Question (R. Zeira to R. Abahu): What is the source that Netah Revay needs to be redeemed?

Answer (R. Abahu): The pasuk states (Vayikra 19:24), "...shall be sanctified to praise'' [Kodesh Hilulim] and it is expounded as reading 'Kodesh Chilulim' - 'sanctified to be redeemed' as the Rabbis interchange the letter 'Hei' with the letter 'Ches'.

R. Aivu bar Nagri taught this teaching of R. Yishmael to R. Ila - the pasuk states (Vayikra 27:31), "And if a man redeems some of his tithe, he shall add its fifth to it'' - this excludes Netah Revay, where a fifth is not added.

He then taught before him that there are two redemptions (indicated in the double wording of the pasuk) - of Maaser (Sheni) and of Netah Revay.

(Mishnah in Maseches Terumos): R. Yehuda says that for a gentile, there is no law of Kerem Revay in Suria. The Chachamim disagree.

(R. Elazar): The Mishnah actually teaches that there is no Kerem Revay for a gentile at all.

(Rav Bayvei): They asked about R. Zeira's teaching in the name of R. Eliezer- R. Yehuda follows Beis Shammai - according to Rebbi - just as Beis Shammai say that they learned Netah Revay from Maaser Sheni - just as there is no Maaser Sheni in Sheviis, so too there is no Netah Revay in Sheviis - similarly, R. Yehuda says that they learned Netah Revay from Maaser Sheni and just as there is no Maaser Sheni in Suria, so too there is no Netah Revay in Suria (like Beis Shammai).

(R. Zeira): Look at what Beis Shammai said - they only said that there is no need to add a fifth and there is no Biur (of Netah Revay); this means that it still has sanctity in Suria; (but R. Yehuda says that there is no sanctity of Netah Revay in Suria at all!)

As said, R. Yehuda says that there is no sanctity of Netah Revay in Suria. Shmuel bar Abba asked - But Beis Shammai learned Netah Revay from Maaser Sheni - just as there is no Maaser Sheni in Sheviis, similarly there is no Netah Revah in Sheviis; so too if in the third and sixth year (of the Shemittah cycle) there is no Maaser Sheni separated, there should also be no Netah Revay in those years...?

(R. Yosi): In the third and sixth years, although there is no Maaser Sheni, there is Maaser Ani; but in Sheviis, there is no Maaser at all!

Question (Chaifa to R. Yudah): We said that Netah Revay is learned from Maaser Sheni - just as there is no Maaser Sheni in Suria, so too there is no Netah Revay in Suria. Similarly, let's say that since they learned Terumas Todah (1/10th of the Todah loaves i.e. 4 of the 40 loaves, are given to the Kohen) from Terumas Maaser (1/10th of Maaser Rishon received by the Levi is given to the Kohen) - just as there was no Terumas Maaser in the desert, so too there was no Terumas Todah in the desert...?

(R. Yosi): They only learn from it the quantity that must be given.

Baraisa (R. Yosi b'R. Yehuda/ R. Eliezer b' R. Shimon): Yisrael only became obligated in Netah Revay after the 14 years - 7 years of conquering and 7 years of dividing the Land.

(Rav Chisda): R. Yosi b'R. Yehuda is following the view of R. Yehuda his father - just as R. Yehuda said that Netah Revay is learned from Maaser Sheni, which didn't apply until after the 14 years, so too Netah Revay. (R. Yehuda also says that there is no Netah Revay in Suria.)

(R. Yosi): R. Yehuda actually followed his son's view - Suria was learned from the 14 years but the 14 years were not learned from Suria. (The 14 years exemption preceded the Suria exemption (which was only relevant many years later when King David conquered Suria) - if so, it should say that R. Yehuda learned that since there was no obligation of Revay in the 14 years, so too there is no obligation of Revay in Suria, like Maaser.)

The pasuk states (Vayikra 19:25), "And in the fifth year, you may consume its fruit''. R. Yosi Haglili says - (Isn't it obvious that if the Torah only prohibited the first four years, that its fifth year is permitted? Rather,) it is to add a law of the produce of the fifth year to that of the fourth year. Just as the fifth year's produce belongs to the owner, so too the fourth year's produce.

(R. Zeira/ R. Yosi citing R. Yochanan): R. Yosi Haglili follows R. Yehuda that he views the fourth year produce as his own.

Question (R. Yirmiyah to R. Zeira): According to the one who views it as his own, is it obligated in Maaseros?

Answer (R. Zeira): It is like R. Yehoshua ben Levi, as R. Avun said in his name - this Halacha is not the end of the matter; rather, any Halacha that is in doubt in Beis Din and you do not know its resolution, go and see how the people act and act that way - and we see that the people do not separate Maaser.

Question (R. Mana): The actions of the people are no proof - the question was according to Beis Shammai!

(R. Avun): (Proof for Beis Shammai) Since Beis Shammai learned Netah Revay from Maaser Sheni, we can say that just as Maaser Sheni (if the wrong order was used and it was separated before Maaser Rishon, it) is not obligated in Maaser Rishon, so too Netah Revay is not obligated in Maaser.

(R. Ba/ R. Chiya citing R. Yochanan): A dough of Maaser Sheni in Yerushalayim, according to R. Meir (who views Maaser Sheni money as 'Mamon Gavo'ah' - 'the property of Hashem'), is exempt from Challah; according to R. Yehuda, it is obligated in Challah.

(R. Yona): This is true only inside Yerushalayim, but if the dough was made outside, it is certainly exempt from Challah.

Question (R. Ba bar Kohen to R. Yosi): According to Beis Shammai who (in the Mishnah) obligated Kerem Revay in Peret, is it obligated in Challah?

Answer (R. Yosi): It is R. Yehuda who reasoned like Beis Shammai (and R. Yehuda views Maaser Sheni as 'property of the owner'), so it is certainly obligated in Challah, even outside Yerushalayim.