Question (Beraisa): If the king's officers took Reuven's grain:

If they took it for money that he owed, he must take Ma'aser (from other Tevel, and give the Ma'aseros to the proper recipients. The same applies to one who eats or damages Tevel!)

If he did not owe anything (they merely stole it), he is exempt.

Answer: That case is different, for he saves money (had they not taken his Tevel, they would have taken other money. One who damaged or even ate Tevel did not save money. He could have fasted!)

Question (Mishnah): If Reuven bought the innards of a cow from a butcher, Reuven gives the stomach to a Kohen, without deducting from the price;

If Reuven bought by weight, he gives the stomach to a Kohen, and does not pay for its weight.

Why must he give to a Kohen? Selling it is like damaging it. We should say that there is no longer a Mitzvah to give it!

Answer: When the Matanos are intact, they must be given.

Question (Beraisa): Nine (of the 24) Matnos Kehunah are the property of the Kohen:

Terumah, Terumas Ma'aser, Chalah, Reishis ha'Gez, Matanos, Terumas Ma'aser of Demai, Bikurim, Keren v'Chomesh (the principal of Gezel ha'Ger and its added fifth. Rashi lists six other Matnos Kehunah that are the property of the Kohen; some pairs are counted like one, so the total is nine. Tosfos' text says seven; the Tana excludes Reishis ha'Gez, for it is permitted to Zarim, and it does not Tovel (forbid shearings before it is given). 'Keren v'Chomesh' refers to payment for Terumah eaten by a Zar, and they are counted like one.)

Suggestion: These are called the property of the Kohen to teach that if one eats or damages them, he must pay the Kohen!

Answer: No. Rather, it teaches as follows;

(Mishnah): These are called property of the Kohen to teach that he may buy with them slaves, land, or Tamei animals. He may use them to pay a debt or Kesuvah, or to buy a Sefer Torah (even though a Sefer Torah has no connection to food. One may not even rent it out to get money for food.)

A certain Levi used to seize Matanos (being sent to a Kohen).

Rav: Is it not enough that we do not make him give, that he even grabs from others?!

Question: (Matanos are taken "Me'es ha'Am'.") Does Rav say that Leviyim are included in "ha'Am" (and therefore obligated to give them), or not?

If they are included, why do we not take from Leviyim?

If they are not included, why did Rav say "is it not enough that we do not make him give"? The Torah exempts him!

Answer: Rav is unsure whether they are included. (We do not make them give, due to the Safek.) (The following question is from a long Beraisa. The question is explained on Amud B, 3:a.)

Question (Rav Idi bar Avin - Beraisa): There are four Matnos Aniyim in a vineyard:

Peret (grapes that drop during harvesting), Olelos (deficient clusters), Shichechah (what is forgotten) and Pe'ah (a corner of the field or vineyard left unharvested).

There are three Matnos Aniyim of grain: Leket (sheaves that drop during harvesting), Shichechah and Pe'ah;

There are two Matanos on trees - Shichechah and Pe'ah.

Regarding all of these, the owner has no Tovas Hana'ah (he may not choose to which poor person to give them). Even if the owner is the poorest Yisrael in the world, if he took them, we force him to give them to other Aniyim.

A landowner has Tovas Hana'ah of Ma'aser Oni that is distributed from the house (i.e. in winter);

Even if he is poor, we force him to give it to other Aniyim.

Regarding other Matnos Kehunah, like Zero'a Lechayayim v'Kevah, we do not force a Kohen or Levi to give them to another Kohen or Levi (this will be explained).

We learn the four Matanos in a vineyard as follows;

"V'Charmecha Lo Se'olel, u'Feret Karmecha Lo Selaket" teaches about Olelos and Peret.

(R. Levi): "Ki Sivtzor Karmecha Lo Se'olel Acharecha" teaches about Shichechah;

We learn about Pe'ah from a Gezeirah Shavah "Acharecha-Acharecha" from olives:

(Beraisa - Tana d'Vei R. Yishmael): "When harvesting your olives, Lo Sefa'er Acharecha" - do not take the beauty (the corner).

We learn the three Matanos from grain (Leket, Shichechah and Pe'ah) from "Lo Sechaleh Pe'as Sadcha b'Kutzrecha v'Leket Ketzircha Lo Selaket" and "v'Shochachta Omer."

