A GENTILE'S ACQUISITION IN ERETZ YISRAEL EXEMPTING FROM MAASER (Yerushalmi Demai Perek 5 Halachah 8 Daf 23b)
ø' éåðä øáé ñéîï áùí øáé éäåùò áï ìåé äìå÷ç ôéøåú úìåùéï îï òëå"í îôøéù úøåîä åúøåîú îòùø îäìëä åðåúï ìùáè åðåèì ãîéí îï äùáè åäìå÷ç ôéøåú îçåáøéï îï äòëå"í îôøéù úøåîä åúøåîú îòùø îäìëä åðåúðï ìùáè åàéðå ðåèì ãîéí îï äùáè
(R. Yona/ R. Siman citing R. Yehoshua ben Levi): One who buys detached fruit from a gentile should separate Terumah and Terumas Maaser MiD'Rabbanan, and give it to the tribe of the Kohanim, but he can charge them for it. One who buys attached fruits from a gentile should separate Terumah and Terumas Maaser and give it the tribe of the Kohanim, but he may not charge them for it.
îä èòí [ãó îè òîåã á (òåæ åäãø)] ëé ú÷çå îàú áðé éùøàì îàú áðé éùøàì àú îåöéà åàéï àú îåöéà îéã îëøé ëäåðä åìååéä
What is the source (for the first law of the Mishnah)? The pasuk states (Bamidbar 18:26), "When you (Leviim) shall take from the children of Israel (Maaser, you shall take Terumah - Maaser from the Maaser..." - you shall take it from Bnei Yisrael but not from people who are familiar with Kohanim and Leviim (if a Yisrael lent money to a Kohen and instead of the Kohen paying it back, each year, the Yisrael sets aside Terumah and keeps it for himself (as if he has given it to his Kohen debtor) and then sells it to another Kohen and deducts that money from the loan).
åàúéà ëãîø øáé àìòæø ëé ú÷çå îàú áðé éùøàì îàú áðé éùøàì àú îåöéà åàéï àú îåöéà îéã äòëå"í
This follows the opinion of R. Elazar, who said - "When you (Levi'im) shall take from the children of Israel..." - you shall take it from Bnei Yisrael but not from the gentile.
à"ø àçà áéîé øáé äåùòé' áé÷ùå ìäéîðåú òì äø äîìê ìôåèøå îï äîòùøåú àîøå éáà øáé äåùòéä ìà äñôé÷ ìáà òã ùðèøôä äùòä
(R. Acha): In the days of R. Hoshiyah, they wanted to vote over Har HeMelech to exempt it from Maaser (since it was in the hands of gentiles). They invited R. Hoshiyah to come, but before it happened, their opportunity passed to have the vote.
øáé éäåãä áø ôæé áùí øáé äåùòé' äìëä ëø"ù
(R. Yehuda ben Pazi citing R. Hoshiyah): The Halachah follows R. Shimon (that a gentile's acquisition in Eretz Yisrael exempts it from Maaser).
ãìà ëï îä ðï àîøéï ø' îàéø åø"ù àéï äìëä ëø"ù
Question: What else would you say? Do we say that between R. Meir and R. Shimon, the Halachah doesn't follow R. Shimon? Of course the Halachah is like R. Shimon!
àìà áâéï ãúðé àø"ù ùæåøé îòùä ùðúòøáå ôéøåú èáåìéï áôéøåúé åùàìúé àú øáé èøôåï åàîø ìé öà åìå÷çí îï äòëå"í åòùø òìéä
Answer: Rather, since it is taught that R. Shimon Shezuri said that it happened that Tevel fruits became mixed with my fruits and I asked R. Tarfon for definite Tevel fruits to be able to use them to tithe for my fruits that were mixed. He told me to go and buy them from a gentile and tithe them, because gentiles certainly do not tithe. (This shows that R. Tarfon held (like R. Meir) that a gentile's produce is obligated in Maaser, or he would not have been able to use that produce to tithe for his own.)
åúðé òìéä øáé éäåãä åø"ù àåîøéí éù ÷ðéï ìòëå"í áà"é ìôåèøå îï äîòùø
And about that, a Baraisa taught - R. Yehuda and R. Shimon say that a gentile's acquisition in Eretz Yisrael exempts it from Maaser.
ãìà úñáåø îéîø úøéé ëì ÷áì úøéé àéðåï ìôåí ëï öøéê ìåîø äìëä ëø"ù
Conclusion of answer: So that you shouldn't think that since it is a dispute of two (R. Meir and R. Tarfon) against two (R. Yehuda and R. Shimon), so that it's not a simple case of a dispute between R. Meir and R. Shimon, where the Halachah follow R. Shimon; that's why R. Hoshiyah had to teach that the Halachah nevertheless follows R. Shimon.
[ãó ð òîåã à (òåæ åäãø)] åòåã îï äãà ãàîø øáé æòéøà àáà àðèåìé æáéï ôéøé îï ãàøîàé àúà ìâáé ãøáé éåãä áï ìåé ùìç ìîðçí áøéä ãéú÷ï ìéä åéäá ìéä îòùøéä îé àúé ÷í òéîéä øéá"ì à"ì îàï éòáéã ãà àìà àáåê
Proof #2: (That the Halachah follows R. Shimon) R. Zeira said - Abba Antuli bought fruits from Aramians. He came to R. Yehuda ben Levi and asked if they need tithing. He sent him to R. Yehuda's son Menachem to tithe for him and Menachem did this and he gave the Maaser to R. Yehuda ben Levi (who was a Levi). When Menachem returned, he met R. Yehoshua ben Levi. R. Yehoshua ben Levi said to him, "Who could have done this for you! Who is as wise as your father, who said that the produce is obligated in Maaser!"
îçìôéä ùéèúéä ãøáé éäåùò á"ì úîï äåà àîø äìå÷ç ôéøåú úìåùéï îï äòëå"í îôøéù úøåîä åúøåîú îòùø îäìëä åðåúðä ìùáè åðåèì ãîéå îï äùáè åäëà äåà àîø äëéï
Question: The opinion of R. Yehoshua ben Levi seems to have reversed - there (above (a)) he said that if a person buys detached fruit from a gentile, he separates Terumah and Terumas Maaser and then gives it to one of the Kohanim tribe and may take payment for it. But here, R. Yehoshua praised him for R. Yehuda ben Levi's accepting it without payment?
àîø øáé àáà áø æîéðà ÷åîé øáé æòéøà øáé ñéîï ìà àîø ëï àìà îé àúé ÷í òéîéä øáé éäåùò áï ìåé àîø ìéä ìéú àéìéï ãàáéê åàé÷ôã
Answer (R. Abba bar Zamina to R. Zeira): R. Simon (above) actually reported the story differently - he said that when Menachem returned and met R. Yehoshua ben Levi, R. Yehoshua ben Levi was upset and said, "These (fruits) are not your father's" - a gentile's fruits are exempt from tithes!