Talmud su Deuteronomio 26:78

MISHNAH: The following are recited in the vernacular: The verses of the suspect wife¹The verses the Cohen has to read to the wife before she drinks. While the scroll has to be written in Hebrew, the wife has to understand them and, therefore, they have to be translated into her vernacular., and the declaration of tithes²Deut. 26:12–16., and the recitation of the Šema‘³Cf. Berakhot, Chapters 1–2., and prayer⁴The eighteen (respectively 7 or 9) benedictions of the ‘Amidah; cf. Berakhot, Chapters 1–2., and grace⁵After a meal., and the oath of a witness⁶If somebody puts an oath on a possible witness that he should come and testify for him; Lev. 5:1. Testimony itself is given without an oath., and the oath about a deposit⁷Ex. 22:6–12..

HALAKHAH: “How does one designate First Fruits? Etc.” In the opinion of Rebbi Simeon, if he did not call them when they were picked they are not sanctified, they do not create dema‘¹If they are mixed with profane fruits and are unrecognizable, the mixture is permitted to laymen., one is not required to add a fifth²If misappropriated, the amount of restitution has to be 100%, not 125%., and one is not whipped for them outside the wall³If eaten outside the city walls of Jerusalem.. What is the reason of the rabbis? (Deut. 26:10) “Now, behold, I brought the first of the fruits of the earth.” At the moment of presentation it must be a fruit, but also at the moment of dedication? Even unripe grapes, even unripe figs! In the opinion of Rebbi Simeon, since at the moment of presentation it must be a fruit, so also at the moment of dedication it must be a fruit.

HALAKHAH: “The priest anointed for war,” etc. Why⁴Why must he speak in Hebrew only? the priest anointed for war? Because it is written “he shall speak⁵Deut. 20:2.”? But about the reading of the Šema‘ it is written: “You shall speak about them,” and it may be recited in any language. But because it is written there “saying⁶Deut. 20:3.”. But for the declaration of tithes it is written “saying⁷Deut. 26:13.” and it may be recited in any language! Rebbi Ḥaggai said, it says here “to come close⁵Deut. 20:2.” and it says there, “the Levitic Cohanim shall come close⁸Deut. 21:5.;” since “coming close” there implies [recitation in] the holy language⁹Mishnah 7:2., so also “coming close” here implies [recitation in] the holy language¹⁰This is an example of an argument outside the hermeneutic rules, used quite frequently in the Babli but very sparingly in the Yerushalmi. It is not an “equal cut” since there is no transfer of meaning involved; it is what is known as הֶקֵּשׁ “tying together”. Both in the case of the priest chosen for war and the calf selected to atone for an unsolved murder case, it should be quite clear that the people involved cannot be heard unless they are reasonably close. In both cases, the note that they have to come near is somewhat redundant. Therefore, one may conclude that the additional expression was used to indicate similar circumstances, which by rabbinic authority is declared to concern the language to be used.. That follows Rebbi Aqiba who says, these are expressions of additions¹¹This refers to the ceremony for the unsolved murder case, where R. Jehudah in 7:2 states that common use of the roots אמר, ענה implies use of the holy language. That argument is acceptable only following R. Aqiba, not following R. Ismael. For the latter, the argument of R. Ḥaggai does not prove anything.. Following Rebbi Ismael who says, these are double expressions? Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said, it says here “to come close” and it says there, “Moses shall come close to the mist¹²Ex. 20:21; the word order is incorrect in the quote.”, since “coming close” there implies [recitation in] the holy language¹³Since Moses was deputized by the people to speak to God Who obviously spoke to them and him in Hebrew. This reference to the holy language is acceptable to R. Ismael., so also “coming close” here implies [recitation in] the holy language.

HALAKHAH: “For heave and First Fruits,” etc. It is written (Num.18.8): “Behold, I gave to you the watch over My heaves.” Two heaves, heave and First Fruits⁷In the Babli (Šabbat25a, 26a; Yebamot 74a; and in slightly different form Bekhorot 34a), the two heaves are pure and impure (or pure and questionable), respectively. That tradition is in the name of the Davidic Rabba bar Abuha and may represent the autochthonous Babylonian tradition. In the Yerushalmi tradition, the verse determines the rules of First Fruits as those of heave.. About heave it is written⁸The paragraph deals with the prohibition of impure hallowed food. (Lev. 22:9): “They should not carry sin because of it and die if they desecrate it.” First fruits as it is written (Deut. 12:6): “There you shall bring your elevation offerings,” these are First Fruits, as it is written (Deut. 26:4): “The Cohen shall take the basket from your hand.⁹This statement is fragmentary and unintelligible in the form presented. The full text is in Sifry Deut.63: There you shall bring your elevation offerings, private and public, your well-being offerings, private and public, your tithes; R. Aqiba said, the verse deals with two different tithes, grain tithes and animal tithes, and your hand’s heaves, these are First Fruits, as it is written: The Cohen shall take the basket from your hand. Other heaves do not have to be brought to the Temple.” Maybe we should say that the verse¹⁰Lev. 22:9 which imposes death by the hand of Heaven for desecrators. refers to sacrifices? Extirpation is already written in regard to sacrifices¹¹Lev. 22:3 imposes the penalty of extirpation on any Cohen coming close to sacrifices while impure. Traditionally, extirpation is considered more of a punishment than death by the hand of Heaven..

Rebbi Joḥanan said, in all cases they judged by the rules of robbers. Rebbi Yose said, that is what the Mishnah⁶Mishnah 1:2. means: “Why can he not bring? Because it was said (Deut. 26:2): ‘the beginning of the First Fruits of your land.’ ”

²³Here starts the discussion of the second part of Mishnah 1.: Rebbi Joḥanan in the name of Rebbi Yannai: This is one of three derivations²⁴Cf. Chapter 1, Note 159. The parallel in the Babli to the derivations here is Qiddušin 66b. The argument of Rav, Rav Abba, somewhat changed, is there given in the name of Samuel’s father, Abba ben Abba. Elsewhere (Sifry Deut. 298. Babli Sanhedrin 28b) the argument of R. Yannai is given in the name of R. Yose the Galilean (the Tanna); the argument of Rav is not found in tannaїtic sources. which are clear from the Torah (Deut. 26:3): “You shall come to the Cohen who will be in those days.” Is there a Cohen now who is not a Cohen after some time? Who is that? That is one who was standing sacrificing on the altar when it became known that he is the son of a divorcee or of one who had performed ḥaliẓah, that his work is valid²⁵In Tosephta Roš Haššanah 2:18, the similar verse Deut. 17:9 is explained that Cohen and judge in one’s own time have the same authority as Aaron and Moses in their time.. Rav said, (Deut. 33:11) “You will want the work of his hands,” that the work of everybody who is of the descendants of Levi is valid²⁶Since the verse is addressed to the entire tribe of Levi and not only to the recognized Cohanim. Since the sons of divorcees are also descendants of Levi, they are included (if they happened to be admitted to the service.).

Rebbi Zeriqan asked before Rebbi Zeïra: Is the Mishnah Rebbi’s since Rebbi said, all roots live off one another¹¹‘Orlah 1:1, Note 39.? He said to him, it is everybody’s opinion. Here, the Torah said (Deut. 26:2): “the beginning of the First Fruits of your land,” that all growth be from your land.

Rebbi Ḥinena understood it from the following²¹Mishnah Yoma 8:3. A person who forgot that it was the Day of Atonement and he ate or drank must bring a sin sacrifice. But if he ate and drank in one forgetting episode he brings only one sacrifice. The argument is weak since the commandment of the Day of Atonement is “to deprive oneself”, and not eating and not drinking are aspects of deprivation.: “If he ate and drank in one forgetting he is guilty only once.” Rebbi Abba Mari understood it from here (Deut. 26:14): “I did not eat from it in my mourning”, but I drank²²From the declaration the farmer makes in the Temple when he brings his Second Tithe to Jerusalem after he gave First Tithe and, if applicable, the tithe of the poor. It seems obvious that the declaration cannot be made if the farmer drank from tithe wine while in deep mourning, which is a desecration as if he had eaten. Therefore, the verse subsumes drinking under eating.?

From where that it is clear as a positive commandment³⁴While illegitimate use of heave oil for anointing is a prohibition, it is mentioned in the framework of the farmer’s declaration in the Temple which is a positive commandment. Overstepping the prohibition of anointing when it is forbidden is legally overstepping a positive commandment not under the scope of biblical penal law.? Rebbi Eleazar in the name of Rebbi Simai (Deut. 26:14): “Nor did I give from it to the dead.” Where do we hold? If it were to bring a casket and shrouds for him, that were also forbidden for a living person³⁵Only consuming Second Tithe is permitted.! If something is forbidden for the living, not so much more for the dead? What is something which is permitted for the living but prohibited for the dead? That is anointing!

[From where that there is a clear commandment³⁰While illegitimate use of heave oil for anointing is prohibited, it is mentioned in the framework of the farmer’s declaration in the Temple, which is a positive commandment. Overstepping the prohibition of anointing when it is forbidden legally is overstepping a positive commandment not under the scope of biblical penal law.
This paragraph is copied from the parallels (Note 24); there is no connection to the rules of the Day of Atonement.? Rebbi Eleazar in the name of Rebbi Simai: I did not give from it to the dead³¹Deut. 26:14.. Where do we hold? If not to bring a casket or shrouds for him, this is forbidden for the living, therefore certainly for the dead. What is permitted for the living but prohibited for the dead?³²Cf. Sifry Deut. 302. I am saying that this is anointing³³Second Tithe must be consumed; no other use is authorized...

