Halakhah su Deuteronomio 26:78

And we have been commanded to walk along G-d's path of goodness and righteousness, as the verse says, "you should travel in His ways" (Deut. 26:13). Furthermore it says, "After Hashem your G-d you shall go" (Deut. 13:5). And furthermore it says, "'to travel in all of His ways' (Deut 10:12)- just as He is gracious, you shall also be gracious. Just as he is merciful, you shall also be merciful" (a similar idea appears on Sotah 14b)". And [we are commanded] to emulate His positive actions and positive righteous traits to the best of our ability. It is a positive commandment to be attached to wise men and their students in order to learn from their actions as the verse says, "and to him you shall be devoted" (Deut. 13:5). Is it possible for one to be attached to the Sechinah (divine presence) if it is a consuming fire (Deut. 4:24)? Rather, to be attached to the wise men and their students (Ketuvos 111b), to spread dirt before their feet and to drink their knowledge with thirst, as the verse says, "he who goes with the wise will become wise" (Proverbs 13:20). And furthermore it says, " the praises of a man are that he did not follow the counsel of the wicked" (Psalms 1:1).

One also has to careful when about to say birkat ha-mazon to remove the knife from the table. The reason for this practice is because the table is called an “altar,” and just as on an altar we have been warned not to brandish something made of iron over it, as it is said, “do not build it [an altar] of hewn stones, etc.”¹⁹⁴Ex 20:22. The rule of Torah is that if one makes it into an altar of hewn stones with a tool of silver or flint, it is permitted. For the point of the prohibition is not against it being hewn, but rather because it is hewn with something made of iron, i.e., a sword, and Torah kept it far from the tabernacle, when it is written: “gold, silver, and copper,”¹⁹⁵Ex 25:3. but does not mention iron there. And likewise with the sanctuary it is written, “No hammers or axe or any iron tool was heard in the House when it was being built.”¹⁹⁶I Kings 6:7. The reason is because that is the power of Esau with what he was blessed from his father’s mouth; this is what is meant by “By the sword you shall live,”¹⁹⁷Gen 27:40. and it is written, “but Esau I hated.”¹⁹⁸Mal 1:3. Therefore it is kept far from the sanctuary. And likewise at the table we have been warned to remove the sword from it, because the sword is something destructive¹⁹⁹The pun ha-herev hu ha-mahriv is lost in the translation. and the source of destruction, the opposite of peace, and it does not belong in a place of blessing, i.e., peace. For indeed the altar and the table prolongs a person’s days, while a sword shortens them, and it makes no sense to brandish something that shortens over something that prolongs life.²⁰⁰Mekhilta Yitro (end).

Birkat ha-mazon is from the Torah, as it is said, “When you have eaten your fill, you shall bless the Lord your God.”²¹⁹Deut 8:10. The complete verse is “When you have eaten your fill, you shall bless the Lord your God for the good land which he has given you.” And they taught in a baraita:²²⁰B. Berakhot 48b. “you shall bless” – this is the blessing “ha-zan;” “the Lord your God” – this is birkat ha-zimmun (“the blessing of invitation”); “for the land” – this is the blessing “ha-aretz” (“for the land”); “good” [ha-tovah]– this is the blessing “boneh Yerushalayim.” And therefore it says “the good hill country [ha-har ha-tov] and the Lebanon.”²²¹Deut 3:25. I have only a blessing after the meal; from where do I get before it? Scripture says “”which He has given you” – from the moment He has given it to you, you are obligated to bless Him. Our rabbis z”l taught in a midrash: Moses instituted the blessing “ha-zan” for Israel when the manna fell down for them; Joshua instituted the blessing “ha-aretz” when he led them into to the land, and David and Solomon instituted “boneh Yerushalayim.”²²²B. Berakhot 48b. And you will also find in the story of the manna a hint at the blessing “ha-zan” in the manna itself, as it is said, “In the morning you shall have your fill of bread,²²³Ex 16:12. and you shall know that I the Lord am you God” – this knowing will occur when remind yourselves of it when you say a blessing over eating the manna. The fourth blessing, “ha-tov ve-ha-metiv,” was instituted at Yavneh. Our rabbis z”l needed to make reference in the blessing “ha-aretz” the Torah, and also refer in it to the covenant (brit), and for them to mention brit before Torah,²²⁴In B. Berakhot 48b-49a it says that Torah was given through three covenants, while the covenant of circumcision was given through thirteen covenants. R. Bahya explains the point of this allusion in what follows. so it would be said like this: “brit and Torah, life and food, for your brit which you sealed [upon us] and your Torah which you taught us.”²²⁵A quotation from a version of birkat ha-mazon used by R. Bahya and his contemporaries, but slightly different from the version we use now. And the reason that they needed to mention both in the blessing “ha-aretz” was to instruct us that it was because of the Torah that we merited the inheritance of the Land.²²⁶And so the Tur, and Rashi’s commentary on b. Berakhot 48b. And this is the reason for the setting up of the stones upon which “the whole Torah” is written, and this is what is meant by “to [le-ma’an] enter the land.”²²⁷Dt 27:3. Le-ma’an means literally “for the sake of” R. Bahya alludes to stones Moses instructed the Israelites to set up in Dt 27:2-3: “As soon as you have crossed the Jordan into the land that the Lord your God is giving you, you shall set up large stones. Coat them with plaster and inscribe upon them all the words of this Torah when you cross over in order, to enter the land that the Lord you God is giving you.” Le-ma’an – “for the sake of” this Torah “you will enter the Land.” And in my opinion, in “to [le-ma’an] enter the land,” “le-ma’an” means “so that you are able to enter,” that is to say, “Insofar as I am commanding you to write on them the whole Torah, so you will have the power to enter the land, because the power of the Torah will cut out [yakhritu] ²²⁸R. Bahya’s word choice here is rich in relevant connotations. “Cut out” – yakhrit – is from the root of the same verb “karat” used in the Biblical expression “to cut a covenant”- likrot brit – that is, to make a covenant, and also used for the punishment of someone who violates the covenant, e.g., as in Ex 12:15: “Whoever eats leavened bread from the first day to the seventh day [of Passover], that person shall be cut off [nikhreta] from Israel.”the enemies of the land, so that you will inherit it.

