Pe'ah 010

1:
This mishnah may be quickly explained. It seeks to set a rule as to which produce is liable to Pe'ah (and the other agricultural donations to the indigent) and which is not. Only produce that would normally be eaten by human beings is liable to Pe'ah. Only produce that belongs to someone is liable to Pe'ah. (This is the meaning of 'guarded'.) To be liable for Pe'ah the produce must grow from the ground – unlike mushrooms, for example. To be liable for Pe'ah the produce must be subject to a harvest, not like some fruit which is picked at random. The requirement that the produce be storable would exclude certain types of produce, such as some vegetables, which could not be put in storage for long periods of time.

2:
Legumes must not be understood in the strictly botanical sense, but the term serves to describe certain vegetables – mainly pulses.

Here are some more of your comments and queries.

In Pe'ah 006 I wrote:

These people are the priests, the Levites and the poverty-stricken. The priests (any priest of the farmer's choice) are entitled to one tenth of the crop; the Levites (again, any Levite of the lessee's choice) is entitled to another tenth (from which he, in turn, must make over one-tenth of his tenth to the priest of his choice). Twice in every seven-year cycle yet another tenth is to be made over to the poor.

Sherry Fyman writes:

I've never understood exactly how this works. Was there any system of equally distributing priests and Levites throughout the population centers or did those groups live where ever they liked? One what basis would a farmer select a priest/levite to favor with his tenth? what happened to the unpopular priests/levites? Did the priests/levites have any responsibility to their local communities in return? They didn't have to teach or anything, did they? (In this regard, I'm thinking of this obligation to give 10% to the priests as analogous to giving to yeshivot today. Does our obligation to give 10% to tzeddakah devolve from this mishna?) It seems unfair if not down-right wrong to distribute 10% every year to the priests and levites while giving to the poor only twice every seven years. Also, does "poor" include widows, strangers and orphans? What did they do the other 5 years in each 7-year cycle? I don't mean to be polemical, but do you think this priority (priests get 10% off the top every year) is a bit self-serving? I'm not quite sure which "widely-held hypothesis concerning the development of the Written Torah" you refer to but if the priests had a role in the development, this priority of giving seems a little fishy.

I think I had better do my best to answer Sherry's questions seriatim, and I shall do so a briefly as I possibly can.

1. Was there any system of equally distributing priests and Levites throughout the population centers or did those groups live where ever they liked?

   The latter.

2. One what basis would a farmer select a priest/levite to favor with his tenth?

   Unless he (or she – women could also be landowners) had needy relatives, friends or neighbours I think the farmer would have given his tithe to the first priest who presented himself. (There are in our sources indications that some priests and levites did the rounds of the farms and smallholdings at the appropriate times.)

3. What happened to the unpopular priests/levites?

   I guess they would go and seek their tithe in a place where they were not known.

4. Did the priests/levites have any responsibility to their local communities in return?

   When the Bet Mikdash was still standing and functioning the priests has the duty to serve there on a rota system. We covered this when we studied Tractate Tamid, which is available in our web archives. (Use this link.)

5. They didn't have to teach or anything, did they?

   They did originally serve as teachers and judges. See Ezekiel 44:23-24; Malachi 2:7; Deuteronomy 33:8-10 etc.

6. Does our obligation to give 10% to tzeddakah devolve from this mishna?

   No. The obligation to give Tzedakah is a mitzvah in the Torah: Deuteronomy 15:7-8. I do not think that the analogy with supporting yeshivot is a good one.

7. Also, does "poor" include widows, strangers and orphans?

   Most certainly! They would probably have been the backbone of this category.

8. What did they do the other 5 years in each 7-year cycle?

   This is the subject of our present tractate! There was Pe'ah, Leket, Shikheĥah etc, and there was the communal Tzedakah both in cash and in "take-away" food.

9. Do you think this priority (priests get 10% off the top every year) is a bit self-serving?

   Not really. Originally the priests and levites had no family holding upon which to sustain themselves as most people did. Their task was to dedicate themselves to the Bet Mikdash. See, for instance, Deuteronomy 12:12, 14:27, 14:29, Numbers 18:23-24 etc. Obviously, towards the latter end of the Temple period this may have been subject to some abuse, but there does not seem to be any real complaint preserved.

10. I'm not quite sure which "widely-held hypothesis concerning the development of the Written Torah" you refer to

    I was referring to the so-called documentary hypothesis. While it is true that one strand was certainly of priestly origin, the three other strands were not necessarily so.

More of your queries and comments next time.