Commento su Terumot 2:11

אין תורמין מטהור על הטמא – as a decree lest he separate the heave offering that is not brought near because they are afraid lest the impure [produce] will come in contact with the pure and defile it. But we require that the person who separates the heave offering separates from that which is brought near.

Introduction One must give terumah from both pure and impure produce. The priest will be able to use the pure terumah for its general purpose and the impure produce he will have to burn but he can enjoy the produce while it is being burned. For instance, if he is given impure oil, he can burn it and use it to light his candles. If he is given impure wheat, he could burn it in his oven. Our mishnah teaches that one cannot give terumah from pure produce in order to exempt impure produce, even though this might seem to be beneficial to the priest.

באמת אמרו – wherever it is taught: "באמת אמרו" /”in fact that they said that,” it is as if it is a usage dating from Moses as delivered from Sinai (i.e., a traditional interpretation of a written law), but not exactly a usage dating from Moses as delivered from Sinai, for in the first chapter of [Tractate] Shabbat [Mishnah 3], we taught: “in fact that they said that the teacher sees [by the light of a lamp] where the children are reading,” and this is from the Rabbis (as opposed to from the Bible).

They may not give terumah from pure [produce] for impure [produce], but if they did give, the terumah is terumah. As I stated in the introduction, one cannot give terumah from pure produce in order to exempt impure produce. If, however, he does so, his terumah is still valid.

העגול של דבילה – even though the cakes of pressed figs are glued to each other in the midst of the cake of pressed figs, they are not thought of as attached regarding ritual defilement, and if defilement touched one of the cakes of pressed figs, the other is not ritually defiled.

In truth they said: If a cake of pressed figs had become partly defiled, one may give terumah from the clean part for that part which had become defiled. The same applies to a bunch of vegetables, or a stack of grain. The phrase, “In truth they said,” usually introduces a halakhah that deviates from the previous general rule. If one has a cake of pressed figs only part of which was impure, or a bunch of vegetables or a stack of grain, only part of which was impure, one can separate terumah from the pure part in order to exempt the entire cake, bunch or stack. Because it is all one pile or one group of produce, this is not considered taking from one pile/stack of pure produce on behalf of a different impure pile/stack.

וכן אגודה של יקרק וכן ערימה – it is necessary [to mention both], for if it (i.e., the Mishnah) had taught [only] the circular cake of pressed figs, I would have said that the cake of pressed figs which is one substance, he separates the heave-offering, [but] the bunch [of greens] which is not one substance, he does not separate the heave-offering. But if it (i.e., the Mishnah) had taught [only] the bunch [of greens], I would have said, the bunch [of greens] where it is all one possession, he separates the heave-offering, [but] a pile is not one possession, which he doesn’t separate the heave-offering, hence, they are all necessary.

If there were two cakes [of figs], two bunches [of vegetables], two stacks [of grain], one pure and one impure, one should not give terumah from one for the other. However, as stated in section one above, if the cakes, bunches of vegetables or stacks of grain were separate, then one should not give terumah from the pure one on behalf of the impure one.

רבי אליעזר אומר תורמים – ab initio from that which is ritually pure for that which is ritually defiled, for Rabbi Eliezer did not decree lest he come to separate the heave-offering from that which is not brought near , but the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Eliezer.

Rabbi Eliezer says: one can give terumah from that which is pure for that which is impure. Rabbi Eliezer disagrees with the rules above and holds that one can give terumah from the pure for the impure.

אין תורמין מן הטמא על הטהור – because of the loss to the Kohen [because ritually impure heave-offering is forbidden to the Kohen].

Introduction This mishnah is the opposite of yesterday’s mishnah. Here we learn what happens if a person tries to give terumah from impure produce for pure produce. Obviously, this is much more problematic, because the impure terumah is far less useful to the kohen.

ואם תרם שוגג תרומתו תרומה – and exactly when it had been fit for use and the season for separating tithes had arrived prior to it becoming ritually impure, because according to the Torah It is perfect heave-offering, but if it he set aside heave-offering, even in advertently, his heave-offering is not a heave-offering.

They may not give terumah from impure [produce] for that which is pure. One should not give terumah from impure produce on behalf of pure produce.

מעשר טבל – First Tithe that had not had the Terumah of the tithe taken from it.

If he did give: If unwittingly, the terumah is valid; If intentionally he has done nothing. If, despite the fact that this is prohibited, the person did so anyway, if he did it without knowing what he was doing, the terumah is valid. However, if he did it intentionally, the terumah is not terumah and he must go back and take terumah out again.

היה מפריש עליו והולך – he would separate from this on the rest of the tithes.

So too, if a Levite had [unclean] tithe [from which terumah] had not been given, and he gave terumah from this, if unwittingly, the terumah is valid, if intentionally he has done nothing. As I stated in the introduction, a Levite must give terumah from the tithes that he receives. The Levite in our section has a pile of impure tithes and he tries to say that this tithe will be terumah on behalf of other tithes that he has received. The same rules apply here as applied in the case of regular terumah in section two. When it comes to the terumah taken from tithes, one also cannot give impure terumah to exempt pure terumah. However, Albeck notes that in the case of terumah from tithes, the opposite is not true one can give from pure produce for impure produce.

