Enter your email address to get our weekly email with fresh, exciting and thoughtful content that will enrich your inbox and your life.

Rambam - 3 Chapters a Day

Terumot - Chapter 7, Terumot - Chapter 8, Terumot - Chapter 9

Video & Audio Classes
Show content in:

Terumot - Chapter 7

1

A priest who is ritually impure is forbidden to partake of terumah whether it is ritually pure or ritually impure,1 as [Leviticus 22:4] states: "Any person from the seed of Aaron who is afflicted with tzaraat2or is a zav3 may not partake of consecrated food." Which consecrated food may be eaten by all the descendants of Aaron, both male and female? We must say: terumah.4

[Thus] any impure person who eats terumah that is ritually pure is liable for death at the hand of heaven. Therefore he is given lashes,5 as [ibid.:9] states: "And you shall protect My charge and not bear sin because of it [and die because of it]."

When an impure person partakes of terumah that is ritually impure, he does not receive lashes, although he transgresses a negative commandment,6 for [impure terumah] is not holy.7

א

כהן טמא אסור לאכול תרומה בין טמאה בין טהורה שנאמר איש איש מזרע אהרן והוא צרוע או זב בקדשים לא יאכל אי זהו קדש שאוכלין אותו כל זרע אהרן זכרים ונקבות הוי אומר זו תרומה אלא שכל טמא האוכל תרומה טהורה חייב מיתה בידי שמים ולפיכך לוקה שנאמר ושמרו את משמרתי ולא ישאו עליו חטא וטמא שאכל תרומה טמאה אף ע"פ שהוא בלאו אינו לוקה שהרי אינה קדש:

2

Impure [priests who have immersed to purify themselves] may not partake of terumah until the sun sets and three stars appear afterwards8 [on the day the impure person immerses himself], as [implied by ibid.:7]: "And the sun will set and he will become pure"9 - until the sky will become pure of the light - "afterwards he may partake of the consecrated foods."

ב

אין הטמאים אוכלין בתרומה עד שיעריב שמשן ויצאו שלשה כוכבים אחר שקיעת החמה שנאמר ובא השמש וטהר עד שיטהר הרקיע מן האור ואחר יאכל מן הקדשים:

3

A priest who is ritually pure who ate terumah that is ritually impure is not liable for lashes, because [the prohibition is the result of] a positive commandment. For the verse states: "Afterwards he may partake of the consecrated foods."10 [Implied is that,] after he becomes purified, he may partake of food that is in a state of holiness. Food which is impure, by contrast, he should not eat, even though he becomes purified. A prohibition that stems from a positive commandment11 has the status of a positive commandment.12

ג

כהן טהור שאכל תרומה טמאה אינו לוקה מפני שהוא בעשה שנאמר ואחר יאכל מן הקדשים מדבר שהוא בקדושתו הוא שיאכל כשיטהר אבל דבר טמא לא יאכל אע"פ שיטהר ולאו הבא מכלל עשה עשה הוא:

4

When [a priest] was partaking of terumah and he feels his limbs shudder to ejaculate.13 He should hold his member14 and swallow the terumah.

ד

מי שהיה אוכל בתרומה והרגיש שנזדעזעו איבריו להוציא שכבת זרע אוחז באמה ובולע את התרומה:

5

We may immerse a deaf-mute or intellectually or emotionally unstable [priest] and feed him terumah after nightfall on that day.15 We guard them to make sure that they do not sleep after immersing themselves, because if they sleep, they are [considered] impure for perhaps they had a seminal emission16 unless a copper container is made for them.17

ה

החרש והשוטה מטבילין אותן ומאכילין אותן תרומה אחר שהעריב שמשן ומשמרין אותן שלא יישנו אחר הטבילה שאם ישנו טמאים אלא אם כן עשו להם כיס של נחשת שמא יראו קרי:

6

Camel-riders are forbidden to partake of terumah until they immerse themselves and [wait] until nightfall, because we presume that they are ritually impure. [The rationale is that] the physical stimulation18 produced by riding on the flesh of a camel produces a drop of semen.19

ו

רוכבי גמלים אסורין לאכול בתרומה עד שיטבלו ויעריב שמשן שהן בחזקת טומאה מפני החימום שהרכיבה על עור הגמל מוציא טיפה של שכבת זרע:

7

When a woman engages in intimacy, she may immerse herself and partake of terumah in the evening,20 provided she did not turn over during intimacy.21If she turned over during intimacy she is forbidden to partake of terumah for a duration of three days. For it is impossible that she will not discharge [semen] and become impure,22 as will be explained in the appropriate place.23

ז

המשמשת מטתה אם לא נתהפכה בשעת תשמיש טובלת ואוכלת בתרומה לערב ואם נתהפכה בשעת התשמיש הרי זו אסורה לאכול בתרומה כל שלשה ימים שאי אפשר לה שלא תפלוט ותהיה טמאה כמו שיתבאר במקומו:

8

Since the primary obligation of terumah [separated] in the Diaspora is Rabbinic in origin,24 it is forbidden only to a priest who becomes ritually impure because of a discharge from his body: i.e., men who had a seminal emission, zavim,25 zavot,26 niddot,27 and women who give birth.28 All of these individuals may partake [of terumah] after they immersed even if they did not [wait] until nightfall.29 Those who, by contrast, became impure because of contact with a source of ritual impurity - whether contact with a human corpse, a form of impurity which is impossible to purge in the present age30 or contact with [the corpse of] a crawling animal - need not immerse themselves [to partake of] terumah separated in the Diaspora.

ח

תרומת ח"ל הואיל ועיקרה מדבריהן אינה אסורה באכילה אלא לכהן שטומאה יוצאה עליו מגופו והן בעלי קריין וזבין וזבות ונדות ויולדות וכולן שטבלו מותרין לאכילה אף על פי שלא העריב שמשן אבל טמאי מגע טומאות בין שנגע במת שאי אפשר לנו היום לטהר ממנו בין שנגע בשרץ אינו צריך לטבול לתרומת חוצה לארץ:

9

For this reason, a male priest who is a minor who has not yet had a seminal emission or a female of the priestly family who has never experienced menstrual bleeding may partake of [terumah from the Diaspora] at all times without undergoing an inspection, for the presumption that they did not have a discharge that would render them ritually impure applies to them.31

A metzora32 is considered as one who had a discharge that renders him impure,33 provided he is declared impure by a priest whose lineage is established.34

ט

לפיכך כהן קטן שעדיין לא ראה קרי וקטנה שעדיין לא ראתה דם נדה אוכלין אותה תמיד בלא בדיקה שחזקתן שלא יצאה טומאה עדיין עליהם והמצורע הרי הוא כמי שטומאה יוצאה עליו מגופו והוא שיטמא אותו כהן מיוחס אבל קודם שיטמאנו הכהן טהור הוא:

10

A priest who is uncircumcised is forbidden to partake of terumah according to Scriptural Law.35 [This concept is derived as follows: Leviticus 22:10] speaks of a resident worker and a hired worker with regard to [partaking of] terumah and [Exodus 12:45] speaks of a resident worker and a hired worker with regard to [partaking of] the Paschal sacrifice. Just as with regard to the Paschal sacrifice, the resident worker and the hired worker spoken about refer to those who are uncircumcised and who are forbidden [to partake of] it,36 so too, with regard to terumah, we learn that a resident worker and a hired worker who are uncircumcised are forbidden [to partake of] it. 37 If such a person partakes [of terumah], he is liable for lashes according to Scriptural Law.