LAWS OF SECOND TITHES AND THE FRUIT OF THE FOURTH YEAR FROM THE PLANTING OF THE TREES.
These comprise nine precepts, of which three are affirmative and six are negative precepts. Their detailed statement is as follows: 1) to set apart the second tithe; 2) not to expend the redemption money of this tithe for any necessaries but food, drink and oil for anointing the body; 3) not to eat the second tithe while in a state of uncleanness; 4) not to eat it while mourning for a deceased relative; 5) not to eat the second tithe of grain outside Jerusalem; 6) not to eat the second tithe of the vintage outside Jerusalem; 7) not to eat the second tithe of oil outside Jerusalem; 8) that the fruit of the fourth year after the trees were planted, shall be altogether holy, and the law is that it is to be eaten by its owner in Jerusalem and is to be treated in all respects like the second tithe; 9) to make the prescribed confession, (Deut. 26:13-15), when bringing the second tithe.

LAWS OF FIRST-FRUITS AND OTHER GIFTS TO THE PRIESTS OUTSIDE THE SANCTUARY.
These comprise nine precepts, of which eight are affirmative and one is a negative precept. The following is their detailed statement: 1) to set apart first-fruits and bring them to the Sanctuary; 2) that the priest (to whom they are presented) shall not eat the first-fruits outside Jerusalem; 3) to read the prescribed declaration (Deut. 26:3 and 5-11), when presenting the first-fruits; 4) to set apart a cake of dough for the priest; 5) to give the shoulder, the two cheeks and the maw (of a beast killed for food) to the priest; 6) to give to the priest the first fleece (at the shearing); 7) to redeem the first-born, if a son, and to give the redemption-money to the priest; 8) to redeem the firstling of an ass and give a Iamb in its stead, to the priest; 9) to break the neck of the firstling of an ass, if the owner does not wish to redeem it.

And also included in these negative statements that are negations is His saying (Leviticus 27:29), "Any human being who has been proscribed is not ransomed." Indeed, once you know what the content of this statement is, it is clear to you that this is a negation and not a prohibition. And that is that Scripture here has already discussed the set values of appraisals according to the amount of years of the one appraised and whether they are male or female. And there is no difference whether one said, "My appraisal is upon me"; or "the appraisal of x is upon me" - as we see who this person is and how old he is, and he gives according to that. But if the one appraised was someone who was liable for a death penalty of the court and his judgment has been completed - and after that someone said, "The appraisal of that one is upon me" - he is not obligated to give anything, since that one is considered as if he is dead, for there is no value to him once his judgment has been completed. And this is the content He wanted [to express] by saying, "is not ransomed" - meaning to say, he has no value, such that the appraiser should give it. So this is one of the laws of appraisals and their regulations mentioned by Scripture, and not a prohibition. And the language of the mishnah (Arakhin 1:3) is, "One who is moribund and one who is taken to be executed is not vowed about nor appraised." And the Talmud (Arakhin 6b) explains that this is on condition that he has come out of a Jewish court with a guilty verdict. And the words of the Mekhilta are, "Those who are liable for the death penalty do not have redemption, as it is stated, 'Any human being who has been proscribed is not ransomed.'" And reflect upon the language of the statement and be precise in your study of it - how they explained that this negative statement is a negation and not a prohibition, by their saying, "do not have redemption"; and they did not say, "we may not redeem them." And they explained this very matter in the Sifra in the section about appraisals (Sifra, Bechukotai, Chapter 12:7) and said, "From where is it derived that if one liable for the death penalty of the court said, 'My value is upon me," he has said nothing? We learn to say, 'is not redeemed.'" That is to say [that the question was,] from where is it that [we know that] he is not liable [for any] value. And we have already explained this matter with complete clarity, such that no question is left about it, even for one whose intellect is the most dense among all people. And since we have spoken about this matter, you should know that the words that can connote a prohibition in the Torah are four. And anything that is prohibited by one of these four is called a negative commandment. And they are guard, lest, do not and no (hishamer, pen, al, lo). And in explanation, they said (Makkot 13b:5), "Wherever it is stated, guard, lest, or do not, it is nothing other than a negative commandment." But there is one thing that remains for us to explain in order to complete the intent of the section. And that is that when the Torah tells and commands us to cleanse ourselves by negating actions x and y, behold that action is included in the negative commandments. And even though the negative statement through which it comes is a negation and not a prohibition - since it commands us to negate it from ourselves, and say, "I have not done such and such," we perforce know that such and such an action is prohibited to us. And this is like when Scripture commands us to say, "I have not eaten of it while in mourning, I have not cleared out any of it while I was unclean and I have not deposited any of it with the dead" (Deuteronomy 26:14) - it is indicating that all of these actions are prohibited to us. And behold that this explanation will come in its place, when we speak about these commandments.

