The Tithe Debate > Against Tithing Today > Tithes & Second Tithes in the Mishnah >

Second Tithes in the Mishnah

Maaser Sheni 6 (Second Tithe)

1. 1. Second Tithe may not be sold, pledged, or bartered, nor may it be used to weigh [other produce] therewith; nor may a man say to his fellow [even] in Jerusalem, 'Here is wine: give me oil'; so, too, with any other produce. But they may give it one to another as a gift.

2.   Tithe of Cattle,7 when unblemished, may not be sold alive; if blemished it may not be sold alive or slaughtered, and none may betroth a woman therewith;8 a Firstling,9 when unblemished, may be sold alive; if blemished it may be sold alive or slaughtered, and a woman may be betrothed therewith. Second Tithe may not be exchanged for unminted metal,10 or for coin that is not current, or for money that is not at command.

3.   If a man bought11 cattle for a Peace-offering or a wild animal for use as food, sanctity [of Second Tithe] does not apply to the hide even though its value was more than that of the flesh. [If he bought] sealed jars of wine where it was usual to sell them sealed, sanctity [of Second Tithe] does not apply to the empty jar; nor does it apply to the shells of walnuts and...

6   Deut. 14:22ff. In the first, second, fourth, and fifth years of the seven-year cycle after the harvested produce has paid Heave-offering to the priest (from a sixtieth to a fortieth part) and (First) Tithe to the levite, it is still liable to 'Second Tithe'. This the owner must take to Jerusalem and there consume it, or else he must 'redeem' it, i.e. put aside coins of the value (plus one-fifth) of this Second Tithe of his produce, and then that produce which was Second Tithe becomes free for use as ordinary food. The coins themselves then count as 'Second Tithe money' and the sanctity of Second Tithe is transferred to them or to other coins for which they, in turn, may be exchanged. They must be taken up to Jerusalem and with them food (or Peace-offerings) must be bought and consumed 'in cleanness' in Jerusalem. In the third and sixth years what would have been Second Tithe must be given to the poor as 'Poorman's Tithe' (Deut. 14:28ff; 26:12).
7    Lev. 2732; Bekh. 9lff.
8   Cf. Kidd. 2:8
9   See p. 529, n. 8; p. 533, n. 9.
10   Eduy. 3:2.  It must, according to Deut. 14:25, be actual money, current coin.
11   With Second Tithe money in Jerusalem.

...almonds. Grape-skin wine1 may not be bought with [Second] Tithe money before it has fermented,2 but it may be bought after it has fermented.

4. If a man bought a wild animal for a Peace-offering or cattle for use as food, sanctity [of Second Tithe] applies to the hide. [If he bought] jars of wine, open or sealed, where it was usual to sell them open, sanctity [of Second Tithe] applies to the empty jar. [If he bought] baskets of olives or grapes together with the basket, sanctity [of Second Tithe] applies to the value of the basket.

5. If a man bought water or salt or unplucked produce, or produce that cannot be taken up to Jerusalem, he has not acquired a [valid] substitute for Second Tithe. If he bought produce in error3 the money must be restored; if wantonly, the produce must be taken up to the Place4 and there consumed; and if it cannot be taken to the Holy City5 it must be allowed to rot.

6. If a man bought cattle in error the money must be restored; if wantonly, it must be taken up to Jerusalem and there consumed; and if it cannot be taken to the Holy City it must be buried with its hide.

7. Bondmen or bondwomen, immovable property or unclean cattle may not be bought with Second Tithe money, and if a man bought the like he must still consume the like value [as Second Tithe in Jerusalem]. Bird-offerings of a man or a woman that suffered a flux, or 'of a woman after child-birth,6 or Sin-offerings or Guilt-offerings, may not be offered if bought with Second Tithe money; and if a man had so bought them he must still consume the like value [as Second Tithe in Jerusalem]. This is the general rule: if with Second Tithe money a man bought other than food, drink, or unguent, he must still consume the like value [as Second Tithe in Jerusalem].

