Yerushalmi Demai 1:3 ירושלמי דמאי א׳:ג׳

MISHNAH: He who buys as seeds or animal fodder, flour for tanning, oil for lighting, or oil to rub on vessels¹⁰⁹However, oil used as lotion is subject to demay, since rubbing on is everywhere equated to drinking., is free from demay¹¹⁰The obligation of heave and tithes falls only on foodstuffs, not on industrial materials.. From Akhzib and further he is free from demay¹¹¹Explained in Halakhah 1.. Ḥallah¹¹²The heave of the dough made for bread, which is given to the Cohen. of the am haäreẓ, food containing heave¹¹³Which either has to be consumed by the priest or heave has to be taken from it as certain heave. Heave is called דמע in Ex. 22:28., food bought with money of the Second Tithe, and the remainders of flour sacrifices¹¹⁴The offering of a handful for the altar was taken and the rest eaten by male Cohanim in the Temple precinct under the strict rules of sacrifices. For all of these, demay was never intended as it would make no sense. are free from demay. Sweet oil¹¹⁵Perfumed oil for the House of Shammai is a lotion, for the House of Hillel it is a perfume. Cf. Note 155., the House of Shammai declare it obligated but the House of Hillel declare it free.

HALAKHAH: Since he bought it as seeds there is no difference whether it is something of which the seed disappears or something of which the seed does not disappear¹¹⁶In contrast to certain heave, where seeds which do not disappear in the new growth never lose their status as heave (Mishnah Terumot 9:5).. Rebbi Johanan said, we have stated this¹¹⁷Tosephta Demay 1:18, the first part of the statement discussed in the next paragraph.: “If he bought as seeds and then changed his mind to use them for consumption, they enter¹¹⁸They enter into the obligation of demay by his thought. by thought. If he bought for consumption and then changed his mind to use them as seeds, not all is from him¹¹⁹Meaning, nothing results from his thought; his intentions may introduce the obligation of demay but cannot remove it..”

It was stated¹²¹Tosephta Demay 1:18: “One does not sow ṭevel, nor does one cover ṭevel; one does not work ṭevel with a Gentile. A Jew who forgot and sowed ṭevel, before it sprouted he is obligated, after it sprouted he is free because it already is lost.” The language of the Yerushalmi (Rome ms.) is preferable; since if one does not work on ṭevel with a Gentile, it is obvious that one cannot do it alone. [Maimonides (Maäser 3:6) omits the mention of the Gentile, possibly because of the two contradictory sources.]: One does not sow ṭevel, one may not cover ṭevel¹²²Produce lying on the ground (or in a ditch) may not be covered with earth before heaves have been given., but one covers ṭevel with a Gentile¹²³In joint ownership.. If one forgot and sowed ṭevel, he is free¹²⁴From giving heave and tithes from the seeds, since they no longer exist., for it is already lost if it is something that usually is not collected; but for something that usually is collected¹²⁵Which can be recovered from the soil in usable (edible) state. In that case, he must remove the produce from the soil, give heaves, and only then may he return the remainder to the ground., he is fined to collect it before it sprouts. But if it sprouted, it turns into something that usually is not collected.

They said that Rebbi Joḥanan was putting in order¹²⁶If anything of demay was used in cooking, he gave heave of the tithe and redeemed the Second Tithe for everything. “Putting in order” everywhere means giving heave and tithes to permit the food for consumption. everything he ate, even red meat, even an egg. His students said to him: Did our teacher not teach us (Deut. 14:22): “You shall certainly tithe all the yield of your field¹²⁷Excluding anything not vegetal..” He was worried about the fluids¹²⁸Wine and oils used in cooking; because of the part absorbed in the meat, he gave heave from everything. in it.

