meta: {"file": "/data/tomer/Sefaria-Export/txt_done/Modern Works/English Explanation of Mishnah/Seder Zeraim/English Explanation of Mishnah Maaser Sheni/English/merged.txt"}
text: English Explanation of Mishnah Maaser Sheni
  ביאור אנגלי על משנה מעשר שני
  merged
  
  This file contains merged sections from the following text versions:
  -Mishnah Yomit by Dr. Joshua Kulp
  -
  
  English Explanation of Mishnah Maaser Sheni
  
  Introduction
  
  According to rabbinic interpretation, Deuteronomy 14: 22-27 refers to a second tithe, a tithe that is separated after the first tithe has already been separated. These verses read:
  Deuteronomy 14 22 You shall set aside every year a tenth part of all the yield of your sowing that is brought from the field.  23 You shall consume the tithes of your new grain and wine and oil, and the firstlings of your herds and flocks, in the presence of the LORD your God, in the place where He will choose to establish His name, so that you may learn to revere the LORD your God forever.  24 Should the distance be too great for you, should you be unable to transport them, because the place where the LORD your God has chosen to establish His name is far from you and because the LORD your God has blessed you,  25 you may convert them into money. Wrap up the money and take it with you to the place that the LORD your God has chosen,  26 and spend the money on anything you want -- cattle, sheep, wine, or other intoxicant, or anything you may desire. And you shall feast there, in the presence of the LORD your God, and rejoice with your household.  27 But do not neglect the Levite in your community, for he has no hereditary portion as you have.
  While the first tithe goes to the Levite, the second tithe stays in the possession of its owners. The owners must take this tithe to Jerusalem and eat it there. If this is a hardship because they don’t live close to Jerusalem and it would be cumbersome to carry the actual produce to Jerusalem, then they can redeem the second tithe for money, adding a fifth to the value of the produce, and bring all of the money to Jerusalem. There they can use the money to buy food products, either sacrifices or other foods.  According to Leviticus 27:30-31, when they redeem the produce for money, they must add an extra fifth to the value of the produce.
  Leviticus 27 30 All tithes from the land, whether seed from the ground or fruit from the tree, are the LORD's; they are holy to the LORD.  31 If anyone wishes to redeem any of his tithes, he must add one-fifth to them.
  This is the procedure in the first, second, fourth and fifth years of a seven-year sabbatical cycle. The rabbis interpreted Deuteronomy 14:28-29 and Deuteronomy 26:12-15 to refer to the poor tithe, which is separated in the third and sixth years of the cycle.
  Deuteronomy 14 28 Every third year you shall bring out the full tithe of your yield of that year, but leave it within your settlements.  29 Then the Levite, who has no hereditary portion as you have, and the stranger, the fatherless, and the widow in your settlements shall come and eat their fill, so that the LORD your God may bless you in all the enterprises you undertake.
  Deuteronomy 26 12 When you have set aside in full the tenth part of your yield -- in the third year, the year of the tithe -- and have given it to the Levite, the stranger, the fatherless, and the widow, that they may eat their fill in your settlements,  13 you shall declare before the LORD your God: "I have cleared out the consecrated portion from the house; and I have given it to the Levite, the stranger, the fatherless, and the widow, just as You commanded me; I have neither transgressed nor forgotten any of Your commandments:  14 I have not eaten of it while in mourning, I have not cleared out any of it while I was unclean, and I have not deposited any of it with the dead. I have obeyed the LORD my God; I have done just as You commanded me.  15 Look down from Your holy abode, from heaven, and bless Your people Israel and the soil You have given us, a land flowing with milk and honey, as You swore to our fathers."
  In these years the poor tithe, called maaser ani, replaces the maaser sheni, the second tithe. The first tithe is given during all years of the cycle, except for the seventh year. 
  Maaser Sheni also discusses the laws governing plants or vineyards in their fourth year. This topic is addressed in Leviticus 19:23-25. 
  Leviticus 19 23 When you enter the land and plant any tree for food, you shall regard its fruit as forbidden. Three years it shall be forbidden for you, not to be eaten.  24 In the fourth year all its fruit shall be set aside for jubilation before the LORD;  25 and only in the fifth year may you use its fruit -- that its yield to you may be increased: I the LORD am your God.
  The reason that this topic is dealt with in Tractate Maaser Sheni is that according to halakhah, like maaser sheni, the produce that grows in the fourth year is also brought to Jerusalem, or redeemed and the proceeds are brought to Jerusalem. 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Mishnah 1
  
  Introduction
  The Torah calls maaser sheni “holy” (Leviticus 27:30). Our mishnah teaches that it must be treated as holy produce and not as one would treat hullin, non-sanctified food.
  Second tithe: one may not sell it, use it as a pledge, exchange it, or use it as a weight.  It is forbidden to act in any of these ways with maaser sheni because this is how one might typically treat non-sacred produce one sells it, uses it as a pledge to secure a loan, and one exchanges it with friends. “Using it as a weight” does not refer to actually weighing maaser sheni but rather it refers to using maaser sheni whose weight is known as a counterweight on a scale. The mishnah is probably referring to maaser sheni coins which were exchanged for the maaser sheni produce.
  One may not say to his friend [even] in Jerusalem: “Here is [second tithe] wine, give me [in exchange] oil, and the same with all other produce.  This section emphasizes that one cannot exchange maaser sheni products one for another, even if one is in Jerusalem, where maaser sheni must be brought. Again, this is not considered a respectful act and shouldn’t be done with maaser sheni.
  But people may give it to one another as a free gift.  Giving maaser sheni to another person as a present, when one does not expect anything in return, is not disgraceful and therefore it may be done.
  
  Mishnah 2
  
  Introduction
  Since yesterday’s mishnah taught that one cannot sell maaser sheni, today’s mishnah compares and contrasts this rule with rules governing cattle tithes, and first-born animals.
  Tithe of cattle: one may not sell it when it is unblemished and alive, and when it is blemished [one may not sell it] neither alive nor slaughtered, nor may one betroth a woman with it.  The tenth of every domesticated animal born into one’s flock must be tithed. The animal’s fat and blood are offered on the altar and its meat can be eaten by the owners (or anyone else) in Jerusalem (see Leviticus 27:32-33). When it is blemished it can be eaten anywhere by anybody and none of it is offered on the altar. With regard to the cattle tithe the Torah specifically states, “It shall not be redeemed” (Leviticus 27:28). The rabbis understood this to mean that it also cannot be sold. While the mishnah says that this is prohibited when the animal is alive, the Talmud understands that it is also prohibited when it has been slaughtered, and it does not matter whether it is unblemished or blemished. It cannot be treated as money and therefore, after having been slaughtered, it cannot be used as betrothal money in betrothing a woman.
  A first-born animal: one may sell it when it is unblemished and alive, and when blemished [one may sell it] both alive and slaughtered, and one may betroth a wife with it.  Similar to the cattle tithe, the fat and blood of the first born animal must be offered on the altar. The meat belongs to the priests and when it is unblemished only priests may eat it. When it is blemished, anyone can eat it, and therefore, the priest may sell it or its meat to a non-priest and anyone can use it to betroth a woman. When it is unblemished the priests may sell it as long as it is still alive. However, after it has been slaughtered it may not be sold because this is considered disgracing a sacrifice.
  One may not redeem second tithe with unstamped coins, nor with coins which are not current, nor for money which is not in one's possession.  Maaser sheni must be redeemed for usable coins. This would exclude unstamped coins, whose value is equivalent only to the value of the metal, non-current coins, stamped by governments that no longer rule, and coins to which a person does not have access. The coin must be stamped, usable and accessible in order to use it to redeem maaser sheni.
  
  Mishnah 3
  
  Introduction
  The rest of this chapter deals with using maaser sheni money to buy food in Jerusalem. There are two important rules to keep in mind here: first of all, food that one buys becomes holy and there are certain rules that apply to it. Second, one can only buy food products with maaser sheni money. If one buys non-food products with maaser sheni money, the tule is that he must go and buy in Jerusalem an equivalent value of food.
  Our mishnah teaches that if there is a product that contains both food and non-food parts, it can be bought with maaser sheni money and the non-food part of it does not become holy.
  One who bought a domesticated animal for a shelamim offering or a wild animal for non-sacrificial eating, the hide becomes hullin [non-sacred], even though the value of the hide exceeds the value of the flesh.  It was considered normal to buy sacrifices with maaser sheni money. Only domesticated animals, sheep, goats and cows, can be used for such offerings. Wild animals such as deer are kosher, but cannot be used as sacrifices. One can buy them with maaser sheni money. In these cases, since he acted in a proper manner, the hide, which obviously cannot be eaten, becomes hullin, non-sacred. This is true even if the value of the hide is greater than that of the food-part of the animal, the flesh.
  Sealed jars of wine [which were bought] in a place where they were usually sold sealed, the jars are hullin.  The wine referred to here was sold in sealed jars, meaning that the jars were sold with the wine. This was typical of the place where he bought the wine. The jars were secondary to the wine, and therefore, the sanctity of the maaser sheni money is not transferred to the jugs. The jugs become non-sacred.
  Walnuts and almonds, their shells become hullin.  Nut shells, such as those of walnuts and almonds, remain hullin, because what he was really buying was the meat of the nuts. The shells were only secondary to the nuts themselves.
  Grape-skin wine: before it has fermented it cannot be bought with second tithe money, but after it has fermented it may be bought with second tithe money.  Before grape-skin wine is fermented, it is considered like water. One cannot buy water with maaser sheni money because water is not food. Once it has been fermented, one can buy it with maaser sheni money.
  
  Mishnah 4
  
  Introduction
  This mishnah contains cases that are opposite of those found in yesterday’s mishnah. In these cases the non-food item bought does not become hullin.
  One who bought a wild animal for a shelamim offering or a domesticated beast for non-sacrificial eating, the hide does not become hullin.  Wild animals cannot be used as shelamim offerings, or any other offerings for that matter. While domesticated animals can be bought for non-sacrificial purposes, the rabbis dictated that with maaser sheni money one should buy only shelamim sacrifices and not just normal non-sacred beasts. Since in both of these cases the person did not act properly, the hide does not become hullin. This means that he will have to buy food the equivalent value of the hide and treat that food with the sanctity of maaser sheni.
  Open or sealed jars of wine [which were bought] in a place where they are usually sold open, the jars do not become hullin.  In this case, the sale of wine occurred in a place where wine was normally sold open, meaning that the jars were usually not part of the sale. Even if he does buy the jar along with the wine, the jar is not considered secondary to the wine (it doesn’t automatically come with the wine) and therefore the jar does not become hullin. He will have to buy food the value of the jar and treat that food with the sanctity of maaser sheni.
  Baskets of olives or baskets of grapes [bought] together with the vessel, the value of the vessel does not become hullin.  Normally, olives and grapes are not sold with the baskets they come in. Therefore, the basket is not considered ancillary to the olives or grapes and the basket does not become hullin. While wine is sometimes sold in sealed jars, meaning the jars are sold along with the wine, this is not true of produce such as olives and grapes. Therefore, if one does buy the jar with them, the jar is not part of the sale, and this is considered buying a non-food item with maaser sheni money.
  
  Mishnah 5
  
  One who bought water or salt, or produce still joined to the soil, or produce which cannot reach Jerusalem, he has not purchased maaser [sheni].  Water and salt are not considered to be food and therefore one should not buy them with maaser sheni money. Produce still attached to the ground also is not considered food and therefore, it too should not be bought with maaser sheni money. Finally, one should not buy produce that will rot before it can reach Jerusalem. In all of these cases, that which he bought is not considered maaser. What he will need to do is use an equivalent amount of money to buy the type of food that he should have bought in the first place. That food he should bring to Jerusalem and eat there.
  One who bought produce unwittingly, the money must be restored to its former place.  This person bought produce using maaser sheni money without knowing that it was maaser sheni money. The result of this would be that he would have to take the produce to Jerusalem and eat it there. However, since he did this by accident, the purchase is considered an accidental purchase and he can return the produce to the seller and get his money back. Since it was accidental, we don’t trouble him to take the food all the way to Jerusalem, which might be difficult.
  But if intentionally, the produce must be taken up and be consumed in the [holy] place, and when there is no Temple, it must be left to rot.  Maaser sheni money should be used to purchase food only in Jerusalem. If a person nevertheless intentionally buys produce with maaser sheni money outside of Jerusalem, he has to take the produce to Jerusalem and eat it there. He cannot ask for his money back. If there is no Temple, then he must let the produce rot it is forbidden for him to redeem it for money.
  
