MISHNAH: When is everybody [Even rich people and even the proprietor himself.] permitted to take gleanings of grain? After the second wave of seekers [A nif‘al participle from מוש “look up last.” (In Arabic, מוש means “collecting gleanings from grapes.”) If the word is derived from משש “to grope,” it designates old people who walk around groping. Both etymologies are considered in the Halakhah.] is gone. Single grapes and gleanings of grapes, after the poor have come to the vineyard and gone. Olives after the second wave of rainfall [In Israel, the first rainfall of the fall season is expected about the seventh of Marḥeshwan; the second rainfall is anytime between Markheshwan 17 and Kislew 1 (after that date, the year would be considered one of draught.)] . Rebbi Jehudah said, are there not people who do not harvest their olives until after the second wave of rainfall? Rather when a poor man goes out and does not collect more than the value of four assarii [An assarius or as is 1/24 of a silver denar. One silver denar was worth 1/25 of a gold denar whose gold content in good times was about 4.3 grams. It is stated that the minimum amount necessary for one meal of a poor person in Mishnaic was 1 as. If a poor man cannot collect the value of two meals for both himself and his wife, he will not waste his time collecting.] .
HALAKHAH: Rebbi Joḥanan said, why are they called nĕmūšōt, because they come at the end [In the Babli (Baba meẓi‘a 21b), this explanation is given in the name of R. Simeon ben Laqish. The feminine form both of the noun and the verb may indicate that the late collectors were mainly women. The use of the masculine later in the same context may be irrelevant since the Yerushalmi in general prefers the masculine singular for all genders and numbers.] . Abba Shaul used to call them “gropers.” Some formulate in the Mishnah nĕmūšōt, some formulate mĕšūšōt. He who says nĕmūšōt, because they come at the end. Those who say mĕšūšōt, because they grope to come. Rebbi Ḥuna in the name of Menaḥem [Probably Rebbi Menaḥem, a student of R. Joḥanan and R. Simeon ben Laqish.] : Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri [Tanna of the third generation, a student of R. Eliezer and colleague of R. Ḥalaphta, the father of R. Yose. On the recommendation of R. Joshua, Rabban Gamliel later appointed him overseer of the Academy of Jabneh. He is the paradigm of the God-fearing poor.] used to go out with the second wave of seekers and returned with his needs for the entire year.
It was stated: The gifts to the poor standing on the field about which the poor do not care [They did not come to collect them at the appointed times, or they did not collect them when they did come.] belong to the proprietor. Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya asked, may a person give the name of peah to take for himself [Since it was stated in Halakhah 1:6 that even a farmer who qualifies as poor has to abandon his peah to the poor in general, how can he then be authorized to take it for himself?] ? Rebbi Simeon bar Ioḥai stated: (Lev. 19:10,22) “Abandon them to the poor and the stranger,” not ravens and bats [It is better that food be used for humans who care about it. Since the obligation of these gifts to the poor is to “abandon” them, not to “give” them, the farmer is not required to give the value of peah, gleanings, etc., to the treasury of charities.] .
“Single grapes and gleanings of grapes, after the poor have come to the vineyard and gone.” We did not state “the second wave of seekers;” since these are so desirable they all come immediately.
“Olives after the second wave of rainfall.” We did not state “the second wave of seekers;” since when it is cold, only young people will go out.
And before that [The argument refers to the last part of the Mishnah, where R. Jehudah disputes the date of the second downpour and connects the date to the value of olives to be gleaned. If less than that amount is found, it is assumed that the poor abandoned the rest and it becomes abandoned to everybody (Baba Meẓi‘a 2:1). But if there is more, is it not still the possession of the poor and forbidden to everybody else?] , is it not forbidden because of robbery? They received their answer according to their reasoning: You who say that because of the cold only young people will go out [Since you require to wait until after the second downpour, you seem to think that the poor have given up on those few farmers who harvest their olives only after the second downpour.] , for you, since he knows [The second gleaner.] that he will not bring home enough for his upkeep, he will not go out.
MISHNAH: They [The poor can be trusted that they received produce as one of the gifts to the poor and that everybody (including a rich person buying from a poor one) is able to eat them, without separating heave and heave of tithes, and not commit a sin.] can be trusted about gleanings, forgotten sheaves, and peah at harvest time, and about the tithe of the poor its entire year [The third and sixth years of a Sabbatical cycle.] ; the Levite can always be trusted [Since he receives the First Tithe every year; even though he is required to separate from this 10% as heave of tithes, we do not suspect him of being derelict in his duty, even if he is unlearned in this matter.] . But they can be trusted only about things that people are in the habit of doing [This is explained in the following two Mishnaiot.] .
HALAKHAH: How far [If the poor person testifies that he collected the grain at a certain place, how far away may that place be so that we still may trust him.] ? Rebbi Ḥanina said, to a place where he usually [I. e., with his usual speed and endurance.] goes and returns the same day. It happened that Rebbi trusted five brothers about five kor [Each one of them returning with one kor, about 380 liter!] of wheat. Is that not impossible? A little here and a little there adds up to a kor.
