Mishneh Torah — Tithes (Ma'aserot) הלכות מעשרות, Chapter 4

אֵין הַטֶּבֶל נִקְבָּע לְמַעַשְׂרוֹת מִן הַתּוֹרָה עַד שֶׁיַּכְנִיסֶנּוּ לְבֵיתוֹ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים כו יג) "בִּעַרְתִּי הַקֹּדֶשׁ מִן הַבַּיִת". וְהוּא שֶׁיַּכְנִיסֶנּוּ דֶּרֶךְ הַשַּׁעַר שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים כו יב) "וְאָכְלוּ בִשְׁעָרֶיךָ". אֲבָל אִם הִכְנִיס תְּבוּאָתוֹ דֶּרֶךְ גַּגּוֹת וְקַרְפִּיפוֹת פָּטוּר מִן הַתְּרוּמָה וּמִן הַמַּעַשְׂרוֹת:

The obligation to tithe is not established for tevel) have not been separated. In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Berachot 7:1), the Rambam interprets this as a composite of the words tav lo, meaning "it is not good." according to Scriptural Law until one brings it into his home, as [implied by Deuteronomy 26:13]: "I removed the sacred produce from the home." [This applies] provided he brings the produce in through the gate, as [ibid.:12] states: "And you shall eat in your gates." If, however, he brought produce in from the roof or from the yard, used by the Rambam, refers to an unprotected yard. he is exempt [from the obligation] to separate terumah and tithes. 35b, the Meiri writes that even according to Scriptural Law, it is forbidden to do this as an initial preference; the leniency is granted only after the fact.

יֵרָאֶה לִי שֶׁאֵין לוֹקִין מִן הַתּוֹרָה עַל אֲכִילַת הַטֶּבֶל עַד שֶׁיִּקָבַע בִּכְנִיסָתוֹ לְבֵיתוֹ כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ מִפִּי הַשְּׁמוּעָה. אֲבָל אִם נִקְבַּע בִּשְׁאָר הַשִּׁשָּׁה דְּבָרִים שֶׁמָּנִינוּ אֵין לוֹקִין עָלָיו אֶלָּא מַכַּת מַרְדּוּת מִדִּבְרֵיהֶן. וְכֵן הָאוֹכֵל מִפֵּרוֹת שֶׁדַּעְתּוֹ לְהוֹלִיכָן לַשּׁוּק אַחַר שֶׁנִּגְמְרָה מְלַאכְתָּן אֵינוֹ לוֹקֶה אֶלָּא מַכַּת מַרְדּוּת כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ. שֶׁאֵין הַגּוֹמֵר לִמְכֹּר חַיָּב בְּמַעֲשֵׂר אֶלָּא מִדִּבְרֵיהֶם:

It appears to me questions why the Rambam uses this expression when the Jerusalem Talmud (Ma'aserot 3:1) explicitly states that the obligation established by three of the six situations is Rabbinic in origin. He explains that there is no explicit source for the other three. Hence, this expression is appropriate. that lashes are not administered as required by Scriptural Law for eating tevel unless [the obligation to tithe] was established by bringing it into one's home as we explained according to the Oral Tradition. If, however, the obligation was established through one of the six ways that we mentioned, he is given only stripes for rebellious conduct as mandated by Rabbinic Law.Similarly, a person who partakes of produce which he desires to bring to the market place after the tasks necessary to prepare it have been completed receives only stripes for rebellious conduct, as we explained. For a person who completes [the tasks necessary to prepare his produce] for sale is obligated to tithe only according to Rabbinic Law.

בַּיִת שֶׁאֵין בּוֹ אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת עַל אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת אֵינוֹ קוֹבֵעַ וְכֵן הַגַּגִּים אֵינָן קוֹבְעִין אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהַבַּיִת שֶׁלְּמַטָּה קוֹבֵעַ. וְאִם לֹא הָיָה בַּגַּג אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת עַל אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת כְּגוֹן שֶׁהָיָה הַבַּיִת מְשֻׁפָּע וְעוֹלֶה אֵינוֹ פּוֹטֵר מִן הַמַּעֲשֵׂר אֶלָּא הֲרֵי גַּג זֶה כְּמִקְצָת אֲוִיר הַבַּיִת:

When a house is less than four cubits by four cubits in area, [bringing produce into it] does not establish an obligation. 6:2, one might assume that tithes are required if the home comprises this area even though it is not square in shape. Similarly, [bringing produce onto] a roof does not establish an obligation even though [bringing it into] the house below would. If, however, the roof was not four cubits by four cubits in area, e.g., the house ascended on a slant, bringing [the produce] there does not absolve it from the obligation to tithe it.). Instead, [the roof] is considered as part of the domain of the home.

