Komentarz do Temura 1:4

אין המדומע מדמע אלא לפי חשבון (that which became subject to the law of Terumah through an admixture, can affect a second mixture only in proportion (i.e., according to the quantity of real Terumah/heave-offering contained therein) – a SEAH of Terumah that fell in less than one-hundred of unconsecrated produce and it became דמע/subject to the law of Terumah, and it fell from this mixture to an other place, we require one-hundred from the unconsecrated produce according to what there is of Terumah in this SEAH of this mixture, but we don’t require one-hundred SEAH corresponding to of all of that SEAH of the mixture of [consecrated] Terumah and unconsecrated produce, for it is not considered all Terumah to prohibit the secondary unconsecrated produce.

Introduction Today’s mishnah has nothing to do with temurah. It is here because it is similar to tomorrow’s mishnah, which does have some connection to our tractate.

ואין המחומץ מחמץ אלא לפי חשבון (that which contains leaven does not impart the status of leaven [to something else] only by due measure) – unconsecrated started dough that became leavened in leaven of heave-offering, it is entirely forbidden to foreigners (i.e., non-Kohanim). But if there fell from that started dough into another unconsecrated started dough and it became leavened, it does not forbid it other than according to the due measure [in the prescribed proportion] of the leavened heave-offering that it became combined with, and it does not forbid the last [batch] other than if there fell in from the first [batch] such a large measure that there is in the leaven of the Terumah combined in it enough I order to leaven the last [batch] without the combination/mixture of the unconsecrated produce that was combined with heave-offering.

[Anything which has become subject to the law of terumah through] a mixture can affect a [second] mixture only in proportion. If terumah and hullin (non-sacred things) become mixed up with, for instance, terumah wine and hullin wine, and there are 100 parts hullin for every part terumah, one can simply remove one part terumah, and the remainder becomes hullin. However, if there is less than a 100 to 1 ratio, the mixture, called “meduma” has to be treated with the stringency of terumah. It can only be eaten or drunk by priests. If this “meduma” mixture becomes mixed in with other hullin, it only affects the hullin according to the amount of terumah that is in the meduma. As long as there are 100 parts hullin for every part terumah in the “meduma” mixture, the entire mixture can be treated as hullin. We should note that it is forbidden to intentionally mix meduma with more hullin in order to nullify the presence of the terumah. Our mishnah refers to a case where this occurs accidentally.

ואין המים שאובים פוסלים את המקוה אלא לפי חשבון – a Mikveh/ritual bath which has in it twenty-one SEAH of rain water, we fill up on the shoulder nineteen SEAH (i.e., a SEAH is equal to 144 egg bulks) and we conduct the water to the Mikveh though a channel (see Talmud Temurah 12b) and they are ritually pure. Bug even though three LOG (i.e., a LOG is equal to six egg bulks) of drawn water disqualify the Mikveh/ritual bath, the drawing of the water is kosher when it is done when conducting the water through a channel and there was there at first most of the measurement of the Mikveh which is twenty-one SEAH of rain water, and that is according to the due measure, for the drawn waters do not disqualify the Mikveh when they are accomplished by conducting the water through a channel, unless they are twenty SEAH of drawn water, as there isn’t a majority from rain water in the Mikveh. Such appears to be the explanation of this Mishnah, and so I have explained in the Tractate Terumah (Chapter 5, Mishnah 6), in the chapter, “a SEAH of Terumah,” but in the Gemara (Tractate Temurah 12b) this is its explanation, according to the measurement of the utensils, for three LOGS of drawn water do not disqualify the Mikveh until they fell from three utensils or less into the Mikveh, but if there fell from four utensil, or more, they do not disqualify, and this is what it means when it says that drawn water does not disqualify the Mikveh other than according to the due measure, for they calculate the utensils from which fell the LOGIM of water into the Mikveh and they count them, if they are three utensils or less, they invalidate the Mikveh. But if from three utensils and higher, they do not disqualify it. And our Mishnah is according to Rabbi Yosi ben Honi, for he holds that they LOGIM that fell from more than three utensils do not disqualify [the Mikveh], but it is not the Halakh.

[Dough] leavened [through terumah] can affect [other dough] only in proportion. If hullin dough is leavened by terumah sour dough, the hullin dough must be treated as terumah. However, if some of this dough falls into more hullin dough, it causes the new dough take on the status of terumah only if there was enough terumah in it to leaven the new dough. This is basically the same principle we saw in section one, just in reference to dough.

Drawn water can disqualify a mikweh only in proportion. If a mikveh has less than 40 seahs of water, and three logs of drawn water fall into it, the mikveh is disqualified. If, however, these three logs of drawn water became mixed in with water that was not drawn, water that can be used for a mikveh, then they disqualify the mikveh only according to amount of drawn water that is in the mixture. To summarize: in all of these cases, there is a mixture of problematic substances (terumah or drawn water) and non-problematic substances. If this mixture is mixed in with something else that is not problematic (hullin or a mikveh) we only consider the problematic parts of the mixture when determining the status of what it fell into.