Mga Sanggunian sa Talmud para sa Exodo 22:28: Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim, Jerusalem Talmud Demai, Jerusalem Talmud Orlah & Jerusalem Talmud Terumot

Rebbi Joḥanan said, because they are the periods of birth⁹Different kinds of livestock produce their young at different times.. Rebbi Aḥa, Rebbi Tanḥum bar Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: That animals be available for the pilgrims on the holidays¹⁰Babli Bekhorot57b/58a. It is explained later that the main time for animal tithe is early fall. The other two times are introduced for the convenience of the farmer that he may take his tithe animal to the Temple when he makes his pilgrimage anyhow.. Rebbi Yudan said, that he should not come to do not tarry¹¹It is sinful to give tithes too late (Ex. 22:28). This is interpreted to mean that one disregards a positive commandment if one does not hand over (for produce) or sacrifices (for animals) his tithes on or before the next holiday, and one transgresses the prohibition on the third holiday after the start of the obligation.. Rebbi Yose said, anybody who is late with his ṭevel transgresses¹²Ṭevel is untithed produce for which heave and tithes are due.. There,¹³Mishnah Bekhorot8:5. The text quoted here is the Mishnah text; nevertheless it seems that the statement from Mishnah Roš Haššanah1:1, quoted in B, that R. Eleazar (ben Shamua) and R. Simeon fix the date at the first of Tishre, has to be included here. From here on the text is copied in Roš Haššanah1:1 (Note 148). we have stated: “Rebbi Meïr says, on the first of Elul is the New Year for animal tithes. Ben Azzai says, those born in Elul are to be tithed separately.” Rebbi Ḥuna said, The reason of Rebbi Meïr: Up to that point they finish to give birth from the old ones; after that they start to give birth from the new ones¹⁴Since the gestation period for sheep is 5 months, those born in Av were conceived before the start of Nisan, those in Elul after the first of Nisan. If the start of the year is fixed in spring, the natural date for a new year of animal tithes is the start of Elul.. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun in the name of Rav Huna: The reason of Rebbi Eleazar and Rebbi Simeon, the rams are mounting the ewes, these are the early ones, and the valleys are clothed in grain, these are the late ones, they are friends and also are tithed¹⁵Ps.65:14. The last word is read as if it were יְעַשְׂרוּ. Babli Roš Haššanah8a., both enter the corral to be tithed. Ben Azzai said, since these are saying this and those are saying that, those born in Elul should be tithed by themselves. How is this? If there were born in his flock five in Av, five in Elul, and five in Tishre, they do not combine¹⁶The tenth lamb is animal tithe. If there are 5 in Av and 5 in Elul, they cannot add up to 10 since practice may follow R. Meïr; 5 in Elul and 5 in Tishre cannot combine since practice may follow R. Simeon.. If there were born in his flock five in Av and five in Tishre, they combine¹⁷This really should be: 5 in Tishre and 5 in the following Av, so they belong to the same fiscal year (Tosephta Bekhorot7:9, Babli Bekhorot58a.). Could Ben Azzai decide between his students¹⁸The reference to Ben Azzai in a dispute between R. Aqiba’s last students is anachronistic; Ben Azzai died young, before these became independent scholars.? Rebbi Jeremiah, Rebbi Miasha in the name of Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac: For so disagreed the fathers of the world. Who are the fathers of the world? Rebbi Jonah stated before Rebbi Jeremiah: Rebbi Ismael and Rebbi Aqiba¹⁹Ben Azzai considers the points of view of R. Aqiba and R. Ismael as equivalent even though he never was R. Ismael’s student. If he does not follow his teacher, he must be an independent authority.. This implies that Ben Azzai was colleague and student of Rebbi Aqiba. If you are saying that he was his teacher, is there anybody who says to his teacher, “since these are saying this and those are saying that”? Rebbi Abun in the name of Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac understood it from the following²⁰Mishnah Bava batra9:14. The testimony of a Mishnah is preferable to that of a baraita.: “Ben Azzai said to him, we are sorry about their disagreement, and you come to find us disagreement where they are concurring.” This implies that Ben Azzai was colleague and student of Rebbi Aqiba. If you are saying that he was his teacher, is there anybody who says to his teacher, “you come to find us disagreement”?