Rebbi Jeremiah sent Rebbi Zeïra a basket of figs that were not put in order. Rebbi Jeremiah said to himself, would Rebbi Zeïra eat anything that was not put in order? Rebbi Zeïra said to himself, it is impossible that Rebbi Jeremiah would send me anything that was not put in order. In the meantime, ṭevel was eaten. The next day, when he was with him, he asked him: Was that basket you sent me put in order? He answered him, I said, would Rebbi Zeïra eat anything that was not put in order? He answered, I also said, would Rebbi Jeremiah send me anything that was not put in order¹³⁰The moral of the story is that among observant Jews it is necessary to spell out whether food is tithed or not. Food originating with the am haäreẓ is automatically put in order by the rules of demay; this story extends the duty ofdemay to food from the observant unless there is a declaration.? Rebbi Abba bar Zemina¹³¹An Amora of the Fourth Generation, student of R. Zeïra. said in the name of Rebbi Zeïra: If the earlier generations were angels, we are men; if they were men, we are donkeys¹³²Quoted in Babli Sabbat 112b. The parallel is Šeqalim fol. 48c, Midrash Gen. rabba 60.. Rebbi Mana said, at that moment¹³³When ṭevel was eaten and nobody suspected that it was not in order. they said, we are not even comparable to the she-ass of Rebbi Phineas ben Yaïr¹³⁴A Tanna of the Fifth Generation, son-in-law of R. Simeon bar Ioḥai. No halakhic statements of his are known. He is the paradigm of a holy man..

Thieves stole the she-ass of Rebbi Phineas ben Yaïr at night. She was hidden with them for three days during which she did not eat anything. After three days, they took counsel to return her to her master. They said, let us send her to her master lest she die with us and foul up the cave. They let her out; she stood at her master’s door and started braying. He said to them¹³⁶“He” is always R. Phineas, “they” his family and servants., open to that poor creature because for three days now she did not taste anything. They opened for her and she entered. He said to them, give her something to eat. They put oats before her but she did not eat. They said to him, rabbi, she does not want to eat. He asked them, did you put it in order? They said: Yes. He asked them, did you remove its demay? They said, did the rabbi not teach us: “He who buys for seeds or animals, flour for tanning, oil for lighting, or oil to rub vessels, is free from demay.” He said to them, what can we do with this poor creature since she is very restrictive for herself¹³⁷The she-ass refused to eat anything she could not eat if she were a Jewish human. A Babylonian version of the second part of the story is in Babli Ḥulin 7a/b; the first part of the story is told of the she-ass of R. Ḥanina ben Dosa in Aboth de Rabbi Nathan, Version 1, end of Chapter 8. Both stories are referred to in Babli Šabbat112b. The Yerushalmi version is also in Gen. rabba 60.? They removed the demay and she ate.

Two poor people entrusted two se’ah of barley to Rebbi Phineas ben Yaïr; he sowed them and harvested them. They came to him and wanted to take their barley. He said to them, bring camels and donkeys to carry their barley¹³⁸This story and the following one are told, in Hebrew, also in MidrashDeut. rabba 3(4). There, he replanted the crop for seven years..

Rebbi Phineas ben Yaïr went to a place where they¹³⁹The farmers of that place. came to him and said, rats are eating our grain. He commanded them¹⁴⁰The rats.; they assembled and started to whistle. He asked them, do you understand what they are saying? They said, no. He said to them, they say that it is not put in order. They said to him, be our guarantor. He promised¹⁴¹That the rats would leave if all tithes were taken. It is implied that the townspeople complied and correctly gave all heave and tithes. and they had no further losses.

A pearl of the king of Saracens¹⁴²It is not clear whether Arabs were already called Saracens at that time; related words arc Arabic שרק “Eastern” and סרּאק “big robber.” fell and was swallowed by a rat. He came to Rebbi Phineas ben Yaïr, who said to him, am I a sorcerer? He answered, I came because of your good name. He commanded them¹⁴⁰The rats.; they assembled. He saw one coming that was hunchbacked. He said, it is in this one; he gave the rat a command and it spat out the pearl.

Rebbi Phineas ben Yaïr went to a place where they¹³⁹The farmers of that place. came to him and said, our water source is not sufficient for us. He said to them, perhaps you do not put in order? They said to him, be our guarantor. He promised them¹⁴¹That the rats would leave if all tithes were taken. It is implied that the townspeople complied and correctly gave all heave and tithes. and it became sufficient for them.