הַצְּרִיפִין וְהַבֻּרְגָּנִין וּבָתֵּי הַקַּיִץ וְהוּא אַרְבָּעָה עַמּוּדִים וְתִקְרָה עַל גַּבֵּיהֶן שֶׁנִּמְצָא בְּלֹא כְּתָלִים וְכֵן סֻכּוֹת שֶׁעוֹשִׂין בְּנֵי הַכְּרָמִים וּבְנֵי הַגִּנּוֹת בִּימֵי הַקַּיִץ אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁדָּרִין בָּהֶן כָּל יְמֵי הַקַּיִץ וְיֵשׁ בָּהֶם רֵחַיִם וְתַרְנְגוֹלִין אֵינָן קוֹבְעִין לְמַעֲשֵׂר. וְכֵן סֻכַּת הַיּוֹצְרִים הַחִיצוֹנָה וְסֻכַּת הֶחָג בֶּחָג אֵינָן קוֹבְעִין שֶׁכָּל אֵלּוּ אֵין דִּירָתָן קֶבַע:

Leantos, 3:7]. guardhouses,). summer shelters - i.e., four pillars with a roof on top of them without walls, and sukkot built by workers who dwell in the vineyard and the gardens in the summer, in the mishnah (loc. cit.). Ginosar (the area around Lake Kinneret) was known for the quality and abundance of its produce. Workers would be hired to pick this produce during the harvest and they would construct semi-permanent structures in which they would dwell over the summer. even though they dwell in them throughout the summer and [the sukkot] contain mills and chickens do not establish an obligation to tithe. Similarly, the outer sukkot built by potters with two rooms. The inner room would be their dwelling, while the outer room would serve as a workshop and storefront. If produce was brought into the inner sukkah, the obligation to tithe is established. See the notes to Halachah 9 with regard to this ruling. and the sukkot for the holiday [of Sukkot] during that festival do not establish an obligation. For none of these are permanent dwellings.

הַצְּרִיפִין וְהַבֻּרְגָּנִין טוֹבְלִין לְבַעְלֵיהֶן אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵינָן טוֹבְלִין לְכָל אָדָם וְכֵן בֵּית הַסֵּפֶר וּבֵית הַמִּדְרָשׁ טוֹבֵל לְזֶה שֶׁיּוֹשֵׁב וּמְלַמֵּד מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵם כְּבֵיתוֹ וְאֵין טוֹבְלִין לַאֲחֵרִים:

Leantos and guardhouses establish an obligation to tithe for their owners, even though they do not create such an obligation for all people. Similarly, [bringing produce into] a school or a house of study 3:7), it appears that the term "school" refers to a school where young children are taught Scripture, while the term "house of study" refers to a study center where older students are taught the Oral Law. creates an obligation to tithe for a person who abides there and teaches, because they are comparable to his home. They do not create an obligation for others.

בֵּית הַכְּנֶסֶת וּבֵית הַמִּדְרָשׁ אִם יֵשׁ בָּהֶן בֵּית דִּירָה קוֹבְעִין וְאִם לָאו אֵין קוֹבְעִין. הָאוֹרִיאֲרוֹת הָאוֹצָרוֹת שֶׁבַּשָּׂדוֹת הָעֲשׂוּיוֹת לִמְכֻנָּס אֵינָן קוֹבְעִין וְאִם הָיוּ לְדִירָה קוֹבְעִין:

When a synagogue or a house of study have a dwelling, [bringing produce there] establishes [an obligation to tithe]. 6:6 and Hilchot Shabbat 28:4. If not, no [such obligation] is established.[Bringing produce to] stables and storehouses in the fields that are built to store produce does not establish an obligation to tithe. If [these structures] were also intended as dwellings, an obligation is established.

