## Tosefta Peah Chapter 3

###### Tosefta Peah 3:1
[Tosefta Peah 3:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tosefta%20Peah/r/3:1)

[המקבל שדה לקצור לא ילקט בנו אחריו ר' יוסי אומר] ילקט בנו אחריו האריסין והחכירות והמוכר קמתו לקצור [מלקט בנו אחריו] היו שם עניים שאין ראוין אם יכול בעל הבית למחות בידם ממחה ואם לאו מניחן מפני דרכי שלום.

**The Tosefta Blog:**
[If a poor worker] received [a one time job] to harvest a field, [then] his son cannot glean [the gifts to the poor right] after him [before other poor people will have a chance to glean that field]. Rebbi Yossi says, “His son may glean after him.” But sharecroppers, and [regular] tenants, and a person who sells his standing crops to his friend in order [that his friend should] harvest them, [in all of these cases] his (i.e. the sharecropper’s, or tenant’s, or friend’s) son can glean [the gifts to the poor right] after him [before other poor people will have a chance to glean that field]. If there were [in the field] poor people who are not fitting [to be allowed] to glean [the gifts to the poor, then] if the owner of the field can prevent them [from gleaning], he is allowed to do so, but if [he is] not [able to prevent them from gleaning, then] he should leave them alone [and let them glean anyway] because of peaceful relations [between people].


###### Tosefta Peah 3:2
[Tosefta Peah 3:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tosefta%20Peah/r/3:2)

אין שוכרין פועלי נכרים לפי שאינן בקיאין בלקט.

**The Tosefta Blog:**
We do not hire Non-Jewish workers [to harvest the fields], because they are not well versed in [leaving] Leket (fallen stalks), [Shikcha (forgotten sheaves), and Peah (corners of the field)].


###### Tosefta Peah 3:3
[Tosefta Peah 3:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tosefta%20Peah/r/3:3)

אין נותנין מעשר עני לעניי נכרים אבל נותנין להן חולין מתוקנין לשם טובה.

**The Tosefta Blog:**
We do not give Maaser Ani (Tithe of the Poor) to Non-Jewish poor people, but we do give them Chulin (ordinary) [food], which has been tithed [instead of the Maaser Ani] as a nice gesture.


###### Tosefta Peah 3:4
[Tosefta Peah 3:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tosefta%20Peah/r/3:4)

בעל הבית שהיה עומד בעיר ואמר יודע אני שהפועלין שוכחים את העומר [במקום פלוני] ושכחוהו הרי זו שכחה היה עומד בשדה ואמר יודע אני שהפועלים שוכחים את העומר ושכחוהו אין זה שכחה רבי שמעון בן יהודה אומר משום רבי שמעון אפילו אחרים עוברין בדרך וראו [את] העומר ששכחוהו פועלין אינו שכחה עד שישכחוהו כל אדם.

**The Tosefta Blog:**
[If] the owner [of the field] was standing in the city and he said, “I know that [my] workers are forgetting a sheaf in such and such a place [in the field],” and they (i.e. workers) [really] forgot it [there, then] it is not [considered to be] Shikcha (forgotten sheaves), [because the owner still knows about it and did not forget it]. Rebbi Shimon Ben Yehuda says in the name of Rebbi Shimon, “Even if other people were passing by on the road [next to the field] and they saw the sheaf that they (i.e. workers) have forgotten, it is not [considered to be] Shikcha until it gets forgotten by all people, [including the passersby.]”


###### Tosefta Peah 3:5
[Tosefta Peah 3:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tosefta%20Peah/r/3:5)

רבי יהודה אומר העושה כל שדהו עומרין [ומעמר] בהן [כמעמר] לגדיש לחררה [לגדיש] מודים ב"ש ובית הלל שאם הפקיר לאדם ולא לבהמה לישראל ולא לנכרים שזה הפקר.

**The Tosefta Blog:**
Rebbi Yehuda says, “A person who made his whole field into sheaves [in order to later] stook them [into stooks, which in turn will be taken to the final stack] is [considered to be] like someone who bundles [sheaves] in [order to put them in a] stack [of sheaves, which makes the sheaves inside the stooks eligible to become Shikcha (forgotten sheaves),] and [then] rounded it (i.e. the stack) out [as if he has completed the stack] and [then brought more sheaves and] pressed [them] into the stack [after the stack seemed to be already finished, which is still considered to be the final act of bundling, which makes these sheaves eligible to become Shikcha].” Bet Shammai and Bet Hillel agree that if [a person] proclaimed [his produce to be] ownerless [only] to people, but not to animals, [or only] to Jews, but not to Non-Jews, [it is still considered to be] ownerless [and anyone can come and take it].


