## Berakhot Daf 40b

###### Berakhot 40b:1
[Berakhot 40b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/40b:1)

אֲבָל הֵיכָא דְּכִי שָׁקְלַתְּ לֵיהּ לְפֵירֵי לֵיתֵיהּ לִגְווֹזָא דַּהֲדַר מַפֵּיק, לָא מְבָרְכִינַן עֲלֵיהּ ״בּוֹרֵא פְּרִי הָעֵץ״ אֶלָּא ״בּוֹרֵא פְּרִי הָאֲדָמָה״.

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
**However,** in a situation **where, when you take the fruit, the branch does not remain and again produce** fruit, **we do not recite the blessing: Who creates fruit of the tree, but rather: Who creates fruit of the ground.**


###### Berakhot 40b:2
[Berakhot 40b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/40b:2)

וְעַל כּוּלָּן אִם אָמַר ״שֶׁהַכֹּל״ וְכוּ׳. אִתְּמַר. רַב הוּנָא אָמַר: חוּץ מִן הַפַּת וּמִן הַיַּיִן. וְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: אֲפִילּוּ פַּת וְיַיִן.

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
We learned in the mishna: **And on all** food items, **if he recited:** By whose word **all things** came to be, he fulfilled his obligation. **It was stated** that the *amora’im* disputed the precise explanation of the mishna. **Rav Huna said:** This *halakha* applies to all foods **except for bread and wine.** Since they have special blessings, one does not fulfill his obligation by reciting the general blessing: By whose word all things came to be. **And Rabbi Yoḥanan said:** One fulfills his obligation with the blessing: By whose word all things came to be, **even** over **bread and wine.**


###### Berakhot 40b:3
[Berakhot 40b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/40b:3)

נֵימָא כְּתַנָּאֵי: רָאָה פַּת וְאָמַר: ״כַּמָּה נָאָה פַּת זוֹ, בָּרוּךְ הַמָּקוֹם שֶׁבְּרָאָהּ״ — יָצָא. רָאָה תְּאֵנָה וְאָמַר ״כַּמָּה נָאָה תְּאֵנָה זוֹ, בָּרוּךְ הַמָּקוֹם שֶׁבְּרָאָהּ״ — יָצָא, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר: כׇּל הַמְשַׁנֶּה מִמַּטְבֵּעַ שֶׁטָּבְעוּ חֲכָמִים בִּבְרָכוֹת — לֹא יָצָא יְדֵי חוֹבָתוֹ. נֵימָא רַב הוּנָא דְּאָמַר כְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי, וְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן דְּאָמַר כְּרַבִּי מֵאִיר?!

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
The Gemara remarks: **Let us say** that this dispute is **parallel to a tannaitic** dispute found elsewhere, as it was taught in a *Tosefta*: One who **saw bread and said: How pleasant is this bread, blessed is the Omnipresent Who created it, fulfilled** his obligation to recite a blessing. **One who saw a fig and said: How pleasant is this fig, blessed is the Omnipresent Who created it, fulfilled** his obligation. This is **the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yosei says: One who deviates from the formula coined by the Sages in blessings, did not fulfill his obligation.** If so, **let us say** that **Rav Huna,** who **said** that one who recites: By whose word all things came to be, over bread or wine, did not fulfill his obligation, holds **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yosei; and Rabbi Yoḥanan,** who **said** that one who recites: By whose word all things came to be, over bread or wine fulfills his obligation, holds **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Meir.**


###### Berakhot 40b:4
[Berakhot 40b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/40b:4)

אָמַר לָךְ רַב הוּנָא: אֲנָא דַּאֲמַרִי אֲפִילּוּ לְרַבִּי מֵאִיר, עַד כָּאן לָא קָאָמַר רַבִּי מֵאִיר הָתָם, אֶלָּא הֵיכָא דְּקָא מַדְכַּר שְׁמֵיהּ דְּפַת, אֲבָל הֵיכָא דְּלָא קָא מַדְכַּר שְׁמֵיהּ דְּפַת אֲפִילּוּ רַבִּי מֵאִיר מוֹדֶה.

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
The Gemara rejects this: **Rav Huna** could have **said to you: I said** my statement, **even** in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Meir,** as **Rabbi Meir only stated** his opinion, that one who alters the formula of the blessing fulfills his obligation, **there, where** the individual explicitly **mentions the term bread** in his blessing, **but where he does not mention** the **term bread, even Rabbi Meir agrees** that he did not fulfill his obligation.


