Trust, Tithes, and Sabbatical Produce in Bekhorot 30

How Tosafot defines agricultural suspicion, defends the reliability of ordinary people, and explains why second tithe remains vulnerable to neglect.

The Hierarchy of Reliability

The Mishnah on Bekhorot 30a explores whether a person suspected of violating one mitzvah is suspected of violating another. It rules that someone suspect regarding שביעית (the Sabbatical Year) is not automatically suspect regarding מעשר (tithes). The Gemara explains that שביעית produce does not require consumption within the walls of Jerusalem, whereas מעשר requires walls. Because of this requirement, מעשר seems more stringent, so a violator of שביעית might still observe the laws of tithes.

Rashi clarifies that this requirement refers to מעשר שני (second tithe), which the Torah mandates must be eaten exclusively within Jerusalem. This premise prompts Tosafot to clarify the precise terminology of the Mishnah, examine the general status of unlearned Jews, and question why anyone would risk eating untransformed tithes.

Defining the Tithe in Question

Tosafot is troubled by the Gemara's interpretation: why does the Gemara assume the Mishnah addresses מעשר שני rather than an individual failing to separate tithes altogether? If the suspect simply refused to tithe, his produce would remain טבל (tevel, untithed produce), a grave biblical prohibition that applies everywhere without any wall requirement.

Rabbeinu Tam answers that whenever the Sages mention מעשר alongside שביעית, it refers to treating second tithe as non-sacred food outside Jerusalem. When the Rabbis speak of someone suspected of neglecting separation entirely, they consistently use the distinct designations טבל or דמאי (demai, produce suspected of being untithed).

מכאן מדקדק רבינו תם בכ"מ שהזכיר מעשר אצל שביעית דמיירי בנותן מעשר שני לשם חולין

From here Rabbeinu Tam infers in every place where tithes are mentioned alongside the Sabbatical Year, that it refers to one who gives Second Tithe as if it were non-sacred food. (Tosafot on Bekhorot 30a:4:1)

The Presumption of Ordinary People

The Gemara cites a contradiction: a baraita states that one who is suspect regarding טהרות (ritual purity) is also suspect regarding שביעית. Rabbi Ilai reconciles this by explaining that our Mishnah speaks of someone whom witnesses observed observing שביעית and מעשר privately inside his home. Rashi notes that private observance proves he is not acting for mere appearance.

Tosafot is challenged by this resolution because it implies that an ordinary עם הארץ (am ha'aretz, someone unlearned in purity and tithes) is presumed suspect regarding שביעית. This contradicts other rulings in Gittin and Ketubot showing that ordinary people are trusted on שביעית. Tosafot resolves this by explaining that any source treating an individual as suspect on שביעית either refers to a Samaritan or to an individual who is already an established suspect.

אי נמי בודאי חשוד איירי וכן ההיא דהלוקח לולב מחבירו בשביעית

Alternatively, it is dealing with someone definitely suspect, and similarly, that case of one who purchases a lulav from his fellow during the Sabbatical Year. (Tosafot on Bekhorot 30a:8:1)

Why Tithes Tempt Transgression

The Gemara cites Rabbi Yehuda's view that in his region, שביעית was considered so severe that someone suspected of violating it was certainly suspected of violating מעשר. Rashi explains that one who transgresses a stringent law will all the more so transgress a lighter one. Tosafot questions how anyone could be suspected regarding מעשר שני at all, since one can avoid any sin by redeeming it onto a small coin. In tractate Shabbat, a person is not suspected regarding תרומה (terumah, priestly gift) because a single grain exempts the entire pile, so redemption should remove suspicion here as well.

Tosafot answers that מעשר is not identical to תרומה. A person might not have a coin immediately available when he wishes to eat. Alternatively, the tithed food might be worth less than a פרוטה (perutah, a coin of minimal value), and the owner refuses to spend an entire coin to redeem it.

וי"ל דלא דמי מעשר לתרומה דפעמים שאין לו פרוטה מזומנת לחלל עליה

And it can be answered that tithe is not comparable to teruma: for at times he does not have a perutah readily at hand to redeem upon it. (Tosafot on Bekhorot 30a:11:1)

Rabbinic suspicion hinges on exact terminology, reserves default trust for ordinary Jews, and accounts for practical financial hurdles in observing tithes.

Learn Bekhorot 30 on Super Daf