###### Tosefta Peah 3:6
[Tosefta Peah 3:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tosefta%20Peah/r/3:6)

אמר ר' אליעזר שאלתי את ר' יהושע על אלו עומרים נחלקו בית שמאי וב"ה אמר לי התורה הזאת על אלו העומר הסמוך לגפה ולגדיש לבקר ולכלים ושכחו וכשבאתי שאלתי את ר' אליעזר ואמר לי מודים באלו [שאין] שכחה ועל מה נחלקו על העומר שהחזיקו בו להוליכו לעיר ונתנו בצד גפה או בצד גדר שב"ש אומרים אינה שכחה מפני שזכה בו וב"ה אומרים שכחה וכשבאתי והרציתי הדברים לפני ר' אלעזר בן עזריה אמר לי אלו הדברים שנאמרו למשה מסיני.

**The Tosefta Blog:**
Rebbi Ilai said, “I asked Rebbi Yehoshua, ‘Regarding which sheaves Bet Shammai and Bet Hillel argue [whether they are considered to be Shikcha (forgotten sheaves) or not]?’ He said to me, ‘[I swear] by this Torah [that they argue]’ regarding a sheaf [that is left in the field] next to a hedge, or [next to] a stack, [or next to] cattle [used for plowing], or [next to plowing] tools, and it was forgotten [there by the farmer].’ And when I came and asked Rebbi Eliezer, he said to me, ‘They agree by all of these [cases that Rebbi Yehoshua mentioned] that it is not [considered to be] Shikcha. [So] what [case] do they argue about? Regarding a sheaf that [the farmer] took [with him] to bring to the city and put it on the side of a stone fence or on the side of a hedge [in order to take a break], and forgot it [there], that Bet Shammai say that it is not [considered to be] Shikcha, because he [already] acquired it [for himself], and Bet Hillel say [that it is considered to be] Shikcha.’ And when I came and proclaimed [these] words [of Rebbi Eliezer] in front of Rebbi Elazar Ben Azaryah he said to me, ‘[I swear] by the Torah, these are the words that were spoken to Moshe on Sinai.’”


###### Tosefta Peah 3:7
[Tosefta Peah 3:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tosefta%20Peah/r/3:7)

העומר [שהחזיק בו] להוליכו לעיר ונתנו על גבי חבירו ושכח [שניהם התחתון שכחה והעליון אינו שכחה ר' שמעון אומר] שניהם אין שכחה התחתון מפני שמכוסה והעליון מפני שזכה בו.

**The Tosefta Blog:**
[If a farmer] took a sheaf in order to take it to the city, and [then] he put [this sheaf] down [on the ground] on top of his friend (i.e. another sheaf) [while still in the field] and [then] he forgot both of them [in the field where he put them down], then the bottom [sheaf] is [considered to be] Shikcha (forgotten sheaf), and the top [sheaf] is not [considered to be] Shikcha. Rebbi Shimon says, “Both of them are not [considered to be] Shikcha. The bottom [sheaf is not considered to be Shikcha], because it is covered [by the top sheaf], and the top [sheaf is not considered to be Shikcha], because [the farmer] acquired it [for himself].”


###### Tosefta Peah 3:8
[Tosefta Peah 3:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tosefta%20Peah/r/3:8)

שדה שעומריה מעורבבין ועמר ושכח אחד מהם אין שכחה עד שיעמר [את] כל [סביביו].

**The Tosefta Blog:**
[If a farmer] stooked [some] sheaves in a field in which sheaves have been [laid out in a] mixed [fashion], and forgot one [of the sheaves, then this sheaf] is not [considered to be] Shikcha (forgotten sheaves), until he stooks all of the [other sheaves] around it.


###### Tosefta Peah 3:9
[Tosefta Peah 3:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tosefta%20Peah/r/3:9)

העומר שכנגדו מוכיח כיצד מי שהיו לו עשר שורות של עשרה עשרה עמרים ועמר אחד מהם לצפון ולדרום ושכח אין שכחה מפני שנידון כמזרח וכמערב.

**The Tosefta Blog:**
What is [the case mentioned in the Mishna titled as] “a sheaf that is in front of it proves [that it is not considered to be Shikcha”]? Someone who had 10 rows [of sheaves with] 10 sheaves in each row, and he stooked one of [the rows in the direction] from North to South, and [then] forgot [the last sheaf in that row.] It is not [considered to be] Shikcha (forgotten sheaf), because [that sheaf] can be counted [as a part of the last row that goes] from East to West.


###### Tosefta Peah 3:10
[Tosefta Peah 3:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tosefta%20Peah/r/3:10)

שתי כריכות המובדלות זו מזו שכחה שלש אין שכחה [שני עמרין המובדלין זה מזה שכחה שלשה אין שכחה] שתי גפנים המובדלות זו מזו שכחה שלש אין שכחה שני גרגרין פרט שלשה אינן פרט שתי שבלים המובדלות כדרכן לקט שלש אינן לקט אלו דברי בית הלל [ר' יוסי אומר חנינא בן אחי רבי יהושע אומר כל שבאת רשות עני לאמצע כגון התבואה והכרם אין מצטרפין וכל שלא באת רשות עני לאמצע כגון פירות האילן הרי אלו מצטרפין].

**The Tosefta Blog:**
Two gavels separated from one another are [considered to be] Shikcha (forgotten sheaves), [but] three [gavels] are not [considered to be] Shikcha. Two sheaves separated from one another are [considered to be] Shikcha (forgotten sheaves), [but] three [sheaves] are not [considered to be] Shikcha. Two grapevines separated from one another (i.e. from separate tree trunks) are [considered to be] Shikcha (forgotten sheaves), [but] three [grapevines] are not [considered to be] Shikcha. Two [grape] berries [lying next to each other on the ground] are [considered to be] Peret (individual fallen grapes), [but] three [grape berries lying next to each other on the ground] are not [considered to be] Peret. Two stalks [of grain] separated from one another in the usual fashion are [considered to be] Leket (fallen stalks), [but] three [stalks of grain] are not [considered to be] Leket. These are the words of Bet Hillel. Rebbi Yossi says, “Chananyah, the son of the brother of Rebbi Yehoshua says, ‘Any [type of produce] where the property of the poor person (i.e. some kind of gift to the poor) can come in the middle [of two sets of produce, one standing and one detached, both of which are one Seah in volume], for example grain and vineyard, does not combine [to form two Seahs and therefore both parts are still considered to be Shikcha]. However, any [produce] where the property of the poor person (i.e. some kind of gift to the poor) cannot come in the middle [of two sets of produce, one standing and one detached, both of which are one Seah in volume], for example fruits of a tree, does combine [to form two Seahs and therefore both parts are not considered to be Shikcha].’”


###### Tosefta Peah 3:11
[Tosefta Peah 3:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tosefta%20Peah/r/3:11)

אימתי אמרו קמה מצלת את העומר בזמן שלא נטלה מבינתים הא אם נטלה מבינתים הרי זו אינה מצלת קמת חבירו מצלת על שלו של חיטין על של שעורין של נכרי על של ישראל דר"מ וחכמים אומרים אין מצלת אלא על שלו וממין על מינו רבן שמעון בן גמליאל אומר כשם שהקמה מצלת את העומר כך העומר מציל את הקמה ודין הוא ומה אם קמה [שהורע] כח עני בה הרי היא מצלת את העומר עומר [שיפה] כח עני בו אינו דין שיציל את הקמה אמר לו רבי מה [לקמה שמצלת את העומר שהרי יפה כח עני בו יציל עומר את הקמה שהרי הורע כח עני בה].

**The Tosefta Blog:**
When did they (i.e. the Rabbis) say [that] standing crops [that have not been forgotten] disqualify a sheaf [that was forgotten next to those standing crops from being considered Shikcha (forgotten sheaves)]? At the time when [the standing crops] were not taken in the middle (i.e. between the time when the sheaf was forgotten and remembered by the farmer), but if [the standing crops] were taken in the middle (i.e. prior to the farmer remembering that he forgot that sheaf) then it does not disqualify [that sheaf from being considered Shikcha, and the farmer cannot go back and take it for himself]. “The standing crops of his (i.e. the farmer’s) friend [that were not forgotten] disqualify his (i.e. the farmer’s) [own standing crops that were forgotten from being considered Shikcha], [the standing crops] of wheat [that were not forgotten disqualify the standing crops] of barley [that were forgotten from being considered Shikcha], [the standing crops] of a non-Jew [that were not forgotten disqualify the standing crops] of a Jew [that were forgotten from being considered Shikcha].” These are the words of Rebbi Meir. But the Chachamim (Sages) say, “[Standing crops that were not forgotten] do not disqualify [other standing crops that were forgotten], unless they were his (i.e. the farmer’s and not someone else’s) [own] and [they were] of the same kind [of crops].” Rabban Shimon Ben Gamliel says, “Just like standing crops [that were not forgotten] disqualify a sheaf [that was forgotten from being considered Shikcha], so too the sheaf [that was not forgotten] disqualifies standing crops [that were forgotten from being considered Shikcha]. And [the reason for this law] is a Kal Vechomer (derivation from minor to major) [which goes as follows]. Since standing crops by which the power of the poor person is weak [have the capability to] disqualify a sheaf [from being considered Shikcha], then for sure a sheaf by which the power of the poor person is strong should [have the capability to] disqualify standing crops.” They (i.e. the Chachamim) said [back] to him (i.e. Rabban Shimon Ben Gamliel), “Rebbi! [That is not correct, because the reverse argument can be made as well, as follows.] Just like standing crops can disqualify a sheaf by which the power of the poor person is strong [from being considered Shikcha], so too the sheaf should disqualify the standing crops by which the power of the poor person is [also] strong [for a different reason as explained in the next Tosefta] [from being considered Shikcha].”