2. 1. Second Tithe is appointed for use as food, drink, or unguent: that is to be eaten which it is usual to eat, and that is to be drunken which it is usual to drink, and that is to be used for anointing which it is usual to use for anointing. A man may not anoint himself with wine or vinegar, but only with oil. He may not make perfumed oil from Second Tithe or buy perfumed oil with Second Tithe money; but he may spice the wine. If honey or spices fell into the wine7 and increased its value, the increased value [is assessed] according to the quantity [of what is added].8 If fish were cooked with Second Tithe leeks and so improved, the increased value [is assessed] according to the quantity [of what is added]. If Second Tithe dough was baked and [so] improved [in value], the increased value is [wholly] reckoned9 to the Second [Tithe]. This is the general rule: when the improvement is recognized [as due to aught that is added] the increased value [is assessed] according to the quantity [of what is added]; but if the improvement is not recognized [as due to aught that is added] the increased value is [wholly] reckoned to the Second [Tithe].

2. R. Simeon says: A man may not anoint himself with Second Tithe...

1   See Maas. 5°; Hull. i7.
2   Since it counts as water only.   See below, par. 5.
3   Outside Jerusalem, and he did not known that he was using Second Tithe money.
4   Jerusalem; for what has been bought with Second Tithe money cannot be redeemed.
5   Heb. Mikdash, lit. 'Temple'; but here used in the wider sense.   So also in Pes. io3.
6   For these see p. 598, n 3.
7   Outside Jerusalem and before its money-substitute had been set aside.
8   Even if the improvement of the Second Tithe was worth more than the value of the added matter.
9   Its value is that of baked bread and not of dough only plus the cost of the fire.

...oil1 in Jerusalem. But the Sages permit it. They said to R. Simeon: Since the more lenient ruling applies to the graver matter of Heave-offering,2 should we not apply the more lenient ruling to the less grave matter of Second Tithe ? He answered: No! even if the more lenient ruling applies to the graver matter of Heave-offering (whereto applies a more lenient ruling in what concerns vetches and fenugreek),3 should we apply a more lenient ruling to the less grave matter of Second Tithe (whereto a more lenient ruling does not apply in what concerns vetches and fenugreek) ?

3. Second Tithe fenugreek may be consumed only in its green condition; but as for Heave-offering fenugreek, the School of Shammai say: Whatso­ever concerns it must be done in cleanness save combing the head there­with. And the School of Hillel say: Whatsoever concerns it may be done in uncleanliness save the soaking of it.

4. Second Tithe vetches may be consumed only in their green condition, and may be brought up to Jerusalem and taken out again. If they have contracted uncleanness, R. Tarfon says: They should be divided among lumps of dough. But the Sages say: They should be redeemed. Of Heave-offering vetches the School of Shammai say:4 They must be soaked and rubbed in cleanness but they may be given as food in uncleanness. And the School of Hillel say: They should be soaked in cleanness but they may be rubbed and given as food in uncleanness. Shammai says: They may only be eaten dry. R. Akiba says: Whatsoever concerns them may be done in uncleanness.

5. If common money and Second Tithe money were scattered5 [and confused], whatsoever coins are [first] picked up are deemed Second Tithe until its tally is complete; and the residue is deemed common money. But if the two were mingled together and could be taken up by handfuls, they are allotted according to their original proportion. This is the general rule: What must be picked up coin by coin [is first allotted] to the Second Tithe money; but what is only mingled together is allotted according to the original proportion.

6. If a sela6 of Second Tithe was confused with a sela of common money,7 he should bring a sela's worth of [copper] coins and say, 'Let the sela of Second Tithe, wherever it may be, be exchanged for these coins'. He should then choose out the finer of the two selas and exchange it [again] for the [copper] coins; for they have said: At need silver may be substituted by copper, not that it should remain thus, but that the copper coins should again be substituted by silver.

7. The School of Shammai say: A man may not change his selas8 for golden denars.9 But the School of Hillel permit it. R. Akiba said: I changed silver for golden denars for Rabban Gamaliel and R. Joshua.

