💾 Archived View for scholasticdiversity.us.to › scriptures › jewish › t › Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Tithe… captured on 2024-05-10 at 13:52:29. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
12 [1] When a person purchases produce from a person upon whom we do not rely with regard to the tithes and forgot to tithe it before the commencement of the Sabbath or a festival - upon which he may not tithe it - he should ask that person regarding their status. If he tells him that it is tithed, he may rely on his word on [that] Sabbath.
Similarly, if another person upon whom we cannot rely tells him that it was tithed, he may partake of it because of his word on that Sabbath. [This applies] even if he possesses other produce of that type from which the separations have been made. [The rationale is that] the awe of Sabbath affects the common people and they will not violate a transgression on that day. [2] Even though one relies on the word of a common person to eat on the Sabbath, he should not partake of that produce after the conclusion of the Sabbath until he separates the tithes as appropriate for *demai* for the entire amount, what he ate on the Sabbath and what remains. For the leniency [to] trust him was granted only out of necessity for that Sabbath.
If the Sabbath and a festival followed in succession, if one asked [a common person concerning produce] on one, he may partake of it on the other, because he did not have the opportunity to tithe in the interim. Similar laws apply with regard to the two days [for each festival celebrated] in the Diaspora. [3] When a person takes an oath that a colleague partake of his hospitality on the Sabbath, but [the guest] does not trust [the host] with regard to tithes, he may ask him and eat based on his statements the first Sabbath. On the second Sabbath, even though he took an oath not to benefit from him unless he accepts his hospitality, he should not eat until he tithes as one does for *demai*. [4] When we see a person who is not trustworthy [with regard to the separation of tithes] separate *terumat ma'aser* from produce belonging to him that is *demai* and we saw that it later fell back in, whether to that [store of produce] or another and he said: "I separated it," we accept his word - even during the week - and may partake of the produce on that basis. Just as the common people are in dread of the Sabbath, so too, they are in dread of *dimua*, and they are not suspect to cause others to partake of such produce. [5] When we see that a person who is not trustworthy separates the first tithes from such produce and he says that he separated the second tithes, his word is accepted. If he separated the second tithe in our presence and said that he separated the first tithe, his word is not accepted, because the second tithe belongs to him. [Thus] one who is trusted with regard to the second tithe is not trusted with regard to the first, but one who is trusted with regard to the first is trusted with regard to the second.
Accordingly, when a person who is not trusted brings produce from his home and says: "This is the first tithe," his word is accepted and there is no need to separate *terumot* and tithes from [the produce separated]. If he says: "This is the second tithe," his word is not accepted. [The produce separated] is considered as *demai* and we must separate *terumat ma'aser* from it. It appears to me that he must redeem the entire amount. [6] When one tells a person whose word is not accepted with regard to the tithes: "Purchase [produce] for me from someone who tithes." And that person went and brought him produce, his word is not accepted. If he told him: "Purchase [produce] for me from so-and-so," the other person's word is accepted if he says that he purchased it from him, for he will fear [to lie], lest [the principal] ask that person. If he went to purchase [the produce] from the person who was named, but said: "I could not find him, so I purchased it for you from another person who is trustworthy," his word is not accepted. [7] [The following rules apply when a person] enters a city where he does not know anyone and asks: "Who is trustworthy? Who tithes?" If someone answers: "I am," his word is not accepted. If he says: "So-and-so," his word is accepted and [the wayfarer] may purchase [produce] from that person and eat on that basis. If [the wayfarer] went and purchased from that person and asked him: "Who here sells vintage wine?" and the person answers: "The one who sent you," his word is accepted even though it appears that they are in collusion. [8] When does the above apply? When [the wayfarer] is not familiar with any person in that place. If, however, he is familiar with people there, he should purchase only from a person [with an established reputation] for observance. If he stays in that place for 30 days, even if he is not familiar with anyone there, he should purchase produce only from an expert. [9] These leniencies were granted only with regard to *terumot* and the tithes, but with regard to produce of the Sabbatical year and questions of ritual purity, one should purchase only from a person [with an established reputation] for observance. [10] When donkey-drivers enter a city and one says: "The appropriate separations have not been made from my produce, but they have been made from my colleague's produce," his word is not accepted. [We fear that] perhaps they are colluding in deception. [11] When a person sells produce in Syria and says that it comes from *Eretz Yisrael*, the purchaser is required to tithe it. If he says that it has been tithed, his word is accepted. [The rationale is that] the same person whose words aroused our suspicion also allayed it.
