Commentary for Peah 7:14

כל זית. כזית הנטופה בשעתו – on account that it drips oil, they called it “dripping,” even though it does not drip every year long since when they raised up this name on that fact that at its time, it drips. If he forgot it, It is not forgetting, as it is written (Deuteronomy 24:19): “And overlook a sheaf in the field,” a sheaf that you always forget it, excluding that which you remember after a while.

Introduction This mishnah deals with the laws of forgotten as they apply to olive trees.

שופכני – that its olives spill much oil.

An olive tree that has a name in the field, such as the olive tree of Netofah in its time, and he forgot it, it is not deemed “forgotten.” The laws of “forgotten” do not apply to special olive trees, ones that are famous for something or other. The mishnah even mentions one of these special olive trees, the “olive tree of Netofah,” a city in the Lower Galilee. In its time, this olive tree was a real winner!

בישני – that it embarrasses all the rest of the trees from the great among of oil that goes out from it, more than its neighbors.

To what does this apply? [Only to a tree distinguished] by its name, produce, or position. “By its name:” if it were a shifkhoni or beshani. “By its produce:” if it yields large quantities. “By its position:” if it stands at the side of the winepress or near the gap in the fence. The previous law applies only if the tree was distinguished by name, by its produce or by its place in the field. Thus if it had a special name like “shifkhoni” (because it spills, shofekh, a lot of oil) or “beshani” (some say this refers to the fact that it is from Bet Shean, whereas others say this is because it embarrasses, biyesh, the other olive trees with it copious amounts of oil) then the laws of forgotten do not apply. The laws of “forgotten” also do not apply to a tree that is well-known for the great amount of oil that it produces or for where it stands in the field. The assumption is that a person who leaves the olives on these trees unharvested has not actually forgotten them.

שהוא עושה הרבה – many olives.

Other kinds of olive trees: two are deemed “forgotten”, but three are not deemed “forgotten.” Two trees left unharvested are considered to be forgotten, but as usual, three are not. (See above 6:5).

שנים שכחה – our anonymous Mishnah is according to the School of Hillel who said above that two are for the poor.

Rabbi Yose says: there is no law of “forgotten” for olive trees. According to Rabbi Yose olive trees are so important that we make a blanket assumption that no one would forget them in the field and therefore the laws of forgotten do not apply. The Yerushalmi explains that olive trees were scarce because Hadrian destroyed so many of them during the Hadrianic persecutions which took place during the first third of the second century. As an aside, there is still much modern contention over olive trees between Palestinians and Jews living in Israel. Without getting into politics, in the Middle East destroying someone else’s olive trees is perhaps one of the most injurious acts a person can do to another, short of personal injury and murder. Olives are far and away the most important agricultural product in the Mediterranean region. The oil is used to make numerous things: food, lighting, soap, perfume, etc. The trees can live for centuries and cutting down an olive tree is truly a tragedy.

רבי יוסי אומר אין שכחה לזיתים – Rabbi Yosi did not say this other than when Hadrian the Caesar came and destroyed all the country and there were no olives found, but when the olives are found, Rabbi Yosi admits that there is forgetting for olives, and similarly, he whose olives were dripping or dry (not producing oil), they have forgetting.

שלש שורות של שני מלבנים – three rows of olive trees and between the first row and the second there is a square garden-bed in the form of a small grain plot (of three handbreadths in width) that is between the olives as is taught in the Mishnah above at the beginning of chapter three (Mishnah 1)., and similarly, between the second row and the third row, and he forget the middle tree that is in the middle row, that is not forgetting for the trees that surround it hid it, and it is similar to covering it with straw or poor people stood opposite it as is taught in the Mishnah above that is not forgetting.

An olive tree found standing between three rows [of olive trees] which have two plots separating them, and he forgot it, it is deemed, “forgotten.” This section describes a field that has three rows of olive trees, and in between the rows there are two plots sewn with grain, one plot between the first and second row and one plot between the second and third row. If there is an olive tree standing between these rows then it is distinguished by its position between the two plots and between the three rows and the rules of forgotten do not apply.

במה דברים אמורים – it refers to the Mishnah that is above (Mishnah 1 of Chapter Seven), with a dripping oil at its time, and its forgetting is not forgetting. What are we referring to? At the time when he not begun [to harvest the tree] with it, but if he begun with it and had forgotten it, it is forgetting until there is in it two Se’ah.

An olive tree containing two seahs and he forgot it, it is not deemed forgotten. Another case in which the rules of forgotten don’t apply is when the tree has two seahs of olives see above 7:5.

