הלכות מתנות עניים ה׳Gifts to the Poor 5

Halacha 1א׳

הָעֹמֶר שֶׁשְּׁכָחוּהוּ פּוֹעֲלִים וְלֹא שְׁכָחוֹ בַּעַל הַשָּׂדֶה. שְׁכָחוֹ בַּעַל הַשָּׂדֶה וְלֹא שְׁכָחוּהוּ פּוֹעֲלִים. שְׁכָחוּהוּ אֵלּוּ וְאֵלּוּ וְהָיוּ שָׁם אֲחֵרִים עוֹבְרִין וְרוֹאִין אוֹתָן בְּעֵת שֶׁשְּׁכָחוּהוּ. אֵינָהּ שִׁכְחָה עַד שֶׁיִּשְׁכְּחוּהוּ כָּל אָדָם. וַאֲפִלּוּ עֹמֶר הַטָּמוּן אִם נִשְׁכָּח הֲרֵי זֶה שִׁכְחָה:

If a sheaf is forgotten by workers but was not forgotten by the owner of the field, or if the owner of the field forgot it but the workers did not forget it, or both of them forgot it but others passed by and saw it at the time that they [the owner and the workers] forgot it, then it does not count as shikhecha until everyone forgets it. Even if it is a sheaf that was hidden, if it was forgotten [by everyone], then this is shikhecha.91See Mishnah Péah 5:7.

Halacha 2ב׳

הָיָה בַּעַל הַשָּׂדֶה בָּעִיר וְאָמַר יוֹדֵעַ אֲנִי שֶׁהַפּוֹעֲלִים שָׁכְחוּ עֹמֶר שֶׁבְּמָקוֹם פְּלוֹנִי וּשְׁכָחוּהוּ הֲרֵי זֶה שִׁכְחָה. וְאִם הָיָה בַּשָּׂדֶה וְאָמַר כֵּן וּשְׁכָחוּהוּ אֵינָהּ שִׁכְחָה שֶׁהַשָּׁכוּחַ מֵעִקָּרוֹ בַּשָּׂדֶה הוּא הַשִּׁכְחָה. אֲבָל בָּעִיר אֲפִלּוּ זָכוּר וּלְבַסּוֹף שָׁכוּחַ הֲרֵי זוֹ שִׁכְחָה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים כד יט) "וְשָׁכַחְתָּ עֹמֶר בַּשָּׂדֶה" וְלֹא בָּעִיר:

If the owner of the field was in the city, and he said, "I know that the workers forgot a sheaf in such-and-such a place," and they had in fact forgotten it, then this is shikhecha. But if he was in the field and said so and they forgot it, then this is not shikhecha, for the act of forgetting is rooted exclusively in the field in order for it to be shikhecha [and remembering outside of the domain of the field has no effect]. If one is in the city, even if it is remembered [by someone there] and in the end becomes forgotten [by those in the field], then this is shikhecha, as it is said, (Deut. 24:19) And overlook a sheaf in the field and not in the city.92See Babylonian Talmud Bava Metzia 11a.

Halacha 3ג׳

עָמְדוּ הָעֲנִיִּים בְּפָנָיו אוֹ חִפּוּהוּ בְּקַשׁ וְהוּא זוֹכֵר אֶת הַקַּשׁ אוֹ שֶׁהֶחֱזִיק בּוֹ לְהוֹלִיכוֹ לָעִיר וְהִנִּיחוֹ בַּשָּׂדֶה וּשְׁכָחוֹ אֵינוֹ שִׁכְחָה. אֲבָל אִם נְטָלוֹ מִמָּקוֹם לְמָקוֹם אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהִנִּיחוֹ סָמוּךְ לַגַּפָּה אוֹ לַגָּדִישׁ אוֹ לַבָּקָר אוֹ לַכֵּלִים וּשְׁכָחוֹ הֲרֵי זֶה שִׁכְחָה:

If the poor people stood in front of him [the owner, hiding the sheaf], or if it was buried in stubble and he [the owner or the worker] remembered the stubble, or if he took it and brought it to the city and left it in a field [there] and forgot it, then this is not shikhecha. But if they took it from place to place [within the field], even if they left it next to a stone wall, a stack, near oxen, or next to tools [which might indicate that it was put there on purpose], and it was forgotten, then this is shikhecha.93See Mishnah Péah 5:7 and Mishnah Péah 6:2. In Mishnah Péah 5:7, we see that it is not shikhecha if it was covered up, but it does not mention anything about forgetting. Perhaps the implication is that the poor may have tried to hide it from the owner. Maimonides adopts Hillel's position that the sheaf does qualify as shikhecha, rejecting the idea that the poor might have covered it up so as to get more.