A person who extends his foreskin38 is permitted to partake of terumah even though he appears uncircumcised.39 According to Rabbinic Law, however, he must be circumcised again until he appears circumcised.40

י

כהן ערל אסור לאכול בתרומה מדין תורה שהרי נאמר תושב ושכיר בתרומה ונאמר תושב ושכיר בפסח מה תושב ושכיר האמור בפסח ערל אסור בו אף תושב ושכיר האמור בתרומה ערל אסור בו ואם אכל לוקה מן התורה משוך מותר לאכול בתרומה ואף על פי שנראה כערל ומד"ס שימול פעם שנייה עד שיראה מהול:

11

One who is born circumcised may partake of terumah.41 A tumtum42 may not partake of terumah for there is a doubt whether he is uncircumcised.43 An androgynus44 should be circumcised and then he may partake of terumah.45

יא

הנולד מהול אוכל בתרומה והטומטום אינו אוכל מפני שהוא ספק ערל ואנדרוגינוס מל ואוכל:

12

Although an uncircumcised priest and all those who are impure are forbidden to partake of terumah, their wives and their servants may partake [of it].46

יב

הערל וכל הטמאין אעפ"י שהן אסורין לאכול בתרומה נשיהן ועבדיהן אוכלין:

13

[The following laws apply to a priest] who has maimed testicles or a severed member. They and their servants may partake of terumah.47 Their wives may not partake of terumah.48 If [such a priest] was not intimate with his wife after suffering these wounds, [his wife] may partake of terumah.49 Similarly, if he married the descendent of converts, she may partake of terumah.50

יג

פצוע דכא וכרות שפכה הם ועבדיהן אוכלין ונשיהן לא יאכלו ואם לא ידע את אשתו משנעשה פצוע דכא וכרות שפכה הרי אלו יאכלו וכן אם נשא בת גרים ה"ז אוכלת:

14

When a priest with maimed testicles consecrates the daughter of a priest, she may not partake of terumah.51 [When a priest is] a eunuch who was brought to this state through natural means,52 he, his wife, and his servants may partake of terumah. [When a priest is] a tumtum or an androgynus, their servants may partake of terumah,53 but not their wives.54

יד

פצוע דכא כהן שקידש בת כהן אינה אוכלת סריס חמה הוא ואשתו ועבדיו אוכלין טומטום ואנדרוגינוס עבדיהן אוכלין אבל לא נשותיהן:

15

When a [priest who was] a deaf-mute, a mentally or emotionally unstable person, or a minor purchased servants, they may not partake of terumah.55 If, however, the local court or their guardian purchases servants for them or they acquire them by inheritance, [the servants] may partake of terumah.56

טו

חרש שוטה וקטן שקנו להן עבדים אינן אוכלין אבל אם קנו להם ב"ד או אפוטרופוס או שנפלו להן בירושה הרי אלו אוכלין:

16

When an androgynus [of the priestly family] engages in intimacy - whether through anal intercourse57 or vaginal intercourse - with a person who is disqualified from partaking of terumah, he is disqualified from partaking of terumah as a woman would be.58 His servants also may not partake of terumah.59

Similarly, if he engages in intimacy with another adrogynus with whom relations would disqualify a woman from partaking of terumah, he is disqualified. Neither he nor his servants may partake of terumah. [The latter law] applies when he engages in intimacy through vaginal intercourse.60 If, however, he is intimate through anal intercourse,61 [the above does not apply], because a male does not disqualify another male from priestly [privileges].62

טז

אנדרוגינוס שנבעל לפסול מן התרומה בין דרך זכרותו בין דרך נקבותו נפסל מלאכול בתרומה כנשים ואין עבדיו אוכלין וכן אם נבעל לאנדרוגינוס אחר שהוא פוסל בביאתו לאשה נפסל ואינו אוכל ולא מאכיל עבדיו והוא שיבעול אותו דרך נקבותו אבל דרך זכרותו אין זכר פוסל זכר מן הכהונה:

17

When a servant belongs to partners and one of them is a priest, that does not entitle him to partake of terumah.63 [Instead,] this servant is forbidden to partake [of terumah]. Whenever [the ownership of a servant] entitles him to partake of terumah, it also entitles him to partake of the breast and the thigh [of the peace sacrifices].64

יז

עבד של שני שותפין שהיה אחד מהן כהן אינו מאכיל ה"ז העבד אסור לאכול וכל המאכיל בתרומה מאכיל בחזה ושוק:

18

When a daughter of an Israelite marries a priest and brings servants [to his domain] - regardless of whether they are classified as nichsei milog or nichsei tzon barzel65 - they may partake [of terumah]. Similarly, when the servants of priests purchase servants or the servants of a priest's wife purchase servants, they may partake of terumah, as [intimated by Leviticus 22:11]: "[When a priest] will purchase a soul, the acquisition of his money, [he shall partake of it]." Implied is even an acquisition of an acquisition.66 An acquisition of [a priest] who is permitted to partake of terumah may entitle others to partake [of terumah]. An acquisition who does not partake of terumah may not entitle others to partake [of terumah].67

יח

בת ישראל שנשאת לכהן והכניסה לו בין עבדי מלוג בין עבדי נכסי צאן ברזל הרי אלו יאכלו וכן עבדי כהן שקנו עבדים ועבדי אשתו שקנו עבדים יאכלו שנאמר כי יקנה נפש קנין כספו אפילו קנין הקנין וקנין האוכל מאכיל (אחרים) וקנין שאינו אוכל אינו מאכיל:

19

When the daughter of a priest marries an Israelite and brings servants [to his domain] - regardless of whether they are classified as nichsei milog or nichsei tzon barzel - they may not partake [of terumah].68

יט

בת כהן שנשאת לישראל והכניסה לו בין עבדי מלוג בין עבדי צאן ברזל הרי אלו לא יאכלו:

20

[The following laws apply when] a widow marries a High Priest or a divorcee or a woman who underwent chalitzah - whether the daughter of a priest or an Israelite - marries an ordinary priest69 or [a priest] marries another one of the women with whom marriage is prohibited [by Scriptural Law].70 If she brings servants [to his domain] which are classified as nichsei milog or nichsei tzon barzel [to his domain], those classified as nichsei milog may not partake [of terumah],71 even though he is required to provide for their sustenance. Those classified as nichsei tzon barzel may partake of terumah, for they are the husband's property. If [a priest] married a shniyah,72 she may partake [of terumah],73 but her servants who are nichsei milog may not partake [of terumah].74

כ

אלמנה לכהן גדול גרושה וחלוצה לכהן הדיוט בין כהנת בין ישראלית וכן שאר חייבי לאוין והכניסה לו עבדי מלוג ועבדי צאן ברזל עבדי מלוג לא יאכלו אף ע"פ שהוא חייב במזונותם ועבדי צאן ברזל יאכלו מפני שהם של בעל נשא שנייה היא אוכלת ועבדי מלוג שלה לא יאכלו:

21

When the daughter of a priest who is a widow is consecrated by a High Priest or one who is divorced is consecrated by an ordinary priest, they may not partake of terumah,75 because they are designated for intimate relations that are forbidden according to Scriptural Law. Similarly, if they enter the chupah76 without being consecrated, they may not partake [of terumah]. For [entering into] the chupah disqualifies them.77

If such a woman is widowed or divorced after consecration [but before marriage], she returns to suitability and may partake of terumah. If, however, she had married, she may not partake of terumah, because she already became a chalalah.78

כא

כהנת אלמנה שנתארסה לכהן גדול או גרושה לכהן הדיוט הואיל והן משמרות לביאה פסולה של תורה הרי אלו לא יאכלו וכן אם נכנסו לחופה בלא אירוסין אינן אוכלות שהחופה פוסלתן מלאכול נתאלמנו או נתגרשו מן האירוסין חזרו להכשרן ואוכלות מן הנישואין לא יאכלו שכבר נתחללו:

22

When the husband of the daughter of a priest who is himself a priest dies and she falls before yevamim, one of which is a challal,79 she may not partake of terumah because of her connection to the challal.80 [This applies] even if one of the acceptable [brothers] issued a mamar81 to her, for a maamar does not constitute a complete acquisition of a yevamah.82

כב

כהנת שמת בעלה כהן ונפלה לפני יבמים שיש בהן חלל לא תאכל מפני זיקת החלל ואפילו עשה בה אחד מן הכשרים מאמר שאין המאמר קונה ביבמה קנין גמור:

23

[Although a yavam who is] a priest gives a bill of divorce83to his yevamah, [despite the fact that] she becomes forbidden to him, she still remains connected to him.84 Hence, she is entitled to partake of terumah. [She is not disqualified,] because she is designated for relations that are forbidden [only] by Rabbinic decree, since a bill of divorce disqualifies a yevamah only according to Rabbinic decree.

Similarly, the daughter of a priest who underwent the right of chalitzah85or is a shniyah86 who became consecrated to a priest may partake of terumah.87 [Also,] when an ordinary priest marries an ailonot,88 she may partake of terumah.89

כג

כהן שנתן גט ליבמתו הכהנת שהרי נאסרה עליו ועדיין זיקתו עליה ה"ז אוכלת בתרומה מפני שהיא משמרת לביאה פסולה של דבריהן שאין הגט פוסל היבמה אלא מדבריהן וכן כהנת חלוצה או שנייה שנתארסה לכהן אוכלת כהן הדיוט שנשא אילונית הרי זו אוכלת בתרומה:

Footnotes
1.

Sefer HaMitzvot (Negative Commandment 136) and Sefer HaChinuch (Mitzvah 279) include this as one of 613 mitzvot of the Torah.

2.

Tzara'at is a physical affliction resembling, but not identical with leprosy, that comes as a result of gossip and imparts ritual impurity.

3.

This refers to a physical affliction resembling, but not identical with gonorrhea that imparts ritual impurity.

4.

It does not refer to the breast and thigh of the peace offerings, for a woman of the priestly family who marries and is widowed or divorced may not partake of them (Yevamot 74b).

5.