8. If10 a man would change a seta's worth of Second Tithe money [outside of Jerusalem]11 the School of Shammai say: He may change it for...

1 He holds that it may be used only as food.
2 As taught in Shebi. 8:2.
3 See Ter. n9.
4 See Eduy. i8.
5 So that they must be picked up one by one.
6 For the coins mentioned in this and the following paragraphs see App. II, A.
7 And its owner wished to spend the common money outside of Jerusalem.
8 Of Second Tithe money.
9 Lest the difficulty of changing them back into smaller money should hinder his going up to Jerusalem.
10 Eduy. i9.
11 In order to lighten his burden on the way to Jerusalem.

...a whole sela. And the School of Hillel say: A shekel's worth of silver and a shekel's worth in copper coin.1 R. Meir says: They may not change silver and produce [together]2 into [other] silver.   But the Sages permit it.

9.  If3 a man would change a sela of Second Tithe money in Jerusalem, the School of Shammai say: He must change the whole sela into copper coin. And the School of Hillel say: He may take one shekel's worth of silver and one shekel's worth in copper coin. They that made argument before the Sages4 say: Three denars' worth of silver and one of copper. R. Akiba says: Three denars* worth of silver and from the fourth [denar]a quarter in copper coin. R. Tarfon says: Four aspers in silver. Shammai says: Let him deposit it in a shop and [gradually] consume its value.

10.  If of a man's sons some were clean and some unclean, he should lay down the sela and say, For what they that are clean shall drink, let this sela [of Second Tithe] be given in exchange'. Thus clean and unclean may drink from the same jar.

3. 1. A man may not say to his fellow, 'Take up this produce to Jerusalem in return for a share therein'; but he may say to him, 'Take it up and we will eat and drink thereof in Jerusalem'. Moreover they may make a present thereof one to another.

2. They may not buy Heave-offering with Second Tithe money, since this renders fewer5 them that may eat of it. But R. Simeon permits it. R. Simeon said to the Sages: What! if the more lenient ruling applies to Peace-offerings6 (which are subject to the laws of Refuse,7 Remnant,8 and uncleanness)9 should we not also apply the more lenient ruling to Heave-offering? They answered: What! if the more lenient ruling applies to Peace-offerings (which are permitted to non-priests) should we therefore apply the more lenient ruling to Heave-offering which is forbidden to non-priests ?

3. If a man in Jerusalem had [Second Tithe] money and it was needful [for other than food, drink, or unguent] and his fellow had produce [that was unconsecrated], he may say to his fellow, 'Let this money be rendered free for common use by [exchange with] thy produce'. Then the one shall eat his produce in cleanness [as Second Tithe] and the other may do what he will with his money. But he may not say so to an Am-haaretz10 unless the money was [Second Tithe money set aside] for deniai-produce.11

4. If a man had [unconsecrated] produce in Jerusalem and [Second Tithe] money in the provinces, he may say, 'Let that money be rendered free for common use by [exchange with] this produce'. [If he had Second Tithe] money in Jerusalem and [unconsecrated] produce in the provinces, he may say, 'Let this money be rendered free for common use by [exchange...

1   Because if all go up with silver it will raise the price of copper coin in Jerusalem.
2   E.g. a half-denar's worth of produce and a ha\£-denar together for a whole denar.
3   Eduy. 1:10
4 The pupils of R. Akiba: Simeon b. Azzai, Simeon b. Zoma, Hanan the Egyptian (not the Hanan of Ket. i3lff), Simeon b. Nanos, and Hananiah b. Hakinai.
5 It may not be eaten by non-priests or even by priests unless they are wholly free from uncleanness.
6 In that they can be bought with Second Tithe money.
7  Lev. 718 ('Abomination'), Zeb. a**-. An offering eaten after its prescribed time or outside its prescribed place.
8   Ex. 2Q34, Lev. 717. An offering that remains after the time appointed for eating it, and
that must be burnt.
9  See Lev. 7:20.
10  Who could not be trusted to eat his produce in 'cleanness, as Second Tithe'.
11  See p. 20, n.9.

