Mishneh Torah — Second Tithes & 4th-Year Fruit הלכות מעשר שני ונטע רבעי, Chapter 4

הָרוֹצֶה לִפְדּוֹת פֵּרוֹת מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי פּוֹדֶה אוֹתָן בִּדְמֵיהֶן וְאוֹמֵר הֲרֵי הַמָּעוֹת הָאֵלּוּ תַּחַת הַפֵּרוֹת הָאֵלּוּ אוֹ הַפֵּרוֹת הָאֵלּוּ מְחֻלָּלוֹת עַל הַמָּעוֹת הָאֵלּוּ. וְאִם לֹא פֵּרֵשׁ אֶלָּא הִפְרִישׁ מָעוֹת בִּלְבַד כְּנֶגֶד הַפֵּרוֹת דַּיּוֹ וְאֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ לְפָרֵשׁ וְיֵצְאוּ הַפֵּרוֹת לְחֻלִּין. וְיַעֲלוּ הַמָּעוֹת לִירוּשָׁלַיִם וְיוֹצִיאֵם שָׁם שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים יד כד) "וְכִי יִרְבֶּה מִמְּךָ הַדֶּרֶךְ כִּי לֹא תוּכַל שְׂאֵתוֹ":

A person who desires to redeem produce from the second tithe should 4:7), the variance in views applies only after the fact. According to all views, the initial and preferable option is for him to make an explicit statement. redeem it according to its worth and say: "These coins take the place of this produce" or "The holiness of this produce is transferred to these coins."If he did not make such an explicit statement, but merely set aside the coins equivalent to [the value of] the produce, it is sufficient. He need not make an explicit statement. 4:7)].In some printings of the Mishneh Torah, there is a note (which some ascribe to the Ra'avad) that states that for the redemption to be acceptable when he does not make an explicit statement, he must have been involved with the matter beforehand. Rav Yosef Corcus discusses this issue at length, noting that this is indeed the law with regard to the consecration and divorce of a woman (Hilchot Ishut 3:8, Hilchot Gerushin 1:11). He makes two distinctions regarding the situations:a) in contrast to consecration and divorce, setting aside money for produce from the second tithe is a self-explanatory act; the intent is directly obvious;b) consecration and divorce must be observed by witnesses. Hence, one must make his intent clear to them. There is no such obligation with regard to the redemption of produce. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 31:136) quotes the Rambam's ruling.The produce then is considered ordinary produce and the coins must be taken to Jerusalem and spent there, as [Deuteronomy 14:24] states: "When the journey will be too great for you, because you cannot transport it...."

וְכֵן אִם רָצָה לְחַלֵּל פֵּרוֹת הַמַּעֲשֵׂר עַל פֵּרוֹת אֲחֵרוֹת. יַעֲלוּ הַפֵּרוֹת הַשְּׁנִיּוֹת וְיֵאָכְלוּ בִּירוּשָׁלַיִם. וְלֹא יְחַלֵּל מִמִּין עַל שֶׁאֵינוֹ מִינוֹ וְלֹא מִן הַיָּפֶה עַל הָרַע וַאֲפִלּוּ בְּאוֹתוֹ הַמִּין. וְאִם חִלֵּל הֲרֵי הֵן מְחֻלָּלוֹת:

Similarly, if a person desires to transfer the holiness of produce from the second tithe to other produce, he should bring the other produce justify the Rambam's ruling. to Jerusalem and eat it there. He should not transfer the holiness of produce from one species to produce from another species, nor from high quality produce from one species to lower quality produce even if it is of the same species. If, however, he transferred the holiness of produce in these instances, the transfer is effective.

הַפּוֹדֶה מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי מְבָרֵךְ אֲשֶׁר קִדְּשָׁנוּ בְּמִצְוֹתָיו וְצִוָּנוּ עַל פִּדְיוֹן מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי. וְאִם חִלְּלָן עַל פֵּרוֹת אֲחֵרוֹת אוֹ שֶׁחִלֵּל מָעוֹת עַל הַפֵּרוֹת מְבָרֵךְ עַל חִלּוּל מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי. וְהַפּוֹדֶה אוֹ הַמְחַלֵּל מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי שֶׁל דְּמַאי אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ בְּרָכָה:

A person who redeems produce from the second tithe should recite a blessing: "[Blessed are You...] who sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us concerning the redemption of the second tithe." If he transferred the holiness to other produce or he transferred the holiness of money to produce, he should recite the blessing: "...concerning the transfer of the holiness of the second tithe." A person who redeems or transfers the holiness of demai need not recite a blessing.