  Mishnah 6
  
  Introduction
  This mishnah teaches the same rule that we saw in yesterday’s mishnah, except whereas yesterday’s mishnah discussed produce, today’s mishnah refers to buying an animal.
  One who bought a domesticated animal unwittingly, the money must be restored to its former place. Intentionally, it must be taken up and eaten in the [holy] place. And when there is no Temple, it must be buried together with its hide. The same exact rules that applied to the produce apply to the animal. If there is no Temple, then the animal can never be eaten, nor can it be used for work. Rather he should leave it alone until it dies, and then bury it together with its hide. The mishnah emphasizes that even the hide, which is not food and which remains hullin if the animal was purchased for a sacrifice (see mishnah three), is forbidden and it must be buried.
  
  Mishnah 7
  
  Introduction
  The final mishnah of this chapter lists other things that one cannot buy with maaser sheni money.
  One may not buy male slaves or female slaves, land, or unclean animals with maaser sheni money. And if he did buy [one of these], its value must be consumed [as maaser sheni in Jerusalem].  None of these are food and therefore one cannot use maaser sheni money to purchase them. If one does, he must purchase and eat an equivalent amount of food in Jerusalem. This is the standard rule when one buys something with maaser sheni money that should not have been bought. It is stated more explicitly below in section three.
  One may not bring bird-offerings of a zav or zavah, or bird-offerings of women after child-birth, or sin-offerings, or guilt-offerings, from maaser sheni money. And if he did buy [one of these], their value must be consumed [as maaser sheni in Jerusalem].  All of these are mandatory offerings, unlike shelamim offerings which are voluntary. According to the rabbis, one cannot use maaser sheni money to buy offerings which he/she would have had to bring in any case. The zav and zavah are a man or woman who had an abnormal genital discharge (see Leviticus 15:14). They bring bird-offerings after they become pure, as does the woman after childbirth.
  This is the general rule: whatever [is bought] out of maaser sheni money which cannot be used for eating or drinking or anointing, its value must be consumed [as maaser sheni in Jerusalem].  This is the general rule stated twice above.
  
  
  
  
  
  Mishnah 1
  
  Introduction
  This mishnah begins to provide some general rules that govern maaser sheni.
  Second tithe is set apart for eating, for drinking and for anointing; for eating what is usually eaten, for drinking what is usually drunk, and for anointing what is usually used for anointing.  We have seen this same rule with regard to terumah and sabbatical year produce (see Sheviit 8:2). If one buys food with maaser sheni money, and it goes bad, he need not eat it, because it’s no longer in the category of that which is usually eaten. The same goes true for spoiled drink.
  One may not anoint oneself with wine or with vinegar, but one may anoint oneself with oil.  Wine or vinegar are normally foods and not used for anointing. Therefore, one cannot anoint oneself with them.
  One may not spice oil of second tithe, nor may one buy spiced oil with second tithe money.  There are a few explanations as to why one shouldn’t put spices in the second tithe oil. First of all, some of the oil is soaked up by the spices and that oil will not end up being used. Second, putting spices in the oil lessens its usefulness as food and therefore this shouldn’t be done. One shouldn’t buy spiced oil with second tithe money because one should only buy products with maaser sheni money that are used by all classes of people. Since only the wealthy use spiced oil, it should not be bought with maaser sheni money.
  But one may spice wine.  But one may spice wine because the entire mixture will be drunk and all classes of people drink spiced wine.
  If honey or spices fell into wine and improved its value, the improved value [is divided] according to the proportion.  The rest of this mishnah deals with improving the value of a maaser sheni product. The general rule is stated in section eight. If someone uses hullin, non-sacred produce, to improve maaser sheni, the added value is divided up according to the percentage of hullin and maaser sheni in the product. Let’s take the example of honey or spices that fell into wine. If the maaser sheni wine was worth two dinars and the hullin spices and wine were worth one dinar, and the mixture was together worth four dinars, there is a one dinar improvement. Two-thirds of the original value was maaser sheni and therefore, two-thirds of the improvement is maaser sheni, and one-third is hullin. In the final mixture 2 2/3 are maaser sheni and 1 1/3 are hullin. This hullin can be bought with maaser sheni money and the money would become hullin.
  If fish was cooked with leek of second tithe and it improved in value, the improved value [is divided] according to the proportion.  This is the same halakhah we saw in the above section.
  If dough of second tithe was baked and it improved in value, the whole improved value is second [tithe].  In this case he used hullin sticks to light a fire to bake maaser sheni dough. Here the hullin is not noticeable in the maaser sheni final product and therefore it is not reckoned as part of the value. So if the maaser sheni dough was worth 2 dinars, and the baked bread is worth 3 dinars, all three dinars are maaser sheni.
  This is the general rule: whenever the improvement is recognizable the improved value [is divided] according to the proportion, but whenever the improved value is not recognizable the improved value belongs to the second [tithe].  This is a restatement of the general rule illustrated above.
  
  Mishnah 2
  
  Introduction
  In this mishnah Rabbi Shimon and the sages argue whether one can anoint oneself with second tithe oil in Jerusalem.
  Rabbi Shimon says: one may not anoint oneself with oil of second tithe in Jerusalem. But the sages allow it.  Albeck explains that Rabbi Shimon prohibits anointing oneself with second tithe oil in Jerusalem lest one does so and then leaves Jerusalem. This would be problematic because one can benefit from second tithe only in Jerusalem. The sages are no concerned with this problem. We should note that Rabbi Shimon really prohibits using second tithe oil for anointing altogether. This means that he disagrees with the opinion in yesterday’s mishnah which allowed anointing with maaser sheni oil.
  They said to Rabbi Shimon: if a lenient ruling has been adopted in the case of terumah which is a grave matter, should we not also adopt a lenient ruling in the case of second tithe which is a light matter?  The sages argue with Rabbi Shimon using terumah as an analogy. A priest is allowed to anoint himself with terumah oil, even though terumah is a graver matter than maaser sheni, since it is forbidden to non-priests, whereas maaser sheni is not. Consequently, we should also rule leniently when it comes to anointing oneself with maaser sheni oil.
  He said to them: No; a lenient ruling has been adopted in the case of terumah though it is a grave matter, because in terumah we have adopted a lenient ruling also with regard to vetches and fenugreek, but how can we adopt a lenient ruling in the case of second tithe though it is a light matter, when we have not adopted a lenient ruling in second tithe with regard to vetches and fenugreek?  Rabbi Shimon responds that terumah is not always a graver matter than maaser sheni. There is one halakhah in which maaser sheni is actually graver than terumah, and that is a halakhah connected with vetches and fenugreek. This will be explained below in mishnayot three-four. Since sometimes the rules governing maaser sheni are stricter than those governing terumah, it is possible that this is one of those cases as well. Hence we cannot deduce that just because one may anoint oneself with terumah oil, one may also anoint oneself with maaser sheni oil.
  
  Mishnah 3
  
  Introduction
  Our mishnah deals with fenugreek of maaser sheni or terumah.
  Fenugreek of second tithe may be eaten when it is still tender.  When fenugreek is young and still tender, it can be eaten. Therefore, one can purchase it with second tithe money and eat it. However, when it gets older its stalks become difficult to eat and it is used as a detergent in washing one’s hair. At this point one cannot buy it with maaser sheni money because maaser sheni money can only be used to buy food, drink and anointing oil, as we learned in mishnah one.
  Fenugreek of terumah: Bet Shammai says: whatever is done with it must be done in a state of purity, except when it is used for cleansing the head. But Bet Hillel says: whatever is done with it may be done in a state of impurity, except soaking it in water.  According to Bet Shammai, fenugreek terumah must always be treated as terumah and dealt with in purity until its stalks have become so hard that they are used only for washing one’s hair. Up until this late point it is considered food and the laws of terumah apply to it.
  Bet Hillel says that fenugreek terumah is not treated as terumah unless it has been soaked in water to soften it to prepare it for food. In all other cases it is not treated as food and therefore one who is impure may handle it.
  
  Mishnah 4
  
  Vetches of second tithe may be eaten when still tender.  Like the fenugreek we learned about in yesterday’s mishnah, vetches are eaten when soft and young. When they grow they are no longer used for human consumption and are given to animals. So when they are young, one can use maaser sheni money to buy them, but not when they age.
  And they may be brought into Jerusalem and taken out again.  Normally, once maaser sheni has been brought into Jerusalem, it cannot be taken out. Vetches are exceptional since when they age they become animal food.
  If they became unclean: Rabbi Tarfon says: they must be divided among pieces of dough. But the sages say: they may be redeemed.  Maaser sheni that has become impure can usually be redeemed for money, in the same way that pure maaser sheni can. This is the sages’ opinion. Rabbi Tarfon holds that maaser sheni vetches that have become impure can no longer be redeemed for money, because it would be disgraceful to redeem them and then feed them to animals. Therefore, what one can do is divide the vetches up and bake them into impure loaves of bread and eat them while they are impure. This was something that was normally done, perhaps to make their flour last a bit longer. In this way the inedible vetches become fit for human consumption. If he wants to mix them in with pure dough, then he would have to put in less than the volume of an egg of vetches into each batch of dough. In this way the dough would remain pure.
  [Vetches] of terumah: Bet Shammai says: they must be soaked and rubbed in a state of purity, but may be given as food [to an animal] in a state of impurity. Bet Hillel says: they must be soaked [only] in a state of purity, but they may be rubbed and given as food [to an animal] in a state of impurity. Shammai says: they must be eaten dry [only]. Rabbi Akiba says: whatever is done with them may be done in a state of impurity.  Bet Shammai says that when it comes to terumah vetches, if they are being soaked and rubbed in order to eat them, the person doing so must be in a state of purity. If they are being fed to an animal, the person may be impure. Bet Hillel holds that only the soaking needs to be done in a state of purity. If he is rubbing them, then according to Bet Hillel he is preparing them for animal food and he need not be pure. Shammai himself rules that terumah vetches should not be soaked at all, because that would cause them to be susceptible to impurity. Bet Shammai and Bet Hillel both allow one to soak the vetches, as long as one does so in a state of purity. It is interesting that Bet Shammai rules differently from their eponymous ancestor Shammai, and that the latter is stricter than his own school. It seems that we can note a movement toward leniency in this matter, from Shammai who rules most strictly, to Rabbi Akiva, who rules most leniently and allows one to be impure even when soaking terumah vetches. Since they are mostly used for animal food, even the vetches that are used to feed humans are not subject to the rules of terumah and once can always make them impure.
  
  Mishnah 5
  
  Introduction
  This mishnah deals with maaser sheni coins (money that had been used to redeem maaser sheni produce) and hullin, non-sacred coins, that were mixed up together. The mishnah assumes that the person knows how many of the coins were maaser sheni, but he doesn’t know which coins are maaser sheni.
  Hullin coins and second tithe coins which were scattered together: whatever is picked up [one at a time] belongs to second tithe until the sum is completed, and the remainder is hullin.  If the coins are scattered such that he picks them up one at a time, then the first coins he picks up are maaser sheni, until he has picked up the number of coins that he knows were originally maaser sheni. The remaining coins are hullin. It doesn’t really matter which coins were originally what all that matters is that in the end, there are just as many maaser sheni coins as there were in the beginning. According to the Yerushalmi, he also needs to say, “If that which I picked up first was not maaser sheni, then let the [real] maaser sheni be redeemed for these coins.”
  If they were so mixed up as to be taken up by the handful, [they are divided] according to the proportion.  But if he gathers them all together and picks up a handful of them, then they are divvied up according to the proportion. So if originally half the coins were maaser sheni and half hullin, then half of the coins in his hand are maaser sheni and half are hullin.
  This is the general rule: what is picked up [one at a time] must be first given to second tithe, but [what is picked up] mixed [quantity is divided] according to the proportion.  This is the general rule that sums up the examples in the beginning of the mishnah.
  
  Mishnah 6
  
  Introduction
  This mishnah deals with a case of a sela of maaser sheni and a sela of hullin that gets mixed up and he wants to take the hullin sela out of Jerusalem.
  A sela of maaser sheni which was mixed up with a sela of hullin, one may bring copper coins for the sela and say: “Let the sela of maaser sheni wherever it may be, be exchanged for these coins.”  After the coins are mixed up, he can declare that one of the coins is exchanged for an equivalent value of copper coins.
  Then he must select the better of the two selas, and change [again] the copper coins for it.  Then he takes the better of the two selas and redeems the copper coins for this sela. In this way he has transferred maaser sheni from one of the two selas to the copper coins and then back to the better sela. The better sela ends up being maaser sheni and the copper coins and the worse sela are hullin.
  For they have said: one may change silver for copper [only] in case of necessity, and not to leave it so but to change it again for silver.  The mishnah explains why he can’t simply exchange the copper coins for one of the selas and be done with it. Also, why can’t he exchange one silver sela for another? Why does he have to bring copper coins to exchange for the silver sela? The mishnah teaches that changing silver to copper is allowed, but only if there is no other way to solve the problem. By implication, changing silver coins for other silver coins is never allowed. And even when he is allowed to change copper for silver, he can only do so temporarily as soon as he has done so he must change the copper back for silver.
  
