Peninei Halakha

6 – Gifts to the Poor

01. The Five Gifts to the Poor

A person is commanded to share the blessing of his produce with the poor in several ways. First, he leaves produce for them at the edge of his field; this is pe’a. If during harvesting or picking he forgets a small amount of grain or fruit, he must leave it for the poor; this forgotten produce is shikḥa. Individual stalks of grain that fall during the harvest are leket, and individual grapes that fall during the grape harvest are peret; these too must be left for the poor. Likewise, he must leave the poor the olelot – small, underdeveloped grape clusters.

Altogether, these gifts are five: pe’a, shikḥa, leket, peret, and olelot. The Torah states: “When you reap the harvest of your land, you shall not reap all the way to the edge of your field, nor shall you gather the gleanings of your harvest. You shall not strip your vineyard bare, nor gather the fallen grapes of your vineyard; you shall leave them for the poor and the stranger. I am the Lord your God” (Vayikra 19:9–10). Similarly, it states: “When you reap your harvest in your field and forget a sheaf in the field, you shall not go back to take it; it shall be for the stranger, the orphan, and the widow, so that the Lord your God may bless you in all the work of your hands” (Devarim 24:19).

The mitzva to leave gifts for the poor applies to produce grown for human consumption, provided it meets five conditions:

  1. The crop must grow from the ground. This excludes truffles and mushrooms, which draw their nourishment from the air.
  2. It must be fit for human consumption. The obligation does not apply to crops grown as animal fodder or for producing thread or dyes.
  3. It must be protected as someone’s property. Produce that grew ownerless, or that the owner declared ownerless, is not subject to the obligation.
  4. It must be gathered as a single crop. In other words, it is reaped or picked continuously, even if the process takes several days. Fruits such as figs, which do not ripen together and therefore are not gathered together, are not subject to the obligation.
  5. It must be brought in for storage. This means that people commonly preserve it for an extended time, as they do with grain and legumes; olives, which keep as oil or as pickled olives; grapes, which keep as wine or raisins; and almonds, walnuts, dates, pomegranates, carobs, onions, and garlic. By contrast, produce that is normally eaten soon after picking – such as cucumbers, tomatoes, lettuce, watermelons, citrus fruit, apples, pears, and peaches – is not subject to the gifts to the poor. In practice, the obligation applies to grain, legumes, some tree fruit, and a few vegetables, such as onions and garlic; it does not apply to almost all vegetables or to most tree fruit.

At least two gifts must be left from every crop subject to gifts to the poor: pe’a and shikḥa. Grain and legumes that are reaped or picked require a third gift: leket. Grapes require four gifts: pe’a, shikḥa, peret – the grape equivalent of leket – and olelot.[1]

[1]. In the count of mitzvot, each of the five gifts includes both a positive mitzva and a negative mitzva (Rambam, Sefer ha-Mitzvot, Positive Commandments 120–124; Negative Commandments 210–214). The five criteria listed above apply to all five gifts to the poor (Rashi, Ḥullin 134b, s.v. ḥayav; Rashba and Ritva to Kiddushin 2b). Torat Kohanim to Vayikra 19:9 explains that these gifts apply by Torah law to any species that meets these five conditions. This is also the view of Behag, Rashi, Rambam, Rashbam, Ramban, Ra’ah, and Ran. Many later authorities incline this way as well (Pe’at ha-Shulḥan; Sha’arei Tzedek; Arukh ha-Shulḥan 1:8).

Other authorities maintain that the statement of Torat Kohanim is only an asmakhta. In their view, the Torah obligation applies only to grain, grapes, and olives: grain, because an unspecified “harvest” in the Torah generally refers to grain; and grapes and olives, because the Torah mentions them explicitly (Rabbeinu Tam and Rashba to Shabbat 68a; R. Shimshon and Rosh). The mitzva to leave gifts to the poor applies only to a regular harvest or picking, that is, when the produce is gathered for storage over several days or for wholesale sale. Incidental harvesting or picking is exempt – for example, when one gathers produce for his household’s food for that day, or for an occasional sale to a neighbor. Olelot are the exception, since they belong to the poor from the outset (MT, Laws of Gifts to the Poor 2:6; 4:27). The law in cases of uncertainty is explained below, section 6 and note 6.

