משנה: הָיוּ לְפָנָיו שְׁתֵי כַלְכָּלוֹת שֶׁל טֵבֵל וְאָמַר מַעְשְׂרוֹת שֶׁל זוּ בְזוּ וְשֶׁל זוּ בְזוּ הָרִאשׁוֹנָה מְעוֹשֶּׂרֶת. מַעְשְׂרוֹתֵיהֶם מַעְשְׂרוֹת כַּלְכָּלָה בַחֲבֵירָתָהּ קָרָא לָהּ שֵׁם. MISHNAH: If he had before him two baskets of ṭevel and he said, the tithes of one are in the other and those of the other in the one, the first one is tithed100At the moment when he said that the tithes of the first basket are in the second one, the first basket was in order and is fully profane food. Hence, when he comes to tithe the second basket, he cannot use the first one since profane food never can become tithe. Hence, what he says of the first basket is valid; what he says about the second basket is invalid, it is as if he never said it. He is in trouble with the second basket since he must separate the Second Tithe before he tithes the second basket, which is forbidden. In addition, Second Tithe must be given from tithed produce; hence the tithe of the second basket has to include the produce taken for Second Tithe from that basket. How to compute the amount of tithe to be taken for the first basket is discussed in the Halakhah.; (if he said) their tithes are tithes of each basket in the other one, he gave it a name101In this case, everything is simultaneous. Hence, the designations of tithes are valid and he must separate the tithe of the first basket from the second, those of the second basket from the first, and he may not change his mind.
Most Mishnah codices (including the Rome ms. of the Yerushalmi but excluding the quote of the Mishnah in Temurah.25b">Babli Temurah 25b) have a longer text of the Mishnah which, however, brings nothing new..
הלכה: וְתַנִּי עֲלָהּ נוֹטֵל מִן הַשְּׁנִייָה שְׁתֵּי תְאֵנִים וּשְׁתֵּי עִישּׂוּרִין וְעִישּׂוּרוֹ שֶׁל עִישּׂוּר. שְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר לָא מָצֵי תַנִּיתָהּ. אִין יְסַב חָדָא לְעֶשֶׂר. צָרִיךְ מֵיסַב חָדָא לְמֵאָת. אִין יְסַב חָדָא לְמֵאָת. צָרִיךְ מֵיסַב חָדָא לְאֶלֶף. אִין יְסַיב חָדָא לְאֶלֶף. צָרִיךְ מֵיסַב חָדָא לַעֲשָׂרָה אֲלָפִין. HALAKHAH: 8102Halakhah 6 in the Venice print.: We have stated for this103Tosephta, Demay 8:15–16 has a similar wording but cannot possibly be the basis of the quote here and either represents a different tradition from that of the Yerushalmi or is hopelessly corrupt. The latter is likely since the second part of 8:16, discussed here in Halakhah 7, is corrupt, as noted by all commentators from R. M. Margalit to R. S. Lieberman. The relevant part of the Tosephta reads: “If he had before him two baskets of ṭevel, in each one a hundred, of which heave was taken. ‘The tithes of one are in the other one,’ the first one is tithed. ‘The tithes of one are in the other, and those of the other in the one’ the first one is not tithed. He takes two figs and two tenths and a tenth of a tenth. ‘Their tithes are tithes of each basket in the other one,’ he gave it a name.”: “He takes from the second one two figs and two tenths and a tenth of a tenth104How does one tithe the first basket out of the second one? First he takes two figs (assuming 100 figs are there in all) for heave. Then he takes two tenths for the two tithes. But tithe should be taken from the produce itself; after tithe was taken, the profane remainder is nine times the tithe. Hence, ten figs of the second basket free only 90 figs of the first basket; 1/10 from above is 1/9 from below. The Tanna then requires one fig to be taken in addition to free the remaining 10 figs. Samuel protests, since 1/9 = 0.1111…, if one includes tenths, the tithing will never end since one always has to add another tenth of the preceding amount..” Samuel says, you cannot state that; when he takes one in ten he has to take one in a hundred, when he takes one in a hundred he has to take one in a thousand, when he takes one in a thousand he has to take one in ten thousand.
אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵה בַּר חֲנִינָא עַל הָרִאשׁוֹנָה עוֹבֵר בַּעֲשֵׂה וְעַל הַשְּׁנִייָה בַּעֲשֵׂה וְלֹא תַעֲשֶׂה. עַל הָרִאשׁוֹנָה עוֹבֵר בַּעֲשֵׂה שֶׁקָּבַע שְׁנֵי שֵׁמוֹת כְּאַחַת וְעַל הַשְּׁנִייָה בַּעֲשֵׂה וְלֹא תַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁקָּבְעוּ שְׁנֵי שֵׁמוֹת כְּאַחַת וְשֶׁהִקְדִּים שֵׁנִי שֶׁבָּרִאשׁוֹנָה לָרִאשׁוֹן שֶׁבִּשְׁנִייָה. Rebbi Yose bar Ḥanina said, for the first basket he transgresses a commandment, for the second a commandment and a prohibition. For the first basket he transgresses a commandment since he gave both names simultaneously106Mishnah Terumot 3:7 states that the First Tithe is called “beginning” since it contains heave of the tithe, but the Second Tithe is never called “beginning.” Hence, the beginning should precede the non-beginning., and for the second a commandment and a prohibition since he gave both names simultaneously and he put the Second Tithe of the first basket before the First Tithe of the second basket107In the parallel in Temurah.4">Babli Temurah4a/b, both R. Yose bar Ḥanina and R. Eleazar agree that declaring the Second Tithe before the First is a violation. R. Yose bar Ḥanina holds that transgressing a prohibition by words alone is not punishable in criminal law while R. Eleazar declares it punishable..
אָמַר רִבִּי לָֽעְזָר דְּרִבִּי מֵאִיר הִיא דְּרִבִּי מֵאִיר אָמַר אֵין אַתְּ תּוֹפֵס אֶלָּא רִאשׁוֹן רִאשׁוֹן בִּלְבַד. תַּמָּן תַּנֵּינָן הֲרֵי זוּ תְּמוּרַת עוֹלָה וּתְמוּרַת שְׁלָמִים הֲרֵי זוּ תְּמוּרַת עוֹלָה דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי מֵאִיר. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי הֲוֵינָן סָֽבְרִין מֵימַר מַה פְלִיגִין רִבִּי מֵאִיר וְרַבָּנִין לְאַחַר כְּדֵי דִיבּוּר אֲבָל בְּתוֹךְ כְּדֵי דִיבּוּר לֹא. מִן מַה דְאָמַר רִבִּי לָֽעְזָר רִבִּי מֵאִיר הִיא. הָדָא אָֽמְרָה אֲפִילוּ בְּתוֹךְ כְּדֵי דִיבּוּר אֵינוֹ חוֹזֵר בּוֹ. Rebbi Eleazar said, this is from Rebbi Meïr since Rebbi Meïr says that you accept only the very first version. There, we have stated108Temurah 5:4" href="/Mishnah_Temurah.5.4">Mishnah Temurah 5:4: “This one {animal} shall be a substitute for a burnt offering {another animal already dedicated} and a substitute for an offering of well-being, then it is a substitution for a burnt offering, the words of Rebbi Meïr. Rebbi Yose said, if this was his original intention then his words stand since it is impossible to pronounce two names at the same time. But if he changed his mind after he said, this one shall be a substitute for a burnt offering, and said, this one should be a substitute for an offering of well-being, then it is a substitute for a burnt offering.” Our Mishnah cannot be R. Yose’s since he would accept both the first and second versions if the original intention was the same. In the Temurah.25b-26a">Babli, Temurah 25b/26a, the difference between R. Meïr and R. Yose is reduced to the stylistic nicety whether there is a difference in meaning between “a substitute for a burnt offering and a substitute for a peace offering” and “a substitute for a burnt offering and an offering of well-being.” It is difficult to square that approach with that of the Yerushalmi.: “This one shall be a substitute109While substituting one sacrifice for another is forbidden (Leviticus.27.9-10">Lev. 27:9–10), nevertheless once done it is a valid dedication. for a burnt offering and for an offering of well-being, then it is a substitute for a burnt offering, the words of Rebbi Meïr.” Rebbi Yose110The Amora. In the Temurah 3:3" href="/Tosefta_Temurah.3.3">Tosephta (Temurah 3:5) there are three opinions, that of R. Meïr (who takes only the first statement) and R. Yose (the Tanna, who asks to investigate what was in the mind of the speaker) as in the Mishnah, and that of the Sages who say that the animal should be put out to graze until it develops a bodily defect (and no longer could become a sacrifice) when it should be sold and the money received be split 50-50 to buy burnt and well-being offerings. said, we were of the opinion that Rebbi Meïr and the Sages disagree only after the time for speech111The measure of “time of speech,” the unit for a simple sentence, is defined in Berakhot 2:1:2-20" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Berakhot.2.1.2-20">Berakhot 2:1, fol. 4b (Notes 50–51)., but not within the time for speech. Since Rebbi Eleazar said, the Mishnah is Rebbi Meïr’s, it means that even within the time of speech he cannot retract.