...with] that produce', provided that the produce is brought up and consumed in Jerusalem.

5. [Second Tithe] money that is brought into Jerusalem may be taken out again, but [Second Tithe] produce that is brought in may not be taken out again. Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel says: Even produce may be brought in and taken out again.1

6. If produce that was fully harvested passed through Jerusalem,2 the Second Tithe thereof must be brought back again to Jerusalem and there consumed. If it was not yet fully harvested (the like of grapes [that are borne] in baskets to the winepress or figs in baskets to the drying-place), the School of Shammai say: The Second Tithe thereof must be brought back to Jerusalem and there consumed. And the School of Hillel say: It may be redeemed and eaten anywhere. R. Simeon b. Judah in the name of R. Jose says: .The School of Shammai and the School of Hillel did not dispute about produce that was not fully harvested, whose Second Tithe can be redeemed and eaten anywhere. But about what did they dispute ? About produce that was fully harvested, whose Second Tithe, according to the School of Shammai, should be brought back and consumed in Jerusalem, and, according to the School of Hillel, could be redeemed and eaten anywhere. Demai-produce may be brought in and taken out again and may be redeemed.

7. If a tree stood within the wall [of Jerusalem] and [its boughs] stretched outside, or stood outside and [its boughs] stretched inwards, the part of the foliage directly above the wall and inwards is deemed within [Jerusalem] and the part directly above the wall and outwards is deemed outside. If the entrance to olive-presses [in the city wall] was within [Jerusalem] and their contained space outside, or their entrance outside and their contained space within [Jerusalem], the School of Shammai say: The whole is deemed within [Jerusalem]. And the School of Hillel say: The part directly above the wall and inwards is deemed within and the part directly above the wall and outwards is deemed outside.

8. In the chambers3 built in the Temple [Court] and opening into ground that was not holy, no sanctity attaches to the space within them, but their roofs are deemed to be within holy ground; in those built in ground that was not holy and opening into the Temple [Court], the space within them is holy but no sanctity attaches to their roofs; in those built both within the Temple [Court] and on ground that was not holy and opening both into the Temple [Court] and into ground that was not holy, [then in what con­cerns] the space within them and their roofs, directly above the Temple [Court] and inwards toward the Temple [Court] is holy, and directly above the Temple [Court] and outward toward ground that is not holy, is not holy.

9. If Second Tithe was brought into Jerusalem and contracted unclean­ness, whether from a Father of Uncleanness or from an Offspring of Uncleanness,4 whether within or without [the walls of Jerusalem], the School of Shammai say: It should be redeemed and it may be consumed within [the walls] excepting only what was rendered unclean by a Father of Uncleanness outside [the walls]. And the School of Hillel say: It should be redeemed and it must be consumed outside [the walls] excepting only...

1  To grind or bake it cheaply and then bring it back to Jerusalem.
2  Before Heave-offering and First Tithe had been taken from it.
3  See Midd. i°; 45.
4  App. IV. 3, 4.   See p. 604, n. 2; cf. Pes. i6.

...what was rendered unclean by an Offspring of Uncleanness within [the
walls].

10. If what was bought with Second Tithe money contracted, unclean­ness it may be redeemed. R. Judah says: It must be buried. They said to R. Judah: If Second Tithe itself, that is rendered unclean, may be re­deemed, must we not infer that what was bought with Second Tithe money and contracted uncleanness may also be redeemed ? He replied: No! as ye argue of Second Tithe itself (that can be redeemed in clean condition far away from the Temple), would ye likewise argue of what is bought with Second Tithe money (that cannot be redeemed in clean condition far away from the Temple) ?

