Yerushalmi Peah 2:5 ירושלמי פאה ב׳:ה׳

MISHNAH: A field harvested by Gentiles¹²¹Illegally, or that they bought the crop from the Jewish farmer while the grain was still standing. or robbers¹²²Greek λῃστής; in Galilean dialect, final m for s is certainly a scribal error. Since Gentiles who rob are mentioned first, the robber here is a Jew., undermined by ants, ruined by a storm or animals, is free¹²³Since the farmer gets nothing of the yield, he has no obligation to give from another field for the lost crop.. If he harvested half of it and robbers harvested the other half, it is free since the obligation of produce is when it is standing¹²⁴The obligation of peah arises at the end of the harvest, when some grain is still standing. Since at that moment the grain is in the hands of the robbers, no obligation is incurred by the owner of the field.. If robbers cut half of it and he harvested the other half, he must give peah from what he cut. If he harvested half and sold half, the buyer gives peah for everything¹²⁵Since the obligation of peah did arise from his cutting. However, he may ask to deduct the value of the seller’s peah, 1⅔% of the seller’s harvest, from the selling price.. If he cut half and dedicated half¹²⁸(Tosephta Peah 3:1). The Mishnah does not have to mention that the Gentiles harvest for themselves and not for the Jew, since for the grain harvest one may not hire Gentile workers who would pick up the single stalks not bound in sheaves., he who redeemed it from the treasurer gives peah for everything.

HALAKHAH: The Mishnah¹²⁷Dealing with the first case, if the field was harvested by Gentiles., if they cut for themselves, but if they cut for a Jew it is obligated. And we have formulated regarding this¹²⁸(Tosephta Peah 3:1). The Mishnah does not have to mention that the Gentiles harvest for themselves and not for the Jew, since for the grain harvest one may not hire Gentile workers who would pick up the single stalks not bound in sheaves.: One does not hire Gentile workers because they do not know about gleanings.

The Mishnah¹²⁹Dealing with the second case, if the field was harvested by Jewish robbers., if they cut to destroy it. But if they do not cut to destroy it, it is obligated¹³⁰Since the robbers, while they are Jewish, are not expected to follow Jewish law and give peah from what they are cutting, the farmer has to give peah from any grain that he manages to obtain from the field. This might apply in particular to the next case, discussed in the next paragraph, when he harvested the first half of the field, in which case the language of the Mishnah may be read to mean that the farmer is totally freed from his obligation.. Rebbi Hoshaia ben Shammai¹³¹A fifth generation Galilean Amora from Caesarea Philippi (קצרין), a colleague of R. Mana II. said, even if you say that they do not cut to destroy it, it is free since peah is given from standing produce and real estate cannot be robbed¹³²This is a principle repeated many times in both Talmudim, cf. Kilaim 7:5, Babli Sukkah 30b. The reason is that ownership of real estate is always documented; hence, real estate taken by force in a time of anarchy can always be recovered in court when the rule of law is reestablished.
According to R. S. Cirillo, since the robbers are not owners of the field, they are not owners of the grain as long as it stands. It is true that they become owners of the grain as soon as they cut it; the legal owner then has a claim for damages against them but not a claim to the actual grain. Hence, when the robbers cut the grain, there is no obligation of peah incurred by the farmer since neither he nor his employees are doing the harvesting. There also is no obligation on the robbers since the grain comes into their possession only after it is cut and the obligation of peah is already a past event. As a consequence, the field is cut without anybody incurring the obligation of peah..

Because¹³³The Mishnah must deal separately with the cases of robbers cutting the entire field or only part of the field because the obligation of peah, once incurred, may be discharged also from cut grain as explained in Mishnah and Halakhah 1:6. he separates¹³⁴Meaning that he sets aside as peah for the poor. from cut grain for standing grain and from standing grain for cut grain but he does not¹³⁵If everything is done correctly. separate from cut grain for either cut or standing grain. Sometimes he has to separate from cut grain for standing grain. How can this be? If he finished his field and left something standing on it for peah, at the moment he cuts the first stalk from this, peah returns to the sheaves; he has to give from cut grain¹³⁶Since he stole from the poor by his action, some obligation is transferred to the grain already harvested as explained in Mishnah 1:6.. Not only if he finished his field but even if he cut some and said: “From here and further on I give for peah,” at the moment he cuts the first stalk from this, peah returns to the sheaves and he separates from cut grain for standing grain.