If his transgression is observed by witnesses and they issued a warning. Whenever lashes are given on the earthly plane, the transgressor receives atonement and is no longer held liable for death by God.

6.

From the fact that Sanhedrin 83a,b emphasizes that an impure priest is not liable for death for partaking of impure terumah, the Rambam concludes that a transgression is involved.

7.

Its impurity nullifies its holiness. See Chapter 6, Halachah 6 and notes, however.

8.

The Kessef Mishneh states that this is approximately 20 minutes after sunset. This applies in Eretz Yisrael. In different latitudes, the duration of this time period varies.

This represents a stringency over other laws where ritual purity is required. In many such instances, as soon as one immerses himself, his purification is completed and no further wait is necessary. See Hilchot Ma'aser Sheni 7:11.

9.

The simple meaning of the verse is that the person's purification process is not completed until the sun sets. The rules of Biblical exegesis, however, leave room for the meaning mentioned by the Rambam.

10.

The Rabaz emphasizes that with regard to partaking of the sacrifices, in certain instances, an impure priest must also bring a sacrifice to mark his immersion from impurity.

11.

I,e., as in the case at hand, there is no verse that says "Do not eat impure terumah," but from the positive commandment regarding pure terumah, we can conclude that partaking of the impure terumah is prohibited.

12.

Hence, its violation is not punishable by lashes.

13.

Which would render him ritually impure.

14.

For he does not become ritually impure until the semen actually emerges and in this way, he could swallow the terumah first (Niddah 40a).

15.

These individuals are not responsible for their conduct. Nevertheless, their priesthood is intact. Hence, we immerse them to purify them and then enable them to partake of terumah.

16.

I.e., because of the doubt, we considered them impure.

17.

Which would allow a seminal emission to be detected. Were the container to be made of cloth, the semen could be absorbed (Radbaz).

18.

The literal meaning of the Hebrew is "warmth."

19.

See the gloss of the Radbaz who states that the Rambam's wording implies that this ruling applies only when one rides bareback [see Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 23:7)]. He also explains why it applies only to camel-riders and not those who ride on other animals.

20.

I.e., intimate relations cause both the man and the woman to become impure. To emerge from that impurity, they must each immerse in the mikvah and wait until nightfall (see Leviticus 15:18).

21.

Intimate relations can cause a woman to become impure for two reasons:

a) as stated above, the very act of intimacy brings about ritual impurity;

b) she comes in contact with semen and touching semen makes one ritually impure (Hilchot Sha'ar Avot HaTumah 5:9).

As long as the semen is in the woman's vagina, it is not considered to have touched her, because it is touching her body internally, not externally. If, however, it flows outside her vagina and touches her externally, she does become impure. According to the Rambam, if the woman does not turn over in intimate relations, the semen will remain in her vagina and not flow outside. Hence, after immersing herself and waiting until nightfall, she may partake of terumah. If, however, she turned over in the midst of intimacy, the semen will flow out. Moreover, it is possible that it will not flow out immediately, but will do so over the course of the coming days. Now, semen is considered to remain viable until the third day after intimacy. Hence for three days, the woman must consider the possibility that the semen flowed out from her body and made her impure. Hence, she cannot immerse herself in the mikvah to regain ritual purity until three days have passed.

The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam and maintains that even if the woman did not turn over during intimacy, as soon as she arises from bed, it is possible that semen will flow out from her vagina and touch her body. He quotes Niddah 41b in support of his explanation. The Radbaz and the Kessef Mishneh suggest that the Rambam had a different text of that Talmudic passage and they validate his ruling.

22.

Because of it touching her body.

23.

Ibid.:11. There the Rambam states that the intent is not that semen remains viable for three full days, but that it can remain viable until the third day after relations.

24.

As stated in Chapter 1, Halachah 1, according to Scriptural Law, the requirement to separate terumah applies only in Eretz Yisrael. The early Sages ordained that it should be observed in certain neighboring countries.

25.

This refers to a physical affliction resembling, but not identical with gonorrhea that imparts ritual impurity.

26.

Women who become impure because they experienced menstrual bleeding at times other than her ordinary cycle.

27.

Women who become impure because they experienced ordinary menstrual bleeding.

28.

Who becomes impure as explained in Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah, ch. 10. Since the obligation to separate terumah in these lands is only Rabbinic in origin, the Sages were lenient regarding the restrictions incumbent on those who partake of terumah.

29.

In contrast to terumah prescribed by Scriptural Law when such a wait is necessary, as stated in Halachah 2. The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam concerning this point and refers to Bechorot 27a in support of his position. The Radbaz and the Kessef Mishneh offer different explanations of that passage that support the Rambam's interpretation.

30.

For to purge the impurity resulting from contact with a human corpse, it is necessary to have the ashes from a Red Heifer sprinkled upon one's body and those ashes are not available in the present age.

31.

Once a male or a female attains majority, by contrast, we assume that they have become impure and they must immerse themselves before partaking of terumah (Radbaz).

32.

Tzara'at is a physical affliction resembling, but not identical with leprosy, that comes as a result of gossip and imparts ritual impurity.

33.

For his impurity is also a result of a physical condition (ibid.).

34.

For a person afflicted by tzara'at does not become ritually impure until a priest declares him so (Hilchot Tuma'at Tzara'at 9:2). With regard to the establishment of a priest's lineage, see the notes to Chapter 6, Halachah 2.

The Radbaz adds that the reason the impurity of tzara'at is not observed in the present age is that we have no priests whose lineage is established to declare people ritually impure. The physical conditions for the impurity may exist in the present age.

35.

The Radbaz writes that this prohibition applies even if he is uncircumcised with the Torah's permission, e.g., his brothers died because of circumcision, in which instance, caution is shown before circumcising him.

36.

See Hilchot Korban Pesach 9:7.

37.

Sefer HaMitzvot (Negative Commandment 135) and Sefer HaChinuch (Mitzvah 282) include this as one of 613 mitzvot of the Torah. There is, however, a slight difficulty with this classification. The Rambam maintains that any commandment that is derived through one of the Thirteen Principles of Biblical Exegesis does not have the status of a Scriptural command, nor is such a prohibition punishable by lashes (Sefer HaMitzvot, General Principle 2) and as the Rambam states here, there is no direct commandment prohibiting an uncircumcised person from partaking of terumah. Instead, it is derived by our Sages (Yevamot 70a) through an association of verses (gezeirah shaveh). Hence, seemingly, it should not be placed in that category. The Rambam notes this difficulty when discussing this mitzvah in Sefer HaMitzvot and states that since our Sages mentioned that this mitzvah was of Scriptural origin, he considered it as having that status.

38.

I.e., one was originally circumcised, but underwent an operation so that it would appear that he was not circumcised. In the Hellenist and Roman periods, there were Jews who underwent such operations so that they would resemble non-Jews.

39.

For according to Scriptural Law, his original circumcision was effective and he can never revert to being uncircumcised.

40.

The Radbaz writes that the intent is not that he is forbidden to partake of terumah until he is circumcised again. Instead, the intent is that he is advised to undergo the operation and not to partake of terumah until he does so. The Sefer HaMitzvot and the Sefer HaChinuch (loc. cit.), however, say that such an individual is prohibited by the Rabbis from partaking of terumah.

41.

Although it is necessary to draw a drop of blood from such a person's organ (Hilchot Milah 1:11), it cannot be said that such a person is uncircumcised. Hence, he is permitted to partake of terumah (Radbaz).

42.

A child whose genital area is covered by a mass of flesh and thus his gender cannot be determined.

43.

Since his gender is undetermined, we do not know whether or not he must be circumcised.

44.

A person with both male and female sexual organs.

45.

Although there are many unresolved questions about such a person's status vis-à-vis gender, there is no difficulty in him partaking of terumah for both males and females of the priestly family are permitted to partake of it.

46.

They are prohibited from partaking of terumah due to outside factors. Their membership in the priestly family is, however, intact. Hence, their wives and servants may partake of terumah (Radbaz).

47.

Although their wounds prevent such priests from serving at the Altar, they are still members of the priestly family. Hence, they and their servants may partake of terumah.

48.

As stated in Deuteronomy 23:2 and Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah, ch. 16, a person with such wounds is forbidden to marry a natural born Jewess. Hence, if a priest is intimate with his wife after suffering such wounds, she becomes a zonah and a chalalah and hence, is forbidden to partake of terumah.

49.

Since they were not intimate, she has not become a chalalah and may partake of terumah. The Kessef Mishneh states that this refers to an instance where the couple were married and then he suffered this wound. If, however, a priest suffers such a wound and then consecrates a woman, she may not partake of terumah. See the notes to the following halachah.

50.

