## Bava Metzia Daf 90a

###### Bava Metzia 90a:1
[Bava Metzia 90a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/90a:1)

וְהַדָּשׁוֹת בִּתְרוּמָה וּמַעֲשֵׂר, אֵינוֹ עוֹבֵר מִשּׁוּם ״בַּל תַּחְסוֹם״, אֲבָל מִפְּנֵי מַרְאִית הָעַיִן – מֵבִיא בּוּל מֵאוֹתוֹ הַמִּין וְתוֹלֶה לָהּ בַּטְּרַסְקָלִין שֶׁבְּפִיהָ. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחַאי אוֹמֵר: מֵבִיא כַּרְשִׁינִים וְתוֹלֶה לָהּ, שֶׁהַכַּרְשִׁינִים יָפוֹת לָהּ מִן הַכֹּל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**or that thresh *teruma* and tithe,** which one may not allow his cows to eat, if he muzzles them **he does not violate** the prohibition of: **Do not muzzle, but due to the appearance of** prohibition, as observers are unaware that he is acting in a permitted manner, he should **bring a piece of that species** of produce **and hang it in the basket [*bateraskalin*] that is by** the animal’s **mouth. Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai says:** He does not have to use the same food that the animal is threshing, as he **may bring vetches and hang** them for **it, as vetches are better for it than anything.**


###### Bava Metzia 90a:2
[Bava Metzia 90a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/90a:2)

וּרְמִינְהִי: פָּרוֹת הַמְרַכְּסוֹת בִּתְבוּאָה – אֵינוֹ עוֹבֵר מִשּׁוּם ״בַּל תַּחְסוֹם״. וְהַדָּשׁוֹת בִּתְרוּמָה וּמַעֲשֵׂר – עוֹבֵר מִשּׁוּם ״בַּל תַּחְסוֹם״. וְנׇכְרִי הַדָּשׁ בְּפָרָתוֹ שֶׁל יִשְׂרָאֵל – אֵינוֹ עוֹבֵר מִשּׁוּם ״בַּל תַּחְסוֹם״. וְיִשְׂרָאֵל הַדָּשׁ בְּפָרָתוֹ שֶׁל נׇכְרִי – עוֹבֵר מִשּׁוּם ״בַּל תַּחְסוֹם״. קַשְׁיָא תְּרוּמָה אַתְּרוּמָה, קַשְׁיָא מַעֲשֵׂר אַמַּעֲשֵׂר!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** the Gemara **raises a contradiction** against this from a *baraita*: In the case of **cows that tread on produce, one does not violate** the prohibition of: **Do not muzzle, but** with regard to **those which thresh *teruma* and tithes, he does violate** the prohibition of: **Do not muzzle. And** in the case of **a gentile who threshes with the cow of a Jew, he does not violate** the prohibition of: **Do not muzzle, but a Jew who threshes with the cow of a gentile does violate** the prohibition of: **Do not muzzle,** as it depends on the person who performs the action, not the identity of the animal’s owner. This presents **a difficulty** with regard to the ruling concerning ***teruma*** in one *baraita* **and** the ruling concerning ***teruma*** in the other *baraita*, and there is similarly **a difficulty** with regard to the ruling concerning **tithe** in one *baraita* **and** the ruling concerning **tithe** in the other *baraita*.


###### Bava Metzia 90a:3
[Bava Metzia 90a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/90a:3)

בִּשְׁלָמָא תְּרוּמָה אַתְּרוּמָה לָא קַשְׁיָא – כָּאן בִּתְרוּמָה, כָּאן בְּגִידּוּלֵי תְרוּמָה. אֶלָּא מַעֲשֵׂר אַמַּעֲשֵׂר קַשְׁיָא!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara comments: **Granted,** the contradiction between the ruling concerning ***teruma*** in one *baraita* **and** the ruling concerning ***teruma*** in the other *baraita* is **not difficult,** as **here,** the ruling in this *baraita* is stated **with regard to** actual ***teruma*,** which may not be fed to a cow, and **there,** the ruling in that *baraita* is stated **with regard to growths of *teruma*,** which have the status of *teruma* by rabbinic law, and therefore it is permitted to feed them to one’s animal so as not to violate the prohibition against muzzling. **But** as for the contradiction between the ruling concerning **tithe** in one *baraita* **and** the ruling concerning **tithe** in the other *baraita*, this is **difficult.**


