משנה: מִי שֶׁהָיוּ לוֹ עֲשָׂרָה שׁוּרוֹת שֶׁל עֶשֶׂר כַּדֵּי יַיִן וְאָמַר שׁוּרָה הַחִיצוֹנָה אַחַת מַעֲשֵׂר וְאֵינוֹ יוֹדֵעַ אֵיזוֹ הִיא נוֹטֵל שְׁתֵּי חָבִיּוֹת לוֹכְסוֹן חֲצִי שׁוּרָה הַחִיצוֹנָה אַחַת מַעֲשֵׂר וְאֵינוֹ יוֹדֵעַ אֵיזוֹ הִיא נוֹטֵל אַרְבַּע חָבִיּוֹת מֵאַרְבַּע זָוִיּוֹת שׁוּרָה אַחַת מַעֲשֵׂר וְאֵינוֹ יוֹדֵעַ אֵיזוֹ הִיא נוֹטֵל שׁוּרָה אַחַת לוֹכְסוֹן. חֲצִי שׁוּרָה אַחַת מַעֲשֵׂר וְאֵינוֹ יוֹדֵעַ אֵיזוֹ הִיא נוֹטֵל שְׁתֵּי שׁוּרוֹת לוֹכְסוֹן. חָבִית אַחַת מַעֲשֵׂר וְאֵינוֹ יוֹדֵעַ אֵיזוֹ הִיא נוֹטֵל מִכָּל חָבִית וְחָבִית. MISHNAH: If somebody had ten rows of ten wine jugs151The Babli, Baba Qama 27a, notes that the Mishnah starts with “jugs” and continues with “amphoras,” to indicate that Biblical כד corresponds to rabbinic חבית. each, and he said that one from an outer row was tithe but he does no longer know which one, he takes two diagonally152Greek λοξός, ή, όν “slanting, crosswise”. opposite amphoras153Let the rows be numbered by i= 1, 2,…,10 and the amphoras in each row by j = 1, 2,…,10. Then the position of each amphora is uniquely described by a couple (i,j) and the amphoras are filling a square. Also, let * denote any number from 1 to 10. The outer rows are (1,*), (10,*), (*,1), (*,10). Since the problem is not the tithe but the heave of the tithe, if one takes both amphoras (1,1) and (10,10) [or (1,10) and (10,1)] he will have taken one amphora from each boundary row and have valid heave of the tithe. From the last sentence of the Mishnah it becomes clear that in all cases, only one amphora has to be given as heave of the tithe. Hence, the interpretation here is that one takes half of each amphora chosen and pours into a new one, so that the full new amphora will be the heave of the tithe.. One of half an outer row was tithe but he does no longer know which one, then he takes the four amphoras at the four corners154Since each semi-row ends at a corner, if he takes one quarter of any of the four at the corners, one of them will be the right one.. One row was tithe but he does no longer know which one, then he takes one diagonal row155If he takes either (i,i) for i = 1,…, 10 or (10-i+1,i) for i = 1,…, 10 then he will have taken one amphora from each row counted in either direction. Here, he takes one tenth out of each amphora chosen.. Half a row was tithe but he does no longer know which one, then he takes from the two diagonal rows156The rows (i,i) and (10-i+1,i) for i = 1,…, 10. Then one amphora for each half-row starting at the border will have been taken. Here, one takes one twentieth of each amphora chosen.. One amphora was tithe but he does no longer know which one, then he takes157He takes 1% of the volume of each amphora, then he gets the required amphora out of the 100 given and from each amphora some wine is in the new barrel. from each amphora.
הלכה: וְיִטּוֹל שְׁתַּיִם. רִבִּי כֹהֵן בְּשֵׁם רַבָּנִין דְּקֵיסָרִין בְּשֶׁהִפְרִישׁ חֶצְייָן מִמָּקוֹם אַחֵר. HALAKHAH: Why does he not take two159This refers to the second sentence in the Mishnah, when he made half a row tithe on 50 of the 100 amphoras. Why can he not declare that the other half is also tithe for the remaining 50 amphoras and reduce this case to the preceding one where he has to take only from two diagonally opposed amphoras? The answer is that the remaining amphoras are already profane, not ṭevel, and the method proposed is impossible. (Explanation of R. Eliahu Fulda.)? Rebbi Cohen in the name of the rabbis of Caesarea: When he separated half of the heave from another place.