And it is this that has stood for our ancestors and for us; since it is not [only] one [person or nation] that has stood [against] us to destroy us, but rather in each generation, they stand [against] us to destroy us, but the Holy One, blessed be He, rescues us from their hand. Go out and learn what Laban the Aramean sought to do to Jacob, our father; since Pharaoh only decreed [the death sentence] on the males, but Laban sought to uproot the whole [people]. As it is stated (Deuteronomy 26:5), "An Aramean was destroying my father; so he went down to Egypt and resided there" - [this] teaches that Ya'akov, our father, didn't go down to settle in Egypt, but rather [only] to reside there, as it is stated (Genesis 47:4), "And they said to Pharaoh, 'To reside in the land have we come, since there is not enough pasture for your servant's flocks, since the famine is heavy in the land of Canaan, and now please grant that your servants should dwell in the Land of Goshen.'"

"And the Egyptians did bad to us and afflicted us and put upon us hard work" (Deuteronomy 26:6). "And the Egyptians did bad to us" - as it is stated (Exodus 1:10), "Let us be wise towards him, lest he multiply and it will be that when war is called, he too will join with our enemies and fight against us and go up from the land."

A more obvious source of Rambam's characterization of a defensive war as a milḥemet mizvah may perhaps lie in a statement found in the Babylonian Talmud.²⁹R. Aaron Soloveichik, Or ha-Mizraḥ, Tevet 5730, posits Midrash Tanḥuma, Parshat Pinḥas, sec. 3, as Rambam’s source. Deuteronomy 26:17-18 states, “Harass the Midianites and smite them; for they harass you.” Tanḥuma comments: “On the basis of this verse our Sages said, ‘If [a person] comes to slay you, arise and slay him.’ ” In context, the mandated response is not merely individual self-defense but a defensive war. As noted earlier, the Gemara, Eruvin 45a, declares that it is permissible to resist aggression likely to result in loss of life by going to battle even on the Sabbath.³⁰See also Arukh ha-Shulḥan he-Atid, Hilkhot Melakhim 74:3. Cf., however, R. Shlomoh Goren, Maḥanayim, no. 69, p. 9, and Torat ha-Shabbat ve-ha-Mo‘ed, p. 345; cf., also, below, note 31. The Gemara must be understood as sanctioning such military activity in the guise of a milḥemet mizvah rather than as a milḥemet reshut for two reasons: (1) A milḥemet reshut requires a monarch, Sanhedrin, and the urim ve-tumim, none of which were available during the period of the Amora'im. (2) A milḥemet reshut may not be initiated on the Sabbath. Indeed, the Gemara, Shabbat 19a, followed by Rambam, Hilkhot Shabbat 2:25, declares that a siege may not be commenced within a three-day period prior to the Sabbath. Rashi, Deuteronomy 20:19, and Leḥem Mishneh, Hilkhot Shabbat 2:25, declare that this restriction applies only to discretionary wars but not to milḥamot mizvah.³¹Since the Gemara, Eruvin 45a, permits military action in defense of border settlements even when no certain threat to life exists, the response that is sanctioned cannot be understood to be in the nature of collective self-defense but must be in the nature of a halakhic category of war. This distinction will be elucidated below. See also, above, note 25.

That is that He commanded us to tell over His kindnesses that He benefited us and saved us - and one begins with the topic of our father, Yaakov, and finishes with the toil of the Egyptians and their afflicting us - to praise Him about all of this; and to request from Him to continue the blessing, at the time that one brings the first-fruits. And that is His, may He be exalted, saying, "And You shall lift your voice and say before the Lord, your God" (Deuteronomy 26:5) - and all that appears after that in this section. And all of this commandment is that which is called the recitation of the first-fruits (mikra bikkurim). And the regulations of this commandment have already been explained in Tractate Bikkurim and in the Chapter 7 of Sotah. But women are not obligated in it. (See Parashat Ki Tavo; Mishneh Torah, Second Tithes and Fourth Year's Fruit 11.)