###### Bava Metzia 90a:4
[Bava Metzia 90a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/90a:4)

וְכִי תֵּימָא מַעֲשֵׂר אַמַּעֲשֵׂר נָמֵי לָא קַשְׁיָא: כָּאן – בְּמַעֲשֵׂר, כָּאן – בְּגִידּוּלֵי מַעֲשֵׂר. בִּשְׁלָמָא גִּידּוּלֵי תְרוּמָה – תְּרוּמָה! אֶלָּא גִּידּוּלֵי מַעֲשֵׂר – חוּלִּין נִינְהוּ. דִּתְנַן: גִּידּוּלֵי טֶבֶל וְגִידּוּלֵי מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי – חוּלִּין!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if you would say** that the contradiction between the ruling concerning **tithe** in one *baraita* **and** the ruling concerning **tithe** in the other *baraita* is **also not difficult,** as **here,** the ruling in this *baraita* is stated **with regard to** actual **tithe,** which may not be fed to a cow, and **there,** the ruling in that *baraita* is stated **with regard to growths of tithe,** which have the status of tithe by rabbinic law, and therefore it is permitted to feed them to one’s animal in order not to violate the prohibition against muzzling, this answer cannot be accepted. The reason is that **granted,** the **growths of *teruma*** are considered like ***teruma*** by rabbinic law, **but** the **growths of tithe are non-sacred** foods. **As we learned** in a mishna (*Terumot* 9:4): The **growths of untithed produce and** the **growths of second tithe** are **non-sacred.**


###### Bava Metzia 90a:5
[Bava Metzia 90a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/90a:5)

אֶלָּא לָא קַשְׁיָא: הָא בְּמַעֲשֵׂר רִאשׁוֹן, הָא בְּמַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי. וְאִיבָּעֵית אֵימָא: הָא וְהָא בְּמַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי, וְלָא קַשְׁיָא: הָא רַבִּי מֵאִיר, הָא רַבִּי יְהוּדָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests a different answer: **Rather,** this is **not difficult.** The ruling of **this** *baraita* is stated **with regard to first tithe,** which is considered the owner’s property, whereas the ruling of **that** *baraita* is stated **with regard to second tithe,** which is property of the Temple treasury. **And if you wish, say** that both **this** ruling **and that** ruling are stated **with regard to second tithe, and** it is **not difficult,** as the ruling of **this** *baraita*, according to which it is prohibited to feed it to the animal, is in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Meir,** while the ruling of **that** *baraita*, which says that one may feed it to the animal, is in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Yehuda.**


###### Bava Metzia 90a:6
[Bava Metzia 90a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/90a:6)

הָא רַבִּי מֵאִיר, דְּאָמַר: מַעֲשֵׂר מָמוֹן גָּבוֹהַּ הוּא, הָא רַבִּי יְהוּדָה דְּאָמַר: מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי מָמוֹן הֶדְיוֹט הוּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara elaborates: **This** *baraita* is in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Meir, who says that** second **tithe is property** belonging to the **Most High,** i.e., the owner has only the right to eat the food, and therefore he may not let his cow consume it, whereas **that** *baraita* is in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Yehuda, who says that second tithe is non-sacred property.**


###### Bava Metzia 90a:7
[Bava Metzia 90a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/90a:7)

הֵיכִי דָּמֵי? כְּגוֹן שֶׁהִקְדִּימוֹ בְּשִׁבֳּלִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **What are the circumstances** of a cow that threshes tithes? Tithes are usually separated only after the produce has been threshed and collected into a pile. The Gemara answers: This is referring to a case **where** the separation of tithes performed by the owner **preceded** the separation of *teruma* at the stage **when** the produce was still **on the stalks.**


###### Bava Metzia 90a:8
[Bava Metzia 90a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/90a:8)

וּלְרַבִּי יְהוּדָה? וְהָא בָּעֵי חוֹמָה! כְּגוֹן שֶׁדָּשׁ לִפְנִים מֵחוֹמַת בֵּית פָּאגֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara further asks: **And according to** the explanation that the *baraita* that permits feeding this produce to one’s animal is in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Yehuda,** i.e., that this is referring to second tithe, how is the consumption of this tithe permitted before it enters Jerusalem? **But** one is **required** to bring second tithe within the city **wall.** The Gemara answers: This is referring to a case **where he threshed inside the wall of Beit Pagei,** the outer wall of Jerusalem, which enclosed a semi-rural suburb.


