Komentarz do Terumot 4:18

המפריש מקצת תרומה ומעשרות – as, for example, that he had one-hundred Seah of eatables forbidden pending separation of sacred gifts, and he removed from them a Seah (i.e., note that he is required to give 2% to a Kohen, not 1%), but it was his intention to yet separate the rest, he goes back and removes from the same pile itself until he completes the two Seah, like the measure of the Terumah/heave-offering. For the eatables forbidden pending separation of sacred gifts is what will be offered in his hand and not what was already made legally fit for use by giving the priestly dues.

One who sets aside only part of terumah and tithes, may take terumah from that [heap], but he may not take terumah from it for other produce. A person has a pile of produce from which he removed some of the terumah and tithes, but not all that he was supposed to give. He may subsequently take the rest of the terumah out of that same pile, since he is not obligated to separate all of the terumah and tithes at one point. However, he can’t take terumah out of this pile in order to exempt another pile. The reason is that this pile is already half-exempt and we look at it as if every part of it is half-exempt and half-liable. There is a rule that one is not allowed to take terumah out of an exempt pile of produce on behalf of another pile of produce that is still subject to the laws of terumah and tithes. Therefore he can’t use the half-tithed pile for another fully untithed pile.

אבל לא למקום אחר – if he has another one-hundred Seah of eatables forbidden pending separation of sacred gifts,, he is not able to separate upon them from those which he took part of their heave-offering, for regarding the others, we rely, perhaps, from that which was already made legally fit for use by giving the priestly dues, he removes from them, and not from the eatables forbidden pending separation of sacred gifs, but Rabbi Meir permits even from another place. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Meir.

Rabbi Meir says: he can also take terumah and tithes for produce elsewhere. Rabbi Meir disagrees and holds that he can even use the half-tithed pile to separate terumah and tithes for another pile. When he took some terumah out in the beginning, he was only exempting part of the pile. So when he goes back and takes more terumah out of that same pile in order to exempt another fully untithed pile, he can say that the part of the produce that he is taking out is the untithed part of the pile. It turns out that he is taking from liable produce for other liable produce which is fine.

במגורה – in a storehouse, as it is written (Haggai 2:19): “While the seed is still in the granary, [and the vine, fig tree, pomegranate and olive tree have not yet borne fruit].”

If one had his produce in a storehouse, and he gave a seah to a Levite and a seah to a poor person, he may set aside another eight seahs and eat them, the words of Rabbi Meir. But the sages say: he may only set aside according to proportion. A person has a storehouse of produce from which tithes have not been taken out. He sees a Levite and he gives him one seah of his produce and then he sees a poor person and gives him one seah of his produce. According to Rabbi Meir, he may then go to his produce and eat another 8 seahs, with the understanding that the seah that he gave to the Levite was first tithe and the seah that he gave to the poor person was poor person’s tithe (given in the third and sixth year of the sabbatical cycle). The remainder of his produce remains totally untithed. The sages do not allow this because they say that the two seahs he gave count towards the entire storehouse, which contains far more than eight other seahs of produce. Any seah that he removes from the storehouse is only partially tithed for, according to the percentage of produce that the two seahs that he did give would account for. For instance, if he had one hundred seahs in the storehouse, each seah that he takes out is only ten percent tithed (he removed two seahs and he should have taken twenty). Before he eats any of the remaining produce he must complete the tithing process.

ונתן סאה לבן לוי – Our Mishnah is speaking about a worker who is a member of the order for the observance of Levitical laws in daily intercourse (i.e., Haver), who comes to dine with the owner of he house and does not believe him on the tithes, and the worker saw that owner of the house giving from his storehouse a Seah to the son of a Levite (i.e., First Tithe) and a Seah to a poor person (i.e., the Poor Tithe, in years 3 and 6 of the seven year cycle). Rabbi Meir states that this worker can eat from the storehouse eight Seah, for undefined, according to the law of First Tithe, he gave to the Levite, and according to the law of the Poor Tithe, he gave to the poor person, and behold there are eight Seah which were already made legally fit for use by giving the priestly dues and a little bit more. And even though he did not see him separate the Great Terumah (i.e., the two-percent for the Kohen), the illiterate were not suspected [of not fulfilling] the heave-offering.

