(R. Eliezer): If a landowner was travelling from place to place and he was in need of taking Leket, Shichechah, Peah and Maaser Ani (as he ran out of money), when he returns home, he must pay (the amount he took).

(Chachamim): (Since) he was poor at the time (he does not need to pay).

One who exchanged with the poor - what they gave him is exempt and what he gave them is obligated.

If two people received a field as sharecroppers, each can give the other his portion of Maaser Ani (although they cannot keep it for themselves).

One who receives a field to harvest may not take (for himself) the Leket, Shichechah, Peah and Maaser Ani.

(R. Yehuda): This is true when he received it (on condition to pay to the owner) a half, a third or a quarter of the produce; but if the owner said, "a third of what you harvest is yours", the sharecropper may keep Leket, Shichechah and Peah but not Maaser Ani.

(Gemara) Baraisa: A father and son, a person and his relative, two brothers and two partners can redeem Maaser Sheni from each other (without the need to add a fifth, since they are considered strangers). They can also give each other Maaser Ani.

(R. Yehuda): A curse should be upon one who gives his father Maaser Ani.

(Rabbanan to R. Yehuda): From where do you know that if both (father and son) are poor (the son should not give the father? Certainly it should be acceptable!)

(The first Tana said that one who receives a field to harvest may not take (for himself) the Leket, Shichechah, Peah and Maaser Ani. R. Yehuda said that this applies when he received it to gain a percentage of the produce, but if the owner said, "a third of what you harvest is yours", the sharecropper may keep Leket, Shichechah and Peah but not Maaser Ani.) What is the difference between the two cases of R. Yehuda? In the latter case, it is understood to mean, "When you will complete the harvest, a third of it will be yours" (but before that time, he does not own anything, so he is exempt from these gifts).

(R. Chiya b'R. Bun): (An earlier Mishnah (Perek 2 Mishnah 5 - Zevachim daf 22(d)) taught that if the owner harvested half and sold half, the buyer must give Peah for the entire field. The Gemara there (o) asked - May the (poor) seller take for himself the Peah that he gives for the portion of the seller?) This can be answered from R' Yehuda's second case in our Mishnah - the seller may take, since the field is not in his possession.

Rebuttal (R. Yosi b'R. Bun): There, the field became obligated in the seller's possession, so he may not take Peah. Here, the sharecropper only received it after it became obligated, so his portion did not become obligated and he may acquire the gifts.

(R. Abahu bar Nagri): The reason that R. Yehuda said that he may not receive the Maaser Ani (above (e)) is that Leket, Shichechah and Peah are left standing in the field and he only had rights to the harvested crop. In contrast, detached crops are obligated in Maaser Ani and since he acquired the detached crops, he cannot therefore acquire the Maaser Ani for himself.

(Mishnah): If a person sells a field, the (poor) seller may take (its gifts) but not the buyer.

One may not hire a laborer on condition that his son gathers the Leket after him (as part of his payment). If someone does not allow the poor to gather or he allows one poor man but not another, or he assists one of them, he is robbing the poor. About this, the pasuk states (Mishlei 22:28), "Do not remove an ancient boundary".

(Gemara): The Mishnah refers to when he sold him his field and its standing corn, but if he sold him just the standing corn and retained the field for himself, they are both prohibited to take its gifts due to their ownership - this one because of the phrase 'your field' and that one because of the phrase 'your harvest' and taking them would be considered stealing from the poor.

If a landowner stipulates with the laborer (as in (b)), he is stealing from the poor; if a laborer did this, he is stealing from the owner and from the poor (as he will intentionally drop a lot of Leket) - about this, the pasuk states (Mishlei 22:28), "Do not remove an ancient boundary".

R. Yirmiyah and Rav Yosef disagreed over the meaning of the word 'Olim' in the pasuk quoted by the Mishnah - one said that it refers to the 'Olei Mitzrayim' - those that came out of Egypt; one said that it refers to those poor who 'Yordu' - lost their possessions - (so why is the term Olim used?) - just as a blind person is called a 'Sagi Nahor' - 'much light'.

(R. Yitzchak): (Another understanding of the word 'Olim' is as the pasuk states (Yishayahu 58:7), "and roaming poor you shall bring home".

(R. Avin): If you do so (bring home poor people), Hash-m views it as if you have brought Bikurim to the Temple - as the word 'you shall bring' is used here and is used in the pasuk (Shemos 23:19), "The choicest of the first fruits of your soil, you shall bring to the House of Hash-m, Your G-d etc."