###### Berakhot 40b:5
[Berakhot 40b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/40b:5)

וְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר לָךְ: אֲנָא דַּאֲמַרִי אֲפִילּוּ לְרַבִּי יוֹסֵי, עַד כָּאן לָא קָאָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי הָתָם אֶלָּא מִשּׁוּם דְּקָאָמַר בְּרָכָה דְּלָא תַּקִּינוּ רַבָּנַן, אֲבָל אָמַר ״שֶׁהַכֹּל נִהְיֶה בִּדְבָרוֹ״ דְּתַקִּינוּ רַבָּנַן, אֲפִילּוּ רַבִּי יוֹסֵי מוֹדֶה.

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
**And Rabbi Yoḥanan** could have **said to you: I said** my statement, **even** in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Yosei,** as **Rabbi Yosei only stated** his opinion, that one who alters the formula of the blessing does not fulfill his obligation, **there, because he recited a blessing that was not instituted by the Sages; however,** if **he recited: By whose word all things came to be, which was instituted by the Sages, even Rabbi Yosei agrees** that, after the fact, he fulfilled his obligation to recite a blessing.


###### Berakhot 40b:6
[Berakhot 40b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/40b:6)

בִּנְיָמִין רָעֲיָא כְּרַךְ רִיפְתָּא, וַאֲמַר: ״בְּרִיךְ מָרֵיהּ דְּהַאי פִּיתָּא״. אָמַר רַב: יָצָא. וְהָאָמַר רַב: כׇּל בְּרָכָה שֶׁאֵין בָּהּ הַזְכָּרַת הַשֵּׁם אֵינָהּ בְּרָכָה! דְּאָמַר: ״בְּרִיךְ רַחֲמָנָא מָרֵיהּ דְּהַאי פִּיתָּא״.

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
Regarding blessings that do not conform to the formula instituted by the Sages, the Gemara relates that **Binyamin the shepherd ate bread and** afterward **recited** in Aramaic: **Blessed is the Master of this bread. Rav said,** he thereby **fulfilled** his obligation to recite a blessing. The Gemara objects: **But didn’t Rav** himself **say: Any blessing that does not contain mention of God’s name is not** considered a **blessing?** The Gemara emends the formula of his blessing. **He said: Blessed is the All-Merciful, Master of this bread.**


###### Berakhot 40b:7
[Berakhot 40b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/40b:7)

וְהָא בָּעֵינַן שָׁלֹשׁ בְּרָכוֹת? מַאי ״יָצָא״ דְּקָאָמַר רַב — נָמֵי יָצָא יְדֵי בְּרָכָה רִאשׁוֹנָה.

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
The Gemara asks: **But don’t we require three blessings** in Grace after Meals? How did he fulfill his obligation with one sentence? The Gemara explains: **What is: Fulfills his obligation, that Rav also said? He fulfills** the obligation **of the first** of the three **blessings,** and must recite two more to fulfill his obligation completely.


###### Berakhot 40b:8
[Berakhot 40b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/40b:8)

מַאי קָמַשְׁמַע לַן? אַף עַל גַּב דַּאֲמָרָהּ בִּלְשׁוֹן חוֹל.

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
The Gemara asks: **What is he teaching us?** The Gemara answers: **Although he recited** the blessing **in a secular language,** other than Hebrew, he fulfilled his obligation.


###### Berakhot 40b:9
[Berakhot 40b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/40b:9)

תְּנֵינָא: וְאֵלּוּ נֶאֱמָרִים בְּכָל לְשׁוֹן: פָּרָשַׁת סוֹטָה, וִידּוּי מַעֲשֵׂר, קְרִיאַת שְׁמַע, וּתְפִלָּה, וּבִרְכַּת הַמָּזוֹן. אִצְטְרִיךְ: סָלְקָא דַעְתָּךְ אָמֵינָא, הָנֵי מִילֵּי דַּאֲמָרָהּ בִּלְשׁוֹן חוֹל כִּי הֵיכִי דְּתַקִּינוּ רַבָּנַן בִּלְשׁוֹן קֹדֶשׁ, אֲבָל לֹא אֲמָרָהּ בִּלְשׁוֹן חוֹל כִּי הֵיכִי דְּתַקִּינוּ רַבָּנַן בִּלְשׁוֹן קֹדֶשׁ, אֵימָא לָא. קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן.