וחכ"א לא הפריש בעל הבית אלא לפי חשבון (with a calculation [of the percentage of tithes which remain to be separa from the batch as a whole]) - this meal that the worker wants to eat with him., but the remainder is a mere gift that he gives to the Levite and the poor person, therefore, the worker does not have to eat with him until he has completed eight Seah according to the words of Rabbi Meir, but that meal which he was to eat with him and nothing more. Another explanation: “and he gave a Seah to the son of Levite and a Seah to a poor person, and they went on their way. But when he came to separate eight Seah from the storehouse and to eat them on the support of the two Seah that he gave to the son of the Levite and the poor person, he doesn’t know if those two Seah exist or not. Rabbi Meir says that he should separate eight Seah and eat them, in support of those two Seah that he gave to the son of the Levite and the poor person in the presupposition that they exist. But the Sages say that he does not separate other than according to a calculation [of the percentage of tithes which to be separated from the batch as a whole], that exist; if all of the two Seah exist, he separates upon them eight Seah and a bit more, and if only one-half of them exist, he does not separate on them other than four Seah, according to the calculation of what he finds of them existing, thus he separates upon them and not more. And the Halakha is according to the Sages.

עין יפה אחד מארבעים – He who is prompted by the heart and donates the heave-offering generously, separates one in forty.

The amount of terumah: A generous amount: one fortieth. Beth Shammai say: one thirtieth. The average amount: one fiftieth. A stingy amount: one sixtieth.
If he gave terumah and discovered that it was only one sixtieth, his terumah is valid and he need not give again.
If he does go back and add to it, [the extra amount] is liable to tithes.
If he found that it was only one sixty-first it is valid, but he must give terumah again according to his established practice, in measure, weight or number.
Rabbi Judah says: even if it be not from produce close by.
As I stated in the introduction the Torah does not prescribe how much terumah a person must give as it does for tithe. Our mishnah gives recommendations as to how much a person should give.
Section one: This section lists various percentages of terumah that a person might give, depending on his generosity. In the mishnah Bet Shammai disagrees only concerning the definition of a generous amount. In the Tosefta, Bet Shammai adds that an average amount is one fortieth, and that a stingy amount is one fiftieth.
Section two: If he intended to give an average or above average amount and he gave only one sixtieth, considered a stingy amount, it still counts and he has fulfilled his duty. He need not give any more terumah.
Section three: If despite this he does try to give more terumah, the extra terumah that he gives is not considered terumah. It is still untithed produce, and before it can be eaten, tithes must be removed. This section teaches us that if one gives one sixtieth, he has fulfilled his obligation and he can’t add to it later on.
Section four: This is the opposite scenario. He thought that he had given a sufficient amount, but it turns out he gave less than one sixtieth. He now must give terumah again and when he gives he should give according to his established practice. If he usually gives 1/40, he should give that amount, etc. In addition, there are a couple of leniencies that apply to this situation. First of all, he can give by measuring the amount he is giving, although usually one is not supposed to give terumah in this manner (see 1:7).
Rabbi Judah allows him to give from produce that is not nearby, meaning that it is not close to the original pile of not fully tithed produce. Normally one should give terumah from produce that is close to the produce for which he is separating.

והבינונית אחד בחמשים – these are not the words of the School of Shammai, but rather, the first Tanna, who stated it. But from the generosity of the School of Shammai (who said one in thirty) you learn for their words what is selfishness/the evil eye and the middle/intermediate amount, even though they are not taught [explicitly] in our Mishnah.

ועלה בידו אחד מששים – as, for example, that he donated from an estimate/guess-work, and there came up into his hand one out of sixty which is selfishness/the evil eye.

חזר והוסיף חייב במעשרות – for he has already exempted and the designation of heave-offering does not fall upon what he adds, therefore, this addition is completely eatables forbidden pending the separation of sacred gifts , and he is liable for tithes.

מששים ואחד – as, for example, that there were sixty one Seah in the pile and he took up a Seah in his hand, that Seah is the heave-offering/Terumah.

