Rambam - 1 Chapter a Day

Since the produce will ultimately be burnt, there is no purpose in setting aside more than the very minimum. The Radbaz notes that the priests are also given the opportunity to benefit from impure terumah, because they use it as fuel. Why then shouldn’t they be given a full measure of impure terumah? He explains that since this is not the primary use of terumah, our Sages did not feel that for the minimal benefit the priest receives from burning the terumah, it was necessary to require the people to separate a larger amount.

As stated in Hilchol ma’aser Sheni I :3, there are certain species of carobs which are generally not eaten by humans. There is no obligation to separate terumah from them according to Scriptural Law. Here we are speaking about carobs from which one is obligated to separate lerumah according to Scriptural Law. Nevertheless, since they are not considered important by the priests, there is no need to separate more than the minimal amount.

As explained in Chapter 11, Halachot 21 and 27, when produce that is terumah is sown, according to Scriptural Law, the produce which grows is ordinary produce and terumah and tithes must be separated from it. Nevertheless, our Sages were stringent and declared that the entire crop should be considered as terumah and sold to the priests (at a price substantially less than that of ordinary produce). Since the owners are required to consider the entire crop as terumah, our Sages did not require them to separate more than a sixtieth to be given as terumah (Tosefta, Terumot, ch. 5).

Tevel is produce from which terumah and tithes were not separated. As indicated by Chapter 13, Halachah 1, if there are more than 100 times the amount of tevel as terumah, it is necessary to remove the amount of terumah that became mixed with the tevel and then separate the terumah. Since the person is already separating the amount of terumah from the mixture, our Sages did not require him to separate a large quantity of terumah from the tevel. As noted in Chapter 13, Halachah 2, more stringent laws apply when terumah becomes mixed with less than 100 times the amount of other produce.

The Radbaz questions: Why is it not sufficient to separate the slightest amount as terumah as is the practice in the present age (Halachah 1)? He explains that in the present age, all terumah will become ritually impure. Hence, there is no need to give a significant amount at all. In the time of the Talmud, by contrast, significant amounts of terumah that is pure must be separated. If an inconsequential amount of impure terumah would beseparated, people might refrain from giving an appropriate amount of pure terumah.

I.e., crops that were consecrated after the work involving their harvest was completed (at which time the obligation to separate terumah became incumbent upon them), but from which terumah was not actually separated. There is no need to separate terumah from crops that grew in a field belonging to the Temple treasury.

Note, however, Hilchot Ma’aser Sheni I :3.

I.e., all of these species are types of produce that are not usually considered valuable.

This leniency is granted, because the obligation to separate terumah from such. produce is merely Rabbinic in origin. Hence it is sufficient to separate one-sixtieth as an initial measure.

Because special consideration is given to the orphans’ property.

In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Terumot I :7), Rambam states that separating terumah in this manner is “forbidden.” The commentaries question whether his use of different wording in this halachah indicates a change of position or not.

This is the average measure. Our translation follows authoritative manuscripts of the Mishneh Torah. The standard printed text reads “one sixtieth.”

The Jerusalem Talmud (Terumah 1:7) derives this from Numbers 18:27: “And your terumah will be considered for you.... “Venechshav translated as “considered” shares the root chashav meaning “thought” or “estimate.” Implied is that terumah should be given by estimation. Although this verse is speaking about terumat ma’aser which must be separated by exact measure (see Halachah 10), we follow the principle (see Rashi, Pesachim 24a): If a concept explicitly stated with regard to terumat ma’aser cannot be applied to it, we assume that it is referring to the great terumah [the Rambam’s Commentary to the Mishnah (loc. cit.)].

I.e., one measures the produce and then separates terumah by estimation (ibid.).

For that is obviously equivalent to separating with a measure.

I.e., a measure above that stated by the Sages.

I.e., he did not designate the entire crop as terumah.

For Numbers 15:21 speaks of giving “from the first of your kneading.” Implied is that one must give “from the first/’ but not all the first [the Rambam’s Commentary to the Mishnah (Terumot 4:5, based on the Jerusalem Talmud)].

For he had intended to give this amount of produce and more as terumah (Kessef Mishneh). And when giving terumah, one’s deed must be aligned - at least partially with his intent. Since the terumah is acceptable, there is no need for the person to supplement the amount separated and give the amount he originally intended (Radbaz).

For he had not intended to give this amount as terumah (ibid.).

