Un ouvrier qui ne fait pas confiance au Ba'al HaBayit [propriétaire] devrait prendre une figue séchée et dire: «Celle-ci et les neuf qui la suivent font [une partie de] la dîme des quatre-vingt-dix que je mange. Cette [première] désigné comme Terumat Ma'aser sur eux et Ma'aser Sheni est à la fin et devient non consacré en [transférant sa consécration à] pièces de monnaie. " Il retient ensuite une figue séchée. Le rabbin Shimon ben Gamliel dit qu'il ne retient pas car il réduit alors le travail de l'employeur. Le rabbin Yossi dit qu'il ne refuse pas en raison d'une promulgation de la cour.
Bartenura on Mishnah Demai
שאינו מאמין לבעל הבית – on the tithes.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Demai
Introduction An employer has a duty, at least under certain circumstances, to feed his employees. Our mishnah deals with a situation in which the worker does not trust that the employer has tithed the produce and therefore needs to tithe the produce himself.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Demai
וחושך גרוגרת אחת - he is prevented from eating one dried-fig corresponding to that of the heave-offering of the tithe [that the Levite gives to the Kohen] that he set aside, in order that he would not steal from the owner of the house.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Demai
A worker who does not trust his employer [in respect of tithes], may take one dried fig and say: “This one and the nine which come after it shall become tithe for the ninety which I shall eat. This one shall become the terumat maaser for them, and the last ones shall be second tithe which shall be exchanged for money.” And he must put aside one dried fig. This formula is basically the same formula as we saw in yesterday’s mishnah. The difference in this mishnah is the question of whether the one fig that has been designated “terumat maaser” the terumah taken from the tithe will be given to the priest from the worker’s share or from the employer’s. Note that all of the other tithes will be eaten by the worker himself, so there is no problem with them, only with the terumat maaser which can only be eaten by a priest. According to the first opinion, the worker himself gives of his share for terumat maaser. So if the employer gives him 100 figs, he only gets to keep 99.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Demai
לא יחשוך (he should not diminish/withhold) – and purchase one dried-fig and eat for if he didn’t eat, he would be starving himself and he would diminish from his meal and it is found that he would diminish through this the work of the owner of the house for he is not able to perform his labor.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Demai
Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says: he does not put one aside, because this reduce the work for his employer. Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel holds that the employer gives the terumat maaser because if the worker were to give the terumat maaser, this would reduce the amount of work he does. How so? By eating one less fig he will have less energy. [Anecdotally, I have noticed that sometimes that one fig will make all the difference in the world to my energy level!]. Interestingly, according to Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel the owner gives because it is in his own interest for the worker to eat as much food as the worker needs.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Demai
לא יחשוך מפני שהוא תנאי בית דין – that the heave-offering of the tithe will be from the owner of the house and the Second Tithe from the worker, therefore, the owner of the house is obligated to give him the dried-fig that he set aside for tithing the heave-offering of the tithe.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Demai
Rabbi Yose says: he does not put one aside, because this is a court stipulation [imposed upon the employer]. Rabbi Yose agrees with Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel that the employer must give the terumat maaser, but he offers a different reason. According to Rabbi Yose, the court made a special stipulation that the employer must give the terumat maaser. Assumedly this stipulation was made in order to protect the interests of the worker.