Halacha 4ד׳

נָטַל עֹמֶר לְהוֹלִיכוֹ לָעִיר וְהִנִּיחוֹ עַל גַּבֵּי חֲבֵרוֹ וְשָׁכַח אֶת שְׁנֵיהֶן. אִם זָכַר הָעֶלְיוֹן קֹדֶם שֶׁיִּפְגַּע בּוֹ אֵין הַתַּחְתּוֹן שִׁכְחָה וְאִם לָאו הַתַּחְתּוֹן שִׁכְחָה:

If he took a sheaf and brought it to the city and placed it on top of another and forgot both of them, if he remembered the top one first and then happened upon it [the bottom one], the bottom one is not shikhecha, but if not [that is, if he did not remember the top one], then the bottom one is shikhecha.94See Tosefta Péah 3:3 and Babylonian Talmud Sotah 45a. Ravad points out that Maimonides is ruling according to Rabbi Shimon who is stating the dissenting opinion. In the Tosefta, the first opinion is that the top sheaf is not subject to the law of shikhecha, presumably because the owner had at one time specifically picked it up to carry it into the city, but the bottom one is. Rabbi Shimon's opinion is that both sheaves are not shikhecha in that the top one is linked with the bottom one and in remembering the top one the bottom one is also exempt from being shikhecha. In the Jerusalem Talmud Péah 6:3, this idea is expanded upon by Rabbi Zeira who states that it is precisely in remembering the top sheaf that the bottom one is not shikhecha, for the top one covers up and hides the bottom sheaf and disqualifies it from being shikhecha, just as if it were hidden by clothes or stones (as in the previous law). In this case, the top sheaf is not shikhecha, but the bottom one is.

Halacha 5ה׳

עָפוּ עֳמָרָיו בְּרוּחַ חֲזָקָה לְתוֹךְ שְׂדֵה חֲבֵרוֹ וְשָׁכַח שָׁם עֹמֶר אֵינוֹ שִׁכְחָה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים כד יט) "קְצִירְךָ בְשָׂדֶךָ". אֲבָל אִם פִּזֵּר הָעֳמָרִים בְּתוֹךְ שָׂדֵהוּ וְשָׁכַח הֲרֵי זוֹ שִׁכְחָה:

If a strong wind blew someone's sheaves into an adjacent field and he [the owner or the worker] forgot the sheaf there, this is not shikhecha, for it is said, (Deut. 24:19) When you reap the harvest in your field [yours and not anyone else's], but if it scattered the sheaves within his own field and he forgot [them] then this is shikhecha.

Halacha 6ו׳

הַנּוֹטֵל עֹמֶר רִאשׁוֹן וְשֵׁנִי וּשְׁלִישִׁי וְשָׁכַח הָרְבִיעִי. אִם הָיָה שָׁם שִׁשִּׁי אֵין הָרְבִיעִי שִׁכְחָה עַד שֶׁיִּטּל הַחֲמִישִׁי. וְאִם הָיוּ חֲמִשָּׁה בִּלְבַד מִשֶּׁיִּשְׁהֶא כְּדֵי לִטּל הַחֲמִישִׁי הֲרֵי הָרְבִיעִי שִׁכְחָה:

If one takes one sheaf and then a second one and then a third one and forgot the fourth, if there is a sixth one, then the fourth one is not forgotten until he takes the fifth. And if there were only five sheaves, if he waited long enough to take the fifth, then the fourth is shikhecha.95It has been demonstrated that one sheaf can "save" another, and the question arises here when an observer can decisively say a sheaf has truly been forgotten. If one is taking sheaves, skips two, and goes back and only picks up one of the skipped sheaves, the one left behind is truly forgotten.

Halacha 7ז׳

שְׁנֵי עֳמָרִים מְעֻרְבָּבִין וְשָׁכַח אֶחָד מֵהֶן אֵינָהּ שִׁכְחָה עַד שֶׁיִּטּל אֶת כָּל סְבִיבוֹתָיו:

If two sheaves were mixed up, and he forgot one of them, this is not shikhecha until he takes all the ones around it.96See Tosefta Péah 3:4.

Halacha 8ח׳

הַלּוּף וְהַשּׁוּם וְהַבְּצָלִים וְכַיּוֹצֵא בָּהּ אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהֵן טְמוּנִין בָּאָרֶץ יֵשׁ לָהֶן שִׁכְחָה. הַקּוֹצֵר בַּלַּיְלָה וְשָׁכַח קָמָה אוֹ שֶׁעִמֵּר בַּלַּיְלָה וְשָׁכַח עֹמֶר וְכֵן הַסּוּמָא שֶׁשָּׁכַח יֵשׁ לָהֶן שִׁכְחָה. וְאִם הָיָה הַסּוּמָא אוֹ הַקּוֹצֵר בַּלַּיְלָה מִתְכַּוֵּן לִטּל אֶת הַגַּס אֵין לוֹ שִׁכְחָה. וְכָל הָאוֹמֵר הֲרֵינִי קוֹצֵר עַל מְנָת מַה שֶּׁאֲנִי שׁוֹכֵחַ אֲנִי אֶטּל יֵשׁ לוֹ שִׁכְחָה שֶׁכָּל הַמַּתְנֶה עַל מַה שֶּׁכָּתוּב בַּתּוֹרָה תְּנָאוֹ בָּטֵל:

Arum, garlic, onions, and similar produce, even though they are buried in the ground, the law of shikhecha applies to them. [So also for] the one who harvests at night and forgets standing grain, or one who was binding sheaves at night and forgot a sheaf, and so too with the blind person who forgets [some standing grain or a sheaf], the law of shikhecha applies in these situation as well. But if the blind person or the one who harvests at night intends to take only the larger sheaves [and deliberately leave some of the smaller ones behind], then they are not shikhecha. But anyone who says, "I am harvesting on the condition that anything I forget I may take [later]," the law of shikhecha still applies, for all of the gifts for the poor come from the Torah, and his condition is invalid.97See Mishnah Péah 6:10-11. Human legal stipulations cannot override laws from the Torah.

Halacha 9ט׳

תְּבוּאָה שֶׁקְּצָרָהּ עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִגְמְרָה לְהַאֲכִילָהּ לִבְהֵמָה. וְכֵן אִם קְצָרָהּ אֲגֻדּוֹת קְטַנּוֹת וְלֹא עֲשָׂאָהּ עֳמָרִים. וְכֵן הַשּׁוּמִים וְהַבְּצָלִים שֶׁתְּלָשָׁן אֲגֻדּוֹת קְטַנּוֹת לְהִמָּכֵר לַשּׁוּק וְלֹא עֲשָׂאָן עֳמָרִים לְהַעֲמִיד מֵהֶן גֹּרֶן אֵין לָהֶם שִׁכְחָה:

If grain was harvested before it was finished [ripening] so as to feed cattle, and so also if he harvested them into small bundles and did not make sheaves of them, and so also with garlic and onions that they picked them in small bundles in order to sell them in the market and they did not make sheaves out of them to put them into storage, then the law of shikhecha does not apply.98See Mishnah Péah 6:10.

Halacha 10י׳

הַקּוֹצֵר שֶׁהִתְחִיל לִקְצֹר מֵרֹאשׁ הַשּׁוּרָה וְשָׁכַח לְפָנָיו וּלְאַחֲרָיו. שֶׁל אַחֲרָיו שִׁכְחָה וְשֶׁלְּפָנָיו אֵינוֹ שִׁכְחָה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים כד יט) "לֹא תָשׁוּב לְקַחְתּוֹ" אֵינוֹ שִׁכְחָה עַד שֶׁיַּעֲבֹר מִמֶּנּוּ וְיַנִּיחֶנּוּ לְאַחֲרָיו. זֶה הַכְּלָל כָּל שֶׁהוּא בְּבַל תָּשׁוּב שִׁכְחָה וְכָל שֶׁאֵינוֹ בְּבַל תָּשׁוּב אֵינוֹ שִׁכְחָה:

If a harvester began to harvest at the beginning of a row and forgot [produce] that was in front of him [that he had not yet gone through] and behind him [that he had gone through], the law of shikhecha applies to what was behind him but not to that which is in front of him, as it is said, (Deut. 24:19) Do not turn back to get it. It is not shikhecha until he has gone through it and left it behind him. A general rule: When "do not turn back" applies, so does shikhecha, and anything to which "do not turn back" does not apply cannot be shikhecha.99See Mishnah Péah 6:4.

Halacha 11י״א

שְׁנַיִם שֶׁהִתְחִילוּ לִקְצֹר מֵאֶמְצַע הַשּׁוּרָה זֶה פָּנָיו לְצָפוֹן וְזֶה פָּנָיו לְדָרוֹם וְשָׁכְחוּ לִפְנֵיהֶם וּלְאַחֲרֵיהֶן. שֶׁלִּפְנֵיהֶם שִׁכְחָה. מִפְּנֵי שֶׁכָּל אֶחָד מֵהֶן זֶה שֶׁלְּפָנָיו הוּא לַאֲחוֹרָיו שֶׁל חֲבֵרוֹ. וְהָעֹמֶר שֶׁשְּׁכָחוּהוּ לַאֲחוֹרֵיהֶן בְּמָקוֹם שֶׁהִתְחִילוּ מִמֶּנּוּ אֵינוֹ שִׁכְחָה. מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא מְעֹרָב עִם הַשּׁוּרוֹת שֶׁמִּן הַמִּזְרָח לְמַעֲרָב וְהֵן מוֹכִיחִין עָלָיו שֶׁאֵינוֹ שָׁכוּחַ. וְכֵן הַשּׁוּרוֹת שֶׁל עֳמָרִים שֶׁפִּינוּ אוֹתָן לְגֹרֶן וְהִתְחִילוּ שְׁנַיִם מֵאֶמְצַע שׁוּרָה וְשָׁכְחוּ עֹמֶר בָּאֶמְצַע בֵּין אֲחוֹרֵיהֶן אֵינוֹ שִׁכְחָה מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא בְּאֶמְצַע הַשּׁוּרָה שֶׁמִּן מַעֲרָב לַמִּזְרָח שֶׁעֲדַיִן לֹא הִתְחִילוּ בָּהּ וְהִיא מוֹכָחַת עָלָיו שֶׁאֵינוֹ שָׁכוּחַ:

If two people began to harvest from the midst of a row [with some space left in between them] with one facing north and the other facing south, and they forgot [produce] that was before them [that the individual did not get through but which his partner was relying upon him to finish] and after them [that they did not go through because both backs were turned to it right from the start], the law of shikhecha applies to that which was before them because what is before one is behind the other [and is shikhecha by the other person] but the sheaf which they forgot after them in the place that they started is not shikhecha because it is mixed in with the rows [that will be harvested] from east to west which they are assuming [will be harvested when people go east and west and that is why they purposefully did not go through it] and thus it is not shikhecha. So also with the rows of sheaves which they transfer to storage, for if two begin in the midst of a row and they forget a sheaf that is behind and between them, this is not shikhecha because it is in the middle of a row [that also goes] from west to east which they have not begun [to bind] and thus this proves that it is not shikhecha.100See Mishnah Péah 6:4. Ravad responds here with an unusually lengthy comment because he apparently feels Maimonides has not explicated the sources completely and properly. First Ravad explains Maimonides' reasoning as he sees it: If someone is gathering sheaves going from north to south, reaches the end of the row and then goes from south to north and so on, if the gatherer passes through and leaves a sheaf behind, Maimonides claims this is shikhecha. Ravad claims that Maimonides does not take into account the special circumstances that exist for sheaves left at the ends of rows. The gatherer who goes from north to south could intend to go back and collect some more at the ends of the rows while going east to west. Since the gatherer going east and west is walking perpendicular to his original path, he is not retracing his steps and does not violate the commandment to not turn back to get it (Deut. 24:19). This possibility is taught in Tosefta Péah 3:4 and the Jerusalem Talmud Péah 6:3. Thus, what is shikhecha at the ends of the rows is not clear until one sees the direction in which one completes the binding of the sheaves. Thus it says in Mishnah Péah 6:3, "In the case of sheaves at the end of rows, whether or not a sheaf is shikhecha is proven by the sheaf lying opposite it."

Halacha 12י״ב

הַקּוֹצֵר וְאִלֵּם אֲלֻמּוֹת אֲלֻמּוֹת. וּפִנָּה הָאֲלֻמּוֹת וְהֵן הַנִּקְרָאִין עֳמָרִים מִמָּקוֹם זֶה לְמָקוֹם אַחֵר. וּמִמָּקוֹם הַשֵּׁנִי לַמָּקוֹם הַשְּׁלִישִׁי. וּמִמָּקוֹם הַשְּׁלִישִׁי לַגֹּרֶן וְשָׁכַח הָעֹמֶר בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁפִּנָּה מִמָּקוֹם לְמָקוֹם. אִם פִּנָּה הָעֳמָרִים לְמָקוֹם שֶׁהוּא גְּמַר מְלָאכָה וּשְׁכָחָהּ יֵשׁ לוֹ שִׁכְחָה וּכְשֶׁיְּפַנֶּה מִמָּקוֹם שֶׁהוּא גְּמַר מְלָאכָה לַגֹּרֶן אֵין לוֹ שִׁכְחָה. וְאִם פִּנָּה הָעֳמָרִים לְמָקוֹם שֶׁאֵינוֹ גְּמַר מְלָאכָה וְשָׁכַח אֵינוֹ שִׁכְחָה וּכְשֶׁיְּפַנֶּה מִמָּקוֹם שֶׁאֵינוֹ גְּמַר מְלָאכָה לַגֹּרֶן יֵשׁ לוֹ שִׁכְחָה:

When one is harvesting standing sheaves, one standing sheaf after another, and transfers these sheaves from one place to another, also called omrim,101The word "sheaf" as it has been translated here has only referred to omrim. from a second place to a third place, and from a third place to the threshing floor storage area, and he forgot a sheaf while transferring it from place to place, if he was transferring sheaves to a place where he had completed the process [of their preparation] and he forgot it, then it is shikhecha. If [he forgot it] when he was transferring it from a place where he had completed the process to the threshing floor, then this is not shikhecha. And if he was transferring sheaves to a place where he would not complete the process and he forgot one, this is not shikhecha [either because he is in the midst of the process]. But if he was transferring from a place where he had not completed the process to the threshing floor, then this is shikhecha.102See Mishnah Péah 5:8.