ויחזור ויתרום כמו שהוא למוד – [if he was accustomed] to donate one from sixty, he should still separate one from sixty in a Seah, and if he was accustomed to donate one from fifty [Seah], and there were found that there still remained eleven Seah that had not been donated [for Terumah].

במדה ובמשקל – meaning to say, that excess/surplus that he donates [as Terumah], it is permissible to donate/separate out Terumah by measure, or by weight or by number. For they didn’t say to donate/separate Terumah] from an estimate, other than at the beginning of the heave-offerinf.

אף שלא מן המוקף – for Rabbi Yehuda holds that one does not need to donate [Terumah] from that which is near and adjoining, other than at the beginning of Terumah. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yehuda.

מוקף – near and adjoing, and in the same place iself.

כדעתו של בעל הבית – because [he is one] who donates generously, and there are those who are miserly/with an evil eye, and there are those who donate the intermediate amount.

Introduction One can appoint a messenger (or agent) to separate terumah on his behalf. The question that our mishnah asks is, how much terumah should the messenger take out?

פיחת עשרה – and he donated one in forty.

One who says to his messenger: “Go and give terumah [for me],” he should give terumah in accordance with the mind of the owner. If the messenger knows how much terumah the owner of the produce usually gives, then he should give that amount.

או הוסיף עשרה – and donated [Terumah] from [one in] sixty.

If he does not know the mind of the owner, he gives according to the average amount one fiftieth. If he doesn’t know, then he should give an average amount.

תרומתו תרומה – for since that in one of he measures of he Sages he donated [Terumah], he can say to him: “For this I have estimated for you.”

If he gave ten parts less or more, the terumah is terumah. If he gave ten parts more or ten parts less, meaning he gave one fortieth or one sixtieth, it is still valid because these are all valid amounts of terumah.

ואם נתכוין להוסיף – that he knows the intention of the owner of the house, and he intended to add, even one, his heave-offering is not a heave-offering.

If, however, his intention was to add even one part more, his terumah is not terumah. However, if he knew how much the owner usually gives, and he intentionally added even one part or gave even one part less, then his actions are competely invalid. For instance, if the owner usually gave one fiftieth, and the messenger intentionally gave 1/51 or 1/49 his terumah is not terumah at all.

חד מעשרה – he is able to increase and to separate Terumah, for since that we find that the designation of Terumah in another place, which is one out of ten. But if it even greater [a percentage], the designation of Terumah is not on that excess, and it is unconsecrated produce that is subject to sacred gifts of tithes, and it is subject to the laws of Terumah, and this is its remedy, that he should make it Terumah of the tithe (i.e., that which the Levite gives to the Kohen) in another place, and give it to the Levite that he can make it the Terumah of the tithe of his eatables forbidden pending the separation of sacred gifts, and the Levite will give him unconsecrated produce corresponding to that excess. And that we say that he should make it Terumah of the tithe for another place and did not say that he should make it Terumah/heave offering for another place, because we don’t give Terumah/heave offering other than from that which is close b, vut the Terumah of the tithe, we separate it from something not close by.

Introduction In mishnah three we learned the minimum amounts that one can give as terumah. Today we learn the maximum amounts.

מחצה חולין ומחצה תרומה – that he (i.e., Rabbi Yishmael) held that a person can make half of his pile Terumah/heave-offering, as it is written (Deuteronomy 18:4): “You shall also give him the first fruits [of your new grain and wine and oil, and the first shearing of your sheep],” it is enough for the first that it be like grain [and the first is Terumah/heave-offering] and the grain is the left-overs.

One who wishes to give more terumah:
Rabbi Eliezer says: he may give up to a tenth part, as in the case of heave-offering of tithe. [If he gave] more than this [measure] he must make it terumah of tithe for other produce. Rabbi Eliezer says that one cannot give more than one tenth of one’s produce as terumah. This is equivalent to the amount of terumah that the Levite separates and gives to the priest from the tithe that he receives. If he gave more than this, then the extra amount doesn’t count as terumah. Rather it is considered untithed and one must tithe it before it is eaten. However, he can’t give any of it to the Levite because there is terumah mixed in with it (the ten percent does count as terumah). So what he can do is let the Levite use the entire amount that he separated as terumat maaser (terumah taken from first tithe) for other produce that he has received as tithe. In this way it will all become terumah.