Rebbi Eleazer from the South [A fifth generation Amora from the South, the region around Lod, student of the Galilean R. Yose.] asked before Rebbi Yose: Does our Mishnah follow Rebbi Eliezer, since Rebbi Eliezer said [The statement is in Tosephtah Maäser Šeni 3:16; it belongs to the topic of tractate Demai and is discussed in Demai 4:5: “If one was seen separating the Second Tithe, he is trustworthy also for the First Tithe, the words of R. Eliezer. But the Sages say, if he can be trusted for the First, he can be trusted for the Second, but if he can be trusted for the Second, he cannot yet be trusted for the First.” Eating First Tithe without separating its heave of the tithe is a deadly sin. Eating unredeemed Second Tithe is a transgression but no deadly sin. For the Sages, essentially everybody can be trusted in matters of the heave of the tithe but only people checked out for trustworthiness can give reliable information about the Second Tithe.] , if he can be trusted for the Second, he can be trusted for the First? Rebbi Yose said, it is everybody’s opinion. Here it is different since nobody fools around with deadly sins [There is no question of minor transgression; eating food that is not a gift to the poor without separating out “great” heave and heave of the tithe is a deadly sin and people will not knowingly engage in it or lead others into a deadly sin.] . Rebbi Eleazar in the name of Rebbi Hoshaia: Just as Jews are not suspected in matters of the great heave [The first heave given from the harvest before tithes.] , so Levites are not suspected in matters of the heave of tithes. Rebbi Hoshaia said, our Mishnah says so: The Levite can always be trusted.
Rebbi Mana asked, can the Levite always be trusted, even in the Sabbatical year [In the six years in which he receives the First Tithe, we understand that he is trustworthy because he will not lightly commit a mortal sin. But in the Sabbatical year, in which no tithes are given, there seems to be no reason to give the Levite a privileged position. The question is not answered.] ?
Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya said, the Levite may be trusted if he says, this is certainly tithe, to free it from Second Tithe. But if he says: It was given to me [As a gift, not as obligatory tithe.] , or if he says that it is from his own crop [Of which he is not entitled to take the gifts to the poor. The Levite may take his own First Tithe.] , they cannot be trusted. That is the Mishnah: But they can be trusted only about things that people are in the habit of doing. So is the Mishnah: But they can be trusted only about things that people are in the habit of giving [That means “the habit” does not refer to the Levite or the poor but to the farmer.] .
MISHNAH: They are trustworthy about wheat but not flour or bread [Since gifts to the poor are only given in unhulled, without supporting evidence one can trust the poor only for the grain itself to exempt it from heave and tithes.] . They are trustworthy about panicles of rice [Only if the rice is on the panicles and not hulled. “Raw” in the next clause refers to hulled rice.] but not if it is either raw or cooked. They are trustworthy about beans but not bean groats, either raw or cooked. They are trustworthy about oil [Olive oil, which is given after pressing.] if they say it is from the tithe of the poor, but not if they say it is made from picked olives [Since oil is made only from olives that are ripe enough to fall off when the tree is shaken.] . They are trustworthy in regard to fresh vegetables [That it is from the tithe of the poor since vegetables are not subject to peah and the other gifts connected with peah.] but not for cooked ones except if it was a small amount, since it is the way of householders to bring out from their pans.
HALAKHAH: Should the poor be trustworthy if they say: It was given me as grain and I turned it into flour, it was given me as grain and I turned it into bread? It is clear to him [The anonymous person who asked the question. Since the testimony is really on the grain, the poor must be trusted.] that he is trustworthy. Even if everybody knew that most people store gleanings, he is not trustworthy [If most farmers collect gleanings and later distribute them, the poor cannot be trusted in their statements about grain they did not collect themselves.] . It was stated: “Rebbi Jehudah says [Tosephta Peah 4:1. There the wording is: The poor person is trustworthy. The last sentence extends the argument of R. Jehudah to olive oil.] , at a place where one presses gleanings of grapes, the poor shall be trusted when they say, this wine is from gleanings of grapes.” Similarly, at a place where one presses picked olives, the poor should be trusted when they say, this oil is from picked olives.
In the house of Assi they cooked vegetables but had forgotten to put them in order [To give at least the heave and the tithes so that the vegetables could be eaten by non-priests.] . Gamliel the twin came and fixed them in the pot [He removed the required amount from the cooked vegetables. This shows that it is possible for the poor to receive their tithe from the pot and one should not object to the formulation of the Mishnah that a testimony about cooked vegetables is irrelevant since tithes certainly were given before the cooking started. We also learn that separating heave and tithes after cooking legitimizes the small amounts absorbed by the walls of the (clay) pot.] .
MISHNAH: One may not give to the poor from the threshing floor [The tithe of the poor, which is given, rather than abandoned, and for which it is in the hand of the farmer to whom to give and how much. A certain minimum has to be handed out each time. What to do if this reduces the number of poor who can receive something is treated in the next Mishnah.] less than half a qab [One sixth of a seah and four log, 2.13 liter; cf. Chapter 3, Note 108.] of wheat or a qab of barley; Rebbi Meïr says, half a qab. One and a half qab of spelt, a qab of dried figs or a mina [The weight of 100 silver denar. According to Maimonides in his Commentary, a denar is 96 grains or 6.22 grams. This would make a mina equal to 622 g, about twice the weight of 100 Severan silver denars. R. Isaac Simponti in his commentary identifies the mina with the 1b. of 16 oz. (following Rashi Erubin 29a), and the log as 12 fl. oz. (.426 liter). Cf. Note 75.] of fig cake; Rebbi Aqiba says, half. Half a log of wine; Rebbi Aqiba says, a quarter. A quarter of a log of olive oil; Rebbi Aqiba says, an eighth. About all other produce, Abba Shaul says enough so he may sell it and buy food for two meals from the proceeds.