###### Tosefta Peah 3:12
[Tosefta Peah 3:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tosefta%20Peah/r/3:12)

יפה כח עני בקמה יתר מבעומר ובעומר יתר מבקמה [הקמה] יש בה לקט שכחה ופאה מה שאין כן בעומר [העומר שיש בו סאתים ושכחו אינו שכחה הקמה אינו שכחה] עד שיהא בו סאתים.

**The Tosefta Blog:**
The power of the poor person is stronger with regards to standing crops than with regards to a sheaf. And [yet at the same time the power of the poor person] is stronger with regards to a sheaf than with regards to standing crops. Because [all three gifts to the poor:] Leket (fallen stalks), Shikcha (forgotten sheaves) and Peah (corners of the field) apply to standing crops, but it is not so with regards to a sheaf, [to which only Shikcha and Peah apply, but Leket does not.] And [yet the opposite is true as well since] the sheaf that is two Seahs [in size by volume] and has been forgotten, is not considered to be Shikcha, unless it is smaller than two Seahs, [whereas standing crops are not considered Shikcha even if they are smaller than two Seahs in size, as long as they have the potential of being two Seahs in size in a different year due to better growth.]


###### Tosefta Peah 3:13
[Tosefta Peah 3:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tosefta%20Peah/r/3:13)

החותך כריכות ועתיד לעמרן וכן אגודי השום והבצלין אין להם שכחה. המעמר מפני הדליקה ומפני אמת המים אין להם שכחה מפני [שעתיד] לאבדן מעשה בחסיד אחד ששכח עומר בתוך שדהו ואמר לבנו צא והקריב עלי פר לעולה ופר לשלמים אמר לו אבא מה ראית לשמוח בשמחת מצוה זו [יותר] מכל מצות שבתורה אמר לו כל מצות שבתורה נתן [להם המקום] לדעתנו זו שלא לדעתנו שאילו [עשינוהו ברצון לפני המקום לא באת מצוה זו לידינו [אלא] הרי הוא אומר (דברים כד) כי תקצור וגו' קבע לו הכתוב ברכה והלא דברים קל וחומר מה אדם שלא נתכוין לזכות וזכה מעלין עליו כאילו זכה המתכוין לזכות וזכה על אחת כו"כ כיוצא בו (ויקרא ה׳:י״ז) ואם נפש כי תחטא ועשתה וגו' והביא איל תמים וגו' והלא דברים קל וחומר מה אם מי שלא נתכוין לחטוא וחטא מעלין עליו כאילו חטא המתכוין לחטוא וחטא על אחת כמה וכמה.