I.e., without either desiring to give this amount or having a desire to give a lesser amount. Note the gloss of the Radbaz who suggests that there is a printing error in the text.

The fact that he gave a larger measure than usual as terumah does not disqualify his gift.

So that he would not be giving a parsimonious measure.

Although normally, there is no obligation to separate tithes from terumah, since the portion he separated originally fulfilled his obligation, it immediately became necessary to separate tithes from the remainder of the produce.

He must observe all the obligations required when partaking of terumah.

With the intent of giving the measure required by our Sages.

Although initially, one should not give a measured amount of terumah, as stated in Halachah 4, in this instance, he is required to give a measured amount so that he will give the amount that he originally intended.

As is required by Halachah 17, as an initial preference.

In contrast to the situation described in the previous halachah, in this instance, the person originally intended to separate more. Hence, what he separated is not considered as terumah.

Since the separation was not effective, that portion is considered as tevel, and terumah must be separated from it. Since it was set aside as a separate portion, the terumah should be separated from it and not from other produce. See the Rambam’s Commentary to the Mishnah (Terumot 4:1).
The Ra’avad differs with the Rambam’s interpretation of that mishnah and maintains that the separated produce is in fact terumah. The Kessef Mishneh justifies the Rambam’s interpretation.

For as mentioned above and in Halachah I 7, preferably, one should separate terumah from the grain for which it is being separated and not from other grain.

And he may separate terumah from other produce. The rationale is that terun:, ah is called “the first.” Implied is that it must be set aside from produce that is not “first” and in this instance, that has not been done (Siftei Cohen 331 :45).

I.e., he designated a certain portion of the first grain heap as terumah.

I.e., the terumah for the second grain heap should be separated in a way entirely parallel to the separation from the first. It should be taken from an equivalent place and have the measure. Our translation is based on the version of the Mishneh Torah possessed by the Radbaz and the Kessef Mishneh and their interpretations of that text. There are other slightly different versions of the text.

As stated in Halachah 12, after a tenth of the produce is given to the Levites, they must separate a tenth of that tenth and give it to the priests as terumat ma’aser.

I.e., in contrast to “the great terumah,” as mentioned in Halachah 4. As stated in the notes to that halachah, a verse ostensibly referring to terumat ma’aser (Numbers 18:27) states: “And your terumah will be considered for you.... “As explained above, implied is that terumah should be given by estimation. Nevertheless, according to the Jerusalem Talmud (Terumah 1 :7), that verse refers to the great terumah and not to terumat ma’aser (Radbaz).

When it will be destroyed because of impurity.

I.e., separating the terumat ma’aser after counting it is praiseworthy [the Rambam’s Commentary to the Mishnah (Terumot 4:6)].

For in this way, the measurement is most precise.

Se/er HaMitzvot (positive commandment 129) and Se/er HaChinuch (mitzvah 396) include this commandment among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.

I.e., the Torah’s requirement is for the Israelite to give the tithes to the Levite and for the Levite to separate one tenth of the tithes as terumat ma’aser. Nevertheless, if the Israelite desires to fulfill this mitzvah, he has the option. It is not considered as if he is usurping the Levite’s right.

Berachot 47a derives this concept from the exegesis of Numbers 18:26 which speaks of taking “a tenth from the tithe.” Implied is that only a tenth is separated from the tithe and nothing more.

And completed all the other tasks to make it obligated for tithing.

I.e., once produce has been reduced to kernels of grain, the obligation to separate terumah takes effect. Hence, the Levite must separate terumah from the tithe as well as terumat ma'aser.

I.e., he is penalized by being required to perform the work necessary to process the stalks of grain until they are reduced to kernels.

For the obligation to tithe is incumbent only on the food and not on the other parts of the plant.

He is required to perform the tasks necessary to process the grain for the reasons mentioned above. Nevertheless, he must give the priest the chaff because he designated it as terumah while it was in its stalks. That sacred designation does not depart from the chaff when the kernels are separated from it.

I.e., his statements indicate that his father desired that the entire tithe be given to the Levite. Hence, we assume that he already separated the terumat ma’aser.

The mention of a measure indicates that he expects the Levite to separate the terumat ma'aser required for this measure.

This measure is slightly less than 5 cc. according to Shiurei Torah and approximately 9.5 cc. according to Chazon Ish.