Halacha 13י״ג

אֵי זֶהוּ מָקוֹם שֶׁהוּא גְּמַר מְלָאכָה. זֶה מָקוֹם שֶׁדַּעְתּוֹ לְקַבֵּץ כָּל הָעֳמָרִין שָׁם וְלָדוּשׁ אוֹתָן שָׁם אוֹ לְהוֹלִיכָן שָׁם לִמְקוֹם גָּדִישׁ שֶׁהוּא הַגֹּרֶן. וּמָקוֹם שֶׁאֵינוֹ גְּמַר מְלָאכָה הוּא הַמָּקוֹם שֶׁמְּקַבְּצִין בּוֹ הָעֳמָרִים כְּדֵי לַעֲשׂוֹת מֵהֶן אֲלֻמּוֹת גְּדוֹלוֹת כְּדֵי לְהוֹלִיכָן לְמָקוֹם אַחֵר:

What is a place that is one where he completed the process [of their preparation]? This a place where it is his intention to gather all of the sheaves and from there to thresh them or to bring them to a stack that serves as storage. And a place which is one where he does not complete the process is a place where he has gathered the sheaves in order to make large standing sheaves so that he can bring them to another place.

Halacha 14י״ד

שְׁתֵּי כְּרִיכוֹת הַמֻּבְדָּלוֹת זוֹ מִזּוֹ שִׁכְחָה. וְשָׁלֹשׁ אֵינָן שִׁכְחָה. שְׁנֵי עֳמָרִים הַמֻּבְדָּלִין זֶה מִזֶּה שִׁכְחָה. וּשְׁלֹשָׁה אֵינָן שִׁכְחָה:

Two small bundles which can be distinguished one from the other may be shikhecha, but three may not count as shikhecha. Two sheaves which can be distinguished one from the other may be shikhecha, but three may not count as shikhecha.103See Mishnah Péah 6:5. Here and in the next three laws, Maimonides upholds the principle that two items of produce go to the poor but three do not. See 4:6.

Halacha 15ט״ו

שְׁנֵי צִבּוּרֵי זֵיתִים וְחָרוּבִין הַמֻּבְדָּלִין זֶה מִזֶּה שִׁכְחָה. וּשְׁלֹשָׁה אֵינָם שִׁכְחָה. שְׁנֵי הוּצְנֵי פִּשְׁתָּן שִׁכְחָה וּשְׁלֹשָׁה אֵינָם שִׁכְחָה:

Two heaps of olives or carobs that can be distinguished one from the other may be shikhecha, but three may not count as shikhecha. Two stalks of flax may be shikhecha, but three may not count as shikhecha.104See Mishnah Péah 6:5.

Halacha 16ט״ז

שְׁתֵּי גְּפָנִים וְכֵן בִּשְׁאָר הָאִילָנוֹת שְׁנַיִם הַמֻּבְדָּלִין זֶה מִזֶּה שִׁכְחָה. וּשְׁלֹשָׁה אֵינָן שִׁכְחָה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא יט י) (ויקרא כג כב) "לֶעָנִי וְלַגֵּר תַּעֲזֹב אֹתָם" אֲפִלּוּ הָיוּ שְׁנַיִם אֶחָד לְעָנִי וְאֶחָד לַגֵּר:

As for two vines, and so also with other trees, two which can be distinguished one from the other may be shikhecha, but three may not count as shikhecha, as it said, (Lev. 19:10, 23:22) You shall leave them for the poor and the stranger. Only if there are two, one for the poor and one for the stranger.105See Tosefta Péah 3:5.

Halacha 17י״ז

הָיוּ כָּל הָעֳמָרִים שֶׁל קַב קַב וְאֶחָד שֶׁל אַרְבָּעָה קַבִּין וּשְׁכָחוֹ הֲרֵי זֶה שִׁכְחָה. יֶתֶר עַל הָאַרְבָּעָה אֵינוֹ שִׁכְחָה. וְכֵן אִם הָיוּ שֶׁל שְׁנֵי שְׁנֵי קַבִּין וְאֶחָד יֶתֶר עַל שְׁמוֹנָה קַבִּין אֵינוֹ שִׁכְחָה:

If [there is a field and] the sheaves are of one kav quantity apiece, and then there is one [unusually large sheaf] with four kavim quantity and they forget it, then it is shikhecha. If it is more than four, then it is not shikhecha. So also if [there is a field and] the sheaves are two kavim quantity apiece, any sheaf more than eight kavim quantity may not be shikhecha.106See Mishnah Péah 6:1.

Halacha 18י״ח

הָעֹמֶר שֶׁיֵּשׁ בּוֹ סָאתַיִם וּשְׁכָחוֹ אֵינוֹ שִׁכְחָה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים כד יט) "וְשָׁכַחְתָּ עֹמֶר בַּשָּׂדֶה" וְלֹא גָּדִישׁ אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁכֻּלָּן סָאתַיִם סָאתַיִם. שָׁכַח שְׁנֵי עֳמָרִים אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁיֵּשׁ מִשְּׁנֵיהֶן סָאתַיִם הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ שִׁכְחָה. וְכֵן יֵרָאֶה לִי שֶׁהֵן שִׁכְחָה אֲפִלּוּ הָיָה בִּשְׁנֵיהֶן יוֹתֵר מִסָּאתַיִם:

A sheaf that will yield two seah107The plural is actually se'atayim, indicating a couple or a pair. and is forgotten does not count as shikhecha, as it is said, (Deut. 24:19) And overlook a sheaf in the field, and not a stack, even if each sheaf yields two seah [and is no different from the others in the field]. If he forgot two sheaves [which between the two add up to two seah], even though there is between them two seah, this counts as shikhecha. So also, it appears to me, that the law of shikhecha applies even if they add up to more than two seah [such as if each sheaf yielded one and a half seah and together made three].108See Mishnah Péah 6:6.