11. If a gazelle bought with Second Tithe money died, it must be buried with its hide. R. Simeon says: It may be redeemed. If it was bought alive and slaughtered and then contracted uncleanness, it may be redeemed. R. Jose says: It must be buried. If it was bought ready slaughtered and then contracted uncleanness, it is treated in like fashion as produce.1

12. If a man lent empty jars for [wine already designated] Second Tithe, even though he sealed them up, they do not count as [Second] Tithe. If he poured therein wine that was still undesignated [and the wine was designated Second Tithe] before the jars were sealed up, they do not count as [Second] Tithe; but if [it was designated] after they were sealed up, they count as [Second] Tithe.2 [So, too, if wine was designated Heave-offering] before the jars were sealed up [and they are confused with others], they are neutralized in a hundred and one; but if after they were sealed up, they render holy [others with which they are confused] in any quantity soever. Until he has sealed them up he may give Heave-offering from one on behalf of all; but after he has sealed them up, he must give Heave-offering from each singly.

13. The School of Shammai say: [If he would give Heave-offering from one on behalf of all after he has sealed them up], he must open [the jars] and empty them into the winepress. But the School of Hillel say: He must open them but he need not empty them. This applies to places where their custom is to sell [the jars] sealed; but where their custom is to sell them open the sanctity [of Heave-offering] applies to the jar. And if the seller restricts himself to selling by measure, sanctity does not apply to the jar. R. Simeon says: Moreover if a man said to his fellow, 'I sell thee this jarful, not including the empty jar', sanctity does not apply to the jar.

4. 1. If a man took Second Tithe produce from a place where prices were high to a place where prices were low, or from a place where prices were low to a place where prices were high, ho*jnust redeem it at the price that prevails in the place where he is. If a man brought produce from the threshing-floor to the town, or jars of wine from the winepress to the town, the increase in value falls to the Second [Tithe] and the outlay [for removal] falls on his household.

2. Second Tithe is redeemed at the cheaper rate—the rate at which the shopkeeper buys and not at the rate at which he sells; [and Second Tithe money is exchanged at] the rate at which the money-changer takes in exchange and not at the rate at which he gives. Second Tithe may not be...

1    And the principles of par. 10 apply.
2    The sanctity of Second Tithe attaches to them, and their value must be included when the wine is 'redeemed'.

...redeemed by guesswork; if it has a known price it may be redeemed according to the estimate of but one,1 and if its price is not known (like as when wine is turned sour or produce has gone bad or coins have rusted) it should be redeemed according to the estimate of three.2

3. If a householder bid a sela and another bid a sela, the householder's claim comes first, since he must add the Fifth.3 If the householder bid a sela and another bid a sela and an issar, his claim comes first, since he adds to the value. When a man redeems his Second Tithe he must add one-fifth more, whether it was his own or whether it was given to him.

4. Men may act with cunning in what concerns Second Tithe.4 Thus a man may say to his son or daughter that are of age, or to his Hebrew bondman or bondwoman,5 'Here is money: do thou redeem this Second Tithe'. But he cannot speak thus to his son or daughter that are minors or to his Canaanite bondman or bondwoman,6 since their hand is as his hand.

5. [Or] if he was star 6p on his threshing-floor and had no money in his hand he may say to his fellow, 'This produce is given thee as a gift', and say moreover, 'Let this be substituted by money that is in the house'.

6. If a man drew into his possession [Second] Tithe from another at the price of one sela, but before he could redeem it its value stood at two selas, he pays but one sela and makes one sela profit and the Second Tithe remains his. If he drew into his possession [Second] Tithe from another at the price of two selas but before he could redeem it its value stood at one sela, he may pay him the one sela in common money and the second sela from Second Tithe money that belongs to him. If he was an Am-haaretz he may pay him [the second sela] from deniai-produce.

7. If a man redeemed Second Tithe yet had not designated it Second Tithe, R. Jose says: It suffices. But R. Judah says: He must designate it expressly. If a man was speaking to a woman about her divorce or her betrothal and gave her her bill of divorce or her betrothal gift but did not expressly designate it such, R. Jose says: It suffices. But R. Judah says: He must designate it expressly.