כל מזן שיש לו תחתיו יש לו בראשו – If the owner of the olives is reminded from the olives that he forgot on the tree while he has olives underneath it, he can go back and harvest them, and it is not considered forgotten what he forgot at the top of the tree other than after no olives remained underneath the tree.

To what does this apply? Only when he [the owner] had not yet begun [to harvest the tree], but if he had begun, even if it were like the olive tree of Netofah in its time, and he forgot it, it is deemed forgotten. The mishnah now limits the rules that appeared in the preceding clauses, cases where the laws of forgotten did not apply. These laws applied only when the person had not yet begun to harvest the tree. However, if he began to harvest the tree and left some of the olives still in the tree, then the rules of forgotten do apply, even if the tree was as special as that amazing olive tree in Netofah.

רבי מאיר אומר משתלך המחבא – that is to say, from when the harvester checked with the rods by which hidden olives are knocked down (i.e., searching after the hidden olives) , then all that remains is for the poor when the owner of the tree has no olives underneath [the tree], but all the while that the harvester did not check with the rods by which hidden olives are knocked down, even though there are no olives underneath, he can go back and harvest. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Meir.

As long as the owner has some of the olives belonging to him at the foot of the tree, he has [possession] of those on top of the tree. Rabbi Meir says: [forgotten applies only] after [those with] the beating-rod have gone. The mishnah now brings a debate about when a person is considered to have forgotten the olives still in the tree such that they belong to the poor. Olives are harvested by beating the tree and letting the olives fall on a sack spread out underneath the tree. According to the first opinion, as long as there are still olives in the sack underneath the tree, then he hasn’t finished harvesting the tree and the laws of forgotten do not apply. Rabbi Meir says that the harvesting is considered completed only when the workers with their sticks for beating the tree have gone away.

איזהו פרט – that is mentioned in the Torah (Leviticus 19:10): “or gather the fallen fruit of your vineyard.”

Introduction Our mishnah defines peret, a word found in Leviticus 19:10, “The peret of your vineyard you shall not gather, for the poor and the stranger you shall leave them.”

עקץ – sever/cut [by the stalk].

What is peret? [Grapes] which fall down during the harvesting. Peret is a grape or a few grapes that fall to the ground when being harvested. Once the grapes hit the ground they belong to the poor.

הוסבך בעלים – it became tied and caught in the trees, and through this fell and was separated into single grapes.

If while he was harvesting [the grapes], he cut off an entire cluster by its stalk, and it got tangled up in the [grape] leaves, and then it fell from his hand to the ground and the single berries were separated, it belongs to the owner. In this case an entire cluster is cut off by its stalk and then it gets tangled up in the leaves, falls to the ground and the grapes split off from the cluster. These grapes are not considered peret because they didn’t separate from the cluster and fall to the ground as a direct result of their being harvested, but rather as a result of their contact with the grape leaves. In order for grapes to be peret it must be the harvesting that causes them to separate from the cluster and fall to the ground.

הרי הוא של בעל הבית – it was not separated through the cutting [of the branches].

One who places a basket under the vine when he is harvesting [the grapes], behold he is a robber of the poor. Concerning him it is said: “Do not remove the landmark of those that come up (” (Proverbs 22:28). By putting the basket under the vine when harvesting, he is preventing anything from becoming peret. The mishnah calls one who does such a thing a “robber of the poor.” This is the same words with which mishnah 5:6 ended. I will copy here what I wrote there: The final midrash on Proverbs 22:28 is based on a variant reading of the text of Proverbs. The Masoretic (traditional Jewish) text reads, “Do not remove the ancient (olam) landmark stone.” Our text reads the word “olam” as if it was written “olim.” “Olim” usually means “those who go up” and therefore it may be being used euphemistically here for the poor who could be called “those who are going down,” meaning they have lost their money.

המניח כלכלה בשעה שהוא בוצר – he places a basket underneath the grapes when the individual grapes fall into it.

הרי זה גוזל את העניים – that fallen grapes when falling, the poor have taken possession before they reach the ground.

אל תסג גבול עולים – this is explained above in chapter 5 (Tractate Peah, Mishnah 6).

איזו היא עוללת – as it states in the Torah (Leviticus 19:10): “You shall not pick your vineyard bare.”

Introduction This mishnah introduces the rules of the “defective cluster,” called in Hebrew the “olelet.” Leviticus 19:10 states, “You shall not pick your vineyard bare,” the word for bare is “teolel” from which the rabbis derive the word olelet. They interpret the halakhah to mean don’t pick defective clusters of grapes, rather leave them for the poor.