02. The Torah’s Guidance in Helping the Poor

The Torah commands us to help the poor in four ways. The first and most central is through the gifts that the poor would gather by their own efforts from the fields. The second is tzedaka: direct assistance that helps meet their basic needs. Its highest form is helping them find work. The third is ma’aser ani, the poor tithe. After landowners gathered their produce, they would separate terumot and ma’asrot. In most years, this included ma’aser sheni; in the third and sixth years of the seven-year shemita cycle, however, ma’aser ani was separated in its place and given to the poor. In this way, the poor received a regular source of support that helped sustain them in relative comfort for two years of the seven-year cycle (see below, 7:9). The fourth is including the poor in one’s celebrations, especially the festival meals at which people ate the fruit of ma’aser sheni and the meat of the ma’aser behema offering (see below, 7:10; Peninei Halakha: Mo’adim 1:11).

In this chapter, we will address the primary way the poor sustained themselves in earlier times. According to a careful estimate, these gifts amounted to approximately three to four percent of the crop, and slightly more in the case of grapes.[2] Today, however, because food has become far less expensive and the general standard of living has risen dramatically, gathering these gifts from the fields no longer provides meaningful benefit to the poor, as will be explained below in section 9.

Nevertheless, the principles behind these mitzvot still teach us how to help the poor properly. First, aid to the poor should, as much as possible, allow them to share responsibility for their own situation. Therefore, they were expected to come to the fields and gather the gifts by their own efforts. Second, it is proper for a property owner to share the fruit of his assets with the poor. Therefore, the mitzva is not to give the poor money from the sale of the crop, but to let them gather from the crop itself. Third, help for the poor should be structured so that the cost to the wealthy is small and the benefit to the poor is great.

There is immense wisdom in these mitzvot. For example, if a field owner pays a worker one hundred shekels to harvest 100 kilograms of regular produce, gathering the same weight of leket, shikḥa, peret, or olelot would cost at least five times as much. Thus, the poor, who in any case had no better work available, gained significantly by gathering the leftover produce in the fields, while the field owner lost very little. Indeed, he even gained somewhat: removing fruit forgotten on the trees prevents pests from being drawn to the trees and spreading disease. This is especially true of grapevines, which are more prone to disease; leaving olelot on them can likewise lead to disease. Similarly, individual grapes that fell from the clusters were usually of lower quality, so the vineyard owner’s loss was small, while the poor could rejoice in the wine they prepared from them.

Regarding pe’a, it is true that harvesting or picking the pe’a costs the owner just as much as harvesting the rest of the field’s grain or fruit. Indeed, by Torah law, one fulfills the mitzva even by leaving a single stalk. Even so, there is wisdom in requiring pe’a to be left at the end of the field: by then, landowners are tired from their work, and generosity comes more easily to them, making it easier for them to leave pe’a for the poor. This is even more apparent when owners of fruit trees choose to leave as pe’a the fruit at the top of the tree. Such fruit is difficult for workers to reach, but poor children can climb up and pick it with relative ease.

The Torah returns to the mitzva of gifts to the poor in the middle of the section on the festivals, when Israel would make the pilgrimage to the Temple, as it states: “When you reap the harvest of your land, you shall not reap all the way to the edge of your field when you reap, nor shall you gather the gleanings of your harvest; you shall leave them for the poor and the stranger. I am the Lord your God” (Vayikra 23:22). The Sages explain that by placing this mitzva here, the Torah implies that “whoever gives leket, shikḥa, and pe’a to the poor properly is regarded as though he built the Temple and offered his sacrifices within it” (Rashi, Vayikra 23:22).

From this we learn that when a person brings the ideals of kindness and tzedaka expressed in the gifts to the poor into his place of work – preserving the efficiency of the business while also helping the poor – he thereby extends the sanctity of the Temple into that workplace. May we merit to draw inspiration and guidance from these mitzvot, so that we extend the sanctity of the Temple into every business and enterprise. In this way, the help we extend to every person in need will be like an offering that rises as a pleasing aroma to God.[3]

[2]. The rabbinic minimum for pe’a is one-sixtieth of the crop, and the Sages often encouraged giving more (see below, section 3). Leket is estimated at 1/337.5 of the crop (see below, section 5). Shikḥa depends on the attentiveness of the workers, but it can be estimated at no less than half a percent. Together, leket and peret presumably added at least another half percent. In the case of grapes, olelot likely added an additional one or two percent.