8. If a man set aside one issar [as Second Tithe redemption money] and in virtue of this consumed half its value and then went elsewhere where it was worth a pondion, he can still consume another issar's worth. If he set aside one pondion and in virtue of this consumed half its value and then went elsewhere where it was worth [only] one issar, he may consume only another half-issar's worth. If he set aside one issar as Second Tithe redemption money, he may in virtue of this consume up to7 one-eleventh of an issar'}s worth [if it was demai-produce] and one-hundredth of an issar's worth [if it was produce certainly untithed]. The School cf Shammai say: In either case one-tenth; and the School of Hillel say: One-eleventh if it was produce certainly untithed, and one-tenth if it was demai-produce.

9. Any coins that are found are deemed unconsecrated, even if it was a golden denar found with silver and copper coins.8 If a potsherd was found with them and on it was written 'Tithe', they must be deemed [Second] Tithe [redemption money].

1 Some texts add 'witness'.
2 Sanh. i3.
3 Lev. 2731.   See Arak. 8lff.
4 To evade the payment of the Added Fifth.
5 See Kidd. i2.
6 See Kidd. i3.
7  i.e. 'so as to leave...'   The precise interpretation of the rest of this paragraph is doubtful.
8  Since it is not usual to mix them together; therefore the natural inference would be that they were specially set aside as Second Tithe redemption money.

10. If a man found a vessel and on it was written "Korban"1 R. Judah says: If it was of earthenware the vessel is to be deemed unconsecrated but its contents Korban; and if it was of metal it is to be deemed Korban but its contents unconsecrated. They said to him: It is not the way of men to put what is unconsecrated into what is Korban.

11. If a man found a vessel and on it was inscribed a Kof, this is Korban; if a Mem it is Maaser (Tithe); if a Daleth it is demai-produce (pro­duce not certainly tithed); if a Tet it is Tebel (produce certainly un-tithed); and if a Tau it is Terumah (Heave-offering); for in the times of danger2 they used to write Tau for Terumah. R. Jose says: They may all be [the initials of] men's names. R. Jose said: Even if a man found a jar full of produce with 'Terumah' written on it it should be deemed unconse­crated, since I may assume that it was filled with Heave-offering a year ago and afterward emptied.

12. If a man said to his son, 'There is Second Tithe [redemption money], in this corner', and he found money in another corner, it counts as unconsecrated. If there had been there a hundred denars [of Second Tithe redemption money] and he found there two hundred, the surplus counts as unconsecrated. [If there had been there] two hundred denars and he found but one hundred, this all counts as [Second] Tithe.

5.1. A Fourth Year Vineyard3 must be marked by clods of earth, and trees of OM-fruit4 by potsherds, and a grave5 by whiting mingled with water and poured over the grave. Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel said: This applies only in the Seventh Year.6 The truly pious used to lay down money and say: Whatsoever fruit is picked from here may it be redeemed by this money.

2. Fruit of a Fourth Year Vineyard was taken up to Jerusalem [from any place] one day's journey in any direction. And what was the [ arthest] limit? Elath7 to the south, Akrabah8 to the north, Lydda to the west, and the Jordan to the east. When the fruits became too many it was ordained that they might be redeemed even though [the vineyard was] near to the [city] wall. And this was with the understanding that when they wished, the matter might be restored as beforetime. R. Jose says: This was the understanding after the Temple was destroyed, and the understanding was that when the Temple should be rebuilt the matter would be restored as beforetime.

3. The School of Shammai say:9 The rules of the [Added] Fifth and of Removal do not apply to [the grapes of] a Fourth Year Vineyard. And the School of Hillel say: They do apply. The School of Shammai say: The laws of grape-gleanings and of the defective cluster apply, and the poor redeem the grapes for themselves. And the School of Hillel say: The whole yield goes to the winepress.