Rebbi Phineas ben Yaïr went to the House of Assembly¹⁴³Probably the place at Ḥamat Gader at which the intercalation of months was decided. when Ginai¹⁴⁴A river, called “river Ginai” in the Babli, Ḥulin 7a, probably Wadi Jenin. overflowed. He said: Ginai, Ginai, why do you prevent me from going to the House of Assembly? It split before him and he crossed it. His students asked him, may we cross also? He said to them, he who knows of himself that he never slighted a Jew may cross and will not be harmed.

Rebbi wanted to permit the Sabbatical year¹⁴⁵Since in the absence of a Temple and the distribution of land as ordered in the Torah, the Sabbatical year is observed as a Rabbinic ordinance, Rebbi wanted to allow cultivation of the land to help pay real estate taxes that were imposed irrespective of the yield. A generation later, R. Yannai did permit the cultivation of land for the payment of taxes and delivery of requisitioned produce to the Roman army (Yerushalmi Ševiït 4:2, Babli Sanhedrin26a, cf. Rashi there.) The parallel to the entire story is in Taäniot 3:1.. Rebbi Phineas ben Yaïr went to him. He said to him: how is the grain doing? He¹⁴⁶R. Phineas ben Yaïr. answered him: endives¹⁴⁷They are irrelevant for taxes or the army. are doing fine. He said to him: how is the grain doing? He answered him: endives are doing fine. From this, Rebbi understood that he did not agree with him. He said to him: Would the rabbi care to eat a bite with me today? He said to him, yes. When he came, he saw the she-mules¹⁴⁸Latin mulus. Yoma 8:5, it is stated that a white mule’s kick is life-threatening. Hence, white mules should not be kept by Jews. of Rebbi standing. He said, are all these fed by Jews? He will not see me again! They went and told this to Rebbi. Rebbi sent and wanted to pacify him. They found him in his city. He said, the people of my city should come close to me. The people of his city came and surrounded him. They said to them, Rebbi wants to make peace with him. They left him and went away. He said, my cousins¹⁴⁹In Taäniot: “My sons.” should come close to me. Fire descended from Heaven and surrounded him. They returned and told Rebbi. He said, since we did not have merit to eat our fill from him in this world, may we be worthy to eat our fill from him in the World to Come.

Rebbi Ḥaggai in the name of Rebbi Samuel bar Naḥman¹⁵⁰The text also appears in Šeqalim 5:2 and in slightly different form in Midrash Deut. rabba 3.: It happened that a pious person used to dig cisterns, ditches, and caves for travellers. Once, his daughter travelled to marry and she was swept away by a river. All people came to him and wanted to console him, but he refused to be consoled. Rebbi Phineas ben Yaïr came to him and wanted to console him, but he refused to be consoled. He told them, is that your pious man? They said to him: Rabbi, such and such he did, such and such happened to him. He replied: It is impossible that he would honor his Creator by water and He hurts him by water! Immediately, there started a rumor in the town that the pious man’s daughter had returned. Some say, she got trapped in a hedge of thorns, others say that an angel came in the appearance of Rebbi Phineas ben Yaïr and saved her.

Rebbi Ḥanina ben Dosa was sitting down to eat on Friday night when the table sank before him. They said to him¹⁵¹Since the Yerushalmi is notoriously inexact with genders and numbers, it might mean: He asked her (his wife)., what is that? She said to him, I borrowed spices from my neighbor and forgot to give tithes¹⁵²It follows that the Yerushalmi requires tithing of spices, whereas the Babli requires it only when the spice may serve as food in itself; cf. Tosafot and Tosafot Yešenim to Yoma 87b. from it. He mentioned a condition¹⁵³He mentioned the place from which he would give tithes after the Sabbath; this is an acceptable form of tithing of demay during the twilight hours of Friday night (Mishnah Sabbath2:6). The story is inserted to show that a just person will not stumble unwittingly over a prohibition. and the table rose by itself.

Rebbi Tarphon sat down to eat when he dropped his bread. They asked him, what is this? He said to them, I borrowed an axe and I prepared food in purity with it¹⁵⁴Apparently the axe was not ritually pure and the bread that was made impure by this fell before he could eat it. As a Pharisee, R. Tarphon ate all his food in purity..

