Yerushalmi Peah 6:3 ירושלמי פאה ו׳:ג׳

MISHNAH: Heads of rows⁵⁶When sheaves are arranged in rows, the first sheaf in each row is always exempt from the law of forgotten sheaves since either one starts from it or one ends at it; in neither case could one return to it., the sheaf next to it proves⁵⁷If sheaves were arranged in parallel rows, and the sheaves were then removed by rows in one direction. If a sheaf from one was left standing but in the orthogonal direction there was a sheaf standing next to it, the standing sheaf now belongs to a row in the other direction; it is not forgotten until it is isolated in all directions from the rest of the sheaves still on the field. (By Mishnah 4, two isolated sheaves may be “forgotten”, a group of three is not.), and a sheaf that was taken up to be brought to town⁵⁸The House of Hillel agree with that of Shammai that as soon as the sheaf is taken up to be removed from growing areas, the laws of the forgotten stalk no longer apply. and then was forgotten, they all agree that they never are forgotten sheaves. The following describe heads of rows: Two who started in the middle of the row, one turned North and the other turned South, and they forgot before them or after them. The one before them is a forgotten sheaf⁵⁹Any sheaf that at the start of the collection was in front of one of the workers, if forgotten, is subject to the law of forgotten sheaves. But if a sheaf was between the two, in the back of both of them, it is not forgotten since it never was considered, and it remains the head of an East-West row., the one after them is not a forgotten sheaf. A single person who started at the head of a row and forgot before and after himself. The one before him is not a forgotten sheaf⁶⁰If he leaves sheaves before him but does not jump over one, these belong to East-West rows and do not have the status of being forgotten., but the one after him is a forgotten sheaf because it falls under (Deut. 24:19) “do not return to take it.” This is the principle: Anything that falls under “do not return to take it,” is a forgotten sheaf, but anything that does not fall under “do not return to take it,” is not a forgotten sheaf.

HALAKHAH: From where about heads of rows⁶¹That they are exempt from the laws of forgotten sheaves.? Rebbi Jonah said, it is written (Deut. 24:19): “When you are harvesting your harvest on your field and you forget,” what you harvest you can forget⁶²But you cannot forget what you only start to harvest. Hence, uncut stalks at the start of a row to be cut are not for the poor.. That refers to the start of rows of standing grain. End of rows of standing grain? Rebbi Jonah said, “do not return to take it.” From the place you came from you should not return to take it⁶³At the end of the row one goes to the next row; since one is at the end of the field he cannot retrace his steps to the end of the row.. So far, about starts of rows of sheaves, ends of rows of sheaves? Rebbi Jonah said, we learn starts of rows of sheaves from starts of rows of standing grain and ends of rows of standing grain from ends of rows of sheaves⁶⁴The verse speaks of the forgotten sheaf but is formulated in terms of harvesting standing grain. Just as forgotten standing stalks at beginning and end of rows are not for the poor, neither are sheaves at beginning and end of rows..

“The sheaf next to it proves⁶⁵Quote from the Mishnah..” How is that? (Tosephta Peah 3:4): “If he had ten rows of ten sheaves each and he removed one row of them in a North-South direction; when he forgot one of them it is not forgotten because it is considered East-West⁶⁶It is connected to the part of the field not yet worked over in the orthogonal direction..” When he then removed the sheaves East-West and forgot one of them, let us hear from the following⁶⁷Word-by-word parallel to Chapter 5, Halakhah 2.: When he removed the first, second, and third sheaves⁶⁸He not only bound them but he also removed them to a storage place or threshing floor. This statement assumes that a standard row of sheaves are three sheaves. Hence, the full second row would be sheaves 4,5,6. but forgot⁶⁹To remove the fourth after it was bound. the fourth, some state: If he removed the fifth, it becomes legally forgotten, but some state: If he waited long enough that he could have removed the fifth, it becomes legally forgotten. Rebbi Avin bar Ḥiyya said, he who says, “if he removed the fifth” if there is a sixth⁷⁰Because sheaves in a row are saved by the next sheaf just as stalks in a row are saved by the next stalk. Hence, the fourth can become legally forgotten only if the fifth, which saves it from being legally forgotten, is removed., but he who says, “if he waited long enough that he could have removed the fifth” if there is no sixth⁷¹Since there is no row of three sheaves, they will be taken to be removed individually and not as a row. Hence, it is enough that the fifth could have been finished and removed.. Before he took away the fifth, would not the fourth be apt to be considered starting a row⁷²If there are six sheaves, the fourth does not become legally abandoned until the sheaf which saves it is removed.? If this is named “forgotten,” then also in our case⁷³Of sheaves first taken N-S, then E-W. it is “forgotten.”

