פירוש על בכורות 4:10

אינו חשוד על המעשרות – and they purchase from him grain in the rest of the years of the Seven Year cycle, but they don’t tithe from them as definitively [tithed] but as a doubtfully tithed. And the reason is that he who is suspected [of violating] the Sabbatical Year is not suspected on account of tithes, and one who is suspected on account of tithes is not suspected on account of the Seventh Year [produce], because there is is in each of hen material that is not part of its partner; Seventh Year produce does not have be consumed inside the walls of Jerusalem, but Second Tithe is not consumed other than within/inside the wall [of Jerusalem]. Therefore, there is a more stringent punishment regarding [Second] Tithe than from the punishment of [not consuming] the Sabbatical Year produce. For the [Second] Tithe has redemption, but since the Seventh Year [produce] is forbidden, it does not have redemption, therefore, the Seventh Year is more stringent than from the [Second] Tithe.

One who is suspected of ignoring the sabbatical year is not suspected of ignoring [also] the tithes. Someone who is suspected of not properly observing the sabbatical year is not automatically suspected of not tithing his food. This would mean that when it is not the sabbatical year, a person could buy or eat his produce without concern that the food is not tithed.

החשוד על זה ועל זה – since he is suspected [of violating] a Torah prohibition all the more so, that he is suspect [of violating] on the purities, for they are from the Rabbis, that a person eats his unconsecrated produce in ritual purity.

One who is suspected of ignoring tithes is not suspected of ignoring [also] the sabbatical year. Similarly, one who is generally suspected of not tithing, is not automatically suspected of not observing the sabbatical laws. The two are not connected, even though they are in the same general set of prohibitions.

ויש שחשוד על הטהרות – that are of the Rabbis, but is not suspected on account of Seventh Year produce and [Second] Tithe. For one that is suspected on a Rabbinic [legislation] is not suspected [of violation] of a Torah prohibition.

One who is suspected of ignoring both is suspected of ignoring the rules of purity. However, one who is suspected of transgressing both the sabbatical year laws and of not tithing is suspected of not observing the purity laws. What this would mean is that he cannot be trusted to state that the food that he is selling is pure. This would have ramifications only for a person who is interested in eating all of their food in a state of purity, a custom that was attributed to the Pharisees.

And it is possible for one to be suspected of ignoring the rules of purity and yet not be suspected of ignoring the two laws [cited above]. The opposite of section three is not true one can be suspected of not observing the purity laws, but trusted with regard to the sabbatical laws and tithing. It seems that certain purity matters were easily ignored, perhaps because fewer people observed them in the mishnaic period or perhaps because it is not really a transgression to eat food without it being pure. Therefore, one who transgresses more consequential laws such as tithing and the sabbatical year, is suspected of transgressing the less consequential matter of purity.

This is the general rule: one who is suspected of [transgressing] something must not give judgment on it or testify concerning it. A person is suspected of transgressing a certain law cannot give testimony or render judgment concerning this law. We shall see this statement again below in 5:4.