HALAKHAH: It was stated [A similar list appears in Babli Erubin 29a in the name of R. Simeon ben Eleazar.] : A quarter [A quarter qab equalling one log fluid.] of rice, an ukla [1/8 of a log.] of spices, a pound [A Roman pound of 12 ounces, 345 g.] of vegetables, three qab carob, half a log of wine, a quarter of a log of olive oil, ten nuts, five peaches, two pomegranates, one etrog [Citrus medica, also used on the feast of Tabernacles.] . What is the reason? (Deut. 26:12) “They shall eat in your gates and be satiated,” give him to satisfy him. Ḥizqiah asked his father: From where do we get all these amounts [Some of them do not appear sufficient for a meal; the amounts seem to be inconsistent with their derivation from the verse.] ? He said to them [R. Ḥiyya, the father, said to Jehudah and Ḥizqiah, his twin sons.] , a pebble supports a tower [A slight allusion may be the justification for an elaborate set of rules.] . Rebbi Ḥananiah was sitting before Rebbi Ilaï, the latter was giving a reason and the former destroyed it, the latter was giving a reason and the former destroyed it, until he said to him, is it not depraved to destroy instead of building up?
Rebbi Mana said, one should state “four pounds. [As a minum gift of vegetables, not one pound as in the Baraitha.] ”
Rebbi Eleazar said, the same is valid for an eruv [The entire paragraph is also in Erubin 3:1, the parallel in Babli Erubin28a. On the Sabbath, one may not venture out from one’s town more than 2000 cubits in each direction. [This is a commonly accepted practice; the Biblical commandment (Ex. 16:29): “Nobody shall leave his place on the Sabbath” is interpreted to mean a distance of 12 mil, 24000 cubits.] If somebody needs to go up to 4000 cubits in a certain direction, he may go on Friday afternoon to a distance of 2000 and deposit there food for two meals as eruv for himself. Then he “acquires Sabbath rest” at that spot and may go 2000 cubits from that place in any direction, even if he was not actually there at nightfall Friday evening. Every built-up area is counted as 4 cubits, but the person with an eruv may not go even one step in the opposite direction outside the built-up area. Since the Mishnah states that the poor should get food for two meals as a minumum, these minima also apply to eruv.] . Rebbi Ḥinena said, this is for wine, but oil for an eruv must be enough for two meals. It was stated: One may use for eruv vinegar enough for two meals. It was stated: One may use for eruv oil enough for two meals. Rebbi Jeremiah in the name of Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac: For dipping in it bundled vegetables for two meals. Rebbi Isaac Aṭoshaya [From a place ‘Aṭoša, probably not far from Tiberias. He transmits traditions from R. Joḥanan and most of the latter’s students.] said before Rebbi Zeïra in the name of the House of Rebbi Yannai: One may use for eruv raw peas enough for two meals. For whom is this statement necessary? For Rebbi Meïr [Tosephta Erubin 6(9):4. Yerushalmi Erubin 3:11, Babli Erubin29a. There R. Meïr decides that onions are not fit for eruv (the Babli applies this only to the leaves, not the bulbs.)] , that one should not say because they produce bad mouth odor one may not use them for eruv. One may use salted fish for eruv. One may use salted meat for eruv. Fresh meat, as we have stated [Mishnah Menaḥot 11:7, referring to the ram given as sin-offering on a Day of Atonement that falls on the Sabbath; it must be eaten by the priests before the next morning but cannot be cooked. The priests from Babylonia (in the opinion of the Babli, those from Alexandria) ate it raw after the fast. The text of our Mishnah has “because their taste is refined” as a euphemism.] : The Babylonians eat it raw because their taste is strange. Rebbi Judan asked: May one use χαλκίς [This word and its meaning are difficult to determine. The Rome manuscript has כלבידה, the Venice text in Erubin כלבודה. These two readings constitute a majority and should be accepted. Levy, followed by all other modern dictionaries, assumes the ב to be an error for כ and reads χαλκίς, a kind of herring, also mentioned as כלכיד in Yerushalmi Niddah 6:1. However, in the Babli (Avodah zarah 39b, Tosephta Avodah zarah 4:11 printed edition, and elsewhere), this appears as כילבית, but in both manuscripts of the Tosephta, the Munich manuscript of the Babli, and the editio princeps of Alfassi, it is כילכית. Rabbenu Ḥananel explains: a small kosher fish.] for eruv since the Samaritans eat it raw? Samuel bar Shilat [In the Babli, he appears as Rav Samuel bar Shilat, a student of Rav, renowned as the devoted school teacher.] in the name of Rav: One may use for eruv pa‘apu‘in,gudganiot, and ḥaluglugot. They asked him: what are these? He said to them, καυκαλίς [A plant, melilotus officinalis. In Arabic, קַקַל is cardamom, קַקֻלַּי an alkaline plant; cf. I. Löw, Die Flora der Juden, Vol. 1, p. 490.] , melilot [Arabic חנדקוקא, a kind of tall clover, only barely digestible. Rashi explains in Berakhot 57b cierges, “candles”, a name used, as also its German equivalent Kerze, to designate tall annual plants.] , and purslain [Arabic פרפח̇. In both Talmudim, the last identification is ascribed to Rebbi’s slave girl (about her see Berakhot Chap. 3, Note 175).] .