Rabbi Judah says: if he knew of it at the outset, even if done in error, he has done nothing. Rabbi Judah holds that if at some point he knew that the pile of tithes was impure, then even if he later forgot and thought that he was giving terumah from pure produce, his terumah does not count. The fact that he once knew means that he can never again be considered as having given it “accidentally.”

אם היה יודע בתחלה – that it is eatables forbidden pending the separation of sacred gifts or it is ritually impure, even though that at the time that he separated the heave-offering, it was inadvertent, for he forgot that it is forbidden pending the separation of sacred gifts, or that it is ritually impure, it is inadvertently that is close to willfully committed, and he did not do anything. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yehuda.

Introduction Our mishnah teaches other cases in halakhah where if someone did something prohibited unintentionally, he may benefit from it, but if he did it intentionally, he may not benefit from it.

המטביל כלים בשבת – that it is forbidden to immerse ritually impure utensils, and to raise them from their ritual impurity on the Sabbath because it appears like repairing a utensil.

One who immerses [unclean] vessels on Shabbat: If unwittingly, he may use them. But if intentionally, he may not use them. It is forbidden to immerse unclean vessels on Shabbat in order to purify them. The reason is that by immersing them he makes them usable. This is like “completing a vessel” which is forbidden on Shabbat. If he does so intentionally, he may not use them until after Shabbat is over, at a time when he could have immersed them in a permissible manner. However, if he did so unwittingly, meaning he either didn’t know that it was Shabbat or he didn’t know that he is not allowed to immerse vessels on Shabbat, then he can use the vessels immediately. Since he did so accidentally, he is not penalized by having to wait to use the vessels.

והמבשל בשבת – [and he who cooks on the Sabbath] inadvertently , he can eat that cooked dish on Saturday night (i.e., after the conclusion of the Sabbath), but not on the Sabbath itself. But [if he cooked it] willfully, he may not eat of it, but others may eat consume it on Saturday night, as it is written (Exodus 31:14): “You shall keep the sabbath, for it is holy;” it is holy, but its actions are not holy.

One who separates tithes, or cooks on Shabbat: If unwittingly, he may eat it. But if intentionally, he may not eat it. Similarly, one may not separate tithes or cook on Shabbat. Again, if he does so accidentally, he may eat the food immediately, but if he did so intentionally, he must wait until after Shabbat.

ובשביעית בין שוגג בין מזיד יעקר – that Israelites were suspected about [observance] of the Seventh year, but are not suspected regarding the Sabbath.

One who plants on Shabbat: If unwittingly, he may keep the tree. But if intentionally, he must uproot it. It is forbidden to plant on Shabbat. If one did so without knowing that it was Shabbat or that planting was forbidden, he may keep the tree. If not, he must get rid of the tree.

But if during the sabbatical year, whether [it was planted] unwittingly or intentionally he must uproot it. The one exception to the notion that if one did something unwittingly he may benefit from it is the sabbatical year. Albeck explains that Jews were suspected of working the land during the sabbatical year and then claiming that they had done so unwittingly. To prevent this, the rabbis made the rule especially stringent. Even if the Jew did the work unwittingly (or at least claimed to have done so), they are not allowed to benefit from it.

כל מין חטים אחד – and even though there is reddish, dark-colored wheat and white-colored [wheat].

Introduction This mishnah deals with the rule that one cannot give terumah from one kind of produce on behalf of another. The second half of the mishnah deals with giving the terumah to the priest.

וכל מין תאנים אחד – and even though there are black [figs] and white [figs], figs while they are yet moist are called תאנים/figs, and when they have dried, they are called גרוגרות/dried figs, and when they are trodden in circular cake, they are called עגול דבלה/cake of pressed figs.

They may not give terumah from one kind for another kind, and if he did give, the terumah is not terumah. One cannot give terumah from any species that is “kilayim” (mixed seed) with another species (we will see this in mishnah six, below). And if one does try to give terumah from one species on behalf of another that is kilayim with it, the terumah doesn’t count.

תורם מן היפה – from the figs on the dried figs, for figs are choicest than dried figs (see also Tractate Bikkurim, Chapter 3, Mishnah 3).

All kinds of wheat count as one. Different species of wheat, such as white wheat and red wheat all count as wheat and one can give terumah from one on behalf of the other.

תורם מן המתקיים – from the dried figs on the figs, for dried figs endure more.

All kinds of fresh figs, dried figs and fig cakes count as one, and he may take terumah from one for the other. Similarly, all kinds of figs can be used for terumah for other kinds of figs. This is because all of these kinds of figs have, at least potentially, finished their processing.

לעולם הוא תורם מן היפה – as it is written (Numbers 18:30): “When you have removed the best part from it [you Levites may consider it the same as the yield of threshing floor or vat],” we always require the best/choicest part, and if he (i.e., the Kohen) loses, he loses. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yehuda.