Ordinarily, a priest cannot marry a convert or the descendant of a convert. In this instance, however, because of his injury, the full measure of the holiness of the priesthood does not rest upon him and he may marry such a woman (Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah 16:1). Once he marries such a woman, she is entitled to partake of terumah, because she is the wife of a priest.

51.

Since this woman is prepared to engage in intimate relations that are forbidden to her, our Sages prohibited her from partaking of terumah even though she had not actually engaged in such relations. Moreover, she is no longer permitted to partake of terumah by virtue of her being a member of the priestly family, because she was consecrated, as stated in Chapter 8, Halachah 1.

52.

See Hilchot Ishut 2:14 for a more precise definition of the term used by the Rambam. As stated in Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah 16:9, such a person is permitted to marry a native-born Jewess. Hence, there is no difficulty with the wife of a priest with such a condition partaking of terumah.

53.

For in this context, there is no difference between them and the servants of an ordinary priest.

54.

For there is an unresolved doubt if their marriages are acceptable. Needless to say, if a tumtum undergoes an operation and it is determined that he is a male, his wife may partake of terumah even if he consecrated her before the operation.

55.

These individuals are considered as not being responsible for their actions and their acquisitions are not valid. Hence, the servants they purchase by themselves are not their property according to Scriptural Law and may not partake of terumah.

56.

Because the acquisitions are binding and they have become the property of a priest.

57.

The literal translation of the Rambam's words would be "as a male would be the object of intimacy."

58.

For such relations would cause a woman to be considered as a chalalah. Since there is an unresolved question regarding the gender of an androgynus, we are stringent and consider the possibility that he is a female. And a female is disqualified from terumah if she engages in intimacy that would render her a chalalah regardless of whether it is vaginal or anal intercourse (Radbaz).

59.

For their right to partake of terumah is dependent on that of their owner.

60.

For such relations would render a woman a chalahah and, because of the unresolved question regarding the status of the androgynus, we apply that stringency to him as well.

61.

The literal translation of the Rambam's words would be "as a male would be the object of intimacy."

62.

A male priest does not become a chalal because he entered into a forbidden sexual relationship.

The Ra'avad and the Kessef Mishneh question the Rambam's ruling, noting that, seemingly, the person should be disqualified from partaking of terumah based on the same rationale as the first clause of the halachah: i.e., that the androgynus also has a feminine dimension and that feminine dimension will be disqualified through anal intercourse. Hence, they ask: Why does the Rambam only view this relationship as intimacy between males and hence, not able to disqualify the androgynus? Why not see it as a relation between a male and a female? Among the explanations given is that since both of the androgynies are engaging in relations as males, it is not appropriate to deem one a male and one a female.

63.

The Jerusalem Talmud (the conclusion of tractate Terumot) states that for a servant to partake of terumah, he must belong to priests entirely. If an Israelite has even a one-hundredth share in the ownership of the servant, he may not partake of terumah.

64.

Which may be eaten by all the members of the priest's household.

65.

When a woman marries, her husband receives the right to benefit from her property. As explained in Hilchot Ishut, ch. 16, there are two arrangements under which a husband is allowed to benefit from his wife's property:

nichsei milog - in this instance, in the event of divorce or the husband's death, the property reverts to the ownership of the woman according to its value at that time, regardless of the profit or loss she suffers;

nichsei tzon barzel - in this instance, the property is evaluated at the time of marriage; in the event of divorce or the husband's death, the woman receives that amount, regardless of the worth of the property at that time.

Servants can be classified in either of these categories. In both instances, they have the right to partake of terumah. With regard to servants who are nichsei tzon barzel, they are the husband's (the priest's) acquisitions, for it is as if he acquired them when he accepted financial responsibility for their worth. With regard to those who are nichsei milog, they are "the acquisition of his acquisition," i.e., property belonging to his wife whom he has acquired. See Halachah 20.

66.

I.e., servants acquired by servants who were acquired by the priest. The inference is derived based on the fact that the verse contains to derivatives of the word koneh - "acquire."

67.

When the wife of a priest is not entitled to partake of terumah (see Halachot 20-22), her servants may also not partake of terumah.

68.

The servants who are nichsei tzon barzel certainly may not partake of terumah for they are now the property of an Israelite. Even the servants who are nichsei milog may not partake of terumah, for at this time, their owner - the Israelite's wife - is disqualified from partaking of terumah.

69.

These three types of relationships are forbidden, the first two by Scriptural Law, the latter by Rabbinic Law. Thus the woman will become a chalalah and hence, forbidden to partake of terumah. Since she is forbidden to partake of terumah, her servants are likewise forbidden.

70.

I.e., a woman who is forbidden to him because of one of the prohibitions that apply to all Jews, even non-priests. Nevertheless, if he engages in relations with that woman, she becomes a zonah and thus prohibited against partaking of terumah. In this instance as well, since she is forbidden to partake of terumah, her servants are likewise forbidden.

71.

For they are the woman's poperty, it is just that they are "on loan" to her husband, as it were.

72.

A relatively distant female relative with whom our Sages prohibited marriage as a safeguard against the Scriptural prohibitions of incest. See Hilchot Ishut 1:6.

73.

For according to Scriptural Law, she is the priest's wife and relations with him do not disqualify her, neither as a zonah or a chalalah.

74.

Seemingly, since such a woman has the right to partake of terumah, her servants should also be so entitled. The Radbaz explains that since her marriage is not sanctioned by Rabbinic Law, her husband is under no obligation to sustain her. Hence, her servants do not receive the right to partake of terumah. Those servants that are nichsei tzon barzel are permitted to partake of terumah according to all authorities, for they are her husband's acquisitions as explained above.

75.

I.e., were it not for the reason stated by the Rambam, they would be permitted to partake of terumah by virtue of their membership in the Priestly family.

76.

Entering the chupah means entering a private place with her husband. This is the act that constitutes the beginning of the second phase of the marriage relationship, nissuin.

77.

Even though a woman enters the chupah without consecration, that act causes her to be considered as designated for intimate relations that are forbidden.

78.

Through intimate relations with her husband.

79.

I.e., her husband, the priest, had several brothers, one of whom was born from a relationship forbidden to the priesthood, and thus had the status of a challal.

80.

Since she could be married by the challal, she is disqualified even though she is a member of the priestly family.

81.

A maamar is a Rabbinic institution in which a yevam declares his intention to marry his brother's childless widow by consecrating her through giving her money (Hilchot Yibbum 2:1).

82.

If another brother would perform yibbum with the widow, he would become her husband despite the maamar given by his brother. Thus the connection to the yevam who is a challal is still intact.

83.

I.e., instead of performing chalitzah which would absolve the connection between him and his yevamah, he gave her a bill of divorce. According to Scriptural Law, the bill of divorce is not effective at all. Nevertheless, according to Rabbinic Law, it disqualifies the woman from carrying out yibbum with any of the brothers (Hilchot Yibbum VeChalitzah 5:1).

84.

For according to Scriptural Law, their connection is still intact.

85.

And thus became forbidden to a priest by Rabbinic decree.

86.

A relatively distant female relative with whom our Sages prohibited marriage as a safeguard against the Scriptural prohibitions of incest. See Hilchot Ishut 1:6.

87.

Because she is a member of the priestly family. In contrast to the women mentioned in Halachah 21, these women are designated for relations that are forbidden only by Rabbinic decree. Hence, they are not disqualified.

Were the yevamah to be the daughter of an Israelite, she would not be permitted to partake of terumah despite the fact that she is bound to a priest through the obligation of yibbum (Radbaz).

88.

A women whose female sexual characteristics are underdeveloped.

89.

Although the priest may divorce her because she cannot have children, until he does so, he may be intimate with her. Hence, she is entitled to partake of terumah.

Terumot - Chapter 8

1

A fetus, a yavam, consecration, a deaf-mute, and a child of nine years old disqualify [a woman] from partaking of terumah, but do not entitle her to partake [of it].1

א

העובר והיבם והאירוסין והחרש ובן ט' שנים ויום אחד פוסלין ולא מאכילין:

2

What is meant [by the above statement] with regard to a fetus? A daughter of an Israelite who was impregnated by a priest2 is not entitled to partake of terumah by virtue of the fetus.3 When the daughter of a priest, by contrast, was impregnated by an Israelite,4 she is prohibited against partaking of terumah because of the fetus. [This is derived from Leviticus 22:13:] "And she shall return to her father's home as in her maidenhood." This excludes a pregnant woman.5

ב

העובר כיצד בת ישראל המעוברת מכהן לא תאכל בשביל העובר ובת כהן המעוברת מישראל אסורה לאכול מפני העובר שנאמר ושבה אל בית אביה כנעוריה פרט למעוברת:

3

When an Israelite has relations with a daughter of a priest,6 we do not suspect that she became pregnant. Instead, she may immerse herself [in the mikveh]7 and partake [of terumah] in the evening. If she was married to an Israelite and her husband died, she may immerse herself and partake of terumah in the evening [and continue doing so] for 40 days.8 If her fetus is recognized [afterwards], retroactively, her [actions] are objectionable9 from the fortieth day onward. For, throughout the forty days, the embryo is not considered as a fetus, merely as water.