[3]. The Sages state (Yevamot 47a) that before conversion, prospective converts are taught only some of the mitzvot – a few severe ones and a few lenient ones. We do not teach them many halakhot at once, because even when the intention is for the sake of Heaven, doing so may frighten them and cause them to refrain from converting. Nevertheless, the Sages made sure that the mitzvot of gifts to the poor were among those taught to them, for three reasons. First, many converts were poor and stood to benefit greatly from these gifts. Second, if one of them was wealthy and bought a field, there was concern that he might think the poor who came to gather their gifts were stealing from him, and might even kill them, as was not uncommon in those times. Third, these mitzvot are especially important because they express the value of gemilut ḥasadim, acts of kindness. Indeed, Ruth the Moabite, the foremost convert, came to the field to gather the gifts left for the poor; through this she became connected to Boaz and married him. From them emerged the monarchy of Israel, the dynasty of the House of David, as described in the Book of Ruth.

03. Pe’a

The mitzva of pe’a requires the owner of a field or orchard to leave at least one-sixtieth of the crop for the poor. By Torah law, however, pe’a has no fixed minimum. Even if one left a single stalk at the end of his field, he fulfilled his obligation, as the Torah states: “You shall not reap all the way to the edge of your field” (Vayikra 19:9). Since he left even one stalk, he did not fully reap his field. The Sages, however, enacted that one must leave the poor at least one-sixtieth, nearly two percent of the crop. They further stated that in three situations it is proper to leave more than one-sixtieth as pe’a: when there are many poor people; when the field has been especially blessed; and when the field is small, so that one-sixtieth would provide almost no benefit to the poor (Mishna, Pe’a 1:1–2; MT, Laws of Gifts to the Poor 1:15).

Pe’a must be given at the end of the harvest or picking, as the verse states: “You shall not reap all the way to the edge of your field when you reap” (Vayikra 19:9). Several reasons are given for this requirement. First, it prevents stealing from the poor. If the landowner could designate pe’a whenever he wished, he could arrange to do so when only a poor relative or friend was nearby, allowing that person to take the pe’a before any other poor people arrived. He would thereby be stealing from the other poor. Second, it prevents the poor from wasting time. Knowing that pe’a will be left only at the end of the harvest, they can estimate when the landowner will finish and use the meantime for their own affairs or to gather in other fields. Third, it prevents fraud. If pe’a could be designated from any part of the field, dishonest landowners might claim that they had already set it aside, or they might choose only the poorest-quality produce. Therefore, the mitzva requires pe’a to be left from what remains at the end, whether of good or poor quality.

Fourth, it avoids a concern of marit ayin. If pe’a were set aside in the middle of the field, people who later saw the end of the field fully harvested might suspect that the owner had failed to leave pe’a at all (Yerushalmi, Pe’a 4:3; MT, Laws of Gifts to the Poor 2:12).[4]

One may not leave pe’a from one species for another, nor from one field for another, even if both fields contain the same species. The mitzva is for the owner to share the blessing of each field with the poor by leaving that field’s own pe’a. Even adjacent fields are treated as separate when a stream, path, or other divider runs between them, so that they are not plowed and harvested together. In such a case, the owner must leave pe’a from each field separately (MT, Laws of Gifts to the Poor 3:1–3). In an orchard, however, a path or stream does not divide the planting, because the trees still appear as a single unit. Only when a fence separates the two sections must the owner leave pe’a from each section independently (MT, Laws of Gifts to the Poor 3:19).

[4]. In a large field, the landowner may leave one-sixtieth of each row as pe’a at the end of the row. This is explained in Mishna, Pe’a 4:5, and Yerushalmi, Pe’a 4:3, where the Sages praised Beit Namer for leaving pe’a at the end of every row. Pe’at ha-Shulḥan, Pe’a 5:22, rules likewise. The benefit of this practice is that the poor do not need to determine when the entire harvest or picking will be finished. Instead, they can come at any of the three times when the field is opened to the poor and collect their gifts, as explained below in section 8.