עד שישייר שם חולין – we do not require oly that its left-overs be recognized, and the Halakha is according to Rabbi Tarfon and Rabbi Akiva.

Rabbi Ishmael says: half non-sacred produce and half terumah. According to Rabbi Ishmael, he can give half of the pile as terumah.

Rabbi Tarfon and Rabbi Akiba say: as long as he retains a part as non-sacred produce. Rabbi Tarfon and Rabbi Akiva allow him to give as much as he wants, as long as some of the pile remains non-sacred produce.

הכלכלה – the basket that they measure in it to separate the tithes and the Terumah of the tithe, for we don’t separate them other than by measurement, and by number and by weight, as it is taught in the Mishnah (see Tractate Terumot, Chapter 1, Mishnah 7), and don’t increase to tithe by estimations, but the Great Terumah – we do not separate it other than from estimation, as it is taught in the Mishnah above (Tractate Terumot 1;7).

On three occasions they measure the contents of the basket: Three times a year a person should check the basket where he collects and stores his fruit, especially figs, to see how much he has gathered so that he will be able to know how much terumah to give. For instance, if he sees that the basket contains 100 figs, he will know to give about two figs.

משערין את הכלכלה – [the calculate] to know what they will bring in from the produce.

At the full time of the first ripe fruits, and of the late summer fruits, and in the middle of the summer. The three periods are: 1) the time when the fruits that ripen quickest have ripened. These fruits are largest and the basket won’t be able to contain very many of them. 2) The late summer fruits. These are smaller and the baskets can hold a larger quantity of them. 3) The middle of the summer, when there is a lot of fruit but they are of average size.

בבכורות – at the time when the produce are in their ripening stage and are in their fullness and the basket includes less of them from what it holds of them at the end of the summer, when they begin to reduce in size and they are shriveled [and] thin (see Genesis 41:23).

He who counts [the fruit] is praiseworthy, he who measures it is more praiseworthy, and he who weighs them is most praiseworthy of all. We learned in 1:7 that when one separates terumah, he does not separate them by measuring that which he takes out, but that he can separate from a pile of fruit that has been measured. Our mishnah teaches that there are three ways of finding out how much fruit is in the basket and that some ways are better than others. The first way is to simply count the fruit this is better than not measuring at all and is praiseworthy. The second way is to measure the container this is more praiseworthy. The final way is weigh the basket this is the most praiseworthy of all. I should emphasize that when he takes out the terumah, he is not supposed to count, measure or weigh that which he is separating. He is only supposed to do so to the entire basket of untithed produce.

ובאמצע הקיץ – when they are ripened and are not shriveled, and the basket holds from the produce more than what it holds of them when they fully developed, but less than what hit holds of them at the end of the summer when they have become reduced in size. Therefore, we calculate at these three seasons/times.

ובסייפות – produce that is at the end of the summer.

המונה משובח – from the one who removes through estimation.

והמודד משובח וכו' – and especially with tithes and the Terumah of the tithe, but not with the Great Terumah (i.e., that two percent which is given to the Kohen by Israelites), as we have explained.

תרומה עולה באחד ומאה – a Seah of heave-offering/Terumah that fell into one-hundred Seah of unconsecrated produce, which are, amidst everything one-and one-hundred, he takes one [Seah] from them and gives it to the Kohen, and the rest is unconsecrated produce as they were.

Introduction I have already explained on several occasions that if terumah falls into non-sacred produce it renders the entire mixture “medumma.” “Medumma” is doubtful terumah and it can only be eaten by a priest. However, if the amount of non-sacred produce was large enough, the terumah can be removed, given to a priest and the rest of the mixture returns to being non-sacred produce. This is obviously a much better scenario for the person who owns the mixture because he can eat all of the hullin. Our mishnah teaches how much non-sacred produce there must be in relation to the amount of terumah that fell in.

במאה ועוד – if a Seah of heave-offering/Terumah fell into ninety-nine Seah of unconsecrated produce and a bit more than ninety nine, and this a bit more, has no measurement, for since there is one-hundred and another something, he takes one Seah and gives it to the Kohen, and the rest is unconsecrated produce as they were.