כְּשֶׁפּוֹדִין אֶת הַמַּעֲשֵׂר אֵין פּוֹדִין אוֹתוֹ לְשֵׁם מַעֲשֵׂר אֶלָּא לְשֵׁם חֻלִּין. וְאוֹמְרִין כַּמָּה שָׁוִין פֵּרוֹת חֻלִּין אֵלּוּ וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהַכּל יוֹדְעִין שֶׁהֵן מַעֲשֵׂר כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יִתְבַּזֶּה:

When one redeems produce from the second tithe, he should not redeem it as the second tithe, but rather as ordinary produce. He should say: "How much is this ordinary produce worth." [This applies] even if everyone knows that the produce is from the second tithe, so that it will not be disgraced. questions this rationale, noting that once this produce is redeemed, there is no difference between it and ordinary produce and hence, its price should not be reduced. He explains that, nevertheless, since it originally was from the second tithe, it is still viewed less favorably.The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam's ruling and maintains that such a ploy is not necessary. The commentaries follow the Rambam's view.

אֵין מְחַלְּלִין מְעוֹת מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי עַל מָעוֹת אֲחֵרוֹת. בֵּין שֶׁהָיוּ אֵלּוּ וְאֵלּוּ כֶּסֶף אוֹ אֵלּוּ וְאֵלּוּ נְחשֶׁת. [אוֹ הָרִאשׁוֹנוֹת כֶּסֶף וְהַשְּׁנִיּוֹת נְחשֶׁת. אוֹ] הָרִאשׁוֹנוֹת נְחשֶׁת וְהַשְּׁנִיּוֹת כֶּסֶף. וְאִם עָבַר וְחִלֵּל הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ מְחֻלָּלִין:

The holiness of coins [used to redeem produce from] the second tithe should not be transferred to other coins. state that the Rambam derives this from the fact that Demai 1:2 states that such a redemption may be made with coins upon which the holiness of the second tithe of demai had been transferred. Implied is that if we are certain that the produce is from the second tithe, no such redemption can be made. See the Rambam's Commentary to that mishnah where he states that the concept is derived from Deuteronomy 14:25 which states: "And you shall exchange it for silver and you shall bundle the silver," i.e., the silver originally used for the redemption must be the silver taken to Jerusalem.See the conclusion of Chapter 5 and the beginning of Chapter 6 which mentions some exceptions to this general principle. [This applies] whether both sets of coins were silver or both were brass, the first set was silver and the second brass, or the first set was brass and the second silver. If one transgressed and transferred the holiness, the transfer is effective.

אֵין מְחַלְּלִין מָעוֹת מַעֲשֵׂר עַל הַפֵּרוֹת. וְאִם חִלֵּל יַעֲלוּ הַפֵּרוֹת וְיֵאָכְלוּ בִּירוּשָׁלַיִם. וְלֹא יְחַלְּלֵם עַל בְּהֵמָה חַיָּה וְעוֹף חַיִּין. וְאִם חִלֵּל לֹא קָנָה מַעֲשֵׂר שֶׁמָּא יְגַדֵּל מֵהֶם עֲדָרִים עֲדָרִים. אֲבָל אִם חִלֵּל עַל שְׁחוּטִים הֲרֵי הֵן כִּשְׁאָר הַפֵּרוֹת וְיַעֲלוּ וְיֵאָכְלוּ בִּירוּשָׁלַיִם וְיֵצְאוּ הַמָּעוֹת לְחֻלִּין:

[Outside of Jerusalem,] the holiness of money of the second tithe should not be transferred to produce. If such a transfer was made, the produce should be brought to Jerusalem and eaten there. [Similarly, the holiness of money from the second tithe] should not be transferred to living domesticated animals, beasts, or fowl. If one [attempted to] make such a transfer, the holiness of the second tithe is not transferred. [This is a decree,] 40b). lest one raise them in herds. If one transferred the [holiness of such funds] to animals that were slaughtered, they are considered as produce. They must be brought to Jerusalem and eaten there and the money is considered as ordinary funds.