That He prohibited us from eating tevel - and that is [produce] from which the priestly tithe and the [other] tithes have not been separated. And that is His saying, "And they shall not desecrate the consecrated items of the Children of Israel which they will set apart" (Leviticus 22:15). And one who transgresses this negative commandment - that he ate tevel - is liable for death at the hands of the Heavens. And the hint to this is surely His saying, "and they shall not desecrate"; and saying with the priestly tithe, "and the consecrated things of the Children of Israel, you must not desecrate" (Numbers 18:32). And it is learned [from the use of the same word,] desecrate with the priestly tithe, [the eating of] which is an iniquity [punished by] death, as we have explained. And the language of the Gemara, Sanhedrin (Sanhedrin 83a), is, "From where [do we know that] one who eats tevel is punished with death? As it is stated, 'They shall not desecrate the consecrated items of the Children of Israel' - that they are to give the Lord in the future." And that is from [the continuation of the verse], "which they will set apart." And after this verse, He said, "And so cause them to bear the iniquity of the guilt" (Leviticus 22:16). And in the Gemara in Makkot (Makkot 16b), they said, "One might have thought that one is liable for eating only tevel from which no gifts were taken at all; [but if] the great priestly tithe was separated from it, but the priestly tithe of the tithe was not separated from it, or if the priestly tithe of the tithe was separated but not the first tithe, or if the first tithe was separated but not the second tithe, or [even] if only poor man’s tithe [was not separated] - from where [do we know it]? [Hence] we learn to say, 'You may not eat within your gates' (Deuteronomy 12:17); and there it states, 'and they shall eat within your gates and be satisfied' (Deuteronomy 26:12). Just as there, it is [referring to] poor man’s tithe, here too, it is [referring to] poor man’s tithe - and the [Torah] said, 'You may not.'" However this is [talking about] lashes. And the iniquity [punished with] death is only with the great priestly tithe and the priestly tithe from the tithe. For one who eats the first tithe, before the priestly tithe from the tithe has been separated, is liable for death. And that is His saying to the Levites, when He commanded to separate the tithe from the tithe, "and the consecrated things of the Children of Israel, you must not desecrate so that you not die." As this is the prohibition about eating the tithe while it is tevel. Hence one is liable for death because of it, as is explained in Demai. And also understood from this is that one who eats tevel before the great priestly tithe and the priestly tithe from the tithe were separated from it, is liable for death; and its prohibition is from, "and the consecrated things of the Children of Israel, you must not desecrate" - as I have explained in this commandment. But one who eats tevel after the separation of the great priestly tithe, but before the separation of all the [other] tithes, is liable for lashes; and its prohibition is from, "You may not eat within your gates." And hold on to this and do not err about it. And the regulations of this commandment - meaning tevel - have already been explained in [various] places in Demai and in Terumot. (See Parashat Emor; Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Foods 10.)

To leave over the corner of the field: To leave over a corner from the produce, as it is stated (Leviticus 19:10), "to the poor and to the stranger shall you leave them," after it mentioned, "you shall not finish the corner of your field" (Leviticus 19:9). And the understanding of stranger [here] is a righteous convert (see Sifra Kedoshim 3:4). And so [too], any "stranger" stated in [the context of] gifts to the poor - as behold, it is written about the second tithe (Deuteronomy 26:12), "to the stranger, to the orphan and to the widow." And that is certainly the righteous convert - when undifferentiated - as its witnesses (the orphan and the widow) are by its side. And the same is the case for all of the gifts to the poor. And nonetheless they, may their memory be blessed, said (Gittin 59b) that we do not prevent them from the poor of the idolaters, due to the ways of peace. And the content of the corner, is that a person leaves a little of his produce at the end of his field at the time that he reaps. And there is no measure to this remnant by Torah writ, but the Sages gave a measurement to the thing (Mishnah Peah 1:2), and it is one in sixty parts.

