Talmud su Levitico 27:19

Rebbi Joḥanan said, Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel parallels him who says “in the evening”, as we have stated³¹Tosephta Peah 2:5: “R. Jehudah says, in the morning the farmer has to say: Everything the poor did collect (ms. Erfurt: will collect) from the sheaves shall be abandoned; R. Dosa says, in the evening. But the Sages say, a declaration of abandonment under duress is not an abandonment, for we are not responsible for tricksters.” Since the rules for collecting single stalks are rather restrictive, RR. Jehudah and Dosa hold that the farmer should declare that anything the poor take in excess of what is legal shall be abandoned to them to protect the poor from sin. The Sages hold that we can only force all the poor to strictly follow the rules if they have to fear sinning when they overstep the legal bounds.
The parallel discussion to this paragraph is in Babli Baba Qama 69 a/b. There are major differences between Yerushalmi and Babli. The name tradition of the Tosephta is that of the Babli, the opposite of the Yerushalmi. In the text, the main (Vienna ms.) text, “will collect”, is the original reading of the Babli, the Erfurt text is the (conditionally) corrected reading of the Babli and the original reading of the Yerushalmi. The Babli (in the name of R. Joḥanan) rejects the notion that the “discreet religious ones” follow Rabban Simeon, the position implied by R. Joḥanan’s statement in the Yerushalmi.: “Rebbi Dosa says, ‘everything the poor will collect between the sheaves shall be abandoned’, it is abandoned. Rebbi Jehudah says, in the evening. But the Sages say, a declaration of abandonment under duress is not an abandonment, for we are not responsible for tricksters.” But he is not parallel to him who says “in the morning”. Can one abandon anything if it is standing on the ground³²“In the morning” means before the day’s harvest. Then the grain is still standing and no stalks lie on the ground that it should be possible to define what can be abandoned. Since the farmer does not want to abandon the field, his declaration is void.? Rebbi Jeremiah said, it is even parallel to him who says “in the morning”. Is it not Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel’s³³Chapter 4:6. Even if the declaration by the farmer in the morning is legally invalid, it becomes activated once the stalks are taken up if we hold that the rules of Second Tithe and abandoned stalks are identical.? In addition, he holds that taking Second Tithe is its redemption³⁴He thinks that the entire declaration is unnecessary; but if somebody wants to do it out of religious scruples, he may put aside something of value for people to take.. Rebbi Yose said, is that (Lev. 27:19): “It shall be his³⁵(Lev. 27:19): “If the person dedicating his field will redeem it, he shall add a fifth of its value and it shall be his.” This verse clearly ties the transfer of title to the property to the payment of money. If we hold that the rules of redemption are the same for dedicated property and Second Tithe, then taking up the tithe cannot be its redemption.”? If somebody saw a loaf floating in a river and said, that loaf shall be dedicated, did he say anything³⁶Since he cannot dispose of the loaf, he cannot dedicate it. Similarly, he cannot dedicate stalks to the poor if it is totally unknown which ones they will be.? Rebbi Jeremiah said, before you ask all these questions regarding “in the morning”, ask them regarding “in the evening!” He answered him, he who holds “in the evening” does not have all these questions³⁷Since in the evening all grain has been cut for the day and bound in sheaves, it is now well-defined what is there for the poor and the owner can make any declaration he wishes. The same holds for the discreet religious ones who can redeem the well-defined fruits of their fourth-year vineyard or orchard..