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
This remains difficult, as **we** already **learned** this in a mishna in *Sota*: **And these are recited in any language** that one understands: **The portion of** the swearing of the ***sota*,** the **confession** of the **tithes** when a homeowner declares that he has given all *teruma* and tithes appropriately, **the recitation of *Shema*, and** the *Amida* **prayer and Grace after Meals.** If Grace after Meals is clearly on the list of matters that may be recited in any language, what did Rav teach us? The Gemara answers: Rav’s ruling with regard to Binyamin the Shepherd **is necessary, as it might have entered your mind to say: This,** the permission to recite Grace after Meals in any language, **applies only** to a case where one **recited it in a secular language, just as it was instituted by the Sages in the holy tongue. However,** in a case **where** one **did not recite** the blessing **in a secular language, just as it was instituted by the Sages in the holy tongue, say** that **no,** he did **not** fulfill his obligation. Therefore, Rav **teaches us** that, after the fact, not only is the language not an impediment to fulfillment of his obligation to recite a blessing, the formula is not an impediment either.


###### Berakhot 40b:10
[Berakhot 40b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/40b:10)

גּוּפָא. אָמַר רַב: כׇּל בְּרָכָה שֶׁאֵין בָּהּ הַזְכָּרַת הַשֵּׁם — אֵינָהּ בְּרָכָה. וְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: כׇּל בְּרָכָה שֶׁאֵין בָּהּ מַלְכוּת אֵינָהּ בְּרָכָה. אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: כְּווֹתֵיהּ דְּרַב מִסְתַּבְּרָא, דְּתַנְיָא: ״לֹא עָבַרְתִּי מִמִּצְוֹתֶיךָ וְלֹא שָׁכָחְתִּי״: לֹא עָבַרְתִּי — מִלְּבָרֶכְךָ, וְלֹא שָׁכָחְתִּי — מִלְּהַזְכִּיר שִׁמְךָ עָלָיו. וְאִילּוּ מַלְכוּת לָא קָתָנֵי.

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
The Gemara considers **the matter** of Rav’s opinion **itself** and cites the fundamental dispute in that regard. **Rav said: Any blessing that does not contain mention of God’s name is not** considered a **blessing. And Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Any blessing that does not contain mention of** God’s **sovereignty is not** considered a **blessing. Abaye said: It stands to reason in accordance with** the opinion of **Rav, as it was taught** in a *Tosefta*: In the confession of the tithes, one recites, **“I did not transgress your mitzvot and I did not forget”** (Deuteronomy 26:13). The meaning of phrase, **I did not transgress,** is that I did not refrain **from blessing You** when separating tithes; and the meaning of the phrase, **and I did not forget,** is that I did not forget **to mention Your name in** the blessing recited **over it. However, this** *baraita* **did not teach** that one must mention God’s **sovereignty** in the blessing.


###### Berakhot 40b:11
[Berakhot 40b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/40b:11)

וְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן תָּנֵי: ״וְלֹא שָׁכָחְתִּי״ — מִלְּהַזְכִּיר שִׁמְךָ וּמַלְכוּתְךָ עָלָיו.

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
**And Rabbi Yoḥanan** would say: **Emend** the *baraita*: **And I did not forget to mention Your name and Your sovereignty in** the blessing recited **over it;** indicating that one must mention both God’s name and God’s sovereignty.


###### Berakhot 40b:12
[Berakhot 40b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/40b:12)

**מַתְנִי׳** וְעַל דָּבָר שֶׁאֵין גִּדּוּלוֹ מִן הָאָרֶץ אוֹמֵר ״שֶׁהַכֹּל נִהְיֶה בִּדְבָרוֹ״. עַל הַחוֹמֶץ וְעַל הַנּוֹבְלוֹת וְעַל הַגּוֹבַאי, אוֹמֵר ״שֶׁהַכֹּל נִהְיֶה בִּדְבָרוֹ״. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: כֹּל שֶׁהוּא מִין קְלָלָה אֵין מְבָרְכִין עָלָיו.

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
**MISHNA:** **And over** a food **item whose growth is not from the ground, one recites: By whose word all things came to be.** And **over vinegar,** wine that fermented and spoiled, **and over *novelot*,** dates that spoiled, **and over locusts, one recites: By whose word all things came to be. Rabbi Yehuda says:** Over **any** food item **that is a type** resulting from a **curse, one does not recite a blessing over it** at all. None of the items listed exist under normal conditions, and they come about as the result of a curse.