כְּשֵׁם שֶׁהַבַּיִת קוֹבֵעַ לְמַעֲשֵׂר כָּךְ הֶחָצֵר קוֹבַעַת לְמַעֲשֵׂר. וּמִשֶּׁיִּכָּנְסוּ לֶחָצֵר דֶּרֶךְ הַשַּׁעַר נִקְבְּעוּ אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא הִכְנִיסָן לְתוֹךְ הַבַּיִת:

Just as [bringing produce into] a home establishes an obligation to tithe, so too, [bringing produce into] a courtyard establishes such an obligation. When produce is brought into a courtyard through the gate, an obligation is established even though it was not brought into the home.

אֵי זוֹ הִיא חָצֵר הַקּוֹבַעַת. כָּל שֶׁהַכֵּלִים נִשְׁמָרִין בְּתוֹכָהּ. אוֹ שֶׁאֵין אָדָם בּוֹשׁ מִלֶּאֱכל בְּתוֹכָהּ. אוֹ חָצֵר שֶׁאִם יִכָּנֵס אָדָם לָהּ אוֹמְרִין לוֹ מָה אַתָּה מְבַקֵּשׁ. וְכֵן חָצֵר שֶׁיֵּשׁ בָּהּ שְׁנֵי דִּיּוּרִין אוֹ שֶׁהִיא לִשְׁנֵי שֻׁתָּפִין שֶׁאֶחָד פּוֹתְחָהּ וְנִכְנָס וְאֶחָד בָּא וְנִכְנָס אוֹ יוֹצֵא וְנוֹעֵל הוֹאִיל וְהֵן פּוֹתְחִין וְנוֹעֲלִין הֲרֵי זוֹ קוֹבַעַת:

[Into] which type of courtyard must [produce be brought] for an obligation [to tithe] to be established? Any one in which utensils are protected within, one in which a person will not be embarrassed to eat there, or one in which were a person to enter, he would be asked: "What are you looking for?" The above also applies to a courtyard which has two inhabitants or is owned by two partners when one opens it and enters and then the other comes and enters or leaves and locks it. Since they open it and lock it, [bringing produce into] it establishes an obligation to tithe.

בֵּית שַׁעַר שֶׁל חָצֵר וְהָאַכְסַדְרָה וְהַמִּרְפֶּסֶת הֲרֵי הֵן כְּחָצֵר אִם הָיְתָה קוֹבַעַת קוֹבְעִין וְאִם לָאו אֵינָן קוֹבְעִין:

A gatehouse to a courtyard, an excedra, and a porch are governed by the same laws as a courtyard. does not create an obligation, while bringing it into the inner sukkah does. Why don't we, he asks, apply the same principle? Let us say that the outer sukkah is an entrance and/or auxiliary to the inner one. He explains that for the inner sukkah to create an obligation is itself a new development and the obligation is not strong enough to be extended to the outer sukkah. If [bringing produce into] a courtyard would establish an obligation to tithe, [bringing produce into these] establishes an obligation. If not, an obligation is not established in these instances as well.

שְׁתֵּי חֲצֵרוֹת זוֹ לְפָנִים מִזּוֹ שְׁתֵּיהֶן קוֹבְעוֹת. סֻכַּת הַיּוֹצְרִים זוֹ לְפָנִים מִזּוֹ הַפְּנִימִית קוֹבַעַת וְהַחִיצוֹנָה אֵינָהּ קוֹבַעַת וְהַחֲנוּת קוֹבַעַת כְּבַיִת:

When there are two courtyards, one inside the other, [bringing produce into] either of them establishes an obligation to tithe. When a potter has [two] sukkot one leading to the other, [bringing produce into] the inner sukkah establishes an obligation to tithe. [Bringing it into] the outer one does not. [Bringing produce into] a store establishes an obligation like a home does.

הַמּוֹלִיךְ פֵּרוֹתָיו מִמָּקוֹם לְמָקוֹם אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא נִכְנָס בָּהֶן לְבָתִּים וְלַחֲצֵרוֹת בַּדֶּרֶךְ לֹא נִקְבְּעוּ אֶלָּא אוֹכֵל עַרְאַי עַד שֶׁיַּגִּיעַ לְמָקוֹם שֶׁהוּא סוֹף מְגַמָּתוֹ וְכֵן בַּחֲזָרָה:

When a person transports his produce from one place to another, an obligation to tithe is not established even though he brings it into homes and courtyards while on his journey. He may snack from it until he reaches his ultimate destination. [These laws] also [apply] when he returns.).