כתף – the middle shoot/twig of the cluster is attached to many small clusters, and they lie one on top of the other it is like a burden that is on the shoulder of a person which is called a shoulder, and when they are scattered in one shoot/twig one hear and the other there, there is no “shoulder,” (i.e., grapes on an arm of a vine which branches off into twigs).

What constitutes a defective cluster ( of grapes? Any [cluster] which has neither a shoulder [a wide upper part] nor a pendant [a cone-shaped lower part]. A defective cluster is defined as one that does not have a broad part on the top and a part that tapers down toward the bottom. A grape cluster normally has a spine that travels its entire length. The top part has small branches off the spine; the grapes grow on these small branches. This part of the cluster is called the shoulder. On the bottom part the grapes grow directly from the spine. This part is called the pendant.

נטף – they are berries of grapes that are attached at the end of the shoot/twig that is customary that many grapes would be hanging there, and on account that its grapes drop downward, it is called נטף/grapes hanging down directly from the trunk, and in the language of the Bible, they call a cluster that lacks a shoulder (i.e., grapes on the arm of a vine which branches off into twigs) and grapes hanging down directly from the trunk עולל/picked bare, because it is in front of the rest of the clusters of grapes like something picked bare before the person.

If it has a shoulder or a pendant, it belongs to the owner. If there is a doubt, it belongs to the poor. If it has only one of these, i.e. it has a shoulder but not a pendant or a pendant but not a shoulder, then it is not an olelet, a defective cluster, and it still belongs to the owner. However, if there is a doubt over whether it missing both the shoulder and the pendant, then it belongs to the poor. Alternatively, if there is a doubt whether there is a spine, or whether it is really just a few grapes growing directly from the vine, then it belongs to the poor.

אם ספק – that the small clusters appear to be hanging/suspended on a shoot/twig, as if the lie one on top of the other and they don’t lie nicely, for now there is doubt if it has grapes on the arm of a vine which branches off into twigs (i.e., a shoulder) or not.

A defective cluster on the joint of a vine [where a normal cluster hangs from the vine], if it can be cut off with the cluster, it belongs to the owner; but if it can not, it belongs to the poor. If there is a defective cluster growing from the vine at the same point as a normal cluster, then if the defective one can be harvested with as the normal one, it belongs to the owner. If, however, it needs to be cut separately, then it belongs to the poor.

שבארכובה – a young shoot of a vine that many clusters hang on it and when the person cutting grapes cuts them and it is called a knee/joint and sometimes it has a small single bunch (on a single branch, or hanging down directly from the trunk) with the clusters.

A single grape: Rabbi Judah says: It is deemed a whole cluster, But the sages say: It is deemed a defective cluster. According to Rabbi Judah a single grape growing from a vine is not considered a defective cluster. Albeck explains that this is because the Bible never uses the singular for olelet, rather it always uses olelot, defective clusters. Hence, he holds that there really is no such thing as a single grape defective cluster. The other rabbis disagree and rule that a single grape is considered a defective cluster and it belongs to the poor.

נקרצת – it is cut and severed and its example we taught in Talmud Yoma (31b): “he cut [the windpipe and the gullet] and another priest completed the slaughtering on his behalf” and in the Bible (Jeremiah 46:20): “a butcher from the north is coming.”

גרגר יחידי – such as a cluster that lacks small clusters lying one on top of the other but the single berries (not growing in clusters) are attached to the shoot/twig itself.

רבי יהודה אומר אשכול – as it is written (Isaiah 17:6): “Only gleanings shall be left of him, as when one beats an olive tree, two or three berries…” are a small single bunch, more than this is a cluster.

וחכמים אומרים עוללת – and they are not considered berries that lie one on top of the other to be called a shoulder (grapes on an arm of a vine which branches off into twigs). And the Halakha is according to the Sages.

המדל בגפנים – when the vines are joined in close contact one after another, he uproots from those that are in-between and the others are fixed with this.

Introduction This mishnah deals with whether when one thins out the grapes from a grapevine so that the other grapes will have more room to grow one can also thin away the defective clusters that are supposed to go to the poor.

כך הוא מדל בשל עניים – even though they have Peah or a small single bunch (on a single branch – or hanging down from the trunk)/gleaning reserved for the poor so the thinning of theirs like with his, for he holds that they have a partnership law and just as he thins his own, so too he thins that [the vines] of his friends and even the poor are included.