From where are tithes taken, from the house or from the field⁷³The question is difficult to understand since it was shown in Terumot 2:1 that only Great Heave must be given from the harvest at a well defined place but tithes and the Heave of the Tithe may be given from any untithed produce of the same kind. The question seems to be whether the grain collected after somebody else’s threshing is subject to tithes as a biblical law, in which case it can be used to tithe others and other grains can tithe for it, or it is rabbinic and a special case which needs special handling.? Let us hear from the following⁷⁴This baraita is quoted in Babli Pesaḥim 4b,9a; Avodah Zarah 41b, Niddah 15b. It is asserted there that the fact that the grain is in a chest is in itself proof that the grain was fully tithed before storage. In contrast, the Yerushalmi seems to permit a fellow to deposit his grain in the chest and tithe from it.: If a fellow died and in his estate was a chest full of grain, even if he filled it the same day it is supposed to be in order. Is it impossible that he should not have been of clouded mind at least for an hour⁷⁵Then the grain might be un-tithed even though it belonged to a fellow who was true to his obligations.? Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya said, explain it if he died with a clear mind. Rebbi Ḥananiah in the name of Rebbi Phineas understood it from the following⁷⁶Mishnah Ma‘aser Šeni 5:9, speaking of Rabban Gamliel and his entourage on a voyage from Rome to the Land of Israel who had to tithe his grains before the holiday and did this by a promise of future delivery from storage. This proves that, in general, tithes can be given from anywhere, also from storage for grain found on the road.: “One tenth which I shall separate in the future is given to Aqiba ben Joseph that he should distribute it to the poor.” That means, from the house. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba understood it from the following⁷⁷Mishnah Terumot 4:2, cf. Note 14. It is implied by the Mishnah that both for R. Meїr and the Sages, tithes can be given from another storage facility.: “If somebody’s produce was in a storage bin and he gave a seah to a Levite and a seah to a poor person;” that means, from the house. Rebbi Abba Mari understood it from the following⁷⁸Mishnah Ma‘aser Šeni 5:10. The Mishnah contains a midrash on Deut. 26:13: “I did remove the sanctified food” refers to Second Tithe and the fourth-year growth, “from the house,” refers to ḥallah, “and also gave it” refers to heave and heave of the tithe, “to the Levite,” refers to the Levite’s tithe, “the sojourner, the orphan, and the poor,” refers to the tithe of the poor, “following all commandments You commanded me;” therefore, if he gave heave of the tithe before the Great Heave he cannot recite the declaration, “I did not transgress Your commandments and I did not forget.” Since the house is mentioned in connection with ḥallah heave from dough, it is clear that heaves and tithes are supposed to be taken outside the house, i. e., in the field.: “(Deut. 26:13) ‘From the house’, that is ḥallah.” That means, from the field.

“They are the Cohen’s property.” Rebbi Abba, Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan (Num. 18: 8): “To you I gave it⁴⁸In the verse נתתים “I gave them.” as mošḥâ.” As mošḥâ, for importance⁴⁹The root being משח “to anoint”, as symbol of elevation.. As mošḥâ, for anointing. As mošḥâ, as fuel⁵⁰In Aramaic, משח is “oil”.. I would say, both for impure and pure. Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, (Deut. 26:14) “I did not burn any of it⁵¹The declaration at the distribution of the tithe of the poor and the consumption of Second Tithe in Jerusalem, including a reference to First Fruits. There is a difference in rules between heave and First Fruits in this respect.
The argument as reported in Babli Yebamot 73b is to take ממנו as partitive: This hallowed food cannot be burned but other (heave) can.,” but one liquidates heave in impurity. Rebbi Zeïra in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: From where for Second Tithe proper which became impure that one may not use it as fuel? The verse says, “I did not burn any of it in impurity”. One may redeem it and you are saying this⁵²Since Second Tithe may always be redeemed for money, impure Second Tithe is redeemed and becomes totally profane. It may be burned as profane fuel.? One may only interpret it as referring to what was bought with Second Tithe money⁵³In this case, R. Jehudah holds in Mishnah Ma‘aser Šeni 3:10 that produce bought with tithe money in Jerusalem which became impure cannot be redeemed but must be buried.. Rebbi Jehudah said⁵⁴The statement is an Amoraic interpretation of what R. Jehudah might have said, that Mishnah Bikkurim 1:8 implies that impure First Fruits must be destroyed even for those who permit redemption of fruits bought with tithe money., but for First Fruits which became impure it is the opinion of everybody.

MISHNAH: Why can he not bring? Because it was said (Deut. 26:2): “You shall bring the beginning of the First Fruits of your land,” that all the growth should be from your land. For the same reason sharecroppers, tenant farmers, sicarii²¹Knife-wielding robbers who take deeds of property as ransom for the lives of the property owners. The sicarii mentioned in this Mishnah obviously are Jews; in Mishnah Giṭṭin 5:6 the sicarii are Gentiles., and robbers cannot bring, since it is said: “The beginning of the First Fruits of your land.”

MISHNAH: But the following must be said in the holy language: The recitation for the first fruits³⁰The declaration in the Temple, Mishnah Bikkurim 2:5., ḥalîṣah³¹The required declarations by the childless widow and brother-in-law in the ceremony which frees her to marry outside the family; cf. Yebamot12:3–4., blessings and curses³²This is of purely antiquarian character, asserting that the curses detailed in Deut. 27:11–26 (each curse prefaced by a corresponding blessing: “Blessed be the man who will not …”) were pronounced in Hebrew, based on Jos. 8:34; cf. Halakhah 4., the priestly blessing³³Num. 6:22–26., the benedictions of the High Priest³⁴In the service of the Day of Atonement, Mishnah Yoma 7:1; cf. Halakhah 6., the portion about the king³⁵The public reading from the Torah at the end of a Sabbatical year, Deut. 31:10–13; cf. Halakhot 7–8., the portion about the calf whose neck was broken³⁶The declarations Deut. 21:7 (the Elders), 8 (the priests); cf. Chapter 9., the [priest] anointed for war at the time he speaks to the people³⁷Deut. 20:1–9; cf. Chapter 8.. The recitation for the first fruits, how? “You shall begin and say before the Eternal, your God³⁸Deut. 26:5.” but further on it says, “the Levites shall begin and say to all the men of Israel in an elevated voice³⁹Deut. 27:14. The implication of this verse is explained in the Halakhah.”. Since “beginning” further on means in the holy language, so also here in the holy language⁴⁰This is an application of the third hermeneutical rule of R. Ismael: The meaning of a word is defined by one paradigm. It does not fit the mold of the second rule, “equal cut”, preferred by the commentators..
Ḥalîṣah how? “She shall begin and say: So shall be done to the man⁴¹Deut. 25:9.” but further on it says, “the Levites shall begin and say to all the men of Israel in an elevated voice”. Since “beginning” further on means in the holy language, so also here in the holy language. Rebbi Jehudah says, “She shall begin and say so,” [it is invalid] unless she says exactly that text⁴²He disregards the dividing accent in the sentence and reads: “She shall begin and say so: it will be done to the man who will not build his brother’s house” instead of “She shall begin and say: thus will be done …” It gives a different twist to a derivation originating with R. Jehudah’s father’s teacher R. Eliezer in Mishnah Yebamot 12:4; cf. Babli 33a/b..

HALAKHAH: It was stated in the name of Rebbi Jehudah: Any place where it was said in any of these expressions: you begin and say, thus, and thus⁴³The first and last expressions were mentioned in the Mishnah. כה “thus” is the introduction to the priests’ blessing, Num. 6:23., it means in the holy language. Rebbi Eleazar said, the defining paradigm for all is: “Moses would speak and God would answer him by voice⁴⁴Ex. 19:19. This is not a reference to the statement of R. Jehudah, but to the argument of the Mishnah. While in that verse, the root ענה does not have the meaning of “to begin to speak” but “to answer”, the mention of קול “voice”, which was in Hebrew, transfers to the recitation of the Levites, who have to speak בְּקוֹל רָם “in the voice of the High”, where High is a Title of God, Is. 56:15; cf. below, Note 61..” Rebbi Ḥaggai objected, is there not written, “Laban and Bethuel began⁴⁵Gen. 24:50. As noted later, they spoke Aramaic.,” if you say because of “beginning” only, is there not written “and said⁴⁶That verse contains both roots, ענה and אמר, even if they are separated by the names of the speakers. Therefore, the argument of R. Jehudah is invalid.”? If you want to say, by “saying” only, is there not written “from the Eternal came the word”⁴⁷This is a counter-argument. Since Laban and Bethuel admitted that the betrothal of Rebecca was a word of the Eternal, did they not speak Hebrew at that moment?? If you want to say, in the holy language, is there not written “the stone heap of testimony⁴⁸Gen. 31:47. Since Laban had to translate Jacob’s גַלְעֵד into Aramaic, it follows that he did not speak Hebrew.”? If you want to say, before the Torah was given, is there not the text of the declaration of tithes⁴⁹Deut. 26:16. However, there only the root אמר is used. which may be recited in any language⁵⁰Cf. Mishnah 1.?

HALAKHAH: “They need to be brought to the Place.” Because it is written (Deut. 12:6): “There, you shall bring your elevation offerings, your family sacrificies, your tithes⁷⁸Animal and second tithes., and your hand’s heave.” “Your hand’s heave” are First Fruits since it is written (Deut. 26:4): “The Cohen shall take the basket from your hand.”⁷⁹Sifry Deut. 63.

So far tithe, from where First Fruits⁸⁰What implies that First Fruits, while they have their own declaration, have to be delivered on time? The farmer cannot read the declaration of second tithe if he has undelivered First Fruits at home.? As Rebbi Jacob bar Ḥama⁸¹No R. Jacob bar Ḥama is otherwise known; the commentators following R. S. Cirillo read “R. Jacob bar Aḥa” since this name is quoted in the next paragraph. said in the name of Rebbi Eleazar (Deut. 26:13): “The hallowed food.” That hallowed food is meant which was described in the preceding paragraph⁸²Deut. 26:1–11.
This contradicts the tannaїtic tradition (Mishnah Ma‘aser Šeni 5:10, Sifry Deut. 303) that the reference is to second tithe and fourth-year yield..