בִּשְׁעַת הַדְּחָק מֻתָּר לְחַלֵּל מָעוֹת הַכֶּסֶף עַל שֶׁל נְחשֶׁת. לֹא שֶׁיְּקַיֵּם כֵּן אֶלָּא עַד שֶׁיִּמְצָא רֶוַח. וְיַחֲזֹר וִיחַלֵּל מָעוֹת הַנְּחשֶׁת עַל מָעוֹת הַכֶּסֶף:

In a pressing situation, 2:6). it is permitted to transfer the holiness of silver coins to brass ones. One should not maintain this situation, however.). Among the reasons silver coins are preferred is that they are more prestigious and they do not corrode. Instead, [when he has] a respite he should transfer the holiness of the brass back to silver coins.

מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי שֶׁל דְּמַאי מְחַלְּלִים אוֹתוֹ לְכַתְּחִלָּה כֶּסֶף עַל כֶּסֶף וְכֶסֶף עַל נְחשֶׁת וּנְחשֶׁת עַל נְחשֶׁת וּנְחשֶׁת עַל הַפֵּרוֹת וְיַעֲלוּ אוֹתָן הַפֵּרוֹת וְיֵאָכְלוּ בִּירוּשָׁלַיִם:

As an initial preference, is merely a Rabbinic stringency, our Sages granted leniency in its application. one may transfer the holiness of coins of the second tithe from demai, transferring the holiness from silver to silver, from silver to brass, from brass to brass, and from brass to produce. That produce should be brought to Jerusalem and eaten there.

אֵין פּוֹדִין פֵּרוֹת מַעֲשֵׂר אֶלָּא בְּכֶסֶף שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים יד כה) "וְצַרְתָּ הַכֶּסֶף". וְכֵן אִם פָּדָה לְעַצְמוֹ וְהוֹסִיף חֹמֶשׁ לֹא יִהְיֶה הַחֹמֶשׁ אֶלָּא כֶּסֶף כַּקֶּרֶן. וְאֵין פּוֹדִין בְּכֶסֶף שֶׁאֵינוֹ מַטְבֵּעַ אֶלָּא בְּכֶסֶף מְפֻתָּח שֶׁיֵּשׁ עָלָיו צוּרָה אוֹ כְּתָב [שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר וְצַרְתָּ הַכֶּסֶף]. וְאִם פָּדָה בְּלָשׁוֹן שֶׁל כֶּסֶף וְכַיּוֹצֵא בּוֹ וְהוּא הַנִּקְרָא אֲסִימוֹן לֹא עָשָׂה כְּלוּם. וְאֵין פּוֹדִין בְּפָחוֹת מִפְּרוּטָה מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא כְּפוֹדֶה בַּאֲסִימוֹן:

The produce from the second tithe may only be redeemed, "redemption," which requires coined silver, and chillul, "the transfer of holiness." The latter does not require coinage at all. for silver, as [implied by Deuteronomy 14:25]: "And you shall bundle the silver." Similarly, if a person redeems the silver for himself and adds a fifth, that fifth must be silver like the principal. 10:15; Hilchot Arachin 7:2.One should not use uncoined silver for the redemption [of the second tithe]. Instead, one must use silver imprinted with an image or with writing., translated as "you shall bundle," relates to the word tzurah meaning "form" or "image." Thus the prooftext is implying that one may redeem produce from the second tithe with silver with an imprint [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Ma'aser Sheni 1:2); based on Bava Metzia 47b]. If one [attempted to] redeem [produce from the second tithe] with silver bullion or the like - this is referred as an asimon - his actions are of no consequence. We may not redeem [produce from the second tithe] with [a coin less valuable] than a p'rutah, is a copper coin of minimal value. One may not use a silver coin less valuable than this copper coin. The rationale is that its minimal value causes it to be considered as uncoined silver (Radbaz; Kessef Mishneh). because this is considered as redeeming with an asimon.

אֵין פּוֹדִין בְּמַטְבֵּעַ שֶׁאֵינוֹ יוֹצֵא בְּאוֹתוֹ זְמַן וּבְאוֹתוֹ מָקוֹם שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים יד כו) "וְנָתַתָּ הַכֶּסֶף בְּכֹל אֲשֶׁר תְּאַוֶּה נַפְשְׁךָ" עַד שֶׁיִּהְיֶה רָאוּי לְהוֹצָאָה. וּמַטְבֵּעַ מְלָכִים הָרִאשׁוֹנִים אִם יוֹצֵא מִשְּׁמָם פּוֹדִין בּוֹ:

We may not redeem [produce from the second tithe] with a coin that is not legal tender in that place and at that time, as [implied by ibid.:26]: "And you shall exchange the silver for anything your heart desires." [Implied is that the silver] must be fit for exchange.). The commentaries have not cited a common prior Rabbinic source. See, however, Midrash HaGadol and Midrash Tana'im. A coin minted by kings of an earlier era may be used for redemption if it is still circulated as currency.