1   'An offering' dedicated to the Temple, either for use as an offering if it is fitted for such use, or as a Temple utensil.  See Shek. 4:6ff; 5:6.
2   When in time of persecution, such as followed the Bar Cocheba revolt in the reign of Hadrian, it was forbidden to observe the Jewish religious practices.    Cf. Ket. 9:9.
3  Cf. Lev. 1924.
4   Cf. App. I. 32
5   To give warning of uncleanness.   Cf. Shek. 1:1; M. Kat. 1:2; cf. Par. 3:2.
6   When all produce is ownerless property.
7  Neub. p. 119f. No place of such a name within one day's journey from Jerusalem has yet been plausibly identified.
8   Neub. p. 159.  Perhaps the modern Akrabah, twenty-five miles north of Jerusalem.
9   See Peah 7:8; Eduy. 4:5.

4. How are the fruits of Fourth-year plantings redeemed ? The owner lays down a basket before three [that are skilled]1 and says, 'How many [such baskets full] can a man redeem for a sela, and jet defray the costs2 incurred by his household V And he lays down the money and says, 'What­soever is henceforth gathered let it be redeemed by this money at the rate of so many baskets for a sela'.

5. But in the Seventh Year it must be redeemed at its [full] value.3 And if it was all ownerless property, only the cost of gathering is taken into account. If a man redeemed the fruit of his own Fourth-year plantings he must add the fifth of the value, whether it was his own or whether it was given him.

6. On the eve of the first4 Festival-day5 of Passover in the fourth6 and seventh years the duty of Removal7 was fulfilled. Thus Heave-offering and Heave-offering of Tithe were given to whom they were due, and the First Tithe was given to whom it was due, and Poorman's Tithe was given to whom it was due, and the Second Tithe and the First-fruits everywhere were re­moved. R. Simeon says: The First-fruits like the Heave-offering were given to the priests. Cooked food8 should be removed, according to the School of Shammai; but the School of Hillel say: It is accounted a thing removed [already].

7. If a man had produce9 at this time10 and the season came for Removal, the School of Shammai say: He must redeem it with money.11 And the School of Hillel say: It is all one whether it is in the form of produce or of money.

8. R. Judah said: Beforetime they used to send to householders in the provinces [saying], 'Hasten and duly tithe your produce before the time of Removal shall come', until R. Akiba came and taught that all produce was exempt from Removal if its tithing season12 was not yet come.

9. He whose produce is far removed from him must say expressly to whom the Tithes thereof are due. Once13 when Rabban Gamaliel and the elders were sailing in a ship Rabban Gamaliel said, 'The Tithe which I should have measured [as First Tithe] is given to Joshua,14 and the land whereon it grows is rented to him; the other Tithe which I should have measured [as Poorman's Tithe] is given to Akiba b. Joseph that he may possess it on behalf of the poor, and the land whereon it grows is rented to him/ R. Joshua said, 'The Tithe which I should have measured [as Heave-offering of Tithe] is given to Eleazar b. Azariah,15 and the land on which it grows is rented to him\ And they each received rent from the other.

10.  At the time of the Afternoon Offering on the last Festival-day they used to make the Avowal.16 How used a man to make the Avowal? [He said], i" have removed the Hallowed Things out of mine house—that is Second...

1 Cf. Sanh. i3.
2 Of guarding, hoeing, and the like.
3   Not deducting the cost of labour, since in the Seventh Year it is forbidden to tend it.
4   Some texts read "last"
5   The first and seventh days of Passover are 'Festival Days' (Heb. yamim tobim, good— i.e. holy days); the intervening days, the 'middle days' are called Hoi ha-Moed (lit. non-holy days of the Feast).  See p. 181, n. 11; p. 207 n.19.
6   In fulfilment of Deut. 14:28.
7    Cf. Shebi. 9:2.
8   That contained any produce subject to Removal.
9    Second Tithe and Fourth-year fruit which should be consumed in Jerusalem.
10 When the Temple has ceased to exist.
11   And throw this into the sea.
12  Maas. 1:2ff.   See Deut. 26:12.
13   On the eve of Passover when the time for Removal was come.
14   Who was a levite.
15   Who was a priest.
l6    Deut. 26:13ff.

...Tithe and the fruits of Fourth-year plantings; I have given them to the Levite—that is the Tithe of the levites; and also1 [I have given them]—that is the Heave-offering and the Heave-offering of Tithe; to the stranger and the fatherless and the widow—that is the Poorman's Tithe, Gleanings, the Forgotten Sheaf, and Peak (although these do not render the Avowal invalid); from the house—that is Dough-offering.

