Maaser Sheini - Chapter 11

In other contexts, the term used by the Rambam here (and by the previous Rabbinic sources) usually means "confession." Among the reasons why this term is used is because the fact that the terumah and the tithes are given to the priests and Levites is a result of the Jews' sin. Had that not occurred, these agricultural separations would have been given to the firstborn.

I.e., in the Temple.

See Halachah 12.

Sefer HaMitzvot (positive commandment 131) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 607) include this commandment among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.

The third and the sixth years of the seven year cycle.

Rashi and others, by contrast, maintain that this declaration should be made on the first day of the Pesach holiday. The Rambam's opinion is based on the Jerusalem Talmud (Ma'aser Sheni 5:10) which states that the Jews were given the opportunity to partake of the second tithe throughout the Pesach holiday so that they would have ample resources with which to celebrate and partake of this food. For that same reason, the declaration is delayed until the afternoon.

For on Sukkot, there are still many fruits from the sixth year in the field (Radbaz; Siftei Cohen 331:159).

A declaration made at night is unacceptable.

From sunrise to sunset. The above statement that it is made in the afternoon was a leniency intended to provide a person with latitude.

For, as stated in Hilchot Terumah 1:1, the laws of terumah and the other agricultural requirements apply even if the Temple is not standing.

The Ra'avad differs and maintains that the mitzvah to make a declaration applies only in the Temple. The Radbaz supports the Rambam's ruling, explaining that it is based on Halachah 6. Since, after the fact, one fulfills his obligation if he makes the declaration outside the Temple, when there is no Temple, there is no choice but to accept that alternative.

It must, however, be an exact translation. Note the contrast to the declaration made when bringing the first fruits (Hilchot Bikkurim 3:10).

I.e., this is the desirable manner of performing the mitzvah (Siftei Cohen 331:161).

Not the Minchat Chinuch (Mitzvah 607) which states that the Rambam is speaking about a situation where one person speaks out loud and the others fulfill their obligation by listening.

The Minchat Chinuch and others question why the removal of the presents from one's property is not considered as an independent mitzvah.

And if he still possessed these presents, he would be lying. See the following halachot.

The standard published text of Ma'aser Sheni 5:6 states "The day before the first holiday of the Pesach festival." The Rambam apparently had a different version of that mishnah. The Kessef Mishneh justifies the Rambam's version, explaining that on the passage from the Jerusalem Talmud cited above which explains that the declaration was delayed so that the people would be able to partake of the presents during the festival indicates that they would not have to remove the presents from their possession until the festival's conclusion.

This halachah is based on Ma'aser Sheni 5:6. That mishnah does not mention neta reva'i. Nevertheless, the Rambam adds it because all the laws that apply to the second tithe apply to it (Kessef Mishneh).

Thus there are two types of biur, removal of agricultural presents: giving presents to those to whom they are supposed to be given and destroying, those which one keeps for oneself (ibid.).

Since the obligation to separate it was imposed only because of a doubt, we rule leniently.

For if it is left for any significant amount of time, it will spoil [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Ma'aser Sheni 5:6)].

For they also will spoil if left for any significant amount of time.

One third of its growth, as stated in Hilchot Ma'aserot 2:5.

Since the produce has not reached this stage of development, there is no obligation to tithe it. Hence, it need not be removed or included in the declaration.

Ma'aser Sheni 5:9 relates that once when the time to remove produce arrived, Rabban Gamliel was on a sea journey and could not physically give the produce to anyone else. He therefore transferred the presents to other sages in the manner described here. Since Rabbi Elazar ben Arach was a priest, he gave him terumah, Rabbi Yehoshua was a Levite and so he gave him the tithes, and since Rabbi Akiva was a collector of gifts for the poor, he gave him the tithes for the poor.

And specify in which portion of the grainheap they are located.

See Hilchot Mechirah, ch. 6, which describes how this transfer of property operates. This means of transfer is used, because this is the only way the ownership of the produce can be given to these individuals without an actual physical transfer.

The term "exchange" is translated from the Hebrew kinyan chilipin, a legal act that formalizes a transaction. See Hilchot Mechirah, ch. 5, for a description. Although this legal act is frequently employed, it is not appropriate in this instance, because the gift would resemble a sale and not a present.

As stated in Deuteronomy 26:13.

See Chapter 9, Halachah 1.

I.e., it is not given until the grain is made into dough [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Ma'aser Sheni 5:10)].

The commentaries have pointed out a difference between leket, shichachah, and pe'ah and the other presents. For the Torah does not prescribe giving the latter three to the poor, but rather leaving them for them.

See Hilchot Terumah 3:23 with regard to the desired order of the presents.

For he cannot say: "As You commanded me," since by deviating from the desired order, he did not fulfill the mitzvot "as commanded." Indeed, he committed a transgression.

When Ezra led the Jews back to Eretz Yisrael after the Babylonian exile, by and large, the Levites did not accompany him. Therefore, he punished them, decreeing that the tithes should be given to the priests instead (Hilchot Ma'aser 1:4). From the Rambam's statements here and also in that source, some have inferred that Ezra's decree applied only in his generation and not in later eras. This conclusion is not, however, borne out by his Commentary to the Mishnah (ibid. 5:15)].

Of them all, it is the only one that must be destroyed as stated in Halachah 8.

And it must also be removed from one's possession.

The Kessef Mishneh states that the same rule applies to the first tithe. For neither of them must be removed from one's possession at a given time.

Although the Rambam explains the details of this declaration, the intent is not that one should explain it while reciting it. Instead, he should merely read the passage as it is stated in the Torah [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Ma'aser Sheni 5:13)].

See Hilchot Terumah 5:18; 5:9, 5:11, and Hilchot Ma'aser 1:12 which explains that separating the presents in such a manner is forbidden.

Some interpret this as referring to the recitation of a blessing when making the separations. The commentaries question these interpretations, however, because the blessings were instituted by the Rabbis and here we are speaking of the exegesis of a Biblical verse. Others maintain that it refers to reciting grace after partaking of the grain, for that is a Scriptural command.

See Chapter 3, Halachah 5ff.

This refers to the first fruits. The second tithe need not be brought to the Temple.

A child born out of an adulterous or incestuous union. Even though they are forbidden to marry, they are considered heirs and are granted their ancestral heritage.

Although they may purchase land in Eretz Yisrael, they were not granted an ancestral heritage when the land was divided among the tribes and thus there is no portion of Eretz Yisrael that is theirs in an ultimate sense. For during the Jubilee year, any purchased land will return to its owner. Note the contrast to the declaration concerning the first fruits which they are required to make (Hilchot Bikkurim 4:3).

As related in Numbers, ch. 35, in addition to the six cities of refuge, the Levites were given 42 cities that were scattered throughout the entire land of Eretz Yisrael.