עֶרֶב שַׁבָּת בַּשְּׁבִיעִית וְאוֹמֵר מִכָּאן אֲנִי אוֹכֵל לְמָחָר וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים עַד שֶׁיִּרְשׁוֹם וְיֹאמַר מִכָּאן וְעַד כָּאן: on Shabbat eve during the Sabbatical Year, during which no tithes are separated, which means one may take fruit on the following day without the need for any corrective measure, and say: From here, from these fruits, I will eat tomorrow. And the Rabbis say: He may not eat unless he marks the pile of fruit the day before and explicitly says: From here to there I will take.
גְּמָ׳ תְּנַן הָתָם תִּינוֹקוֹת שֶׁטָּמְנוּ תְּאֵנִים מֵעֶרֶב שַׁבָּת וְשָׁכְחוּ וְלֹא עִשְּׂרוּ לְמוֹצָאֵי שַׁבָּת לֹא יֹאכְלוּ אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן עִשְּׂרוּ וּתְנַן נָמֵי הַמַּעֲבִיר תְּאֵנִים בַּחֲצֵרוֹ לְקַצּוֹת בָּנָיו וּבְנֵי בֵּיתוֹ אוֹכְלִין מֵהֶן עֲרַאי וּפְטוּרִים GEMARA: We learned in a mishna there: (Ma'asrot 4:2) Children who hid figs for themselves in a field on Shabbat eve in order to eat them on Shabbat, and they forgot and did not separate tithes, not only are they prohibited from eating them on Shabbat, for eating on Shabbat is always considered a fixed meal that obligates the produce in tithes, but even after the conclusion of Shabbat, they may not eat until they have separated tithes. And we also learned in a mishna: One who transfers figs in his courtyard in order to make them into dry figs, his children and the members of his household may in the meantime partake of them in a casual manner, and they are exempt from tithes. The fact that the fruit has reached his courtyard, as opposed to his house, is not enough to cause it to be liable for tithing.
בְּעָא מִנֵּיהּ רָבָא מֵרַב נַחְמָן שַׁבָּת מַהוּ שֶׁתִּקְבַּע מוּקְצֶה לְמַעֲשֵׂר בְּדָבָר שֶׁלֹּא נִגְמְרָה מְלַאכְתּוֹ מִי אָמְרִינַן כֵּיוָן דִּכְתִיב וְקָרָאתָ לַשַּׁבָּת עוֹנֶג קָבְעָה וַאֲפִילּוּ בְּדָבָר שֶׁלֹּא נִגְמְרָה מְלַאכְתּוֹ אוֹ דִלְמָא בְּדָבָר שֶׁנִּגְמְרָה מְלַאכְתּוֹ קָבְעָה בְּדָבָר שֶׁלֹּא נִגְמְרָה מְלַאכְתּוֹ לָא קָבְעָה Based on these two sources, Rava inquired of Rav Naḥman: With regard to Shabbat, what is the halakha in terms of whether it establishes an obligation to tithe food that has been muktze on Shabbat? Specifically, in the case of an item whose labor has not been completed,does the fact that the food is muktze on Shabbat give it the status of completely prepared food, or not? Do we say that since it is written: “And call Shabbat a delight” (Isaiah 58:13), this implies that any food one eats on Shabbat is considered a delight and not a casual meal, and therefore Shabbat establishes an obligation to tithe, as if the food were fully completed and fit to be eaten as a fixed meal, even for an item that has not had its labor completed? Or perhaps Shabbat establishes an obligation to tithe an item whose labor is completed, but regarding an item whose labor is not completed it does not establish an obligation to tithe?