דִּי מַתְנִיתָא מַעְשְׂרוֹתֵיהֶן מַעְשְׂרוֹת כַּלְכָּלָה וַחֲבֵירָתָהּ קָרָא שֵׁם. מִפְּנֵי שֶׁקָּבַע שְׁנֵי שֵׁמוֹת כְּאַחַת. הָא זֶה אַחַר זֶה אֵין אַתְּ תּוֹפֵשׂ אֶלָּא רִאשׁוֹן רִאשׁוֹן בִּלְבַד. אָמַר רִבִּי אָבוּנָא מוֹדִין חֲכָמִים לְרִבִּי מֵאִיר בְּאוֹמֵר תְּרוּמָה זוּ תַּחַת שֵׁנִי חַייָב. בְּהֵמָה זוּ תַּחַת זְבָחִים שֵׁנִי חַייָב מִפְּנֵי שֶׁקָּבַע שְׁנֵי שֵׁמוֹת כְּאַחַת הָא זֶה אַחַר זֶה אֵין אַתְּ תּוֹפֵשׂ אֶלָּא רִאשׁוֹן רִאשׁוֹן בִּלְבַד. לֹא כֵן אָמַר רִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר רַב יִצְחָק בְּשֵׁם רַב הוּנָא אָמַר זוּ תְמוּרַת עוֹלָה חוֹזֵר בּוֹ אֲפִילוּ בְּתוֹךְ כְּדֵי דִיבּוּר. כָּאן בְּמִתְכַּוֵּין לִפְחוֹת. כָּאן בְּמִתְכַּוֵּין לְהוֹסִיף. אָמַר הֲרֵי זוּ תְּרוּמָה אֲפִילוּ בְּתוֹךְ כְּדֵי דִיבּוּר אֵינוֹ חוֹזֵר בּוֹ. אָדָם נִשְׁאַל עַל הֶקְדֵּישׁוֹ וְאֵין אָדָם נִשְׁאַל עַל תְּרוּמָתוֹ. This is the Mishnah: “Their tithes are tithes for each basket in the other one, he gave it a name,” because he declared both names at the same time. One after the other you accept only the very first version. Rebbi Abuna112Usually called Rebbi Abun. said, the Sages agree with Rebbi Meïr about him who says “this heave substitutes for Second”113Since heave cannot become tithe; if he first declares it to be heave and then tithe, the second declaration is void. The words in parenthesis seem to be a scribal error induced by the next clause. (that he is guilty). “This animal instead of well-being offerings,” he is obligated for two since he declared two names114By using a plural. An unspecified plural always means two, cf. Peah 3:4:1" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Peah.3.4.1">Peah, Chapter 3, Note 78. at the same time; hence, one after the other you accept only the very first version. Not so, said Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac who said in the name of Rav Huna: “This one shall be a substitute for a burnt offering,” he may retract that within the time for speech. That is, if he wants to retract115Rav Huna does not refer to our case but to a person making a substitution and retracting it. In our case, the speaker makes a substitution and then adds to it; he compounds his sin, and the rule of “time for speech” does not apply., there if he wants to add. If one said, “this is heave,” even within the time of speech he cannot retract. A person can be asked about his dedication116All dedications of sacrifices are vows, which are subject to annullment by a court if the circumstances change in which the vow was made. Hence, there is reason to allow a time of reflection. Heave is holy by declaration, not by vow, and no retraction is possible. but nobody can be asked about his heave.