One who is thinning out vines, just as he may thin out in that which belongs to him, so too he may thin out in that which belongs to the poor, the words of Rabbi Judah. Rabbi Meir says: in that which belongs to him, he is permitted, but he is not permitted in that which belongs to the poor. To make room for the grapes to grow, a grape farmer might thin out the vines and get rid of the some of the clusters. The problem is that this might cause a loss to the poor, especially if he gets rid of many of the defective clusters. Rabbi Judah says that nevertheless when thinning out vines one may thin out the defective clusters that belong to the poor. Rabbi Meir says that he may not, because the defective clusters don’t belong to him, rather they belong to the poor.

רבי מאיר אומר בשלו הוא רשאי – He holds that the poor have a law of acquisition with their part, and just as the seller says to his fellow – ten clusters of grapes it is prohibited to touch them, so too regarding that of the poor. But the Halakha is according to Rabbi Yehuda.

כרם רבעי – A person who plants a food-bearing tree, in the fourth year, he brings the fruit to Jerusalem and eats them there in the holiness of the Second Tithe, or redeems them and brings their monetary-value to Jerusalem, as it is written (Leviticus 19:24): “In the fourth year all its fruit shall be set aside for jubilation before the LORD,” and we expound on [the word] הלולים/jubilation like redeemed to become secular again, as the All Merciful said, redeem it and then eat it.

Introduction For the first three years’ of a vine’s growth, its grapes are “orlah” and cannot be eaten. In the fourth year of its growth, they are like second tithe and must either be eaten in Jerusalem or redeemed and brought to Jerusalem where the proceeds are to be used to buy food. Our mishnah deals with these laws and in the second half of the mishnah it deals with the impact that these laws have on some of the agricultural gifts.

בית שמאי אומרים אין לו חומש – even though it requires redemption like the Second Tithe, the owners do not add the one-fifth for the Torah did not write [an added] fifth concerning it.

[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, that is one takes money and transfers the holiness of the grapes onto the money and brings the money to Jerusalem, one does not need to add a fifth of the value, as one does for second tithe. With regard to second tithe 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.

ואין לו ביעור – He is not obligated to remove it from the house on the Eve of Passover of the fourth year and the seventh year as one removes the tithes as it is written (Deuteronomy 26:13): “I have cleared out the consecrated portion from the house.”

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 of the poor do not apply to tithes. 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.

וב"ה אומרים יש לו – [He has the added] fifth and he has removal. The School of Hillel derives [through a Gezerah Shavah/analogy] as he learns the fourth year fruit from the Second Tithe (Leviticus 19:24: “In the fourth year all its fruit shall be set aside (קדש) for jubilation before the LORD,” and 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.”). Just as the Second Tithe has the additional fifth and it has the removal from the house, so also the fourth-year fruit has the added firth and the it has removal from the house. But the School of Shammai does not derive “holy/holy” from the Second Tithe (see the above verses).

יש לו פרט ויש לו עוללות – they are considered like non-sacred/secular produce.

והעניים פודין לעצמן – from the grapes fallen off during cutting/the poor man’s share and the gleaning reserved for the poor (i.e., the small single bunch on a single branch or hanging down directly from the trunk) that they had gleaned, eating them in their place and bringing their monetary value to Jerusalem.

ובית הלל אומרים כולו לגת – because they derive it from the Second Tithe and they hold that the Second Tithe is the money of the Most-High (God), therefore, the poor have no share in it. And they tread on the gleaning reserved for the poor with the rest of the wine and owners bring everything to Jerusalem.

שכולו עוללות – throughout the entire vineyard there is not a bunch of grapes that has grapes on an arm of the vine which branches off into twigs (כתף) and grapes hanging down directly from the trunk (נטף).

Introduction In today’s mishnah Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Akiva argue over a vineyard where all of the clusters of grapes are defective (olelot).

אם אין בציר – and what is the measure of a harvest? Three bunches which makes a fourth.

A vineyard which consists entirely of defective clusters: Rabbi Eliezer says: it belongs to the owner. Rabbi Akiva says: to the poor. According to Rabbi Eliezer, if the entire vineyard consists of defective clusters, then they belong to the owner and not to the poor. Rabbi Akiva disagrees and holds that the defective clusters go to the poor, just as they normally do.

