פאה אע"ג דכתיב שדך דידך אין שותפות לא כתב רחמנא (ויקרא יט, ט) ובקצרכם את קציר ארצכם אלא שדך ל"ל
Now this is so only because Scripture stated: 'Your dough', but had it not stated it I should have said that we should draw an analogy by reason of the common word 'first' from the law of the first of the fleece, but on the contrary we would rather draw the analogy from the law of terumah!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' With the result that what is held jointly by Israelites is subject to the dough-offering, just as it is subject to terumah. For it is an established principle that where two analogies are possible, one leading to stringency and the other to leniency, we must adopt the former; v. Yeb. 8a, Kid. 68a, and A.Z. 46b.');"><sup>14</sup></span>
Tosefta Terumot
A Jew and a Gentile that bought a field in Syria, behold they are like untithed produce and like tithes that are mixed together, the words of Rebbi. Rabbi Shimon ben Gamaliel says, the portion [belonging to] the Jew are liable in tithes, and the portion [belonging to] the Gentile are exempt from tithes. A Jew that bought a field in Syria, even though he went back and sold it to a Gentile, [the field] is liable in tithes and in shevi'it (the laws of the sabbatical year), because it had previously been liable. But [in the case of a field owned by a Gentile but worked on by Jewish] sharecroppers or tenant farmers or the families [of Jewish sharecroppers], or [in the case where] a Gentile mortgaged his field to a Jew, even though he acted based on [Jewish] law, [the field] is exempt from tithes and from shevi'it [because ownership is retained by a Gentile, see Gitt. 43b:11].
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