So far tithe, from where First Fruits⁸⁰What implies that First Fruits, while they have their own declaration, have to be delivered on time? The farmer cannot read the declaration of second tithe if he has undelivered First Fruits at home.? As Rebbi Jacob bar Ḥama⁸¹No R. Jacob bar Ḥama is otherwise known; the commentators following R. S. Cirillo read “R. Jacob bar Aḥa” since this name is quoted in the next paragraph. said in the name of Rebbi Eleazar (Deut. 26:13): “The hallowed food.” That hallowed food is meant which was described in the preceding paragraph⁸²Deut. 26:1–11.
This contradicts the tannaїtic tradition (Mishnah Ma‘aser Šeni 5:10, Sifry Deut. 303) that the reference is to second tithe and fourth-year yield..

“They need a declaration.” Since it is written (Deut. 26:5): “You should formally declare⁸³Or: “You shall answer and declare”, repeating the text of the declaration recited by the priest. This verse deals only with First Fruits. Cf. Halakhah 3:5; Sifry Deut. 301. The declaration for tithes is prescribed in v. 13. before the Eternal, your God⁸⁴This introduces the declaration of First Fruits. The next two sentences are copied from the preceding paragraph, most likely in error. They are appropriate again in the next paragraph..” So far tithe, from where First Fruits? As Rebbi Jacob bar Ḥama said in the name of Rebbi Eleazar (Deut. 26:13): “The hallowed food.” That hallowed food is meant which was described in the preceding paragraph.

⁷¹Babli 6b; Sifra Ḥovah (Wayyiqra 2) Pereq 11(9). And from where that it speaks only about the impurity of the Sanctuary and its sancta? He warned and punished about impurity⁷²In Lev. 22:15–16, both warning and punishment are written for priests who would violate the purity of the Sanctuary and its sancta. For the laity the corresponding verses are Lev. 7:19–20. The sacrifice for violations in purity is mentioned in Lev. 5:2–3; one has to establish that no sacrifice is possible for violations of sancta which do not belong to the Sanctuary such as heave. and required a sacrifice about impurity. Since punishment and warning spelled out later on refer to impurity of the Sanctuary and its sancta⁷³Deut. 26:14. The person who comes to eat his Second Tithe at the place of the Sanctuary has to make a declaration that he followed all the rules; in particular that he did not eat of it while in “deep mourning”, occupied in burying a close relative. Second Tithe has to be eaten in purity but no sanction for violation of its purity is spelled out anywhere in the Pentateuch., also when He made liable for a sacrifice it is about impurity of the Sanctuary and its sancta. Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob says, since it says, I did not eat from it in my deep mourning⁷⁴Deut.14., I could think that an Israel who ate tithe in deep mourning should bring a sacrifice. The verse says, from thes e⁷⁵Lev. 5:4. Prefix מ always is read as partitive, “some but not all.” Since it is not spelled out which infractions of the laws of impurity (or of testimony, or oaths) are included, and which are excluded, the detailed rules are left to rabbinic interpretation. Babli 33b.. For some of these he is liable, for some of these he is not liable. I will exclude tithe which is not a deadly sin but will not exclude heave which is a deadly sin as it is said, they would die from it for they desecrated it⁷⁶Lev. 22:9. First Tithe (of which heave of the tithe was separated) is totally profane in the hand of the Levite. Second Tithe has to be eaten in purity at the place of the Sanctuary but there is no penalty for violation of its purity. But heave has to be eaten by the Cohen in purity and violation of its purity is a deadly sin.. The verse says from thes e; for some of these he is liable, for some of these he is not liable. Or since there⁷⁷The verse mentioned in Note 76. [one speaks about] heave, also here heave. But did you not learn it from foreign worship⁷⁸The sacrifice atoning for inadvertent idolatry is declared paradigmatic for all sins in Num. 15:22.? Since foreign worship teaches about all transgressions in the Torah, to say that as foreign worship is special that one is liable for extirpation if done intentionally and for a sacrifice if done unintentionally⁷⁹The sacrifice is spelled out in Num. 15:22–29; extirpation in vv. 30–31. Babli Šabbat 69a.. This excludes heave which only is a deadly sin⁸⁰But no extirpation is mentioned for violating purity of heaves..

“They need a declaration.” Since it is written (Deut. 26:5): “You should formally declare⁸³Or: “You shall answer and declare”, repeating the text of the declaration recited by the priest. This verse deals only with First Fruits. Cf. Halakhah 3:5; Sifry Deut. 301. The declaration for tithes is prescribed in v. 13. before the Eternal, your God⁸⁴This introduces the declaration of First Fruits. The next two sentences are copied from the preceding paragraph, most likely in error. They are appropriate again in the next paragraph..” So far tithe, from where First Fruits? As Rebbi Jacob bar Ḥama said in the name of Rebbi Eleazar (Deut. 26:13): “The hallowed food.” That hallowed food is meant which was described in the preceding paragraph.

“They are forbidden to the current mourner.” Since it is written (Deut. 26:14): “I did not eat from it in my deep mourning.” So far tithe, from where First Fruits? As Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa said in the name of Rebbi Eleazar (Deut. 26:13): “The hallowed food.” That hallowed food is meant which was described in the preceding paragraph.

“They are forbidden to the current mourner.” Since it is written (Deut. 26:14): “I did not eat from it in my deep mourning.” So far tithe, from where First Fruits? As Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa said in the name of Rebbi Eleazar (Deut. 26:13): “The hallowed food.” That hallowed food is meant which was described in the preceding paragraph.

There, they say, because Rebbi Joshua praised Rebbi Aqiba, it implies that practice follows his argument. The rabbis of Caesarea say, he praised him for his ingenuity, but in fact practice does not follow his argument, since Rebbi Aḥa, Rebbi Maisha, in the name of Rebbi Eleazar said, one whips for tertiary [impurity] for tithes⁶⁶This refers to the Second Tithe, food that the farmer retains for himself and his family, to be eaten in purity in Jerusalem. On that occasion, he has to declare in the Temple that he “did not separate it while impure” (Deut. 26:14; Bikkurim 2:2). This implies that Second Tithe becomes desecrated by impurity and must be redeemed. The question is whether eating Second Tithe in any state of impurity is a criminal offense, for which the punishment is whipping. The thesis advanced here is that Second Tithe has a status equal to heave, so that tertiary impurity makes that tithe unusable.
The Babli certainly agrees that the statement of R. Joshua is not an endorsement of the practice since it quotes Mishnah Tahorot 2:2 in which R. Joshua disagrees with R. Eliezer whom R. Aqiba follows.
It is always held that first tithe after separation of the heave of the tithe is totally profane in the hand of the Levite, even if consumption is restricted to Levites of good standing., even⁶⁷he meaning of this word is unclear; possibly this is a reflection from “even” in the next sentence. according to Rebbi Aqiba. Rebbi Yudan in the name of Rebbi Hilai: Even according to Rebbi Aqiba one does not whip. Why? The ṭevul yom makes invalid, secondary impurity makes invalid. Since the ṭevul yom has no touch for profane food⁶⁸This means that as far as the status of purity is concerned, the touch of a ṭevul yom is totally irrelevant., also secondary impurity has no touch for profane food⁶⁹Since Second Tithe is eaten by the farmer’s family, without anything being given to Cohanim or Levites, it cannot have the status of sanctified food.. Rebbi Eleazar said, as the count for profane food so is the count of tithes⁷⁰Since for profane food one has only primary and secondary impurity, not tertiary, the same holds for tithes. This contradicts the statement quoted earlier in the name of R. Eleazar.. This corresponds to what Rebbi Jonah, Rebbi Immi, said in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: We deal with somebody who ate⁷¹Reading בָּכַל as contraction of בְּאָכַל. profane food, and that Chapter deals with tithe⁷²Chapter 2 of Ṭahorot, which was quoted in the previous paragraph and which details the stages of impurity, mentions only profane, heave, and sacrificial foods. Since the tithes are not mentioned and First Tithe is profane, it is clear that tithes are classified with profane food.. Rebbi Yose said, even its primary [impurity] is not clear. Not “I will not eat” is written, but “I did not eat.”⁷³Deut. 26:14. It is clear that if the farmer ate some Second Tithe in impurity, he cannot make the declaration in the Temple. But this does not imply that eating in impurity is forbidden as a criminal act. Rebbi Abba Mari said, since it is written “following all Your commandments which You commanded me,” is it as if it were not clear⁷⁴Since the verse classifies all that is mentioned there as God’s commandments, necessarily the infractions which bar the farmer from making the declaration are criminal acts.?

Rebbi Ḥinena understood all this from the following: I did not eat from it in my mourning,³⁶Deut. 26:14 but I drank?

In all these cases we stated that Rebbi Simeon disagrees. For the declaration Rebbi Simeon does not disagree. The declaration is the reading; there, Rebbi Simeon does not disagree since it is written (Deut. 26:5): “You should formally declare.”

HALAKHAH: ⁴¹A similar text in Sifra Deut. 197(2), a third version in Babli Menaḥot 84b.“One does not bring First Fruits”, etc. If it were written (Deut. 26:2): “You shall take the First Fruits of your land”, I would have said that all kinds should be obligated for First Fruits. The verse says,“from⁴²As always, prefix מ is read as partitive. the First Fruits”, not all firsts. If “from the first” and not all first, then you have only wheat and barley. The verse says “fruits of your land”; this is inclusive. Does it include everything? Here⁴³Deut. 26:2. “your land” has been said; at another place⁴⁴Deut. 8:8. “the Land of wheat and barley” has been said. Since “land” mentioned there deals with the Seven Kinds, so also “land” mentioned in this verse must deal with the Seven Kinds.