**The Tosefta Blog:**
[A person] who is cutting gavels [of grain, with intention] to bundle them into sheaves later [and not right away], and also [a person who is piling up] heaps of garlic [with intention to make from the heaps] bundles of garlic, or [spread out] onions, [later and not right away, if any of these gavels of grain or heaps of garlic, or spread out onions, have been forgotten in the field, the law of] Shikcha (forgotten sheaves) does not apply to them, [and therefore they still belong to the owner, who can go back and retrieve them.] [A person] who is binding sheaves, because of [an approaching] fire or because of an irrigation canal [that broke through and is about to flood the field, if any of these sheaves have been forgotten in the field the law of] Shikcha does not apply to them, [and therefore they still belong to the owner, who can go back and retrieve them,] because he (i.e. the farmer) will check [the field for any forgotten sheaves, since he is not harvesting them, but rather moving them out of the way of the fire or flooding water.] It happened with a certain pious person that he forgot a sheaf in his field [during harvest,] and he said to his son, “Go [to the Temple in Jerusalem] and sacrifice in my name a bull for Korban Olah (burnt-offering) and a bull for Korban Shlamim (peace-offering).” He (i.e. his son) said [back] to him (i.e. the father), “Father! What have you seen in this commandment [of Shikcha that caused you] to rejoice [about it] more than all [other] commandments that are mentioned in the Torah?” He (i.e. the father) said [back] to him (i.e. the son), “All [other] commandments [that are mentioned] in the Torah have been given to us by God [to be executed] consciously (i.e. on purpose with intent). [But] this [commandment of Shikcha was given to us by God to be executed] unconsciously (i.e. accidentally due to forgetfulness), because if we would have done it willingly (i.e. left the sheaf in the field on purpose for the poor to take) in front of God, this commandment would not be counted for us [as a fulfilled commandment of Shikcha, but rather as a random act of kindness.]” He (i.e. the son) said [back] to him (i.e. the father), “It says [in the Torah], ‘When you will harvest your harvest in your field and you will forget a sheaf in the field, do not go back to take it. It shall be [left there] for the Non-Jewish resident, for the orphan, and for the widow, in order that Hashem, your God, will bless you with all the deeds of your hand.’ (Devarim 24:19) The verse has granted him (i.e. the farmer who left the sheaf in the field) a blessing. [But why did the verse need to say explicitly that the farmer will get a blessing?] Is not it a Kal Vechomer (derivation from minor to major) [which can be concluded by us logically without the need of an explicit verse]? Just like someone who did not intend to do something good, but he [ended up] doing something good [anyway], the verse considers him as if he has done something good, so for sure someone who intended to do something good, and [ended up] doing something good [that he meant to do] how much more so [should get a blessing]?” Similarly, [it says in the Torah:] “If a soul from the common people sins by accident by doing one of the negative commandments of Hashem, and becomes guilty of it. When his sin which he sinned will become known to him … (the verses go on to describe the sacrifice that the sinner should bring) … and the priest will atone for him, and he will be forgiven.” (Vayikra 4:27-31) And it is a Kal Vechomer [which can be concluded by us logically]! Just like someone who did not intend to sin, but sinned [anyway], we consider him as if he sinned. So someone who intended to sin and [then] sinned, how much more so [should be considered as if he sinned. And therefore will for sure get punished.]


###### Tosefta Peah 3:14
[Tosefta Peah 3:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tosefta%20Peah/r/3:14)

כל זית שיש לו שם בשדה כזית נטופה בשעתו ושכחה אינו שכחה במה דברים אמורים בזמן שלא התחיל בו אבל אם התחיל בו ושכחו הרי זה שכחה עד שיהא בו סאתים.

**The Tosefta Blog:**
Every olive [tree] that has a [distinguished] name in the field, such as the Olive Tree of Netofah had in its time, and he forgot [to collect its produce from the field], it is not considered forgotten (Peah 7:1). What case are we talking about? About a situation where he had not started with it (i.e., not begun to harvest the tree), but if he had started with it and he forgot it, behold, it is [considered] forgotten, until the time that [the owner has harvested] two seahs (Peah 7:2).


###### Tosefta Peah 3:15
[Tosefta Peah 3:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tosefta%20Peah/r/3:15)

[חבית שהוא נגד] ג' שורות של שני מלבנין ושכחו אין שכחה בד"א בזמן שאין מכירו אבל בזמן שמכירו רץ אחריו ונוטלו אפי' מאה [ומאה].

**The Tosefta Blog:**
[With respect to] a cask [of oil]* that [is found] against three rows [of trees] of two plots [per row], and he forgot it, it is not [considered] forgotten. When do these words apply? In a situation that he does not recognize it [as distinguished], but in a situation that he does recognize it, he may run after him (i.e., the poor person) and [the poor person] must give it back to him, even [if he runs after him for] one hundred amot*.


###### Tosefta Peah 3:16
[Tosefta Peah 3:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tosefta%20Peah/r/3:16)

המפקיר את כרמו עשירים נוטלין את האשכולות ועניים נוטלין את האשכולות ואת העוללות איזהו עוללות כל שאין [לה] לא כתף ולא נטף יש לה כתף ואין לה נטף נטף ואין לה כתף הרי היא של בעל הבית ואם לאו הרי היא של עניים איזהו כתף פסיגין המחוברים בשדרה זו על גבי זו נטף הענבים המחוברות בשדרה ויורדות.