We have stated ḥallah between First and Second Tithes¹⁵The Mishnah prescribes taking heave of the tithe and ḥallah together, and only then to give a name to Second Tithe and to redeem it. Both tithes should have been given when the grain was first stored at the farm barn. The obligation of ḥallah comes much later, when grain is first made into flour and then the flour into bread dough.. Rebbi Jonah in the name of Rebbi Zeïra: This means that ḥallah is not subject to “do not give too late¹⁶“From your storage and your dema‘ you should not give too late,” Ex. 22:28. From this one concludes that a person who gave heave of the tithe before the first heave cannot declare that he followed all the rules of tithing. No similar rule seems to exist for ḥallah..” Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Zeïra: The Mishnah is not formulated in sequence, do we not deal with demay¹⁷Since heave and tithes should have been given at the threshing floor, any fixing of demay is in itself in the wrong order.? Did not Rebbi Abba, son of Rebbi Ḥiyya, say in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan that the Mishnah deals with demay; hence, not with certain produce¹⁸This refers to Mishnah 1:4 which states that the order of separation for demay is irrelevant, that one may separate the heave of the tithe (which is part of the First Tithe) after the Second Tithe. R. Joḥanan notes that this is one of the special leniencies for demay.? And here¹⁹In Mishnah 5:1. we deal with demay. Rebbi Ḥiyya stated²⁰Tosephta Demay 5:6: “He who wants to separate heave, heave of the tithe, and ḥallah together …” There the order of the declaration is heave, heave of the tithe, ḥallah, Second Tithe. Since the first heave is mentioned, one speaks about produce from which nothing at all was yet taken. Nevertheless, ḥallah appears between First and Second tithes.: Also for certain. On that, Rebbi Jonah in the name of Rebbi Zeïra said, this means that ḥallah is not subject to “do not give too late.” Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Zeïra: The Mishnah is not formulated in sequence, should not ḥallah precede the First Tithe²¹Since ḥallah has the status of heave, once the obligation has started it should take the place of heave that must be given before any tithe.? Then ḥallah should be subject to tithes but not tithes to ḥallah, because everything that precedes another, the other is obligated for it²²Just as if one would transgress giving First Tithe before the heave, the heave given later must be not only from the remaining produce but also from the tithe, since anything that comes later needs to be put in order by fulfillment of the prior obligation. Then the requirement that ḥallah should be taken from dough made from grain from which heave and tithes were taken would be put on its head.. And we have stated in this respect²³Tosephta Terumot 4:10. It follows that heave and ḥallah are coordinate, not subordinate one to the other. Hence, each of them needs to be put in order with respect to the other. But definitely this should give ḥallah a status prior to tithes.: “He who makes dough from ṭevel, whether he takes ḥallah before heave or heave before ḥallah, what he did is done. Ḥallah should not be eaten until he take heave for it, heave should not be eaten until he separate ḥallah for it.” But why does First Tithe²⁴I. e., the heave of the tithe that must be given from the First Tithe. have precedence? Because it started at the threshing floor. But does the Second Tithe not start at the threshing floor? Rebbi Mattaniah said, it would have been logical that ḥallah should precede everything else²⁵Not quite everything else, but everything else which has to be given for demay, i. e., comes after heave.. Why does First Heave have precedence? Because it started at the threshing floor and it is called “beginning²⁶Num. 18:12. Ḥallah also is called “beginning” (Num. 15:20,21) but its obligation does not start at the threshing floor..” Second Tithe, even though it started at the threshing floor, is not called “beginning.”

It was stated: “Heave of the tithe from demay that returned to its origin makes dema‘²⁷Dema‘ (a word of unclear etymology, Ex.22:28) describes profane produce mixed with heave, which is unfit for human consumption if heave and food are impure, and is food only for Cohanim and their families if both the heave and the food are pure. It can be put in order only if the amount of heave in the total is less than 1 in 101. Since heave from demay is genuinely holy only in a minority of cases, that heave does not necessarily create dema‘. (Maimonides Maäser 12:4 and R. Abraham ben David ad loc.), not to its origin does not make dema‘. Rebbi Simeon from Shezur said, both at its origin and not at its origin it does not make dema‘.” Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya asked before Rebbi Zeïra: For one who says, it makes dema‘, it makes dema‘; for one who says, it does not make dema‘, it does not make dema‘; this is reasonable²⁸That means, I can understand R. Simeon from Shezur, that we always follow the majority of cases and, therefore, heave from demay cannot create dema‘. I also could understand the position that, once the name of heave was attached to any produce, it must be treated like heave in all respects.. But if one says, in its origin it makes dema‘, not in its origin it does not make dema‘; what is the difference between in its origin and not in its origin? Rebbi Ḥaggai came up. They said, this one will say, “by Moses, I shall explain the reason²⁹R. Ḥaggai’s standard answer to questions of this type..” He said, by Moses, I shall explain the reason: He who says, it makes dema‘, because it permits the rest to be eaten³⁰Since without tithing, demay may not be eaten by rabbinic ordinance, it should in this respect be treated like heave taken according to Biblical precept.. He who says, it does not make dema‘, because it does not permit the rest to be eaten³¹For other produce, it simply is food of questionable status.. Rebbi La taught according to that of Rebbi Ḥaggai³²He declares practice to follow the anonymous Tanna in the baraita.. Rebbi Zeïra said: A case came before Rebbi Ḥanina and he taught according to Rebbi Simeon from Shezur. Rebbi Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Jonathan: Practice does not follow Rebbi Simeon from Shezur³³In Babli Ḥulin 75b, both R. Ḥanina and R. Jonathan endorse the ruling of R. Simeon from Shezur as valid practice..