משנה: הַקּוֹנֶה שְׁנֵי אִילָנוֹת בְּתוֹךְ שֶׁל חֲבֵירוֹ מֵבִיא וְאֵינוֹ קוֹרֵא. רִבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר מֵבִיא וְקוֹרֵא. יָבַשׁ הַמַּעְייָן נִקְצַץ הָאִילָן מֵבִיא וְאֵינוֹ קוֹרֵא. רִבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר מֵבִיא וְקוֹרֵא. מִן הָעֲצֶרֶת וְעַד הֶחָג מֵבִיא וְקוֹרֵא. מִן הֶחָג וְעַד הַחֲנוּכָּה מֵבִיא וְאֵינוֹ קוֹרֵא. רִבִּי יְהוּדָה בֶּן בְּתֵירָה אוֹמֵר מֵבִיא וְקוֹרֵא. MISHNAH: He who buys two trees on another’s property brings but does not make the declaration; Rebbi Meїr says he brings and makes the declaration131The standard contract (Bava Batra 5:1:1" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Bava_Batra.5.1.1">Mishnah Baba Batra 5:4) about buying trees implies that the ground on which the trees stand is sold with the trees only if the transaction involves at least three trees in one orchard. R. Meїr disagrees in that Mishnah; his standard contract implies the sale of the land also for two trees. It is clear that if the sale of the ground is expressly stipulated, the buyer can recite the declaration which is formulated for the owners of the land (Mishnah 11).. If the spring dried up132If the field or orchard from which the First Fruits were taken cannot bear fruit the next year since there is no longer any possibility of irrigation, it is as if the owner no longer possessed the property as agricultural land. or the tree133From which the First Fruits were taken. was cut down, one brings but does not make the declaration; Rebbi Jehudah says he brings and makes the declaration134Since the farmer remains the owner of the property.. From Pentecost to Tabernacles one brings and makes the declaration; from Tabernacles to Ḥanukkah one brings but does not make the declaration; Rebbi Jehudah ben Bathyra says he brings and makes the declaration135For the anonymous majority, after Tabernacles there no longer is any joy in the harvest. Everybody agrees that there is no harvest between Ḥanukkah and Pentecost; cf. Bikkurim 1:3:1" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Bikkurim.1.3.1">Mishnah 3..
הלכה: רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֶּן חֲנִינָה בָּעֵי. קָנָה אִילָן אֶחָד לֹא קָנָה קַרְקַע. שְׁנַיִם לֹא קָנָה קַרְקַע. אֶחָד אֵינוֹ מֵבִיא כָּל־עִיקָּר. שְׁנַיִם מֵבִיא וְאֵינוֹ קוֹרֵא. אָמַר לֵיהּ רִבִּי לָֽעְזָר מִילִּין דִּצְרִיכִין לָרַבָּנִין בְּבֵית װַעֲדָא אַתְּ שְׁאִיל. HALAKHAH: Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina asked: If one bought a single tree he did not acquire the ground, two he did not acquire the ground. From one he does not bring at all, from two he brings and does not make the declaration136For real estate law, it makes no difference whether one or two trees are bought. Does one have to read the Mishnah as dealing with exactly two trees or is there no difference for the rabbis whether one buys one or two trees and the number 2 is mentioned only because of R. Meїr who will agree with the rabbis in the case of a single tree but disagrees about 2? In the latter case, the person acquiring a single fruit tree could bring but not make the declaration. In the Babli, Baba Batra 81a the matter is decided, that R. Meïr permits the buyer of a single tree to bring but not to make the declaration.? Rebbi Eleazar said to him, you are asking a question to which the rabbis in assembly have no answer.