Because such a small amount is of little value. On the basis of the Jerusalem Talmud (Terumot 11 :4), the Ra’avad questions the Rambam’s ruling, maintaining that even the slightest amount of pure grain should also be brought to a priest if there was a definite obligation to tithe. The Radbaz and the Kessef Mishneh. acknowledge the validity of Ra’avad’s questions, but offer possible resolutions for the Rambam’s approach.

He must, however, separate it. Otherwise, it is forbidden to benefit from the tithes.

For even a small amount of these substances is of value for a priest (Radbaz).

If it was not ritually pure, it would be of little benefit to the priest, for he could use it only as fuel. Hence we do not require that it be brought to him.

Produce from which we are uncertain whether the tithes had been separated and hence, require that the tithes be separated again. Since the tithes are being separated merely as a safeguard and thus it is possible that there is no Scriptural obligation from this crop, we do not trouble him to bring a priest a very small amount.

Our translation is taken from the Rambam’s Commentary to the Mishnah (Challah 1 :9). Note the contrast to terumat ma’aser as stated in Halachah 20.

We have chosen this translation for bayit based on the gloss of the Kessef Mishneh to Halachah 18 where he explains that when one grain heap is in a room and another in the loft of the same building, they are considered as being in the same place. This interpretation enables us to understand an otherwise difficult passage in the Tosefta, Terumot 3:9.

Everything that is in the same room is considered as being in the same location even if the two piles of produce are not touching each other (Radbaz; see the following halachah).

The Siftei Cohen 331 :49 explains the rationale for the above restriction and why it is not binding after the fact. As mentioned above, according to Rabbinic Law, one must separate between one fortieth and one sixtieth of the crop as terumah and that separation must be made by estimation. Hence, in order to make an appropriate estimation, one must be in the same place as the produce. Nevertheless, since according to Scriptural Law, one fulfills his obligation with even one grain, after the fact, such a separation is not disqualified.

And thus try to receive something of value for the wine and/or oil that will be spilled.

Since the jugs are breaking, we consider them as having been broken already and the produce as having been spilled. When quoting this law, the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De ‘ah 331 :25) states that in the present age, when terumah is destroyed regardless because of its impurity, even when the jugs are breaking, the separation is effective.

Since they are in the same room, they are considered as being in the same place.

It is considered as if they were all mixed together [see the Rambam’s Commentary to the Mishnah (ma’aser Sheni 3:12)].

Each closed jug is considered as a separate entity, even though they are all in the same room.

For the entire garden is considered as a single entity.

The fact that they are in the same granary causes them to be ·considered as a single entity.

I.e., provided he has not begun removing produce from the granary.

I.e., provided he has not begun removing produce from the granary.

The Rambam is not quoting the verse as it appears in the Torah.

The Siftei Cohen 331 :48 describes this as the most choice way of observing the mitzvah. The Radbaz emphasizes that this is a stringency that Torah scholars have accepted upon themselves and, according to the Rambam, is not even a Rabbinic obligation. The Ra’avad explains that an Israelite need not separate terumat ma’aser from produce that is in one place, but a Levite must. The Kessef Mishneh does not accept that position and quotes sources in support of the Rambam’s view.

And it is as if terumat ma’aser has never been separated for the produce for which he intended that it serve that purpose.

I.e., terumat ma'aser has not yet been separated.

I.e., terumah has never been separated from them. See Chapter 5, Halachah 12.

I.e., the tithes have never been separated from them. See Hilchot Ma’aser 1:7.

The first fruits.

I.e., either one or the other. For in the year the second tithe is separated, the tithe for the poor is not separated.

Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 154) and Se/er HaChinuch (mitzvah 72) include this commandment among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.

“Your fullness offering” refers to bikkurim for they are separated when the produce becomes full. “Your priestly heave-offering” refers to terumah. Thus the bikkurim precede terumah. See also Terumot 3:6-7.

Temurah 4b explains that this prohibition is considered as correctable by the fulfillment of a positive commandment, for one may make separations in the proper order. See the gloss of Radbaz.

I.e., three hundredths of his crop. An average donation of terumah is one fifitieth, two hundredths. And terumat ma’aser is one tenth of the first tithe, another hundredth. See the Rambam’s Commentary to Demai 5:2.

This refers to the portion that will be separated as terumat ma’aser. Initially, it is to remain as ordinary produce, so that the prohibition against making the separations in improper sequence is not violated.

I.e., including that which was separated as terumah.

In this way, he will have separated terumah, the tithes, and terumat ma'aser in proper sequence.