אמר לו רבי עקיבא וכרמך לא תעולל אפילו כולו עוללות – But Rabbi Eliezer said that you should say this since the poor don’t have [a share in] grapes hanging down directly from the trunk prior to the harvest, the owner of the house will get possession of them, and therefore it says (Leviticus 19:10): “You shall not pick your vineyard bare.”

Rabbi Eliezer: “When you harvest the grapes of your vineyard, do not take the defective clusters” (Deuteronomy 24:21). If there is no grape harvesting, how can there be “defective clusters”? Each side in this debate will now present a midrash that supports his point of view. Rabbi Eliezer’s midrash is on Deuteronomy 24:21 which he reads as implying that there must be a harvesting of the grapes in order for the defective clusters to go to the poor. For the some of the grapes to go to the poor, some must also go to the owner. In other words, if we can’t fulfill the first half of the verse, “when you harvest the grapes of your vineyard” then we do not fulfill the second half of the verse “do not take the defective clusters.”

Rabbi Akiva said to him: “And from your vineyard do not take the defective clusters” (Leviticus 19:10) even if it consists entirely of defective clusters. If that is so, why is it said: “When you harvest the grapes of your vineyard, do not take the defective clusters”? [This teaches that] the poor have no right to claim the defective clusters before the harvest. Rabbi Akiva’s midrash is based on Leviticus 19:10, where the verse concerning defective clusters does not begin with the words, “Whey you harvest…” Rather the verse simply says not to take the defective clusters, regardless of whether the entire vineyard consists of defective clusters. From this verse Rabbi Akiva learns that the defective clusters always go to the poor. Rabbi Akiva also offers an alternative midrash to the verse that Rabbi Eliezer had used. Deuteronomy 24:21 teaches that the poor cannot come and collect the defective clusters until the owner has begun to harvest his vineyard.

משנודעו הועללות – when it is recognized what are grapes hanging down directly from the trunk and what is a bundle [of grapes].

Introduction The first part of our mishnah deals with one who dedicates his vineyard to the Temple. The second half deals with what constitutes a forgotten cluster of grapes.

העוללות לעניים – A person cannot dedicate/sanctify [to the Temple] something that is not his.

One who dedicates his entire vineyard [to the Temple] before the “defective clusters” were recognizable, the “defective clusters” do not belong to the poor. After the defective clusters were recognizable, then they do belong to the poor. When one dedicates his vineyard to the Temple, we need to know whether or not the defective clusters still go to the poor. After all, these defective clusters are not really his to dedicate because they belong to the poor. The mishnah rules that if he dedicated the vineyard before the defective clusters were recognizable, then the whole vineyard belongs to the Temple, even the defective clusters that eventually grow there. This is because the agricultural gifts are not given from Temple property. However, if the defective clusters were already recognizable, then they were not his to dedicate in the first place. Hence they belong to the poor.

יתנו שכר גדולן להקדש – that which grows in value all the while that they are in the ground of something dedicated to the Temple. And the Halakha is according to Rabbi Yosi.

Rabbi Yose says: [the poor] must give the value of their improved growth to the Temple. Rabbi Yose adds in that in the case where the defective clusters belong to the poor, it turns out that the poor were benefiting by having their defective clusters grow from land that belonged to the Temple. Therefore the poor have to reimburse the Temple for the value of the improved growth from the time of the dedication until the time of the harvest. In this way they restore to the Temple the value of that which they benefited from Temple property.

בעריס – a vineyards where its vines hang on poles and trees, based upon the language (Song of Songs 1:16): “Our couch is in a bower.”

What is deemed “forgotten” in the case of a trellis [a lattice for supporting plants]? Anything that one can no longer stretch his hand and take it. The mishnah now completes its discussion of vineyards by delineating when something is deemed forgotten. When it comes to grapes growing on a trellis, they are deemed forgotten when the harvester has passed by them and cannot reach back and take them. Note that these grapes do not become forgotten automatically when the person passes by them.

כל שאינו יכול לפשוט – that is to say, after he has passed by them, and if in the place where he remembers he cannot stretch his hand and take, it is called concerning him, (Deuteronomy 24:19): “Do not turn back to get it.”

And in the case of ground-trained vines? From the time [the gatherers] pass by it. In the case of vines that are trained on the ground, they do become forgotten once the person harvesting the vineyard has passed by them.

אבל רוגליות –[grapes growing in a row on isolated vines] grapes that stand on the ground when they tread upon them with the foot.

משיעבור ממנה – that is forgetting, for each and every vine among the grapes growing in a row on isolated vines is considered like a border-bed/furrow on its own, and it is prohibited to return from one border bed to another border bed.