It is written (Deut. 14:28): “At the end of three years you shall take out all tithe of your produce, in that year, and deposit it in your gates.” I could think that once in a Sabbatical cycle you have to distribute the tithes including the tithe of the poor⁷⁶The tithe of the poor is mentioned separately since the paragraph in question introduces the tithe of the poor.. The verse says “at the end of three years,” once in three years and not once in seven; i. e., in the third and the seventh⁷⁷This formulation is inconsistent. It must either be the 3^rd and the 6^th year for the obligation of tithes, or the 4^th and the 7^th which are finally determined to be the times of delivery., twice in a Sabbatical cycle. Do I understand at New Year’s Day, that on New Year’s Day you have to distribute the tithes including the tithe of the poor? The verse says “at the end of three years.” “At the end” means at its conclusion you remove, you do not remove on New Year’s Day. If it is at the end of the year, I could understand that at the beginning of the fourth you have to remove the tithes including the tithe of the poor; the verse says (Deut. 26:12): “If you have finished tithing [all tithe of]⁷⁸In the masoretic text, missing in the quote. your produce,” when you have tithed all your fruits. ⁷⁹From here on, including the tannaitic parts of the next two paragraphs, a similar text is in Sifry Deut. §109; in very shortened form also §302. If it is when you have tithed all your fruits, could I understand even on Ḥanukkah⁸⁰Since Ḥanukkah is not connected with the agricultural year and is not a biblical holiday, its mention does not make much sense, in particular because the tithing year for trees and their fruits ends only on the 14^th of Ševaṭ, more than a month and a half after the start of Ḥanukkah. The 15^th of Ševaṭ is mentioned as “New Year of trees” in Mishnah Roš Haššanah 1:2; in the opinion of the House of Shammai it is the first of Ševaṭ. This indetermination in itself disqualifies the New Year of trees as a biblical date. The discussion of the date is in Roš Haššanah 1:2 (fol. 57a), Babli 14a.? It says here, “at the end of;” it says further (Deut. 26:12): “At the end⁸¹In the biblical text, מקץ not מקצה. of seven years, on the fixed time of the Sabbatical year, on the festival of booths.” Since “at the end” there means at a fixed time, so here also at a fixed time. Since there “at the end” means the holiday of booths, does it here also mean the holiday of booths? The verse says “if you have finished tithing all tithe of your produce,” when you have finished tithing all of your fruits? On Passover of the fourth year⁸²Since this is the first biblical holiday after the end of tithing fruits of the preceding year..

Rebbi Samuel ben Naḥman in the name of Rebbi Jonathan: All of them learned it from the house⁹³A courtyard induces ṭevel if and only if a house would induce ṭevel under the same circumstances.. The house creates ṭevel by biblical decree; it says (Deut. 26:13) “I removed the holy food from the house⁹⁴This means that the heave, the sanctified food, is in the house, not in the open..”

Rebbi Abba Mari understood it from the following:] I did not eat from it in my mourning,⁷⁴Deut. 26:14. but I drank?

“And weaving¹²²The movements prescribed for presenting well-being offerings (Lev. 7:30) to the altar and for those public flour offerings (Lev. 23:11,17) which have to be presented.,” as it is written (Deut. 26:4) “The Cohen shall take the basket from your hand and deposit it¹²³“And deposit it before the altar of the Eternal, your God.” This implies a presentation before the altar.,” to add that First Fruits require weaving, following Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob¹²⁴Quoted with the reasoning behind R. Eliezer ben Jacob’s statement in Babli Sukkah 47b, Makkot 18b, Menaḥot 61a/b; Yalqut Šim‘oni Torah §938..

From where that it is clear as a positive commandment⁷⁹While illegitimate use of Second Tithe oil for anointing is prohibited, it is mentioned in the context of the farmer’s declaration in the Temple, which is a positive commandment. Therefore overstepping the prohibition is violating a positive commandment not under the scope of criminal law.? Rebbi Eleazar in the name of Rebbi Simai: Nor did I give from it to the dead⁷⁴Deut. 26:14.. Where do we hold? If it were to bring a casket and shrouds for him, that were also forbidden for a living person⁸⁰Since only consuming Second Tithe is permitted.! If something is forbidden for the living, not so much more for the dead? What is something which is permitted for the living but prohibited for the dead? That is anointing!

MISHNAH: Jews were sharecroppers for Gentiles in Syria⁶¹The parts of David’s kingdom not conquered by the 12 tribes under Joshua; cf. Peah 7, Note 119. R. Eliezer holds that the laws of the Holy Land extend to Syria but Rabban Gamliel holds that Syria is essentially outside the Land and only selected laws of the Land are extended to apply there.; Rebbi Eliezer obligates their produce for tithes and the Sabbatical but Rabban Gamliel exempts them. Rabban Gamliel says there are two ḥallot in Syria⁶²As explained in Mishnah 8. Biblical law restricts the duty of ḥallah to the Land (Num. 15:18–19). Rabbinic practice extends the obligation to the rest of the world but, since the soil outside the Land is intrinsically impure, any ḥallah outside the Land is impure and must be burned. Nevertheless, in order to remind people that the original duty is to give ḥallah to a Cohen, it was established that some dough should be given to a Cohen. This dough cannot be sanctified, otherwise it would be forbidden to the recipient. but Rebbi Eliezer says one ḥallah⁶³He denies that Syrian soil is impure.. They took the leniency of Rabban Gamliel and the leniency of Rebbi Eliezer but then returned to follow Rabban Gamliel in both cases.
Rabban Gamliel says: There are three domains for ḥallah⁸⁵In the biblical Land of Israel.. The Land of Israel⁸⁶The actual Land of Israel of the Second Commonwealth; cf. Mishnah Ševi‘it 6:1, Note 3, for the geographic details. up to Akhzib, one ḥallah. From Akhzib to the Euphrates or Amanus⁸⁷One has to add, with Mishnah Ševi‘it 6:1, “any place held by the immigrants from Egypt,” i. e., the regions North of Akhzib described as tribal territories in the book of Joshua., two ḥallot, one for the fire and one for the Cohen. The one for the fire has a measure⁸⁸The true ḥallah which cannot be eaten since the impurity of Gentile lands is extended rabbinically to any region not inhabited by Jews. The “measure” is that for ḥallah of the Land, Mishnah 2:7., the one for the Cohen has no measure⁸⁹A purely symbolic ḥallah to be eaten in impurity, as a remembrance of the rules to be restored in the times of the Messiah.. From Euphrates or Amanus inside⁹⁰The rest of Syria, domain of biblical promise; cf. Ševi‘it 6:1, Note 3., two ḥallot, one for the fire and one for the Cohen. The one for the fire has no measure⁹¹Both ḥallot are symbolical since that region was not under obligation of ḥallah even during the First Commonwealth., the one for the Cohen has a measure but a ṭevul yom may eat it⁹²He is forbidden true ḥallah.. Rebbi Yose says one does not need immersion⁹³This also shows that the symbolic ḥallah is no true heave, cf. Berakhot 1, Note 3..
But it⁹⁴The purely symbolic ḥallah mentioned last in Mishnah 8. By rabbinic ordinance, it is forbidden for people whose impurity originates in their own body. is forbidden to people suffering from genital flux⁹⁵Lev. 15:1–15, 25–30., and to women during menstruation⁹⁶Lev. 15:19–24. or after childbirth⁹⁷Lev. 12:1–8.. It may be eaten at one table with a layman and may be given to any Cohen⁹⁸Even a vulgar who cannot be expected to follow all rules of purity..
The following may be given to any Cohen¹²²Irrespective of his level of observance and knowledge of the Law. Some of the prescribed gifts are given to priests serving in the Temple; there, they are under supervision and instruction. The other gifts are purely profane; they cannot be impaired by the impurity of the Cohen.: ḥērem-dedications¹²³Num. 18:14. According to most sources, this special dedication is not for the upkeep of the Temple but for the Cohanim [Sifra Beḥuqotay Pereq12(9), Babli Sanhedrin 88a, Arakhin28a]. However, Babylonian practice follows the dissenting opinion (Arakhin29a)., firstlings¹²⁴Ex. 13:1, Num. 18:15., the redemption money for a [firstborn] son¹²⁵Ex. 13:1,13, Num. 3:47, 18:15., the redemption value of a firstling donkey¹²⁶Ex. 13:1,13., foreleg, jawbone, and first stomach¹²⁷Deut. 18:3., the first shearing¹²⁸Deut. 18:4., oil to burn¹²⁹Impure heave olive oil., Temple sacrifices, and First Fruits¹³⁰Deut. 26:1–11.. Rebbi Jehudah forbids First Fruits¹³¹Since they have to follow rules of heave, Mishnah Bikkurim 2:1.. Heave vetch¹³²This is animal fodder except in times of famine. Rebbi Aqiba permits but the Sages forbid.

MISHNAH: ⁶⁷He only excludes valley figs. The following bring but do not make the declaration. The proselyte brings but does not make the declaration since he cannot say (Deut. 26:3): “That the Eternal had sworn to our forefathers to give us.” But if his mother was Jewish⁶⁸The child of a Jewish mother is automatically Jewish. But since Mishnah Qiddušin 3:12 states that “in all cases where marriage is possible and not sinful, the child is classified with the male”, the child is still classified as a proselyte. he brings and makes the declaration. When he prays in private⁶⁹In the first benediction of the ‘Amidah prayer., he says “God of the forefathers of Israel.” When he is in the synagogue, he says “God of your forefathers.” But if his mother was Jewish he says “God of our forefathers.”