Halacha 19י״ט

קָמָה שֶׁיֵּשׁ בָּהּ סָאתַיִם וּשְׁכָחָהּ אֵינָהּ שִׁכְחָה. אֵין בָּהּ סָאתַיִם רוֹאִין אֶת הַשִּׁבֳּלִים הַדַּקּוֹת כְּאִלּוּ הֵן בְּרִיאוֹת וַאֲרֻכּוֹת וְאֶת הַשְּׁדוּפוֹת כְּאִלּוּ הֵן מְלֵאוֹת. וְאִם הָיְתָה רְאוּיָה (לִהְיוֹת) הַקָּמָה אַחַר אֻמְדָּן זֶה לַעֲשׂוֹת סָאתַיִם וּשְׁכָחָהּ אֵינָהּ שִׁכְחָה:

Standing grain that would yield two seah which he forgot does not count as shikhecha. If it would not yield two seah, they view the thin stalks as if they were healthy and long and the blasted ones as if they were full, and if they estimate the standing grain to be fit to yield two seah and then he forgot it, this does not count as shikhecha.109See Mishnah Péah 6:7.

Halacha 20כ׳

שָׁכַח סְאָה תְּבוּאָה עֲקוּרָה וּסְאָה שֶׁאֵינָהּ עֲקוּרָה אֵינָן מִצְטָרְפִים. וּשְׁנֵיהֶם שִׁכְחָה. וְכֵן בְּשׁוּם וּבִבְצָלִים וּבְפֵרוֹת הָאִילָן אִם שָׁכַח מִקְצָתָן בַּקַּרְקַע וּמִקְצָתָן תָּלוּשׁ וּבִשְׁנֵיהֶם סָאתַיִם אֵינָן מִצְטָרְפִין אֶלָּא שְׁנֵיהֶם שִׁכְחָה

If he forgot a seah of grain that was uprooted and a seah of grain that was not uprooted, they do not combine them but rather both of them are shikhecha. So also with garlic, onions, and fruits of trees. If he forgot part of them in the ground and part of them already picked and combined they make up two seah, they do not combine them, but both of them are shikhecha.110See Mishnah Péah 6:9.

Halacha 21כ״א

הַשּׁוֹכֵחַ עֹמֶר בְּצַד הַקָּמָה שֶׁאֵינָהּ שְׁכוּחָה אֵינָהּ שִׁכְחָה. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים כד יט) "כִּי תִקְצֹר וְשָׁכַחְתָּ עֹמֶר". עֹמֶר שֶׁסְּבִיבוֹתָיו קָצִיר שִׁכְחָה אֲבָל עֹמֶר שֶׁסְּבִיבוֹתָיו קָמָה אֵינָהּ שִׁכְחָה. וְכֵן אִם שָׁכַח קָמָה בְּצַד קָמָה שֶׁאֵינָהּ שְׁכוּחָה אֲפִלּוּ קֶלַח אֶחָד הֲרֵי זוֹ מַצֶּלֶת אֶת הַשְּׁכוּחָה וְיִהְיֶה מֻתָּר לְקַחְתָּהּ. אֲבָל אִם שָׁכַח עֹמֶר אוֹ קָמָה בְּצַד עֹמֶר שֶׁאֵינוֹ שָׁכוּחַ אֲפִלּוּ הָיָה בּוֹ סָאתַיִם אֵינוֹ מַצִּיל אוֹתָהּ וַהֲרֵי הַשָּׁכוּחַ לָעֲנִיִּים. אֵין קָמַת חֲבֵרוֹ מַצֶּלֶת עַל עֹמֶר שֶׁלּוֹ וְאֵין קָמַת שְׂעוֹרִים מַצֶּלֶת עַל עֹמֶר חִטִּים עַד שֶׁתִּהְיֶה הַקָּמָה מִמִּין הָעֹמֶר:

If one forgets a sheaf next to standing grain that is not forgotten, then this [sheaf] is not shikhecha, as it is said, (Deut. 24:19) When you reap the harvest in your field and overlook a sheaf in the field. A sheaf in which the area around it is harvested may be shikhecha, but a sheaf in which the area around it is standing grain is not shikhecha. So also if one forgot standing grain that is next to standing grain that is not forgotten, even one stem [that is not forgotten] saves that which is forgotten and it is permitted to take it, but if he forgot a sheaf or standing grain next to a sheaf that is not forgotten, even if it would yield two seah, it does not save it and this is considered shikhecha and for the poor.111See Mishnah Péah 6:8. The standing grain of one's fellow does not save his [the original farmer's] sheaf. And the standing grain of barley does not save a sheaf of wheat, that this only applies if the standing grain is of the same type as the [forgotten] sheaf.