MISHNAH: These measures [The amounts specified in the previous Mishnah apply to all poor persons equally, as well as the Levites and priests who come to get the First Tithe.] apply to priests, Levites, and Israel. If he wanted to save [If he wanted to save from his tithe of the poor to give to his own poor relatives, he must publicly distribute half of it to the general poor who come to collect, in a nondiscriminatory manner; the other half he gives to his poor relatives in private.] , he gives half and takes half. If it was little [If the tithe of the poor (or half of it) was not sufficient to give the minimal amount to every poor person who appeared, he does not distribute but lets the poor divide it among themselves.] , he puts it before them and they divide it up among themselves.
HALAKHAH: Rebbi Jonah refers the Mishnah to the case when he has more than the measure: If he wanted to save, he takes away half and gives half, but if he has only the measure [After taking off half for his own family, he can no longer give to every poor what is due to him by Mishnah 5. Maimonides (Mattenot Aniïm 6:11) accepts the position of R. Jonah.] , he puts it before them and they divide it up among themselves. Rebbi Ḥizqiah refers the Mishnah to the case when he has the exact measure: If he wants to save, he takes away one half and gives one half; since if he takes away one half and gives one half it becomes less, he puts it before them and they divide it up among themselves [R. Ḥizqiah permits the farmer to reduce by his own deliberate action the amount available for the general poor below the required minimum. [In the Tosephta (Peah 4:2) it is reported in the name of R. Eliezer that the farmer may reserve two thirds for his family.]] .
It was stated [Tosephta Peah 4:8, formulated in singular as in Babli Baba Batra 9a, where the same conclusion is reached here that if he does not collect a minimum, one may give him from public money up to the minimum but not more than that.] : “One does not bother at all [This refers both to public assistance, detailed in the next Mishnah, and the public distribution of the tithe of the poor. The “doors” here are doors of residences, not of barns. Since a tax is collected (both in money and in foodstuffs) for public charity, private persons do not have an obligation over and above that which is stated in the Mishnah.] with those who beg at doors.” Rebbi Jonah said, only if he would not get less than his collection [The poor should not have less than the minimum needed to keep him alive. [Explanation of R. Moses Margalit. Sperber (loc. cit.) gives economical reasons for the apparent relaxation of the Tannaitic rule in R. Jonah’s time (ca. 350 C. E.)] The singular might be addressed to the householder who in R. Jonah’s time was supposed not to let the beggar at his door go away totally emptyhanded.] .
Here [Mishnah 5; the minimum gift is one half qab, and the same Mishnah states later that the general principle is “food for two meals.”] you say, one may not give to the poor less than this from the threshing floor. And there [Mishnah 7; one may not give to the poor person who is travelling from one place to another less than a loaf of bread in the value of a pondion, i. e., a dupondius (half an obolus, one twelfth of a silver denar) if four seah cost a sela‘ (tetradrachma). 4 seah are 24 qab and a tetradrachma is 24 oboli.] you say, one may not give to the poor who is travelling from one place to another less than [The price of the loaf of bread is exactly the price of the grain that the poor gets at the barn. Some weight is lost in milling, and some expense is incurred in baking, and the baker has to make a living. So it seems that the stranger is treated better than the local poor, which is against all rules. [Not all the water used for the dough evaporates in baking, which increases the weight somewhat.]] that. Rav Huna said, deduct one third for expenses [The loaf which the stranger gets is not made from half a qab of wheat flour but only from a third of a qab so that miller and baker can make a living. In Babli Erubin 82a, it is Rav Ḥisda, a student of Rav Huna, who explains that processing costs 1/3 from above, or 1/2 from below.] . Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun gave to the bakers according to the statement of Rav Huna, but only for these measures [For greater amounts, the price to be paid to miller and baker may be less and is negotiable without being unfair to the baker.] .
Rebbi Abba bar Abba bar Mamal [A son of the more renowned Rebbi Abba bar Mamal.] asked before Rebbi Ilaī: What if they saw him [The travelling poor, who comes back to take twice at the same place.] leave the town and enter it again? He said to him, he who gives shall give and he who takes should be afraid for himself [For committing the sin of stealing from other needy people, as explained in Mishnah 9. In handing out charity, the giver should err on the side of generosity.] .
MISHNAH: One does not give to the poor who is travelling from one place to another less than a loaf that costs a dupondius at a time when four seah cost a sela‘ [Mishnah 7; one may not give to the poor person who is travelling from one place to another less than a loaf of bread in the value of a pondion, i. e., a dupondius (half an obolus, one twelfth of a silver denar) if four seah cost a sela‘ (tetradrachma). 4 seah are 24 qab and a tetradrachma is 24 oboli.] . If he stays overnight, one provides him with a bed for sleeping [A mattress and cover.] . If he stays over the Sabbath, one gives him food for three meals. He who has food for two meals should not take from the tamḥui [A basket from which food is distributed to the poor; it was collected for this purpose by the overseers of charity from the households of the town. The word is derived from a Semitic root that in Arabic is ת̇מח̇ “to mix”, since all food was put together in one big basket or plate (Accadic tamaẖu “to grasp, hold in one’s hand”.)] , if for fourteen meals, he should not take from the charity chest. The chest is collected by two people [Since the contribution of money for welfare is a local tax and forcibly collected as a tax, it can never be in the hands of only one person.] and distributed by three [Tosephta Peah 4:9, Babli Baba Batra 8b.] .
HALAKHAH: Tamḥui [Tosephta Peah 4:9, Babli Baba Batra 8b.] is collected every day, the chest every Friday. Tamḥui is for everybody [Including the travellers.] , the chest is only for local people.