אֵינוֹ פּוֹדֶה בְּמָעוֹת שֶׁאֵינָן בִּרְשׁוּתוֹ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים יד כה) "וְצַרְתָּ הַכֶּסֶף בְּיָדְךָ". נָפַל כִּיסוֹ לְבוֹר וְהוּא יָכוֹל לְהוֹצִיאוֹ פּוֹדֶה בּוֹ מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא בִּרְשׁוּתוֹ:

We may not redeem [produce from the second tithe] with coins that are not in one's possession, 98a). as [implied by] the verse: "And you shall bundle the silver in your hand."," translated as "your hand," can also be interpreted as "your domain." That is the intent here, because the money need not actually be in one's hand. As long as they are in one's domain, and they are accessible, it is acceptable, as evident from this and the subsequent halachot. If a person's pouch fell into a cistern, but it is possible for him to remove it from there, he may use [the coins in] it for redemption, 1:2)]. for it is [still] in his domain.

הָיָה בָּא בַּדֶּרֶךְ וּמָעוֹת בְּיָדוֹ וְאַנָּס בָּא כְּנֶגְדּוֹ אִם יָכוֹל לְהַצִּיל עַל יְדֵי הַדְּחָק פּוֹדֶה בָּהֶן פֵּרוֹת שֶׁבְּבֵיתוֹ. וְאִם לָאו וְאָמַר פֵּרוֹת שֶׁיֵּשׁ לִי בְּתוֹךְ בֵּיתִי מְחֻלָּלִין עַל הַמָּעוֹת הַלָּלוּ לֹא אָמַר כְּלוּם:

[The following rules apply when] one was traveling on the road, carrying money, and a man of force was approaching him. If he could save [his money, even] with difficulty, he can use it to redeem produce of the second tithe in his home. maintains that the Rambam is not stating that, a priori, he may use the money to redeem his produce. Instead, the intent is that after the fact if he redeems the produce with this money, after the fact, the redemption is effective. If he cannot, and he says: "The holiness of the produce that is in my house is transferred to this money," his statements are of no consequence.

הַמֵּנִיחַ מָעוֹת לִהְיוֹת מְחַלֵּל עֲלֵיהֶן מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי הֲרֵי זֶה פּוֹדֶה בָּהֶן בְּחֶזְקַת שֶׁהֵן קַיָּמִים. מְצָאָן שֶׁאָבְדוּ חוֹשֵׁשׁ לְכָל מַה שֶּׁפָּדָה בָּהֶן לְמַפְרֵעַ:

When a person sets aside money upon which to transfer the holiness of produce from the second tithe, he may [continue to] redeem his produce under the assumption that the money exists in his possession. If he discovers that the money has been lost, he must be concerned about all the produce that he redeemed with that money. 7:4, however, which mentions a similar situation with regard to tithing produce and rules that although the produce must be tithed again, the status of that tithing is only doubtful.

מִי שֶׁהָיָה עוֹמֵד בִּטְבֶרְיָא וְיֵשׁ לוֹ מָעוֹת (בָּבֶל) בְּבָבֶל אֵינוֹ מְחַלֵּל עֲלֵיהֶם. הָיוּ לוֹ מָעוֹת מִמַּטְבֵּעַ טְבֶרְיָא בְּבָבֶל מְחַלֵּל עֲלֵיהֶם. וְכֵן כָּל כַּיּוֹצֵא בָּזֶה:

When a person located in Tiberias has money in Babylonian coinage in Babylon, he may not transfer the holiness [of the produce of the second tithe] to them. If, by contrast, [although he is in Tiberias,] he possesses money of Tiberian coinage in Babylon, he may transfer the holiness [of the produce of the second tithe] to them. discuss the two views at length. Similarly laws apply in all analogous situations.