###### Bava Metzia 90a:9
[Bava Metzia 90a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/90a:9)

אִיבָּעֵית אֵימָא: לָא קַשְׁיָא. כָּאן – בְּמַעֲשֵׂר וַדַּאי, כָּאן – בְּמַעֲשֵׂר דְּמַאי. הַשְׁתָּא דְּאָתֵית לְהָכִי, תְּרוּמָה אַתְּרוּמָה נָמֵי לָא קַשְׁיָא: כָּאן – בִּתְרוּמַת וַדַּאי, כָּאן – בִּתְרוּמַת דְּמַאי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**If you wish, say** a different answer to the original contradiction between the *baraitot*: This is **not difficult; here,** the ruling in this *baraita* is stated **with regard to definite tithe,** which may not be fed to a cow, whereas **there,** the ruling in that *baraita* is stated **with regard to doubtfully tithed produce [*demai*],** from which one is required to separate tithes by rabbinic law. The Gemara comments: **Now that you have arrived at this** answer, i.e., that this *baraita* is referring to *demai*, the contradiction between the ruling of this *baraita* concerning ***teruma* and** the ruling of that *baraita* concerning ***teruma*** is **also not difficult,** as one can likewise say that **here,** the ruling in this *baraita* is stated **with regard to definite *teruma*,** and **there,** the ruling in that *baraita* is stated **with regard to *teruma* of *demai*.**


###### Bava Metzia 90a:10
[Bava Metzia 90a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/90a:10)

בִּשְׁלָמָא מַעֲשֵׂר דְּמַאי אִיכָּא, אֶלָּא תְּרוּמַת דְּמַאי מִי אִיכָּא? וְהָתַנְיָא: אַף הוּא בִּיטֵּל אֶת הַוִּידּוּי וְגָזַר עַל הַדְּמַאי – לְפִי שֶׁשָּׁלַח בְּכֹל גְּבוּל יִשְׂרָאֵל וְרָאָה שֶׁלֹּא הָיוּ מַפְרִישִׁין אֶלָּא תְּרוּמָה גְּדוֹלָה בִּלְבָד!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **Granted,** with regard to ***demai* of tithe, there is** such a concept, as the Sages decreed that one must separate tithe from doubtfully tithed produce. **But** with regard to ***demai* of *teruma*, is there** *teruma* of this kind? **But isn’t it taught** in a *baraita*: **He,** Yoḥanan the High Priest, **also annulled the declaration** of tithes (Deuteronomy 26:12–19), due to fear that the agricultural *halakhot* were not being properly observed and the declaration that one has separated his tithe in accordance with Torah law would therefore be false, **and he decreed that** one must separate ***demai*** of tithe from the produce of one who is unreliable with regard to tithes. He issued this decree **because he sent** messengers **throughout all the borders of Eretz Yisrael and saw that they would separate only the great *teruma* alone,** not tithes. It is clear from here that Jews were not suspected of neglecting the mitzva of *teruma*, and therefore was no need to separate *teruma* from *demai*.


###### Bava Metzia 90a:11
[Bava Metzia 90a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/90a:11)

אֶלָּא לָא קַשְׁיָא: כָּאן – בִּתְרוּמַת מַעֲשֵׂר וַדַּאי, כָּאן – בִּתְרוּמַת מַעֲשֵׂר דְּמַאי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather,** the Gemara offers a slightly different answer: It is **not difficult; here,** the ruling in this *baraita* is stated **with regard to definite *teruma* of the tithe,** separated by a Levite from his tithe and given to a priest; **there,** the ruling in that *baraita* is stated **with regard to *teruma* of the tithe from *demai*.**


###### Bava Metzia 90a:12
[Bava Metzia 90a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/90a:12)

בְּעוֹ מִינֵּיהּ מֵרַב שֵׁשֶׁת: הָיְתָה אוֹכֶלֶת וּמַתְרֶזֶת, מַהוּ? מִשּׁוּם דִּמְעַלֵּי לַהּ הוּא, וְהָא לָא מְעַלֵּי לַהּ? אוֹ דִלְמָא דְּחָזְיָא וּמִצְטַעֲרָא, וְהָא חָזְיָא וּמִצְטַעֲרָא?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The Sages **raised a dilemma before Rav Sheshet:** If the animal **was eating** from the produce it was threshing, **and** it **was excreting diarrhea [*matrezet*], what is** the *halakha*? The Gemara explains the sides of the dilemma: Is the reason that one must let the animal eat **because** the food **is good for it, and this** produce **is** evidently **not good for it,** and therefore the animal should be muzzled to prevent it from harm? **Or perhaps** the reason for the prohibition against muzzling is **that it sees** food **and suffers** when it cannot eat, **and this one** also **sees** food **and suffers** when it cannot eat.