###### Berakhot 40b:13
[Berakhot 40b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/40b:13)

הָיוּ לְפָנָיו מִינִין הַרְבֵּה, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: אִם יֵשׁ בֵּינֵיהֶן מִין שִׁבְעָה — עָלָיו הוּא מְבָרֵךְ. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: מְבָרֵךְ עַל אֵיזֶה מֵהֶן שֶׁיִּרְצֶה.

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
On a different note: If there were **many types** of food **before him,** over which food should he recite a blessing first? **Rabbi Yehuda says: If there is one of the seven species** for which Eretz Yisrael was praised **among them, he recites** the first **blessing over it. And the Rabbis say: He recites a blessing over whichever of them he wants.**


###### Berakhot 40b:14
[Berakhot 40b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/40b:14)

**גְּמָ׳** תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: עַל דָּבָר שֶׁאֵין גִּדּוּלוֹ מִן הָאָרֶץ, כְּגוֹן בְּשַׂר בְּהֵמוֹת חַיּוֹת וְעוֹפוֹת וְדָגִים אוֹמֵר ״שֶׁהַכֹּל נִהְיֶה בִּדְבָרוֹ״. עַל הֶחָלָב וְעַל הַבֵּיצִים וְעַל הַגְּבִינָה אוֹמֵר ״שֶׁהַכֹּל״. עַל הַפַּת שֶׁעִפְּשָׁה, וְעַל הַיַּיִן שֶׁהִקְרִים, וְעַל הַתַּבְשִׁיל שֶׁעִבֵּר צוּרָתוֹ אוֹמֵר ״שֶׁהַכֹּל״. עַל הַמֶּלַח וְעַל הַזָּמִית וְעַל כְּמֵהִין וּפִטְרִיּוֹת אוֹמֵר ״שֶׁהַכֹּל״. לְמֵימְרָא דִּכְמֵהִין וּפִטְרִיּוֹת לָאו גִּדּוּלֵי קַרְקַע נִינְהוּ? וְהָתַנְיָא הַנּוֹדֵר מִפֵּירוֹת הָאָרֶץ — אָסוּר בְּפֵירוֹת הָאָרֶץ, וּמוּתָּר בִּכְמֵהִין וּפִטְרִיּוֹת, וְאִם אָמַר ״כׇּל גִּדּוּלֵי קַרְקַע עָלַי״ — אָסוּר אַף בִּכְמֵהִין וּפִטְרִיּוֹת.

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
**GEMARA:** **The Sages taught: Over a** food **item whose growth is not from the earth, for example, meat from domesticated animals, non-domesticated animals, and fowl and fish, one recites: By whose word all things came to be.** So too, **over milk, and over eggs, and over cheese, one recites:** By whose word **all things** came to be. This is not only true with regard to items that come from animals, but **over moldy bread, and over wine that fermented slightly, and over a cooked dish that spoiled, one recites: By whose word all things came to be,** because the designated blessing is inappropriate for food that is partially spoiled. Similarly, **over salt and over brine, and over truffles and mushrooms, one recites: By whose word all things came to be.** The Gemara asks: **Is this to say** that **truffles and mushrooms are not** items **that grow from the ground? Wasn’t it taught** in a *baraita*: **One who vows** not to eat **from the fruit of the earth is forbidden** to eat all **fruit of the earth;** however, he **is permitted** to eat **truffles and mushrooms.** And **if he said: All** items **that grow from the ground** are forbidden **to me, he is forbidden** to eat **even truffles and mushrooms.** Apparently, truffles and mushrooms are items that grow from the ground.


###### Berakhot 40b:15
[Berakhot 40b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/40b:15)

אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: מִירְבָּא רָבוּ מֵאַרְעָא, מֵינָק לָא יָנְקִי מֵאַרְעָא.

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
**Abaye said:** With regard **to growth, they grow from the earth,** but with regard **to sustenance, they do not draw sustenance from the earth.**


###### Berakhot 40b:16
[Berakhot 40b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/40b:16)

וְהָא ״עַל דָּבָר שֶׁאֵין גִּדּוּלוֹ מִן הָאָרֶץ״ קָתָנֵי! תְּנִי: עַל דָּבָר שֶׁאֵין יוֹנֵק מִן הָאָרֶץ.

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
The Gemara asks: Why is that distinction significant? **Wasn’t it taught: Over** a food **item whose growth is not from the ground** one recites the blessing: By whose word all things came to be? Even according to Abaye, mushrooms grow from the ground. The Gemara answers: **Emend** the *baraita* to read: **Over** a food **item that does not draw sustenance from the ground,** one recites: By whose word all things came to be. Consequently, even over mushrooms one recites: By whose word all things came to be.