Halacha 22כ״ב

הַשּׁוֹכֵחַ אִילָן בֵּין הָאִילָנוֹת אֲפִלּוּ הָיָה בּוֹ כַּמָּה סְאִין פֵּרוֹת אוֹ שֶׁשָּׁכַח שְׁנֵי אִילָנוֹת הֲרֵי הֵן שִׁכְחָה. שְׁלֹשָׁה אֵינָן שִׁכְחָה:

If one forgot a tree that was in the midst of other trees, even if it were to yield several seah worth of fruit, or [even] if one forgot two trees, then these are shikhecha. Three [trees] may not be shikhecha.112See Mishnah Péah 7:1. Ravad disagrees claiming that trees do not fit into this category.

Halacha 23כ״ג

בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים בְּאִילָן שֶׁאֵינוֹ יָדוּעַ וּמְפֻרְסָם בַּמָּקוֹם כְּגוֹן שֶׁהָיָה עוֹמֵד בְּצַד הַגַּת אוֹ בְּצַד הַפִּרְצָה. אוֹ בְּמַעֲשָׂיו כְּגוֹן שֶׁהָיָה עוֹשֶׂה זֵיתִים הַרְבֵּה. אוֹ בִּשְׁמוֹ כְּגוֹן שֶׁהָיָה לוֹ שֵׁם יָדוּעַ כְּגוֹן זַיִת הַנְּטוּפָה בֵּין הַזֵּיתִים שֶׁהוּא נוֹטֵף שֶׁמֶן הַרְבֵּה אוֹ הַשַּׁפְכָנִי אוֹ הַבֵּיְשָׁנִי. אֲבָל אִם הָיָה בּוֹ אֶחָד מִשְּׁלֹשָׁה דְּבָרִים אֵלּוּ אֵינוֹ שִׁכְחָה. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים כד יט) "וְשָׁכַחְתָּ עֹמֶר בַּשָּׂדֶה" עֹמֶר שֶׁאַתָּה שׁוֹכְחוֹ לְעוֹלָם וְאֵין אַתָּה יוֹדֵעַ בּוֹ אֶלָּא אִם תָּשׁוּב וְתִרְאֵהוּ. יָצָא זֶה שֶׁאַתָּה זוֹכְרוֹ לְאַחַר זְמַן וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא תִּפְגַּע בּוֹ מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא יָדוּעַ וּמְפֻרְסָם:

To what does this refer? To a tree that is not well-known for its place, such as one that stands by a wine vat or by the side of a breach in a wall, or for its productivity, such as one that makes many of olives, or for its name, such as it being known as "the olive tree that drips olives" or if it overflows with a great deal of oil or [has a nickname, such as] "the Pourer" or "the Embarrasser" [in that it embarrasses the other trees], or even if it has only one of these three characteristics, the law of shikhecha does not apply to it, as it is said, (Deut. 24:19) Overlook a sheaf in the field, [which means] a sheaf you have forgotten completely and you would not know it unless you went back and saw it. It is exempt [from the law of shikhecha] because one remembers it for a long time, even if [one would only remember that particular produce] by happening upon it, for it is well-known.113See Mishnah Péah 7:1.

Halacha 24כ״ד

הָיָה מְסֻיָּם בְּדַעְתּוֹ הֲרֵי זֶה כִּמְפֻרְסָם וְיָדוּעַ. הָיָה עוֹמֵד בְּצַד הַדֶּקֶל הַדֶּקֶל מְסַיְּמוֹ. הָיוּ שְׁנֵיהֶן זַיִת נְטוּפָה זֶה מְסַיֵּם אֶת זֶה. הָיְתָה כָּל שָׂדֵהוּ זַיִת נְטוּפָה וְשָׁכַח אַחַת מֵהֶן אוֹ שְׁתַּיִם יֵשׁ לוֹ שִׁכְחָה. בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים שֶׁלֹּא הִתְחִיל בְּאִילָן זֶה הַמְפֻרְסָם. אֲבָל אִם הִתְחִיל בּוֹ וְשָׁכַח מִקְצָתוֹ הֲרֵי זֶה שִׁכְחָה. וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא מְפֻרְסָם. וְהוּא שֶׁיִּהְיֶה הַנִּשְׁאָר בּוֹ פָּחוֹת מִסָּאתַיִם. אֲבָל סָאתַיִם אֵינָהּ שִׁכְחָה אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן שָׁכַח כָּל הָאִילָן כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ:

If one had marked it [a certain tree] off in his mind, then this counts as being well-known. If it stood next to a date palm tree, then the date palm tree marks it off. If there are two olive trees that overflow [with oil by their abundant produce], they mark off each other. If an entire field is of olive trees known for overflowing with oil, and he forgot one or two of them, then these are shikhecha. To what does this refer? Only when he has not begun [to pick] this well-known tree, but if he began to pick it and forgot part of it, then this does count as shikhecha, even if it is well-known. But if what remained was less than two seah [then this does not apply]. But if it is of two seah then this is not shikhecha unless he forgot the whole tree, as was explained.114Ravad objects that Mishnah Péah 7:1 does not seem to indicate this.

