Керем реваи (виноградник уже четвертый год), [который требует выкупа, если он хочет есть свои фрукты за пределами Иерусалима (и то же самое относится к каждому фруктовому дереву)] —Бет Шаммай говорит: для этого не требуется хомеш (прибавление пятой части его значения), [в Торе не говорится о том, что добавляется пятая часть, как написано относительно второй десятины]; и это не требует удаления [из дома в канун Песаха четвертого и седьмого лет, когда он снимает десятину, а именно. (Второзаконие 26:13): «Я убрал из дома святыню (ma'aser sheni и neta revai) (см. Левит 27:30 и 19:24)». И Бет Гилель говорит: для этого нужен чомеш и это требует удаления. [Бет Гилель выводит его (по идентичности) «святой» - «святой» из маазера—Так же, как маасеру требуется хомеш и удаление, так и керем реваи требует хомеш и удаление; и Бет Шаммай не выводит его оттуда.] Бет Шаммай говорит: он [керем реваи] подвержен перету (взятию отдельных [падших] сортов винограда бедными), и он подвержен ололоте (взятию одиноких [павших) ] пучки бедных), [потому что они считаются хуллинскими (несвященными) владельцами]; и бедные выкупают для себя (перета и олелота, которых они выбрали), и едят их на своих местах, и приносят свои (искупительные) деньги в Иерусалим.] И Бет Гилель говорит: они все идут в винный пресс, [ потому что они происходят (kerem revai) от ma'aser, и считают, что ma'aser sheni считается священным для владельца. Поэтому бедные не имеют к этому никакого отношения. А владельцы прижимают олиму вместе с остальным виноградом и приносят все в Иерусалим.]
Bartenura on Mishnah Eduyot
כרם רבעי (this Mishnah is also taught in Tractate Peah, Chapter 7, Mishnah 6 and also in Tractate Ma’aser Sheni, Chapter 5, Mishnah 3) – which needs redemption if he comes to eat it outside of Jerusalem and the same law applies to all fruit-bearing trees.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Eduyot
Introduction
Our mishnah contains several disputes between Beth Shammai and Beth Hillel with regards to the status of the fruit of a vineyard in its fourth year, which according to Leviticus 19:24 must be “set aside”. The Rabbis teach that this fruit is similar to second tithe and that both may be consumed by their owners only in Jerusalem. In our mishnah Beth Shammai says that despite some similarities to second tithe there are some key differences. Beth Hillel teaches that they are completely the same.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Eduyot
אין לו חומש – For the Torah did not write concerning it that the owners add one-fifth in the matter that it wrote regarding the Second Tithe.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Eduyot
A vineyard of the fourth year Beth Shammai says: it is not subject to the law of the fifth nor to the law of removal. And Beth Hillel says: it is subject to the law of the fifth and to the law of removal. The fruit of a vineyard in its fourth year is treated similar to second tithe. Both must be brought to Jerusalem and consumed there. If it is too far or too difficult to carry the actual fruit to Jerusalem one may redeem it for money and bring the money to Jerusalem and use it to buy food there. When second tithe is redeemed for money, a person must add one-fifth the value of the produce being redeemed. According to Beth Shammai, when one redeems the fruit of fourth year vineyard he does not need to add the fifth. According to Beth Hillel he does, just as he does with second tithe. Before Passover on the fourth and seventh years of a seven year (shmittah) cycle, one must remove all of the tithes from one’s house. This is called the “law of removal”. According to Beth Shammai the law does not apply to the removal of the fruit of a fourth year vineyard. According to Beth Hillel it does.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Eduyot
ואין לו ביעור – he is not liable to remove it from the house on the Eve of Passover of the fourth year and of the seventh year as one removes the tithes, as it is written (Deuteronomy 26:13): “[You shall declare before the LORD your God:] ‘I have cleared out the consecrated portion from the house, [and I have given it to the Levite, the stranger, the fatherless and the widow…].”
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Eduyot
Beth Shammai says: it is subject to the law of fallen grapes and to the law of gleanings, and the poor redeem them for themselves. And Beth Hillel says: all of it goes to the winepress. According to Leviticus 19:10 one is not allowed to pick bare the fruit of a vineyard nor collect the fallen fruit. Rather these must be left for the poor. According to Beth Shammai these rules still apply for the fourth year vineyard. When the poor person has collected his share, he must redeem it himself and bring the money to Jerusalem and use it there to buy food. According to Beth Hillel fourth year produce is not subject to the laws of what must be left to the poor. Just as second tithe is not subject to the laws of what must be left for the poor, so too fourth year produce is not.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Eduyot
יש לו חומש ויש לו בעור – The School of Hillel derives “holy” “holy” from tithes (Leviticus 19:24: “In the fourth year all its fruit shall be set aside [literally – “holy”] 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 tithes have an added fifth and it has removal, so does the fourth year fruit of the vineyard - it has the added fifth [when redeemed] and it has removal. But the School of Shammai does not derive “holy, holy” from tithes.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Eduyot
יש לו פרט ויש לו עוללות – for they are considered like non-holy produce.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Eduyot
והעניים פודין לעצמן – The grapes fallen off during cutting and the gleaning reserved for the poor which they harvested, and they eat them in their place and bring their monetary value to Jerusalem.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Eduyot
וב"ה אומרים כולו לגת – because they derive it from tithes, and they hold that the Second Tithe money belongs to “On-High.” Therefore, the poor have no portion in it and they tread on the gleanings with the rest of the wine, and the owners bring it all up to Jerusalem.