It seems that one may also fulfill the mitzva of pe’a for trees by leaving one-sixtieth of each tree’s fruit at its top. The law of tree pe’a is derived from the verse: “When you beat your olive tree, you shall not remove its glory after you; it shall be for the stranger, the orphan, and the widow” (Devarim 24:20). The academy of R. Yishmael taught: “Do not take its splendor from it” (Ḥullin 131b). This understanding is supported by Ramban and Ha-Ketav ve-ha-Kabbala, who explain that the verse refers to the fruit at the top of the tree: tefa’er is related to “the splendor of the hilltops,” meaning the fruit at the tree’s crown. This practice may have an additional advantage: fruit at the top of the tree is difficult for workers to reach, so the owner may naturally leave more than one-sixtieth there. At the same time, children can climb trees more easily than adult workers, making these fruits especially accessible to poor orphans.

04. Shikḥa

If one forgets grain or fruit in the field, it is a mitzva to leave it for the poor, as the Torah states: “When you reap your harvest in your field and forget a sheaf in the field, you shall not go back to take it; it shall be for the stranger, the orphan, and the widow, so that the Lord your God may bless you in all the work of your hands” (Devarim 24:19). The same law applies to fruit left on trees, as the Torah continues: “When you beat your olive tree, you shall not remove its glory after you; it shall be for the stranger, the orphan, and the widow” (Devarim 24:20).

The mitzva of shikḥa applies at two stages. First, if one forgets grain or fruit during the harvest or picking, he may not return to harvest or pick it. Second, if he forgets sheaves of grain or bundles of fruit while bringing them to the place where the field’s or orchard’s yield is gathered, he must leave them for the poor (MT, Laws of Gifts to the Poor 1:6).

If the forgotten grain or fruit comprised the large measure of two se’a – approximately 14.4 liters – it is not considered shikḥa and belongs to the landowner. The Torah speaks of “a sheaf in the field.” A sheaf is a small or medium bundle of grain, not a large quantity that has the status of a stack. This limit applies only when the forgotten produce was all in one place. If, however, sheaves or fruit were forgotten in several places throughout the field or orchard, each location is considered separately. Therefore, as long as each place contained less than two se’a, all of it must be left for the poor, even if the combined total is one hundred se’a or more (MT, Laws of Gifts to the Poor 5:18).[5]

If the forgotten sheaves or bundles were adjacent to one another, two adjacent sheaves or bundles still have the status of shikḥa. Three adjacent sheaves or bundles, however, are not shikḥa, even if the three together amount to less than two se’a. Similarly, if one forgot to pick two consecutive trees, they are shikḥa; if he forgot three or more consecutive trees, they are not shikḥa (MT, Laws of Gifts to the Poor 5:14–16). If one forgot a tree with a distinctive identity – for example, one that produced especially delicious fruit or stood in a distinctive location – it is not shikḥa, because the orchard owner remembers it even without seeing it (MT, Laws of Gifts to the Poor 5:23–24).

The mitzva of shikḥa is unique in that it comes to a person from Heaven, without his intending it. The Sages tell of a pious man who once forgot a sheaf in his field and was filled with joy. He told his son: “Go and offer on my behalf a bull as a burnt offering and a bull as a peace offering,” in gratitude for the mitzva that God had arranged for him (Tosefta, Pe’a 3:8). For most mitzvot, a person acts with awareness and intention. This mitzva is different: he fulfills it without awareness, because God brings it into his hands in order to bless him. As the verse states: “When you reap your harvest in your field and forget a sheaf in the field, you shall not go back to take it; it shall be for the stranger, the orphan, and the widow, so that the Lord your God may bless you in all the work of your hands” (Devarim 24:19).

[5]. According to Rambam (MT, Laws of Gifts to the Poor 5:22), if one forgot one or two trees, they have the status of shikḥa even if each tree contained more than two se’a. In his view, the two-se’a threshold applies only to forgotten sheaves, not to trees. Sha’arei Tzedek rules likewise. Raavad, R. Shlomo Sirilio, and Pe’at ha-Shulḥan, however, maintain that the two-se’a threshold applies to trees as well. Thus, if a forgotten tree contains two se’a or more, it does not have the status of shikḥa. This also appears to be the view of R. Shimshon and Rosh. Their position is compelling, since the basic mitzva of shikḥa applies to forgotten quantities that are not especially large.

