You may not eat within your gates the tithe of your grain, or of your new wine, or of your oil, or the firstborn of your herd or of your flock, nor any of your vows which you vow, nor your free will offerings, nor the wave offering of your hand;
Not to eat the second tithe of oil outside Jerusalem
The cited verse
The Hebrew (Masoretic Text)
לֹא־תוּכַל לֶאֱכֹל בִּשְׁעָרֶיךָ ... וְיִצְהָרֶךָ
In Maimonides’ words
How Maimonides defines this commandment in his Sefer HaMitzvot — his own words, shown as a primary source.
שהזהירנו מלאכול מעשר שני של יצהר חוץ לירושלים ומי שאכלו לוקה ובתנאי הקודם. והוא אמרו יתעלה לא תוכל וגר ויצהרך. ואולי תרחיק למנות מעשר דגן ומעשר תירוש ומעשר יצהר שלש מצות עד שהוא כשיאכל שלשתן כאחד לוקה על כל אחד ואחד. לפי שזה הלאו שבזה הפסוק אינו לאו שבכללות שאין לוקין עליו ואמנם הוא לחלק. ובבאור אמרו בגמרא כריתות (דף ד':) אכל מעשר דגן תירוש ויצהר לוקה על כל אחד ואחד וכי לוקין על לאו שבכללות קרא יתירא כתיב מכדי כתיב ואכלת לפני ה' אלהיך מעשר דגנך וגו' למה לי למהדר ולמיכתבינהו כלהו שמע מינה לחלק. ובגמרא מכות (דף י"ח) אמרו מכדי כתיב ואכלת לפני ה' אלהיך לכתוב רחמנא לא תוכל לאכול אותם לחודיה למה לי למהדר לפרושינהו לכלהו שמע מינה ליחודי לאו לכל אחד ואחד הוא דאתא. הנה כבר התבאר שכל מה שהוזהר ממנו בזה הפסוק כל כל ענין וענין לאו בפני עצמו הוא. ואשוב להשלים שאר הלאוים שכולל זה הפסוק. (ראה, הלכות מעשר שני פ"ב):
That He prohibited us from consuming the second tithe from oil, outside of Jerusalem. And one who eats it is lashed - but [only] with the previous condition. And that is His, may He be exalted, saying, "You may not eat, etc. of your oil" (Deuteronomy 12:17). But perhaps you will dismiss counting the [second] tithe of grain, the second tithe of wine and the second tithe of oil as three commandments: Know that when one would eat all three together, he would be lashed for each and every one; since the negative statement in this verse is not a general negative commandment, such that we do not give lashes for it. In fact, [the statement] is to differentiate [the three as separate from each other]. And in the explanation, they said in the Gemara, Keritot (Keritot 4b), "One who ate the [second] tithes of grain, wine and oil is lashed for each and every one. And do we give lashes for a general negative commandment? [It is different here, as] the verse is written with superfluity. After all, it is written (Deuteronomy 14:23), 'And you shall eat before the Lord, your God, [...] the tithe of your grain, etc.' Why do I need it to repeat and write each of them? [It is understood from it] to differentiate." And in the Gemara, Makkot (Makkot 18a), they said, "After all, it is written (Deuteronomy 12:6-7), '[your burnt-offerings, and your sacrifices, and your tithes, and the donation of your hand, and your vows, and your gift offerings and the firstborn of your herd and of your flock.] And there you shall eat before the Lord your God.' Let the [Torah] write simply, 'You may not eat them.' Why do I need it to repeat and specify each of them? [It is understood from it] that it comes to designate a negative commandment for each and every one." Behold it has already been explained that everything that has been prohibited in this verse - each and every matter is a separate negative commandment. And I will [now] return to finish the other negative commandments included in this verse. (See Parashat Re'eh; Mishneh Torah, Second Tithe 2.)
Hebrew: Sefer HaMitzvot, Warsaw 1883 (public domain). English: Sefaria Edition, trans. Rabbi Francis Nataf, 2021 (CC0). Via Sefaria; translator’s footnotes omitted.
Literary form: a prohibition
Applicability
How the catalog describes where and when this commandment applies. These are independent descriptions, not a verdict on which laws still count.
- Binding in the land of Israel
Classical halakhic consequences
The consequences the classical halakhah attaches to this commandment, grouped by who imposes them. Where a category has none recorded, that absence is itself meaningful.
Imposed by a court
- Lashes (malkot)
At the hands of Heaven
No divinely-imposed consequence is recorded.
Ritual remedy
No ritual remedy is recorded.
How the streams of Judaism treat this commandment
The streams of Judaism read the same commandment differently — an ongoing plurality, not a ranking. Each position below is reported as the catalog records it; none is presented as the correct one.
- Orthodox Binding, with modification
- Conservative Not binding
- Reform Not binding
- Reconstructionist Not binding
- Karaite Binding, with modification
24 of 613 commandments have been examined in depth so far — this one is queued.
How later traditions received this commandment
How later traditions read or reworked this commandment, each attributed to its own voice. The catalog’s own classification of each reception is shown as it records it, never adopted as GEBible’s.
Qumran (the Dead Sea Scrolls)
- 11QTa (Temple Scroll) 43:3-12 The catalog describes this reception as: harmonizing reformulation
Philo of Alexandria
- De Specialibus Legibus 1.141-144 The catalog describes this reception as: discussed (tithe/firstfruit context)
Josephus
- Ant. 4.205 paraphrased it
Where this commandment meets modern human-rights frameworks
One modern normative lens, attributed to it — not GEBible’s assessment. Each row names the framework it measures against and the catalog’s own classification of the relation.
This framework catalogues tensions; it records agreement in only one of its entries. The near-total tension rate is the shape of the instrument, not a finding.
-
general principle
This framework classifies the relation as a direct contradiction.
The commandment prescribes corporal punishment for consuming one's own oil outside a designated city — a non-violent personal consumption choice for which judicial flogging is wholly disproportionate under modern penal standards.
-
Article 7
This framework classifies the relation as a direct contradiction.
ICCPR Article 7 prohibits cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment; lashing for a consumption-location infraction falls within the scope of inhuman or degrading punishment under international human-rights law.
-
general principle
This framework classifies the relation as abrogated in practice.
The commandment is doubly inoperative in practice: it presupposes a standing Temple (second tithe exists only while the Temple stands) and an ordained Sanhedrin (required for malkot jurisdiction); rabbinic tradition acknowledges both conditions lapsed with the Temple's destruction.