אֲמַר לֵיהּ שַׁבָּת קוֹבַעַת בֵּין בְּדָבָר שֶׁנִּגְמְרָה מְלַאכְתּוֹ בֵּין בְּדָבָר שֶׁלֹּא נִגְמְרָה מְלַאכְתּוֹ אֲמַר לֵיהּ וְאֵימָא שַׁבָּת דּוּמְיָא דְחָצֵר מָה חָצֵר אֵינָהּ קוֹבַעַת אֶלָּא בְּדָבָר שֶׁנִּגְמְרָה מְלַאכְתּוֹ אַף שַׁבָּת לֹא תִּקְבַּע אֶלָּא בְּדָבָר שֶׁנִּגְמְרָה מְלַאכְתּוֹ אֲמַר לֵיהּ תַּלְמוּד עָרוּךְ הוּא בְּיָדֵינוּ שֶׁהַשַּׁבָּת קוֹבַעַת בֵּין בְּדָבָר שֶׁנִּגְמְרָה מְלַאכְתּוֹ בֵּין בְּדָבָר שֶׁלֹּא נִגְמְרָה מְלַאכְתּוֹ Rav Naḥman said to Rava: Shabbat establishes the obligation for tithes, both with regard to an item whose work is completed and things whose work is not completed. Rava said to Rav Naḥman and challenged: But say that the law of Shabbat should be similar to that of a courtyard: Just as a courtyard establishes food placed inside it as a fixed meal with regard to tithes only when the work on an item is completed, so too, Shabbat should establish only an item whose work is completed as liable for tithing. Rav Naḥman said to Rava: I did not say this based on my own logic, which can be countered by logic of your own. Rather, we have it as an ordered teaching that Shabbat establishes both things whose work is completed and things whose work is not completed.
אָמַר מָר זוּטְרָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב נַחְמָן אַף אֲנַן נָמֵי תְּנֵינָא וְעוֹד אָמַר רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר עוֹמֵד אָדָם עַל הַמּוּקְצֶה עֶרֶב שַׁבָּת בַּשְּׁבִיעִית וְכוּ׳ טַעְמָא דִּשְׁבִיעִית דְּלָאו בַּר עַשּׂוֹרֵי הוּא הָא בִּשְׁאָר שְׁנֵי שָׁבוּעַ הָכִי נָמֵי דְּאָסוּר מַאי טַעְמָא לָאו מִשּׁוּם דְּשַׁבָּת קָבְעָה Mar Zutra, son of Rav Naḥman, said: We, too, have learned in the mishna: And Rabbi Eliezer further stated that a person may stand over objects in the storage area on Shabbat eve during the Sabbatical Year and say: I will eat from here and here. The reason is that it is fruit of the Sabbatical Year, with regard to which one is not obligated to separate tithes. However, if it occurred in the other years of the Sabbatical cycle, so too, you will say that it is prohibited to eat them without separating tithes. What is the reason for this? Is it not because Shabbat establishes them with regard to tithes, and consequently they not be eaten until tithes have been separated?
לָא שָׁאנֵי הָתָם כֵּיוָן דְּאָמַר מִכָּאן אֲנִי אוֹכֵל לְמָחָר קָבַע לֵיהּ עִלָּוֵיהּ אִי הָכִי מַאי אִרְיָא שַׁבָּת אֲפִילּוּ בְּחוֹל נָמֵי הָא קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן דְּטֶבֶל מוּכָן הוּא אֵצֶל שַׁבָּת שֶׁאִם עָבַר וְתִקְּנוֹ מְתוּקָּן The Gemara refutes this: This is no proof, for there it is different: Since he said: From here I will eat tomorrow, he has immediately established for himself a meal with them, by stating his intention to eat the food as it is. The Gemara asks: If so, why does the mishna mention particularly Shabbat? Even if one said so on a weekday the same should also apply. Since he has set them aside for his meal, they are considered finished and are liable to tithes. The Gemara answers: This comes to teach us the following: One should not conclude that untithed produce is inherently muktze because one may not separate the tithes and eat it; rather, it is considered prepared with regard to Shabbat, in that if one transgressed the words of the Sages and corrected it by separating the tithes, it is considered corrected.