  Mishnah 7
  
  Bet Shammai says: one may not turn his selas into gold dinars.  According to Bet Shammai, if one has gathered together a large amount of silver coins of maaser sheni, coins which he used to redeem his produce, he should not exchange them for gold dinars in order to lighten the load that he has to bring to Jerusalem. According to the Talmud, Bet Shammai does not allow this because they are concerned that if this were allowed, people would delay bringing their silver coins to Jerusalem until they had gathered enough to turn them into gold dinars. Delaying bringing coins to Jerusalem might be problematic if this would lead to one accidentally uses them for a profane purpose.
  But Bet Hillel permits it. Rabbi Akiva said: For Rabban Gamaliel and Rabbi Joshua I turned silver into gold dinars.  Bet Hillel is not concerned with this problem, and neither are Rabbi Akiva, Rabban Gamaliel or Rabbi Joshua. It is interesting to see Rabbi Akiva “serving” his elders. This would have been common for young scholars, who served as apprentices for their teachers.
  
  Mishnah 8
  
  Introduction
  This mishnah continues to deal with what types of maaser sheni coins may be exchanged for which others.
  One who changes copper coins of second tithe for a sela: Bet Shammai says: he may change copper coins for a whole sela. But Bet Hillel says: a shekel of silver and a shekel’s worth of copper coins [can be exchanged for the sela].  The person in this mishnah has some copper coins that he used to redeem second tithe produce and he wants to exchange the copper coins for a silver sela, so that he doesn’t have to carry all of the copper to Jerusalem. According to Bet Shammai, if he has enough copper coins to equal an entire silver sela, he can exchange them. However, if he only has enough coins for half of a sela, and for the other half he has a silver shekel (worth half of a sela) of maaser sheni money, he cannot exchange the copper and the silver shekel for the silver sela because silver maaser sheni money cannot be exchanged for other silver. Bet Hillel says that one can exchange copper coins and a silver shekel for a silver sela. Even though in general it is forbidden to exchange silver maaser sheni coins for other silver maaser sheni coins in this case it is permitted because he is exchanging copper coins for half of the sela.
  Rabbi Meir says: one may not exchange silver and produce for silver. But the sages allow it.  If someone has half a sela’s worth of produce, and half a sela’s worth of silver coins, according to Rabbi Meir he may not exchange all of them for a silver sela. This is similar to Bet Shammai in section one who held that one cannot exchange silver coins for another larger silver coin, even if some of the larger coin is being exchanged for copper. So too, Rabbi Meir holds that one may not exchange silver coins for larger silver coin, even if part of the exchange is being done with produce, which is usually a permitted exchange. The other sages stick closer to Bet Hillel and rule permissively. Just as one can exchange copper and silver for silver, so too one can exchange produce and silver for silver. As long as half of the exchange is done in a normally permitted manner (silver for produce or copper) the rest may be done in a normally forbidden manner (silver for silver).
  
  Mishnah 9
  
  Introduction
  Today’s mishnah deals with exchanging maaser sheni coins in Jerusalem for other coins. In Jerusalem one can exchange silver coins for copper coins. This would make it easier to go to the store and buy food, because silver coins are too big for use in a store. This was opposite the case outside of Jerusalem, where people wanted to exchange copper for silver to make it easier to carry the coins to Jerusalem. As was the case with regard to exchanging coins outside of Jerusalem, it is generally forbidden to redeem silver for silver. The question is what to do if all he has is enough copper coins to redeem part of the silver coin.
  There are a whopping six opinions in this mishnah! I should note that this is exceedingly rare. Usually we see two, perhaps three opinions.
  One who exchanges a sela of second tithe in Jerusalem:Bet Shammai says: he may exchange the whole sela for copper coins.  Bet Shammai’s opinion is the same as his opinion in yesterday’s mishnah. If one wants to exchange a sela of maaser sheni for copper coins, he must have enough copper coins for the whole sela. He cannot exchange half copper coins and a silver coin for the sela.
  Bet Hillel says: a shekel of silver and a shekel’s worth of copper coins [can be exchanged for the sela].  Like Bet Shammai, Bet Hillel has the same opinion as in yesterday’s mishnah. One can exchange a silver sela, half for copper coins (one shekel’s worth) and half for silver coins (one shekel’s worth). Since half of the exchange is being done with copper, the other half can be done with silver.
  Those discussing before the sages say: silver for three dinars and copper coins for one denar.  This is an interesting phrase “those discussing before the sages.” The Talmud interprets this to be younger sages, perhaps too young to merit their names being attached to their statements. In any case, they go a step further than Bet Hillel. As long as one dinar, equivalent to ¼ of a sela, consists of copper coins being exchanged for the silver sela, the remaining ¾ can consist of silver coins. Bet Hillel said that at least ½ had to be copper.
  Rabbi Akiva says: silver for three denars and copper coins for a fourth [of the fourth denar].  Rabbi Akiva is even more lenient and says that there doesn’t need to be a full dinar of copper, but rather only ¼ of the dinar need be copper. Thus three dinars can be silver and as long as the fourth dinar of the sela is redeemed for ¼ of a dinar’s worth of copper coins, the exchange is valid.
  Rabbi Tarfon says: four aspers in silver.  Rabbi Tarfon says that the fourth dinar of the sela (1/4 of the value of the sela) can be exchanged for four asperim of silver and one asper of copper. Rabbi Tarfon is slightly more lenient than Rabbi Akiva, who said that ¼ of the last dinar had to be copper. We can now note that there are not really six different opinions in the mishnah Rabbi Tarfon, Rabbi Akiva and “those discussing before the sage” are all more and more lenient versions of Bet Hillel.
  Shammai says: he must leave it in a shop and eat as much as it is worth.  Shammai provides a different solution altogether. Instead of trying to figure out how to exchange the coin when he doesn’t have sufficient copper coins to equal the sela, what he should do is just give the coin to the shopkeeper and keep eating food until he has taken enough food to cover the value of the coin. It seems likely that Shammai is actually the strictest opinion, and says that once in Jerusalem, it is forbidden to exchange the coin for other coins altogether.
  
  Mishnah 10
  
  Introduction
  In this mishnah a man has sons, some of whom are pure and some of whom are not. He is in Jerusalem and he wants to buy the pure sons wine with maaser sheni money, and give regular non-sacred wine to his impure sons who are not allowed to drink maaser sheni. The mishnah finds a way for him to let them both drink from the same jug.
  If one had some of his sons pure and some impure, he may put down a sela and say: “What the pure drink, this sela will be redeemed for it.” In this way the pure and the impure may drink from one jar. What he needs to do is take the maaser sheni sela and say that it is being redeemed only for what the pure sons drink. In this way, only the wine that the pure sons take from the jug will be maaser sheni. What the impure sons take remains hullin, non-sacred produce. Note that the impure sons do not need to touch the wine in the jug. They can pour wine from it and drink from it.
  
  
  
  
  
  Mishnah 1
  
  Introduction
  We learned in the first mishnah of the tractate that it is forbidden to sell maaser sheni. Our mishnah teaches that it is also forbidden to make certain deals that make it look as if one is selling maaser sheni.
  One should not say to his friend: “Carry up this [second tithe] produce to Jerusalem that in order to divide it.”  The problem with this type of arrangement is that it looks as if he is using maaser sheni produce to pay his friend to help him carry it to Jerusalem. Therefore, this type of statement is prohibited.
  Rather he should say to him, “Carry it up that so that we may eat and drink of it in Jerusalem.”  If he doesn’t use the word “divide” then this is permitted. All he is doing here is asking his friend to help him carry the load to Jerusalem so that they can eat and drink it together there.
  But people may give it to one another as a free gift.  If someone wants to have another person carry his maaser sheni for him to Jerusalem, he is allowed to give it to him as a gift. When they get to Jerusalem, the one who carried it can give some of the maaser sheni back to its original owner. Of course, he takes a risk in doing so maybe his friend won’t give it back to him! But if he doesn’t, then he wasn’t really much of a friend to begin with. This same halakhah was also taught in the first mishnah of the tractate, but there it was not taught in connection to this specific issue.
  
  Mishnah 2
  
  Introduction
  In this mishnah we learn that one cannot use second tithe money to buy terumah.
  One may not buy terumah with maaser sheni money, because this reduces the number of those who can eat it. But Rabbi Shimon permits it.  Here we learn that there is a debate with regard to buying terumah with maaser sheni money. This probably refers to a priest who has maaser sheni money and wants to use it in Jerusalem to buy terumah, which is cheaper than hullin, non-sacred produce. The sages forbid this because it reduces the number of people who can eat the maaser sheni. Produce bought with maaser sheni can be eaten by anyone, but terumah can only be eaten by priests. Rabbi Shimon permits.
  Rabbi Shimon said to them: If the law is lenient in the case of wellbeing offerings, though they may become unfit or a remnant or unclean, why should it not also be lenient with regard to terumah?  Rabbi Shimon argues that just as it is permitted to use maaser sheni money to buy wellbeing offerings, even though these sacrifices might eventually be forbidden for anyone to eat, so too we should allow one to buy terumah with maaser sheni money. In other words, even though there is a reduction in the general edibility of the food bought, this does not cause the purchase to be prohibited.
  But they said to him: The law was lenient in the case of wellbeing offerings, because they are permitted to non-priests, but should we therefore be lenient with regard to terumah, which is forbidden to non-priests?  The other rabbis argue that the two cases are not analogous. The wellbeing offering can be eaten by anyone, and although it might become prohibited for anyone to eat, it also might never become prohibited. In contrast, terumah is always prohibited to non-priests, so there is a definite reduction in who can eat it. Therefore, one should not buy terumah with maaser sheni money.
  
  Mishnah 3
  
  Introduction
  This mishnah deals with a person who has maaser sheni money in Jerusalem, but doesn’t want to use it to buy food or other things that one can buy with maaser sheni money.
  One who has [second tithe] money in Jerusalem and he needs [to spend] it, and his friend had [non-sacred] produce, he may say to his friend: “Let this money be exchanged for your produce.”  He may redeem his money by transferring its sanctity onto his friend’s non-sacred produce. The only real difference between this case and a normal case of buying produce with maaser sheni money is that here his friend did not want to sell the produce and the purchaser didn’t want to buy it. There has been only a fictional transaction here the only thing that has been transferred is the sanctity.
  It turns out that the one [must] eat his produce in purity and the other may do what he needs with his money.  Now that the sanctity of the maaser sheni money has been transferred to the produce, the one with the produce has to make sure that he is pure when he eats it. The person with the money can now use the money to buy anything he wants, because its sanctity has transferred to the produce.
  But he may not say thus to an am haaretz except when [the money was] from [second tithe of] demai.  A person should not make this type of deal with an am haaretz, a person who is not scrupulous about observing the laws of purity. The am haaretz might eat the maaser sheni in a state of impurity, which is prohibited. However, if the maaser sheni came from demai, then he can make this fictional exchange even with an am haaretz. An am haaretz is suspected of not separating tithes. When a person buys produce from an am haaretz he must tithe the produce because we are concerned that it hasn’t been tithed. This tithe is called “demai” hopefully you remember this concept because there was a whole tractate dedicate to the subject. The rules are generally more lenient with demai, because if the am haaretz had tithed, there would have been no need to separate another tithe. Returning to our case, if one has maaser sheni money whose origin is in demai, he can transfer its sanctity onto an am haaretz’s non-sacred produce.
  
  Mishnah 4
  
  Introduction
  This mishnah teaches ways in which a person who has maaser sheni money in one place and hullin (non-sacred) produce in another can exchange one for the other.
  If [one had hullin] produce in Jerusalem and [second tithe money] in the provinces, he may say: “Let that money be exchanged for this produce.”  Even though the produce and the money are not in the same place, a person can buy the produce with this maaser sheni money. He can now eat the produce in Jerusalem and when he gets home he can use the money for whatever he wants.
  If [he had second tithe] money in Jerusalem and [hullin] produce in the provinces, he may say: “Let this money be exchanged for that produce,” as long as he will carry that produce and eat it in Jerusalem.  In this case the second tithe money is in Jerusalem, but he wants to use the coins to buy something besides food. What he can do is state that the money’s sanctity will be transferred to the hullin produce that he has outside of Jerusalem. He can then use the money for whatever purpose he wants. However, later he must bring that produce to Jerusalem. He cannot again redeem the produce and then bring the money to Jerusalem.
  
  Mishnah 5
  
  [Second tithe] money may be brought into Jerusalem and taken out again, but [second tithe] produce may only be brought in, but not taken out again.Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says: produce also may be brought in and be taken out again.In our mishnah we learn that all of the sages agree that maaser sheni money can be brought out of Jerusalem once it has been brought in. However, there is a debate whether second tithe produce can be taken out of Jerusalem once it has already been brought in. According to the first opinion, once it has been brought into Jerusalem it can no longer be brought out. The point of the laws of maaser sheni is for the produce to be eaten in Jerusalem therefore once it has been brought into Jerusalem, it can no longer be brought out. In contrast, maaser sheni money is just a means through which to transfer the sanctity of some maasser sheni produce to other maaser sheni produce. Hence, one can bring it out of Jerusalem.Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel holds that even produce can be brought in and taken out of Jerusalem.
  
  Mishnah 6
  
  Introduction
  In yesterday’s mishnah we learned that maaser sheni produce that has been in Jerusalem cannot be taken out again. Today we learn about regular produce that has not yet been tithed and has entered Jerusalem. Can the maaser sheni from that produce be brought in and taken out of Jerusalem?
  Produce whose processing was completed and it passed through Jerusalem, its second tithe must be brought back and eaten in Jerusalem.  Produce becomes liable for tithes once its processing has been completed (this was the main topic of tractate Maasrot). So if its processing has been completed its tithes are in a sense already in it, they just have not yet been separated. Therefore, if one brings such produce into Jerusalem, this is similar to a case of bringing second tithe into Jerusalem. And as we learned in yesterday’s mishnah, once maaser sheni produce is brought into Jerusalem, it cannot be brought out. If he does bring this produce out, he cannot redeem it and eat it outside of Jerusalem. He must bring it back and eat it in Jerusalem.
  If its processing had not been completed, [such as] baskets of grapes [that were going] to the wine-press or baskets of figs [that were going] to the drying-place: Bet Shammai says: its second tithe must be brought back and be eaten in Jerusalem. But Bet Hillel says: it may be redeemed and eaten anywhere.  If the processing had not been completed, for instance the grapes were on their way to being pressed or the figs were on their way to being dried, then Bet Shammai and Bet Hillel debate whether the maaser sheni that will eventually be taken out of the produce has to be brought back to Jerusalm. Bet Shammai says that this situation is the same as that in section one. Produce has future maaser sheni in it, even though the produce has not yet become liable for tithes. Therefore, it can no longer be taken out of Jerusalem. If it is taken out of Jerusalem, he can’t redeem the maaser sheni; he must bring it back to Jerusalem and eat it there. Bet Hillel holds that since the produce had not yet become liable for tithes, we don’t look at it as if maaser sheni had been brought into Jerusalem. When he separates the maaser sheni produce, he can redeem it and eat it wherever he wants.
  Rabbi Shimon ben Judah says in the name of Rabbi Yose: Bet Shammai and Bet Hillel did not disagree concerning produce whose processing had not been completed that its second tithe may be redeemed and be eaten anywhere.  Rabbi Shimon ben Judah relates a different version of the debate between Bet Shammai and Bet Hillel. According to this version, both sides are more lenient than in the previous version and both agree that if the processing of the produce had not yet been completed, that the maaser sheni from the produce can be redeemed and eaten wherever he wants.
  What did they disagree about? About produce whose processing was completed. Bet Shammai says that its second tithe must be brought back and be eaten in Jerusalem. And Bet Hillel says that it may be redeemed and be eaten anywhere.  Rather the two houses disagree about a case where the processing has been completed. Here Bet Hillel is even more lenient than they were according to the version of their opinion found in section one. Bet Hillel holds that even if the processing had been completed, the maaser sheni eventually taken from it can be redeemed and eaten anywhere. According to this, the only time that Bet Hillel would say that produce cannot be taken out of Jerusalem would be if it was actual maaser sheni produce, not produce whose maaser sheni had not yet been taken out of it. Bet Shammai disagrees and holds that in this case, when the maaser sheni is taken out of the produce, it must be brought into Jerusalem and eaten there.
  [The second tithe of] demai may [always] be brought in and taken out again and be redeemed.  Demai produce (for a definition of demai see above, mishnah three) that has been brought into Jerusalem can always have its maaser sheni redeemed outside of Jerusalem and eaten anywhere, because this maaser sheni is only “doubtful” maaser sheni. Since the tithes may have been taken out of it already, it might not have been necessary to take out maaser sheni at all. Therefore, we can be lenient.
  
  Mishnah 7
  
  Introduction
  Our mishnah deals with structures that lie both in and outside of Jerusalem. If we deem them to be within Jerusalem, then maaser sheni produce may be eaten there, but it may not be redeemed. But if we deem them to be outside of Jerusalem, then maaser sheni produce may be redeemed there but not eaten.
  The geographical area of Jerusalem was judged, at least while the Temple still stood, by Jerusalem’s walls.
  A tree which stood within [Jerusalem] and was bending outwards, or if it stood outside [Jerusalem] and was bending inwards, what is opposite the wall and inwards is deemed as being within, and what is opposite the wall and outwards is deemed as being outside.  Quite simply, the parts of the tree that lie within the walls are judged to be within Jerusalem, and the parts that are outside of the walls are considered to be outside of Jerusalem.
  Olive-presses which have their entrance within and their inner space outside, or which have their entrance outside and their inner space within: Bet Shammai says: the whole is deemed as being within. But Bet Hillel says: what is opposite the wall and inwards is deemed as being within, and what is opposite the wall and outwards is deemed as being outside.  When it comes to olive presses, part of which lie in Jerusalem and part outside, Bet Shammai considers them all to lie within Jerusalem. The Tosefta explains that Bet Shammai’s ruling only applies to the stringent aspect of this law. The whole olive press is considered to be lying within Jerusalem, and therefore, maaser sheni cannot be redeemed there. But they agree with Bet Hillel that one can eat maaser sheni only in the parts that actually lie within the walls of Jerusalem. Bet Hillel holds that each part is judged based on where it is. In the part that is within Jerusalem one can eat, but not redeem maaser sheni. In the part outside of Jerusalem, one can redeem but not eat.
  
  Mishnah 8
  
  Introduction
  Today’s mishnah is similar in structure to yesterday’s mishnah, although the content has nothing to do with the laws of maaser sheni. Today we deal with chambers of the Temple, part of which were built on holy ground, within the Temple courtyards, and part of which were outside of the Temple. There are three important ramifications for considering something to be within the Temple: 1) It is permitted to slaughter some sacrifices there; 2) It is permitted to eat those sacrifices there; 3) One who enters such an area while impure has transgressed and must bring a sacrifice to atone.
  The chambers [of the Temple] which were built on holy ground but were open towards common ground: their interior was deemed common and their roofs were deemed holy.  If the chamber was built on holy ground, but the inside was open to common ground (not parts of the Temple) then the interior part is judged according to its opening and it is considered to be common (not sacred). However, the roofs, which lie above holy ground, are considered to be holy. This does create a strange situation in which the insides of the chambers are treated as common ground, whereas the roofs are holy.
  Those which were built on common ground but were open towards holy ground: their interior was deemed holy and their roofs were deemed common.  This is the opposite situation as that in section one. Again, the interior goes after the opening, whereas the roof goes after the ground that the interior is on.
  Those which were built both on holy and on common ground and were open both towards holy and common ground: the interior and the roofs that were on holy ground and inwards were deemed holy, but [the interior and roofs] on common ground and outwards were deemed common.  If the interior is on both holy and common ground and the opening is also open to both holy and common ground, then the parts that are on holy ground are deemed to be holy and the parts on common ground are deemed to be common. We should note that according to the Tosefta, there were no chambers in the Temple that filled this description it is purely theoretical.
  
  Mishnah 9
  
  Introduction
  As we have learned many times, maaser sheni can be redeemed only outside of Jerusalem. Once in Jerusalem it must be eaten. However, this applies only to pure maaser sheni. Impure maaser sheni, which cannot be eaten and must be redeemed, can be redeemed in Jerusalem.
  Our mishnah deals with what is done with the impure maaser sheni produce which was redeemed after it had already been brought into Jerusalem. While this produce is no longer maaser sheni (because it was redeemed) it was maaser sheni when it was brought into Jerusalem, and generally one cannot take maaser sheni out of Jerusalem once it has been brought in. The question is: does this prohibition still apply?
  The mishnah mentions “principal defilements” and “secondary defilements.” I don’t think it is necessary to explain these concepts here, just to say that the defilement caused by principal defilements is more serious than that caused by secondary defilement.
  Second tithe which was brought into Jerusalem and became unclean, whether it became unclean by a principal defilement or by a secondary defilement, whether it became unclean within [Jerusalem] or outside:Bet Shammai says: it must all be redeemed and be eaten within except that which became unclean by a principal defilement outside.  Bet Shammai says that in all the cases referred to in the mishnah, the maaser sheni must be redeemed and then eaten inside Jerusalem, except for the case of maaser sheni that was made impure by a principal defilement before it came into Jerusalem. This produce was seriously defiled before it came into Jerusalem and therefore the walls of Jerusalem don’t “absorb it.” This means that coming within the walls of Jerusalem doesn’t count as far as prohibiting it from leaving Jerusalem. In the other cases, the walls do absorb the maaser sheni and it cannot be taken out.
  But Bet Hillel says: it must all be redeemed and may be eaten outside except that which became unclean by a secondary defilement within.  Bet Hillel rules more leniently. In all of these cases the redeemed maaser sheni may be brought out of Jerusalem except where the maaser sheni contracted a lesser degree of impurity within Jerusalem. This produce was pure when it was brought into Jerusalem and only contracted a lesser degree of impurities. Therefore, it has to be eaten in Jerusalem. However, in all cases where the maaser sheni became impure before coming into Jerusalem and in cases where it contracted a serious type of impurity within Jerusalem, it can be brought out of Jerusalem and eaten there.
  
  Mishnah 10
  
  Introduction
  Today’s mishnah deals with produce purchased with maaser sheni money that then becomes unclean. This produce cannot be eaten because unclean maaser sheni can never The question is: can it be redeemed?
  If that which was bought with maaser sheni money became unclean, it should be redeemed.  According to the anonymous opinion in the mishnah, if produce was bought with maaser sheni money and then that produce became impure, it can be redeemed. This money will now be treated as maaser sheni money and used to buy produce that will be eaten as maaser sheni in Jerusalem.
  R. Judah says: it must be buried.  Rabbi Judah disagrees and says that the produce which was bought with maaser sheni money and then became impure must be buried. It cannot be redeemed.
  They said to Rabbi Judah: if maaser sheni itself when it became unclean may be redeemed, should not also that which is bought with maaser sheni money be redeemed when it became unclean?  The sages now begin to argue their case with Rabbi Judah. In yesterday’s mishnah we learned that maaser sheni itself which became impure can be redeemed. Why, then, shouldn’t maaser sheni produce that was bought with maaser sheni money be redeemed if it becomes impure?
  He said to them: No! If you say this of maaser sheni itself, it is because it may be redeemed also when pure at a distance from the [holy] place. But how can you say this of that which is bought with maaser sheni money, seeing that it cannot be redeemed when clean at a distance from the [holy] place.  Rabbi Judah responds that the two are not truly analogous. Maaser sheni produce itself can be redeemed outside of Jerusalem, even when it is pure. In contrast, produce bought with maaser sheni money cannot be redeemed outside of Jerusalem when it is pure. Such produce must be brought to Jerusalem and it can be eaten there. Since the rule is stricter concerning produce bought with maaser sheni money outside of Jerusalem, it is also stricter with produce bought with maaser sheni money inside Jerusalem. It cannot be redeemed, but rather must be buried.
  
  Mishnah 11
  
  Introduction
  Our mishnah deals with a deer that was bought with maaser sheni money and then something happened to it that caused it to become inedible.
  If a deer which had been bought with maaser sheni money died, it must be buried together with its hide. Rabbi Shimon says: it may be redeemed.  When the deer dies it cannot be eaten it is called “nevelah.” All that can be done with it is to give it to the dogs. However, since it is maaser sheni, it cannot be used to feed dogs. The first opinion in the mishnah holds that it cannot be redeemed in order to be given to the dogs, because one does not redeem holy things, like maaser sheni, in order to feed them to animals. In addition, its hide must also be buried, because he shouldn’t have bought a deer with maaser sheni money, because a deer cannot be used as a sacrifice (see above 1:4). Rabbi Shimon says that one can redeem maaser sheni in order to feed it to animals.
  If it was bought alive and slaughtered and it then became unclean, it may be redeemed. Rabbi Yose says: it must be buried.  If he slaughtered it and then it became unclean, the first opinion holds that it may be redeemed, as is the rule with other produce that was bought with maaser sheni money and then became impure (see yesterday’s mishnah.) Commentators note that even Rabbi Judah, who in yesterday’s mishnah said that the produce must be buried, here agrees that it can be redeemed. Since he bought it alive and it would not be difficult to carry it to Jerusalem, it is not governed by the law “when you are far from the place.” It can be redeemed like maaser sheni itself, which everyone agrees can be redeemed if it becomes impure. Rabbi Yose says that it must be buried. He treats this deer as if it had died, and therefore it must be buried.
  If it was bought slaughtered and it became unclean, behold it is like produce.  If it was bought when it was already slaughtered and then became impure, then it is treated like maaser sheni produce. This means that the same debate that we saw in yesterday’s mishnah applies here. The sages say that it may be redeemed, whereas Rabbi Judah says that it may not.
  
  Mishnah 12
  
  Introduction
  This mishnah deals with jars that contain maaser sheni wine. The question is: do the jars become sanctified with the sanctity of maaser sheni?
  One who lends jars for maaser sheni [wine], even if they were corked, they do not acquire [the sanctity of] maaser sheni.  If one is selling maaser sheni wine in Jerusalem, and he lends his customers the wine, then the jars do acquire the sanctity of maaser sheni because they weren’t sold only the wine was being sold.
  If wine was poured into them without specifying [that it was for sale] they do not acquire [the sanctity of] maaser sheni before they are corked, but after they are corked they acquire [the sanctity of] maaser sheni.  A person took untithed wine out of a vat and poured it into jars without having the specific intention that he was going to sell the wine. If he makes the wine in it maaser sheni before he corks the jar, then the jar does not become maaser sheni. However, it he calls it maaser sheni after he has corked the jars, then the jars do become maaser sheni, because they are secondary to the wine. He will have to sell the jars in Jerusalem, and then use the proceeds to buy food and eat it there.
  Before they are corked they are neutralized in a hundred and one, but after they are corked they sanctify any quantity.  The following two sections do not deal with maaser sheni, but rather with various laws that are concerned with corked and uncorked jars. If one of the jars was terumah but it is unknown which jar was terumah, then if there are 100 jars of non-terumah and one of terumah, the terumah one is nullified. He may then take any one jar, call it terumah and the rest reverts to being hullin. This is the normal way that terumah is nullified (a good refresher on a large portion of what we learned in tractate Terumot). This is possible only if the jars were uncorked. Once they are corked, each jar becomes significant in its own right and it cannot be nullified. No matter how many jars are there, they are all doubtful terumah and they all must be treated as doubtful terumah.
  Before they are corked terumah may be taken from one jar for all the others, but after they are corked terumah must be taken from each jar separately.  Before the jars are corked, they are considered a group, almost as if the wine is still in one vat. Therefore, terumah can be taken from one jar to exempt the wine found in other jars. However, once they are corked, each jar is considered its own separate entity, and terumah must be removed from each individual jar before it can be drunk.
  
  Mishnah 13
  
  Introduction
  This mishnah is a continuation of yesterday’s mishnah. Here we discuss what happens if after corking the jars the owner wishes to change their status. For instance, he decides that instead of selling the jars with the wine he wants to sell the wine and lend the jars. Or he decides that he wants to give terumah from one jar for the other, instead of giving from each and every jar. Does just uncorking the jar cause it to revert to its previous status?
  Bet Shammai says: the jars must be opened and emptied into the wine-press. Bet Hillel says: they must be opened but need not be emptied.  According to Bet Shammai, in order for the wine to revert to its previous status, he needs to open the jars and pour the wine back into the wine-press. If he does this, then he can put the wine back into the jar and then sell the wine and not the jars. In this way, the jars will not be maaser sheni. Bet Hillel is more lenient and says that all he has to do is just open the jars up again. He need not empty them into the wine-press. Now he can sell the wine and just lend out the jars, and thereby prevent the jars from becoming maaser sheni.
  When does this apply? In a place where they are usually sold closed, but in a place where they are usually sold open, the jar does not revert to hullin.  The leniency of Bet Hillel applies only if jars of wine are normally sold closed in that place. In such a place opening the jars will effect a change in their status. However, if jars of wine are normally sold open, the jar does not become hullin, non-sacred. If the jar had been maaser sheni, it remains maaser sheni.
  If, however, he wishes to be stringent upon himself and to sell [only] by measure, the jar reverts hullin.  There is one way that the jar can revert to hullin. If the seller opens the jar and decides to sell it by measure, then the jar won’t be sold with the wine and the jar becomes hullin. He will not be able to sell the whole jar of wine at one time, but just pour out wine into other people’s vessels.
  Rabbi Shimon says: also when one says to his friend, “This jar [of wine] I am selling to you from its jar, the jar reverts to hullin.  Rabbi Shimon provides another way for the jar to revert to being hullin. If the seller specifically says to the buyer that he is selling just the wine, then the buyer can use the jar and give it back to him when he is done with it. In this case the jar is not maaser sheni.
  
  
  
  
  
  Mishnah 1
  
  Introduction
  This mishnah deals with variants in the price of the produce of maaser sheni and how they affect the evaluation when he comes to redeem the produce for money.
  One who carries produce of maaser sheni from a place where it is expensive to a place where it is cheap, or from a place where it is cheap to a place where it is expensive, he redeems it according to the market price of the place [where he redeems it].  The price for the maaser sheni produce is determined by market-value of the place where it was redeemed. It doesn’t matter what the price of the produce was in the place where he grew and picked the produce.
  One who brings produce from the threshing-floor into the city, or jars of wine from the wine-press into the city, the increase in the price belongs to maaser sheni and the expenses [must be covered] from his household.  As produce and wine is brought into the city from the threshing floor, its price goes up in value because it is now closer to its market. This increase in price goes into the cost of redeeming the value of the maaser sheni. So if wine was one dinar for a jug at the threshing floor and 2 dinars in the city, if he redeems it in the city, he must pay the higher price. In addition, the expenses for carrying the wine into the city, hiring porters, donkeys, etc. come out of his pocket and are not taken out of the maaser sheni money.
  
  Mishnah 2
  
  Introduction
  This mishnah deals with various laws concerning the evaluation of maaser sheni when it comes time to redeem it.
  Maaser sheni may be redeemed at the lower market price: At the price at which the shopkeeper buys and not at which he sells. At the price at which the money-changer takes small change and not at the price at which he gives small change.  The mishnah provides two examples that illustrate the rule that maaser sheni can be redeemed at the lower market price. The first is what we call wholesale, and not retail. The second has to do with the exchange rate. When a moneychanger takes small coins and gives the customer a large coin which would be easier to carry to Jerusalem, he takes some percentage for himself. When he gives small change, he gives less small coins for the large coin. Today this is similar to the different rates you get at the bank whether you are buying dollars (your foreign money will be worth less) or selling dollars (the foreign money you buy will be more expensive). When one comes to exchange small maaser sheni coins for a large one, he can estimate the value of the larger coin at the higher rate, so that it counts for more small coins. This will save him some money.
  Maaser sheni may not be redeemed in an estimated lump.  When one redeems maaser sheni, he must measure the produce, either by counting how much there is (ten jars of wine) or how much it weighs (two seahs of wheat). He cannot make a lump of the produce and estimate how much is there.
  If its value is known, it may be redeemed according to the evaluation of one.  If the value of the produce is known, then only one person is needed to estimate its value. We should note that normal produce would have a typical market value.
  But if its value is not known, it must be redeemed according to the evaluation of three, as for instance in the case of wine which has formed a film, or produce which has begun to rot, or coins which have become rusty.  The evaluation of produce or coins that are beginning to deteriorate requires three people, because its value cannot be determined solely on their market value. Since it is more difficult to evaluate and people might disagree, it requires more people to do the estimate.
  
  Mishnah 3
  
  Introduction
  This mishnah teaches what happens if several different people want to redeem some maaser sheni produce.
  If the owner says, “With a sela [I will redeem this maaser sheni] and another person says “With a sela,” the owner has the first right, because he must add a fifth.  If the owner says that he wants to redeem the maaser sheni produce with a sela (a coin) and then another person says that he also wants to redeem the produce with the same amount of money, we take the owner’s sela because he has to add an extra fifth to the value (see the introduction). When the other person redeems the maaser sheni he need not add the extra fifth. What this means in our case is that more money will become maaser sheni, which is considered a good thing.
  If the owner says “With a sela” and another person says “With a sela and an issar,” the one who offered a sela and an issar has the first right, because he added to the principal.  However, if the other person offers more money, the other person’s evaluation is accepted, even if the total amount of money is less than it would be if the owner redeemed it and added the extra fifth. An issar is 1/96 of a sela, so when the other person redeems the maaser sheni for a sela and and an issar less money will become maaser sheni than if the owner had redeemed it for a sela and an added fifth. Nevertheless, in this case we only take the principle amount into account because the redemption is considered to be done with the principle the added fifth is merely extra.
  When one redeems his maaser sheni he must add a fifth, whether it is his own or it was given him as a gift.  The law that mandates that a person add an extra fifth when he redeems his maaser sheni applies whether the maaser sheni was his to begin with (he grew it or bought it) or he got it as a gift. Tomorrow’s mishnah will continue to deal with the topic of who has to add the additional fifth and who does not.
  
  Mishnah 4
  
  Introduction
  When a person redeems his own maaser sheni, he must add an extra fifth to the value, but when he redeems someone else’s maaser sheni produce, he need not do so. Our mishnah teaches that there are ways in which a person can get around having to add the extra fifth, but that this does not always work.
  One may act in a deceptive manner when it comes to maaser sheni.  It is possible to act in a deceptive manner when it comes to maaser sheni so that one can get out of paying the added fifth.
  How so? A man may say to his grown-up son or daughter, or to his Hebrew slave or female slave, “Take this money and redeem this maaser sheni for yourself.”  One is able to give money to one’s adult children or Hebrew slave in order for them to redeem the maaser sheni, as long as he says, “redeem this maaser sheni for yourself.” Even if the child or slave gives the produce back to the father and gives him back the maaser sheni money so that the father can bring it to Jerusalem, this is possible, because adult children and Hebrew slaves are independent of their father/master. These people can independently own property. So this is considered a case of one person redeeming someone else’s maaser sheni, and he does not need to add the extra fifth.
  But he may not say so to his son or daughter who are minors or to his Canaanite slave or female slave, because their hand is as his own hand.  In contrast, minors and non-Jewish slaves (called Canaanite slaves) cannot legally own property. Any money they make or any thing they find automatically belongs to the father/master. Therefore, when he gives them money to redeem maaser sheni, it is as if he is redeeming it himself, and he still needs to add the extra fifth.
  
  Mishnah 5
  
  Introduction
  This mishnah teaches a way for a person to redeem his maaser sheni without adding a fifth, even if he doesn’t have any coins in his hand. This is another form of deception a legal means by which to get around paying the added fifth.
  One who was standing at the threshing-floor and didn’t have any coins may say to his friend: “Behold, this produce is given to you as a gift,” and then he may say again, “Behold, let this produce be exchanged for money which I have in the house.” If this person had coins in his possession he could simply give the coins and the produce to his friend and have his friend redeem them for him. However, since he doesn’t, he must make a slight modification. First he officially gives the produce to his fellow, and now it legally belongs to the other, even if he intends to give it back. Now that the maaser sheni produce belongs to his friend, the original owner can redeem it by using coins that he has in his house, without adding the extra fifth. Had he simply redeemed them without first giving them to his friend, he would have had to add the extra fifth.
  
  Mishnah 6
  
  Introduction
  This mishnah deals with cases where there were fluctuations in the value of the maaser sheni produce from the time it was given to a buyer until the time it was redeemed.
  If one took possession from the owner of maaser sheni for a sela, but before he had time to redeem it, it stood at the price of two selas, he may give him one sela and make a profit of one sela and the maaser sheni remains his.  A person took produce from another person in order to buy them and the money would become maaser sheni, which the seller would then bring to Jerusalem and use there. When the purchaser took possession of the maaser sheni produce, it was worth a sela, but by the time he gave the sela coin to the seller, the price had risen to two selas. The purchaser may now give the seller a sela, to compensate him for the value of the produce when he acquired it. The seller will then have to take this sela to Jerusalem and use it there. The buyer profits the second sela and the extra sela of maaser sheni belongs to him. The buyer will have to redeem this second sela of maaser sheni and bring the money to Jerusalem and use it there.
  If he took possession from the owner of maaser sheni for two selas, but before he had time to redeem it, it stood at the price of one sela, he may give him one sela out of hullin [money] and one sela of his maaser sheni money.  In this case, he bought two selas worth of maaser sheni produce and now the value has gone down to one sela. The buyer is liable to pay two selas. However, he can pay back the seller one of the selas with hullin, non-sacred money. He can pay back the second sela with his own maaser sheni money, which the seller will then have to bring to Jerusalem. The main point is that on the one hand, he has to pay back two selas, because that is the value of the produce when he bought it. On the other hand, there needs to be only one sela of maaser sheni, because that is the current value of the produce.
  If the owner was an am haaretz, he should give him out of [maaser sheni of] demai.  If the seller was an am haaretz, one can’t give him actually maaser sheni money, because he may not take it to Jerusalem. Therefore, he should give him maaser sheni money whose source was demai (doubtfully tithed produce). If the am haaretz doesn’t take it to Jerusalem,
  
  Mishnah 7
  
  If one redeemed maaser sheni but did not call it by its name: Rabbi Yose says: it is sufficient. But Rabbi Judah says: he must name it explicitly.  When one redeems maaser sheni he should declare that these coins are now maaser sheni. If he redeems the produce without declaring that the coins are maaser sheni, Rabbi Yose says it is sufficient. Rabbi Judah disagrees and says that without declaring that the coins are maaser sheni, the redemption has not been done.
  If a man was speaking to a woman concerning her divorce or her betrothal, and gave her a get or betrothal money but did not state explicitly [what he was doing]: Rabbi Yose says: it is sufficient. But Rabbi Judah says: he must say it explicitly.  A similar halakhah is related concerning marriage and divorce. If a man and woman are talking about their divorce or betrothal and he gives her a get (a divorce document) or betrothal money (kiddushin) without saying, “Behold, this is your get” or “Behold, you are betrothed to me” according to Rabbi Yose, she is betrothed or divorced, whereas Rabbi Judah says that he must state explicitly what he is doing.
  
  Mishnah 8
  
  Introduction
  It would have been common practice to set aside a coin and then use it progressively as money for maaser sheni produce. In our mishnah a person sets aside an issar, which is worth 1/24 of a dinar, and then uses that issar as redemption money for a future amount of maaser sheni produce that he will eat. The question that arises is: what happens if the value of the issar changes?
  One who sets aside an issar [for the redemption of maaser sheni] and on its account he ate [the value of] half [an issar of maaser sheni] and then went to another place where [the issar] was worth a pondion, he may eat of [maaser sheni the value of] another issar.  A person set aside an issar to use as redemption money for maaser sheni produce that he will eat in the future. Then he ate half of an issar’s worth of maaser sheni, meaning that half the issar was still not maaser sheni money. Afterwards he took his issar and went to a place where the issar was worth a pundion, which is two issars. The issar doubled in value, so the half that was left unredeemed was now worth a full issar in the old terms. Therefore, he can redeem another issar’s worth of maaser sheni produce before the coin is fully maaser sheni.
  One who sets aside a pundion [for the redemption of maaser sheni] and on its account he ate [the value of] half [a pundion of maaser sheni] and then went to another place where [the pundion] was worth an issar, he may eat [maaser sheni the value of] another half [an issar].  This is the opposite case. He set aside a pundion, which was worth two issars, and he ate half of the value. Then he took the coin and went to another place where the pundion was worth half as much, only an issar. He can now only redeem another half of an issar’s worth of maaser sheni produce, because the half pundion that was not yet maaser sheni is now only worth half of an issar. The rule seems quite straightforward the value of the coin is determined by its value in the place where he redeems the produce.
  One who sets aside an issar of maaser sheni [money] he should eat on its account eleven parts of the value of an issar, or [he should eat an additional] one hundredth of an issar. Bet Shammai say: in both cases one tenth part [of an issar]. But Bet Hillels says: in the case of certain [maaser sheni] an eleventh part, in the case of demai a tenth part.  The following is Albeck’s explanation of this section. We should note that its language is very difficult and there are many different interpretations. The mishnah refers to a person who is in Jerusalem and eating produce as maaser sheni based on the coin that he has at home. As he eats the produce the coin will be redeemed and will revert to being hullin. The custom in their time was to buy food at 1/10 of an issar or 1/100 of an issar. Since the price of an issar would rise and fall as we saw in the previous section, he would need to eat 11 parts of an issar and not ten parts, and only then would the issar become hullin. Alternatively, if people are buying produce at 1/100 increments, then he needs to eat 101 parts of the produce before the issar is totally redeemed. This is a stringency he needs to buy more produce than the coin may actually be worth. Bet Shammai says that in all cases, both cases of certain maaser sheni and demai, doubtful maaser sheni, one needs to eat only 10 parts of the issar, meaning a complete issar. He does not need to eat the extra 11th part, in any case. Bet Hillel is slightly stricter. When the coin was used to redeem produce that was certain maaser sheni, he needs to eat the eleventh part. But when the produce was used to redeem demai, produce that already may have been tithed, all he needs to eat is the first ten parts, the actual value. We don’t have to be concerned lest the issar increased in value, when the produce may not have needed to be tithed in the first place.
  
  Mishnah 9
  
  Introduction
  Our mishnah deals with coins that are found and whether we have to be concerned lest they are maaser sheni.
  Any money found is considered hullin, even gold dinars with silver and with copper coins.  We need not be concerned lest money that is found is maaser sheni money. Since most money is not maaser sheni, we can consider it hullin. Even if coins that are not commonly put together, such as gold, silver and copper, are found together, we need not be concerned that a person gathered together his maaser sheni money.
  If a potsherd was found with the money on which was written “tithe” this is considered maaser sheni [money].  The only time we must consider the coins to be maaser sheni is when there is a note with them and it is written on the note, “maaser.” Obviously, in this case the coins must be treated as maaser sheni.
  
  Mishnah 10
  
  Introduction
  In yesterday’s mishnah we discussed whether one must be concerned that found coins are maaser sheni. In today’s mishnah we discuss other things that are found and whether we must be concerned lest they are holy items.
  One who finds a vessel one which was written “korban:”  The mishnah deals with a vessel that is found on which is written “korban.” Korban is the Hebrew word for sacrifice but by extension can mean, “holy.” If the vessel and the stuff inside of it are holy, then they belong to the Temple and non-holy use cannot be made of them.
  Rabbi Judah says: if it was of clay, it is itself hullin and what is in it is a korban (. But if it was of metal it is itself korban and what is in it is hullin.  Rabbi Judah makes a distinction between clay and metal vessels. People do not generally dedicate cheap clay vessels to the Temple and therefore, the clay vessel on which the word “korban” is written is itself still hullin, non-sacred. The word “korban” is assumed to refer to the stuff inside, which we must treat as holy. When it comes to metal vessels, which were valuable, one might dedicate the vessel itself to the Temple. Hence, according to Rabbi Judah, the vessel itself is considered holy. Since the vessel is assumed to be holy, Rabbi Judah says that the stuff inside is considered to be hullin.
  They said to him: it is not the custom of people to put what is common into what is korban.  The other sages respond that people wouldn’t put hullin, non-sacred produce, into a holy vessel. Therefore, if we assume that the vessel is holy, we must also assume that the produce is holy.
  
  Mishnah 11
  
  One who finds a vessel on which was written a kof, it is korban.If a mem, it is maaser.If a dalet, it is demai.If a tet, it is tevel (untithed.If a tav, it is terumah.For in the time of danger people would write a tav for terumah.Rabbi Yose says: they may all stand for the names of people.Rabbi Yose said: even if he finds a jar which was full of produce and on it was written ‘terumah’ it may yet be considered hullin, because I can say that last year it was full of produce of terumah and was afterwards emptied.Sections one-six: According to the first opinion in the mishnah, people would write on vessels the first letter of the type of produce contained in the vessel. The reason that they wouldn’t write the whole word is that in the time of danger if people were caught observing the commandments, the Roman authorities would punish them. To avoid this danger, they would write only the first letter. Hence, if one finds a vessel with one of these letters on it, he must be concerned lest the contents are that type of produce.Section seven: Rabbi Yose is lenient and says that these letters may stand for the names of the people who own them. Therefore, we need not be concerned lest they are these types of produce.Section eight: Finally, Rabbi Yose states an even greater leniency. Even if the jar says on it “terumah” we need not be concerned lest it is actually terumah, because it might be that the jar held terumah last year. Since jars are reused, we can’t be certain that the contents match what is written on the jar.
  
  Mishnah 12
  
  One who says to his son, “There is maaser sheni [produce] in this corner,” but the son found [produce] in another corner, this may be considered hullin.  If a father tells his son that there is maaser sheni produce in one corner of the house and the son finds produce in another corner of the house, he can assume that the produce that he finds is not maaser sheni. We can assume someone took the maaser sheni produce and that which he finds is something else.
  [If the father said] there was there a hundred [of maaser sheni] and the son found two hundred, the remainder is hullin.  If his father tells him that there were 100 dinars worth of maaser sheni coins, and the son finds 200 dinars, then the extra is hullin. We do not assume that the father made a mistake and that all 200 dinars are really maaser sheni.
  [If the father said there were there] two hundred and the son found one hundred, it is all maaser sheni.  On the other hand, if his father tells him that there were 200 dinars of maaser sheni and he finds only 100 there, we have to assume that all 100 are maaser sheni.
  
  
  
  
  
  Mishnah 1
  
  Introduction
  The final chapter of Maaser Sheni deals with vineyards and other fruit-bearing trees which are in their fourth year. This topic is addressed in Leviticus 19:23-24:
  When you enter the land and plant any tree for food, you shall regard its fruit as forbidden. Three years it shall be forbidden for you, not to be eaten. In the fourth year all its fruit shall be set aside for jubilation before the LORD; and only in the fifth year may you use its fruit -- that its yield to you may be increased: I the LORD am your God.”
  While the Torah mentions only the vineyard, the rabbis extended this law to include all fruit-bearing trees.  Thus during the first three years of a trees growth one cannot eat the produce. This is called “orlah” and there is an entire tractate dedicated to the subject. During the fourth year the fruits are holy and they must be brought to Jerusalem and eaten there, or redeemed, like maaser sheni, and the money is brought to Jerusalem and used there to buy food.
  Our mishnah deals with the topic of how they would mark a vineyard to let people know that it was in its fourth year.
  A vineyard in its fourth year, they mark it with clods of earth, and of orlah with potter's clay, and graves with lime which is dissolved and poured on.  In order to let people know that various vineyards or orchards were prohibited, they would mark them off in different ways. They would mark off fourth-year vineyards and orchards with special clods of earth. If the vineyard or orchard was of “orlah” trees from their first three years then they would mark it off with potter’s clay. Finally, the mishnah notes that in order to let priests know where graves were located, they would mark them off with lime.
  Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel said: When does this apply? In the seventh year.  Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says that they didn’t always mark off fourth-year and orlah vineyards and orchards, only during the seventh year. During the seventh year all produce is considered ownerless and anyone can enter a field and eat from the trees. To let people know that this produce was prohibited because it was in its first four years of growth they would mark it off. But during other years, one is not allowed to enter into another person’s field and eat from the trees. One who does so is a thief. According to Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel we don’t need to take special actions to prevent thieves from eating prohibited food. On the contrary, we allow the thief to transgress another transgression as well, in the hope that he will receive his just punishment. This is, in my opinion, a radical, but interesting concept. Do we try to prevent people who are committing moral crimes (thievery) from also committing “ritual” crimes, such as eating prohibited food? Or do we hold back and watch them sin even more?
  The conscientious used to put down money and say: any fruit gathered from this vineyard may be exchanged for this money.  Those who conscientiously observed the commandments would not abide by Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel’s principal. Rather, they would go even a step further and set aside money that would be redeemed for any fruit that was picked from the tree/vineyard during its fourth year. When a person would enter the field, without the owner’s permission or knowledge, and he would steal some fruit from the tree, the sanctity of the fruit would automatically transfer to the money. This would prevent the thief from committing the additional sin of eating produce during its fourth year. We can see here that the “conscientious” refer to a group of people who were willing to spend their own money to make sure that others didn’t unwittingly transgress.
  
