טו תולה בדעת עצמו לית ליה ברירה דתניא הלוקח יין מבין הכותים אומר שני לוגין שאני עתיד להפריש הרי הן תרומה עשרה מעשר ראשון תשעה מעשר שני
15 This is also indicated [by the language of the passage itself], which states, as soon as the first has entered with his head and the greater part of his body, he becomes entitled to his portion and makes his brothers entitled to theirs along with him.' If now you say that the father mentally reckoned them all as of his company<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The company which was to eat that particular lamb. V. Ex. XII, 4: According to every man's eating ye shall make your count for the lamb. ');"><sup>14</sup></span> from the first, this is intelligible. But if you say that he did not so reckon them, can they be counted in after the lamb is killed? Have we not learnt: 'Persons can be counted in to a company and withdraw until the lamb is killed [but not after].'?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Pes. ibid. ');"><sup>15</sup></span> It has also been taught to the same effect: It happened once that the daughters came before the sons. the former showing themselves diligent and the latter slack.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' But it does not say that the sons were not reckoned in, which proves that the father originally counted all his sons in. ');"><sup>16</sup></span> Abaye said: [R. Hoshaiah] questioned him [Rab Judah] with reference to the case where he leaves the choice to another,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the husband leaves the choice to the woman who will first go out of doors. ');"><sup>17</sup></span> and Rab Judah answers him by citing the case where he retains the choice in his own hands, and then R. Hoshaiah raises an objection from the case where he leaves the choice to others again! — Said Raba: What is the difficulty? Perhaps according to the authority who says there is [such a thing as] retrospective decision, it makes no difference whether he leaves the choice to another or retains it in his own hand; in either case he holds there is retrospective decision; whereas according to the authority who says there is no [such thing as] retrospective decision it makes no difference whether he keeps the choice in his own hand or leaves it to others: in either case he holds there is no retrospective decision. Said R. Mesharsheya to Raba: But is there not R. Judah, who holds that when the man keeps the choice in his own hands we do not decide retrospectively but when he leaves the choice to others he holds that we do decide retrospectively? That [R. Judah] holds that he is permitted to decide retrospectively when he keeps the choice in his own hands [is shown by the following Baraitha]. For it was taught: If a man buys wine from the Cutheans, he can say. 'Two logs which I intend to set aside [from each hundred] are to be the priest's due;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The amount of the terumah is not specified in the Scripture, but the Rabbis considered two parts in a hundred a fair proportion. ');"><sup>18</sup></span> ten [logs] the first tithe;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For the Levites, v. Num. XVIII, 21. ');"><sup>19</sup></span> and nine [logs]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' From the remaining ninety. ');"><sup>20</sup></span> the second tithe,'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To be consumed in Jerusalem. V. Deut. XIV, 22ff. ');"><sup>21</sup></span>