“¹⁵⁵A similar text in Tosephta Demay 1:24. There, the text continues: “If one buys wine and oil to put on abscesses, black peas to make powder, they are subject to demay but R. Simeon ben Eleazar declares it free.” Wine for brine¹⁵⁶Latin muries,muria, shortened from Greek ἁλμυρίς, ίδος, ἡ, “salty thing; salt land; saltiness” (E. G.)., wine for perfume¹⁵⁷Latin olentia, cf. Berakhot pp. 87, 510. According to the Babli (Šabbat 140 a) a mixture of olive oil, wine, and balsamum., legumes to make into powder¹⁵⁸Pea or bean meal to be used as powder. are subject to demay, not to mention if they are certain. They themselves¹⁵⁹If one buys them ready-made. are free from demay.” Where are we standing? According to Rebbi, they should be subject to demay, according to Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon, even if certain they should be free¹⁶⁰The disagreement between Rebbi and R. Eleazar ben R. Simeon is stated in Terumot 11:1 (fol. 47c) “Wine of terumah {heave} to use for brine, Rebbi permits it {since the wine remains wine}, R. Eleazar ben R. Simeon forbids it {since it is a use of the heave not for direct consumption.} Hence, Rebbi forbids such brine for non-Cohanim {since the sanctity of the heave permeates all}, R. Simeon ben Eleazar permits it to non-Cohanim {since the wine has disappeared.}” Here also, if the wine etc. has disappeared, and if brine bought on the market is not subject to demay, for R. Eleazar ben R. Simeon even wine bought expressly for the production of brine cannot be subject to demay.. But we follow Rebbi, we say we are dealing with the easy ones, for which they eased the rules of demay.

“Wine for eye medication¹⁶¹Greek κολλύριον. The text in Tosephta Demay 1:25 reads: “He who buys wine to put into eye medication or flour to put into wound dressing, is free from demay and obligated if it is certain. They themselves are free from demay.” It seems that this is a Babylonian text., flour to make into wound dressing¹⁶²Greek μάλαγμα. If wine and flour are produced, they are subject to the duties of heave and tithes, no matter what the final use is. But if one buys medication which definitely is not food, no obligation exists even if heave was not given from grain or wine., are obligated if they are certain and one does not have to mention that they are under the rules of demay. They themselves are free if certain.” Here you say, free if certain, and there¹⁶³In the previous paragraph, where wine and flour are used for exempt foods, but foods nevertheless. In medication, wine and flour are denatured; in foods, only their status is changed. you say, free from demay. Here it disappears by itself, there it disappears when used.

Did we not state: “Eye medication from a pagan temple is forbidden to use?”¹⁶⁴This implies that eye medication is valuable; why should it be free from heave and tithes? There is a difference, since it is written (Deut. 13:16): “Nothing banned should stick to your hands.” What is the difference between this and grape skins from Gentiles? Are these not also forbidden to use¹⁶⁵Since the pagan Gentile is assumed to have offered a libation from his newly pressed wine to his gods, all pagan wine is forbidden for any use whatsoever. (This is different from the prohibition to drink any Gentile wine, even from non-pagans.)? But dried skins are not forbidden because of idolatrous use¹⁶⁶As stated in Mishnah Avodah zarah 2:4, skins remaining after pressing grapes for wine are forbidden to use if moist but not if completely dry. The question is not answered, probably because the answer is obvious: totally dry eye medication is unusable..

“¹⁶⁷Continuation of the discussion of the Mishnah. From Akhzib and further on it is free from demay.” What is the status of Akhzib itself? It was stated (Tosephta Demay 1:4): “Akhzib itself is free from demay.”

