. is induced. Maybe the children collected the figs for consumption on Sunday. ” Rebbi Zeïra in the name of Rav Hamnuna: Explain if it they collected close to sundown when their action was proof of their intent!
Does this not disagree with Rebbi Joḥanan since Rebbi Joḥanan said, the Sabbath induces ṭevel ? Because they collected for the Sabbath; therefore, not if they did not collect for the Sabbath at the start of the next Sabbath irrespective of its place. The fact that the figs were collected for the Sabbath should be irrelevant. ! Rebbi Jonah in the name of Rav Hamnuna: Even if they collected for the Sabbath one may eat a snack from them on Sabbath eve. It does not even disagree with Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish. Are they not children and even if they collected for the Sabbath it is as if they had not collected for the Sabbath by biblical law, there must be clear intent to use the fruits on the Sabbath to make them ṭevel but children have no legal intent. ! Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Hila: Explain if it they collected close to sundown when their action was proof of their intent!
Rebbi Eleazar in the name of Rebbi Hoshaia: The Mishnah speaks of a harvesting basket of figs. In the House of Rebbi Yannai they said, even a branch. Rebbi Eleazar ben Antigonos in the name of Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Yannai: Explain it for a fig tree reserved for the Sabbath. Example: Rebbi Ḥiyya, Rebbi Assi and Rebbi Ammi were sitting together when somebody passed by with a harvesting basket of figs. He said to him, [we want] to buy! He answered, the Sabbath basket is not for sale.
Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Rebbi Jehudah spoke only about a Sabbath basket. Maybe Rebbi Jehudah spoke about someone who collected a harvesting basket full to send to his friend, that he cared for it as if it were a Sabbath basket or any basket treated with the same care as a Sabbath basket? The question is not answered since practice does not follow R. Jehudah. ?
Does this not disagree with Rav? Since Rav said, it is forbidden to eat. Explain it if he makes his vat in the field. It is still difficult: If salting induces ṭevel , why do we need taking together, if taking together induces, why do we need salting? It must be both.
Where do we hold? If there are two vats, everybody agrees that it is forbidden. If there is only one vat, everybody agrees that it is permitted. Where do we hold? If he has a pure vat and his friend an impure one. Rebbi Eliezer says, a person may return to his friend’s vat but the rabbis say, a person does not return to his friend’s vat.
Rebbi Joḥanan said, for warm [cider] he is obligated because that is not a snack; cold is free because it is a snack and he may put it back. Following what Rebbi Yose said in the name of Rebbi Zeїra, Rebbi Jonah, Rebbi Zeїra in the name of Rebbi Eleazar, even what is in a flask did not become ṭevel , in case it was not fully processed, since he woul put it back in the end.
MISHNAH: If somebody peels barley, he may peel one by one and eat but if he peeled and collected in his hand he is obligated. If somebody rolls wheat grains he may blow away the chaff from his hand and eat but if he blew away and stored in the fold of his toga, he is obligated. If coriander is sown for its seed, its greenery is free. If it was sown as vegetable, seeds and greenery are obligated. Rebbi Eliezer said, dill is tithed seeds, vegetable, and perianths 7b) and Maimonides (Commentary to the Mishnah). . But the Sages say, only cress, Rashi קרש״ון French cresson ; Maimonides Arabic رشاد Lepidium sativum , garden peppergrass. and wild rocket 7–2, Note 7 . are tithed seeds and vegetable.
HALAKHAH: Rebbi Zeїra said, I may peel two by two. It is stated so: “Barley, two are free, three obligated; wheat, three are free, four obligated.” Huna bar Ḥinena and Rav Taḥlifa bar Immi were sitting before Rebbi Eleazar. {Rebbi Jonah said, either all are “bar Immi” but this one “bar Rav Immi” or all are “bar Rav Immi”.} He had [grains] up to the knuckles of his fingers. They were taking from him. He turned his face to the wall and showed them his hand full as long as they will be peeled one by one according to the rules. . It is stated so: Only he should not sift into a reed-basket or into a wide basket. For the Sabbath, up to the volume of a dried fig. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Ada asked before Rebbi Mana: Here, they said for barley, two are free, three obligated; there, you say so which allows stripping of barlay grains as long as the stripped grains are eaten directly and not stored in any basket. ? He said to him, there is a difference; here you say that he may put the remainder back. It was stated so: When has this been said, when he is not close to the threshing floor. But when he was close to the threshing floor [he can have] even more since he may put the remainder back.
MISHNAH: Rabban Gamliel says, the budding fruits and Ma’serot Arukh and Maimonides define תמדות as budding fruits; this is accepted by I. Löw. In his Commentary to Parah 11:7, Maimonides explains as pods. of fenugreek, mustard, and white beans are subject to tithes. Rebbi Eliezer says, the caper tree is subject to tithes for its budding fruits and capers. Rebbi Aqiba says, only the berries are subject because they are fruit.