MISHNAH: The fife beats before them until they arrive at the Temple Mount. Arrived at the Temple Mount, even king Agrippas takes the basket on his own shoulder and enters until he arrives at the Temple courtyard. When they arrived at the Temple courtyard, the Levites sang (Ps. 30:2): “I shall elevate You, Eternal, for You drew me up and You did not make my enemies happy because of me.” The pigeons on the baskets were elevation sacrifices and what was in their hands⁶⁷According to Maimonides, pigeons that were not tied to the baskets. According to R. Abraham ben David and R. Simson, the baskets of First Fruits; according to the Mayence commentary (“Rabbenu Gershom”) and Rashi (in Menaḥot 58a), the baskets themselves. The last explanation is the only one compatible with the Halakhah (Note 70). they gave to the Cohanim.
As long as the basket is still on his shoulder he reads from (Deut. 26:3) “I am declaring today before the Eternal, your God” until he finishes the entire paragraph. Rebbi Jehudah says, until (v. 5): “My father was a wandering Aramean.” When he comes to “my father was a wandering Aramean”, he takes the basket down from his shoulder, holds it by its rim, and the Cohen puts his hand under it and weaves⁶⁸Cf. Chapter 2, Note 122. it. Then he reads from “my father was a wandering Aramean” until he finishes the entire paragraph, he puts it down next to the altar, prostrates himself, and leaves.
In earlier times, everybody who knew how to read, read, and everybody who did not know how to read, had someone read before him⁸¹The Cohen recites the declaration word by word and the farmer repeats each word after the Cohen.. When they refrained from bringing they instituted that one read before him who knew and him who did not know.
Rich people bring their First Fruits in bowls⁸²Greek κάλαθος, Latin calathus “basket; pail; bowl”. of silver and gold but poor people bring them in baskets of stripped willow twigs. Baskets and First Fruits are given to the Cohanim.

MISHNAH: The fife beats before them until they arrive at the Temple Mount. Arrived at the Temple Mount, even king Agrippas takes the basket on his own shoulder and enters until he arrives at the Temple courtyard. When they arrived at the Temple courtyard, the Levites sang (Ps. 30:2): “I shall elevate You, Eternal, for You drew me up and You did not make my enemies happy because of me.” The pigeons on the baskets were elevation sacrifices and what was in their hands⁶⁷According to Maimonides, pigeons that were not tied to the baskets. According to R. Abraham ben David and R. Simson, the baskets of First Fruits; according to the Mayence commentary (“Rabbenu Gershom”) and Rashi (in Menaḥot 58a), the baskets themselves. The last explanation is the only one compatible with the Halakhah (Note 70). they gave to the Cohanim.
As long as the basket is still on his shoulder he reads from (Deut. 26:3) “I am declaring today before the Eternal, your God” until he finishes the entire paragraph. Rebbi Jehudah says, until (v. 5): “My father was a wandering Aramean.” When he comes to “my father was a wandering Aramean”, he takes the basket down from his shoulder, holds it by its rim, and the Cohen puts his hand under it and weaves⁶⁸Cf. Chapter 2, Note 122. it. Then he reads from “my father was a wandering Aramean” until he finishes the entire paragraph, he puts it down next to the altar, prostrates himself, and leaves.
In earlier times, everybody who knew how to read, read, and everybody who did not know how to read, had someone read before him⁸¹The Cohen recites the declaration word by word and the farmer repeats each word after the Cohen.. When they refrained from bringing they instituted that one read before him who knew and him who did not know.
Rich people bring their First Fruits in bowls⁸²Greek κάλαθος, Latin calathus “basket; pail; bowl”. of silver and gold but poor people bring them in baskets of stripped willow twigs. Baskets and First Fruits are given to the Cohanim.

MISHNAH: One mixes him the second cup, and here the son asks⁶²He is supposed spontaneously to ask why this dinner is different from the usual set-up.. If the son does not know how to ask, his father instructs him⁶³The following catalogue is an example of the questions with which the instruction may start. The order of the questions is the same in Maimonides’s text, different in the Babli.: What is the difference between this night and all other nights? For every night we dip once⁶⁴As explained in Note 52., but this night we dip twice. For every night we eat leavened and unleavened bread, but this night only unleavened. For in all other nights we eat meat roasted, preserved⁶⁵By extended cooking. This always is mentioned as a separate category of preparation of food., or cooked, but in this night only roasted. According to the son’s understanding the father teaches him⁶⁶Along the lines explained in Mishnah 5. If children or women do not understand Hebrew, this implies the duty to translate the Haggadah text.. He starts with ignominy⁶⁷As explained in Halakhah 5. and ends with praise and explains from “a lost Aramean was my father” until he finishes the paragraph⁶⁸Deut. 26:5–8. The Babli text, “until he finishes the paragraph completely”, would instruct to include also v. 9, not included in the Haggadah text identical with Sifry Deut. on Deut. 26:5–8..
Rabban Gamliel used to say, anybody who did not teach these three words on Passover did not fulfill his duty, Pesaḥ, mazzah, and bitter herbs. Pesaḥ because the Omnipresent passed over the houses of our forefathers in Egypt, mazzah because our forefathers were freed from Egypt⁸¹A reference to Ex. 12:39 is understood, but is not included in any reliable Mishnah ms.. Bitter herbs because the Egyptians embittered the lives of our forefathers in Egypt. In every generation a person is required to see himself as if he himself had gone out of Egypt, as it was said, you shall tell your son on that day, this is on account of what the Eternal did for me when I left Egypt. Therefore we are required to thank, sing His praise, laud, glorify, exalt, praise in perpetuity, to glorify, Him who did all these miracles for us⁸²Since everybody has to consider himself as if he left Egypt, it is appropriate that here “our forefathers” are not mentioned, in contrast to the Mishnah in the Babli. and led us from slavery to freedom; let us say before Him Hallelujah⁸³The Hallel, Pss. 113–118..

MISHNAH: One mixes him the second cup, and here the son asks⁶²He is supposed spontaneously to ask why this dinner is different from the usual set-up.. If the son does not know how to ask, his father instructs him⁶³The following catalogue is an example of the questions with which the instruction may start. The order of the questions is the same in Maimonides’s text, different in the Babli.: What is the difference between this night and all other nights? For every night we dip once⁶⁴As explained in Note 52., but this night we dip twice. For every night we eat leavened and unleavened bread, but this night only unleavened. For in all other nights we eat meat roasted, preserved⁶⁵By extended cooking. This always is mentioned as a separate category of preparation of food., or cooked, but in this night only roasted. According to the son’s understanding the father teaches him⁶⁶Along the lines explained in Mishnah 5. If children or women do not understand Hebrew, this implies the duty to translate the Haggadah text.. He starts with ignominy⁶⁷As explained in Halakhah 5. and ends with praise and explains from “a lost Aramean was my father” until he finishes the paragraph⁶⁸Deut. 26:5–8. The Babli text, “until he finishes the paragraph completely”, would instruct to include also v. 9, not included in the Haggadah text identical with Sifry Deut. on Deut. 26:5–8..
Rabban Gamliel used to say, anybody who did not teach these three words on Passover did not fulfill his duty, Pesaḥ, mazzah, and bitter herbs. Pesaḥ because the Omnipresent passed over the houses of our forefathers in Egypt, mazzah because our forefathers were freed from Egypt⁸¹A reference to Ex. 12:39 is understood, but is not included in any reliable Mishnah ms.. Bitter herbs because the Egyptians embittered the lives of our forefathers in Egypt. In every generation a person is required to see himself as if he himself had gone out of Egypt, as it was said, you shall tell your son on that day, this is on account of what the Eternal did for me when I left Egypt. Therefore we are required to thank, sing His praise, laud, glorify, exalt, praise in perpetuity, to glorify, Him who did all these miracles for us⁸²Since everybody has to consider himself as if he left Egypt, it is appropriate that here “our forefathers” are not mentioned, in contrast to the Mishnah in the Babli. and led us from slavery to freedom; let us say before Him Hallelujah⁸³The Hallel, Pss. 113–118..

HALAKHAH: It was stated⁴⁷A similar list appears in Babli Erubin 29a in the name of R. Simeon ben Eleazar.: A quarter⁴⁸A quarter qab equalling one log fluid. of rice, an ukla⁴⁹1/8 of a log. of spices, a pound⁵⁰A Roman pound of 12 ounces, 345 g. of vegetables, three qab carob, half a log of wine, a quarter of a log of olive oil, ten nuts, five peaches, two pomegranates, one etrog⁵¹Citrus medica, also used on the feast of Tabernacles.. What is the reason? (Deut. 26:12) “They shall eat in your gates and be satiated,” give him to satisfy him. Ḥizqiah asked his father: From where do we get all these amounts⁵²Some of them do not appear sufficient for a meal; the amounts seem to be inconsistent with their derivation from the verse.? He said to them⁵³R. Ḥiyya, the father, said to Jehudah and Ḥizqiah, his twin sons., a pebble supports a tower⁵⁴A slight allusion may be the justification for an elaborate set of rules.. Rebbi Ḥananiah was sitting before Rebbi Ilaï, the latter was giving a reason and the former destroyed it, the latter was giving a reason and the former destroyed it, until he said to him, is it not depraved to destroy instead of building up?

HALAKHAH: Rav Huna said⁶⁹According to R. Isaac Simponti and R. Simson of Sens, this refers to Mishnah 4: The Cohen has to take the basket before the Levites start to sing. In this version, the Levites wait until the procession reaches the inner courtyard where the ceremony is held. According to others, Rav Huna gives the reason why even the king has to take the basket himself, that the Cohen has to receive it from the owner’s hand. The correct interpretation seems to be that “the Cohen shall take the basket from your hand” should replace the first reference to “my father was a wandering Aramean” in the text of R. Jehudah since v.4 separates between two declarations.: So is the Mishnah (Deut. 26:4): “The Cohen shall take the basket from your hand.”

A person was tithing following the rules¹⁶⁰Which not may people did.. Rebbi Mana said to him, stand up and say, I removed the sancta from the house¹⁶¹Deut. 26:13. One has to explain that this happened during a prayer for rain, and R. Mana wanted him to recite the entire passage, ending with v. 15: Look down from Your holy Place, from Heaven, and bless Your people Israel, and the Land which You gave us as You had sworn to our forefathers, a land flowing with milk and honey..

There¹⁵¹Mishnah Ḥallah 4:12. There, the text is better, אפמיא Apamea in Syria. In the Babli in particular, Apamea is usually given as איספמיא which occasionally means “Spain”., we have stated: “Ariston brought First Fruits¹⁵²Deut. 26:1–11. The text makes it quite clear that the obligation of bringing First Fruits is discharged only upon delivery of the fruits in the Temple courtyard. Heave is given to the Cohen from the barn; the transport is at the Cohen’s expense. If heave from Syria were acceptable, a Cohen might be tempted to leave the Land for Syria to collect heave from the Jews there. from Apamea and they received them from him.” Why could he not bring heave? Rebbi Hoshaia said, First Fruits are the responsibility of the owners, heave is not the responsibility of the owners. If you would say so, they would run after it there.