Rebbi Ḥuna said, the tamḥui is collected by three people, because it it given out on the spot. Rebbi Ḥelbo in the name of Rebbi Abba bar Zavda, one does not appoint less than three providers [Who spend public money or distribute food to support the poor.] . Come and look, money matters are judged by three, matters of life and death not so much more? But then they should be 23 [The number of judges of a criminal court (mainly acting as a jury.)] . Until one assembles them, he [The hungry poor.] is in danger.
Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: One does not appoint two brothers as providers [The Babli (Baba Batra 8b) quotes R. Ḥanina (a very early Galilean Amora) to the effect that Rebbi appointed two brothers as overseers of charity at the same time.] . Rebbi Yose removed one of two brothers. He came and said before them [In public assembly before the entire town.] : There was not anything wrong with Mr. X, only one does not appoint two brothers as providers.
Rebbi Yose went up to Kufra [Possibly Koufeir near Hasbeya in South Lebanon.] and wanted to appoint providers there, but they did not accept. He came and said before them [Mishnah Šeqalim 5:1 lists the small permanent staff of the Temple, probably in the last times of its existence. Ben Babai administered the oakum, bought with public money, from which the wicks for the candelabra were made.] : “Ben Bavai over the oakum.” If this one had been appointed over the wicks and therefore merited to be counted with the leaders of his generation, you who are being appointed over the lives of people [The poor who would starve without assistance.] , so much more. Rebbi Ḥaggai, when he inducted providers, let them carry the Torah, to indicate that every public office is given by the Torah (Prov. 8:15–16): “Through me, kings rule, through me, princes become princes.” Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba appointed magistrates [Greek ἄρχων. He also inducted them to their offices by giving them the Torah scroll to carry.] .
Rebbi Eliezer was provider. Once, he returned to his house and said to them: What happened? He said to him, there came a group, they ate and drank and prayed for you. He said to them, that does not give much reward. Another time, he came to his house and said to them: What happened? They said to him, there came another group, they ate and drank and cursed you. He said to them, that gives much reward.
They wanted to appoint Rebbi Aqiba as provider. He said that he had to take counsel with his house [The house is his wife, who may be referred to only in indirect speech.] . They followed him and heard him say: In order to be cursed, in order to be insulted [His wife warned him of what would happen to him and he agreed that these things must be expected when a provider takes office.] .
Rebbi Abba bar Zavda said: Rav and Rebbi Joḥanan disagreed [In the Babli, Baba Batra 9a, Rav Huna (the student of Rav) says that one checks for food but not for clothing and Rav Jehudah (student mainly of Samuel) says that one checks for clothing but not for food. Maimonides (Mattenot Aniïm 7:6) decides for Rav Jehudah. It seems that nobody in Babylonia accepted the theory that one does not check in either case.] . One said, one checks out before giving clothing but one does not check out for necessities of life [I. e., food for the hungry.] . The other said, even before giving clothing one does not check out, because of the covenant of the patriarch Abraham [That no Jew should have to go naked.] . A baraita disagrees with him who says that even before giving clothing one does not check out. He explains it for giving him according to his status, as we have stated [Tosephta Peah 4:8: “One does not give to the poor who is travelling from one place to another less than a loaf that costs a dupondius at a time when four seah cost a sela‘. If he stays overnight, one provides for him bedding, oil, and legumes. If he stays over the Sabbath, one gives him food for three meals, oil, legumes, fish, and vegetables. When has this been said? If they do not know him. But if they know him, they also clothe him, everything befitting his status (his prior status before he lost his money).”] : “When has this been said? If they do not know him. But if they know him, they also clothe him, everything befitting his status.” But was it not stated [A similar text is in Tosephta Peah 4:9: “Tamḥui is collected every day, the chest every Friday. Tamḥui is for everybody, the chest is only for local people. If he stayed there for thirty days, he is like the local residents for the charity chest, but for clothing six months. For the poor (Erfurt manuscript: the taxes) of the town twelve months.” The last sentence certainly refers to an obligation to pay taxes; the sentence before the last is ambiguous as to whether it speaks of a duty to contribute or a right to take.] : “For food thirty days, for clothing six months.” Explain it, to contribute. But was it not stated: “For food thirty days, for assessments [Meaning of the Syriac word פסא. Compare also Arabic פסא “to tear something up.”] and charity twelve months?” This means to contribute, the earlier must mean to receive. It still means to contribute; what does it mean, for assessments and charity twelve months? For the salaries of scribes [Scribes of the courts who also were notaries and teachers of advanced students.] and teachers [Elementary school teachers, since the upkeep of elementary schools is a communal obligation from the times of the High Priest Joshua ben Gamla.] .
MISHNAH: He who owns 200 zuz [This is the usual name for the silver denar. [According to the definition of Shulḥan Arukh that a pĕruṭah, 1/192 of a denar, is one-half grain of sterling silver, 200 zuz would be 80 oz. of sterling silver. Its buying power would be much more since in Antiquity the ratio of silver to gold was at most 1:12; it was an amount on which a person could live comfortably for one full year.]] should not take gleanings, forgotten sheaves, peah, and tithes of the poor. If he had 199, even if a thousand people gave him at the same time, he should take. If they were mortgaged for his wife’s ketubah [Cf. Chapter 3, Note 151. The ketubah is a general lien on all his property. The Mishnah supposes that specific money is set aside for the satisfaction of the ketubah. This is permitted only in special cases such as an impending divorce or death. In the same way, the surety for a loan here is not a general mortgaging of property but a definite lien attached to cash.] or for a creditor, he may take. One does not require him to sell his house or the vessels of daily use [The rules of this Mishnah apply only to one who takes gleanings, forgotten sheaves, peah, and tithes of the poor. The protection does not apply to people asking for public assistance.] .