הָאוֹמֵר מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי מְחֻלָּל עַל סֶלַע שֶׁתַּעֲלֶה בְּיָדִי מִכִּיס זֶה עַל סֶלַע שֶׁאֶפְרֹט מִדִּינָר זָהָב זֶה עַל פּוּנְדְיוֹן שֶׁאֶפְרֹט מִסֶּלַע זֶה הֲרֵי זֶה חִלֵּל. וְסֶלַע שֶׁתַּעֲלֶה בְּיָדוֹ אוֹ שֶׁיִּפְרֹט תְּהִי מַעֲשֵׂר:

When a person says: "The holiness of produce from the second tithe is transferred to the first sela that I will take out of this wallet," "...on the sela I will receive when I exchange this golden dinar," "...on the pundiyon I will receive when I exchange this sela, the transfer is effective. 1:21) does not accept the principle of bereirah with regard to questions of Scriptural Law. The Radbaz explains that this explanation is not necessary, because the Rambam rules that the obligation to separate the second tithe in the present age is Rabbinic in origin. The sela that he will take out or receive in exchange is money of the second tithe.

אָמַר הֲרֵי מַעֲשֵׂר מְחֻלָּל עַל סֶלַע שֶׁהָיְתָה בְּיַד בְּנִי לֹא חִלֵּל. שֶׁמָּא לֹא הָיְתָה בְּיָדוֹ בְּאוֹתָהּ שָׁעָה:

When a person says: "The holiness of the produce of the second tithe is transferred to the sela in my son's possession, the holiness is not transferred. Perhaps the sela was not in his possession at that time.

הַפּוֹדֶה מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי קֹדֶם שֶׁיַּפְרִישֶׁנּוּ כְּגוֹן שֶׁאָמַר מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי שֶׁל פֵּרוֹת אֵלּוּ פָּדוּי בְּמָעוֹת אֵלּוּ לֹא אָמַר כְּלוּם וְלֹא קָבַע מַעֲשֵׂר. אֲבָל אִם קָבַע וְאָמַר מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי שֶׁלָּהֶן בַּצָּפוֹן אוֹ בַּדָּרוֹם מְחֻלָּל עַל הַמָּעוֹת אֵלּוּ הֲרֵי זֶה פָּדוּי:

When a person redeems the produce from the second tithe before he separates it, e.g., he says: "The second tithe of this produce is redeemed with this money," his statements are of no consequence and the tithes have not been defined. If, however, he says: "The second tithe from this produce is in its northern portion" or "...in its southern portion 3:8. and its holiness is transferred to this money," the redemption is effective.

כְּשֶׁפּוֹדִין מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי פּוֹדִין אוֹתוֹ בְּשָׁוְיוֹ. וְיֵשׁ לוֹ לִפְדּוֹת בַּשַּׁעַר הַזּוֹל כְּמוֹת שֶׁהַחֶנְוָנִי לוֹקֵחַ וְלֹא כְּמוֹת שֶׁהוּא מוֹכֵר. וְנוֹתֵן הַמָּעוֹת כְּמוֹת שֶׁהַשֻּׁלְחָנִי פּוֹרֵט לֹא כְּמוֹת שֶׁהוּא מְצָרֵף. וְאִם עָבַר וּפָדָה שְׁוֵה מָנֶה בִּפְרוּטָה אוֹ חִלֵּל שְׁוֵה מָנֶה עַל שְׁוֵה פְּרוּטָה הֲרֵי זֶה מְחֻלָּל:

When the produce of the second tithe is redeemed, it should be redeemed for its fair value. One may, however, value it at the buying price, i.e., what the storekeeper would pay if he purchased it and not the price he would charge if he sold it. Similarly, he may pay money according to the rate that a moneychanger would pay and not according to the rate he would charge. 4:2), the Rambam explains that a moneychanger will take 25 me'ah for a sela, but will only give 24. If the produce is worth a sela, the person redeeming it need not pay more than 24. If a person transgresses and redeemed [produce] worth a maneh with [a coin] worth a p'rutah, the holiness [of the produce] is transferred. 57a makes such a statement with regard to consecrated property (see Hilchot Arachin 7:8). The Rambam draws the parallel since the laws governing consecrated property are more stringent than those governing the second tithe.

הָיְתָה הַסֶּלַע חֲסֵרָה שְׁתוּת אוֹ פָּחוֹת מִשְּׁתוּת אִם הָיְתָה יוֹצֵאת עַל יְדֵי הַדְּחָק מְחַלֵּל עָלֶיהָ לְכַתְּחִלָּה בִּשְׁוֵה סֶלַע וְאֵינוֹ חוֹשֵׁשׁ. פָּדָה בְּסֶלַע וְנִמְצֵאת רָעָה יַחֲלִיפֶנָּה:

[The following laws apply if] a sela was lacking a sixth or less [than its weight]. If it would be accepted [in business dealings even] with difficulty, one may transfer the holiness a sela's worth [of produce of the second tithe] to it without concern. 10:12). If one redeemed [produce] with a sela and it was discovered to be unacceptable,. he should exchange it., the transfer of holiness to it is effective as stated in the previous halachah.

