Yerushalmi Maaser Sheni 3:1 ירושלמי מעשר שני ג׳:א׳

MISHNAH: A person should not say to another: bring this produce to Jerusalem to distribute¹He cannot promise the other person a piece of the Second Tithe as reward for his transporting the tithe since that would be a commercial transaction forbidden by Mishnah 1:1. He can either invite the other to join in the consumption of the tithe or he can give it all to the other as an unconditional gift; the other person will take it up to Jerusalem, and then may give it to the original owner as an unconditional gift., but he may say bring it that we shall eat and drink it together, or they may give free gifts to one another.

HALAKHAH: ²This paragraph and the next appear (with a natural change in the order of the first two subjects) in Ševi‘it 8:4, and are explained there, Notes 51–62.“One should not say to another person,” etc. What is the difference between him who says “to distribute” and him who says “that we should eat and drink them?” Rebbi Zeïra in the name of Rebbi Jonathan, this is one of the practices of obfuscation. There, we have stated: If somebody says to a day-laborer: “Here you have an as and collect vegetables for me today”, these wages are permitted. “For its value collect vegetables for me today”, these wages are forbidden. If somebody bought from the baker a loaf in the value of a dupondius [and says], when I collect vegetables from the field I shall bring to you, that is permitted. If he took from him silently he should not pay with the proceeds of Sabbatical [produce] since one may not pay a debt with proceeds of the Sabbatical. What is the difference between him who says “collect for me” and him who says “for its value collect for me”? Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina, this is one of the practices of obfuscation. There, we have stated: “A person may borrow from another pitchers of wine or oil but he should not say: lend me.” What is the difference between him who says “let me borrow” and him who says “lend me”? Rebbi Zeïra in the name of Rebbi Jonathan, this is one of the practices of obfuscation.

Their bread. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Jonathan: This also belongs to the practices of obfuscation. Rebbi Yose said, I objected before Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa: Why should it belong to the practices of obfuscation? Do I say that at a place where Jewish bread is available, Gentile bread should be forbidden but they obfuscated about it and permitted it or that at a place where no Jewish bread is available it is logical that Gentile bread should be permitted, but they obfuscated the matter and forbade it. Rebbi Mana said: Does there exist obfuscation for prohibition? Is bread not like Gentile cooking? So we say: At a place where no Jewish cooking is to be found it is logical that Gentile cooking should be permitted, but they obfuscated the matter and forbade it. But so it was: At a place where no Jewish bread is available it is logical that Gentile bread should be forbidden, but they obfuscated the matter and permitted it as a necessity of life. The rabbis of Caesarea in the name of Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa [hold] with the one who permits, but only from a store. But we do not follow this.

⁴This also belongs to Ševi‘it 8:4; it is there in rudimentary form, cf. Ševi‘it8, Note 69. It was stated: “Rebbi Jehudah and Rebbi Neḥemiah forbid it.⁵Tosephta Ševi‘it 6:21: “If somebody buys from the baker a loaf for a dupondius [and says] I shall collect vegetables from the field this is permitted [in the Sabbatical]. Rebbis Jehudah and Neḥemiah forbid it.”” What are we talking about? If about him⁶The baker. In this formulation, Sabbatical vegetables would be used for the payment of a debt; this is forbidden. who says, here you have it, give me [payment], everybody agrees that it is forbidden. If he⁷The buyer. says, give me and I shall give you, everybody agrees that it is permitted. But it is about one who says, give it to me and it is clear to me [where to find it], I shall bring it to you; Rebbi Jehudah and Rebbi Neḥemiah forbid it because vegetables on the field are rare; but the Sages permit it because vegetables on the field are abundant.

After he transported it, may he say take your part and I shall take mine⁸If the tithe is already in Jerusalem, is the language which was barred in the Mishnah acceptable?? May he say to him, take this barrel of wine⁹And transport it to Jerusalem. and we shall eat the barrel of oil that is there. Is it similar with animal tithe¹⁰This question refers both to the situation described in the Mishnah and the two questions raised here.? Second Tithe, since it has special conditions for a sale¹¹While it is forbidden to sell Second Tithe, it may be exchanged for money and then sold. you say is forbidden but animal tithe since it has no conditions for a sale¹²Redemption and any use of animal tithe other than as sacrifice or food of the family of the original rancher is strictly forbidden; Lev. 27:32–33, Mishnah 1:2. you say is permitted. It should not be clear to you that it is permitted. May he ask him, take and transport this domesticated or wild animal, and we shall eat meat from a ritually slaughtered animal there¹³It is difficult to make sense of the question in the framework of tithes. The best explanation seems to be that of the author of Sepher Nir who emends בהמה וחיה into בהמה חיה and reads: “May he ask another person, take and transport this live animal [of tithe], and we shall eat [its] meat [once it is] ritually slaughtered [in the Temple] there?” It is possible to call meat from the sacrifice of animal tithe “slaughtered meat”, an expression usually reserved for profane meat, since only the blood of the animal is sprinkled on the altar but no part of it is burned or given to a Cohen.?