HALAKHAH: A student of Rebbi had 199 denar; Rebbi used to let him receive the tithe of the poor once every three years. His students cast an evil eye on him and completed for him [That he had exactly 200 denar.] . The next time, when he wanted to let him receive, he said: My teacher, I have the measure. He said, this one was hit by a beast of prey [In Mishnah Sotah 3:4, a list is given of those who destroy the world, and beasts of prey (not “the pious”) are part of the list. The story is repeated there. The main definition given for “hit by a beast of prey” are tricks by learned people who think that by scrupulously observing all formal legal rules they can hurt other people with impunity, for example those who advise heirs how to manipulate their property legally so that nothing is left to sustain their father’s widow (assuming she is not their mother.) The derivation here assumes that the Hebrew has the same root as Arabic פרשׂ “to devour, tear apart,” said of a beast of prey.] . He gave a hint to his student who took him to a store [Greek καπηλεῖον.] , made him spend a carat [1/24 of a denar, in Mishnaic Hebrew called איסר. The student still had 199 23/24 denar left, so he could take the tithe and still keep most of the gift that was maliciously given to him. (Note that while the story is told in Aramaic, Rebbi is quoted speaking only pure Hebrew. This fits in with what we know about Rebbi’s household from other sources.)] , then he (Rebbi) let him receive as he was used to do.
A [This and the following stories illustrate the principle that if one knows the recipient of charity one has to support him so that his prior dignity is not impaired.] family from Nevallat [In Tosephta Peah 4:11, the reading is בית נבלטה, in Sifri Deut. 110,303 בית נבטלה. The best explanation is given by I. Löw; the reference is to a town in Benjamin, Neh. 11:34.] in Jerusalem traced its descent from Oman the Yebusite [The last king of the Yebusites who sold the Temple site to David (2Sam. 24:20–24, 1Chr. 21:15).] . Once the Sages alotted them six hundred talents of gold [The enormous sum of 1’800’000 gold sheqel. In the Tosephta it is 300 gold sheqel (Erfurt manuscript: 600), in the Rome manuscript 600 talents silver gold, a confluence of two versions. The number given in the Yerushalmi also appears in Sifri Deut. 110, but in #303 it is 600 talents of silver. The amount given here probably is an adaptation of the original amount to the hyperinflation of the military anarchy; it would correspond approximately to 1’800 honest gold sheqel.] to avoid causing them to leave Jerusalem, since they interpreted “in your gates, in your gates [The repetition of “in your gates” in Deut. 26:12, 16:11,14, 14:21,27,29 is taken to include Jerusalem. The verse Deut. 26:12, referring to tithes one has to give to the Levite, the stranger, the orphan, and the widow, so that “they should eat in your gates and be satisfied,” is explained in Sifri Deut. 303: “‘In your gates’ teaches that one may not export tithes from the Land of Israel. They said that a family from Nevallat was in Jerusalem and the Sages alotted them six hundred talents of silver and did not want to permit them to leave Jerusalem.” (Similar in Sifri Deut. 110). In Sifri Deut. 71, the repetition “in your gates, in your gates” is explained as reference to dedicated animals that may be slaughtered outside of Jerusalem; hence, a special inclusion of Jerusalem is needed.] ,” to include Jerusalem.
Also [Tosephta Peah 4:11, Ketubot67b.] , we have stated: It happened that Hillel took for a poor son of a prominent family a horse for his exercise and a slave to serve him. Also, it happened that the people of Galilee brought a Sepphoris pound of meat [In Babli and Tosephta, the text reads: “Daily a pound of meat for a poor man from Sepphoris”. We do not know how much a Sepphoris pound was; it is also mentioned in Sifri Deut. 317. Rashi in Babli Ketubot 67b reads: בליטרא בשר, “meat for a pound (of coins).” However, the pound as unit of currency is not found before Charlemagne.] to an old man every day. Is this not impossible [That an old man would need so much meat.] ? It was because he did not eat except in company.
It was stated [Tosephta Peah 4:11: “If he was used to golden vessels, he has to sell them and use silver vessels,” in Babli Ketubot 68a: “If he was used to golden vessels, he should use silver vessels.” Tosephta and Babli make a condition for public support that he first should sell his luxury items; the Yerushalmi speaks of what public charity has to provide for him.] : “If he was used to golden vessels, one gives him silver vessels, silver vessels one gives him brass vessels, brass vessels one gives him glass vessels.” Rebbi Mana said, silver vessels and glass vessels of personal use [If the Mishnah said, one does not require him to sell the vessels of daily use, that refers only to utensils used on his body, like combs etc. The Tosephta that requires him to sell his precious belongings refers to tableware and other vessels that are not used on his body. Glass vessels were luxury items in ancient Rome. One has to assume that the cheap glass vessels referred to here are those products of Phoenician glass making that were not of export quality.] . But was it not stated: If he was used to silk clothes, one gives him silk clothes. Here it is on his body, there it is not on his body.
One from the family of the Patriarch lost his possessions; they provided for him in pottery vessels, he ate and threw up [Since he was so disgusted by the ugly tableware.] . The doctor told him, is not the main preparation of food in the cooking pan? Eat out of the pan [Greek λοπάς, cf. Chapter 7, Note 69. There was no difference heard between ס = s and צ = ss.] !
