💾 Archived View for scholasticdiversity.us.to › scriptures › jewish › t › Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Heave… captured on 2024-05-10 at 12:34:31. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
1 [1] According to Scriptural Law, [the obligation to separate] the *terumot* and the tithes applies only in *Eretz Yisrael*. [It applies] whether the Temple is standing or not. The prophets ordained that these obligations should be observed in Babylon as well, because it is adjacent to *Eretz Yisrael* and the majority of the Jewish people journey to and from there. The Sages of the early generations ordained that they also be observed in the lands of Egypt and the lands of Ammon and Moab, because they are on the peripheries of *Eretz Yisrael*. [2] Whenever *Eretz Yisrael* is mentioned, the intent is the lands conquered by the King of Israel or a prophet with the consent of the entire Jewish people. This is called "a conquest of the community." If, however, an individual Jew, a family, or a tribe go and conquer a place for themselves - even in the land given to Abraham - it is not considered as *Eretz Yisrael* in the sense that one is obligated to observe all the mitzvot there. For this reason, Joshua and his court divided the entire Land of Israel into tribal portions even though it was not conquered [entirely] at that time. In this way, when every tribe would ascend and conquer its portion, it would not be considered as merely an individual conquest. [3] The lands which [King] David conquered outside of the Land of Canaan, e.g., Aram Naharaim, Aram Tzovah, Achlab, and the like, even though he was a King of Israel and he was acting with the consent of the High Court, is not considered as the Land of Israel with regard to all matters, nor is it like the Diaspora, i.e., Babylonia and Egypt with regard to all matters. Instead, it was removed from the category of the Diaspora, but did not enter the category of *Eretz Yisrael*.
Why was its level considered lower than that of *Eretz Yisrael*? Because David conquered them before he conquered all of *Eretz Yisrael*. Instead, there were still members of the seven nations there. If, however, he had conquered *Eretz Yisrael* entirely, in all of its boundaries, and afterwards conquered other lands, his entire conquest would have been equivalent to *Eretz Yisrael* with regard to all matters. The lands which [King] David conquered are called Syria. [4] There are dimensions of [the laws that apply to] Syria that resemble [the laws that apply in] *Eretz Yisrael* and there are dimensions of [its laws] that resemble [those which apply] in the Diaspora. A person who purchases landed property [in Syria] is comparable to one who purchases [land] in *Eretz Yisrael* with regard to *terumot*, tithes, and the Sabbatical year. All [the laws that apply] in Syria are of Rabbinic origin. [5] All of the lands that [the Jews] who ascended from Egypt took possession of were sanctified in the first consecration [of the land]. When they were exiled, that sanctity was nullified. [The rationale is that] the initial consecration came about because of the conquest. [Hence,] its consecration was effective for the time [it was under their rule], but not for all time. When, by contrast, the descendants of the exiles ascended [from Babylon] and took possession of a portion of the land, they consecrated it a second time. [This consecration] is perpetuated forever, for that time and for all time.
[The Sages] left those places that had been settled by [the Jews who] ascended from Egypt, but were not settled by those who ascended from Babylon in their previous [halachic status] and did not exempt them from [the obligations of] *terumah* and tithes so that the poor could rely upon them in the Sabbatical year. Our holy teacher released Beit Shan from those places which [the Jews] who ascended from Babylon did not take hold of. He decided that Ashkelon should be exempted from the tithes. [6] Thus the entire earth is divided into three categories in relation to those mitzvot involving the land: *Eretz Yisrael*, Syria, and the Diaspora. *Eretz Yisrael* itself is divided into two categories: a) those portions settled by the Jews who ascended from Babylonia, and b) those portions that were settled only by the Jews who ascended from Egypt.
The Diaspora is divided into two categories: a) Egypt, Babylon, Ammon, and Moab in which the mitzvot are observed according to the decrees of the sages and the prophets and the other lands in which [the obligations of] the *terumot* and the tithes are not observed. [7] What are [the boundaries of] the land settled by the Jews who ascended from Egypt? From Rekem which is in the east of *Eretz Yisrael* until the Mediterranean Sea. From Ashkelon which is in the south of *Eretz Yisrael* until Acre which is in the north. As one proceeds from Acre to Kziv, the area to one's right, on the east, can generally be assumed to be of the Diaspora - it is impure as is the lands of the nations and is exempt from [the mitzvot of] the tithes and the Sabbatical year - unless it is known that it was part of *Eretz Yisrael*. The area to one's left, to the west, can generally be assumed to be part of *Eretz Yisrael* - it is pure [from the impurity associated with] the lands of the nations and is obligated with regard to [mitzvot of] the tithes and the Sabbatical year - unless it is known to be part of the Diaspora. With regard to the entire area that slopes downward from the Samnum Mountains: The inner [portion] is *Eretz Yisrael*, the portion outside the Samnum Mountains is the Diaspora.