Wherever there is a priest, one must give terumah from the very best, and where there is no priest, one must give terumah from that which lasts longest. Rabbi Judah says: he should always give only from the very best. The mishnah now turns its attention to what kind of terumah one should optimally give to the priest. If the priest is right there when the person is separating the terumah, he should give him the best of the produce. If he is not right there, then he should give him the part of the produce that will last the longest. For instance, if he has fresh figs and dried figs, if the priest is right there he should give him the fresh figs, but if he is not around, he should give him the dried ones. Rabbi Judah says he should always give him the best of the produce and we are not concerned lest the produce goes bad.

תורמין בצל קטן שלם – because it endures.

Introduction Our mishnah deals with giving terumah from onions.

ולא חצי בצל גדול – even though it is nicer than it.

They should give terumah of a whole small onion, and not of half of a large onion. If one has a choice of giving either a whole small onion or half of a large onion as terumah, he should give the whole small onion. This seems to accord with what the sages said in yesterday’s mishnah, that one should give from something that will last, even though it is not the best of the produce.

רבי יהודה אומר לא כי – Rabbi Yehuda, according to his reasoning, who stated that he separates heave-offering from the choicest [produce].

Rabbi Judah says: not so, rather half of a large onion. Rabbi Judah holds that the large onion is of better quality and therefore it is preferable to give half of the large onion and not the small onion. [Personally, I like small onions, especially when we give them a fancy name like shallots].

מבני המדינה – it is good for eating from those of the villages, the onions of the villages, but that of the villages is preserved better.

So too, Rabbi Judah says: they give terumah from town onions for those from the village, but not from village onions for those from the town, since these are the food of its principal citizens. The onions that grow in the town are bigger than those that grow in the village. The principal citizens (in the Mishnah the word is “politikim” literally politicians!) eat only the big onions from their town. Hence, according to Rabbi Judah one can give from these types of onions in order to exempt the onions from the villages, but one cannot give from village onions in order to exempt the big onions. In other words, it is not just that town onions are better than village onions the finicky people from the town won’t even eat the village onions.

מפני שהא מאכל פולטיקין – onions of the people of the city people which is the food for important people, and they are better/choicest produce than those of the villagers. פולטיקין/city people, the members of the residence of kings.

תורמין זיתי שמן – that stand to remove their oil.

Introduction This mishnah continues to discuss giving terumah from one species for another.

על זיתי כבש – olives that don’t produce oil and they press them with wine or with vinegar to preserve them for eating. But olives for oil are better than olives for pressing, for it should be from the nice ones on the bad ones.

They may give terumah from olives [to be used] for oil for those to be preserved, but not from olives due to be preserved for olives [to be used] for oil. The olives that are used for oil are of a better quality than the olives that are going to be preserved and eaten. Therefore, one can take terumah from olives that will later be used for oil in order to exempt olives that are going to be preserved. However, one cannot do the reverse take terumah from olives that will be preserved from olives that will be used for oil.

ויין שאינו מבושל – good for drinking from that which is boiled.

[They may give] from unboiled wine for boiled wine, but not from boiled wine for unboiled wine. The wine that is going to be boiled is the bad wine that will not taste as good as the unboiled wine (for a taste test, compare Golan to Manischewitz!). Therefore, he can’t give terumah from boiled wine for unboiled wine, but he can give unboiled wine for boiled wine.

כל שהוא כלאים בחבירו לא יתרום מזה לזה – as Scripture states (Numbers 18:12): “All the best of the new oil, wine and grain [the choice parts that they present to the LORD – I give to you],” the Torah stated: give oil to this one and oil to that one.

This is the general rule: any two things which together are kilayim (mixed he should not give terumah from one for the other, even if one is superior and the other inferior. The mishnah now gives some general rules, which have been illustrated throughout the previous couple of mishnayot. First of all, anything which is kilayim with another species cannot be used as terumah for that species, even if one of the sets of produce is superior to the other.

חוץ מן הזונין – in Arabic ZOAN, and in the foreign language, VITZAH, and it is not the food for humans but they keep it for doves (see also Tractate Kilayim, Chapter 1, Mishnah 1).

But if they are not kilayim, then one may give terumah from the superior for that which is inferior, but not from the inferior for that which is superior. If the species are not kilayim with one another, then one can give terumah from the superior species for the inferior species, as we learned before.

הקישות – in Arabic, FAKUS.

If one does give terumah from the inferior for that which is superior, his terumah is terumah, except for zunin given for wheat, since these ( are not food. One should not give terumah from the inferior species for the superior species but if one does, the terumah is valid. For instance, if one gives terumah from boiled wine for unboiled wine, the terumah is valid. The only exception to this is “zunin” a type of species that grows between wheat and that is not kilayim with wheat (see Kilayim 1:1). Since “zunin” are inedible, they cannot be used for terumah.

והמלפפון – in Arabic, KIYYAR.

Cucumbers and melon count are one kind. Rabbi Judah says: two kinds. In Kilayim 1:2 we learn that Rabbi Judah and the sages disagree whether melons and cucumbers are kilayim. Their dispute is brought here because according to the sages, one could give from one in order to exempt the other, whereas according to Rabbi Judah, one cannot.

מין אחר – and the separate the heave offering from this one on that one.

שני מינין – but we do not separate the heave-offering from that one for this one, but the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yehuda.