💾 Archived View for scholasticdiversity.us.to › scriptures › jewish › t › Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Heave… captured on 2024-05-10 at 12:12:05. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
7 [1] A priest who is ritually impure is forbidden to partake of *terumah* whether it is ritually pure or ritually impure, as [Leviticus 22:4] states: "Any person from the seed of Aaron who is afflicted with *tzaraat* or is a *zav* 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*.
[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, 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, for [impure *terumah*] is not holy. [2] Impure [priests who have immersed to purify themselves] may not partake of *terumah* until the sun sets and three stars appear afterwards [on the day the impure person immerses himself], as [implied by *ibid.*:7]: "And the sun will set and he will become pure" - until the sky will become pure of the light - "afterwards he may partake of the consecrated foods." [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." [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 commandment has the status of a positive commandment. [4] When [a priest] was partaking of *terumah* and he feels his limbs shudder to ejaculate. He should hold his member and swallow the *terumah*. [5] We may immerse a deaf-mute or intellectually or emotionally unstable [priest] and feed him *terumah* after nightfall on that day. 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 emission unless a copper container is made for them. [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 stimulation produced by riding on the flesh of a camel produces a drop of semen. [7] When a woman engages in intimacy, she may immerse herself and partake of *terumah* in the evening, provided she did not turn over during intimacy. If 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, as will be explained in the appropriate place. [8] Since the primary obligation of *terumah* [separated] in the Diaspora is Rabbinic in origin, 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*, *zavot*, *niddot*, and women who give birth. All of these individuals may partake [of *terumah*] after they immersed even if they did not [wait] until nightfall. 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 age or contact with [the corpse of] a crawling animal - need not immerse themselves [to partake of] *terumah* separated in the Diaspora. [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.
A *metzora* is considered as one who had a discharge that renders him impure, provided he is declared impure by a priest whose lineage is established. [10] A priest who is uncircumcised is forbidden to partake of *terumah* according to Scriptural Law. [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, 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. If such a person partakes [of *terumah*], he is liable for lashes according to Scriptural Law.
A person who extends his foreskin is permitted to partake of *terumah* even though he appears uncircumcised. According to Rabbinic Law, however, he must be circumcised again until he appears circumcised. [11] One who is born circumcised may partake of *terumah*. A *tumtum* may not partake of *terumah* for there is a doubt whether he is uncircumcised. An *androgynus* should be circumcised and then he may partake of *terumah*. [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]. [13] [The following laws apply to a priest] who has maimed testicles or a severed member. They and their servants may partake of *terumah*. Their wives may not partake of *terumah*. If [such a priest] was not intimate with his wife after suffering these wounds, [his wife] may partake of *terumah*. Similarly, if he married the descendent of converts, she may partake of *terumah*. [14] When a priest with maimed testicles consecrates the daughter of a priest, she may not partake of *terumah*. [When a priest is] a eunuch who was brought to this state through natural means, 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*, but not their wives. [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*. If, however, the local court or their guardian purchases servants for them or they acquire them by inheritance, [the servants] may partake of *terumah*. [16] When an *androgynus* [of the priestly family] engages in intimacy - whether through anal intercourse 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. His servants also may not partake of *terumah*.
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. If, however, he is intimate through anal intercourse, [the above does not apply], because a male does not disqualify another male from priestly [privileges]. [17] When a servant belongs to partners and one of them is a priest that does not entitle others to partake of *terumah*, 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]. [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 barzel* - 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. 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*]. [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*]. [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 priest or [a priest] marries another one of the women with whom marriage is prohibited [by Scriptural Law]. 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*], 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*, she may partake [of *terumah*], but her servants who are *nichsei milog* may not partake [of *terumah*]. [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*, because they are designated for intimate relations that are forbidden according to Scriptural Law. Similarly, if they enter the *chupah* without being consecrated, they may not partake [of *terumah*]. For [entering into] the *chupah* disqualifies them.
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.* [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*, she may not partake of *terumah* because of her connection to the *challal*. [This applies] even if one of the acceptable [brothers] issued a *mamar* to her, for a *maamar* does not constitute a complete acquisition of a *yevamah*. [23] [Although a *yavam* who is] a priest gives a bill of divorce to his *yevamah*, [despite the fact that] she becomes forbidden to him, she still remains connected to him. 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 rite of *chalitzah* or is a *shniyah* who became consecrated to a priest may partake of *terumah*. [Also,] when an ordinary priest marries an *ailonot*, she may partake of *terumah*.
Version: Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007
Source: https://www.nli.org.il/he/books/NNL_ALEPH001020101/NLI
License: CC-BY-NC