Avodah Zarah 62a derives this insight from the exegesis of Leviticus 25:.7 The fact that the Rambam does not mention that prooftext here has raised a question among the commentaries: Does he consider the prohibition against using the produce of the Sabbatical year as merchandise as Scriptural or Rabbinic in origin?
Enough for three meals (Kessef Mishneh).
For selling a small amount is not considered as using the produce as merchandise.
For humans (see Chapter 5, Halachah 12).
Sukkah 40b derives this from the exegesis of Leviticus 25:12: “It shall be holy for you.” Just as the sanctity of articles that are “holy,” consecrated to the Temple, is transferred to the money received for them, so too, the holiness of the produce of the Sabbatical year is transferred to the money received for it.
See Halachot 6-.7
This is forbidden even if one intends to use the proceeds to purchase food which he will eat according to the requirements of the holiness of the Sabbatical year [the Rambam’s Commentary to the Mishnah (Shivi ‘it 7:3)].
For it is obvious that he gathered the vegetables for his own personal use. I 0. Since the person who reaped the produce was not the one who sold it, there is no prohibition involved (Radbaz).
For it is obvious that he gathered the vegetables for his own personal use. I 0. Since the person who reaped the produce was not the one who sold it, there is no prohibition involved (Radbaz).
The Radbaz states that one should also sell the produce at a lower price than usual.
When. a person packages produce to talce home from his field, he is not precise with regard to the amount he takes.
When a person packages produce to take home from his field, he is not precise with regard to the amount he takes.
When a person packages produce to sell in the marketplace, he is careful to package an exact amount, so that the sale will be honest.
For an onlooker will not understand that the produce is from the Diaspora and will think that the produce of the Sabbatical year is being sold in an ordinary manner.
See Hilchot Arachin 6:.4
And it must be used to purchase food which will be eaten with the stringencies befitting the holiness of the produce of the Sabbatical year.
Leviticus 25:1.2 See the Slfra to this verse.
As is true with regard to the money used to redeem consecrated objects.
I.e., the food to be eaten; see the following halachah, for an explanation.
See Chapter 7, Halachah 1, which speaks about this subject.
I.e., one says: “The holiness of this produce is transferred to this other produce.”
Note the parallel to Hilchot Ma’aser Sheni 4:.6 There it is stated that if one makes such a transfer, it is not effective. The commentaries state that the same law applies in the present instance.
That the holiness may not be transferred to a living animal.
For the abovementioned difficulty does not apply.
This is considered similar to using it to purchase merchandise.
Shushvinut refers to a custom where a person sends money to a friend as a present at the time of the friend’s wedding. Afterwards, when the person himself marries, his friend is expected to send a similar sum to him as a present. The money is considered as a debt and if he fails to so, he can be sued in court.
I.e., the person once lent him money. He may not use money received in return for the produce of the Sabbatical year to offer that person a loan (Radbaz, Hilchot Matnot Aniyim 6:17).
Since the person pledged money, satisfying his obligation with the produce of the Sabbatical year is comparable to using it to pay a debt.
I.e., providing that person with the meal of comfort at the time of bereavement (ibid.).
So that they treat it with the appropriate holiness and rid themselves of it when required. Also, the recipient will realize that he need not be overly grateful, for he was not given produce of full value.
For as mentioned above, such money may only be used for the purchase of food.
Our translation is taken from the Rambam’s Commentary to the Mishnah (Shivi’it 8:8).
See Hilchot Ma’aser Sheni 7:.17
As explained in Hilchot Mechusrei Kapparah, ch. 1, these individuals are required to bring pairs of doves as part of their sacrifices to emerge from impurity.
In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Ma’aser Sheni 1 :7), the Rambam explains that money from the second tithes - and thus by extension, money from the Sabbatical year may not be used for these sacrifices, for they are not eaten by their owners.
For then, he is not receiving direct physical benefit from the oil. See Chapter 5, Halachah.7
But not use it for smearing. See Chapter 5, Halachah 12, and notes.
Our translation is taken from the Rambam’s Commentary to the Mishnah (Kilayim 9:3).
39. For, as stated, above, they may not be used for a purpose other than food.
For that is like using the money to purchase drinking water [the Rambam’s Commentary to the Mishnah (Shivi ‘it 8:5)]. He may not, however, give it to him to draw water for other purposes (Radbaz).
Even though the craftsman will be receiving a present and will return the favor to the person in some way, that is permitted. See Halachah 15 and notes.
A coin of small value used in the Talmudic period. In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Shivi'it 8:4), the Rambam states that this was the cost of inexpensive vegetables in the Talmudic era.
This refers to vegetables that grow in the manner described in Chapter 6, Halachah 4 (Kessef Mishneh).
I.e., it is not restricted to being used for eating or drinking as is money received in return for produce of the Sabbatical year.
I.e., it is not restricted to being used for eating or drinking as is money received in return for produce of the Sabbatical year.
The wording used by the employer clearly establishes such a connection. As the Radbaz explains, in the first instance, it appears that he is hiring him to work that day. In the second instance, it appears that he is hiring him to gather vegetables.
The wording used by the employer clearly establishes such a connection. In the first instance, it appears that he is hiring him to work that day. In the second instance, it appears that he is hiring him to reap vegetables (Radbaz).
A coin of the Talmudic period that was twice the value of an isar.
A coin of the Talmudic period that was twice the worth of an isar.
I.e., rather than pay him now, he promises that he will pay him in the future by bringing him vegetables.
The purchaser is not considered to be paying a debt with the produce from the Sabbatical year. Instead, since at the time he took the loaf of bread, he already stipulated that the exchange would be made, this is considered as an exchange for the produce of the Sabbatical year, which is permitted [the Rambam’s Commentary to the Mishnah (Shivi’it 8:4)]. The commentaries explain that this concept is alluded to by the Rambam’s addition of the word bo, meaning “for it.” This implies that the purchaser is clearly stipulating that he is making an exchange.
For it was received in exchange for produce of the Sabbatical year.
And does not pay him immediately.
As stated in Halachah 10. This applies even to debts incurred from purchasing food.
Or even in return for having perfomed a favor.
The Rambam is adding this point, to emphasize that we do not follow the opinion of Rabbi Y ehudah whomaintains that the School of Hillel permitted a person to partake of the produce of the Sabbatical year that belongs to a colleague only in expectation of favors (see Ediyot 5:1). Rabbi Yehudah’s rationale is that it is not desirable for any person to have free access to a colleague’s field and enter it at all times.
In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Shivi’it 4:1), the Rambam explains that the person tells a colleague: “Reap in my field and then I will reap in your field.”
There is a difference of opinion regarding this issue in Shivi ‘it 9:9 and the Rambam’s ruling does not follow either of the views mentioned there. Nevertheless, it can be explained that the mishnah is speaking according to RabbiEliezer’s perspective and Rabbi Eliezer follows the opinion of the School of Shammai. The Rambam’s ruling reflects the position that would be given by the School of Hillel, whose opinion is accepted as halachah.