**The Tosefta Blog:**
One who declares his orchard ownerless (see Peah 4:9), the rich people [may] take away the grapefruits and the grapes, [and] the poor people [may] take away the grapefruits and the grapes with defective clusters (olelot). What are defective clusters? Any [cluster] that lacks a "shoulder" or a "pendant." If it has a shoulder but not a pendant, or has a pendant but lacks a shoulder, behold, it belongs to the property owner, and if not, behold, it belongs to the poor people. What is a "shoulder"? Growths joined to each other at the stem, each one next to the other. What is a "pendant"? Grapes joined to the stem and that drop down.


###### Tosefta Peah 3:17
[Tosefta Peah 3:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tosefta%20Peah/r/3:17)

נכרי שמכר כרמו לישראל לבצור חייב בעוללות וישראל שמכר כרמו לנכרי לבצור פטור מן העוללות.

**The Tosefta Blog:**
A Gentile that sold his orchard to a Jew to harvest -- [the Jew is] liable in [the laws of] the defective cluster. A Jew that sold is orchard to a Gentile to harvest -- [the Jew] is exempt from [the laws of] the defective cluster.


###### Tosefta Peah 3:18
[Tosefta Peah 3:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tosefta%20Peah/r/3:18)

ישראל ונכרי שהיו שותפין בכרם חלקו של ישראל חייב ושל נכרי פטור רבי שמעון אומר ישראל ונכרי שהיו שותפין בכרם פטור מן העוללות.

**The Tosefta Blog:**
A Jew and a Gentile that were partners in an orchard, the portion belonging to the Jew is liable, and [the portion] belonging to the Gentile is exempt. Rabbi Shimon says, a Jew and a Gentile that were partners in an orchard are exempt from the defective cluster.


###### Tosefta Peah 3:19
[Tosefta Peah 3:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tosefta%20Peah/r/3:19)

[המקדיש את כרמו לא הקדיש את העוללות שאין אדם מקדיש דבר שאינו שלו].

**The Tosefta Blog:**
One who dedicates his orchard [to the Temple] does not dedicate the defective clusters, because a person cannot dedicate something that is not his.


###### Tosefta Peah 3:20
[Tosefta Peah 3:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tosefta%20Peah/r/3:20)

בן לוי שנתנו לו ענבים [והיו בהן עוללות] אין חושש שמא של עניים הן.

**The Tosefta Blog:**
[Similarly,] a Levite to whom they gave grapes [as a gift], and there were defective clusters amongst them, there is no concern that perhaps they belong to the poor.


###### Tosefta Peah 3:21
[Tosefta Peah 3:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tosefta%20Peah/r/3:21)

הנוטע כרם להקדש פטור [מן הערלה ומן הרבעי וחייב בשביעית מאימתי אדם רשאי לבצור כרמו בשביעית] משיודע הפרי שכבר נתחייב הכרם בגדולי עוללות.

**The Tosefta Blog:**
One who plants an orchard in order to dedicate it [to the Temple] is exempt from orlah and from the fourth-year vineyard*, but he is liable in shevi'it. From what time is a person permitted to harvest his vineyard*? From the time that he knows his fruit (i.e., whether each grape cluster is going to be normal or defective), because [at that point] the vineyard is already liable in (the laws of) the growth of defective clusters.


###### Tosefta Peah 3:22
[Tosefta Peah 3:22](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tosefta%20Peah/r/3:22)

איזהו שכחה בעריסין גדולים כל שאינו יכול לפשוט את ידו וליטלה בעריסין קטנים כשיעבור הימנו בדלית ובדקל משירד ממנו ושאר כל האילן משיפנה וילך לו בד"א בזמן שלא התחיל בו אבל אם התחיל בו ושכחו אין שכחה עד שיבצור את כל סביביו.

**The Tosefta Blog:**
What is considered "forgotten" in the case of large espaliers (Peah 7:8)? Whatever [produce] one cannot stretch out his hand and take it. In the case of small espaliers? That which [has not been picked] from the time that [the gatherers] pass by it. In the case of hanging vines and date palms? [What remains] from the time that [the gatherers] descend from it. And [in the case of] all other trees, from the time that he turns and walks away from it. In what case does this apply? At a time that he has not started with it, but if he has started with it, and he he forgot it (i.e., the produce), the laws of "forgotten" do not apply until he has harvested all of the surrounding area.