SELLING SAPLINGS (Yerushalmi Peah Halachah 5 Daf 16a)
îùðä äîåëø ÷ìçé àéìï áúåê ùãäå ðåúï ôàä îëì àçã åàçã
(Mishnah): If one sells tree trunks from his field, each buyer gives Peah from the trunks that he bought.
àîø øáé éäåãà àéîúé áæîï ùìà ùééø áòì äùãä àáì àí ùééø ùãäå äåà ðåúï ôàä ìëì:
(R. Yehuda): When is this? When the owner of the field left nothing for himself; but if he did, he gives Peah for everything.
âîøà òã ëãåï ëùäúçéì ì÷öåø [ãó ì òîåã á (òåæ åäãø)] àôé' ëùìà äúçéì ì÷öåø
(Gemara) Question: The Mishnah only seems to teach this law (of R. Yehuda that the seller gives Peah) if he began the harvesting (as the obligation falls on him); but if not, would the seller also give Peah for everything?
ðéùîòéðä îï äãà ì÷ç âæ öàðå ùì çáéøå àí ùééø äîåëø äîåëø çééá åàí ìàå äìå÷ç çééá
Suggestion (Mishnah in Chulin): If a person bought the shearings of his friend's sheep, if the seller withheld some, the seller is obligated in Reishis HaGez (the first shearings of wool of a flock of sheep); if not, the buyer is obligated.
ø' éøîéä áùí ø' éåçðï ãø' éäåãà äéà ùðééà äéà úîï áéï ùäúçéì ìâæåæ öàðå áéï ùìà äúçéì ìâæåæ åëà ìà ùðéé' ìéä áéï ùäúçéì ì÷öåø áéï ùìà äúçéì ì÷öåø
(R. Yirmiyah citing R. Yochanan): That Mishnah, that does not differentiate in whether or not the owner began shearing, follows the opinion of R. Yehuda - here also, we do not differentiate in whether or not the owner began harvesting (as long as he left something for himself).
î''è ãø''é îùåí ãçåáú ä÷öéø á÷îä àå îùåí ãîåëø ìå çåõ îçåáúå
Question: What is the reasoning of R. Yehuda? Is it because the obligation is always on the (last remaining) standing crops or is it because the seller (automatically) sells in a way that retains the obligation for himself?
ðéùîòéðä îï äãà ì÷ç âæ öàï çáéøå àí ùééø äîåëø äîåëø çééá åàí ìàå äìå÷ç çééá à''ø éøîéä áùí ø' éåçðï ãø' éäåãà äéà
Suggestion (that Mishnah in Chulin): If a person bought the shearings of his friend's sheep, if the seller withheld some, the seller is obligated in Reishis HaGez; if not, the buyer is obligated. It was about this case that R. Yirmiyah quoted R. Yochanan as saying that the Mishnah is R. Yehuda.
àéú ìê ìîéîø úîï ùçåáú ÷öéø á÷îä ìà îùåí ãîëøå ìå çåõ îçåáúå åëà áîëøå çåõ îçåáúå
Conclusion of answer: There (shearings), could one say that the obligation remains on the last wool that is still attached?! Rather, it is because the seller retains the obligation for himself. Similarly here, in Peah, the seller retains the obligation for himself.
îä ðô÷ îáéðéäï
Question: What is the practical difference between these two reasons?
òáø äìå÷ç (åîôøéù)[åäôøéù] àéï úéîø îùåí ùçåáú ä÷öéø á÷îä äôøéù äôøéù åàéï úéîø îùåí ãîåëø ìå çåõ îçåáúå äôøéù åðåèì îîðå ãîéí
Answer #1: If the buyer gave Peah - if you say that the obligation remains on that which is still attached, it is valid and the seller does not need to give; if it is because the seller retains the obligation, the buyer can now claim money back from the seller.
ðùøó çì÷å ùì îåëø àéï úéîø îùåí ãçåáú ÷öéø á÷îä ðùøó ðùøó åàéï úéîø îùåí áîåëø ìå çåõ îçåáúå ðùøó ðåèì îîðå ãîéí:
Answer #2: If the portion of the seller became burned - if you say that the obligation remains on that which is still attached, if it burned, the obligation is gone; if it is because the seller retains the obligation, if it burned, the buyer must give Peah from his produce and can then claim money back from the seller.