Rabbi Eliezer says: terumah can be taken out [if it falls into] a hundred and one parts. According to Rabbi Eliezer there must be a full one hundred parts non-sacred produce (hullin) for every part terumah. So if one seah of terumah falls into one hundred seahs hullin, there will be a total of 101 seahs, and the terumah can be removed. One seah is given to the priest and the rest reverts back to hullin.

קב למאה סאה שתות למדמע – if a Seah of Terumah/heave-offering fell into ninety-nine [parts] of unconsecrated produce and a Kab more, for the Kab is one-sixth of a Seah of Terumah in a proportion that makes the whole prohibited to non-priests, for a Seah is six Kabim, then he takes one Seah and the rest is unconsecrated produce as they were. But if there was unconsecrated produce less than ninety-nine [parts] and a Kab, the entire whole is forbidden to non-priests, and all of it should be sold to a Kohen at the value of Terumah outside of the value of a Seah of the Terumah that is in it. But the Halakha is according to Rabbi Eliezer that the Terumah is not offered with less than one hundred and one. For the Tanna/teacher of the Mishnah taught for us taught us anonymously according to him in several places. And everyone admits that the Terumah is not offered with one-hundred alone, and all the more so, with less than one-hundred [corresponding parts] as it is written (Numbers 18:29): “from every thing its best portion, the part thereof that is to be consecrated,” a thank that you donate from it [as Terumah], if it fell into it, you sanctify it, which is identical with one from one -hundred [parts], for from one-hundred Seah, you separate ten for First Tithe, and from those ten Seah for the Terumah of the tithe, and the All-Merciful stated that if that Seah returned to the ninety-nine, you sanctify them and everything becomes forbidden to non-priests, subject to the laws of Terumah.

Rabbi Joshua says: in a hundred and more, and this “more” has no definite measure. Rabbi Judah holds that if one seah of terumah falls into 99 seahs and a little bit more of hullin, thereby making a mixture that has a total of 100 parts and a little bit more, the terumah can be taken out. This “more,” the amount over 99 seahs, can be of any amount, even the smallest amount.

Rabbi Yose ben Meshullam says: this ‘more’ must be a kav to a hundred seahs, a sixth [of the seah] which renders the whole as medumma. Rabbi Yose ben Meshullam agrees in principle with Rabbi Joshua, but says that there is a measure to this small amount. In the situation described above, where one seah of terumah falls into a vat of hullin, there must be 99 seahs and one kav of hullin in order for the terumah to be nullified. The kav is 1/6 of the seah of terumah that fell in. In other words, the extra amount must be 1/6 of the amount of terumah that one is attempting to nullify.

תאנים שחורים מעלות ת הלבנות – a fig of heave-offering, black or white, that fell into one-hundred unconsecrated figs , half of them black and half of hem white, all of them combine to be voided, for if he had wanted, he would tread on them and mix them all together. But if a a black one fell, it neutralizes one from the black ones, and if a white one [fell], it neutralizes one of the white ones, and the remainder are unconsecrated produce as they were.

Introduction Our mishnah deals with the issue of whether the kind of terumah that fell into the hullin (non-sacred produce) must be exactly like all of the hullin into which it fell.

עגולי דבלה – cakes of of figs that are pressed/stamped with a round mold in which figs are pressed, the large ones neutralize the small ones,, if there are fifty small cakes found there and twenty-five large cakes, and one of he large ones is like two of the small ones, and there fell into them a small cake of heave-offering/Terumah, they assist all of them to be nullified. And similarly, round ones neutralize the figs pressed in quadrangular molds, these round ones are pressed in a round mold, the quadrangular ones are figs pressed in the square shape, like a frame/mold that they make the square stamped ones.

