רבן שמעון בן גמליאל אומר
are inextricably mixed up in it:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Even after they have divided between them the produce of the field, we do not assume that the share which each took eventually was intended for him from the beginning, so that the result would be that the Israelite's share is wholly tebel and the gentile's wholly hullin. This would mean the application of the principle of bererah i.e., retrospective designation. Rabbi does not accept this principle and maintains that each share, nay, each grain, is part tebel and part hullin; and the Israelite therefore must separate the tithe for his share from this very produce but not kcy from other produce, neither can this produce be set aside as tithe for other produce. V. Rashi s.v. vrhrc');"><sup>6</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