To not eat tevel: To not eat tevel - whether an Israelite or a priest - and that is a thing that tithes and priestly tithes have not been taken away from it, as it is stated (Leviticus 22:15), "And they shall not profane the consecrated things of the Children of Israel that they shall raise to the Lord." And the received (traditional) explanation comes about this (Sanhedrin 83a) that the verse is speaking about tevel. And the content of the verse is to say that they should not profane the consecrated things in their still being mixed with the non-sacred. And that is [why] the expression is [in] future tense - meaning to say that it has not yet been raised. And so [too], is it in the Gemara Sanhedrin 83a, "From where [do we know] about the one who eats tevel that he is [punishable by] death? As it is stated, 'And they shall not profane the consecrated things of the Children of Israel that they shall raise to the Lord' - the verse is speaking about those that will be raised in the future; such that we learn [a comparison of] 'profane' [and] 'profane' from priestly tithe," about which it is written (Numbers 18:32), "and the consecrated things of the Children of Israel you shall not profane and not die." And [the latter] is with the death penalty - as we wrote above (Sefer HaChinukh 280), from that which is written (Leviticus 22:9), "and die for it, since they profaned it," and adjacent to it, "And any foreigner shall not eat the holy." And they, may their memory be blessed, also said about this matter in the Gemara Makkot 16b, "Perhaps one is only liable for eating tevel from which no [gifts] were taken at all; but if the great priestly tithe was taken from [the produce], but not the tithe of the tithe, or the first tithe or the second tithe, or even if only the poor tithe [was not separated]; from where [is it derived] that there is a liability in the thing? [Hence] we learn to say, 'You may not eat in your gates' (Deuteronomy 12:17), and later it states, 'and they shall eat within your gates and be satisfied' (Deuteronomy 26:12). Just as there, it is poor tithe, here too, it is poor tithe - and the [Torah] states, 'You may not.'"

From the laws of the commandment is that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Yevamot 85b), that this tithe that is of the Levites is completely non-sacred (chullin) and [so] permissible for any man to eat - whether a Levite or whether an Israelite - and even in impurity, as it is stated (Numbers 18:27), "This shall be accounted to you as your gift." [That is] to say that the tithe which is given as the tithe of Israel is for you "as the grain from the threshing floor or the flow from the vat." And they, may their memory be blessed, expounded [that] just like the threshing floor and the vat are non-sacred for all purposes, so too is the first tithe that had its tithe taken non-sacred for all purposes. [And] the explanation of 'that had its tithe taken' is meaning to say after the Levites skimmed a tithe from their tithe and gave it to the priests. That is what is called 'its tithe.' And every place that it is stated about the tithe, "holy" or "redemption" is only about the second tithe. And they said in Sifrei that all that is food for people and guarded and its growth is from the earth is liable for the tithe and the priestly tithe (terumah). And they [derive] it from that it is written about the priestly tithe (Deuteronomy 18:4), "The beginning of your grain, etc." As they, may their memory be blessed, expounded [that] just like grain, grapes and oil are food of people and its growth is from the earth and has owners, as it is stated, "your grain"; so too all that is similar to them are liable for the tithe and the priestly tithe. But even though vegetables are food of people, they are not liable for the tithe except rabbinically; as about the tithe it states (Deuteronomy 14:22), "all the produce of your seed," and vegetables are not called 'produce.' But from the words of the Gemara that we rely upon more, it appears that also in all [other] fruits besides grain, grapes and oil, is there no liability for the tithe, except rabbinically. And [according to this,] the verse that was brought [as a prooftext] in the Sifrei was only a memory device (asmakhta). This is the conclusion in the beginning of the chapter [entitled] Hasokher et HaPoalim (Bava Metzia 88a) concerning that which Rav Pappa answered that the fig tree stood in the garden, but its branches leaned into the courtyard. However, Rambam, may his memory be blessed, wrote the opposite of this, and like he found [it] in the Sifrei. And so [too] from the topic of the commandment is that which they said that we do not separate the tithe of the new crop for the old crop, and not from the old for the new, not from that which is liable for that which is exempt and not from that which is exempt for that which is liable. And if one separated the tithe [like this], it is not [considered] a tithe. But we do take the tithe from that which is not encircled (close to the produce for which one is liable), even though it is not like this with the priestly tithe, as we only separate the priestly tithe