Rabbi Joshua says: black figs can bring up white ones, and white ones can bring up black ones. In the case of cakes of figs, the large can bring up the small, and the small can bring up the large. Round cakes of figs can bring up square cakes, and square cakes can bring up round ones. According to Rabbi Joshua if a black terumah fig fell into a pile of 100 hullin figs, fifty of which were white and fifty black, the owner can remove one fig, give it to the priest and eat the rest. Even though it is clear that the fifty white figs were not the terumah fig that fell in, so that in reality there are only fifty-one figs that could have been the terumah fig (the fifty one black figs), the white figs can join with the black figs to make up the required 100 to 1 ratio. Rabbi Joshua goes on to the say that the same is true if a large cake of figs fell into a pile of small and large cakes of figs, or if a round cake fell into a pile of round and square cakes. Since they are all figs, they all join to create the required ratio to “bring up” the terumah figs.

רבי אליעזר אוסר – if a black one fell, the black ones are forbidden, and id if what one fell, the white ones are forbidden, and similarly, large and small ones, and round and square ones, that which is similar to what fell are forbidden.

Rabbi Eliezer prohibits this. Rabbi Eliezer forbids this for the reason that I explained above in this scenario only fifty-one of the figs is potentially terumah and therefore we don’t have the required 100-1 ratio.

בידו מה נפלה – black or white, they do not neutralize, because one is able to eat the others, and since they are permitted, they do not help to nullify. But if it is not known if black ones fell or white ones fell, that all of them are doubtfully forbidden, they neutralize each other, and he Halakha is according to Rabbi Akiva.

Rabbi Akiba says: if the kind which fell in is known, then the one kind cannot bring up the other kind, but if the kind is not known, the one kind can bring up the other. Rabbi Akiva mediates between their two opinions. If we know that a white fig fell in, then only white figs can count to the ratio of 100-1. But if we don’t know which color fig fell in, then all of the figs could have been terumah and we will have the required ratio. It seems that conceptually Rabbi Akiva agrees more with Rabbi Eliezer, but that he notes that if we don’t know exactly what fell in, then it doesn’t matter what color the figs are, as long as there is a 100-1 ratio.

כיצד – it comes to explain the words of Rabbi Akiva.

Introduction Our mishnah is a continuation of Rabbi Akiva’s statement from yesterday’s mishnah.

ובזו ר' אליעזר מחמיר – of that which we taught above (in Mishnah 8), but in what that he need to say further on (the next Mishnah), it is the opposite.

How so? If there were fifty black figs and fifty white fig, and a black fig fell in, the black figs are forbidden, but the white figs are permitted; and if a white fig fell in them, the white figs are forbidden and the black figs are permitted. In yesterday’s mishnah Rabbi Akiva stated that if they knew which type of fig fell in, then only similar figs can help in counting towards the 100 to 1 ratio. So if we know what color fig fell in, then all of the figs of the same color are forbidden because they are “medumma” (doubtful terumah). But the other color figs are fine because we know that they didn’t fall in.

If it is unknown which kind fell in, then each kind helps to bring up the other. If they don’t know which color fig fell in, then all the figs are potentially the terumah fig, and as long as there is a 100-1 ratio, one fig can be removed and the rest remains hullin, as we stated in yesterday’s mishnah.

In this case, Rabbi Eliezer is stringent and Rabbi Joshua is lenient. Rabbi Eliezer was strict in this case, and Rabbi Joshua was lenient in this case (there opinions are found in yesterday’s mishnah). In tomorrow’s mishnah we will see an opposite case, one where Rabbi Eliezer is more lenient than Rabbi Joshua.

בדורס ליטרא קציעות – a Litra/pound of dry figs of heave-offering.

Introduction Yesterday’s mishnah ended with a note that Rabbi Joshua was more lenient than Rabbi Eliezer. Today we learn that in a different, yet similar case, Rabbi Joshua was more stringent.

על פי הכד – of heave-offering [in the mouth of a jar] and there are many jars.