“⁷⁸This is a Babylonian baraita, quoted in Babli Soṭa 14b, Zebaḥim 66a, Menaḥot 19b. The Babylonian character is shown by the use of אי as “if”. One puts them⁷⁹The First Fruits to be deposited near the altar. The problem treated is an apparent contradiction between the prescriptions contained in verses 4 and 10 of Chap. 26. near the South-West corner. (Deut. 26:10) ‘Before the Eternal’, that should mean the West. The verse says (Deut. 26:4) ‘at the face of the altar.’ If it is at the face of the altar that should mean the South⁸⁰The entrance to the Temple precinct was to the East. Going from East to West one has the outer and inner courtyards, then the Cohanim’s court containing the altar, and to the West the Temple building containing the holiest of holies, counted as the Presence of the Eternal. The access to the altar was via the ramp built at its South side. Therefore, “before the Eternal” means before the Temple building, to the West of the altar. “At the face of the altar” means at the South side.. The verse says ‘before the Eternal’! How is that? He presents them at the South-Western corner and puts them down South of the corner.”

“⁷⁸This is a Babylonian baraita, quoted in Babli Soṭa 14b, Zebaḥim 66a, Menaḥot 19b. The Babylonian character is shown by the use of אי as “if”. One puts them⁷⁹The First Fruits to be deposited near the altar. The problem treated is an apparent contradiction between the prescriptions contained in verses 4 and 10 of Chap. 26. near the South-West corner. (Deut. 26:10) ‘Before the Eternal’, that should mean the West. The verse says (Deut. 26:4) ‘at the face of the altar.’ If it is at the face of the altar that should mean the South⁸⁰The entrance to the Temple precinct was to the East. Going from East to West one has the outer and inner courtyards, then the Cohanim’s court containing the altar, and to the West the Temple building containing the holiest of holies, counted as the Presence of the Eternal. The access to the altar was via the ramp built at its South side. Therefore, “before the Eternal” means before the Temple building, to the West of the altar. “At the face of the altar” means at the South side.. The verse says ‘before the Eternal’! How is that? He presents them at the South-Western corner and puts them down South of the corner.”

It was stated: “Answering is only by a single person. Not only that but they found support in the verse (Deut. 26:5): ‘You shall answer and say’.⁸³In Deut. 26:5, reciting the declaration is formulated as “answering and saying.” From this one deduces that even though First Fruits are brought to the Temple in a large procession, the presentation is a private ceremony for each farmer separately. They also found a biblical hint that the declaration should be repeated after the Cohen, to convince literate people to conform to the usage of the illiterate.
The corresponding statement in Sifry Deut (#301) reads: “ ‘You shall answer and say’. It is said here ‘answer’ and it is said there (Deut. 27:14) ‘answer’. Since the answering there is in the holy language (Hebrew), so the answering here is in the holy language. From here, they said that in earlier times, everybody who knew how to read, read, and everybody who did not know how to read, had someone read before him. When they refrained from bringing they instituted that one read before him who knew and him who did not know; they found support in the verse: ‘You shall answer’, answering is only to what others said.” This text would read in the Halakhah: אֵין עֲנִייָה אֶלָּא מִפִּי אַחֵר.”

MISHNAH: Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob says, a woman, daughter of proselytes, should not marry a Cohen unless her mother is from Israel⁸¹The dissenting opinions are in Mishnah Qiddušin 4:8. The discussion in the Halakhah is repeated in Qiddušin 4:6 (fol. 66a).. There is no difference between proselytes and freedmen, even up to ten generations, unless their mothers be from Israel. The guardians⁸²Administrators of orphans’ property; Greek ἐπίτροπος., the slave⁸³A freed slave owning property., the agent⁸⁴The possibility of agency for the presentation of First Fruits is discussed in Halakhah 6., the woman⁸⁵Who brings First Fruits from her private property., the sexless, and the hermaphrodite⁸⁶They possibly are female. can bring but not make the declaration, since they cannot say (Deut.26:10): “Which You gave me, Eternal.”

MISHNAH: In the afternoon of the holiday¹³³This is the text in the Mishnah mss. of the Yerushalmi and Maimonides traditions, unspecified between first and last days of Passover. However, the Halakhah seems to presume a reading of “last day”. they made the declaration. How was the declaration? (Deut. 26:13) “I removed the holy produce from the house,” is Second Tithe and fourth-year growth. “I gave it to the Levite,” is the Levite’s tithe. “Also I gave it,” includes heave and heave of the tithe. “To the sojourner, the orphan, and the widow,” is the tithe of the poor. “From the house,” is ḥallah. “Following Your entire Commandment which You commanded me;” therefore, if he gave Second Tithe before the First he cannot make the declaration. “I did not transgress Your Commandments,” I did not give from one kind for another, not from the harvested on the standing or from the standing on the harvested, not from new for old or from old for new. “And I did not forget,” to praise and mention Your Name over it.
(Deut. 26:14) “I did not eat from it in my deep mourning;” therefore if he ate from it in deep mourning¹³⁴Cf. Demay Chapter 1, Note 70. he cannot make the declaration. “I did not remove any of it in impurity;” therefore if he separtated it in impurity he cannot make the declaration. “I did not give from it to the dead,” I did not buy from it a casket or shrouds for a dead person nor did I give it to other deep mourners. “I listened to the voice of the Eternal, my God,” I brought it to the Selected House¹³⁵A standard name for the Temple.. “I did all You commanded me,” I enjoyed and gave joy to others with it¹³⁶Fulfilling part of the commandment (Deut. 16:14) “enjoy your holiday” with festive meals..
(Deut. 26:15) “Look down from Your Holy Abode, from Heaven,” we did what You decided¹⁴⁹This use of גזר is in the sense of Biblical Hebrew “to cut” in the meaning of גזר דין = פסק דין “(judicial) decision”; not the rabbinical גדר = גור; cf. Demay 1:2, Note 89. for us, You also do what You promised us: “Look down from Your Holy Abode, from Heaven, and bless Your people Israel” with sons and daughters, “and the land You gave us,” with dew, winds, rain and young of the domestic animals, “that You had sworn to our forefathers, a Land flowing with milk and honey” to give taste to the fruits¹⁵⁰The verse is the continuation of the declaration. The commentary is a paraphrase of Deut. 28:4..
Because of this¹⁶⁸The statement “the land You gave us” in the declaration., they said that Israel persons and Mamzerim¹⁶⁹Children born from adultery or incest who are forbidden to marry regular Israelites (Deut. 23:3). Since the disability is hereditary, R. Ṭarphon in Mishnah Qiddušin 3:14 counsels male bastards to live with a non-manumitted slave girl and at the birth of a child (which is his biologically but not legally) manumit the child which by this act automatically becomes a full Jew free of his father’s disability. Today he would have to marry a non-Jewish woman and convert the child at birth. may make the declaration but not proselytes and freed slaves who have no part in the Land. Rebbi Meïr says, also excluding Cohanim or Levites who did not receive any part of the Land. Rebbi Yose says, they have their cities with surroundings¹⁷⁰This was discussed in the preceding paragraph.. ¹⁷¹From here it is also Mishnah Soṭah 9:10. The historical identity of this High Priest cannot be determined. {Cf. Eliahu Katz, “Who was Joḥanan the High Priest?” Šanah bešanah 1979, pp. 368–373 (Hebrew).} In the Babli (Yoma9a) it is reported that he acted as High Priest for 80 years; an assertion of doubtful accuracy like most historical stories in the Babli. According to a possible interpretation of Tosephta Soṭah 13:6, he was the Hasmonean Joḥanan Hyrkanos; cf. Notes 188,189. The High Priest Joḥanan disestablished the declaration of tithes. He also eliminated the arousers and the hitters¹⁷²This will be discussed in the Halakhah.. Up to his days the hammer was hitting in Jerusalem¹⁷³This is explained only in the Babli, Makkot 11b and Soṭah 48a and Tosephta Soṭah 13:10. On the intermediate days of the holiday week urgent work may be done. But since metal work is very noisy, and Jerusalem was full of holiday pilgrims at these times, he decreed that, in Jerusalem only, noisy work should not be performed. and in his days nobody had to ask about demay.

