Talmud for Sheviit 4:2

שָׂדֶה שֶׁנִּתְקַוְּצָה, תִּזָּרַע בְּמוֹצָאֵי שְׁבִיעִית. שֶׁנִּטַּיְּבָה אוֹ שֶׁנִּדַּיְּרָה, לֹא תִזָּרַע בְּמוֹצָאֵי שְׁבִיעִית. שָׂדֶה שֶׁנִּטַּיְּבָה, בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים, אֵין אוֹכְלִין פֵּרוֹתֶיהָ בַּשְּׁבִיעִית, וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים, אוֹכְלִין. בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים, אֵין אוֹכְלִין פֵּרוֹת שְׁבִיעִית בְּטוֹבָה, וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים, אוֹכְלִין בְּטוֹבָה וְשֶׁלֹּא בְטוֹבָה. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, חִלּוּף הַדְּבָרִים, זוֹ מִקֻּלֵּי בֵית שַׁמַּאי וּמֵחֻמְרֵי בֵית הִלֵּל:

A field which had been de-thorned, may be planted during the eight year. A field which had been improved [by ploughing] or fertilized may not be planted during the eighth year. A field which had been improved: the house of Shammai says its fruit may not be eaten on the seventh year, while the house of Hillel says they may be eaten. The house of Shammai says the fruit of the seventh year may not be eaten while [expressing] gratitude [to the original owner], while the house of Hillel says they may be eaten either while [expressing] gratitude [to the original owner] or not. Rabbi Yehudah says, These opinions must be switched, for this is one of the examples of a leniency of the house of Shammai and a stringency of the house of Hillel.

Jerusalem Talmud Demai

Him³⁷Here starts the discussion of the rule of R. Jehudah, who makes the situation of the sharecropper on his ancestral land worse than that of any other sharecropper. who says that the law applies, one can understand. He who says, they fined³⁸Why should he be fined? R. Joḥanan explains that the Gentile got the land not by paying for it but by expropriation of the Jew. In that case, the Jew should be pushed to ask for help from his fellow Jews to buy back his land. The statement of R. Joḥanan is quoted as a baraita in the Babli (Baba Meẓia 101a), with מציק instead of מסיק (identical sounds in Galilean dialect; Babylonian spelling as a rule is more historically correct.)? Rebbi Joḥanan said, one has stated this only in the case of oppressors. Since you say so to him, he exerts himself and buys the land back.

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Jerusalem Talmud Ketubot

HALAKHAH: “If he left produce taken¹⁰⁷In this and the preceding Mishnah, the Mishnah text differs in a few details from the common reading of most Mishnaiot but the text quoted in the Halakhah is the standard Mishnah text.,” etc. Both Rav and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish say, if they were collected at a trading place¹⁰⁸“A place of Saracens.” The problem discussed here is quite different from that discussed in the Babli, 84b, by the same authors. In the Yerushalmi, it is supposed that the acquirer removes the produce from the public place since it is obvious that it would not be his when left in the public place. But if the produce was already in a place belonging to the claimant, according to Rav and R. Simeon ben Laqish “a person’s courtyard acquires for him automatically” (Babli Baba meṣi‘a 10b). For R. Joḥanan, “a person’s courtyard acquires for him only by a conscious act.” Therefore, in a situation where an unlearned person could think that anything in a private domain to which the owner has a claim is automatically his, we may assume that the conscious act of acquisition is missing. This argument assumes that the first part of the Mishnah is everybody’s opinion and the difference between R. Ṭarphon and R. Aqiba refers only to the excess.
In the Babli, the entire first part of the Mishnah is considered R. Ṭarphon’s and everybody agrees that “a person’s courtyard acquires for him automatically”; cf. Note 106.. But if somebody collected it in his house, his house acquired for him. Rebbi Joḥanan said, even if he collected it in his house, his house did not acquire for him. For he thinks that they are his but they are not his. Does from this follow how the owner acquires his produce¹⁰⁹The ripe produce is ownerless by biblical decree. Naturally, the owner of the property has the same right to take it as does everybody else. Anybody but the owner acquires simply by taking. How does the owner acquire, that taking from him would be theft? in a Sabbatical year? Rebbi Jeremiah wanted to say, from the moment he put them into his vessel. Rebbi Yose said, even if he put them into his vessel he did not acquire, for he thinks that they are his but they are not his¹¹⁰He can acquire only by a) putting the produce into his vessel and b) declaring that it is his..

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Previous Verse Full Chapter Next Verse