But in this, Rabbi Eliezer is more lenient and Rabbi Joshua more stringent. One was pressing a litra of dried figs [of terumah] into a jar and he didn’t know which: Rabbi Eliezer says: they are to be regarded as if they were separated, so that those below can bring up those above. Rabbi Joshua says: it cannot be brought up unless there are a hundred jars. In mishnaic times they used to make cakes of figs by pressing the figs into a jar. The jar would be filled up layer by layer, each layer being an individual cake. In the case in our mishnah someone pressed a liter of terumah figs into the top of a jar that already had 100 liters of non-terumah figs. He then forgot which jar he put the figs into, and there were a number of jars there. The question is: can the figs on the bottom of the jar join with the figs on the top of the jar to make a 100-1 ratio, in which case he can take out one liter of figs and then eat the rest as hullin? Or are we stricter because we know that the terumah figs are on top of one of the jars and the figs on the bottoms of the jars are certainly not terumah? According to Rabbi Eliezer we can look at the figs in the jar as if they are separated, meaning they are loose in the jar. This way we can look at the bottom figs as if they are mixed in with the top figs and if there are 100 liters of non-terumah figs in the jars, then they cancel out the one liter of terumah figs that may be on one of the jar. The difference between this situation and the situation in yesterday’s mishnah is that the white figs and black figs look different and therefore one colored fig cannot serve to “bring up” the other. In today’s case the figs look the same and even though we are certain that the bottom figs are not terumah, they count in reckoning the required 100-1 ratio. According to Rabbi Joshua, we know that the bottom figs were not terumah, and therefore the 100-1 ratio must come from the number of jars into which the terumah figs may have been placed. There must be 100 jars into which the terumah figs might have been pressed. When it came to the white and black figs, since they were actually mixed in together, Rabbi Joshua held that they each could “bring up” the other, despite the fact that they look different.

ואין ידוע – in which jar he stuffed in [the figs], and in each jar there are one-hundred Litra/pounds of unconsecrated produce (i.e., figs), even if there are aren’t here one hundred according to the law, Rabbi Eliezer permits it. But even though that it is known that the Litra in the mouth of the jar is of heave-offering, and is not mixed with the unconsecrated produce (i.e., figs), we view them as if they were separated from their place and the unconsecrated produce (i.e., figs) combined with the heave offering and are neutralized in one and one-hundred. But Rabbi Yehoshua holds that since they are not mixed/combined, the bottom/lower ones do not assist to nullify the upper ones, but rather, the rims at the bottom of the vessel are permitted, whereas the ones at the mouth are forbidden, until there will be there one-hundred according to the law and it will nullify the mouth of this jug with one-hundred mouths, and the Halakha is according to Rabbi Yehoshua.

מגורה – a storehouse where they store the grain.

Introduction Our mishnah continues to deal with cases of terumah getting mixed in with hullin and again we see that Rabbi Joshua and Rabbi Eliezer disagree.

וקפאה – he removed what was above, the Aramaic translation of (II Kings 6:6): “and he made the ax head float”: the iron floated.

A seah of terumah which fell on top of a pile and he skimmed it off: Rabbi Eliezer says: if in that which he skimmed off there are hundred seahs, it can be taken out [through a ratio of] one hundred to one. The case in our mishnah is one in which a seah of terumah fell on top of a pile of hullin and the terumah remained on top of the pile. Rabbi Eliezer holds that if in the top part of the pile there are one hundred seahs of hullin, then the one seah can be removed and the rest can be eaten. In other words, when trying to figure out if we have a 100-1 ratio, we can only take into consideration that which is on the top because, as we shall learn below, when terumah falls on top of a pile, one must skim it off. The bottom rows of produce cannot count toward the ratio.

אם יש בקפוי תעלה באחד ומאה – The Jerusalem Talmud explains that this is what he said: if there is in the skimming with what is underneath it one-hundred and one [parts], it is neutralized, and Rabbi Eliezer, according to his reasoning, who said that he ones on the bottom neutralize the ones on the top, and it comes to tell us that even though he skimmed it, he revealed his intention that it had not become mixed with the bottom ones, nevertheless, the bottom ones assist to nullify.

But Rabbi Joshua says: it cannot be brought up. Rabbi Joshua holds that since he must skim off the top, he can’t also take out one seah, even if there is a 100-1 ratio.

ורבי יהושע אומר לא תעלה – Rabbi Yehoshua, according to his reasoning who said about that the bottom ones do not assist to nullify.