MISHNAH: How much time does one have to return it⁹⁵The defective coin which fails the standards of Mishnah 4.? In walled cities⁹⁶Greek χάραξ, χάρακος “palisade”. until one can show it to a banker, in villages until Sabbath eve. If he recognizes it, he should take it back even after twelve months, but he has only a complaint against him⁹⁷If the person who handed out the defective coin recognizes that it is the coin given out illegally, he has a moral duty to take it back even when the legal period in which he can be forced to take it back has expired. If he refuses, the injured party has the right to complain (i. e., tell about the case to other people) but has no recourse in court.. He may use it for Second Tithe without hesitation since it is only miserly⁹⁴In Temple times, Second Tithe produce was redeemed for coin which was spent on food in Jerusalem, to be eaten there in purity. Since the redemption is a transaction between a person and himself, occasionally deficient coins may be used since he knows the deficiency. But one may not collect deficient coins during the year and then use the collected coins for redemption (Ma‘aśer Šeni 2:7, Note 96).’⁹⁸After the destruction of the Temple and the disappearence of the ashes of the red cow (cf. Berakhot 1:1, Note 3) when food can no longer be eaten in purity, the coin has to be destroyed. For that purpose it even is preferable to use defective coins..
Cheating is by four oboli⁹⁹Mishnah 3., claim is about two oboli, confession is about one peruṭah¹⁰⁰The court will not impose a judicial oath unless it be a case in which the claim is at least 2 oboli and the defendant admits to owing at least 1 peruṭah:, Mishnah Šebuot 6:1.. There are five peruṭot¹⁰¹The peruṭah appears as minimal standard in five legal categories.: Confession is about one peruṭah¹⁰⁰The court will not impose a judicial oath unless it be a case in which the claim is at least 2 oboli and the defendant admits to owing at least 1 peruṭah:, Mishnah Šebuot 6:1.; a woman is preliminarily married by one peruṭah’s worth¹⁰²Mishnah Qiddušin 1:1.; one who used one peruṭah’s worth of Temple property committed larceny¹⁰³He has to pay a 25% fine and bring a sacrifice, Lev. 5:15–16.; one who finds one peruṭah’ s worth has to make it public; one who robbed another of one peruṭah’s worth and swore about it, has to return it to him even in Media¹⁰⁴Mishnah Bava qamma 9:7..
There are five fifths¹⁰⁵Five cases in which a payment of 125% of the amount is due.: He who eats heave, or heave of the tithe¹⁰⁶If he eats in error, Mishnah Terumot 6:1; Lev. 22:14, Num. 18:26., or heave of the tithe of demay¹⁰⁷This only applies to demay(produce of which it is not known whether it was tithed), but not to the heave of its tithe; Mishnah Demay 1:2, Note 67., or ḥallah¹⁰⁸Num. 15:20., or first fruits¹⁰⁹Mishnah Bikkurim 2:1., adds a fifth¹¹⁰All these cases are considered identical since each of them is called “heave” in a verse.. He who redeems his vineyard in the fourth year¹¹¹Lev.19:24, 27:31. or his Second Tithe¹¹²Mishnah Ma‘aśer Šeni 5:5; Deut.14:25., adds a fifth. He who redeems his own gifts to the Temple, adds a fifth¹¹³Lev. 27:19.. He who used one peruṭah’s worth of Temple property, adds a fifth¹⁰³He has to pay a 25% fine and bring a sacrifice, Lev. 5:15–16.. He who robbed another of one peruṭah’s worth and swore about it, adds a fifth¹¹⁴Lev. 5:24..

“A promise to Heaven is like delivery to an individual.” How? If he bought a cow from the Temple for 200. If he did not have occasion to pay the 200 until the going rate was a mina, he has to pay 200. That means, a promise to Heaven is like delivery to an individual. A cow from the Temple for a mina. If he did not have occasion to pay the mina until the going rate was 200, he has to pay 200. That is what is written⁵⁵²Lev. 27:19: “He has to add a fifth of its estimated value, then it is delivered to him.” Therefore, if he adds, it is delivered to him; if he does not add, it is not delivered to him. ⁵⁵³Babli 28b, Tosephta 1:9.“ ‘This steer as elevation offering, or this house as a qorbān,’ they are in the Temple’s possession wherever they are, for it is written: “The Eternal’s are the earth and what fills it,” etc. But among private persons one obtains possession only be taking hold.”