כֵּיצַד הוּא עוֹשֶׂה נוֹטֵל עֶשְׂרִים תְּאֵנִים מֵאֵי זוּ מֵהֶן שֶׁיִּרְצֶה. וְכָל עֶשֶׂר דִּיסַב אִית בְּהוֹן תְּרוּמַת מַעֲשֵׂר. עַד כְדוֹן בְּשָׁווֹת. הָיָה בְזוּ מֵאָה וּבְזוּ מָאתַיִם אִם לְשֵׁם מֵאָה הוּא נוֹטֵל אַחַת עֶשְׂרֵה. אִם לְשֵׁם מָאתַיִם הוּא נוֹטֵל ששים תְּאֵנִים. בְּזוּ מֵאָה וּבְזוּ אֶלֶף אִם לְשֵׁם מֵאָה הוּא נוֹטֵל חֲמֵשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה. אִם לְשֵׁם אֶלֶף הוּא נוֹטֵל אֲפִילוּ הוּא נוֹטֵל אֶת כּוּלָּהּ אֵינוֹ מַשְׁלִים. How does one act119This refers to the last part of Mishnah 8, if he has two baskets and says, “their tithes are tithes of each basket in the other one; he gave it a name.” The parallel is in Tosephta Demay 8:16, in badly garbled form: “Their tithes are tithes of each basket in the other one, he gave it a name. One takes 20 figs from the one he chooses. In one 100, in one 200, if he takes from the small one, he takes 11, if from the large one, he takes it all and it is not enough. In one 100, in the other 1000, if he takes from the small one he takes 16, if he takes from the large one he takes all of 60. In other cases, by this computation.” In the computation, the second number in either case was switched.? “One takes 20 figs from any basket one chooses120Since the name of tithe was given for both simultaneously, the tithes have to be taken together. If one took tithes for one of the baskets alone, then the rest of the baskets would be profane and could no longer be used to tithe anything..” And in any 10 one takes there is one of heave of the tithe121In all these computations of the preceding Halakhah and the current one, one separates all the tithes but in case of demay only heave of the tithe has to be given away; the Second Tithe is redeemed by a coin. In the current baraita, only First Tithe is considered.. That is, if they were equal. “If in one basket there were 100 and in the other 200, if he takes for the one with a hundred, he takes 11122If he takes the tithe of the smaller basket out of the larger basket, he has to take 11 since there remain 100 profane and not 90 as there would be if he tithed the basket for itself. (To be mathematically exact, he should take 11.1111… figs, but if at all possible, tithing other than whole fruits is avoided.). If for the one with 200 he takes 30123In this case, the smaller basket is treated as appendix of the larger one, and the two are tithed together.. “If in one basket there were 100 and in the other 1000, if he takes for the one with a hundred, he takes 15124This is incomprehensible (as is the explanation of R. Moses Margalit.) R. Eliahu Fulda, R. Eliahu Wilna and R. S. Lieberman emend and read 11 instead of 15, as in the previous sentence.
The last case is again clear; he would need 110.. If for the one with a thousand, even if he takes the entire basket he does not complete taking.”
מִי שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ כַלְכָּלָה וְהוּא מְבַקֵּשׁ לְעַשְּׂרָהּ נוֹטֵל שְׁנֵי תִישּׁוּעִין וְתִישּׁוּעַ שֶׁל תִישׁוּעַ שֶׁהֵן עֶשֶׂר מַעֲשֵׂר וְתֵשַׁע מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי. וְיֹאמַר תְּשַׁע עֶשְׂרֵה. אָמַר רִבִּי זְעִירָא דִּבְרֵי חֲכָמִים וְחִידּוֹתָם. הָרוֹצֶה לְהַכְנִיס מֵאָה תְאֵנִים מְתוּקָּנוֹת לְתוֹךְ בֵּיתוֹ הֲרֵי זֶה נוֹטֵל עַל כָּל־תְּאֵינָה וּתְאֵינָה שְׁנֵי תִישּׁוּעִין וְתִישּׁוּעַ שֶׁל תִישׁוּעַ שֶׁהֵן עֶשְׂרִים וְשָׁלֹשׁ תְּאֵינָה אַרְבָּעָה אָמַר תִּישּׁוּעוֹ שֶׁל תִישׁוּעַ. “125The text is very close to Tosephta Demay 8:17. In all these cases, it is supposed that heave was already taken and only tithe with its heave has to be taken. If someone has a basket and wants to tithe it, he takes two ninths and a ninth of a ninth, corresponding to ten tithe and nine Second Tithe126Since 2/9 + 1/81 = 19/81, one takes 19 figs for any 81 remaining. For all other numbers of figs, one has to multiply by this ratio..” Why does he not say 19? Rebbi Zeïra said, the words of the Sages and their riddles. He who wants to bring a hundred figs in order into his house takes for ever single fig two ninths and a ninth of a ninth, 23 figs in all, four called ninth of a ninth127By the preceding computation, for a remainder of 100 one has to take 19×100÷81 = 23.4568 figs. Hence, the interpretation of the final statement must be “23 whole figs, four tenths, and 4/81 = 23.4494” The word אמר was emended by all commentators but the text is confirmed by the arithmetic..