Talmud su Ecclesiaste 4:5

That is⁹If the heave given was more than 50% of what was due, one follows R. Simeon ben Laqish. If less than 50% was given, one follows R. Eliezer ben Jacob in this paragraph. The Mishnah therefore is valid only in case exactly 50% were given., if most of the heap was put in order. If most of the heap was not put in order, there is disagreement between Ḥizqiah and Rebbi Joḥanan. As Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said in the name of Ḥizqiah, ṭevel becomes voided by plurality¹⁰He disagrees with the generally accepted statement that by rabbinic decree, the prohibition of anything that can be put in order is not voided if it becomes an indistinguishable part of other produce or food; cf. Ševi‘it 6:3, Notes 117–121. It is agreed that in biblical law, the prohibition of any food becomes void by a plurality of permitted matter. Cf. also Halakhah 8, Note 71., but Rebbi Joḥanan said, ṭevel does not become voided by plurality. Since it was his intention to give, each single grain of wheat was labelled at its place¹¹As noted before, if it was the farmer’s intention to put in order only part of the heap, then the remainder is ṭevel and no one knows which grains are profane and which ṭevel.. Some want to explain following Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob, as Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob stated, that he cannot separate either for itself or for another place¹²If humans cannot distinguish between profane and ṭevel, humans cannot use the remainder of the heap for heave or tithes.. This parallels the following¹³The following text is from Chapter 2, Notes 26–28.: If there were before him two heaps and from each of them he took part of heave or tithes, may he take heave or tithe from one for the other? The students of the elder Rebbi Ḥiyya asked the elder Rebbi Ḥiyya and he said to them (Eccl. 4:5): “The fool folds his hands and eats his own flesh.” Rebbi Eleazar in the name of the elder Rebbi Ḥiyya: He may not give heave or tithe from one for the other.

If there were two fig cakes, one partially impure and one partially pure¹Fig cakes are not strings of figs put together when they are completely dry but made of fresh figs formed into cakes and then put out to ferment and dry. The sap of figs is not one of the fluids that make food susceptible to impurity (Demay Chapter 5, Note 8); if no water touched the cake before it was dry and the individual figs are still recognizable, then if later it is prepared for impurity and one fig was touched by an impure person, this fig will be impure by one degree more than the person who touched and the figs touching this fig will be impure by still one more degree, and so on, cf. Demay Chapter 2, Note 137 (higher degree meaning lesser impurity). Since profane food can acquire only impurity in the first and second degrees, all figs not directly touching the impure fig will remain pure (if the cake is dry)., may one give heave from one for the other²⁵Since the Mishnah permits taking pure heave also for the impure parts of the same fig cake, may one put both cakes together on a table where they are earmarked and give one heave for both of them?? If he had two heaps²⁶כרי is a heap of freshly threshed grain, ערימה one of totally dry grain., and from both of them he had given part of heaves and tithes²⁷Mishnah 4:1 states that if only partial heave and tithes were taken from a heap they would have no status as heave and tithes but, even though they would now be separated from the heap, they would still count as one for giving heave from an earmarked heap. May one give one heave for both in this case? The two cases are treated as similar., may he give heave from one for the other? The students of the elder Rebbi Ḥiyya asked the elder Rebbi Ḥiyya and he said to them (Eccl. 4:5): “The fool folds his hands and eats his own flesh.²⁸The answer, “no”, is too simple and a thinking person should not have to ask.” Rebbi Eleazar in the name of the elder Rebbi Ḥiyya: He may not give heave from one for the other.