ג

בת כהן שבא עליה ישראל אין חוששין שמא נתעברה אלא טובלת ואוכלת לערב היתה נשואה לישראל ומת בעלה טובלת ואוכלת בתרומה לערב עד מ' יום ואם הוכר עוברה הרי זו מקולקלת למפרע עד מ' יום שכל המ' יום אינו עובר אלא מים בעולם הוא חשוב:

4

When a daughter of an Israelite was married to a priest and he died, leaving her pregnant,10 her servants11 should not partake of terumah because of the fetus. For only a child that was born entitles others to partake [of terumah]. One which is not born does not entitle others to partake [of terumah]. Therefore if the fetus was a challal [and the woman had other acceptable children, the fetus] does not disqualify the servants from partaking of terumah.12 Instead, they may partake of it by virtue of his brothers who are acceptable priests until this challal is born, at which point, the servants become forbidden to partake [of terumah].13

ד

בת ישראל שנשאת לכהן ומת והניחה מעוברת לא יאכלו עבדיה בתרומה בשביל העובר שהילוד הוא שמאכיל שאינו ילוד אינו מאכיל לפיכך אם היה העובר חלל אינו פוסל העבדים אלא אוכלין בגלל אחיו הכשרים עד שיולד זה החלל ויאסרו העבדים מלאכול:

5

What is meant [by the initial statement] with regard to a yavam? When a daughter of an Israelite is under the obligation to perform yibbum with a priest,14she may not partake of terumah, for [ibid.:11] states: "When a priest will purchase a soul" and this [yavam] has not acquired [the woman] yet.15

When the daughter of a priest is under the obligation to perform yibbum with an Israelite, she is forbidden [to partake of terumah]16 because of her yavam, as [implied by the verse:] "And she shall return to her father's home as in her maidenhood." This excludes a woman under obligation to perform yibbum.17

ה

היבם כיצד בת ישראל הזקוקה ליבם כהן לא תאכל שנאמר וכהן כי יקנה נפש וזה עדיין לא קנאה ובת כהן הזקוקה לישראל אסורה מפני יבמה שנאמר ושבה אל בית אביה כנעוריה פרט לשומרת יבם:

6

When a yavam who is a priest engages in relations with his yevamah by force or without intent or he merely uncovers her and does not complete the act of intercourse,18 he acquires [his yevamah], as stated in Hilchot Yibbum.19 Nevertheless, he does not entitle her to partake of terumah until he completes the act of intercourse with her consent.

When does the above apply? When [the yevamah] was widowed after consecration [alone].20 If, however, she had been married, since she had been partaking of terumah previously,21 she is entitled to partake of it by virtue of [the inferior] acts of intimacy mentioned above.

ו

יבם כהן שבא על יבמתו באונס או בשגגה או שהערה בה ולא גמר אע"פ שקנאה כמו שבארנו בהלכות יבום אינו מאכילה בתרומה עד שיבעול בעילה גמורה ברצון במה דברים אמורים שנתאלמנה מן האירוסין אבל מן הנישואין הואיל והיתה אוכלת תאכל בביאה זו:

7

What is meant [by the initial statement] with regard to a consecration? When a daughter of a priest is consecrated by an Israelite, she is forbidden to partake [of terumah], for he has already acquired her. When the daughter of an Israelite has been consecrated by a priest, she may not partake [of terumah] until she enters the chupah, lest she give terumah to the members of her father's household, as we explained.22

ז

האירוסין כיצד בת כהן שנתארסה לישראל אסורה לאכול שהרי יש לו בה קנין ובת ישראל שנתארסה לכהן לא תאכל עד שתכנס לחופה שמא תאכיל לבני בית אביה כמו שביארנו:

8

When an Israelite tells the daughter of a priest: "Behold, you are consecrated to me after 30 days," she may partake [of terumah] for these 30 days,23 for the consecration has not taken effect yet.24 If, however, he told her: "You are consecrated to me from the present and after 30 days,"25 she is forbidden to partake [of terumah] immediately.26 Similar laws apply with regard to other conditional agreements of this type.27

ח

ישראל שאמר לכהנת הרי את מקודשת לי אחר ל' יום ה"ז אוכלת בתרומה כל השלשים שעדיין לא נתארסה ואם אמר לה הרי את מקודשת לי מעכשיו ולאחר ל' יום ה"ז אסורה לאכול מיד וכן שאר התנאים כיוצא בזה:

9

What is meant [by the initial statement] with regard to a deaf-mute? When a daughter of a priest is married to an Israelite who is a deaf-mute, she may not partake [of terumah], since he acquires her by virtue of the ordinance of our Sages who instituted marriage for him.28 When a daughter of an Israelite marries a priest who is a deaf-mute, she may not partake [of terumah], because he does not acquire [her] according to Scriptural Law,29 because he is not of [adequate] intellectual capacity.

ט

החרש כיצד כהנת שנשאת לישראל חרש לא תאכל שהרי קונה בתקנת חכמים שתקנו לו נישואין ובת ישראל שנשאת לכהן חרש לא תאכל שאינו קונה מן התורה שאינו בן דעת:

10

[When a woman] was consecrated by a priest of ordinary mental capacity, but he did not marry her until he became a deaf-mute, she may not partake [of terumah].30 [In the above situation, if after consecrating a woman, a priest] died and she fell before a yavam who is a deaf-mute, she may not partake [of terumah].31 If, however, he married her when he was of ordinary mental capacity and then became a deaf-mute, she may [continue] to partake [of terumah].32 If he died and she fell before a yavam who is a deaf-mute and he performs yibbum with her, she may [also continue to] partake [of terumah]. [The rationale for the leniency is] that she was partaking of terumah beforehand.33

When the wife of [a priest who is] a deaf-mute bears him a child, she may partake [of terumah] by virtue of her child.

י

נתארסה לכהן פקח ולא הספיק לכונסה עד שנתחרש אינה אוכלת מת ונפלה לפני יבם חרש ויבמה אינה אוכלת אבל אם נשאה כשהוא פיקח ונתחרש הרי זו אוכלת מת ונפלה לפני יבם חרש ויבמה הרי זו אוכלת הואיל והיתה אוכלת בתחלה ואשת חרש שילדה ממנו הרי זו אוכלת בשביל בנה:

11

What is meant [by the initial statement] with regard to a child of nine years old?34 [When a daughter of a priest] engaged in relations with a child of nine years old who is forbidden to her, since sexual relations in which he engages are significant,35 she is disqualified from the priesthood and forbidden to partake of terumah, because she becomes a zonah or a chalalah, as we explained.36 [This applies] even if [the child] is sexually impotent.37

When a daughter of an Israelite marries a priest who is nine years old, even though the relations in which he engages are significant, she is not entitled to partake of terumah because of [this] child, because he cannot acquire her [as his wife] until he reaches majority.38

If there is a doubt whether [a child forbidden to a daughter of a priest] is nine years old39or not,40 she is forbidden to partake [of terumah].41 [This same ruling applies] if she married a boy thirteen years old and there was a question whether he manifested physical signs of maturity or not.42

יא

בן תשע שנים ויום אחד כיצד מי שנבעלה לאסור לה והוא בן תשע שנים ויום אחד הואיל וביאתו ביאה נפסלה מן הכהונה ואסורה מלאכול בתרומה מפני שנעשית זונה או חללה כמו שביארנו אפילו היה שחיף ובת ישראל שנשאת לכהן בן ט' שנים ויום אחד אף על פי שביאתו ביאה אינה אוכלת בשביל הקטן לפי שאינו קונה עד שיגדיל ספק שהוא בן ט' שנים ויום אחד ספק שאינו נשאת לבן י"ג שנה ויום אחד ספק שהביא שתי שערות ספק שלא הביא הרי זו אסורה לאכול:

12

All of the relationships [mentioned above] that do not entitle a woman to partake of terumah prescribed by Scriptural Law also do not entitle her to partake of terumah prescribed by Rabbinic Law. [This is] a decree lest they have them partake of terumah prescribed by Scriptural Law.

יב

כל אלו כשם שאין מאכילין בתרומה של תורה כך אין מאכילין בתרומה של דבריהם גזירה שמא יאכילו בשל תורה:

13

The [following] individuals neither disqualify [the daughter of a priest from partaking of terumah]43 or enable [the daughter of an Israelite] to partake of it:44a rapist, a seducer,45 or a mentally or emotionally unstable person.46 [This applies] provided she is not forbidden to them, in which instance, they disqualify her through relations, because she becomes a zonah or a chalalah, as we explained.47

יג

ואלו לא פוסלין ולא מאכילין:

האונס והמפתה והשוטה שנשא אשה אא"כ היתה אסורה להן שהן פוסלין אותה בביאתם מפני שנעשית זונה וחללה כמו שביארנו:

14

When a woman married a priest who was intellectually or emotionally unstable or a priest raped her or seduced her and she bore him a child, she may partake of terumah because of her son.48 There is a doubt concerning the matter, for since she was not consecrated to him, it is possible that she was impregnated by another person. Nevertheless, we operate under the presumption that the child was conceived by [the priest] who engaged in relations with her. [This applies] provided rumors did not circulate concerning her with another person. Instead, everyone gossips about her and this priest.

Similar concepts apply when an Israelite who is intellectually or emotionally unstable engages in relations with the daughter of a priest or [an Israelite] raped or seduced her and she became pregnant. She may not partake of terumah because of the fetus. If the fetus is is aborted, she may partake [of terumah].49

יד

מי שנשאת לכהן שוטה או שאנס אותה או שפיתה אותה כהן וילדה אוכלת בשביל בנה ואע"פ שהדבר ספק הואיל ובלא קידושין היא שמא מאחר נתעברה הרי הולד בחזקת זה שבא עליה:

והוא שלא יצא עליה קול עם אחר אלא הכל מרננין אחריה בזה הכהן וכן כהנת שבא עליה ישראל שוטה או שאנסה או פיתה אותה ונתעברה אינה אוכלת מפני העובר נתחתך העובר ה"ז תאכל:

15

When witnesses concerning a [sotah] warning and witnesses concerning [a sotah] meeting testify against a woman50 married [to a priest], she is forbidden to partake of terumah until she drinks the bitter water, because there is a question whether she is a zonah. If her husband dies before she drinks the water or she is one of the women who are absolved from drinking51 and do not receive the money due them by virtue of their ketubah, she is forbidden to partake of terumah forever.52 Whenever the wife of a priest says: "I have been unfaithful," she is forbidden to partake of terumah.53

טו

אשת איש שבאו עליה עידי קינוי ועידי סתירה הרי זו אסורה לאכול בתרומה עד שתשתה מי המרים מפני שהיא ספק זונה מת בעלה קודם שישקנה או שהיתה מן הנשים שאינן שותות ולא נוטלות כתובה ה"ז אסורה לאכול בתרומה לעולם וכל אשת כהן שאמרה טמאה אני הרי זו אסורה לאכול בתרומה:

16

When a daughter of an Israelite who has not attained majority marries a priest without her father's consent, whether in his presence or in his absence, she may not partake of terumah even though her father consecrated her.54 [The rationale is that] her father might object and then she would retroactively be unfit [to partake of terumah]. [The reason] he remains silent even though he sees is because he is angry because she married without his consent.55

טז

קטנה בת ישראל שנשאת לכהן שלא מדעת אביה בין בפני אביה בין שלא בפניו אף על פי שקדשה אביה אינה אוכלת בתרומה שאם מיחה תעשה זרה למפרע וזה שרואה ושותק כועס הוא לפי שנשאת שלא לדעתו:

Footnotes
1.

This statement is explained in the halachot that follow.

2.

Without being married to the priest or after being widowed from him.

3.

I.e., as soon as the baby is born, the mother is entitled to eat by virtue of her child. Until it is born, however, the restrictions apply.

4.

Without being married to the priest or after being widowed from him.

5.

Rashi (Yevamot 67b) explains that a pregnant woman is excluded, because she does not resemble a maiden.

6.

Without being married to the priest or after being widowed from him.

7.

To purify herself from the impurity she contracted because of the relations in which she engaged (see Leviticus 15:18). Note, however, Chapter 7, Halachah 7, and notes, from which it is apparent that there are times when a woman will have to wait longer.

8.

For even if she became pregnant, the pregnancy is not significant as the Rambam continues to explain. Hence, after 40 days passed, she should refrain from partaking of terumah until it is clear that she is not pregnant.

9.

She is required to make restoration of the terumah and add a fifth of its value as atonement.

10.

Without any other children.

11.

She herself may also not partake of terumah, as stated in Halachah 2. This halachah is speaking about her servants that are nichsei tzon barzel and thus belong to the heirs of her husband's estate. Until the fetus is born, it is not a significant entity and the servants that belong to it do not have the right to partake of terumah because of it.

12.

The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam concerning this point and maintains that the right of the fetus to the servants is significant even before the fetus is born. Hence, he disqualifies them from partaking of terumah. The Radbaz and the Kessef Mishneh offer interpretations of the relevant Talmudic portions that substantiate the Rambam's ruling.

13.

Until the estate is divided and each brother receives his share.

14.

Regardless of the age of the prospective yavam.

15.

Although she was married to the brother of the yavam, the yavam does not acquire her until he performs yibbum. The Radbaz emphasizes that this ruling applies even if the yavam gave her a ma'amar, designating her as his wife.

16.

Which, were she not obligated to her yavam, she could partake of by virtue of her membership in the priestly family.

17.

Rashi (loc. cit. 67b) explains that such a woman is excluded, because she may not return to her father's home.

18.

As stated in Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah 1:10, the term "uncover" is of Biblical origin (Leviticus 20:18) and refers to the insertion of the corona alone in the woman's vaginal channel. "Completing relations" refers to the insertion of the entire male organ.

19.

Hilchot Yibbum VeChalitzah 2:3.

20.

And thus was not yet entitled to partake of terumah by virtue of her initial marriage.

21.

I.e., during her first marriage.

22.

Chapter 6, Halachah 3, explains that the Sages forbade such a woman from partaking of terumah for this reason. According to Scriptural Law, she is entitled to partake of it.

23.

By virtue of her ancestral right.

24.

When a woman's husband words his statement in that manner, the consecration does not take effect until the 30 days pass (Hilchot Ishut 7:10).

25.

In which instance, the wording he uses is confusing and there is a doubt whether the consecration takes effect immediately or only after 30 days (ibid.:12).

26.

Because of the doubt regarding her status.

27.

I.e., if the man consecrated the woman conditionally, but stated that when the condition is fulfilled, the consecration would take effect from the present time (see ibid.: 6:16).

28.

According to Scriptural Law, a deaf-mute does not have the capacity to consecrate a woman as his wife. Our Sages, however, desired that these individuals be given a chance to enjoy the basics of family life (see Hilchot Ishut 4:9, 11:4).

29.

And the acquisition ordained by our Sages does not have the power to supercede Scriptural Law.

30.

For her consecration did not entitle her to partake of terumah and her marriage to a deaf-mute (through yibbum) does not give her this right either.

31.

In this instance, the yibbum performed by the deaf-mute creates a marriage-bond that is effective according to Scriptural Law. Nevertheless, the relations with which he engages with her resemble the inadvertent relations mentioned in Halachah 6 and hence do not entitle the woman to partake of terumah.

32.

For she is married according to Scriptural Law.

33.

And the relations with the yavam restore her to her previous status.

34.

The Rambam speaks about a boy "nine years and one day old." Nevertheless, the intent is that he has completed nine years of life and entered his tenth year. Even a portion of a day is considered as an entire day. Thus as soon as a child reaches his ninth birthday, he is nine years and one day old. Hence, for the purpose of brevity, we have translated as above.

35.

Although such a child is a minor and not entirely sexually potent, at this age, he is somewhat physically mature. Hence, relations in which he engage are significant to a certain extent. See Hilchot Ishut 11:3; Hilchot Yibbum 1:16; Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah 1:13.

36.

See Chapter 6, Halachah 7.

37.

I.e., and he inserted his organ in hers without an erection. The Radbaz explains that this is the fundamental new concept taught by this halachah. Otherwise, it would be obvious that since relations with this child are significant and they are forbidden to this woman, they disqualify her from partaking of terumah.

38.

For a male cannot acquire a wife until he reaches majority. Such a marriage is not significant even according to Rabbinic Law (Hilchot Ishut 11:6-7).

39.

In which instance, she would be forbidden to partake of terumah.

40.

In which instance, she would be permitted.

41.

Because of the doubt.

42.

For a child does not reach maturity - and hence, a marriage that he enters is not significant - until he manifests bodily signs, two pubic hairs for a male, that he has reached maturity. Attaining the age of maturity is itself not sufficient (Hilchot Ishut 2:10-11).

Seemingly, this clause is also speaking about an instance where the daughter of a priest is marrying a youth who disqualifies her and the question is whether he is of sufficient physical maturity for the marriage to be significant. In that instance, however, it would be proper to speak of consecration, not marriage. For this reason, Rav Yosef Korcus defines this clause as referring to a daughter of an Israelite who is marrying a priest and the question is whether the marriage entitles her to partake of terumah or not.

43.

If the individual involved is an Israelite fit to marry this woman.

44.

If the individual involved is a priest.

45.

I.e., one who seduced a girl under majority. In that instance, even though the relations were with consent, since the girl is a minor, they are considered to have been carried out against her will.

46.

In the first two instances, since the relations were carried out outside the context of marriage, they are not significant with regard to terumah. In the latter instance, since the marriage of an intellectual or emotionally unstable person is of no significance whatsoever (Hilchot Ishut 11:6), the relations are considered as taking place outside the context of marriage.

47.

See Chapter 6, Halachah 7. In such an instance, the woman is disqualified even if the relations were carried out under duress.

48.

Since he is a priest, he entitles his mother to partake of terumah. See Chapter 6, Halachah 12.

49.

I.e., she resumes her previous status.

50.

A sotah is a woman suspected of adultery who is subjected to a test of her fidelity by drinking special water, the "bitter water" mentioned by the Rambam, prepared in the Temple. For a woman to be required to take this test, two witnesses must testify that she was warned by her husband not to enter into privacy with a particular man and two witnesses must testify that she in fact entered into privacy with the said person (Hilchot Sotah 1:1).

51.

See Hilchot Sotah 2:2 which mentions fifteen women that are placed in this category.

52.

For the sotah test is necessary to very whether or not she was faithful to her husband and that test is not administered unless the husband is alive (ibid. 2:7).

53.

This is not speaking about a sotah, but rather an ordinary woman married to a priest.

Hilchot Ishut 24:23 states that, in this situation, we do not accept the woman's word and we require her to remain married to her husband, for we suspect that she was not unfaithful and made this statement only so that she would be divorced and free to marry someone else. Nevertheless, her word is accepted with regard to terumah and her husband must provide her with other food.

54.

Until a girl attains majority, she cannot marry without her father's consent. Thus it is as if the marriage is conditional until he consents and if he does not consent, it is nullified (Hilchot Ishut 3:13, 22:5). Hence, we do no allow her to partake of terumah, for if the marriage is nullified, she would have no right to partake of terumah.

55.

And does not desire to speak his mind until he calms down.

Terumot - Chapter 9

1

A woman may partake of terumah until her bill of divorce reaches her hand or the hand of her agent whom she appointed to receive it.1

Whenever there is a doubt whether or not a woman was divorced, she may not partake of terumah.2 When a woman appoints an agent to receive her bill of divorce, she is forbidden to partake of terumah immediately.3 If she said: "Receive the bill of divorce for me in this-and-this place," she is not forbidden [to partake of terumah] until the agent reaches that place.4

If she sent an agent to bring her the bill of divorce, she may partake of terumah until the bill of divorce reaches her hand.5 When a person tells his wife: "This is your bill of divorce; [it is effective] one hour before my death"6 she is forbidden to partake of terumah immediately.7

א

האשה אוכלת בתרומה עד שיגיע גט לידה או ליד שלוחה שעשתה לקבלה וכל שהיא ספק גרושה הרי זו לא תאכל:

האשה שעשתה שליח לקבל לה גיטה אסורה לאכול בתרומה מיד ואם אמרה קבל לי גיטי במקום פלוני אינה אסורה עד שיגיע שליח לאותו מקום שלחה שליח להביא לה גיטה אוכלת בתרומה עד שיגיע גט לידה האומר לאשתו ה"ז גיטיך שעה אחת קודם למיתתי אסורה לאכול בתרומה מיד:

2

[The inhabitants of] a city under siege, [the voyagers on] a ship in danger of sinking at sea, and a suspect to be judged [for a crime worthy of capital punishment] are presumed to be alive.8 Needless to say, this applies to one who goes on a caravan journey.9

[In the following instances,] however: a city was captured by besieging forces, a ship was lost at sea, or a person was going out to be executed by a gentile court,10 a person dragged by a wild beast, one upon whom a landslide fell, or one carried away by a river, we regard the individuals with the stringencies appropriate to both the living and the dead.11 Therefore if among the women were the daughter of a priest married to an Israelite12 or the daughter of an Israelite married to a priest,13 they may not partake [of terumah].

If, however, a person was sentenced to death in a [Jewish] court and was taken to the place where he will be stoned,14 we presume that he is dead and his wife may not partake [of terumah].15

ב

עיר שהקיפוה כרקום וספינה המטרפת בים והיוצא לידון הרי אלו בחזקת קיימין ואין צריך לומר מפרש ויוצא בשיירא אבל עיר שכבשוה כרכום וספינה שאבדה בים והיוצא ליהרג מבתי דיני עכו"ם ומי שגררתו חיה או נפלה עליו מפולת או שטפו נהר נותנין לו חומרי מתים וחומרי חיים לפיכך אם היו נשותיהן בת כהן לישראל או בת ישראל לכהן הרי אלו לא יאכלו אבל מי שנגמר דינו בב"ד והניחוהו בבית הסקילה ליהרג ה"ז בחזקת מת ולא תאכל אשתו:

3

If a woman left her husband while he was in his death throes in another country, she may not partake of terumah, whether she is the daughter of a priest married to an Israelite or the daughter of an Israelite married to a priest. [The rationale is that] most people in their death throes die.16

If one witness testifies that [a woman's husband] has died and one testifies that he has not died, she may not partake [of terumah].17

ג

הניחה בעלה גוסס במדינה אחרת בין שהיתה כהנת אשת ישראל או ישראלית אשת כהן לא תאכל שרוב גוססין למיתה אחד אומר מת ואחד אומר לא מת הרי זו לא תאכל:

4

[When a man is married to two wives and] one of the wives tells the other that their husband died, since [the other wife] cannot marry by virtue of this testimony,18 she may continue to partake of terumah19 on the presumption that her husband is alive until a person upon whose testimony is sufficient to enable her to marry testifies concerning her. [The same ruling applies] if such testimony is given by any of the five women whose testimony is not accepted if they say that her husband died.20

ד

אמרה לה צרתה או אחת מהחמש נשים שאינן נאמנות להעידה שמת בעלה הואיל ואינה נישאת על פיהן הרי זו אוכלת בתרומה בחזקת שבעלה קיים עד שיעיד לה מי שהוא נאמן להשיאה על פיו:

5

When [a priest] frees his servant, from the time he transfers21 his bill of emancipation22 to him, he disqualifies him from partaking of terumah. Whenever a servant is given his freedom, but his bill of emancipation is withheld as will be explained in Hilchot Avadim,23 he is, nonetheless, forbidden to partake of terumah.

ה

המשחרר את עבדו משיזכה לו בגט שחרור פסלו מלאכול בתרומה וכל עבד שיצא לחירות ועדיין הוא מעוכב גט שחרור כמו שיתבאר בהלכות עבדים אע"פ כן הרי הוא אסור לאכול בתרומה:

6

There is a doubt [whether the transfer of the ownership of a servant is effective in the following situation]. A person composed a legal document transferring his property - which included servants - to another person. He [did not give the document to that person directly, but instead] gave it to another person on his behalf.24 The recipient [of the present] remained silent and afterwards, protested. There is a doubt whether his protests reflected his initial disposition25 and thus [the servants] have never left the initial domain or whether his protest after his initial silence is [interpreted as] a renunciation of his initial position.26 Therefore, [the servants] may not partake of terumah. [This applies] whether the second master27 was an Israelite and the first master, a priest or the first master was an Israelite and the second, a priest.28

ו

הכותב נכסיו לאחר וזכה לו על ידי אחר והיו בהן עבדים ושתק זה שנתנו לו ואחר כך צווח ה"ז ספק אם זה שצווח הוכיח סופו על תחילתו ועדיין לא יצאו מרשות ראשון או זה שצווח אחר ששתק חזר בו לפיכך אין אוכלין בתרומה בין שהיה רבו שני ישראל והראשון כהן בין שהיה רבו ראשון ישראל והשני כהן:

7

When an Israelite rents livestock from a priest, he may feed it terumah.29 When a priest rents livestock from an Israelite, although he is obligated to provide it with food, he may not feed it terumah, because it is not his financial acquisition.30

ז

ישראל ששכר בהמה מכהן מאכילה תרומה וכהן ששכר בהמת ישראל אף על פי שהוא חייב במזונותיה לא יאכילנה תרומה מפני שאינה קניין כספו:

8

When an Israelite receives a cow from a priest for the sake of fattening it and has it evaluated so that its increase in value will be split,31 he may not feed it terumah even though the priest has a share in its increase in value. If, by contrast, a priest receives a cow from an Israelite for the sake of fattening it and has it evaluated, he may feed it terumah. [The rationale is that] although the Israelite has a share in its increase in value, its body belongs to the priest, because he has [accepted responsibility] for its value.