May the seller get the peah which permits the sheaves¹³⁷This refers to the case when the farmer cuts half the harvest and then sells the field with the remaining crop. If the seller is legally below the poverty line, may he take from the peah the buyer is obligated to give also for the grain he himself cut? The problem is that nobody is permitted to take his own peah.? Let us hear it from the following (Mishnah 5:4): “¹³⁸The Mishnah deals with the case of the sharecropper who is not permitted to take from the peah of the field he is working on. Then Rebbi Jehudah explains (nobody dissenting) that this is only true for the sharecropper who has leased the field and has property rights to 50%, 33%, or 25% of the crop. But if the landlord acts as the owner of the field at all times and the sharecropper has no property rights to the crop except that he will receive 50%, 33%, or 25% of the harvest after it is harvested, then the peah was never his and, being poor, he may go and collect from the peah with the rest of the poor. Rebbi Jehudah said: When is this, if he received it for a half, a third, or a quarter.” What is the difference between this and the first case¹³⁹Of the usual sharecropper.? It must be, “if you cut it, a third will be yours¹⁴⁰Only after the harvest is completed does the sharecropper have a claim..” Rebbi Abin bar Ḥiyya said, this implies that the seller may get the peah which permits the sheaves¹⁴¹Since at the moment of the actual obligation of peah the field is already sold, the peah was never the seller’s and he may take his part among the other poor who come to collect.. Rebbi Yose¹⁴²He shows that the argument of R. Abin bar Ḥiyya is faulty. While the actual obligation of peah arises during the buyer’s harvest, the potential obligation started with the seller’s harvest. Hence, the seller should be barred from taking his part of the peah. In contrast, the sharecropper who is given ownership only of a part of the harvest, not of the standing grain, has nothing at all to do with the obligation of peah. said, there the obligation of the field did not come during his ownership, but here the obligation of the field started during his ownership. It is correct that if he cut half of the field and sold what he cut, the buyer¹⁴³Since he is poor and never acquired any ownership of the real estate, he may take everything a poor person is entitled to. This sentence is R. Yose’s analysis of the correct parallel to the Mishnah of the sharecropper. is allowed gleanings, forgotten sheaves, and peah. May the buyer get the peah which permits the sheaves of the seller¹⁴⁴If the buyer is legally poor, may he take for himself the peah that he will give for the seller’s harvest? The answer might be yes, unless we are afraid of unfair competition. This is the essence of the last argument in the quarrel between Rebbi and Rebbi Jehudah II the Prince as explained at the end of Halakhah 1:6.? That is the disagreement of Rebbi and Rebbi Jehudah the Prince.

Rebbi Phineas asked¹⁴⁵Here starts the discussion of the last case of the Mishnah, if part of the field was dedicated to the upkeep of the Temple.: Can a harvest outside of the Land become subject to peah? Could you not say that a dedicated crop is exempt and (a crop) outside the Land is exempt; just as a dedicated crop may become obligated¹⁴⁶As explained in the Mishnah, if the field is sold by the Temple officials with the crop still standing., so from outside the Land it may become obligated? He found it stated: (Lev. 19:9, 23:22) “When you harvest the harvest of your Land,” and not the harvest outside of the Land¹⁴⁷Under any circumstance..

If the treasurer cut half of the half but did not finish to harvest the rest before somebody redeemed everything, he gives from the harvest for what was harvested¹⁴⁸As explained in the Mishnah, the buyer has to give peah also for the harvest of the original owner. However, since the verse speaks to individuals, “when you cut the harvest of your land”, the obligation is only on private individuals. It does not apply to the Temple which is the collective property of all of Israel. but all that was harvested in the possession of the Temple is already exempted.