###### Berakhot 40b:17
[Berakhot 40b:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/40b:17)

וְעַל הַנּוֹבְלוֹת: מַאי נוֹבְלוֹת? רַבִּי זֵירָא וְרַבִּי אִילְעָא. חַד אָמַר: בּוּשְׁלֵי כַמְרָא. וְחַד אָמַר: תַּמְרֵי דְזִיקָא.

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
We learned in the mishna that **over *novelot*** one recites: By whose word all things came to be. The Gemara asks: **What** are ***novelot*?** The Gemara responds that the *amora’im* **Rabbi Zeira and Rabbi Il’a** disputed this. **One said** that the term refers to dates that, due to extreme conditions, were **burned by the heat** of the sun and ripened prematurely. **And one said** that they are **dates** that fell from the tree because **of the wind.**


###### Berakhot 40b:18
[Berakhot 40b:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/40b:18)

תְּנַן, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: כֹּל שֶׁהוּא מִין קְלָלָה אֵין מְבָרְכִין עָלָיו. בִּשְׁלָמָא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר בּוּשְׁלֵי כַמְרָא, הַיְינוּ דְּקָרֵי לֵיהּ ״מִין קְלָלָה״, אֶלָּא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר תַּמְרֵי דְזִיקָא — מַאי מִין קְלָלָה?

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
**We learned** later in the mishna that **Rabbi Yehuda says:** Over **any** food item **that is a type** resulting from a **curse, one does not recite a blessing over it** at all. **Granted, according to the one who said** that *novelot* are dates **burned by the heat** of the sun, **that is** the reason **that** he **considers them a type of curse; however, according to the one who said** that *novelot* are **dates that** fell because **of the wind, what** is the reason that it is considered a **type of curse?** Dates that fell from the tree are no worse than other dates.


###### Berakhot 40b:19
[Berakhot 40b:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/40b:19)

אַשְּׁאָרָא.

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
The Gemara reconciles: Rabbi Yehuda’s statement was **about the rest,** the vinegar and locusts, not about the *novelot*.


###### Berakhot 40b:20
[Berakhot 40b:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/40b:20)

אִיכָּא דְּאָמְרִי: בִּשְׁלָמָא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר בּוּשְׁלֵי כַמְרָא, הַיְינוּ דִּמְבָרְכִינַן עֲלַיְיהוּ ״שֶׁהַכֹּל״. אֶלָּא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר תַּמְרֵי דְזִיקָא, ״שֶׁהַכֹּל״?! ״בּוֹרֵא פְּרִי הָעֵץ״ מִבְּעֵי לֵיהּ לְבָרוֹכֵי!

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
**Some say** that the Gemara raised the question differently: **Granted, according to the one who said** that *novelot* are dates **burned by the heat** of the sun, **that is** the reason **that we recite over them: By whose word all things came to be,** as they are of inferior quality. **However, to the one who said** that *novelot* are **dates that** fell because **of the wind,** should we recite over them: By whose word all things came to be? **We should recite: Who creates fruit of the tree.**


###### Berakhot 40b:21
[Berakhot 40b:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/40b:21)

אֶלָּא, בְּנוֹבְלוֹת סְתָמָא כּוּלֵּי עָלְמָא לָא פְּלִיגִי דְּבוּשְׁלֵי כַמְרָא נִינְהוּ. כִּי פְּלִיגִי בְּנוֹבְלוֹת תְּמָרָה. דִּתְנַן: הַקַּלִּין שֶׁבַּדְּמַאי: הַשִּׁיתִין, וְהָרִימִּין, וְהָעוּזְרָדִין, בְּנוֹת שׁוּחַ, וּבְנוֹת שִׁקְמָה, וְגוּפְנִין, וְנִצְפָּה, וְנוֹבְלוֹת תְּמָרָה.