If he says: "They are mine," [the purchaser] is obligated to tithe it. If he says that it has been tithed, his word is accepted. [The rationale is that] the same statement that aroused our suspicion also allayed it. If it is known that [the seller] owns land in Syria and most [of the produce] he sells is from his own field, one who purchases from him is obligated to tithe, for we assume that he brought the produce from his own field. [12] When poor people say: "This produce is from *leket, shichachah,* and *pe'ah*, their word is accepted as long as there are granaries in which *leket, shichachah,* and *pe'ah* can be found and provided [a poor person] is close enough to the granary so that he can go [to it] and return on the same day.
If they said: "They are from the tithes given to the poor," their word is accepted throughout those years. The word of these individuals is accepted only with regard to objects which people would ordinarily give [to the poor]. [13] What is implied? [Poor people say:] "This wheat is from *leket, shichachah,* and *pe'ah*," their word is accepted. [If they say:] "This flour from *leket, shichachah,* and *pe'ah*," their word is not accepted. Needless to say, their word is not accepted when they say that bread comes from presents to the poor. Instead, [such articles] should be tithed as *demai* is. [14] Similarly, their word is accepted with regard to kernels of rice [while in their husks]. Their word is not accepted, however, with regard to husked kernels or cooked ones. Their word is accepted with regard to beans [in their kernels]. Their word is not accepted, however, with regard to raw, husked beans or cooked beans.
Their word is accepted when they say that oil was from the tithe for the poor. Their word is not accepted, however, if they say it comes from leftover olives. Their word is accepted with regard to raw vegetables, but not with regard to cooked vegetables unless we are speaking about a small quantity. For it is customary for homeowners to give a poor person some vegetables from their pot. And since he can say: "A homeowner gave it to me," he can say: "I cooked it from the presents given me." [15] Similarly, the word of a Levite who says: "This produce is from the first tithe from which *terumah* was separated" is always accepted with regard to *terumat ma'aser*, just as the word of an Israelite is always accepted with regard to the great *terumah*. [The Levite's word] is not accepted, however, with regard to exempting [the grain] from the second tithe. [16] All of the above applies with regard to a common person who is neither suspect [to violate these prohibitions], nor trustworthy [in their observance]. If, however, someone is suspected of selling *terumah* as ordinary produce, it is forbidden to purchase anything from him that has a connection to *terumah* and the tithes. Even the intestines of fish [may not be purchased from him] because oil is mixed with them. It is, however, only forbidden to purchase the produce that is being sold by such a person at that time. It is, by contrast, permitted to purchase from his storehouse, because he will fear to mix *terumah* into his stores [of produce], lest the matter become known and he lose everything.
Similarly, it is forbidden to purchase anything that has a connection to tithes from a person who is suspect of selling the second tithe as ordinary produce. All of this is a penalty [imposed] by Rabbinic decree. [17] When a person who is suspect to transgress attests [to the tithes being separated from produce] belonging to another person, his word is accepted. [The rationale is that we operate] under the presumption that a person will not sin without receiving any benefit. Needless to say, this applies with regard to a common person. Therefore, if a common person says: "[This produce] is *tevel* and this is *terumah*. This is definitely untithed and this is *demai*," his word is accepted, even with regard to his own produce. If he said: "The required separations have been made from this produce," his word is accepted with regard to the produce of others provided it does not appear that they are acting in collusion, as we explained. [18] When a person sells produce to a colleague and, after the produce leaves his hand, he tells the purchaser: "The produce I sold you is *tevel*. The meat is meat from a firstborn animal. And the wine is wine that was poured as a libation to a false deity. The letter of the law dictates that the seller's word should not be accepted, even if he is a *chavair*. A person who is eager should be stringent with himself. If he accepts his word, [his conduct] is praiseworthy, even if [the seller] is a common person.
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