With regard to the islands in the sea, we consider their [status dependent] on an [imaginary] line extended from the Samnum Mountains until the River of Egypt. Those within this line are part of *Eretz Yisrael*. Those outside this line are part of the Diaspora. This is a depiction of the matter. [8] Which area did the Jews who ascended from Babylonia settle in? [The area] from Kziv inward toward the east. They did not, however, take possession of the area from Kziv outward until Amana which is Samnum until the river, i.e., the River of Egypt. And they did not take possession of Kziv itself. [9] What constitutes Syria? From *Eretz Yisrael* and below parallel to Aram Naharaim and Aram Tzovah, the entire region of the Euphrates until Babylonia, e.g., Damascus, Achalev, Charan, Minbag, and the like until Shinar and Tzahar. These are considered like Syria. Acre, by contrast, is considered part of the Diaspora, like Ashkelon. These are the boundaries of *Eretz Yisrael*. [10] When a gentile purchases land in *Eretz Yisrael*, he does not cause it to be absolved from [the observance of] the mitzvot. Instead, its holiness is still intact. Therefore, if a Jew purchases this land from [the gentile], it is not considered as a private conquest. Instead, he should separate the *terumot* and the tithes and bring the first fruits. All these [obligations] are Scriptural in origin, as if it was never sold to a gentile. When a gentile acquires land in Syria, his acquisition has the power to absolve [the land] from the obligations of tithes and the Sabbatical year, as will be explained. [11] [The following laws apply with regard to] produce belonging to a gentile that grew on land that he purchased in *Eretz Yisrael*. If all the work involving the produce was completed in the possession of a gentile and the gentile straightened the edges of the grain heap, they are exempt, because [the verse mentioning the obligation to separate *terumah*, Deuteronomy 18:4] mentions "your grain," [thus excluding] the grain of a gentile.
If a Jew purchases [the produce] after it was harvested, but before the tasks involved with it were completed and they were completed by a Jew, all [of the agricultural obligations apply with regard to the produce] according to Scriptural Law. He must separate the great *terumah* and give it to a priest and [separate] the *terumat ma'aser* and sell it to a priest. The first tithe belongs to him, because he can tell a Levite with regard to the tithes and a priest with regard to the *terumat ma'aser*: "I am coming in the stead of a person from which you could not have collected anything."
Why do we say that he should not give the *terumat ma'aser* to a priest as [he gives him] the great *terumah*? Because with regard to *terumat ma'aser,* it is written: "When you take the tithes from the children of Israel...." [Implied is that from] untithed produce that you purchase from a Jew, you should separate *terumat ma'aser* and give it to a priest, but from untithed produce that you purchase from a gentile, you need not give the priest the *terumat ma'aser* you separate from it. Instead, you sell it to the priest and take the money. [12] [The following laws apply if] a gentile sold his produce to a Jew while it was connected to the earth. If [he sold it] before it developed to a stage when he is obligated to separate tithes and the work [associated with it] was completed while it was owned by the Jew, [the Jew] is responsible for all of the agricultural obligations and should give the *terumot* and the tithes to their [appropriate] owners. If [the gentile] sold [the produce] after it developed to a stage when he is obligated to separate tithes, he should separate *terumat ma'aser* and the tithes and give them to their [appropriate] owners according to the [acceptable] reckoning.
What is implied? If he purchased grain that had been sown from a gentile after it reached a third of its growth and the work associated with its completion was performed while it was in the possession of a Jew, he should separate the *terumot* and the tithes, as we explained. He should give two thirds of the tithes to a Levite. [With regard to the] *terumat ma'aser*, he should give two thirds to the priest and sell him one third. [13] [The following laws apply if] a Jew sold his produce to a gentile before it developed to a stage when he is obligated to separate tithes and the work [associated with it] was completed by the gentiles, it is exempt from the *terumot* and the tithes. If [he purchased it] after it developed to a stage when the tithes are obligated to be separated, even if the gentile completed the work associated with it, all of the agricultural obligations are incumbent upon it according to Rabbinic decree.
Similarly, if a gentile completed [the work associated with] produce belonging to a Jew, since the work associated with them was completed by a gentile, the obligation for *terumot* and tithes is incumbent upon them, but it is only Rabbinic in origin. [14] If a gentile sold produce that was still connected to the earth after it reached the stage when the tithes are obligated to be separated and [another] gentile straightened the edges of the grain heap in the possession of a Jew, [the produce] is not obligated in the *terumot* or the tithes. Since the produce reached the stage when the tithes are obligated to be separated in the possession of a gentile and a gentile straightened the edges of the grain heap, [the fact] the produce belongs to a Jew [is not significant]. [15] When a person purchases a field in Syria, he is obligated by Rabbinic decree to separate *terumot* and tithes like one who purchases [a field] in Jerusalem according to Scriptural Law, as we explained. If, however, a person [merely] purchases produce from a gentile - whether it was harvested or [still] connected to the earth - he is exempt, because [the produce] does not come from his land. [This applies] even if [he purchases the produce] before it develops to a stage when the tithes are obligated to be separated [and] even though a Jew straightened the edges of the grain heap. [16] [The following laws apply when a person] purchases land in Syria to which produce is attached. If it reached a stage when the tithes are obligated to be separated while in the possession of a gentile, it is exempt. [Conversely,] if it did not reach a stage when the tithes are obligated to be separated [in his possession], [the Jewish purchaser] is obligated to tithe it, since he purchased it together with the land. [17] When a Jew is working as a sharecropper for a gentile in Syria, his produce is exempt from the tithes, because he does not own the land itself at all. A gentile's purchase of land in Syria causes it to be absolved from [the obligation of] the tithes, as we explained. The same laws apply when one rents a field, but stipulates that the payment will be made in produce, enters into a sharecropping agreement as a *mekabel*, or rents a field for money from a gentile in Syria, he is absolved [from the obligations of] *terumot* and tithes. [18] [The following law applies when] a Jew purchases a field from a gentile in Syria before [the crops] reached a third of their development and sells it to a gentile after the crops reach a third of their development. If a Jew purchases it a second time, he is obligated [to separate] the *terumot* and the tithes, because [the field] incurred that obligation in the possession of a Jew. [19] When a Jew owns land in Syria and he hired a sharecropper and the sharecropper sent him produce, he is not obligated to separate [the *terumot* and tithes], for it is possible to say that [the sharecropper] purchased [the produce he gave him] from the marketplace. [This applies] provided this species is available in the marketplace. [20] There is an obligation [to separate] the *terumot* and the tithes [from crops grown on land owned in] partnership with a gentile.
What is implied? When a Jew and a non-Jew purchased a field in partnership - even if they divided the field while the grain was standing, and needless to say, if they divided it after it was collected in a grain heap - *tevel* and ordinary produce are mixed together in each and every stalk of grain in the gentile's share. [This applies] even if the gentile straightened the edges of the grain heap and thus the obligation is Rabbinic in origin, as explained. [21] When does the above apply? In *Eretz Yisrael*, where [the obligation to] tithe is Scriptural in origin, and according to Scriptural Law, the principle of *bereirah* does not apply. If, however, he purchased a field in Syria, since [the obligation to] tithe there is Rabbinic in origin, even if they divided a grain heap, the portion of the gentile is exempt entirely. [22] When produce from *Eretz Yisrael* is taken to the Diaspora, it is exempt from the obligations of *challah*, the *terumot*, and the tithes, [for one of the prooftexts requiring the separation of these gifts, Numbers 15:18] states: "[the land] to which I am bringing you." [Implied is that] these obligations exist there alone. In the Diaspora, one is exempt. If [the produce] was taken to Syria, one is obligated by Rabbinic decree.
Conversely, we are obligated [to separate] *challah* from produce from the Diaspora that was brought into *Eretz Yisrael*, as [suggested by the phrase] "to which." [Implied is that] one is liable [to make these gifts] there, whether the produce is from *Eretz Yisrael* or the Diaspora. If the obligation [to separate *challah* or the tithes] was established [because of the actions] of a Jew after the produce entered *Eretz Yisrael*, there is an obligation of Rabbinic origin to separate the tithes. [23] When earth from the Diaspora is brought to *Eretz Yisrael* by ship, if the ship's [bottom] comes in contact with the earth [of *Eretz Yisrael*], *terumah* and tithes must [be separated from produce] growing on [the earth in the ship] and the Sabbatical laws must be observed as if [the produce] was growing in *Eretz Yisrael* itself. [24] When a tree is standing in the Diaspora and its foliage leans into *Eretz Yisrael* or it is standing in *Eretz Yisrael* and its foliage leans into the Diaspora, [the determination of its status] depends on its roots. If some of its roots were in *Eretz Yisrael* and others were in the Diaspora - even if they were separated by glistening stone, [it is considered as if] *tevel* and ordinary produce are mixed together [throughout the entire produce]. [25] [The following rules apply when] a plant in a flowerpot with a hole has not sprouted roots [outside the flowerpot]. If its roots were in *Eretz Yisrael* and its foliage in the Diaspora, [the determination of its status] depends on its foliage. [26] In the present era, even in the areas settled by the Jews who ascended from Babylonia, even those [settled] in the era of Ezra, [the obligation to separate] *terumah* does not have the status of a Scriptural commandment, merely that of a Rabbinic decree. [The rationale is that] the Scriptural [commandment to separate] *terumah* applies only in *Eretz Yisrael* and only when the entire Jewish people are located there. [This is derived from the phrase] "When you enter...." [Implied is that] the entire [Jewish people] must enter [the land], as they did when they took possession of the land originally and as will happen in the future when they take possession of the land a third time. In contrast, the second time [the people] took possession of the land, in the time of Ezra, only a portion entered. Hence, they were not obligated according to Scriptural Law. Similarly, it appears to me that the same concept applies with regard to the tithes. In the present era, this obligation [as well] has the status of a Rabbinic decree like *terumah*.
Version: Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007
Source: https://www.nli.org.il/he/books/NNL_ALEPH001020101/NLI
License: CC-BY-NC