רִבִּי יוּדָה עֲבַד אֶת הָאִילָן כְּקַשִּׁים. תַּמָּן תִּנִּינָן בֵּירַךְ עַל פֵּירוֹת הָאִילָן בּוֹרֵא פְרִי הָאֲדָמָה יָצָא. רִבִּי חִזְקִיָּה בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אָחָא דְּרִבִּי יוּדָה הִיא. דְּרִבִּי יוּדָה אָמַר עֲבַד אֶת הָאִילָן כְּקַשִּׁים. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל הִיא. פֵּירוֹת הָאִילָן בִּכְלַל פֵּירוֹת הָאֲדָמָה. וְאֵין פֵּירוֹת הָאֲדָמָה בִּכְלַל פֵּירוֹת הָאִילָן. 137This is from Berakhot 6:2:2" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Berakhot.6.2.2">Berakhot 6:2, Notes 117–118. Rebbi Jehudah treats trees like straws. There, we have stated: “If he pronounced the benediction ‘Creator of the fruit of the soil’ on fruits of the tree, he has fulfilled his obligation.” Rebbi Ḥizqiah in the name of Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa: This is Rebbi Yehuda’s since Rebbi Jehudah treats trees like straws. Rebbi Yose said, it is everybody’s opinion since fruits of a tree are also fruits of the soil but fruits of the soil are not fruits of the tree.
רִבִּי בּוּן בַּר כַּהֲנָא בְּעָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי אִילָא. מָכַר לוֹ שָׂדֶה בְּקָמָתָהּ. הַלּוֹקֵחַ מַהוּ שֶׁיָּבִיא מִּמֶּנָּה בִּיכּוּרִים. אָמַר לֵיהּ לָמָּה לָאו. עַד כְּדוֹן לַחָה. אֲפִילוּ יְבֵישָׁה. אָמַר לֵיהּ אֲפִילוּ יְבֵישָׁה אֲפִילוּ קְצוּרָה. מֵעַתָּה אֲפִילוּ חִיטִּין. כֵּן אָנוּ אוֹמְרִים הַלּוֹקֵחַ מִן הַשּׁוּק מֵבִיא בִּיכּוּרִין. Rebbi Abun bar Cahana asked before Rebbi Hila: If somebody sold him a field with its standing crop, may the buyer bring First Fruits? He said to him, why not? That is, when it is moist; even when it is dry138If the grain is totally dry at the moment of sale and does not ripen in the possession of the buyer.? He said to him, even dry, even harvested. Then even wheat grain; do we say that the buyer on the market brings First Fruits139There is no answer since the question is too stupid to merit one; the buyer of grain on the market does not buy the field; the only buyer who may bring First Fruits is the buyer of the field. In the Babli, Baba Batra 81a, the opinion that R. Meїr will allow First Fruits from grain bought on the market is shown to be impossible.?
פְּשִׁיטָא הָדָא מִילְתָא. מָכַר לוֹ פֵּירוֹת וְשִׁייֵר לוֹ קַרְקַע הַמּוֹכֵר אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לְהָבִיא שֶׁאֵין לוֹ פֵירוֹת. חָזַר וּלְקָחָן מִמֶּנּוּ. נִישְׁמְעִינָהּ מִן הָדָא. נָתַן לָהּ קֳדָשִׁים הֲרֵי אֵילּוּ מוּתָּרִין. יֵינוֹת שְׁמָנִין וּסְלָתוֹת כָּל־דָּבָר שֶׁכְּיוֹצֵא בוֹ קָרֵב לְגַבֵּי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ אָסוּר. אֵין בִּכְלָל אֶלָּא פַרְכִּירֵי עֲנָבִים וַעֲטָרוֹת שֶׁלְשִׁיבֳּלִין. מַה נָן קַייָמִין. אִם בְּשֶׁנָּתַן לָהּ בְּאֶתְנַנָּהּ כָּךְ אָנוּ אוֹמְרִים הַלּוֹקֵחַ מִן הַשּׁוּק מֵבִיא בִּכּוּרִים. אֶלָּא כִּי נָן קַייָמִין בְּשֶׁהָיוּ הַגְּפָנִים מִשֶּׁלָּהּ וּמָכַר לוֹ פֵירוֹתֵיהֶן וְחָזַר וּנְתָנָם לָהּ בְּאֶתְנַנָּהּ. מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהָיָה אֶתְנַן. הָא לֹא הָיָה אֶתְנַן מֵבִיא. הָדָא אָֽמֶרָה חָזַר וּלְקָחָן מִמֶּנּוּ מֵבִיא. The following is obvious: If somebody sold the harvest and retained the land for himself, the seller