05. Leket

During the harvest, stalks sometimes fall to the ground. If one or two stalks fall in a single cut, they must be left for the poor to collect. If three or more fall, they belong to the landowner. The same applies to legumes: if one or two stems fall in a single act of picking, they must be left for the poor; if three or more fall, the landowner may take them. This mitzva is called leket. It applies to grain, legumes, and vegetables that are subject to pe’a. It does not apply to tree fruit, except for grapes. If one or two grapes fall during the grape harvest, there is a mitzva to leave them for the poor; this is peret. Thus the Torah states: “When you reap the harvest of your land, you shall not reap all the way to the edge of your field, nor shall you gather the gleanings of your harvest… nor shall you gather the fallen grapes of your vineyard; you shall leave them for the poor and the stranger. I am the Lord your God” (Vayikra 19:9–10).

Only produce that fell in the normal manner of harvesting is considered leket – that is, stalks that fall during the harvest of grain, or legumes that fall during picking. As the verse says, “nor shall you gather the gleanings of your harvest,” meaning only what falls in the manner of your harvest. If, however, one pulled the grain out by hand, then since he did not harvest in the manner of harvesters, whatever fell is not leket. Similarly, if stalks fell because a thorn pierced his hand, or because of some other external cause, the fallen stalks do not have the status of leket; they belong to the field owner (Yerushalmi, Pe’a 4:7; MT, Laws of Gifts to the Poor 4:1–2).

If a wind blew the landowner’s stalks into the leket left in the field, and the amount of leket can no longer be determined, the landowner must give the poor the average amount normally left as leket: 1/337.5 of the crop, approximately one-third of one percent (Bava Metzia 105b; MT, Laws of Gifts to the Poor 4:5; Derekh Emuna 4:31).

06. Peret and Olelot of Grapes

As we have learned, grapes are the only tree fruit to which a mitzva parallel to leket applies. This mitzva is called peret. In addition, grapes have another distinctive mitzva: leaving the olelot for the poor, as it says: “You shall not strip your vineyard bare, nor shall you gather the fallen grapes of your vineyard” (Vayikra 19:10). Thus, the Torah gives the poor a larger share of the grape harvest. From the vineyard owner’s perspective, it is fitting that he share with the poor the produce that brings him special joy. From the perspective of the poor, they too should be able to rejoice in the wine they prepare from the grapes of peret and olelot.

Peret comes from a word meaning “separated.” It refers to individual grapes that become detached from the cluster during the grape harvest. If, while picking a cluster, one or two grapes fall, they must be left for the poor. If three or more grapes fall, they belong to the vineyard owner. Similarly, if the cluster falls to the ground and one or two grapes become detached from it, they must be left for the poor; if three or more become detached, the vineyard owner may take them. If one or two grapes fall at a time, then even if many grapes fall there altogether, they all belong to the poor. If, however, the cluster became entangled in leaves and therefore fell to the ground, or if a thorn caused the picker to drop it, then even if one or two grapes became detached from the cluster, they do not have the status of peret, since they did not become separated in the ordinary course of the grape harvest (MT, Laws of Gifts to the Poor 4:15–16).

Olelot are small, underdeveloped grape clusters. Compared to ordinary clusters, they are like infants beside adults. A regular grape cluster is made up of pesigim – smaller branching stems on which the grapes grow. When grapes grow densely along the cluster, the upper pesig rests on the grapes beneath it, forming what looks like the cluster’s “shoulder,” while the end of the lower pesig hangs downward like a “drop.”

The olelot that must be left for the poor are clusters lacking both a shoulder and a drop. If a cluster has either of these features, it is not an olelet. If there is doubt, one must leave it for the poor, because uncertain gifts to the poor belong to the poor. If an entire vineyard consists of olelot, the entire vineyard belongs to the poor (Mishna, Pe’a 7:4; MT, Laws of Gifts to the Poor 4:17–21).[6]

[6]. The Yerushalmi gives another criterion for defining olelot (Pe’a 7:3): the grapes must be so sparse that, if the cluster were placed on a tray, each grape would touch the tray. This is the ruling of Rambam and Raavad (MT, Laws of Gifts to the Poor 4:18), as explained by Kesef Mishneh and Mahari Kurkus. R. Shimshon and Rosh, however, understand the Yerushalmi differently. In their view, it does not add a further criterion to the definition of olelot. Rather, it addresses a separate case: if an isolated grape is separated from the cluster by the distance of a tabla – a measure whose precise size is unknown – that grape has the status of olelot. If the distance is less than that, it does not.

The Mishna states the general rule: “Doubtful leket is leket” (Mishna, Pe’a 4:11). Similarly, regarding olelot, it states: “If there is doubt, it belongs to the poor” (Mishna, Pe’a 7:4). The basis for this rule is the verse, “Vindicate the poor and destitute” (Tehilim 82:3), which the Sages interpret to mean: “Vindicate him from what is yours and give it to him” (Ḥullin 134a). This means that once the obligation of gifts to the poor certainly applies to a field, or once the crop in question is certainly of a type to which these gifts apply, any doubt about particular stalks or clusters is resolved in favor of the poor.

If, however, the doubt concerns whether there is any obligation at all – for example, whether the species keeps in storage, or whether it is gathered all at once, as discussed above in section 1 – one is exempt. In such cases, the ordinary rule of monetary claims applies: the burden of proof rests on the claimant (Mahariṭ 1:39:6; Ḥatam Sofer, Nedarim 7a; Ḥazon Ish, Ma’asrot 7:10).

07. General Rules of the Mitzva

The field owner must open his field to all the poor, so that they can all gather their gifts. He may not favor one poor person over another. If he denies certain poor people permission to enter his field, he violates the prohibition against theft, for he has stolen their share of the gifts (MT, Laws of Gifts to the Poor 1:8; 4:12).[7]

Only the poor themselves may gather these gifts. A person who is not poor may not gather the gifts on behalf of a poor friend who cannot come to the field. If the field owner, or any other person who is not poor, gathered the gifts for a particular poor person, that poor person has not acquired them. The one who gathered them unlawfully must place them before the first poor person he meets (MT, Laws of Gifts to the Poor 2:19).

If the field owner hired a poor worker to harvest his field, the worker’s son or wife may gather after him and take from the pe’a, provided that they are treated like all the other poor people (Bava Metzia 12a–b; MT, Laws of Gifts to the Poor 4:11). Moreover, after finishing his work, the poor worker himself may take from whatever gifts remain in the field, so long as he had not earlier prevented the other poor people from taking them (MT, Laws of Gifts to the Poor 6:15).

The mitzva is to leave the gifts for the poor at the time of harvest or picking. If, however, thieves harvested the grain or picked the fruit, then left it in the field and fled, the field owner is exempt from the obligation to leave gifts to the poor (MT, Laws of Gifts to the Poor 2:4).

If one harvested the entire field and did not leave pe’a, he violated a Torah prohibition. Nevertheless, he is not yet liable to lashes, since the violation can still be corrected: he can give the poor a portion of what he harvested or picked. If, however, he already sold all the produce, or if it was lost or burned, the violation can no longer be corrected, and he becomes liable to lashes (MT, Laws of Gifts to the Poor 1:1–5).

Even a poor field owner must leave the gifts for other poor people. For purposes of his own field, he is considered wealthy (see Bava Metzia 12a; MT, Laws of Gifts to the Poor 1:8).

Even if the poor were delayed and did not come to take their gifts at the time of harvest or picking, the field owner may not gather the gifts for himself until the time has passed when the last of the poor normally come to gather in the fields. At that point, the poor are considered to have given up hope of receiving the gifts. The field owner may then gather them, plow them under, or destroy them (Bava Metzia 21b).

Gifts to the poor are exempt from terumot and ma’asrot (MT, Laws of Terumot 2:9; see below, 8:4, note 7). They have no sanctity, and the poor person may do with them whatever he wishes, even feed them to animals (Arukh ha-Shulḥan 14:28).

[7]. Some Rishonim (Tosafot and Ran) maintain that the field owner may open his field only to the poor people he chooses. Their view is very difficult, however, since the foundation of the mitzva is to leave the gifts for the poor as a whole, as many Aḥaronim write. Pri Ḥadash explains this at length in Mayim Ḥayim to MT, Laws of Gifts to the Poor 1:8, based on Mishna, Pe’a 4:1; Shabbat 23b; and other sources.

08. Opening the Fields for the Poor to Gather

The poor may not enter the field to gather their gifts without the field owner’s permission. The field owner’s mitzva is to grant them access to the field, but not to gather or distribute the gifts for them. Rather, once he allows them to enter, each poor person gathers from the gifts according to his ability.

Once a poor person picks up the gifts, they belong to him, and anyone who snatches them from him commits theft. If he has not actually taken them but merely claimed them verbally or spread his garment over them, he has not acquired them, and any other poor person may still take them.