So [This refers to the part of the Mishnah which prescribes that mortgaged debts can be deducted from the net worth before the limit of 200 zuz is computed.] far a creditor who pushes for payment. Also for a creditor who does not push for payment? Let us hear from the following: “If they were mortgaged for his wife’s ketubah or for a creditor.” Is the wife not like a creditor who does not push for payment [Since the ketubah is not due as long as she is married.] ? “One does not require him to sell.”
Rebbi Ḥanina said: A person has to have two outer garments, one for weekdays and one for the Sabbath. What is the reason (Ruth 3:3): “Wash, rub yourself with oil, and put on your clothes [In Babli Sabbath 113b, this is a saying of R. Eleazar, a frequent tradent of sayings by R. Ḥanina. The explanation of Rashi is taken straight from this Yerushalmi or from the (Yerushalmi) parallel in Midrash Ruth rabba 5:12. The speaker is Naomi, the person addressed Ruth. It is spelled out in Ruth that they were poor enough to go and collect gleanings; hence, even if somebody is on welfare he needs separate outer garments for weekdays and Sabbath, and these must be provided by public assistance. Hence, this paragraph belongs to the current Halakhah.] .” Was she naked? But that refers to her Sabbath clothes. When Rebbi Simlai preached this in public, the companions [The members of his yeshivah.] cried and said to him, our teacher, as our garments are on weekdays so our garments are on the Sabbath. He said to them, nevertheless, you have to change, from this: “Wash, rub yourself with oil, and put your clothes on yourself and descend to the threshing floor.” (It is written “I will decend,” she said to her, my merits will go down with you. [This aggadic insert is appropriate in Midrash Ruth but is intrusive here. However, R. Simlai, the famous preacher, will not let the occasion for a sermon pass by.] Was she naked? No, she said to her: put on your Sabbath garments.)
MISHNAH: He who has 50 zuz and uses them for trade should not take [Neither the agricultural gifts to the poor nor public assistance.] . One who has no need to take but takes will not die of old age until he needs the creatures [I. e., people.] . One who has need to take but does not take will not die of old age until he can provide for others from what is his; for him is was said (Jer. 17:7): “Blessed be the man who will be confident in the Eternal, the Eternal will be his trust.” The same applies to a judge who delivers strictly true judgment [While compromise is usually preferred, he who negotiates a compromise does not have the same responsibility as one who has to deliver unassailable true judgment.] . But one who is neither lame nor blind nor limping and presents himself as such will not die from old age until he will be one of them, as it is said (Deut. 16:20): “Justice, justice you shall pursue.” But every judge who takes bribes and bends the law will not die from old age until his eyes are dimmed, as it is said (Ex. 23:8): “Do not take bribes, for bribes blind the eyes of the seeing.” [The blinding of the seeing can also be applied to welfare fraud, as it was stated in Halakhah 6 that certifying eligibility for welfare is a judicial task. In the most trustworthy Mishnah manuscripts, the text after the quote from Jeremiah is missing. In others, only the reference to honest and dishonest judges is added. It is clear from the disconnected text that the insertion about simulants is the last. Since these additions are not discussed in the Halakhah, it seems that they are late additions to emphasize the end of the tractate (probably being added by the compilers of the Yerushalmi.)]
HALAKHAH: This means that 50 at work are better than 200 not at work.
He who blinds his eye [He fakes blindness or swelling.] or swells his legs or blows up his belly does not leave this world until it really happens to him [A slightly different version in Tosephta Peah 4:14 and Babli Ketubot68a.] .
Samuel ran away from his father and stayed between two huts of the poor. He heard their voices saying, on which silver [Latin argentum.] will we eat today, on golden silverplate [Latin argentarius,-a,-um, adj. “of silver”.] or silver silverplate? He returned and told his father about it. He said to him, we have to give thanks to the dishonest among them [Since we know that some who pose as poor are not poor, we can be discriminating and give only to those we judge worthy.] .
Clarification. Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish went to bathe in the public baths [Greek, cf. Berakhot p. 299.] of Tiberias. A poor man met them and said to them: acquire merit by me. They said to him, when we return, when we return. When they returned, they found him dead. They said, since we did not acquire merit during his lifetime, let us care for him in his death. While they were occupied with him, they found a pouch of denars hanging on him. They said, that is what Rebbi Abbahu said in the name of Rebbi Eleazar [Parallels in Babli Ketubot 68a, Lev. rabba 34, Ruth rabba 5.] : We have to give thanks to the dishonest among them, because if there were no dishonest persons among them, if one of them was requesting alms from a man and he would not give him, he would be punished immediately.
Abba bar Abba [The father of Samuel, rabbi of Nahardea and descendant of R. Joshua’s nephew.] gave coins to his son Samuel to distribute to the poor. He found one poor who ate red meat and drank wine. He returned and told his father about it. The latter said to him, give him more since his soul is bitter [He has expensive tastes and lacks the money to indulge them.] .