ח

ישראל ששם פרה מכהן לפטמה ולהיות השבח ביניהן לא יאכילנה בתרומה אע"פ שיש לכהן חלק בשבחה אבל כהן ששם פרה מישראל לפטמה אף על פי שיש לישראל חלק בשבח הואיל וגופה לכהן שהרי שמה על עצמו ה"ז מאכילה תרומה:

9

When a cow belonging to an Israelite gives birth to its firstborn, the owner may feed it terumah, for the firstborn belongs to the priests.32 A person may store vetch33 that is terumah in his dovecote. He need not worry that his doves will come and eat it.34

ט

פרתו של ישראל שילדה בכור מאכילו תרומה שהבכור לכהנים ואוצר אדם כרשיני תרומה לתוך שובכו ואינו חושש שמא יבואו היונים שלו ויאכלו אותן:

10

It appears to me35 that if a priest sold his cow to an Israelite and took payment, he can no longer feed it terumah even though the purchaser has not drawn it into his domain as of yet. [The rationale is that] according to Scriptural Law, the transfer of money completes a transaction, as will be explained in Hilchot Mekach UMemcar.36 [Conversely,] if an Israelite sold a cow to a priest, he should not feed it terumah until he draws it into his domain37 even though he already made payment.

י

יראה לי שאם מכר הכהן פרתו לישראל ולקח הדמים אע"פ שעדיין לא משך הלוקח ה"ז אסור להאכילה תרומה שדין תורה מעות קונות כמו שיתבאר בהלכות מקח וממכר ואם מכר ישראל לכהן אף על פי שנתן הדמים לא תאכל בתרומה עד שימשוך:

Footnotes
1.

This latter point requires qualification as the Rambam proceeds to state.

2.

For a Scriptural prohibition is involved and we follow the general principle: Whenever there is a question regarding a point of Scriptural Law, we rule stringently. Hence, even though her husband is liable to provide her with her sustenance in such a situation (Hilchot Ishut 5:13), he may not give her terumah.

3.

This is a corollary to the point mentioned beforehand. Since a woman is forbidden to partake of terumah whenever there is a doubt that she was divorced, she is forbidden as soon as she appoints her agent, for at any time, he may receive her bill of divorce. Even though the matter is not entirely in the agent's hands, for the bill of divorce must be given on the husband's initiative, we follow the presumption that the agent will fulfill the mission with which he is charged (Radbaz).

4.

For the bill of divorce is not effective if given elsewhere (Hilchot Gerushin 9:34).

5.

For in this instance, the agent is acting in place of the husband and the divorce is not completed until he gives the woman the bill of divorce (ibid. 6:5).

6.

Such an arrangement was often made when a couple were childless so that if the husband died the woman would be free of the obligation of yibbum.

7.

For we fear that he might die at any moment. Hence, from the previous hour onward, she would have partaken of terumah without having the right to do so.

8.

And if they are priests, their wives may continue partaking of terumah.

9.

We are speaking about a caravan journey through the desert. Although there is a certain amount of danger to the travelers, we operate under the presumption that they are alive until we receive information otherwise.

10.

The officers of a gentile court are likely to accept bribes. Hence, the fact that one was sentenced to death is not necessarily proof that he died.

11.

In these situations, there is a high likelihood - but no definite proof that the person died. Hence, his wife must assume that he is dead and accept all the stringencies that state would apply. At the same time, she cannot act on the assumption that he is dead and remarry. The Rambam continues explaining the implications of this status vis-à-vis terumah.

12.

She must presume her husband is alive and may not partake of terumah for that reason.

13.

She must presume her husband is dead and may not partake of terumah for that reason.

14.

A person sentenced to be executed may be given a reprieve from execution if a redeeming factor is found for him (Hilchot Sanhedrin 13:1). Nevertheless, once he has already been brought to the place of execution, it is very unlikely that this will happen (Kessef Mishneh).

15.

I.e., if she is the daughter of an Israelite married to a priest. If she is the daughter of a priest married to an Israelite, she may partake of terumah.

16.

Hence, the daughter of the Israelite may not partake of terumah. On the other hand, not all die. Hence, since a daughter of the priest married to an Israelite was not partaking of terumah beforehand, this is not considered sufficient reason to allow her to do so (Radbaz).

17.

Although a woman is not given permission to remarry in such an instance (Hilchot Gerushin 12:18), she is still not permitted to partake of terumah.

18.

Hilchot Gerushin 12:16 states that, if no one contradicts the testimony, whenever a witness testifies that a woman's husband died, his or her word is accepted with the exception of five women: another wife of that man, a woman who is her husband's yevamah, the woman's mother-in-law, her mother-in-law's daughter, and her husband's daughter from another wife. In all these instances, we fear that there is enmity between these women and the man's wife and they will testify falsely so that she will marry another man and hence, be forced to accept a divorce from her husband.

19.

The Ra'avad does not accept the Rambam's ruling and maintains that even though the woman is not allowed to remarry, she should not be allowed to partake of terumah. For perhaps these women are telling the truth. The Radbaz supports the Rambam's ruling.

20.

Hilchot Gerushin 12:16 states that, if no one contradicts the testimony, whenever a witness testifies that a woman's husband died, his or her word is accepted with the exception of five women: another wife of that man, a woman who is her husband's yevamah, the woman's mother-in-law, her mother-in-law's daughter, and her husband's daughter from another wife. In all these instances, we fear that there is enmity between these women and the man's wife and they will testify falsely so that she will marry another man and hence, be forced to accept a divorce from her husband.

21.

The Rambam's wording allows for the interpretation that this ruling applies whether he gives the bill of emancipation to the servant or to another person on behalf of the servant (see Hilchot Avadim 6:1).

22.

The formal legal contract freeing him from slavery.

23.

As stated in Hilchot Avadim 5:4, et al, there are certain situations where a servant is deserving of his freedom. Nevertheless, he does not receive the status of a freed servant until he receives his bill of emancipation. Even so, he is forbidden to partake of terumah from the time he becomes worthy of freedom.

24.

In such a situation, we say that since generally, it is considered desirable to receive a gift, the intended recipient acquires the property unless he lodges an objection at the time he hears about the gift. See Hilchot Zechiyah UMatanah 4:2.

25.

I.e., that he never desired to receive the present and thus it never left the domain of its initial owner (ibid.:3).

26.

And thus, he is considered to have acquired the property - and the servants - and then to have renounced ownership of it and them.

27.

The recipient of the present.

28.

For in either situation, there is a possibility that their present owner is an Israelite.

29.

Because the rental does not interrupt the priests's ownership. The Israelite must, however, transfer ownership of the terumah to the priest before feeding it to the animal.

30.

There are, however, contexts where rental is considered equivalent to purchase. See Hilchot Sechirut 7:1.

31.

This was a popular arrangement in the Talmudic era. The owner of livestock would give it to a shepherd to fatten. The shepherd would have it evaluated and accept responsibility for its value although he did not actually pay the priest anything. Afterwards, when it has been fattened, the value which the shepherd accepted responsibility for is returned to the owner and the two share the profits equally. See Hilchot Shluchin VeShutafim 8:1-4 and Hilchot Malveh ViLoveh 8:12 for more details concerning this arrangement.

32.

And thus the law mentioned in the first clause of Halachah 7 applies.

33.

A type of legume used as animal fodder.

34.

Even a priest may not feed his doves terumah, for terumah may only be given to domesticated animals. Nevertheless, everyone, even Israelites, need not take precautions against an animal eating vetch that is terumah on its own initiative. The Radbaz explains that the rationale is that the obligation to separate terumah from vetch is merely Rabbinic in origin. Implied is that if the obligation was Scriptural in origin, one could not take such leniency. It must be noted, however, that not all authorities consider the obligation to separate terumah from vetch as Rabbinic.

35.

This introduction precedes a law which the Rambam derived through his own process of deduction without an explicit source in the previous Rabbinic literature.

36.

Hilchot Mechirah 3:1. There it is explained that the Rabbis required the purchaser to draw the article into his possession for the transaction to be completed.

37.

And thus completes the transaction.

Published and copyright by Moznaim Publications, all rights reserved.
To purchase this book or the entire series, please click here. The text on this page contains sacred literature. Please do not deface or discard.
The Mishneh Torah was the Rambam's (Rabbi Moses ben Maimon) magnum opus, a work spanning hundreds of chapters and describing all of the laws mentioned in the Torah. To this day it is the only work that details all of Jewish observance, including those laws which are only applicable when the Holy Temple is in place. Participating in the one of the annual study cycles of these laws (3 chapters/day, 1 chapter/day, or Sefer Hamitzvot) is a way we can play a small but essential part in rebuilding the final Temple.
Download Rambam Study Schedules: 3 Chapters | 1 Chapter | Daily Mitzvah