Even if ninety-nine elderly poor people ask the field owner to harvest the pe’a for them and divide it equally, while one young person asks that the poor be allowed to gather it themselves, each according to his ability, we listen to the young person, because he is asking that the mitzva be fulfilled properly – that the poor enter and gather with their own hands.

To prevent them from accidentally injuring one another while collecting their gifts, the Sages enacted that the poor must pick the pe’a by hand, not with tools such as sickles or axes. Nevertheless, when the fruit grows on a tall tree, such as a date palm, where the struggle to collect it could become dangerous, the Sages enacted that the field owner should pick the pe’a for all of them and divide it equally (Mishna, Pe’a 4:1–2, 4; MT, Laws of Gifts to the Poor 2:16–20).

The Sages established that field owners should open their fields to the poor three times each day, so that they could take from the pe’a and the other gifts. In the morning, the fields were opened for nursing mothers, who could then gather before their children woke up. At midday, they were opened for poor children who had risen late, as well as for children who had been occupied in the morning with Torah study. Toward evening, they were opened for the elderly, who had difficulty walking and seeing; by the time they had gathered the strength to go out to the fields, the time of minḥa had arrived. Setting fixed times served another purpose as well: it prevented field owners from coordinating the opening of the field with their poor relatives and thereby favoring them over the other poor (Yerushalmi, Pe’a 4:3; MT, Laws of Gifts to the Poor 2:14, 17).

Originally, it seems the poor would gather leket, shikḥa, peret, and olelot throughout the day, as the harvest or picking was taking place, while only pe’a was made available at the three fixed times. However, when the field owner was concerned that the poor might steal or damage the trees, these gifts too were gathered only at those three times, under his supervision.

Regarding pe’a, the practice seems to have been as follows: in small fields and orchards, once the harvest or picking was completed, the owner would wait until the next of the three fixed times and then allow the poor to gather the gifts. Thus, at least one of the three groups of poor people would be able to gather from that field or orchard.

In large fields and orchards, where the harvesting or picking proceeded row by row, at each of the three fixed times the owner would designate the ends of the rows that had already been harvested or picked as pe’a for the poor. In this way, all three groups of poor people could benefit from the pe’a.[8]

The field owner must supervise the gathering to ensure that people who are not poor do not take from the gifts. If, however, a person who is not poor comes to gather and the owner cannot stop him without creating conflict, he should let him gather together with the poor for the sake of peace (MT, Laws of Gifts to the Poor 4:13; Mahari Kurkus).

Although the gifts are intended for the Jewish poor, if non-Jewish poor people come together with them, they too may gather for the sake of peace (Gittin 59b; MT, Laws of Gifts to the Poor 1:9).

The Sages said that it is not proper for a Jew to employ non-Jewish workers to harvest or pick if they are unfamiliar with the laws of the gifts to the poor, lest they deprive the poor of what belongs to them (MT, Laws of Gifts to the Poor 2:10).

[8]. According to Rosh (to Mishna, Pe’a 4:5), leket and shikḥa were distributed at the three fixed times. On the other hand, we learn that the poor would follow the reapers (Mishna Rishona), and this is also implied by the account of Ruth the Moabite, who gathered in the field throughout the day, as it says: “She went, came, and gleaned in the field after the reapers” (Rut 2:3), and later: “She gleaned in the field until evening” (ibid. 2:17). We should therefore explain as follows: when the field owner was concerned that the poor might cause damage or steal, he opened the field or vineyard for leket, shikḥa, peret, and olelot only during the three fixed times; when he was not concerned, they could gather after the reapers and pickers.

Regarding pe’a, Rosh writes that it was distributed once, when the reapers or pickers reached the end of the field. According to Rambam, however, pe’a was distributed at the three fixed times (MT, Laws of Gifts to the Poor 2:17). This seems difficult, since pe’a must be given at the end of the field. R. Shlomo Sirilio explains that a person’s fields are divided, so the end of each field would be reached at a different time, allowing all three groups of poor people to benefit (Yerushalmi, Pe’a 4:3). Hilkheta Gevirta 4:5 writes that the owner should not allow the poor to take all the pe’a at one time; rather, he should leave part of it for the later times, so that the other two groups of poor people can benefit as well. According to Leḥem Mishneh’s commentary to the Mishna there, the field owner would go out three times a day to see whether the needs of the poor were great, so that he could add more pe’a for them.