from what is encircled. And nonetheless, with other things the tithe and the priestly tithe are the same; such that anything about which we say regarding the priestly tithe, "we do not take the priestly tithe, but if one [took it], his priestly tithe is a [valid] priestly tithe - so [too,] with the tithe, if he separated it, his tithe is a [valid] tithe. And everything that is exempt from the priestly tithe is exempt for the tithe. And in the Order of Shoftim, we will write at greater length, with God's help, and you can see it there. And so [too] from the topic of the commandment is that which they, may their memory be blessed, said that a person is only obligated to separate the tithe from Torah writ if he finished [the work] on his fruit to eat them for himself, but one who finished them to sell them in the marketplace is exempted, as it is stated (Deuteronomy 14:22), "You shall surely tithe, etc. and you shall eat." And so [too,] one who buys [the produce] after its work has been completed - meaning to say it was put in the threshing floor by the seller - is exempt from Torah writ, but obligated from the words [of the Rabbis], as it is stated, "the produce of your seed," meaning to say that the work was finished in your domain. And the obligation of the tithe does not rest on the fruits until they reach the time of the tithe, as it is stated (Leviticus 27:30), "from the seed of the land, from the fruit of the tree"; meaning to say until it becomes a fruit. And from here, they, may their memory be blessed, learned that the time of the tithe is from when the fruits reach [when they could] be seeded and grow. Everything is according to what [the specific] fruit is. How is this? Figs, from when they become soft such that they are ready to eat; apples and citrons from when they turn round. And so [too,] with each and every fruit, they established its time for the tithe. That is to say until this time that is established for them, we can eat as much as we need, as they are not in the category of the tithe at all. But after this time, it can only be eaten casually, until their threshing floor designates them for the tithe. And after their threshing floor has designated them for the tithe, it is forbidden to eat from them, even casually. And what is their threshing floor with regard to the tithe? Produce from when it is flattened, meaning to say that he flattens its top with a shovel, in the way that people do when they make it into a heap. And in the Talmud Yerushalmi Ma'asrot 1:4, we have found further that if his intention is not to flatten [it], it is a threshing floor for [the designation of] the tithe from when he sets up a pile from his produce. As the verse made it dependent on the threshing floor, and even without flattening, when his intention is not to flatten [it]. And even if he makes a threshing floor of it inside his house; even there, the threshing floor creates the designation for the tithe. And that which Rav Oshaya said, "A man may be crafty about his produce and bring it in with its chaff," so as to exempt it from the tithe - and it is a set law, as we say in Tractate Berakhot 31a - that is speaking when he did not set up a pile inside his house, and so [too,] that he did not flatten it, but rather that he pounded it and winnowed it, little by little without flattening, and put it into the storehouse, little by little. This is what appears in this matter; and in this way, all of the discussions go up in one 'stalk, healthy and well' (are all in agreement). And they, may their memory be blessed, said that the season of squash and watermelon and pumpkin is from when they are rubbed, meaning from when the thin hair that is upon them is removed; and the season of a basket of fruit is from when he covers the fruit inside of it with leaves and fronds. And so [too,] with each and every fruit, they established the time of its threshing floor, according to what it is - everything like it comes in Tractate Maasrot (Mishna Maasrot 1:5). And I have also seen about the topic of designating the tithe by Torah writ that the opinion of some of the commentators is that there is never designation for the tithe from any angle until there is seeing the face of the house (that the produce enter the home), and also that the house be fit for it, as it is stated (Deuteronomy 26:13), "I have cleared out the consecrated from the house." And that is when he brought it in through the gate, as it is stated (Deuteronomy 26:12), "and they shall eat in your gates and they shall be satiated." But if he brought them in through the roofs or the enclosures, they are exempt from the tithe and the priestly tithe. And so did Rambam, may his memory be blessed, write (Mishneh Torah, Laws of Tithes 4:2), "It appears to me that we do not administer lashes from Torah writ for the eating of unseparated produce until they are designated by his bringing them into his house. But if it is designated with the other things that designate for the tithe, we do not administer lashes, besides [rabbinic] lashes of rebellion." [This] and the rest of its details are elucidated in Tractate Maasrot (see Tur, Yoreh Deah 338).