תַּנִּי הָיוּ לְפָנָיו שְׁתֵּי חָבִיּוֹת אַחַת שֶׁל מַעֲשֵׂר טֵבֵל טָהוֹר וְאַחַת שֶׁל מַעֲשֵׂר טֵבֵל טָמֵא הֲרֵי זֶה מֵבִיא שְׁנֵי לָגִינִין וְנוֹטֵל מִזּוּ כְדֵי תְרוּמַת מַעֲשֵׂר מִשְּׁתֵּיהֶן וּמִזּוּ כְדֵי תְרוּמַת מַעֲשֵׂר מִשְּׁתֵּיהֶן. וְחוֹזֵר וּמַגְבִּיהַּ אֶת הַלָּגִין וְאוֹמֵר. אִם זֶהוּ טָהוֹר הֲרֵי הוּא עָשִׂיתִיו תְּרוּמַת מַעֲשֵׂר. וְאִם לָאו לֹא עָשִׂיתִי כְלוּם. וְחוֹזֵר וְעוֹשֶׂה כֵן בַּשֵּׁנִי וְטוֹבֵל וְשׁוֹתֶה דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי. רִבִּי לָֽעְזָר בֵּי רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר אֵינוֹ נוֹטֵל אֶלָּא בְסוֹף. מַה טַעֲמָא דְרִבִּי אֲנִי אוֹמֵר שֶׁמָּא שָׁתָה מַשְׁקִין טְמֵאִין תְּחִילָּה. וּמַה טַעֲמָא דְרִבִּי לָֽעְזָר בַּר שִׁמְעוֹן אֲנִי אוֹמֵר שֶׁמָּא שָׁתָה מַשְׁקִין טְמֵאִין בְּסוֹף. הַכֹּל מוֹדִין בְּשׁוֹתֶה מַשְׁקִין טְמֵאִין שֶׁהוּא אָסוּר לוֹכַל אֲפִילוּ סָפֵק תְּרוּמָה. סָפֵק מַשְׁקִין כָּל־עַמָּא מוֹדֵיי שֶׁהוּא מוּתָּר לוֹכַל אֲפִילוּ תְרוּמָה וַדַּאי. אֶלָּא כָא אֲנָן קַייָמִין כְּהָדָא מַתְנִיתָא. מַה טַעֲמָא דְרִבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בַּר שִׁמְעוֹן מֵאַחַר שֶׁעַל יְדֵי זֶה וְעַל יְדֵי זֶה נִתְבָּֽרְרָה הַטּוּמְאָה טָעוּן טְבִילָה. מַה טַעֲמָא דְרִבִּי שֶׁלֹּא יָבוֹא לִידֵי רְבִיעִית. לְמַה טַעֲמָא דְרִבִּי לָֽעְזָר בֵּי רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בְּשׁוֹתֶה פָּחוֹת מֵרְבִיעִית. וְלֵית לֵיהּ לְרִבִּי לָֽעְזָר בֵּי רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן שֶׁלֹּא יָבוֹא לִידֵי רְבִיעִית. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּרִבִּי בּוּן אֵין לָךְ אֶלָּא כְהָדֵין פִּיתְרָא קַדְמָיָא. דְּרִבִּי חָשַׁשׁ שֶׁמָּא שָׁתָה מַשְׁקִין טְמֵאִין תְּחִילָּה. וְרִבִּי לָֽעְזָר בֵּי רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן חָשַׁשׁ שֶׁמָּא שָׁתָה מַשְׁקִין טְמֵאִין בְּסוֹף. It was stated160There is a similar Tosephta, Demay 5:22–23, which first explains how to take two pitchers and the declarations to make, as in the baraita here. But then there is no disagreement reported but it is stated that the Cohen who drinks must immerse himself not only before drinking but between the drinks and after them, combining the rules of Rebbi and R. Eleazar ben R. Simeon. That Tosephta explains the practical rule and not the background as does the baraita here. Nevertheless, the text of the Tosephta cannot stand as it is in manuscript and print: “The pitchers, one of impure ṭevel tithe, the other of pure ṭevel tithe. He drinks from one and immerses himself, and drinks from the other and immerses himself, and drinks from both of them together, and needs an immersion at the end.” All commentators of the Tosephta feel compelled to rearrange the Tosephta according to the Yerushalmi.: “If there were two amphoras before him, one of pure tithe which was ṭevel and one of impure tithe which was ṭevel161Only pure heave may be consumed; impure heave of oil may be used as fuel but impure heave of wine cannot be used at all. Hence, if the Cohen is the owner of the tithe, he wants to take heave so that he can drink everything., he brings two vessels and takes from each of them heave of the tithe for both of them. He then turns and lifts one vessel and says: If this one is pure, I am making it heave of the tithe; else I did not do anything. Then he turns, does the same for the second vessel, immerses himself and drinks, the words of Rebbi162Since no Cohen may eat or drink heave without first immersing himself, it is obvious that here the Cohen did immerse himself first. Hence, the immersion required by Rebbi is between the drinks from both vessels.. Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar says, he takes it163A scribal error for טובל “he immerses himself.” only at the end.” What is the reason of Rebbi? I say, maybe he started drinking the impure one first164Then he has to purify himself again for the heave since the first pitcher was profane drink.. And what is the reason of Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon? Maybe he drank the impure one at the end. Everybody agrees that he who drinks impure liquids may not even eat heave that is in doubt165If somebody drinks impure fluids (in a minimum of a reviït, about 135 cm3) then, by rabbinic decree (Zavim 5:12), his body becomes impure even if the impurity was only secondary. (Biblical impurity is transferred to a person only by original impurity.) If the impurity is certain, then by rabbinic decree he is impure even if it is in doubt whether the food is heave or not. But if the drink is only suspected of being impure there is no rabbinic decree and impurity is imparted only by original impurity. The discussion here assumes that all impurities discussed are rabbinic in character.. If the liquids were possibly impure, everybody agrees that he may eat what certainly is heave. But here we deal with another Mishnah166Zavim 5:12.. What is the reason of Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon? Since according to both the impurity is certain, he needs immersion167At the end, the contents of one of the vessels certainly was impure and made his body impure.. What is the reason of Rebbi? That he should not be led into drinking a reviït168If he drinks less the immersion is not really necessary; it is a reminder not to make one’s body impure by drinking a reviït of a questionable liquid.. According to the reason of Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon, he drinks less than a reviït169In that case, no immersion at the end would be necessary. Hence, the argument is faulty because otherwise Rebbi and R. Eleazar would not quarrel, one speaking about a person drinking less than a reviït, the other about one who drinks more.. Is Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon not afraid that he would be led into drinking a reviït? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, the only explanation you have is our first one. Rebbi is afraid that he drank the impure liquid first and Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon is afraid that he drank the impure liquid at the end170Hence, the practical rule is the one given in the Tosephta..