###### Bava Metzia 90a:13
[Bava Metzia 90a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/90a:13)

אֲמַר לְהוּ רַב שֵׁשֶׁת: תְּנֵיתוּהָ, רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחַי אוֹמֵר: מֵבִיא כַּרְשִׁינִים וְתוֹלֶה לָהּ, שֶׁהַכַּרְשִׁינִים יָפוֹת לָהּ מִן הַכֹּל. שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ מִשּׁוּם דִּמְעַלֵּי לַהּ הוּא. שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Sheshet said to them: You learned** a *baraita* that provides the answer to your question. **Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai says:** One can **bring vetches and hang** them for **it, as vetches are better for it than anything.** One can **learn from** the *baraita* that the reason is **because** the food **is good for it.** The Gemara affirms: **Learn from** the *baraita* that it is so.


###### Bava Metzia 90a:14
[Bava Metzia 90a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/90a:14)

אִיבַּעְיָא לְהוּ: מַהוּ שֶׁיֹּאמַר אָדָם לְנׇכְרִי ״חֲסוֹם פָּרָתִי וְדוּשׁ בָּהּ״? מִי אָמְרִינַן: כִּי אָמְרִינַן אֲמִירָה לְנׇכְרִי שְׁבוּת, הָנֵי מִילֵּי לְעִנְיַן שַׁבָּת – דְּאִיסּוּר סְקִילָה, אֲבָל חֲסִימָה, דְּאִיסּוּר לָאו – לָא, אוֹ דִלְמָא לָא שְׁנָא?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **A dilemma was raised before** the Sages: **What is** the *halakha* with regard to the possibility **that a person can say to a gentile: Muzzle my cow and thresh with it? Do we say** that **when we state** the principle that **speaking to a gentile** and requesting of him to perform for oneself a task forbidden to a Jew is prohibited by **a rabbinic decree, this matter** applies **only to Shabbat, when** the performance of labor is **a prohibition** that entails **stoning, but** with regard to **muzzling, which** is merely a regular **prohibition,** giving an instruction of this kind to a gentile is **not** prohibited; **or perhaps** there **is no difference** between the prohibitions of Shabbat and other prohibitions in this regard?


###### Bava Metzia 90a:15
[Bava Metzia 90a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/90a:15)

תָּא שְׁמַע: נׇכְרִי הַדָּשׁ בְּפָרָתוֹ שֶׁל יִשְׂרָאֵל – אֵינוֹ עוֹבֵר מִשּׁוּם ״בַּל תַּחְסוֹם״. מִעְבָּר הוּא דְּלָא עָבַר, הָא אִיסּוּרָא אִיכָּא. בְּדִין הוּא דְּאִיסּוּרָא נָמֵי לֵיכָּא, וְאַיְּידֵי דִּתְנָא סֵיפָא דְּיִשְׂרָאֵל הַדָּשׁ בְּפָרָתוֹ שֶׁל נׇכְרִי עוֹבֵר, תְּנָא רֵישָׁא: אֵינוֹ עוֹבֵר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests: **Come** and **hear** a proof from the aforementioned *baraita*. **A gentile who threshes with the cow of a Jew does not violate** the prohibition of: **Do not muzzle.** One can infer as follows: **It is a transgression** by Torah law **that he does not transgress, but there is a prohibition** here by rabbinic law. The Gemara refutes this argument: This is no proof, as **by right** the *baraita* should have stated **that there is no prohibition** here **either, but since** the *tanna* of the *baraita* **taught** in **the latter clause that a Jew who threshes with the cow of a gentile does violate** the prohibition, **he taught the first clause** in a similar style, with the phrase: **He does not violate** the prohibition. If so, one cannot reach any conclusions from the wording of the *baraita*.


###### Bava Metzia 90a:16
[Bava Metzia 90a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/90a:16)

תָּא שְׁמַע דִּשְׁלַחוּ לֵיהּ לַאֲבוּהּ דִּשְׁמוּאֵל: הָלֵין תּוֹרֵי

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests: **Come** and **hear, as they sent to Shmuel’s father** a halakhic inquiry with regard to **these oxen**