MISHNAH: In the afternoon of the holiday¹³³This is the text in the Mishnah mss. of the Yerushalmi and Maimonides traditions, unspecified between first and last days of Passover. However, the Halakhah seems to presume a reading of “last day”. they made the declaration. How was the declaration? (Deut. 26:13) “I removed the holy produce from the house,” is Second Tithe and fourth-year growth. “I gave it to the Levite,” is the Levite’s tithe. “Also I gave it,” includes heave and heave of the tithe. “To the sojourner, the orphan, and the widow,” is the tithe of the poor. “From the house,” is ḥallah. “Following Your entire Commandment which You commanded me;” therefore, if he gave Second Tithe before the First he cannot make the declaration. “I did not transgress Your Commandments,” I did not give from one kind for another, not from the harvested on the standing or from the standing on the harvested, not from new for old or from old for new. “And I did not forget,” to praise and mention Your Name over it.
(Deut. 26:14) “I did not eat from it in my deep mourning;” therefore if he ate from it in deep mourning¹³⁴Cf. Demay Chapter 1, Note 70. he cannot make the declaration. “I did not remove any of it in impurity;” therefore if he separtated it in impurity he cannot make the declaration. “I did not give from it to the dead,” I did not buy from it a casket or shrouds for a dead person nor did I give it to other deep mourners. “I listened to the voice of the Eternal, my God,” I brought it to the Selected House¹³⁵A standard name for the Temple.. “I did all You commanded me,” I enjoyed and gave joy to others with it¹³⁶Fulfilling part of the commandment (Deut. 16:14) “enjoy your holiday” with festive meals..
(Deut. 26:15) “Look down from Your Holy Abode, from Heaven,” we did what You decided¹⁴⁹This use of גזר is in the sense of Biblical Hebrew “to cut” in the meaning of גזר דין = פסק דין “(judicial) decision”; not the rabbinical גדר = גור; cf. Demay 1:2, Note 89. for us, You also do what You promised us: “Look down from Your Holy Abode, from Heaven, and bless Your people Israel” with sons and daughters, “and the land You gave us,” with dew, winds, rain and young of the domestic animals, “that You had sworn to our forefathers, a Land flowing with milk and honey” to give taste to the fruits¹⁵⁰The verse is the continuation of the declaration. The commentary is a paraphrase of Deut. 28:4..
Because of this¹⁶⁸The statement “the land You gave us” in the declaration., they said that Israel persons and Mamzerim¹⁶⁹Children born from adultery or incest who are forbidden to marry regular Israelites (Deut. 23:3). Since the disability is hereditary, R. Ṭarphon in Mishnah Qiddušin 3:14 counsels male bastards to live with a non-manumitted slave girl and at the birth of a child (which is his biologically but not legally) manumit the child which by this act automatically becomes a full Jew free of his father’s disability. Today he would have to marry a non-Jewish woman and convert the child at birth. may make the declaration but not proselytes and freed slaves who have no part in the Land. Rebbi Meïr says, also excluding Cohanim or Levites who did not receive any part of the Land. Rebbi Yose says, they have their cities with surroundings¹⁷⁰This was discussed in the preceding paragraph.. ¹⁷¹From here it is also Mishnah Soṭah 9:10. The historical identity of this High Priest cannot be determined. {Cf. Eliahu Katz, “Who was Joḥanan the High Priest?” Šanah bešanah 1979, pp. 368–373 (Hebrew).} In the Babli (Yoma9a) it is reported that he acted as High Priest for 80 years; an assertion of doubtful accuracy like most historical stories in the Babli. According to a possible interpretation of Tosephta Soṭah 13:6, he was the Hasmonean Joḥanan Hyrkanos; cf. Notes 188,189. The High Priest Joḥanan disestablished the declaration of tithes. He also eliminated the arousers and the hitters¹⁷²This will be discussed in the Halakhah.. Up to his days the hammer was hitting in Jerusalem¹⁷³This is explained only in the Babli, Makkot 11b and Soṭah 48a and Tosephta Soṭah 13:10. On the intermediate days of the holiday week urgent work may be done. But since metal work is very noisy, and Jerusalem was full of holiday pilgrims at these times, he decreed that, in Jerusalem only, noisy work should not be performed. and in his days nobody had to ask about demay.

MISHNAH: In the afternoon of the holiday¹³³This is the text in the Mishnah mss. of the Yerushalmi and Maimonides traditions, unspecified between first and last days of Passover. However, the Halakhah seems to presume a reading of “last day”. they made the declaration. How was the declaration? (Deut. 26:13) “I removed the holy produce from the house,” is Second Tithe and fourth-year growth. “I gave it to the Levite,” is the Levite’s tithe. “Also I gave it,” includes heave and heave of the tithe. “To the sojourner, the orphan, and the widow,” is the tithe of the poor. “From the house,” is ḥallah. “Following Your entire Commandment which You commanded me;” therefore, if he gave Second Tithe before the First he cannot make the declaration. “I did not transgress Your Commandments,” I did not give from one kind for another, not from the harvested on the standing or from the standing on the harvested, not from new for old or from old for new. “And I did not forget,” to praise and mention Your Name over it.
(Deut. 26:14) “I did not eat from it in my deep mourning;” therefore if he ate from it in deep mourning¹³⁴Cf. Demay Chapter 1, Note 70. he cannot make the declaration. “I did not remove any of it in impurity;” therefore if he separtated it in impurity he cannot make the declaration. “I did not give from it to the dead,” I did not buy from it a casket or shrouds for a dead person nor did I give it to other deep mourners. “I listened to the voice of the Eternal, my God,” I brought it to the Selected House¹³⁵A standard name for the Temple.. “I did all You commanded me,” I enjoyed and gave joy to others with it¹³⁶Fulfilling part of the commandment (Deut. 16:14) “enjoy your holiday” with festive meals..
(Deut. 26:15) “Look down from Your Holy Abode, from Heaven,” we did what You decided¹⁴⁹This use of גזר is in the sense of Biblical Hebrew “to cut” in the meaning of גזר דין = פסק דין “(judicial) decision”; not the rabbinical גדר = גור; cf. Demay 1:2, Note 89. for us, You also do what You promised us: “Look down from Your Holy Abode, from Heaven, and bless Your people Israel” with sons and daughters, “and the land You gave us,” with dew, winds, rain and young of the domestic animals, “that You had sworn to our forefathers, a Land flowing with milk and honey” to give taste to the fruits¹⁵⁰The verse is the continuation of the declaration. The commentary is a paraphrase of Deut. 28:4..
Because of this¹⁶⁸The statement “the land You gave us” in the declaration., they said that Israel persons and Mamzerim¹⁶⁹Children born from adultery or incest who are forbidden to marry regular Israelites (Deut. 23:3). Since the disability is hereditary, R. Ṭarphon in Mishnah Qiddušin 3:14 counsels male bastards to live with a non-manumitted slave girl and at the birth of a child (which is his biologically but not legally) manumit the child which by this act automatically becomes a full Jew free of his father’s disability. Today he would have to marry a non-Jewish woman and convert the child at birth. may make the declaration but not proselytes and freed slaves who have no part in the Land. Rebbi Meïr says, also excluding Cohanim or Levites who did not receive any part of the Land. Rebbi Yose says, they have their cities with surroundings¹⁷⁰This was discussed in the preceding paragraph.. ¹⁷¹From here it is also Mishnah Soṭah 9:10. The historical identity of this High Priest cannot be determined. {Cf. Eliahu Katz, “Who was Joḥanan the High Priest?” Šanah bešanah 1979, pp. 368–373 (Hebrew).} In the Babli (Yoma9a) it is reported that he acted as High Priest for 80 years; an assertion of doubtful accuracy like most historical stories in the Babli. According to a possible interpretation of Tosephta Soṭah 13:6, he was the Hasmonean Joḥanan Hyrkanos; cf. Notes 188,189. The High Priest Joḥanan disestablished the declaration of tithes. He also eliminated the arousers and the hitters¹⁷²This will be discussed in the Halakhah.. Up to his days the hammer was hitting in Jerusalem¹⁷³This is explained only in the Babli, Makkot 11b and Soṭah 48a and Tosephta Soṭah 13:10. On the intermediate days of the holiday week urgent work may be done. But since metal work is very noisy, and Jerusalem was full of holiday pilgrims at these times, he decreed that, in Jerusalem only, noisy work should not be performed. and in his days nobody had to ask about demay.

HALAKHAH: “Rebbi Simeon says, in the circumstances where he was empowered,” etc. You say, at her entrance they are his: If she sold them they are not sold, if she gave them to a sharecropper he has the reward from it⁴¹The text may mean: He takes it away from him. In the first interpretation, the standing crop given to the sharecropper is counted as part of the latter’s compensation., if she dedicated them as First Fruits they are not dedicated⁴²Since nobody can dedicate anything which is not his property and not in his possession. You say, at her exit they are hers, if he sold them they are not sold, if he gave them to a sharecropper she has the reward from it, if he dedicated them as First Fruits, this is the disagreement of Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, since they disagreed: ⁴³The next few sentences are from Bikkurim 1:6, Notes 119–121. Cf. Sifry Deut. #301.(Deut. 26:11): ‘You shall enjoy all the good things that the Eternal, your God, gave to you and your house.’ This teaches that a person brings First Fruits from his wife’s property.” Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, after her death but not during her lifetime. Rebbi Joḥanan said, there is no difference, during her lifetime and after her death. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish follows his own opinion since he said, a person does not inherit from his wife as a biblical rule⁴⁴This is the common Sadducee-Karaite opinion that the wife is never mentioned in Num. 27:7–11 (only that the children inherit from their mother, Num. 36:3). In the Babli, Giṭṭin 47b. it is supposed that R. Simeon ben Laqish accepts that the wife is mentioned obliquely in Num. 27:11 and his disagreement with R. Joḥanan is about a technicality; the opinion attributed here to R. Simeon ben Laqish is attributed in the Babli, 84a, to Rav. In Bekhorot 52b, it is asserted without dissent that the husband’s right of inheritance is biblical. (Maimonides, Hilkhot Naḥalot 6:8, asserts that the husband’s right of inheritance from his wife is only rabbinic practice.). In the opinion of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish it never was dedicated. In the opinion of Rebbi Joḥanan it is dedicated and the holiness is removed⁴⁵If the First Fruits were dedicated during the marriage then the act of divorce removes the husband’s ownership and with it the dedication..

¹¹⁹Sifry Deut. #301. The verse is the last in the paragraph about First Fruits.“It is written (Deut. 26:11): ‘You shall enjoy all the good things that the Eternal, your God, gave you and your house.’ This teaches that a person brings First Fruits from his wife’s property¹²⁰Since a person called “a person’s house” is his wife. The property here is the wife’s separate property, not her dowry which becomes the husband’s property subject to the wife’s claim in case of dissolution of the marriage. and makes the declaration.” Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, after her death but not during her lifetime. Rebbi Joḥanan said, there is no difference, during her lifetime and after her death. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish follows his own opinion since Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, a person does not inherit from his wife as a biblical rule¹²¹For R. Simeon ben Laqish, the husband inherits from his wife by rabbinic institution, in exchange for the obligations which the husband takes upon himself in signing the ketubah. This opinion is not mentioned elsewhere; Sifry Num. 137 derives the husband’s inheritance from the verses of the law of inheritance, Num. 27:6–11. In the Babli, Giṭṭin 47b, the disagreement between R. Simeon ben Laqish and R. Joḥanan is reduced to the question whether buying usufruct, without buying the underlying real estate, transfers property rights since during the marriage the husband has the usufruct also of the wife’s separate property..