From the laws of the commandment is that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Yevamot 85b), that this tithe that is of the Levites is completely non-sacred (chullin) and [so] permissible for any man to eat - whether a Levite or whether an Israelite - and even in impurity, as it is stated (Numbers 18:27), "This shall be accounted to you as your gift." [That is] to say that the tithe which is given as the tithe of Israel is for you "as the grain from the threshing floor or the flow from the vat." And they, may their memory be blessed, expounded [that] just like the threshing floor and the vat are non-sacred for all purposes, so too is the first tithe that had its tithe taken non-sacred for all purposes. [And] the explanation of 'that had its tithe taken' is meaning to say after the Levites skimmed a tithe from their tithe and gave it to the priests. That is what is called 'its tithe.' And every place that it is stated about the tithe, "holy" or "redemption" is only about the second tithe. And they said in Sifrei that all that is food for people and guarded and its growth is from the earth is liable for the tithe and the priestly tithe (terumah). And they [derive] it from that it is written about the priestly tithe (Deuteronomy 18:4), "The beginning of your grain, etc." As they, may their memory be blessed, expounded [that] just like grain, grapes and oil are food of people and its growth is from the earth and has owners, as it is stated, "your grain"; so too all that is similar to them are liable for the tithe and the priestly tithe. But even though vegetables are food of people, they are not liable for the tithe except rabbinically; as about the tithe it states (Deuteronomy 14:22), "all the produce of your seed," and vegetables are not called 'produce.' But from the words of the Gemara that we rely upon more, it appears that also in all [other] fruits besides grain, grapes and oil, is there no liability for the tithe, except rabbinically. And [according to this,] the verse that was brought [as a prooftext] in the Sifrei was only a memory device (asmakhta). This is the conclusion in the beginning of the chapter [entitled] Hasokher et HaPoalim (Bava Metzia 88a) concerning that which Rav Pappa answered that the fig tree stood in the garden, but its branches leaned into the courtyard. However, Rambam, may his memory be blessed, wrote the opposite of this, and like he found [it] in the Sifrei. And so [too] from the topic of the commandment is that which they said that we do not separate the tithe of the new crop for the old crop, and not from the old for the new, not from that which is liable for that which is exempt and not from that which is exempt for that which is liable. And if one separated the tithe [like this], it is not [considered] a tithe. But we do take the tithe from that which is not encircled (close to the produce for which one is liable), even though it is not like this with the priestly tithe, as we only separate the priestly tithe from what is encircled. And nonetheless, with other things the tithe and the priestly tithe are the same; such that anything about which we say regarding the priestly tithe, "we do not take the priestly tithe, but if one [took it], his priestly tithe is a [valid] priestly tithe - so [too,] with the tithe, if he separated it, his tithe is a [valid] tithe. And everything that is exempt from the priestly tithe is exempt for the tithe. And in the Order of Shoftim, we will write at greater length, with God's help, and you can see it there. And so [too] from the topic of the commandment is that which they, may their memory be blessed, said that a person is only obligated to separate the tithe from Torah writ if he finished [the work] on his fruit to eat them for himself, but one who finished them to sell them in the marketplace is exempted, as it is stated (Deuteronomy 14:22), "You shall surely tithe, etc. and you shall eat." And so [too,] one who buys [the produce] after its work has been completed - meaning to say it was put in the threshing floor by the seller - is exempt from Torah writ, but obligated from the words [of the Rabbis], as it is stated, "the produce of your seed," meaning to say that the work was finished in your domain. And the obligation of the tithe does not rest on the fruits until they reach the time of the tithe, as it is stated (Leviticus 27:30), "from the seed of the land, from the fruit of the tree"; meaning to say until it becomes a fruit. And from here, they, may their memory be blessed, learned that the time of the tithe is from when the fruits reach [when they could] be seeded and grow. Everything is according to what [the specific] fruit is. How is this? Figs, from when they become soft such that they are ready to eat; apples and citrons from when they turn round. And so [too,] with each and every fruit, they established its time for the tithe. That is to say until this time that is established for them, we can eat as much as we need, as they are not in the category of the tithe at all. But after this time, it can only be eaten casually, until their threshing floor designates them for the tithe. And after their threshing floor has designated them for the tithe, it is forbidden to eat from them, even casually. And what is their threshing floor with regard to the tithe? Produce from when it is flattened, meaning to say that he flattens its top with a shovel, in the way that people do when they make it into a heap. And in the Talmud Yerushalmi Ma'asrot 1:4, we have found further that if his intention is not to flatten [it], it is a threshing floor for [the designation of] the tithe from when he sets up a pile from his produce. As the verse made it dependent on the threshing floor, and even without flattening, when his intention is not to flatten [it]. And even if he makes a threshing floor of it inside his house; even there, the threshing floor creates the designation for the tithe. And that which Rav Oshaya said, "A man may be crafty about his produce and bring it in with its chaff," so as to exempt it from the tithe - and it is a set law, as we say in Tractate Berakhot 31a - that is speaking when he did not set up a pile inside his house, and so [too,] that he did not flatten it, but rather that he pounded it and winnowed it, little by little without flattening, and put it into the storehouse, little by little. This is what appears in this matter; and in this way, all of the discussions go up in one 'stalk, healthy and well' (are all in agreement). And they, may their memory be blessed, said that the season of squash and watermelon and pumpkin is from when they are rubbed, meaning from when the thin hair that is upon them is removed; and the season of a basket of fruit is from when he covers the fruit inside of it with leaves and fronds. And so [too,] with each and every fruit, they established the time of its threshing floor, according to what it is - everything like it comes in Tractate Maasrot (Mishna Maasrot 1:5). And I have also seen about the topic of designating the tithe by Torah writ that the opinion of some of the commentators is that there is never designation for the tithe from any angle until there is seeing the face of the house (that the produce enter the home), and also that the house be fit for it, as it is stated (Deuteronomy 26:13), "I have cleared out the consecrated from the house." And that is when he brought it in through the gate, as it is stated (Deuteronomy 26:12), "and they shall eat in your gates and they shall be satiated." But if he brought them in through the roofs or the enclosures, they are exempt from the tithe and the priestly tithe. And so did Rambam, may his memory be blessed, write (Mishneh Torah, Laws of Tithes 4:2), "It appears to me that we do not administer lashes from Torah writ for the eating of unseparated produce until they are designated by his bringing them into his house. But if it is designated with the other things that designate for the tithe, we do not administer lashes, besides [rabbinic] lashes of rebellion." [This] and the rest of its details are elucidated in Tractate Maasrot (see Tur, Yoreh Deah 338).