A seah of terumah which fell on top of a pile, he must skim it off. If so, why did they say that terumah can be taken up in one hundred and one parts? [Only] if it is not known whether it has become mixed up or where it has fallen. This section explains the rule that stands behind the debate in the previous sections. When terumah falls into a pile of non-sacred produce (hullin) the first thing that one must do is attempt to skim it off the top. The rule that if there are 100 parts hullin to one part terumah one may take out any one part and give that to the priest and eat the rest only applies in two situations. 1) It is not known whether the terumah was mixed up or not; 2) the exact location of the terumah is unknown. However, if one knows that the terumah has not become mixed up and he knows where it is, he should just skim it off the top.

סאה תרומה וכו' – it is the conclusion of the words of Rabbi Yehoshua, and this is what he said: since it is not neutralized, how does he do it? יקפיאנה – he should remove what floats above and a bit around it until he knows that he removed everything, and all of the rest is unconsecrated produce.

אם כן למה אמרו – our Mishnah disputes the words of Rabbi Yehoshua. If so, in which place did they say that heave-offering requires one and one hundred [parts], since there is repair through skimming. And they respond that when it is not known if the Seah had become mixed up in the storehouse after it fell on the lip of the storehouse, alternatively, from the outset, it was not known where it fell, and the Halakha is according to Rabbi Yehoshua.

שתי קופות – in each one is fifty Seah [of unconsecrated produce].

Two baskets or two piles and a seah of terumah fell on top of one of them and it is not known into which it had fallen, they bring up the terumah in the other. Rabbi Shimon says: even if they are in two cities, they bring up the terumah in the other. A seah of terumah falls into a basket or a pile of non-sacred produce and it is unknown which of two piles or baskets it falls into. The fact that the terumah could have fallen into either of the two baskets or piles means that the total amount of hullin in the two piles or baskets counts towards the 100-1 ratio needed to take the terumah out of the mixture. Even though the piles and baskets are separate, since we don’t know which the terumah fell into, both count towards the ratio. Rabbi Shimon said that this remains true even if the two baskets or piles are in different cities. For instance a person had a bottle of terumah wine, and he put it into his wine rack and he doesn’t know if he put it in his wine rack in his home in Paris or in his summer home in Nice (a posh mishnah). If there are a total of 100 bottles of non-terumah wine in his wine racks in Paris and Nice, he can give one bottle to the priest (not hard to find in Paris, but perhaps a bit more difficult in Nice) and the rest remains hullin.

ואין ידוע לאיזו מהן נפלה – and both are forbidden from doubt, they assist each other tonullify, and if he wanted to neutralize a Seah from this one, he neutralizes, from that one, he neutralizes, half from this and half from that one, he neutralizes. And these two bins, even if they are in two homes, and it is not known from into which the Seah of heave-offering fell, they neutralize each other, because it is their manner to be vacated, and they are carried from place to place and sometimes are mixed with each other. But two storehouses are not carried; when they are in the same house, they neutralize each other, and if they are in two [houses], they don’t neutralize each other.

ר"ש אומר אפילו הן שבתי עיירות – but the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Shimon.

שנפלה אחת מהן – one bunch in a similar manner, and it is not recognized from between them, and that bunch was half unconsecrated produce and half heave-offering.

Rabbi Yose said: A case once came before Rabbi Akiva concerning fifty bundles of vegetables into which a bundle of the same size had fallen, half of which was terumah. And I said in front of him, that it can be brought up, not because terumah can be brought up in fifty-one, but because there were one hundred and two halves there. The issue in this case is how do we look at the fifty bundles of hullin vegetable into which one bundle of vegetables, half of which was terumah, has been mixed? Is this a case of fifty one bundles, in which case one would not be able to remove one bundle, give it to a priest and consider the rest to be hullin? Or do we simply look at the total amount of hullin and the total amount of terumah, in which case there is sufficient hullin to allow one to remove one half of one bundle, give it to a priest and keep the rest as hullin? Rabbi Yose teaches that we take the latter option we look at the total amount of vegetables and not the number of bundles.

שהיו שם מאה ושני חציים – with the half of heave-offering which is in it, and Rabbi Yosi teaches us that the the bunch which is half heave-offering becomes Terumah, but according to he percentage of Terumah that is in it, and we don’t say that the entire bunch becomes forbidden to non-priests, since it is Terumah that is mixed with unconsecrated produce.