11. According to all thy commandment which thou hast commanded me— thus if he granted Second Tithe before First Tithe he may not make the Avowal; I have not transgressed any of thy commandments—I have not given from one kind instead of from some other kind or from what has been plucked instead of from what is unplucked or from what is unplucked instead of from what is-plucked, or from new produce instead of from old, or from old produce instead of from new; neither have I forgotten—I have not forgotten to bless thee or to make mention of thy name over it.

12. I have not eaten thereof in my mourning—thus if he had eaten during mourning he may not make the Avowral; nor have I removed ought thereof being unclean—thus if he had set it apart in uncleanness he may not make the Avowal; nor given thereof for the dead—I have not used aught thereof for a coffin or wrappings for a corpse nor have I given it to other mourners; I have hearkened to the voice of the Lord my God—I have brought it to his chosen Temple; / have done according to all that thou hast commanded me— I have rejoiced and made others to rejoice therewith.

13. Look down from thy holy habitation from heaven—we have done what thou hast decreed concerning us: do thou also what thou hast promised to us; Look down from thy holy habitation from heaven and bless thy people Israel—with, sons and daughters; and the ground which thou hast given us— with dew and wine and with the young of cattle; as thou swarest unto our fathers, a land flowing with milk and honey—-that thou mayest give flavour to the fruits.

14. From this they have inferred that Israelites and bastards may make the Avowal but not proselytes and freed slaves, who have no share in the Land. R. Meir says: And not priests and levites, because they have not received a share from the Land. R. Jose says: They have the cities of the outskirts.2

15. Johanan the High Priest3 did away with the Avowal concerning the Tithe.4 He too made an end also of the 'Awakeners'5 and-the 'Stunners'.6 Until his days the hammer used to smite7 in Jerusalem. And in his days none needed to inquire concerning demai-produce.8

1  This is an example of the rule of Ribbui and Mi'ut ('extension' and 'limitation') taught by R. Nahum of Gimzo, according to which certain particles (as here) 'extend' or else 'limit' the provision enjoined in the law there enjoined.   Cf. Shebu. 35.
2   See Num. 35:2ff.
2 John Hyrcanus, 135-105 B.C.  Cf. Sot. 9:10; Par. 3:5; Yad. 4:6.
4 So that a man need not say, 'I have given it to the levite', for Ezra had enacted that, as a punishment to the levites who did not go up with him to Jerusalem, the First Tithe should be given to the priests.
5 He abolished the daily singing by the levites of the verse (Ps. 44s3) 'Awake, why sleepest thou, O Lord?' because of its unseemliness.
6   Who used to stupify the animals in the Temple before slaughtering them. This was abolished as likely to cause a forbidden blemish in the beast.    (Lev. 22:19ff).
7   In the 'middle days' of the Feasts; i.e. he forbade even necessary work on such days. See p. 207, n. 19. It is doubtful whether the above rendering of these two clauses (which is that of the Gemara, Sot. 48a) represents the original sense of this early tradition.
8   Beforetime it was needful to inquire whether a dealer was 'trustworthy' in the matter of tithes or not; and it was necessary to set apart all the dues and tithes in cases of doubt. But Johanant the High Priest issued the ruling that (Sot. 48a) only Heave-offering of Tithe and Second Tithe need be taken account of in demai-produce.  See p. 20, n. 9.

Return to the start of The Tithe Debate: About Tithes and Tithing?
© www.tithe-debate.info March 2008.

Why do many christian theologians believe even after the crucifixion that Paul kept Nazirite vows and offered sacrifices at the temple? In the predominantly Jewish New Testament church, why isn't any fuss recorded if most of the Old Testament laws were "done away" yet in Acts a small and predictable change to one "Old Testament" law about the circumcision of gentile proselytes caused massive turmoil? The Mosaic law - is it really "done away" in Galatians?