Talmud do Zewachim 4:8

“The Gentile’s heave creates dema‘ and one is obligated to a fifth^3,Cf. Mishnah 6:4 and Chapter 1, Note 71. In the interpretation of Maimonides (Terumot 5:22), the last sentence refers both to wine and to melons.⁹⁵Since Lev. 22:25 implies that dedication by a Gentile is a meritorious action, it follows that all stringencies of dedications have to be applied. for it, but Rebbi Simeon frees from the obligation.” Rebbi Zeïra said, I said this before Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: They disagree only for the heave of his threshing floor. But for a Gentile who bought the produce of a Jew¹⁰¹After it was harvested. R. Simeon teaches that real estate in the Land of Israel held by Gentiles is free from all obligations of the Land, cf. Peah Chapter 4, Note 129, Demay Chapter 5, Note 102., even Rebbi Simeon will agree. Rebbi Abbahu said to me in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, the disagreement is about the latter case. It is difficult according to Rebbi Simeon, does he free his ṭevel from the Torah and you say so¹⁰²If the Gentile bought produce after threshing, obligated for heave but before heave was taken, then his heave will free the grain for consumption by Jews. Since his heave has all the force of heave given by a Jew, why should it not be subject to all rules of heave?? But are sacrifices¹⁰³Sacrifices given to the Temple by Gentiles are accepted by biblical law, cf. Note 93. not from the Torah, and nevertheless Rebbi Simeon frees, as we have stated there¹⁰⁴Mishnah Zebaḥim 4:5, and similarly Tosephta Zebaḥim 5:6. In all these texts, R. Simeon is quoted as freeing from punishment and R. Yose as declaring guilty. This is also a necessary reading here since the argument is that R. Simeon considers the Gentile’s sacrifice to be a genuine sacrifice acceptable to Heaven but not subject to any of the restrictions imposed on Jewish sacrifices; in parallel, the Gentile’s heave is heave but subject to its rules. (In some Mishnah mss. and editions, “R. Simeon” is replaced by “R. Meїr.”) Maimonides, both in his Commentary and his Code (Pesule Hammuqdašim 18:24) follows R. Simeon, against the rule that R. Yose prevails over R. Simeon. As R. Aqiba Eiger points out, the Babli quotes two instances (Zebaḥim 116b, Menaḥot109b) of actual sacrifices performed for Gentiles outside the Land. Since the action of a respected authority, in this case Rava, the unquestioned leader of his generation, overrides all decision rules, Maimonides is justified.: “Sacrifices of Gentiles are not subject to piggul¹⁰⁵A sacrifice brought with the intent of eating it at an inappropriate time or inappropriate place, a deadly sin (Lev. 7:18, 19:7)., left-overs¹⁰⁶Leftovers from sacrificial meat remaining after the allotted time, whose consumption is sinful., and impurity and one who slaughters them outside¹⁰⁷Sacrificed outside the Temple, a prohibition restricted to “the Children of Israel”, Lev. 17:3. is free [from punishment], the words of Rebbi Yose, but Rebbi Simeon declares him guilty.” They wanted to say that they disagree only about the fifth but not about dema‘. They found stated: It is all the same.