cannot bring since he has no harvest. If he bought it back? Let us hear from the following: “If he gave her dedicated things they are permitted; wines, oils, flour, or anything of a kind admissible near the altar, are prohibited140Similar statements, in different order, are Temurah 6:4" href="/Mishnah_Temurah.6.4">Mishnah Temurah 6:4, Temurah 4:2" href="/Tosefta_Temurah.4.2">Tosephta Temurah 4:7,Temurah 4:2" href="/Tosefta_Temurah.4.2">9. The statements refer to the prohibition (Deuteronomy.23.19">Deut. 23:19) to bring a whore’s wages to the Temple in fulfillment of any vow. This implies that the prostitute was paid in kind; if she is paid in money then what she buys with that money is not prohibited. Since animals or produce dedicated to the Temple cannot become objects of a new vow, these are not under the prohibition of a whore’s wages.. The latter adds only bundles142The root is פכר, to bundle, as pointed out by I. Löw. The Babli form is פרכילי with a change of liquids. of vines and rings made of grain stalks141This sentence is a baraita not otherwise recorded. Since wine, olive oil, and flour are the only vegetal products used on the altar, the addition “or anything of a kind admissible near the altar” can only refer to First Fruits which are the only other vegetables admitted in the Temple..” Where do we hold? If he gave her143Fruits or grains admissible as First Fruits. as whore’s wages, do we say that the buyer on the market brings First Fruits? But we must hold in case the vines were hers, she sold him the fruits, and he gave them back to her as whore’s wages. Because they are whore’s wages144This is the only reason they cannot be brought to the Temple.. Therefore, if they were not whore’s wages she might bring. That means, if he bought back he may bring.
חֲבֵרַייָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי. הִפְרִישָׁן קוֹדֶם לֶחָג וְעָבַר עֲלֵיהֶן הֶחָג מֵבִיא וְאֵינוֹ קוֹרֵא. הִפְרִישָׁן קוֹדֶם לַחֲנוּכָּה וְעָֽבְרָה עֲלֵיהֶן חֲנוּכָּה וְנִרְקָבוּ. לְאַחַר חֲנוּכָּה לֹא קָֽדְשֵׁי. וְלֵית לֵיהּ לְרִבִּי זְעִירָא כְּהָדָא דַחֲבֵרַייָא. סָבַר רִבִּי זְעִירָא שֶׁכָּל־הַבִּיכּוּרִים שֶׁנִּרְאוּ לִיתּוּר בָּאָרֶץ אֵינָן נִיתּוּרִין אֶלָּא בְקִרְייָה. וְלֵית לַחֲבֵרַייָא כֵּן. אִית לְהוֹן בְּשֶׁהִפְרִישָׁן קוֹדֶם לֶחָג לַהֲבִיאָן אַחַר הֶחָג. וְהָתַנִּינָן אֵין מְבִיאִין בִּכּוּרִים לֹא מִן הֶחָדָשׁ עַל הַיָּשָׁן וְלֹא מִן הַיָּשָׁן עַל הֶחָדָשׁ. מָה נָן קַייָמִין. אִם בְּפֵירוֹת שֶׁהֵבִיאוּ שְׁלִישׁ לְאַחַר רֹאשׁ הַשָּׁנָה עַל הַפֵּירוֹת שֶׁהֵבִיאוּ שְׁלִישׁ לְאַחַר רֹאשׁ הַשָּׁנָה. מִכִּיוָן שֶׁלֹּא הֵבִיאוּ שְׁלִישׁ לִפְנֵי רֹאשׁ הַשָּׁנָה דָּבָר בָּרוּר שֶׁלֹּא הִשְׁרִישׁוּ קוֹדֶם לָעוֹמֶר וְהֵן אֲסוּרִין עַד שֶׁיָּבוֹא הָעוֹמֶר וִיתִּירֵם. אֶלָּא כִּי נָן קַייָמִין בְּפֵירוֹת שֶׁחָֽנְטוּ קוֹדֶם טֹוֹ בִּשְׁבָט עַל פֵּירוֹת שֶׁחָֽנְטוּ אַחַר טֹוֹ בִּשְׁבָט. מִכִּיוָן שֶׁהוּא מִן חָדָשׁ עַל הַיָּשָׁן. הָוא מִן חָדָשׁ עַל חָדָשׁ מָבִיא. וְסָֽבְרִנָן מֵימַר לְאַחַר חֲנוּכָּה אֲנָן קַייָמִין. אָמַר רִבִּי חִינְנָא בִּזְמַנָּן. The colleagues in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: If he dedicated them before Tabernacles and Tabernacles passed, he brings and does not make the declaration. If he