הָרוֹכְלִין הַמַּחְזִירִין בַּעֲיָרוֹת שֶׁהֵן נִכְנָסִין מֵחָצֵר לְחָצֵר אוֹכְלִין עַרְאַי עַד שֶׁמַּגִּיעִין לְבַיִת שֶׁלָּנִין בּוֹ:

Traveling salesmen 2:3)]. who journey through villages and pass from one courtyard to another may snack from their produce). If they were intending to sell the produce, there is an immediate obligation to tithe it. It is like bringing it to the marketplace (see Chapter 3, Halachah 2). until they reach the home where they will spend the night.

הַמֵּבִיא תְּאֵנִים מִן הַשָּׂדֶה לְאָכְלָן בֶּחָצֵר הַפְּטוּרָה מִן הַמַּעַשְׂרוֹת. שָׁכַח וְהִכְנִיסָן לְתוֹךְ בֵּיתוֹ הֲרֵי זֶה מֻתָּר לְהוֹצִיאָן וְלֶאֱכל מֵהֶן עַרְאַי וְכֵן אִם שָׁכַח וְהֶעֱלָן לַגַּג אוֹכֵל מֵהֶן בַּגַּג עַרְאַי. הֱבִיאָן לְאָכְלָן בְּרֹאשׁ גַּגּוֹ וְשָׁכַח וְהִכְנִיסָן לְתוֹךְ חֲצַר חֲבֵרוֹ נִקְבְּעוּ וְלֹא יֹאכַל עַד שֶׁיְּעַשֵּׂר:

When a person brings figs from a field to partake of them in a courtyard which is exempt from the obligation to tithe, but then he forgot and brought them into his home, he is permitted to take them out from the home and snack from them. Similarly, if he forget [and after taking them into his home], took them up to the roof, he may snack from them on the roof.If he brought them to partake of them and is also found in authoritative manuscripts and early printings. The version of the Mishneh Torah which the Radbaz and Rav Yosef Korcus followed states: "brought them to dry them on the roof." on his roof and brought them into a friend's courtyard, an obligation to tithe is established and he should not partake of them until he tithes them. (Ma'aserot 2:10) which supports his understanding.Rav Yosef Korcus offers two justifications for the Rambam's ruling. First of all, he states that the phrase "he should not partake of them" could be interpreted as referring to the owner of the courtyard and not to the owner of the produce. Alternatively, he explains that even if it refers to the owner of the produce, since the courtyard he brings it into is part of a permanent dwelling, he should not partake of it until he tithes it. Leniency was given to traveling salesmen (Halachah 13), because they brought the produce into the courtyard with the intent of removing it immediately. In this instance, however, the owner does not necessarily intend to remove it immediately. Why then should he not be obligated to tithe?In his gloss to Chapter 5, Halachah 8, the Ra'avad notes a seeming contradiction to the Rambam's ruling here. In his gloss to that halachah, the Radbaz explains that the stringency here is to correct a misimpression that might result in the eyes of an observer. The Kessef Mishneh, however, finds the Rambam's rulings difficult to reconcile and suggests that there is a printing error here.Nevertheless, Rav Yosef Korcus continues, the Rambam's statements appear to be self-contradictory, because in the previous clause it appears that if one brings produce into a home after forgetting, he is not obligated to tithe it, but this clause states that if he brings it into his colleague's courtyard, he is. Seemingly, bringing it into one's own home would be a stronger factor than bringing it into a colleague's courtyard. Among the resolutions he offers is that when a person forgets and brings the produce into his own home, he is certainly acting inadvertently, without intent. If, however, he brings it into his colleague's courtyard, that could be considered as a conscious change of mind.

חָצֵר שֶׁהִיא נֶעְדֶּרֶת הֲרֵי הִיא כְּגִנָּה וְאוֹכְלִין בְּתוֹכָהּ עַרְאַי. וְהוּא שֶׁיֵּעָדֵר רֻבָּהּ. וְאִם זָרַע רֻבָּהּ אֵין אוֹכְלִין עַרְאַי וְכֵן אִם נָטַע רֻבָּהּ. וְאִם נָטַע לְנוֹי חָצֵר הוֹאִיל וְהִיא נֶעְדֶּרֶת הֲרֵי זֶה אוֹכֵל עַרְאַי מֵאוֹתָן אִילָנוֹת:

When a courtyard has been plowed, it is considered like a garden and one may snack in it. [This applies] provided he plowed the majority [of the courtyard]. If he sowed the majority of it, he may not snack in it. The same law applies if he planted trees in it. 3:10). For the Rambam's version of that passage conflicts with the rulings of Eruvin 23a regarding eruvin. The Kessef Mishneh explains that the obligations of eruvin and tithes are governed by different principles and deductions cannot necessarily be made from one situation to the other. If he planted trees in the courtyard to make it attractive, since the field has been plowed, he may snack from those trees [without tithing].

