Fourth-year fruit has sanctity. There is a mitzva to eat it in a state of purity in Jerusalem, as with ma’aser sheni (see below, 7:9–10). If the owner wishes, he may redeem the fruit onto money, bring the money to Jerusalem, buy food with it, and eat that food there in purity. Since neta reva’i fruit has sanctity, one need not leave leket, shikḥa, or pe’a from it for the poor, nor must one separate terumot and ma’aserot from it (Mishna, Ma’aser Sheni 5:3–4; Yerushalmi, Ma’aser Sheni 5:3–4; MT, Laws of Second Tithe and Fourth-Year Fruit 9:1–4).
Today, since we cannot bring fourth-year fruit to Jerusalem and eat it there in a state of purity, one redeems such fruit onto money or onto food of monetary value, thereby permitting the fruit to be eaten. Even if the fruit is abundant, since we may not eat it today while it retains its sanctity, it has no real value. Nevertheless, it may not be redeemed for less than a peruta. Therefore, one redeems all the fruit onto a coin worth at least a peruta, or onto food worth a peruta. Before redeeming it, one recites: “Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the universe, Who has sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us regarding the redemption of fourth-year produce.” One then says: “All this fruit is hereby redeemed onto this peruta,” or “onto this food, which is worth a peruta.” The coin or food onto which the sanctity was transferred must then be destroyed, so that no one will mistakenly derive benefit from it (MT, Laws of Forbidden Foods 10:16–17). The details of these laws are explained below, in the laws of redeeming ma’aser sheni (chapter 10, sections 6–8).[14]
The laws of orla and neta reva’i also apply to Shemita fruit. Fruit that grows during the tree’s first three years has the status of orla and may not be eaten. Fruit that grows in the fourth year may be picked by anyone, but it must be eaten in Jerusalem. Today, it must be redeemed onto a peruta. Field owners must mark such trees during the Shemita year, so that those who enter the field will know not to eat fruit that is orla and to redeem fruit that is neta reva’i. After it is redeemed, care must be taken to finish eating it by the time of bi’ur. If one did not do so, one must perform bi’ur for it, just as one does with all other Shemita produce (MT, Laws of Second Tithe and Fourth-Year Fruit 9:7; Peninei Halakha: Shevi’it 4:5).
The halakhic authorities disagree about neta reva’i in the Diaspora. Some maintain that since a halakha transmitted to Moshe at Sinai establishes that orla applies outside Eretz Yisrael, neta reva’i applies there as well, because the two laws are linked (Rabbeinu Yona; R. Yitzḥak Ha-zaken). Others maintain that neta reva’i is like ma’aser sheni, which applies only in Eretz Yisrael (Rambam). Ideally, in order to satisfy all views, one should redeem neta reva’i in the Diaspora without reciting a berakha (Shakh YD 294:17). Nevertheless, one may rely on the lenient view and not redeem it. Just as fruit whose orla status is uncertain is permitted in the Diaspora, so too, when there is uncertainty about neta reva’i in the Diaspora, the halakha follows the lenient view.[15]
[14]. The halakhic authorities disagree about one who redeems his own neta reva’i fruit. Some maintain that he must add a fifth, just as with ma’aser sheni (Mishpetei Eretz 12:6). Others maintain that he need not add a fifth, because the Torah does not mention that requirement with regard to neta reva’i. Accordingly, today all such fruit is redeemed onto a single peruta (Kesef Mishneh on MT, Laws of Forbidden Foods 10:17; SA YD 294:6). Even one who wishes to be stringent should take care: saying, ‘It and its fifth are redeemed onto this peruta,’ risks leaving the fruit redeemed onto less than a peruta. (Or Le-Tziyon, vol. 1, YD 25).
Fourth-year fruit may be redeemed only after it has been picked. In pressing circumstances, however, one may redeem it while it is still attached, provided that he stipulates that the redemption will take effect only after it is picked. One should not recite a berakha at that time, because the redemption has not yet taken effect. This stipulation works only if the fruit has already reached the stage at which one must separate tithes from it, meaning that it could be eaten in pressing circumstances, and only if the coin remains available until after the fruit is picked.
[15]. Some maintain that in the Diaspora, neta reva’i applies only to a vineyard, not to other plantings, and not even to an individual grapevine unless it is planted as part of a vineyard (see below, 4:3). This is because the Tanna’im disagree whether the law of fourth-year fruit applies to all trees or only to a vineyard. Although in Eretz Yisrael the halakha follows the view that it applies to all trees, in the Diaspora the halakha follows the lenient opinion, namely, that it applies only to a vineyard (Geonim; Rosh; Rema). In practice, ideally one should redeem fourth-year fruit from all trees in the Diaspora, in order to take all views into account. Strictly speaking, however, since when it is uncertain whether fruit is orla, the ruling in the Diaspora is lenient, one may likewise be lenient when it is uncertain whether kerem reva’i applies in the Diaspora, and all the more so when it is uncertain whether neta reva’i applies.
Some maintain that just as orla applies by Torah law today, so too neta reva’i applies by Torah law today (Mabit; see Minḥat Shlomo 1:71:13). Others maintain that neta reva’i follows the law of ma’aser sheni. According to Rambam and those who agree with him that terumot and ma’aserot today are rabbinic, neta reva’i is likewise rabbinic (Minḥat Ḥinukh 247:15; Yeshu’ot Malko).
The mitzva of eating ma’aser sheni fruit can apparently be fulfilled only when the Temple is standing and the altar is in its place. Rambam writes (MT, Laws of Second Tithe and Fourth-Year Fruit 2:1) that ma’aser sheni may not be eaten in Jerusalem today, because it is compared to the firstborn offering, which may be eaten only when the altar is in its place (Makkot 19a). Rambam further writes there (ibid. 9:1) that neta reva’i has the same law as ma’aser sheni, and the Vilna Gaon rules likewise (YD 294:17).