There are two Matanos from trees (Pe'ah and Shichechah);

(Tana d'Vei R. Yishmael): "Lo Sefa'er Acharecha" - do not take the beauty (the corner);

"Acharecha" teaches Shichechah.

Regarding all of these, the owner may not choose which poor person to give them to.

Question: What is the reason?

Answer: It says "Ta'azov (leave)."

Even if the owner is poor, if he took them, we force him to give them to other poor people. "Le'Oni vela'Ger Ta'azov" commands him to leave them.

The owner has Tovas Hana'ah of Ma'aser Oni that is distributed from the house (i.e. in winter).

Question: What is the reason?

Answer: It says "v'Nasata (you will give)."

Even if the owner is poor, we force him to give to other Aniyim;

(R. Ila'a): We learn from a Gezeirah Shavah "la'Ger-la'Ger" from other Matnos Aniyim that a poor owner is commanded to leave them.

Regarding other Matnos Kehunah, like Zero'a Lechayayim v'Kevah, we do not force a Kohen to give them to another Kohen, or a Levi to give to another Levi.

Inference: We do force a Levi to give them to a Kohen!

Summation of question: Why did Rav not learn from this Beraisa that Leviyim are included in "ha'Am" (and must give Matanos)?

Answer: The Beraisa discusses Matanos like Zero'a Lechayayim v'Kevah, but not Zero'a Lechayayim v'Kevah themselves.

Question: Which Matanos does it discuss?

Answer #1: It discusses Ma'aser Rishon.

Question: A Levi receives Ma'aser Rishon. He need not give it to a Kohen!

Answer: The Beraisa is like R. Elazar ben Azaryah:

(Beraisa - R. Akiva): We give Terumah to a Kohen, and Ma'aser Rishon to a Levi;

R. Elazar ben Azaryah says, we give Ma'aser Rishon even to a Kohen.

Question: R. Elazar said only that we give it even to a Kohen. He did not say that we give it only to a Kohen!

Answer: He holds that after Ezra fined the Leviyim (for not returning to Eretz Yisrael at the beginning of Bayis Sheni), we give it only to a Kohen.

Objection: Ezra fined them so that Yisraelim will give only to Kohanim. He did not obligate Leviyim to give to Kohanim!

Answer #2: Rather, the Beraisa discusses Reishis ha'Gez. (Leviyim must give it to Kohanim.)

Question (Beraisa): The general rule is, anything with Kedushah (that is forbidden to a Zar), like Terumah, Terumas Ma'aser and Chalah, Leviyim must give to Kohanim;

Anything without Kedushah, like Zero'a Lechayayim v'Kevah, Leviyim need not give to Kohanim. (Rav should have learned from this Beraisa that Leviyim are not included in "ha'Am"!)

Answer: The Beraisa discusses Matanos like Zero'a Lechayayim v'Kevah, namely, Ma'aser Rishon.

Question (Beraisa): If one slaughters an animal for a Kohen or Nochri, he is exempt from Matanos.

Inference: If he slaughters for a Yisrael or Levi, he must give them!

Answer: No. If he slaughters for a Yisrael, he must give them.

Question #1: If one who slaughters for a Levi is exempt, the Beraisa should (explicitly) exempt one who slaughters for a Levi or Nochri!

Question #2 (Beraisa): If one slaughters for a Kohen or Nochri, he is exempt; if he slaughters for a Yisrael or Levi, he must give Matanos.

This refutes Rav!

Answer (to both questions): Tana'im argue about this;

(Beraisa #1): "V'Chiper Es Mikdash ha'Kodesh" - Avodah (on Yom Kipur) atones for transgressions of Tum'ah in the Mikdash. "Ohel Mo'ed" - (it atones for Tum'ah in) the Heichal. "Ha'Mizbe'ach" refers to the Mizbe'ach. "Yechaper" refers to the courtyards of the Mikdash. "Ha'Kohanim" teaches about the Kohanim. "Am ha'Kahal" teaches about Yisrael. "Yechaper" teaches about the Leviyim. (Leviyim are not included in "Am ha'Kahal");

(Beraisa #2): "Yechaper" - it atones for slaves. (This Tana must hold that Leviyim are included in "ha'Kahal.")

Question: If Rav says that the Halachah follows Tana #1, he should exempt Leviyim from Matanos. If the Halachah follows Tana #2, he should obligate them!

Answer: Rav was unsure whom the Halachah follows.

(Mereimar): The Halachah follows Rav, and Rav Chisda (who exempts one who damages Matnos Kehunah).