תְּאֵנָה הָעוֹמֶדֶת בֶּחָצֵר אוֹכֵל מִמֶּנָּה אַחַת אַחַת וּפָטוּר. וְאִם צֵרֵף חַיָּב בְּמַעֲשֵׂר. בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים בְּשֶׁהָיָה עוֹמֵד בַּקַּרְקַע. אֲבָל אִם עָלָה לְרֹאשׁ הַתְּאֵנָה מְמַלֵּא חֵיקוֹ וְאוֹכֵל שָׁם שֶׁאֵין אֲוִיר חָצֵר קוֹבֵעַ לְמַעֲשֵׂר:

When a fig tree is growing in a courtyard, one may eat figs from it one by one while exempt [from tithing]. If he gathers them together, he is obligated to tithe.When does the above apply? When he is standing on the ground. If, however, he climbs to the top of the fig tree, he may fill his bosom with them and eat them there. For the open space of a courtyard does not create an obligation to tithe.

הָיְתָה עוֹמֶדֶת בְּחָצֵר וְנוֹטָה לְגִנָּה הֲרֵי זֶה אוֹכֵל מִמֶּנָּה בַּגִּנָּה כְּדַרְכּוֹ כְּאִלּוּ הָיְתָה נְטוּעָה בַּגִּנָּה. הָיְתָה נְטוּעָה בַּגִּנָּה וְנוֹטָה לְחָצֵר הֲרֵי זוֹ כִּנְטוּעָה בֶּחָצֵר שֶׁאֵינוֹ אוֹכֵל שָׁם אֶלָּא אַחַת [אַחַת]:

[If a fruit tree] was standing in a courtyard and leaning into a garden, one may partake of the tree while standing in the garden in his ordinary manner, as if the tree was planted in the garden. 3:10), the foliage of the tree is considered as being in the same domain as its trunk. In this instance, however, the ruling depends on the domain in which the produce is collected. If [the tree] was planted in a garden and leaning into a courtyard, it is considered as if it was planted in the courtyard and one may only partake of them one at a time.

גֶּפֶן שֶׁנְּטוּעָה בֶּחָצֵר לֹא יִטּל אֶת כָּל הָאֶשְׁכּוֹל וְיֹאכַל אֶלָּא מְגַרְגֵּר אֶחָד אֶחָד. וְכֵן בְּרִמּוֹן לֹא יִטּל אֶת כָּל הָרִמּוֹן אֶלָּא פּוֹרֵט אֶת הָרִמּוֹן בָּאִילָן וְאוֹכֵל הַפֶּרֶד מִשָּׁם. וְכֵן בָּאֲבַטִּיחַ כּוֹפְתוֹ בַּקַּרְקַע וְאוֹכְלוֹ שָׁם. הָיָה אוֹכֵל בְּאֶשְׁכּוֹל בַּגִּנָּה וְנִכְנַס מִן הַגִּנָּה לֶחָצֵר אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁיָּצָא מִן הֶחָצֵר לֹא יִגְמֹר עַד שֶׁיְּעַשֵּׂר:

When a vine is planted in a courtyard, one should not pick an entire cluster and partake of it. Instead, one should pick the grapes one by one. Similarly, with regard to pomegranates, one should not take the entire pomegranate, but instead should divide the pomegranate while it is on the tree and partake of the seeds from it. Similarly, with regard to a watermelon, one should bend it over to the ground and partake of it there.If one was eating a cluster [of grapes] in a garden and brought it into a courtyard, one should not continue eating until he tithes even if he departs from the courtyard.

כֻּסְבַּר הַזְּרוּעָה בֶּחָצֵר מְקַרְסֵם עָלֶה עָלֶה וְאוֹכְלוֹ. וְאִם צֵרֵף חַיָּב לְעַשֵּׂר. וְכֵן כָּל כַּיּוֹצֵא בָּזֶה:

When coriander 3:10). is planted in a courtyard, one may pick it leaf by leaf and partake of it. If one gathers them together, he is obligated to tithe. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.