Question: The (following) Mishnah is unlike R. Yosi bei R. Chanina - If a person made a vow prohibiting Kohanim and Leviim from benefitting from his property, they may forcibly take the tithes. (The actual tithes aren't his and the Tovas Hana'ah does not have monetary value.)

Answer: It's when he said, "I will not give the gifts at all". (His declaration negated all rights he had concerning giving the tithes - even the Tovas Hana'ah.)

Proof: The latter part of that Mishnah says - If he said, "I prohibit these Kohanim or these Leviim from benefitting from me", others should take the tithes. (It's clear that in the first part of the Mishnah, he prohibited all Kohanim.)

Question: The (following) Mishnah is unlike R. Yochanan - If a Yisrael says to a Yisrael, "Take this Selah coin and give this firstborn animal to my daughter's son (who is a Kohen)". (This shows that a Yisrael may accept payment to give away his right to choose the Kohen - since his right to choose has monetary value.)

Answer: He anyway had intended to divide between two Kohanim (the aforementioned one being one of them), so he paid him to give all of it to his daughter's son.

Question (asked to R. Zeira): The Baraisa speaks about a Yisrael who stipulated with a Yisrael, What if a Kohen stipulated with a Yisrael that, "Take this Sela and give this Bechor (firstborn animal) to my grandson" - would it be permitted according to R. Yosi bei R. Chanina (who says that Tovas Hana'ah has monetary value)? R. Zeira didn't answer.

Answer (R. Chizkiyah citing R. Acha): R. Zeira said that according to R. Yosi bei R. Chanina, why may a Kohen not stipulate to a Yisrael? Isn't it because of Maris HaAyin (conspicuous behavior - as it appears as if he is selling Maaser)? And similarly, R. Yochanan also reasons that a Yisrael with a Yisrael is prohibited, because of Maris HaAyin.

Question (R. Yosi bei R. Bun): When the Kohen says this to the Yisrael, Kodshim is being profaned (which is a Torah prohibition); and you say that it's prohibited because of Maris HaAyin? As the Baraisa teaches - Kohanim and Leviim who help at the granary (in order to receive Terumos and Maaseros from the produce owner) may not receive Terumah or Maaser and if he gave them, he has profaned them, as the pasuk states (Vayikra 22:15), "And they shall not profane the Holy items of the Bnei Yisrael..."?

And Chazal said even more than that - 'Their Terumah and Maaseros do not take effect and their consecration to Hekdesh is invalid' - about such people the pasuk states (Michah 3:11), "Its heads judge for bribes, and its Kohanim instruct for a price etc.". And because of such people, Hash-m brings three punishments - (Pasuk 12), "Therefore, because of you, Tzion shall be plowed as a field (Yerushalayim shall become heaps, and the Temple Mount like the high places of a forest)."

Question: There's a Mishnah (in Maseches Kidushin) that disagrees with R. Yochanan - If a person betroths a woman using Terumos, Maaseros, Kohanims' gifts, waters of the Red Heifer or the ashes of the Red Heifer, she is betrothed, even if the groom is a Yisrael...? (The Mishnah seems to be allowing Terumah that is meant for a Kohen to be used, and he is betrothing her with the value of the Tovas Hana'ah.)

Answer: It's referring to a Yisrael who inherited Terumah from his maternal grandfather, who was a Kohen.

Question: If a Kohen sold a field to a Yisrael and said to him, "...on condition that the Maaseros are mine" - the Maaseros are his. But is the Kohen permitted to sell the Maaseros of the produce that will grow in the future?

Answer: Let's learn from R. Abahu who cited from R. Shimon ben Lakish that one who sells the Maaseros of his field, or the fetuses of his animal, or the airspace of his ruin, he's done nothing. Rather, he should sell him his field and withhold its Maaseros or his maidservant and withhold her fetus, or his animal and withhold its fetus, or his ruin and withhold the airspace.

Question: How is possible for a person to sell the airspace of his ruin?

Answer: If he tells the buyer, "Acquire a piece of land of this ruin so that you can acquire the airspace". Similarly, (if he wants to sell the future Maaseros of his field) he should tell him, "Go and acquire a small piece of the land so that you can acquire 1/10th of its (future) produce".

If a Kohen sold a field to a Yisrael and said to him, "...on condition that the Maaseros should be mine" - the Maaseros are his. If he dies, his children don't receive the Maaseros. If he said, "the Maaseros should go to me and my children" or "to me and my inheritors", both he and his children or he and his inheritors receive the Maaseros.

Question (R. Yudan bar Shalom to R. Yosi): Until here, it's been referring to inheritors, even if they only inherit Rabbinically. What about those who do not even inherit Rabbinically?

When it said 'that all of the Maasoros are his", it means as long as the buyer still owns the land, but if he sold it then not? And if so, if the buyer from the Kohen sold it to someone and then bought it back - R. Chiya's Baraisa taught that the Kohen does not receive the Maaseros. But R. Hoshiya's Baraisa taught that he does receive Maaseros.

This dispute is like the dispute of the Mishnah - as it taught - one who divorces and then remarries his wife, he is assumed to be relying on her original Kesubah.

Baraisa (R. Chana to R.Ila): Two Amoraim disagreed - one said that she has (rights to) her original Kesubah (money), but without its stipulation of Tosefes Kesubah (additional money promised to her). The other one said that she has both.

The first opinion (that she gets Kesubah but not her Tosefes Kesubah) says that if they buyer sold the land and bought it back, that the Kohen no longer gets the Maaseros (as the original stipulation has now gone). The second opinion (that she also gets her Tosefes Kesubah) says that if the buyer bought back the land, that the Kohen still receives the Maaseros).

Question (Baraisa): If a Yisrael received (in Kablanus) a field from the daughter of a Kohen, the Maaseros are hers. If she married a Yisrael (thereby losing her right to eat Terumah), the Maaseros must be distributed (as she cannot keep them). If she became widowed or divorced, she returns to her original status...? (This is a question according to R. Chiya (above (s)) that if a person bought back the field, he does not get the Maaseros.)

Answer: In R' Chiya's Baraisa, the Kohen sold (the field); here the person merely received it in Kablanus (so she retains the connection to it).

Question: But R. Chiya taught (in an alternative version) that she sold the field (and the Maaseros return to her after she is divorced)?

Answer (R. Shmuel bar Avdima): There (the field) left both of their possession; but here, it left the seller's possession but not the buyer's possession.