Halacha 25כ״ה

זַיִת הָעוֹמֵד בְּאֶמְצַע הַשּׁוּרוֹת לְבַדּוֹ וְשָׁלֹשׁ שׁוּרוֹת שֶׁל זֵיתִים מַקִּיפִין אוֹתוֹ מִשְּׁלֹשׁ רוּחוֹתָיו אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין בְּכָל שׁוּרָה מֵהֶן אֶלָּא שְׁנֵי זֵיתִים שָׁכַח אֶת הָאֶמְצָעִי אֵינוֹ שִׁכְחָה. שֶׁהֲרֵי הַשּׁוּרוֹת הִסְתִּירוּהוּ. וְלָמָּה אָמְרוּ זַיִת בִּלְבַד מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהָיָה חָשׁוּב בְּאֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּאוֹתוֹ הַזְּמַן:

An olive tree that stands in the middle of several rows by itself, and three rows of olive trees surround it from three sides, even if each row has only two olive trees, if he forgot the one in the middle, this does not count as shikhecha, for the rows [of trees] hid it. Why does this apply to olive trees only? Because they were important in the Land of Israel at that time.115Ravad points out that this view is only according to Rabbi Yosi in Mishnah Péah 7:1. See also Mishnah Péah 7:2.

Halacha 26כ״ו

אֵיזֶהוּ שִׁכְחָה בְּעָרִיס. כָּל שֶׁאֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לִפְשֹׁט אֶת יָדוֹ וְלִטְּלָהּ. וּבְכֶרֶם מִשֶּׁיַּעֲבֹר מִן הַגֶּפֶן (אוֹ) וּמִן הַגְּפָנִים וְיִשְׁכַּח אוֹתָהּ. בְּדָלִית וּבְדֶקֶל מִשֶּׁיֵּרֵד הֵימֶנּוּ. וּשְׁאָר כָּל הָאִילָנוֹת מִשֶּׁיִּפְנֶה וְיֵלֵךְ לוֹ. בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים שֶׁלֹּא הִתְחִיל בּוֹ. אֲבָל אִם הִתְחִיל בּוֹ וּשְׁכָחוֹ אֵינָהּ שִׁכְחָה עַד שֶׁיִּבְצֹר אֶת כָּל סְבִיבָיו:

What is considered shikhecha in an arbor? Anything that is beyond one's reach and cannot grasp. In a vineyard? When one has passed by one vine or several vines and forgotten them. In suspended vines or date palm trees? Whatever remains after he has come back down. And as for all the other types of trees? Whatever he leaves behind when he turns and goes. To what situation does this apply? When he has not begun [to harvest the orchard with that tree], but if he began [to harvest the orchard with that tree] and forgot it, it [the first tree] is only shikhecha when he has harvested all of the fruit trees from around it [in that orchard].116See Mishnah Péah 7:2.

Halacha 27כ״ז

הַמַּפְקִיר אֶת כַּרְמוֹ וְהִשְׁכִּים בַּבֹּקֶר וְזָכָה בּוֹ לְעַצְמוֹ וּבְצָרוֹ חַיָּב בְּפֶרֶט וּבְעוֹלֵלוֹת וּבְשִׁכְחָה וּבְפֵאָה שֶׁהֲרֵי שָׂדְךָ וְכַרְמְךָ אֲנִי קוֹרֵא בּוֹ מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהָיָה שֶׁלּוֹ וַהֲרֵי הוּא שֶׁלּוֹ. אֲבָל אִם זָכָה מִן הַהֶפְקֵר בְּשָׂדֶה שֶׁל אֲחֵרִים הֲרֵי זֶה פָּטוּר מִן הַכּל. וּבֵין כָּךְ וּבֵין כָּךְ פָּטוּר מִן הַמַּעַשְׂרוֹת כְּמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר:

If one declares one's field "ownerless" [and thus community property] and he [the former owner] then gets up one morning and repossesses it and harvests grapes from it, one is obligated to give peret, olélot, shikhecha, and péah, for this is [what is it says in Scripture], (Lev. 19:9-10), Your field...your vineyard. I read this to mean that because it was his and now it is his [again], [he is obligated to give these things to the poor]. But if one took possession of that which was declared ownerless from others, then one is exempt from all, and in any case one is exempt from tithes as will be explained.117See Babylonian Talmud Bava Kamma 28a.