  Mishnah 2
  
  Introduction
  As we learned in the introduction to yesterday’s mishnah, during the fourth year of its growth, the produce of a vineyard or an orchard must be brought to Jerusalem and eaten there. Our mishnah teaches that produce that grew more than a day’s journey from Jerusalem can be redeemed, like maaser sheni. The money would then be brought to Jerusalem and used to buy food there.
  [The produce of] a vineyard in its fourth year was brought up to Jerusalem within a distance of one day’s journey on each side.  Within a day’s walk on each side of Jerusalem, produce from fourth-year vineyards and orchards would be taken to Jerusalem and not redeemed.
  And what is the border [of a day’s journey on each side]? Eilat to the south, Akrabat on the north, Lod to the west, and the Jordan [river] to the east.  “Eilat” in the Mishnah is of course, not modern Eilat, which is far more than a one day’s journey from Jerusalem. Some scholars say mishnaic Eilat was near Hebron.
  When produce increased, it was decreed that it can be redeemed even if the vineyard was close to the wall.  According to the mishnah, the rule that produce within a day’s walk from Jerusalem had to be brought to Jerusalem and could not be redeemed referred to a time when produce was scarce. At that time, to encourage people to bring their produce to Jerusalem, they wouldn’t allow people who lived close to Jerusalem to redeem it. Once produce became more plentiful, they began to allow people to redeem the produce even right next to the walls of Jerusalem.
  And there was a stipulation on this matter, that whenever it was so desired, the arrangement would be restored as it had been before.  When they changed the rule, they made a stipulation that whenever they wished to change the law back to its original state, they could do so. Interestingly, this implies that without this stipulation, it would have been difficult to change the law. In order to make the law flexible, they had to include in it a special stipulation that when they wanted to, they could change it again.
  Rabbi Yose says: this was the stipulation after the Temple was destroyed, and the stipulation was that when the Temple should be rebuilt the arrangement would be restored as it had been before.  Rabbi Yose relates a different version concerning when the law changed. When the Temple was destroyed they changed the law to allow one to redeem produce even right outside the walls of Jerusalem. At that time, they made a stipulation that when the Temple was rebuilt, it would again be forbidden to redeem fourth-year produce (and by extension, maaser sheni) within one day’s journey from Jerusalem.
  
  Mishnah 3
  
  Introduction
  This mishnah is found word for word in Peah 7:6. In it Bet Shammai and Bet Hillel argue whether when one redeems the grapes of a fourth-year vineyard, one has to add an extra fifth, as one does with maaser sheni. They also argue whether the law which mandates the removal of tithes from one’s home at the end of the fourth year applies to this produce.
  [The grapes of] a vineyard in its fourth year:Bet Shammai says: the laws of the added fifth and removal do not apply to them; But Bet Hillel says: they do.  According to Bet Shammai when one redeems the grapes of a fourth year vineyard one does not need to add a fifth of the value, as one does for maaser sheni.  With regard to maaser sheni Leviticus 27:31 states, “If anyone wishes to redeem any of his tithes, he must add one-fifth to them.”  This, according to Bet Shammai, was stated only with regard to tithes and not with regard to the fourth-year vineyard. Bet Shammai also holds that another rule concerning tithes does not apply.  Deuteronomy 14:28 states, “At the end of three years you shall bring out the full tithe of your yield of that year.” This means that at the end of three years one must get rid of all of the tithes within one’s household and give them to whomever they rightfully belong.  According to Bet Shammai one does not have to get rid of the wine made of fourth year grapes.  In short, Bet Shammai says that while there is some similarity between fourth year grapes and second tithe, they are not similar in all aspects. Bet Hillel says that all of the laws of second tithe apply to fourth year grapes.  Therefore, when one redeems them he must add a fifth and they must be removed at the end of three years.
  Bet Shammai says: the laws of peret and the defective clusters apply to them, and the poor can redeem the grapes for themselves. But Bet Hillel says: all [of them] go to the wine-press.  The laws of peret (fallen grapes) and defective clusters (olelot) do not apply to tithes.  Since Bet Shammai does not hold that the laws of tithes apply to the fourth year grapes, they therefore hold that the laws of peret and defective clusters do apply.  The poor people would take their peret and olelot, redeem them, and bring the money to Jerusalem, just as the owner does with his own grapes/wine. Bet Hillel, on the other hand, holds that the poor do not receive the peret and the olelot because the agricultural gifts given to the poor do not apply to tithes. Since fourth year produce is like tithes, no agricultural gifts must be given. Rather, the owners take all of the grapes and bring them to the winepress, make wine and then either bring the wine to Jerusalem or redeem the wine and bring the money to Jerusalem.
  
  Mishnah 4
  
  Introduction
  This mishnah deals with the procedure for redeeming fourth year produce. How is the value of the produce evaluated?
  How does one redeem the fruit of a plant in its fourth year? The owner puts down a basket in the presence of three [people] and says: “How many such baskets would a man wish to redeem for himself for a sela on condition that the costs [to produce the fruit] shall be on his house?  In the presence of three people, who will acts as estimators, the owner puts a sample of the produce to be redeemed into a basket. He then asks how much a person would redeem for himself the produce in the basket, under the condition that he would have to pay for the costs involved in growing the produce. We would term this “profit.” This is very important: the owner doesn’t redeem the produce at market cost; he only pays the potential profit. This is why three people are needed to do the estimate. It doesn’t take three people to figure out how much something costs at the market. What is more difficult is figuring out how much it would have cost to grow the produce.
  And then he puts down the money and says: “Whatever shall be picked from this plant may it be exchanged for this money at the price of so many baskets for a sela.”  Once we have figured out how many baskets of produce can be redeemed for a sela, the owner puts down a sela and says that the sela will redeem however many baskets of future produce were determined.
  
  Mishnah 5
  
  Introduction
  During the sabbatical year, it is forbidden to work the land. Therefore, there is no cost in growing the produce, and one who redeems it cannot reduce this cost.
  But in the seventh year he must redeem it for its full value.  As was explained in the introduction, since one cannot work the land during the sabbatical year, when redeeming it there are no costs to reduce from the produce. It must, therefore, be redeemed for full market value.
  If [in other years] it had all been made ownerless property, the person [who redeems it] can only claim the cost of picking it.  If in other years during the sabbatical cycle, one makes his field ownerless, and then someone comes and picks the produce, the one who redeems the maaser sheni can only claim the costs involved in picking it. These will be quite minimal, just what one would pay to have someone pick his produce.
  One who redeems his own plant in its fourth year, he must add a fifth of its value,   whether the fruit was his own or was given him as a gift.  This follows the opinion of Bet Hillel from mishnah three, who holds that the same rules that govern maaser sheni govern fourth year produce, and it is the same rule we saw in 4:3 with regard to maaser sheni.
  
  Mishnah 6
  
  Introduction
  There are two places in which the Torah discusses removing tithes from one’s home. The first is Deuteronomy 14:28-29, “Every third year you shall bring out the full tithe of your yield of that year, but leave it within your settlements.29 Then the Levite, who has no hereditary portion as you have, and the stranger, the fatherless, and the widow in your settlements shall come and eat their fill, so that the LORD your God may bless you in all the enterprises you undertake.”
  The second place is Deuteronomy 26:12-15, “When you have set aside in full the tenth part of your yield -- in the third year, the year of the tithe -- and have given it to the Levite, the stranger, the fatherless, and the widow, that they may eat their fill in your settlements,
  13 you shall declare before the LORD your God: "I have cleared out the consecrated portion from the house; and I have given it to the Levite, the stranger, the fatherless, and the widow, just as You commanded me; I have neither transgressed nor neglected any of Your commandments: 14 I have not eaten of it while in mourning, I have not cleared out any of it while I was unclean, and I have not deposited any of it with the dead. I have obeyed the LORD my God; I have done just as You commanded me. 15 Look down from Your holy abode, from heaven, and bless Your people Israel and the soil You have given us, a land flowing with milk and honey, as You swore to our fathers."
  The remainder of tractate Maaser Sheni deals with the laws concerning removing tithes from one’s possession, which is supposed to occur, according to the rabbis, at the end of the third and sixth years of the sabbatical cycle, or at the beginning of the fourth and seventh years, depending on how you look at it.
  On the eve of the first [others read “last”] festival-day of Pesah in the fourth and in the seventh [years of the sabbatical cycle] the removal was performed.  Right before the last day of Pesah, after the third and sixth years have been completed, meaning at the beginning of the fourth and seventh years, one is commanded to remove any of the tithes that one may have kept lingering in one’s home. This is how the rabbis understand Deuteronomy 14:28, “Every three years.”
  Terumah and the terumah of tithe were given to their owners, the first tithe was given to its owner, the tithe of the poor to its owner, and maaser sheni and first-fruits were removed in every place.  Each agricultural gift is given to its rightful owner. Terumah and any terumah removed from tithes must be given to the priests, first tithe is given to the Levites, and poor tithe is given to the poor. Maaser Sheni and first fruits are special cases because normally these should be brought to Jerusalem and eaten there. There is no one to give them to. Therefore, they should be brought out and left to rot so that they can be totally removed from the world.
  Rabbi Shimon says: first-fruits were given to the priests like terumah.  According to Rabbi Shimon first fruits are given to the priest. That is what the Torah means when it says, “And the priest shall take the basket and place it before the altar” (Deuteronomy 26:4). Rabbi Shimon also derives midrashically that first-fruits have the status of terumah. Since first-fruits are given to the priest, they do not need to be destroyed.
  As for a cooked dish [with maaser sheni in it]: Bet Shammai says: it must be removed. But Bet Hillel say: lo, it may be considered as already removed.  According to Bet Shammai, if there is a cooked dish that has maaser sheni produce in it, it must be removed just as maaser sheni itself must be removed. Bet Hillel holds that since one can’t see the maaser sheni, because it has blended in with the dish, it need not be removed.
  
  Mishnah 7
  
  Introduction
  This mishnah addresses the question of what to do with maaser sheni once the Temple has destroyed and it is impossible to eat it in Jerusalem.
  One who had produce at this time and the time of removal arrived:Bet Shammai says: he must exchange it for money.  According to Bet Shammai, when the Temple no longer stands one should redeem maaser sheni produce with money and then put the money aside.  Better to have the money sitting around then the produce. Perhaps Bet Shammai reasons that money will last longer than produce, so if he redeems the produce for money there is a chance that when the Temple is rebuilt he can bring it to Jerusalem.
  But Bet Hillel says: it is all the same whether it becomes money or it remains fruit.  Bet Hillel says it doesn’t matter whether the maaser sheni is produce or money, it must be removed at the end of the third or sixth year, because it can’t be brought to Jerusalem when the Temple no longer stands. So he should just leave the maaser sheni as produce and let it rot (see above 1:5).
  
  Mishnah 8
  
  Rabbi Judah said: in early times they used to send to householders in the provinces [saying:] “Hasten to set right your produce before the time of removal arrives,” until Rabbi Akiva came and taught that all produce which has not reached the time of tithing is exempt from the removal. Before Rabbi Akiva, rabbis used to send messages to people all over the provinces of Israel warning them that they should hurry up and separate terumah and all tithes from their produce before the time to remove them from the home comes around. Furthermore, they won’t be able to do the confession over tithes (Deuteronomy 26:12-15) until they separate all the tithes from their produce. This all changed when Rabbi Akiva taught that all produce that has not reached the time when it must be tithed need not be removed from the home. These times were explicated in Maasrot 1:2-4.
  
  Mishnah 9
  
  Introduction
  This mishnah deals with how a person can set aside his tithes and give them to the rightful owners if his produce is at a distance from him. This would be necessary if the time for removal was drawing near and he needed to separate the tithes and give them away before that time passed.
  One whose produce was far away from him, he must call it by name.  A person can separate his tithes even if he is not near his produce. He doesn’t need to be in close, physical contact with his produce in order to set aside the tithes and to transfer them to their proper owners. The mishnah now brings in the story of Rabban Gamaliel to illustrate exactly how this is done.
  Once it happened that Rabban Gamaliel and the elders were traveling by ship, and Rabban Gamaliel said: “The tithe which I shall measure out in the future is given to Joshua, and the place which it is in is leased to him. The other tithe which I shall measure out in the future is given to Akiva ben Joseph that he may hold it for the poor, and the place which it is in is leased to him.”  Rabban Gamaliel is traveling on a boat when the time to remove the tithes comes. He obviously can’t get to the produce to physically set it aside, so what he does is declare that the tithe that he has in such and such a place is given to Rabbi Joshua, a Levi who was traveling with him. To Akiva ben Joseph, known to you and me as Rabbi Akiva, he gave the poor tithe, not because R. Akiva himself was poor, but because R. Akiva was the charity collector who gave out tithes to the poor. Just allotting the tithes to Rabbi Joshua and Akiva was not sufficient. He also had to lease them the space where the tithes were located. This was a technique that he used so that they could acquire the tithes without actually taking them into their hands. Transactions involving produce cannot be done with mere statements, so in order to transfer to them the produce he also had to transfer to them, at least temporarily, the land on which the tithes were currently being stored. Rabbi Joshua and Akiva would then pay Rabban Gamaliel for the rental of the land (this is stated explicitly at the end of section three) and in this way, their land could acquire the produce found on it.
  Rabbi Joshua said: “The tithe [taken from terumah] which I shall measure out is given to Elazar ben Azariah, and the place which it is in is leased to him,” and they each received rent one from another.  Now that Rabbi Joshua had received tithe from Rabban Gamaliel, he needed to transfer the terumat maaser (the terumah that the Levite gives to the priest) to Elazar ben Azariah, who is a priest. As above, he also rented him the place where the tithe was being held and then Elazar paid him the rent. In this way, everyone successfully separated their tithes and they could keep sailing on their ship, without worrying about their tithes.
  
  Mishnah 10
  
  Introduction
  This mishnah and the following three mishnayot are an extended midrash on Deuteronomy 26:12-15, the tithe confession. We should note that according to a simple reading of these verses, they only refer to one type of tithe, although it is not entirely clear to whom this tithe is allotted. However, the rabbis midrashically read into these verses all of the various types of agricultural gifts that a person must remove from his home before he can recite the tithe confession.
  At minhah on the last festival day they would make the confession.  The tithe confession would be made at the last possible time on the last day of Pesah, at minhah, or late afternoon.
  How was the confession made?  The actual confession consisted simply of reading all of the verses from Deuteronomy. The mishnah interpolates these verses with midrash, meant to explain what the various phrases in the confession refer to.
  “I have cleared out the holy portion from the house”  this refers to maaser sheni and the fruit of plants in their fourth year.  “The holy portion” can refer to maaser sheni which is called “holy” in Leviticus 27:30. And since according to Bet Hillel the rules of maaser sheni also apply to fourth-year fruits, they too can be called “holy.”
  “I have given them to the Levite”   this refers to the tithe of the levites.  The “Levite” is a reference to first tithe, given to the Levites.
  “And also I have given them”   this refers to terumah and the terumah of tithe.  “And also” is taken to be an additional reference, for these words are not strictly needed for the verse to work. Since terumah is not referred to explicitly in the confession, the rabbis see these additional words as a reference to terumah and to the terumah taken from tithe.
  “To the stranger, to the orphans, and to the widow”  this refers to the tithe of the poor, gleanings, forgotten sheaves, and the corners of the field, even though these do not prevent   [one from making] the confession.  “To the stranger, to the orphans, and to the widow,” refers to poor tithe, which must be removed from one’s house before the confession can be recited. In addition, the mishnah also sees here a reference to the other agricultural gifts given to the poor, even though these do not strictly need to be given before one recites the confession.
  “Out of the house”   this refers to hallah.  Finally, the mishnah reads into the confession a reference to “hallah” the part of the dough separated and given to the priest. We will be starting tractate Hallah in just a few short days so get ready (and start baking!).
  
  Mishnah 11
  
  Introduction
  This mishnah continues to expound up Deuteronomy 26.
  “According to all Your commandments which You have commanded me,” thus, if he took out maaser sheni before the first tithe he cannot make the confession.  The confessor states that he has properly performed all of the mitzvot involved with separating tithes. The first issue is that he has performed the tithes in their proper order. He didn’t take out maaser sheni before he took out first tithe (see Terumot  3:6).
  “I have not transgressed any of Your commandments” I have not set apart [tithes] from one kind for a different kind, nor from plucked [produce] for [produce still] joined [to the soil], nor from new [produce] for old [produce], nor from old [produce] for new.  He now confesses that he didn’t do anything else that is prohibited when it comes to tithing. We have learned all of these issues before (see Terumot 1:5, 2:4). Basically, one has to give terumot and maasrot from like produce, and one can’t separate one type of produce in order to exempt another.
  “Neither have I forgotten”   I have not forgotten to bless You, nor to make mention of You name over it.  When one separates terumah and tithes, one must make a blessing, “Who has sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us to separate terumot and maasrot.” “I have not forgotten” is a reference to the fact that he didn’t forget to recite this blessing.
  
  Mishnah 12
  
  Introduction
  And more midrash….
  “I have not eaten from it in my mourning (”  thus, if he had eaten it in his mourning (, he cannot make the confession.  The word for mourning used here is “oni” in the Torah, and “aninut” in the midrashic explanation. This is not the full seven day period of mourning but the day that one of a person’s close relatives die. If one of a person’s seven close relatives dies, then he/she is an onen on that day and is not allowed to eat holy things, such as terumah, maaser sheni or sacrifices. After the day is over and the body has been buried the person can eat terumah and maaser sheni, as long as he is ritually pure. If he ate of it while he was an onen, he can’t make the confession.
  “Neither have I removed any of it when unclean”   thus, if he had removed it in uncleanness he cannot make the confession.  The removal must be done in a state of purity because if he removes it while impure, he will cause the produce to become impure. If he did the removal while impure, he can’t recite the confession.
  “And I have not given any of it to the dead”  I have not used any of it for a coffin or shrouds for the dead, and I have not given any of it to other mourners.  The Torah cryptically (pun intended) states, “I have not given any of it to the dead.” Tigay (JPS Commentary on Deuteronomy, p. 244) explains that this originally meant “to feed their spirits…The ancients believed that the living can assist the spirits of the dead in Sheol by providing them with food and drink.” The rabbis do not seem familiar with this concept and therefore they interpret it to mean that one cannot use maaser sheni money to aid the dead in practical ways, either by using the money to buy a coffin or shrouds, or by giving the money to other mourners (onenim) so that they could use the money for their dead.
  “I have listened to the voice of the Lord my God”   I have brought it to the chosen house.  “The Chosen House” refers to all of Jerusalem and not just the Temple. The confessor states that he has brought the maaser sheni to the city of Jerusalem so that he could eat it there.
  “I have done just as you commanded me   I have rejoiced and made others rejoice.  Deuteronomy 14:26-27 stipulates that when a person comes to Jerusalem he should rejoice and cause others to rejoice. The midrash in our mishnah reads this mitzvah into the confession.
  
  Mishnah 13
  
  “Look down from Your holy abode, from heaven”   We have done what You decreed upon us, You too do what You have promised us.“Look down from Your holy abode, from heaven, and bless Your people Israel”   with sons and daughters.“And the land which You have given us”   with dew and rain and with offspring of cattle.“As You swore to our fathers, a land flowing with milk and honey”  that You may give a good taste to the produce.You guessed it more midrash!The confession has now turned from what the confessor, and by extension all of Israel, claims to have done, to the blessings that the confessor is asking. The confession might be understood as a petition to fulfill a contract we have fulfilled our side of the bargain, Israel is saying, now we ask of You, God, to fulfill yours.The midrashim themselves should be self-understood, so I have not commented below.
  
  Mishnah 14
  
  Introduction
  This mishnah contains an additional midrash on the verse, “And the land which You have given us” which was cited in yesterday’s mishnah.
  From here they said that Israelites and mamzerim may make the confession, but not converts, nor freed slaves, since they have no inheritance in the land.  Since the verse states, “and the Land which You have given us” only those people who received land in the original conquest of Israel can recite the confession. This would exclude converts and freed slaves who did not receive any inheritance in the land of Israel because they were not part of the original 12 tribes. However, it would include Israelites and even mamzerim, for although they were born from an illicit union, they can still trace their lineage to the original twelve tribes.
  Rabbi Meir says: neither do priests and Levites since they did not take a share of the land.  Rabbi Meir notes that priests and Levites also did not receive a share of the land, and therefore they too cannot make the confession. The land was divided up to the 12 tribes and Levi is not considered one of the tribes (Joseph’s tribe is divided into Menashe and Ephraim).
  Rabbi Yose says: they have the Levitical cities.  Although the Levites did not receive a full geographical region, they did receive the Levitical cities (see Numbers 35:1-8). According to Rabbi Yose, this is sufficient for them to be able to recite the tithes confession.
  
  Mishnah 15
  
  Introduction
  This mishnah contains some historical information concerning changes in practice initiated by Yohanan the high priest, who lived some time during the late Second Temple period. The first of these changes deals with the tithe confession, and hence this mishnah is brought here.
  Yohanan the high priest stopped [the recitation] of the confession of the tithes.  Yohanan ended the recitation of the tithes confession. There are two explanations as to why he put an end to this practice. The first is that in his day people stopped separating tithes and they only separated terumah. Therefore, they couldn’t make the tithes declaration. The second explanation is that at this point in history they were giving the tithes to the priests, and therefore they could no longer say, “And I have given of it to the Levite.”
  He also abolished the “wakers” and the “strikers.”  Psalm 44:24 reads, “Rouse yourself; why do you sleep O Lord?” The Levites would recite this Psalm when reciting the Psalm over the daily sacrifice (today we recite these as “songs of the day”). These Levites were called the “Wakers.” Yohanan abolished this practice because it gave the impression that God could sleep, or that God was asleep and not listening to their petitions. “The strikers” refers to the priests who would strike a calf about to be sacrificed in order to stun it and make it easier to sacrifice. Yohanan abolished this practice lest the blow make the animal into a “terefah” an animal with a mortal wound. Such an animal cannot be eaten. Indeed, this issue is still at hand today and is the problem that ritual slaughterers have with administering a blow to the animal before its throat is cut.
  Until his days the hammer used to beat in Jerusalem.  Before Yohanan’s time in Jerusalem you could hear the hammer strike during hol hamoed, the intermediate days of the festival. People were working on things that needed to be done during the festival, and this type of work is permitted on hol hamoed. However, Yohanan was strict and forbade this hammer striking because it gave the impression that work could proceed as usual on hol hamoed. Hearing the hammer might lead others to perform truly prohibited work, so Yohanan abolished the practice.
  And in his days one did not have to ask about demai.  Before Yohanan’s time when people bought produce, they had to ask the seller if he had separated the tithes. If he had not, they wouldn’t buy from him because it would cost them to separate all of the tithes. Yohanan decreed that people could buy produce from anyone and they could treat it as demai. This would mean the following: they wouldn’t have to separate terumah, because they could assume that the seller had already taken out terumah. They would have to separate the tithes, but they could eat the tithes themselves since anyone can eat tithes. Since the Levite can’t prove that these tithes were necessary (they may have already been tithed), the owner gets to keep them. They would take out terumah from the tithe and give it to the kohen, and they would have to take out second tithe. But the second tithe they can keep as long as they eat it in Jerusalem. So the only thing that they would have to give away would be the terumat maaser, which is only a tiny percentage of the overall purchase. In this way, Yohanan created a way for people to buy produce from anyone. Congratulations!  We have finished Maaser Sheni! It is a tradition at this point to thank God for helping us finish learning the tractate and to commit ourselves to going back and relearning it, so that we may not forget it and so that its lessons will stay with us for all of our lives. Maaser Sheni was brought to Jerusalem and eaten there. The purpose of this law was to bring people to Jerusalem and to make them bring their produce with them or at least buy food and have a celebratory feast there. Most people would fulfill this on one of the three festivals. Thus, Jerusalem would be full of people, eating good food together and celebrating the Jewish calendar. Today, I think we can fulfill the spirit of this law by visiting Jerusalem and celebrating there with other Jews. We can even return to the colorful markets and buy an array of produce, fish and meat that taste as good as anything that I’ve ever had (although I admit that my culinary experience is somewhat lacking). Jerusalem is like glue that bonds the Jewish people to one another, and it works best when people actually come to Jerusalem. As many of you know, I work in Jerusalem, although I don’t actually live there. Driving to Jerusalem every day can easily become a routine, one that I don’t appreciate enough. So personally, this tractate serves to remind me that I don’t work just in Jerusalem, I work in the Holy City of Jerusalem, where all Jews used to bring their maaser sheni and rejoice together. Tomorrow we begin Tractate Hallah.