“He who buys from a donkey caravan at Tyre and from the chest¹⁶⁸The drawer of a trader, who sells staple goods which may come from any nearby region that is a major producer, including Galilee. It seems that in Tyre, which is much closer to Galilee, Galilean grain was usually sold directly by the transporter who brought the grain, not by the local merchant (Maimonides Maäser 13:6). at Sidon is obligated¹⁶⁹Quote from a Tosephta. In our Tosephta, Demay 1:10, the statement is inverted: “He who buys from a donkey caravan at Tyre and from the chest at Sidon is free, from the chest at Tyre and the donkey caravan at Sidon is obligated. R. Yose ben R. Jehudah says, he who buys from the chest at Tyre is free, and certainly from the donkey caravan. From one donkey driver at Tyre he is obligated. R. Jehudah says, the donkey caravan that descends to Akhzib is obligated because it may be assumed that it comes from Galilee. {If it “descends”, it comes either from Galilee or from Tyre.} But the Sages say, it is in its prior state, free until you have ascertained from where it comes.”.” Hence, from the donkey caravan at Sidon and from the chest at Tyre it is free. From a single donkey at Tyre¹⁷⁰The status is not indicated. Since the Yerushalmi contradicts the Tosephta the inference is that it is free (Maimonides Maäser 13:6).. A donkey caravan that entered Tyre through Akhzib? Come and see, if it were standing at Akhziv it would be free, now that it entered Tyre would it be obligated?

Rebbi Joḥanan said: When they decreed demay, they did not decree about these matters¹⁷¹The cases enumerated at the end of the Mishnah, “Ḥallah of the am haäreẓ, food containing heave, food bought with money of the Second Tithe, and the remainders of flour sacrifices are free from demay” were never included in a duty of demay; there is no need for an explanation why these are excluded.. Rebbi Hoshaia said, the fear of sacred things is on him and he will not give to the Cohen anything that is not in order¹⁷²Any one of these is connected with the Sanctuary and their consumption in violation of the rules is a deadly sin, the farmer’s sin if he tricks the Cohen into thinking that the produce was brought in order. Hence, it is rational to exclude these items from demay even if the original decree did not mention this exclusion.. “Ḥallah of the am haäreẓ,” according to R. Hoshaia, the Mishnah deals with the ḥallah of an am haäreẓ. But a ḥaver who bought dough from an am haäreẓ and gave ḥallah is not covered¹⁷³His heave of the tithes must include 10% of the amount given as ḥallah, since his case is not mentioned in the Mishnah.. According to R. Joḥanan, the two cases are identical. “And food containing heave,” according to R. Hoshaia, the Mishnah deals with produce of an am haäreẓ. But if a ḥaver bought produce from an am haäreẓ and it became mixed with heave, he is not covered. According to R. Joḥanan, the two cases are identical. What is the difference between them¹⁷⁴Is there a case where the difference is in the opposite direction, that R. Joḥanan requires putting in order and R. Hoshaia does not?? One seah that was lifted from among 100 seah¹⁷⁵If heave fell into profane food (of the same kind, so that the heave is no longer recognizable) the entire food becomes מדומע and is no longer usable by laymen. But if the volume of the profane food is at least 100 times that of the heave, one may lift food in the volume of the heave out of the mixture and declare this now to be the heave; the rest is profane and may be used by everybody. This is true only if the rest is truly profane food which may be used by everybody. Hence, before designating the lifted amount as heave, the owner has to be sure that the rest is profane, so he has to remove the heave of the tithe from it first. According to R. Hoshaia, the owner will do that, so that the remainder is in order even in the hands of the unobservant. R. Joḥanan does not accept the argument and any produce in the hands of the unobservant remains demay., according to R. Joḥanan it is obligated, according to R. Hoshaia it is free.

It was stated: “All of these¹⁷⁶Mentioned in the Mishnah as not under the laws of demay., if he gave a name to their heave of the tithe or Second Tithe, what he did is done.¹⁷⁷A similar text is in Tosephta Demay 1:28 which, however, as noted by R. S. Lieberman, deals exclusively with matters of the Temple and, therefore, excludes the heave of the tithe.” According to R. Joḥanan, this is fine¹⁷⁸He is not required to give, but if he gives there is no objection.. According to R. Hoshaia, they are in order, and you say so¹⁷⁹Since one cannot give heave from produce that was already tithed and if he is sure the produce was tithed, he should declare that calling anything from it heave of the tithe is invalid.? Because of one who is unscrupulous about sacred things¹⁸⁰According to R. Hoshaia, his assertion is one of probability that the produce will be in order, so that one may base one’s actions on it, not of total certainty.. It was stated¹⁸¹A baraita was found expressing the last argument.: “All of these, if he gave a name to their heave of the tithe or Second Tithe, what he did is done, because of one who does not put in order.”

Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya asked¹⁸²He asked whether the exemption of food bought with money of the Second Tithe refers only to money from demay or also includes regular tithe. The answer is that all tithe money is exempt (R. Simson.) before Rebbi Ze'ira: So far with money of tithes of demay? Even if it is certain!

It¹⁸³The entire paragraph is also in Qiddušin 2:8, fol. 63a, which is its main place. was stated: “All of these, if he gave a name to their heave of the tithe or Second Tithe, what he did is done.” Rebbi Eleazar said, with the exception of the remainders of flour sacrifices¹⁸⁴Since the flour sacrifice must be eaten by male priests in the Temple precinct but heave of the tithe can be eaten by all members of the Cohen’s family anywhere, it is clear that strict sanctity cannot be replaced by a less stringent one.. Rebbi Jeremiah said, the rest is in dispute. Rebbi Yose asked, what dispute? Where are we standing, if according to Rebbi Meïr¹⁸⁵The dispute is in Mishnah Qiddušin 2:8: “If a priest marries by his share in the holiest sacrifices or simple holy sacrifices, the marriage is not valid. With Second Tithes, be it with or without knowledge, the marriage is not valid, the words of R. Meïr. Rebbi Jehudah said, if in error, the marriage is not valid, if with knowledge, the marriage is valid.” In order to marry, the groom has to give the bride something valuable of his property while declaring before two witnesses that by accepting the gift she is married to him (cf. Peah Chapter 6, Note 46). Rebbi Meïr declares that holiest sacrifices, the Cohen’s share of simple sacrifices, and the Second Tithe are all Heaven’s property offered, as the case may be, to the Cohen, his family, or the layman and his family for consumption in Jerusalem. Hence, for R. Meïr, the basic conditions for a valid marriage are not satisfied., both for tithes and for the remainders of flour sacrifices, he did not do anything. If according to Rebbi Jehudah¹⁸⁶R. Jehudah agrees that under normal circumstances, Second Tithe in Jerusalem cannot be redeemed. However, since it must be redeemed if it became ritually impure, it can also be redeemed unlawfully. His position is explained in Peah, Chapter 7, Note 135., what he did is done. Rebbi Mana said, I went to Caesarea and heard Rebbi Ḥizqiah who was sitting there, stating: “If a priest marries by means of his share in the holiest sacrifices or simple holy sacrifices, the marriage is not valid.” Rebbi Eleazar said, that is everybody’s opinion. Rebbi Joḥanan said, it is in dispute¹⁸⁷Rebbi Jehudah states that the Cohen’s share of the sacrifices is his personal property. Hence, at least as far as simple sacrifices are concerned, the woman becomes his wife through the marriage and can legally consume the meat given to her. In that case, R. Jehudah also asserts that Second Tithe is always the owner’s property, even before redemption. However, it cannot be used as a marriage gift as is since there is a lien on it that it should be used only for consumption, and that lien must first be removed by redemption.. I said to him, from whom did the rabbi hear this, and he said, from Rebbi Jeremiah. I said, this explains the matter! Rebbi Jeremiah, who heard that Rebbi Eleazar said, it is everybody’s opinion, he says it is in dispute¹⁸⁸Transferring R. Joḥanan’s opinion from the Mishnah in Qiddušin to Demay.. Rebbi Yose, who did not hear that, asked which dispute? If according to Rebbi Meïr, both for Second Tithe and for the remainders of flour sacrifices, he did not do anything, if according to Rebbi Jehudah, what he did is done.

It was stated¹⁸⁹This is the discussion of the last statement in the Mishnah. A different text, in the name of R. Nathan and not mentioning iris, is Tosephta Demay1:26–27. As R. S. Lieberman points out, it follows that putting some (not too much) natural perfume in oil does not make the oil unfit for human consumption even though it is destined for rubbing into the skin.: Rebbi Jehudah said, the House of Hillel freed only spikenard oil¹⁹⁰Latin foliatum, cf. Pliny, Hist. Nat. XIII, 2.. Others say in the name of Rebbi Nathan, the House of Hillel obligated oil perfumed with rose or iris¹⁹¹Greek ἴρινον “made from the iris”..