(R. Yosi citing R. Sheshes/ R. Elazar bei R. Rosi citing R. Avin): If one said to his friend, "I will separate Maaser for you'', he doesn't need to stand and watch that he tithes properly.

(Mishnah in Eiruvin): If he deposited (his Eiruv) on a tree - if above 10 Tefachim, it's not an Eiruv; below 10 Tefachim, it is an Eiruv. (And earlier, the Mishnah there taught - If one sent his Eiruv with a deaf-mute, a lunatic or a minor, it's not a (valid) Eiruv.)

(R. Elazar): (The sender) must stand with him (and see that the recipient gets it).

Question: So why here doesn't he need to watch him?

Answer (R. Chiya bar Ada): Here is discussing an adult; there is discussing a minor.

(R. Chananya citing R. Chanina): You can even say that both are discussing an adult or both are discussing a minor - there (Eiruvin) the sender requested it (so it's not certain that it will be done); here (Maaser), the messenger volunteered to do it.

Eiruvin can be learned from Maaser - if the messenger volunteered, he does not need to watch him. Maaser can be learned from Eiruvin - if the sender requested it, he must watch the messenger.

"Go and pick for yourself twenty of my figs'' - he may eat and is exempt. If he said, "Go and fill the basket'', Rebbi says that he must show the size of the basket to the owner (to avoid possible theft).

Question: What is the assumed size of the basket?

Answer (R. Shmuel bar Nachman citing R. Yonasan): A standard basket holds four Kav; a large one holds a Seah and a small one holds three Kav.

Question (R. Yona): (The Mishnah taught earlier (Chulin 127(d)) that produce usually put in a basket is considered complete after it's covered. And if it isn't being covered, after he fills the vessel.) Were these sizes given by R. Yonasan specifically related to the basket of that Mishnah or were they to business law, (that a buyer may not fill a basket larger than the type that was agreed upon)...? If you say it was for Ma'asros, certainly it would apply to business law. If you say that it was for business law, perhaps it would not apply to Ma'asros (and even if a small basket was filled it would be considered complete).

According to R. Yosi, it was obvious that it was said about Ma'asros and it would certainly apply to business law.

(The Mishnah taught (Chulin 132(b)) that if they were sitting in a doorway or a store and he said to them, "Take for yourselves figs'', they may eat them without tithing but the doorway and store owners are obligated.) This shows that his house obligates him but not others.

(R. Elazar): R. Yehuda and R. Nechemia have the same opinion - as the Mishnah (further on, in Perek 3 Mishnah 5) taught - (What type of courtyard obligates Maaser?) R. Nechemia says - If a person would not be embarrassed there, it obligates. (This is also the reasoning of R. Yehuda, who said in our Mishnah (see earlier, Chulin 132(b) 1.) that he is exempt, unless he turns his face or changes his seat.)

(R. Yosi): We thought that the dispute between R. Nechemia and Rabbanan is over a courtyard into which he is embarrassed to eat in all of it, but if he is embarrassed to eat only in part of it, not; (as R. Nechemia agrees that it obligates).

But R. Elazar's teaching that R. Yehuda and R. Nechemia have the same opinion shows that an area in which he is embarrassed exempts and an area in which he is not embarrassed obligates.

(R. Yochanan): (Disagreeing with R. Elazar) (That's the not R. Yehuda's reasoning; rather) it's because he views it like a branch of a fig tree that is leaning into the courtyard (that one who eats from it outside the courtyard is exempt and one who eats from it inside the courtyard is obligated).

According to R. Yochanan, he is only exempt if he eats them one at a time and he eats the fruits from the shared basket and leaves over for others.

According to R. Elazar, even if he does not eat them one at a time and even if he doesn't eat from the shared basket and even if he doesn't leave over for others.