¹⁴⁸This is from Chapter 2, Notes 34–35 and refers to the prohibition to use any tithe or tithe money for funeral rites. From where that he would transgress a positive commandment? Rebbi Eleazar in the name of Rebbi Simai (Deut. 26:14): “Nor did I give from it to the dead.” Where do we hold? If it were to bring a casket and shrouds for him, that were also forbidden for a living person! If something is forbidden for the living, not so much more for the dead? What is something which is permitted for the living but prohibited for the dead? That is anointing!

Rebbi Huna bar Aḥa¹⁵¹He is not otherwise known. in the name of Rebbi Alexandros: Come and see the power of those who keep the Commandments because all “lookings down” in the Torah¹⁵²Gen. 18:16, 19:28 (Sodom), 26:8 (Abimelekh and Rebekka), Ex. 14:24 (Egyptians on the Sea). This refers only to hiph‘il of שקף. are curses but this one is in the language of blessing. Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina said, not only that but it is written¹⁵³Starting words of the next paragraph guaranteeing instant response. (Deut. 26:16) “this day,” the condition of every day.

On the first and second day [of mourning] he may not enter the Temple Mount; on the third day he may enter but must go round to the left.²⁵Since he is forbidden to bring an offering (Deut. 26, 14); cf. Mid. II, 2 (Sonc. ed. p. 6). These are they who must go round to the left: a mourner, an excommunicated person, one who has a sick person in his house, and one who lost an object. [When asked,] ‘Why do you²⁶Reading with GRA and H מה לך for V’s מהלך. go round to the left?’ [he answers,] ‘Because I am a mourner’. They reply, ‘May He Who dwells in this House comfort you’. [If he says,] ‘Because I am under a ban’, [they reply,] ‘May He Who dwells in this House put it into their heart to draw you near’; so said R. Meir. R. Jose said to him, ‘You make out as if they [who banned] passed a wrong judgment on him; but [what they say is,] “May He Who dwells in this house put it into your heart to hearken to the words of your colleagues so that they may draw you near” ’. To one who has a sick person in his house they say, ‘May He Who dwells in this House have mercy upon him’; and if he is barely living²⁷lit. ‘son of existence’, far gone in his illness. [they say,] ‘May He have mercy upon him immediately’. It is related of a certain woman whose daughter was ill that she ascended the Temple Mount and went round it, and did not move from there until they came and told her, ‘She is cured’.
To one who lost some object they say, ‘May He Who dwells in this House put it into the heart of the finder to return it to you at once’. It is related of Eleazar b. Ḥananiah b. Hezekiah b. Gorion that he lost a scroll of the Torah which he had bought for one hundred minas. He ascended [the Temple Mount], went round it and did not move from there until they came and told him, ‘The scroll of the Torah has been found’.

MISHNAH: If he dedicated his First Fruits and then sold his field he brings but does not make the declaration. The other person cannot bring from the same kind, but from another kind he brings and makes the declaration. Rebbi Jehudah says, he may bring and make the declaration from the same kind.
If he dedicated his First Fruits and then they rotted, were robbed, stolen, lost, or became impure, he brings others in their stead. One is not liable for a fifth for the replacements¹⁵⁹But the original First Fruits go under the rules of heave (Mishnah 2:1, Note 150) and the replacement has to be 125% of the original.. If they became impure in the Temple court, he scatters them and cannot make the declaration¹⁶⁰Since delivering the basket of fruits to the Cohen to be set down near the altar is necessary; cf. Note 122..
From where that he is responsible for them until he delivers them to the Temple Mount? Because it is said (Deut. 26:3): “The beginning of the First Fruits of your land you shall bring to the Temple of the Eternal, your God, etc.” This teaches that he is responsible for them until be delivers them to the Temple Mount.
If he brought from one kind and made the declaration, when he comes back and brings from another kind he cannot make the declaration.

HALAKHAH: What is the reason of the rabbis¹⁵⁵That the buyer cannot bring First Fruits. It is obvious that the seller cannot make the declaration since he has no land.? (Deut. 26:3) “I am declaring today”. He declares once¹⁵⁶Today but not tomorrow. but not twice. Does not Rebbi Jehudah hold so? He does, referring to one person¹⁵⁷It is accepted without dissent that a farmer can bring First Fruits of different kinds at different times but he can read the declaration only once (Mishnah 9).. But two persons can declare and declare again¹⁵⁸Even for the same crop since First Fruits are an obligation of the farmer, not of the crop..

It was stated: “And the appearance¹²⁶In the Temple, see Mishnah 1:1, note 4..” Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: He who owns no real estate is freed from the appearance. Rebbi Mana asked: And why do we not say: He who has no real estate is freed from the declaration¹²⁷From Rashi and R. Samuel ben Meïr (Rashbam) in Babli Qiddušin 26a and Baba Batra 150b it is clear that in old Mishnah texts, the reading was that any real estate obligates its owner “for peah, first fruits, and declaration.” They negate the last term since they read it as referring to the declaration to be made in the Temple that the tithes of the last three years were given as required. Since tithes are due also from a tenant farmer or a sharecropper and, in case the farmer did not give tithes, even from the buyer of grain, and, in addition, the text does not require “tithes from your land,” there is no place for this clause in the Mishnah. The reference in Deut. 26:15 is to את האדמה אשר נתת לנו.
Nachmanides quotes an explanation that the “declaration” is the one required for first fruits (Deut. 26:3–10); he is followed by Meïri and R. Yom Tov ben Abraham Al-Išbili. The reference would be to Deut. 26:10: האדמה אשר נתת לי. There is no verse מן האדמה אשר נתת לנו., since it is written (Deut. 26:15): “From the land that You gave us.¹²⁸The text is slightly misquoted; it should read: “And the Land that You gave us.”” Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun¹²⁹What R. Mana put forward as a possibility is a tradition for R. Yose bar Abun. taught a tradition in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: “He who has no real estate is freed from the declaration, since it is written: From the land that You gave us.”

“If they became impure in the Temple court, he scatters them and cannot make the declaration.” Rebbi Ḥama bar Uqba in the name of Rebbi Yose bar Ḥanina: If the First Fruits became impure¹⁶⁴But not the baskets which cannot become impure in secondary or tertiary degree., the baskets are given to the priests¹⁶⁵Since it was the original intent to give First Fruits in their baskets. since it is said (Deut. 26:4): “The Cohen shall take the basket from your hand.”

For whom is this needed? For Rebbi Jehudah. Even though Rebbi Jehudah said, he declares and he¹⁶⁶Another person; cf. Mishnah 7, Halakhah 9. declares again, but if he brought from one kind and made the declaration, when he comes back and brings from another kind he cannot make the declaration. Rebbi Jonathan said, Rebbi Simeon ben Ioḥai stated this: (Deut. 26:5) “You shall say”, (Deut. 26:11) “you shall enjoy”; you have to say it while you enjoy¹⁶⁷And a repeat performance is not the same as the first. The Sifry (#301) concludes from Deut 26:11 that the (first) presentation of First Fruits requires a family sacrifice to provide a meat meal (cf. Mishnah 3:3)..

For whom is this needed? For Rebbi Jehudah. Even though Rebbi Jehudah said, he declares and he¹⁶⁶Another person; cf. Mishnah 7, Halakhah 9. declares again, but if he brought from one kind and made the declaration, when he comes back and brings from another kind he cannot make the declaration. Rebbi Jonathan said, Rebbi Simeon ben Ioḥai stated this: (Deut. 26:5) “You shall say”, (Deut. 26:11) “you shall enjoy”; you have to say it while you enjoy¹⁶⁷And a repeat performance is not the same as the first. The Sifry (#301) concludes from Deut 26:11 that the (first) presentation of First Fruits requires a family sacrifice to provide a meat meal (cf. Mishnah 3:3)..

MISHNAH: And he reads from the beginning of “These are the words²²⁸Deut. 1,1.” to Šema‘,Šema‘²²⁹Deut. 6:4–9., “And it shall be if you listen,²³⁰Deut. 11:13–21.” “tithing you shall tithe,²³¹Deut. 14:22–27.” “when you will have finished tithing,²³²Deut. 26:12–15.” blessings and curses²³³Deut. 28. [and the paragraph of the king]²³⁴Deut. 17:8–20., until he finishes the entire paragraph. The benedictions which the High Priest recites, the king recites, except that he substitutes “for the holidays of pilgrimage²³⁵The last paragraph of the middle benediction of the Amidah for holidays.” instead of “forgiving of sins”.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Abbahu said, why does one read “ “tithing you shall tithe,²³¹Deut. 14:22–27.”, “when you will have finished tithing,²³²Deut. 26:12–15.”? Because Israel went from the Sabbatical year to the eighth, not to have them forget tithes.²³⁶Since no tithes may be given from Sabbatical produce. Rebbi Ḥaggai asked before Rebbi Yose, does he not to make havdalah²³⁷The required benediction when leaving a sanctified state (such as Sabbath or holidays) to enter into profane status. If such a benediction is required after the Sabbath (cf. Berakhot 5:2, Note 62), it should also be required after the Sabbatical year in order to permit agricultural work.? He said to him, one already said havdalah on New Year’s Day.

It was stated: (Deut. 26:10) “Which You gave me”, not what I took by myself.¹⁷⁴The Sifry (#301) takes this as basis to exclude guardians, etc. (Mishnah 5) from the right to declaration. For the Tanna here, the verse excludes produce from “Syria”, from territories conquered by David outside the boundaries of promise. About what do they differ¹⁷⁵The anonymous majority and R. Yose the Galilean.? Rebbi Abun said, half of the tribe of Manasse¹⁷⁶The tribes of Reuben and Gad were sheep herders, not farmers.. If one says, “which You gave me, not what I took by myself,” half the tribe of Manasse did not take by themselves. If one says, (Deut. 26:10) “a Land of milk and honey,” nevertheless it is not a land of milk and honey.