dedicated them before Ḥanukkah and Ḥanukkah passed, they will rot145Since they must be brought to the Temple but would not be accepted, they are forbidden for any use.. After Ḥanukkah they do not become holy. Rebbi Zeïra will not accept this of the colleagues; Rebbi Zeïra is of the opinion that all First Fruits which could become permitted by making the declaration become permitted only by making the declaration146This discusses the opinion of the colleagues that First Fruits dedicated before Tabernacles may still be brought after Tabernacles. This seems to contradict the opinion stated in Halakhah 6 (Note 108) without opposition that First Fruits under the obligation of declaration cannot become permitted to Cohanim except by the declaration by the farmer.. Do the colleagues not accept this? They accept it; if he dedicated before Tabernacles intending to bring them after Tabernacles147In this case, there never was an obligation to recite the declaration.. Did we not state148It seems that תנינן should be תני since the statement is not a Mishnah. This paragraph discusses the statement that First Fruits dedicated after Ḥanukkah do not acquire sanctity.: One may not bring First Fruits from the new crop for the old, nor from the old for the new. Where do we hold? If about produce149In rabbinic Hebrew, פירות usually means grain but it also can be used in the Biblical sense of “fruit” in general. This ambiguity is expressed here; the first sentence speaks of grain, the second of fruits of a tree. which was one third ripe before New Year’s Day for produce which was not one third ripe before New Year’s Day150Since First Fruits are called ראשית (Deuteronomy.26.2">Deut. 26:2) and heave is called ראשית (Deuteronomy.18.4">Deut. 18:4), the rules of heave apply to First Fruits; cf. Bikkurim 2:1:1" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Bikkurim.2.1.1">Mishnah 2:1.., since it was not one third ripe before New Year’s Day it is obvious that it did not form roots before the ‘omer and will be forbidden until the coming ‘omer permits it151Mishnah ‘Orlah 3:9, Note 155.. But we must deal with fruits [from trees] which budded before the fifteenth of Šebaṭ 152The New Year of fruit trees for tithing periods, cf. Mishnah Roš Haššanah 1:1; Sheviit 5:1:3" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Sheviit.5.1.3">Ševi‘it 5, Note 6. for fruits which budded after the fifteenth of Šebaṭ; because that would be from new for old. Therefore, from new for new one may bring153Designating First Fruits after the 15th of Šebaṭ (which comes after Ḥanukkah) but before Pentecost. This is also implied by Bikkurim 1:3:1" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Bikkurim.1.3.1">Mishnah 1:3.. We thought to say that one speaks of the time after Ḥanukkah. Rebbi Ḥinena said, in its time154The baraita does not apply to the colleagues’ statement; it refers to the time between Pentecost and Tabernacles which is the actual time of First Fruits. One may not bring first fruit raisins and dried figs from former years; one may not let this year’s First Fruits count for former years in which one neglected the duty to bring First Fruits to the Temple..