From the laws of the commandment are that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Mishneh Torah, Laws of Gifts to the Poor 6:7, 10) that the owner of a field through which poor people passed must give everyone of them tithe enough to satiate him, as it is stated (Deuteronomy 26:12), "and they shall eat in your gates and be satiated." And how much is enough to satiate him? From wheat, he should [give] no less than half a kav; from barley, no less than a kav; spelt, no less than a kav and a half; fig-cakes no less than the weight of twenty-five sela; wine, no less than half a log; oil, [no less] than a quarter log; a quarter of a kav of rice; a litra weight of vegetables; three kav of carobs; ten nuts; five peaches; two pomegranates; and one etrog (citron). If he had a little [produce] and the poor are many, he places it in front of them and they divide it among themselves. And there is no right for the owners to benefit [by choosing who receives] the favor [for] the second tithe that is divided on the threshing floor. [If] a man and a woman come to take, we give to the woman first and afterwards to the man. [These] and the rest of its details are elucidated in Tractates Peah, Maaserot, Demai and in [various] places in [the Order,] Zeraim, and in Makhshirim and Yadayim. And with God's help, I will write in which place it is practiced and at what time, in the Order of Shoftim (Sefer HaChinukh 507).

The commandment of recital over the first-fruits: That we were commanded when bringing the first-fruits to the Temple to recite these verses in this section over them; and they are from, "My father was a wandering Aramean" (Deuteronomy 26:5), until "behold I have brought the first of the fruit of the land that the Lord gave me" (Deuteronomy 26:10). And about this is it stated (Deuteronomy 26:5), "And you will answer and you will say in front of the Lord, your God, etc." And they, may their memory be blessed, called this commandment, (Sotah 32a), "the recital of the first-fruits." I have written about the commandment of bringing them in the Order of Mishpatim (Sefer HaChinukh 91); and the commandment to bring them is likewise repeated in this section. And we already known that many of the commandments are repeated in the Torah; and all of them are for a great matter or necessity.

The commandment of recital over the first-fruits: That we were commanded when bringing the first-fruits to the Temple to recite these verses in this section over them; and they are from, "My father was a wandering Aramean" (Deuteronomy 26:5), until "behold I have brought the first of the fruit of the land that the Lord gave me" (Deuteronomy 26:10). And about this is it stated (Deuteronomy 26:5), "And you will answer and you will say in front of the Lord, your God, etc." And they, may their memory be blessed, called this commandment, (Sotah 32a), "the recital of the first-fruits." I have written about the commandment of bringing them in the Order of Mishpatim (Sefer HaChinukh 91); and the commandment to bring them is likewise repeated in this section. And we already known that many of the commandments are repeated in the Torah; and all of them are for a great matter or necessity.

The commandment of declaration of tithes: That we have been commanded to declare before God, Blessed be He, and to state with our mouths in His Temple, that we took out the legally-required tithes and priestly tithes from our grain and from our fruits, and that none of them is remaining in our possession that we have not given. And this is called the commandment of the declaration of tithes. And about this is it stated (Deuteronomy 26:13), "And you shall say before the Lord, your God, ‘I have disposed of the holy from the house, etc.'"

To not eat the second tithe in bereavement: To not eat the second tithe in bereavement. And I have written the content of the second tithe in the Order of Reeh Anochi (Sefer HaChinukh 473). And the content of bereavement from Torah writ is that one who has one of his relatives die on him is obligated to mourn for them - that day that [the relative] dies and he buries him, he is called a bereaved (onen). And they, may their memory be blessed, said explicitly that only the day of death and burial is the main bereavement from Torah writ. And [that is] specifically the day, but not the night, as it is stated (Leviticus 10:19), "And I ate the sin-offering of the day" - and they, may their memory be blessed, expounded (Zevachim 100b), "'The day' is forbidden, but it is permitted at night." And about this is it stated (Deuteronomy 26:14), "I have not eaten from it in bereavement" - meaning to say that if he ate from it in bereavement, he would have transgressed. And it is not only second tithes that it is forbidden to eat in bereavement, but rather one who eats any consecrated foods in bereavement is lashed for them (Mishneh Torah, Laws of Second Tithes and Fourth Year's Fruit 3:7).

To not eat the second tithe in impurity: To not eat the second tithe in impurity - and even in Jerusalem - until it is redeemed (Sefer HaMitzvot LaRambam, Mitzvot Lo Taase 150); as the essential rule for us is that we can redeem second tithe that has become impure, even in Jerusalem, as it is elucidated in Tractate Makkot 19b. And about this is it stated (Deuteronomy 26:14), "I have not disposed of it while impure" - and it is as if it said, "You shall not dispose of it while impure," meaning to say, "You shall not eat from it while impure." As since God commanded us that we should say, "I did not do this and that," behold it is as if He commanded us, "Do not do this." And for that reason, these expressions in this verse are considered negative commandments. And behold, the end of the verse states, "I have heeded to the voice of the Lord, my God" - meaning to say that He warned us about all this.

To only expend monies of the second tithe for eating and drinking: To only expend monies of the second tithe for the needs of eating and drinking. And about this is it stated (Deuteronomy 26:14), "and I did not give from it to the dead; I have heeded to the voice of the Lord, my God" - meaning to say, "I have not expended from it for a thing that does not sustain the body."