Rebbi Jacob bar Idi and Rebbi Isaac bar Naḥman were providers [Administrators of public charity. From here to the penultimate paragraph, the text also appears in Šeqalim 5:6, in a text with fewer scribal errors. In doubtful cases, the spelling of Šeqalim is followed.] and gave a denar to Rebbi Ḥama [R. Ḥama bar Bissa, of the generation of transition from Tannaïm to Amoraïm, from the region of Lod. His son belongs to the first Amoraïm.] the father of Rabbi Oshaia, but he gave it away to others. All were saying evil things about Rebbi Zachariah [Amora of the third and fourth generations. His father-in-law was the preacher in Tiberias in R. Joḥanan’s time.] , the son-in-law of Rebbi Levi; they said that he was taking while he did not need it. When he died, they checked and found that he was splitting it up for others.
Rebbi Ḥinena bar Pappai used to distribute his charity in the night. Once the prince of spirits encountered him. He said to him, did not our teacher [Moses. The implication is that humans should leave the night for spirits since it is dangerous to go out then (Mishnah Avot 3:8).] teach us (Deut 19:14): “Do not displace your neighbor’s boundaries.” He said to him, but is it not written (Prov. 21:14): “A gift in secret appeases anger.” He was afraid of him and fled from him.
Rebbi Jonah said, it is not written, “hail to him who gives to the needy,” but (Ps. 41:2): “Hail to him who is considerate to the needy;” this refers to him who fulfills this commandment intelligently. How did Rebbi Jonah do it? When he saw a son of a prominent family who had lost his property, he used to say to him: My son, since I heard that an inheritance fell to you at another place, take and you will pay back. When he had taken it, he said to him, it is a gift.
Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Ada said, in our days there were old people who used to take if somebody gave to them between New Year’s Day and the Great Fastday. After that, they were not taking. They said, there [During the days of repentance, between Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur, the givers need the merit that comes with giving gifts to the needy; hence, the gifts are given wholeheartedly.] is permission for us.
Neḥemiah from Shiḥin [During the days of repentance, between Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur, the givers need the merit that comes with giving gifts to the needy; hence, the gifts are given wholeheartedly.] met a Jerusalemite who said to him, acquire merit by giving me that chicken. He said to him, here is its value [Greek τιμή “value,” cf. Berakhot p. 604.] , go buy red meat; he ate and died [Being unaccustomed to red meat.] . He said, come and eulogize him whom Neḥemiah killed.
Naḥum from Gimzo [A Tanna of the third generation, teacher of R. Aqiba. Gimzo is a village near Lod. His surname was changed into גם זו “this also” since his motto was “this also will be for the best”, גם זו לטובה.] was carrying a gift [Greek δῶρον, τό, “gift”.] to the house of his father-in-law when he met a person afflicted with boils [A dirt infection, sign of poverty.] who asked him, acquire merit [Give me a charitable gift.] from what you have on you. He said to him, when I shall return. He returned and found him dead. He said before him, his [Meaning, “my”. It is Talmudic usage that all bad things said about one’s own person are formulated in the third person, cf. Berakhot Chapter 3, notes 195–196.] eyes which saw you and did not give to you shall go blind, his hands which did not stretch out to give to you shall be cut off, his feet which did not run to give to you shall be broken. This happened to him. Rebbi Aqiba came to visit him and said, woe to me that I see you in this state. He answered, woe to me that I do not see you in this state. He asked, why do you curse me? He answered, why are you contemptuous of suffering [Since suffering for sins in this world leaves you innocent and with much merit in the World to Come.] ?
The teacher of the great Rebbi Hoshaia’s son was blind and he used to invite him to eat with him every day. One day there were guests and he [R. Hoshaia did not invite the blind man to table.] did not ask him to eat with him. In the evening, he went to him and said: Please, Sir, do not be angry with me. Since I had guests, I did not want risking injuring the Sir’s honor [It seems that handicapped persons were treated as social outcasts.] , therefore I did not eat with you today. He said to him, you assuaged him who is seen but does not see; may He be appeased by you Who sees but is not seen [God. The expression is the translation of Targum Yerushalmi for אל ראי, חי ראי (Gen. 16.13, 24:62).] . He asked him, from where do you have this? He said, from Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob [He is R. Eliezer ben Jacob II, a contemporary of the last students of R. Aqiba, not to be confused with R. Eliezer ben Jacob I, a Tanna of the first generation whom practice always follows.] . For there came a blind man to Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob’s town; Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob sat below him [Indicating that the blind man was his superior in knowledge.] so that they should say if he were not a great person, Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob would not sit below him. They provided for him in honor. He asked them, what is this? They told him, because Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob sat below you. He prayed for him the following prayer: You did a good deed for one who is seen but does not see; He Who sees but is not seen may be appeased by you and do good for you.
Clarification. Rebbi Ḥama bar Ḥanina and Rebbi Hoshaiah were strolling through the synagogue of Lod. Rebbi Ḥama bar Ḥanina said to Rebbi Hoshaiah: How much money did my forefathers invest here! He answered him: How many souls did your forefathers invest here, there is no one in here who studies Torah [All the money spent on building the synagogue could have been spent either on saving the poor from starvation or to support students of Torah (probably, including building houses of study for these students.)] !
Rebbi Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Ḥinena, so is the Mishnah: Everybody who needs to take and does not take commits suicide [If he cannot survive without the help of others, one should not give private charity to one who refuses public charity. But one who can survive and does not take any charity is characterized in the last sentence of the rewritten Mishnah.] and one may not have mercy on him. If he does not care for himself, would he care for others? Everybody who has no need to take but takes will not die of old age until he needs the creatures. Everybody who needs to take but does not take will not die of old age until he can provide for others from what is his; on him is was said (Jer. 17:7): “Blessed be the man who will be confident in the Eternal; the Eternal will be his trust.”