HALAKHAH: 2:8. The second paragraph is practically identical (except for the order of subjects) with a paragraph there; Notes 80–81 . Ḥizqiah said, if he collected two or three modii is a dry measure, corresponding to the seah . Because of the parallel with Ševiït , the commentators change מודייות into מורביות morbiot , a word that seems to indicate watering periods, cf. Ševiït 2:8, Note 83. This must be the intended meaning in the next sentence: If the farmer stops watering in order to hasten the ripening of the seeds, he cannot be interested in the vegetable. Also, one cannot withhold bushels from vegetables. But it does not make much sense to change the reading in the first sentence which speaks of harvesting vegetables. In the second sentence, the expression “two or three” must have slipped in as parallel to the first sentence since the discussion in Ševiїt 2:8 shows clearly that only the withholding of three waterings determines the crop as seeds. from it, it comes under the category of vegetable. Also for seeds it is so: If he withheld from it two or three morbiot is a dry measure, corresponding to the seah . Because of the parallel with Ševiït , the commentators change מודייות into מורביות morbiot , a word that seems to indicate watering periods, cf. Ševiït 2:8, Note 83. This must be the intended meaning in the next sentence: If the farmer stops watering in order to hasten the ripening of the seeds, he cannot be interested in the vegetable. Also, one cannot withhold bushels from vegetables. But it does not make much sense to change the reading in the first sentence which speaks of harvesting vegetables. In the second sentence, the expression “two or three” must have slipped in as parallel to the first sentence since the discussion in Ševiїt 2:8 shows clearly that only the withholding of three waterings determines the crop as seeds. , it comes under the category of seeds. If one sowed it for seeds it is tithed for the past; if he sowed it as vegetable it is tithed for the future. If he sowed it for both seeds and vegetable, or if he sowed for seeds and then wanted it as vegetable, one may tithe from its seed on vegetable and from vegetable on seeds, on condition that it was collected before the New Year; but if some of it was collected after the New Year, its seed is tithed for the past and its vegetable is tithed at the moment of its being harvested if it was one-third ripe before the New Year. But if it was only ripe one-third after the New Year, both seed and vegetable are tithed for the future.
It was stated2:7. There, the text reads: “If he sowed it for perianths, it is tithed for seeds and perianths but the vegetable is free.” : “Dill sown for its seeds is tithed for seeds but not vegetable. If sown as vegetable, it is tithed for seeds and vegetable but not perianths. If sown it for periants, it is tithed for seeds, vegetable, and perianths.” But we have stated: “Only cress and wild rocket are tithed for seeds and vegetable!” So is the Mishnah: The only things sown for seeds which are tithed for seeds and vegetable are cress and wild rocket.
Where do they disagree? When he sowed it for its seeds. But if he sowed it as vegetable, even the rabbis agree. It was stated so: “In Bethany p. 698. they used to permit its vegetable, the words of Rebbi Eliezer.” He said only “the words of Rebbi Eliezer;” therefore, everybody else says it is obligated.
It was stated 2:8. : “If one sowed Lima beans, barley, or fenugreek as vegetables, his intention is disregarded; the seeds are obligated but the greenery is free.” Rebbi Jeremiah said, that also is from the words of Rebbi Eliezer 28a , accepts the statement as majority opinion. .
Samuel said, capers are forbidden because of skins. It was stated so: ( Lev . 19:23 ) “You shall treat as foreskin the foreskin of its fruit;” anything which envelopes the fruit. Rav commanded those of the House of Ati, Rav Hamnuna commanded the colleagues: Tell your wives that when they come to preserve capers to throw away the calix. Rebbi Abba said, Rebbi Zeїra explained to me that all skins grow with the fruit but there, the fruit is on top and the skins below 37b , the same conclusion is reached. .
Capers and budding fruits are one kind; one tithes from capers for budding fruit and from budding fruit for capers but not from both for ripe fruits or from ripe fruits for them. On the ripe fruits one applies the stringencies of both trees and vegetables. In which respect? If it is after the second year going into the third, he separates, redeems, and gives it to the poor.
The caper bush5:8 . A shortened version, not mentioning grains, is in Tosephta Kilaim 3:17 and Babli Berakhot 36a . . The House of Shammai say, it is kilaim in a vineyard and those of fruit trees for orlah , so that its fruit is forbidden the first three years after planting ( Lev . 19:23 ). but not with grains. The House of Hillel say, it is never kilaim , neither in a vineyard nor with grains. Both agree that it is subject to orlah . Rebbi Ḥanina bar Papa and those of fruit trees for orlah , so that its fruit is forbidden the first three years after planting ( Lev . 19:23 ). stated: Any plant that branches out from its stem is a tree; from its roots it is a vegetable. They objected: But cabbage forms its leaves from its stem! Here 5:5 : “R. Ḥama bar ‘Uqba in the name of R. Yose. Anything that grows from both root and stem is a root (a vegetable); from its stem but not from its root it is a tree.” In that formulation, cabbage presents no problem since there is no piece of stem free of leaves. when it is sure, there when it is doubtful.