אֵין פּוֹדִין מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי אַכְסָרָה אֶלָּא מְדַקְדֵּק בְּמִדָּתוֹ אוֹ בְּמִשְׁקָלוֹ וְנוֹתֵן דָּמָיו. אִם הָיוּ דָּמָיו יְדוּעִים יִפָּדֶה עַל פִּי אֶחָד. וְאִם דָּבָר שֶׁאֵין דָּמָיו יְדוּעִים כְּגוֹן יַיִן שֶׁהִתְחִיל לְהַחֲמִיץ וּפֵרוֹת שֶׁהִרְקִיבוּ אוֹ מָעוֹת שֶׁהֶחֱלִידוּ יִפָּדֶה עַל פִּי שְׁלֹשָׁה תַּגָּרִים וַאֲפִלּוּ הָיָה אֶחָד מֵהֶן עַכּוּ"ם אוֹ בַּעַל הַמַּעֲשֵׂר אֲפִלּוּ אִישׁ וּשְׁתֵּי נָשָׁיו פּוֹדִין עַל פִּיהֶם. וְכוֹפִין אֶת הַבְּעָלִים לִפְתֹּחַ רִאשׁוֹן. וְזֶה חֹמֶר בְּמַעֲשֵׂר מִן הַהֶקְדֵּשׁ:

One should not redeem produce from the second tithe by estimation. Instead, one should be precise concerning its volume or its weight and give their value. If the value [of the produce] was known, he may redeem it in the presence of only one person. If its value was not known, e.g., wine that had begun turning into vinegar, 4:2)]. produce that spoiled, or coins that corroded, he should redeem them according to the appraisal of three merchants. [It is acceptable] even if one of them is a gentile or the owner of the produce 4:2)]. of the second tithe. It is even acceptable to redeem [produce] based on the appraisal of a man and his two wives. 14b relates that Rav Papa's wife helped evaluate his produce. We compel the owner to make the first bid [to redeem the produce]. This is a stringency applied with regard to produce from the second tithe over consecrated property. 3:3. The Ra'avad maintains that the proper version of that source is: "We compel him to make the first bid. If he desires to retract he may. This is the stringency of consecrated property over the second tithes." The Kessef Mishneh notes that this is indeed the version of the Tosefta commonly followed. There is an added difficulty with the Rambam's ruling, because in all instances of consecrated property, he requires the owner to make the first bid. See Hilchot Arachin, ch. 5, in contrast to the statements of Radbaz here.

אֵין מוֹלִיכִין פֵּרוֹת מַעֲשֵׂר מִמָּקוֹם לְמָקוֹם לִפְדּוֹתָם שָׁם. וְהַמּוֹלִיךְ מִמְּקוֹם הַיֹּקֶר לַמָּקוֹם הַזּוֹל אוֹ מִמָּקוֹם הַזּוֹל לִמְקוֹם הַיֹּקֶר פּוֹדֶה כְּשַׁעַר מְקוֹם הַפְּדִיָּה. וְאִם הָיוּ דְּמַאי פּוֹדִין אוֹתוֹ כַּשַּׁעַר הַזּוֹל הוֹאִיל וְנִרְאוּ לְהִמָּכֵר בְּזוֹל:

We should not transport produce from the second tithe from one place to another to redeem it there. When a person transports produce from a place where it is expensive to a place where it is inexpensive, he should redeem it according to its value in the place he is redeeming it. If it is demai, we may redeem it at the inexpensive price, since it was possible to sell it at that price.

הָיוּ לוֹ פֵּרוֹת מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי בַּגֹּרֶן וְהוֹצִיא עֲלֵיהֶם יְצִיאוֹת מִבֵּיתוֹ עַד שֶׁהֱבִיאָן לָעִיר וְהִשְׁבִּיחוּ. פּוֹדֶה כְּשַׁעַר הָעִיר וְהִפְסִיד יְצִיאוֹתָיו:

If a person possessed produce from the second tithe in his granary and spent money to transport them from his house to the town, 2:1)]. thus causing the value of the produce to increase, he should redeem it according to the price in the city. He forfeits the expenses he undertook.