It seems, as I wrote above, that when the field was small, the pe’a was given once, at one of the three times established by the Sages. The poor would wander among the fields, and when they saw that pe’a was about to be left in a particular field, they would wait there until the time of distribution. In large fields, presumably, the practice was to leave pe’a at the end of each row. In this way, the field was opened for the poor to gather pe’a at the three fixed times in a manner that benefited all three groups of poor people, similar to the practice of Beit Namer, which the Sages praised, as noted above in note 4.

09. The Law of These Gifts Today

The mitzva to leave gifts for the poor applies only when poor people are expected to come and gather them. When it is known that they will not come – such as when the field is very far from where they live – there is no mitzva to leave the gifts. The Torah states, “You shall leave them for the poor and the stranger” (Vayikra 19:10), meaning that they must be left for the poor, “not for ravens and bats” (Ḥullin 134b). Since, in such a case, there is no mitzva to leave the gifts, the entire crop belongs to the field owner outright, and he must separate terumot and ma’asrot from all of it (Ritva, Gittin 47a).

Similarly, when it is known that most of those who will come to gather the gifts are poor non-Jews, there is no mitzva to leave them. These gifts are meant for the Jewish poor. If poor non-Jews happen to come together with poor Jews, they may gather with them for the sake of peace. But where most of the gatherers are non-Jews, the mitzva does not apply (Tur YD 332; Baḥ).

Today, when fields are far from the towns and cities where the poor live, there is almost no realistic situation in which it would be worthwhile for them to come and gather these gifts. Reaching them would require walking long distances, and the poor would be able to carry only a small amount of produce on their backs. If they obtained a vehicle to transport the produce, the cost of the vehicle and travel would generally exceed the value of the produce. Even if they managed to gather large quantities, they would have great difficulty selling them, since they are not connected to marketing systems. And even if they did connect to those systems, they would receive little for the produce. In industrial agriculture, the produce itself has little value; most of what the consumer pays goes toward transportation and marketing.

In principle, there may be rare cases in which it would be worthwhile for a poor person to gather these gifts. For example, this might apply to grapes suitable for high-quality wine, if poor people live near the fields, have no other work, and are capable of gathering the grapes, bringing them home, and producing fine wine from them. In practice, however, such cases almost never arise, because a poor person capable of doing all this could generally find steady work that pays more.

Therefore, as long as the field owner knows of no poor people who wish to gather the gifts from his field, the general rule today applies: there is no mitzva for him to leave these gifts for the poor. Since the entire crop belongs to him, terumot and ma’asrot must be separated from all of it, including the portion that in earlier times would have been left as gifts to the poor.[9]

Although today we do not merit fulfilling the mitzvot of gifts to the poor directly in the fields, Torah scholars must study deeply the realities of economics and employment in all their sectors. They must examine the condition of the poor, the causes of their hardship, and, at the same time, the Torah’s laws of gifts to the poor. From these laws, they can draw inspiration and guidance for the proper Torah approach to helping the poor in the best possible way. The goal is to find a way for all those who produce goods and services that people need – such as food, clothing, furniture, housing, health care, and the like – to share the fruits of their labor with the poor. This sharing should be structured so that the poor participate in the effort needed to receive it, while causing little loss to the donors and great benefit to the recipients, as explained above in section 2.

[9]. The contemporary exemption, based on the fact that the poor do not come to gather their gifts, is explained by Ḥazon Ish, Ma’asrot 7:10, and by R. Yehuda Amichai (Emunat Itekha 96). R. Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, however, questioned the assumption that gathering the gifts is not worthwhile for the poor; R. Revaḥ writes similarly (Ḥelkat ha-Sadeh 2, Gifts to the Poor 1). In practice, though, poor people do not ask field owners to leave the gifts for them. Therefore, today there is no mitzva to leave gifts for the poor, except in the unusual case where a poor person asks the field owner to leave the gifts for him. If the field owner thought that poor people would come to gather, left the gifts in the field, and later, when they did not come, took them for himself, those gifts remain exempt from terumot and ma’asrot (as Devar Avraham 1:13 writes).

Chapter Contents

Peninei Halakha We use cookies to ensure the website functions properly and improve user experience. You can choose which types of cookies to enable.
Cookie Selection


Privacy Policy

Menu