If there was an oversize sheaf⁷⁴And he decided to split it into regular size sheaves. and he removed a sheaf from the outside next to the inside, it is considered a row⁷⁵If only part of the sheaf is removed, that part must be bound in a separate sheaf. We must assume that there is another sheaf standing nearby, so that there are three sheaves standing close together which form a row for the House of Hillel (Mishnah 4), or that the farmer splits his oversized sheaf into three, working from the outside in (which is the natural thing to do.). If he removed from the inside next to the outside, may it be considered a row⁷⁶We still have a minimum of three sheaves (see preceding Note) but since the farmer works from the inside out he is going back and, by R. Jonah’s argument at the start of the Halakhah, the sheaf formed by the outside stalks should not be protected as “head of row.”? If he removed from the top beside the bottom it is considered a row⁷⁷That means, he takes off the top stalks to form a separate sheaf, the bottom part taking the place of the original oversized sheaf. This certainly is legitimate. However, if the farmer contrives a way to pull the lower stalks out of the sheaf, the question is as before, whether any of the resulting sheaves can be protected as heads of a row. These purely theoretical questions are not answered.. If he removed from the bottom beside the top, is it considered a row?

When Rav descended there⁷⁸“There” always means Babylonia; going to Babylonia is “descending,” going to the Land of Israel is “ascending.” The story appears in the same context in Babli Sotah 45a, the actor being Abbaie, three generations after Rav; the Yerushalmi version is also in Sota 9:2., he declared: I am this place’s Ben Azai⁷⁹Ben Azai, one of the most outstanding students of Rebbi Aqiba, was a walking encyclopedia and used to stroll through the markets of Tiberias, ready to immediately answer any question of Jewish learning. He died during mystical studies before he could marry R. Aqiba’s daughter. In the Talmudim, several sages are reported to have tried to imitate Ben Azai but all of them were quickly confronted with a question for which they gave the wrong answer or did not know any answer at all. The story is inserted here because a few paragraphs down hidden sheaves will be discussed.. There came an old man and asked him, two slain people, one on top of the other⁸⁰This refers to Deut. 21:1–9, about the purification ceremony when a person is found murdered and the murderer is not found. Then a calf’s neck is broken in a ravine not used for agriculture.? Rav was of the opinion that one breaks the neck. He told him, one does not break the neck. He asked him, why? He said to him, not the lower one for he is hidden⁸¹The relevant verse is Deut. 21:1: “If a corpse is found on the land the Eternal, your God, gives to you.…” The lower body is not “found”; he is only discovered when the other body is removed. The upper body is not found on the land., not the upper one because he floats. When he ascended here, he came to Rebbi, who told him: He told you correctly, “if he is found,” and not “if they are found.”

The great Rebbi Jehudah⁸²He probably is Jehudah bar Ḥiyya, son of the great R. Ḥiyya and twin brother of Ḥizqiah. said: If a water canal crossed the entire field, if he has to lift the plough on one side and put it on the other side, it is not considered one row, otherwise it is considered one row⁸³If the irrigation canal is so shallow that the farmer can plough right across, the rows on both sides form just one row together. But if the plough has to be lifted and carried to the other side, then even if the furrow on one side is the exact continuation of the one on the other side, there are legally two rows and four ends that are protected from the law of forgotten sheaves.. If he cut half a row and came back the next day it is considered a row⁸⁴As in the following examples, anytime the harvest or the work on the sheaves was interrupted, the new start is counted as head of row and exempt from becoming “forgotten.”, when he sat down to eat, when he sat down to sleep, when his friend called him, when it got dark.

“⁸⁵An almost identical text is Tosephta Peah 3:3. R. Eliahu Fulda explains that חבירו refers to a friend of the farmer; he and his friend both carry a sheaf. This is impossible since one speaks about “upper and lower” sheaf. The other commentators, from Rashi on the Babli to R. S. Lieberman on the Tosephta, do not note the incongruity of having the farmer taking up one sheaf and forgetting two. One has to explain that חבירו is another sheaf; now two are lying on top of one another. {This is good Hebrew style, cf. Ex. 26:3 where gobelins are “sisters”.} When the upper one is taken up, it is acquired. The lower one then lies uncovered in the field and its status is the subject of the disagreement in the Tosephta. (Problem noted by E. G.) A sheaf he took to bring to town, put it on another one, and forgot about both, the lower one is a forgotten sheaf but the upper one is not a forgotten sheaf. Rebbi Simeon⁸⁶In the Babli, Sotah 45b, this is quoted in the name of R. Simeon ben Jehudah who earlier in 5:6 quoted the tradition of R. Simeon (bar Ioḥai.) said, neither of them is a forgotten sheaf; not the lower one because it is covered⁸⁷R. Simeon follows the opinion of R. Jehudah in Mishnah 9 that covered sheaves do not fall under the law of forgotten sheaves. and not the upper one because he already had acquired it.” Rebbi Zeïra said, if he remembers⁸⁸If he somehow later remembers the upper one, it is his by prior acquisition as spelled out in the Mishnah. If he never remembers the upper one, then the lower one is not covered by anything different from itself and, therefore, cannot legally qualify as hidden.. Rebbi Zeïra parallels Rebbi Jonah, just as Rebbi Jonah said⁸⁹Chapter 5, Halakhah 6, speaking about a sheaf covered under straw which is not forgotten as long as the farmer has the intention of collecting the straw since then the sheaf will automatically be discovered., if he remembers the straws, so Rebbi Zeïra said, if he remembers the upper one.

(Tosephta Peah 3:4) “A field whose sheaves are mixed up, if one was forgotten it is not a forgotten sheaf until he removes all around it⁹⁰The principle of the Mishnah is applied here to a field whose sheaves are not in orderly rows. Nevertheless, a sheaf is not legally forgotten unless it is completely isolated..”