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
**Rather,** the conclusion is, **with regard to *novelot* unmodified, everyone agrees that they are** dates that were **burned by the heat** of the sun. **When they argue, it** is **with regard to** those dates known as ***novelot temara*, as we learned** in a mishna concerning the laws of doubtfully tithed produce [*demai*]: Although, under normal circumstances, fruits that come into one’s possession by means of an *am ha’aretz* must be tithed due to concern lest the *am ha’aretz* failed to do so, the following fruits of inferior quality are **lenient with regard to *demai*** and one need not tithe them: ***Shittin*, *rimin*, *uzradin*, *benot shuaḥ*, *benot shikma*, *gufnin*, *nitzpa*, and *novelot temara*.**


###### Berakhot 40b:22
[Berakhot 40b:22](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/40b:22)

שִׁיתִין, אָמַר רַבָּה בַּר בַּר חָנָה אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: מִין תְּאֵנִים. רִימִּין — כַּנְדֵי. הָעוּזְרָדִין — טוּלְשֵׁי. בְּנוֹת שׁוּחַ, אָמַר רַבָּה בַּר בַּר חָנָה אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: תְּאֵינֵי חִיוָּרָתָא. בְּנוֹת שִׁקְמָה, אָמַר רַבָּה בַּר בַּר חָנָה אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: דּוּבְלֵי. גּוּפְנִין — שִׁילְהֵי גּוּפְנֵי. נִצְפָּה — פִּרְחָה. נוֹבְלוֹת תְּמָרָה — רַבִּי אִילְעָא וְרַבִּי זֵירָא, חַד אָמַר: בּוּשְׁלֵי כַמְרָא, וְחַד אָמַר: תַּמְרֵי דְזִיקָא.

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
The Gemara identifies these plants. ***Shittin*, Rabba bar bar Ḥana said** that **Rabbi Yoḥanan said:** They are **a type** of **figs. *Rimin*** are **lote. *Uzradin*** are **crabapples. *Benot shuaḥ*, Rabba bar bar Ḥana said** that **Rabbi Yoḥanan said:** They are **white figs. *Benot shikma*, Rabba bar bar Ḥana said** that **Rabbi Yoḥanan said:** They are **the fruit of the sycamore tree. *Gufnin*** are **the last grapes** which remain on the tree at the end of the season. ***Nitzpa*** are the **fruit of the caper-bush. *Novelot temara*, Rabbi Il’a and Rabbi Zeira** disagreed. **One said** that they are dates **burned by the heat** of the sun, **and one said** that they are **dates** that fell because **of the wind.**


###### Berakhot 40b:23
[Berakhot 40b:23](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/40b:23)

בִּשְׁלָמָא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר בּוּשְׁלֵי כַמְרָא — הַיְינוּ דְּקָתָנֵי הַקַּלִּין שֶׁבַּדְּמַאי סְפֵיקָן הוּא דְּפָטוּר, הָא וַדָּאָן — חַיָּיב. אֶלָּא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר תַּמְרֵי דְזִיקָא — וַדָּאָן חַיָּיב?! הֶפְקֵרָא נִינְהוּ!

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
Here too, the Gemara asks: **Granted, according to the one who said** that *novelot temara* are dates **burned by the heat** of the sun, **that is** the reason **that it was taught** concerning them: Their *halakhot* are **lenient with regard to *demai*,** meaning that it is **those** with regard to which there is **uncertainty** whether or not they were tithed **that are exempt** from being tithed. **Those** with regard to which there is **certainty** that they were not tithed, **one is obligated** to tithe those dates. **However, according to the one who said** that *novelot temara* are **dates** felled because **of the wind,** this is difficult: **Those** regarding which there is **certainty** that they were not tithed, **one is obligated? They are ownerless,** and ownerless produce is exempt from the requirement to tithe.


###### Berakhot 40b:24
[Berakhot 40b:24](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/40b:24)

הָכָא בְּמַאי עָסְקִינַן — שֶׁעֲשָׂאָן גּוֹרֶן. דְּאָמַר רַבִּי יִצְחָק אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב: הַלֶּקֶט וְהַשִּׁכְחָה וְהַפֵּאָה שֶׁעֲשָׂאָן גּוֹרֶן — הוּקְבְּעוּ לְמַעֲשֵׂר.

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
The Gemara responds: **With what are we dealing here?** With a case where he gathered the dates that fell because of the wind and **made them** into a pile, like **a pile of threshed grain,** signifying that the produce is a finished product. **As Rabbi Yitzḥak said** that **Rabbi Yoḥanan said in the name of Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov:** Even gifts to the poor such as **gleanings, forgotten sheaves, and** produce of the **corners,** which are normally exempt from tithes, if a poor person gathered them and **made them into a pile of threshed grain,** by rabbinic law **they were rendered** obligated in **tithes.** In that case, only *demai* would be exempt from tithes.


###### Berakhot 40b:25
[Berakhot 40b:25](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/40b:25)

אִיכָּא דְּאָמְרִי:

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
**Some say** that the discussion was as follows: