💾 Archived View for scholasticdiversity.us.to › scriptures › jewish › t › Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Heave… captured on 2024-05-12 at 15:32:04. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
⬅️ Previous capture (2024-05-10)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
10 [1] When a non-priests partakes of *terumah* unknowingly, he must make restitution for the principal and add a fifth. Even if he knows that it is *terumah* and that he is warned against partaking of it, but he does not know whether or not he is liable for death, he is considered to have acted unknowingly and he must make restitution for the principal and add a fifth. [2] A person who eats an article [that is *terumah*] that is ordinarily eaten, drinks something that is ordinarily drunk, or smears himself with something ordinarily used for that purpose [is liable], as [derived from Leviticus 22:15]: "And they shall not defile the sacraments of the children of Israel." This includes one who smears himself.
Whether one partakes of *terumah* which is ritually pure or ritually impure unknowingly, one must make restitution for the principal and add a fifth. He is not liable for a fifth until he eats an olive-sized portion, as [indicated by *ibid.*:14]: "When one will eat a sacrament unknowingly"; eating implies consuming no less than an olive-sized portion. Just as one is liable for eating an olive-sized portion, so too, [one is liable for] drinking an olive-sized portion. [3] [The following laws apply if a person] ate *terumah* and then ate again, drank and then drank again. If there is sufficient time to eat a half a loaf of bread from the time he began to eat until he concluded or sufficient time to drink a *revi'it* from the time he began to drink until he concluded, [all he consumes] is combined to comprise an olive-sized portion. [4] *Terumah, terumat ma'aser*, whether the latter is from *d'mai* or from produce from which the tithes were definitely [not separated], *challah*, and the first fruits can all be combined together to comprise an olive-sized portion for which one is liable for death or [restitution, plus] a fifth, for they are all called *terumah* [at different times in the Torah].
According to law, one should not be liable for a fifth for [the unknowing consumption of] *terumat ma'aser* that is *d'mai*, just as one is not liable for the second tithe [from *d'mai*], as will be explained. Nevertheless, our Sages said: If one is not liable for a fifth, people will treat it with disdain. [5] When a person partook *terumah* intentionally [after] receiving a warning, he is liable for lashes and is not required to make financial restitution. If he did not receive warning, [he is required to make financial restitution]. If [the *terumah*] was ritually pure, he is required to make restitution for the principal, but is not required to add a fifth. If [the *terumah*] was ritually impure, he is required to pay only as if it were wood, because it is fit only to use as fuel. Accordingly, if one ate berries or pomegranates or the like that were *terumah* that became impure, he is not obligated to make restitution, because these are not fit to be used as fuel. [6] When a person eats *terumah* that is *chametz* on Pesach, whether willfully or unknowingly, whether it is ritually impure or pure, he is exempt from financial liability. Even if he separated *terumah* from *matzah*, but it became *chametz* [before he ate it], he is exempt. He is not even required to pay as if it were wood, because it is not fit for use as fuel. [Instead,] since it is forbidden to benefit from it, it is of no value whatsoever. [7] If, however, one unknowingly ate *terumah* on Yom Kippur, ate *terumah* that was perforated, drank wine that was *terumah* that was left open, smeared himself with wine and oil [that were *terumah*] at the same time, or drank oil and vinegar [that were *terumah*] at the same time, chewed raw kernels of wheat, or swallowed vinegar, he is liable to make restitution for the principal and add a fifth. [8] When a person is satisfied and is disgusted by his food, but continues eating *terumah* despite the fact that he is satisfied, he is not required to add a fifth [when making restitution, for the prooftext cited above] states: "When one will eat...." [Implied is that he is when he eats in an ordinary manner] and not when he harms himself. Similarly, when one chews raw kernels of barley, he is not liable, because he harms himself. [9] When a non-priest swallowed prunes of *terumah* [whole unknowingly] and then regurgitated them, and another person came and also ate them unknowingly, the first person is required to make restitution for the principal and add a fifth and the second person is obligated to pay the first one as if the prunes were wood. [10] When one feeds *terumah* to workers or to guests, they are required to make restitution for the principal and add a fifth, for they acted unknowingly. He must pay them for their meal, for ordinary produce is more valuable than the *terumah*, since a person's soul is repelled from forbidden food. [11] When [a non-priest] feeds *terumah* to his children who were below majority or to his servants whether they are above or below majority, he must pay the principal, but not the additional fifth. [This ruling also applies to] one who partakes of *terumah* from the Diaspora, one who eats or drinks less than an olive-sized portion, a nazarite who unknowingly drank wine that was *terumah*, one drinks oil [without it being mixed with other liquids] and one who smears himself with wine. [12] When the daughter of a priest who was married to an Israelite or disqualified [from partaking of *terumah* for other reasons] partook of *terumah*, she must make restitution for the principal, but she is not required to add a fifth.
When a woman was partaking of *terumah* and she was told: "Your husband died," or "...divorced you," she is required to pay only the principal. If the *terumah* was *chametz* on the day preceding Pesach, she is exempt from making restitution. [The rationale is that then] the time is pressing and she hurried to eat without investigating.
[These same laws apply] when a servant was partaking [of *terumah*] and he was told: "Your master died and left an heir who does not entitle you to eat," "...sold you to an Israelite," "...gave you to him as a present," or "...freed you," and when a priest was partaking [of *terumah*] and he discovered that he is the son of a divorcee or a woman who underwent *chalitzah*. In all of these instances, if these individuals had *terumah* in their mouths when they discovered that they were forbidden to partake of it, they should spit it out. [13] [Similarly, when a priest] was partaking [of *terumah*] and he was told: "You became impure," "The *terumah* became impure," "You were impure," or "the *terumah* was impure," he should spit it out. [The same ruling applies] if he discovered that [the *terumah*] was *tevel*, the first tithe from which *terumat ma'aser* had not been separated, or *ma'aser sheni* or consecrated property that was not redeemed, or [when partaking of the *terumah*,] he tasted a bug. [14] When there are two containers, one of *terumah* and one of ordinary produce, and *terumah* fell into one of them, but it is not known which one, we operate under the supposition that it fell into the one which [contained] *terumah*.
If it is not known which one is *terumah* and a non-priest partakes of one of them, he is not liable for payment. [The rationale is that when a person seeks] to expropriate money from a colleague, the burden of proof is on him. He must treat the other one as if it were *terumah*. If another person partakes of the other one, however, he is also exempt. If, however, one person eats them both, he must make restitution for the smaller one. If he did so intentionally, he is required to make restitution for the principal. If he did so unknowingly, he is required to make restitution for the principal, plus a fifth. [15] When a person eats the additional fifth unknowingly, he must [make restitution for it and] add another fifth. For the fifth is considered as the principal with regard to all matters. Similarly, he continues to add a fifth for every fifth forever.
Whenever a person makes restitution for the principal and the additional fifth, [the grain] he gives is *terumah* with regard to all matters [with one exception]. If they were sown, the grain that grows is ordinary produce. If the priest wishes to forgo [the payment], he cannot. Whenever, [by contrast,] a person makes restitution only for the principal, [the grain] he gives is ordinary grain and if the priest desires to forgo payment, he may. [16] [The following laws apply if] a daughter of an Israelite partakes of *terumah* and then marries a priest. If [she partook] of *terumah* that had not been acquired by a priest, she may make restitution of the principal and the additional fifth to herself. If she partook of *terumah* that a priest had acquired, she is required to make restitution of the principal to its owner, but she may keep the additional fifth as her own. For whenever a person makes restitution and pays an additional fifth, he may give the additional fifth to whichever priest he desires. [17] If she was not able to make restitution before she was divorced, she can no longer make restitution to herself and she is like a person who never married a priest at all. [18] Whenever a person partakes of *terumah* whether unknowingly or intentionally, he may make restitution only from ordinary produce from which the *terumot* and the tithes have been separated. Restitution may be made from *leket, shichichah, pe'ah,* ownerless grain, and grain from the first tithe after *terumat ma'aser* was separated i.e., even if the great *terumah* from that crop had not been separated, for the person separated the tithes before the *terumah*.
One may make restitution from the second tithes and consecrated property that were redeemed, even though they were not redeemed in an appropriate manner. And one may make restitution using new grain for old grain. One may not, however, make restitution from one type [of grain] for another type [of grain]. [This is derived from Leviticus 22:14:] "And he shall give the priest the sanctified [food]." [Implied is that it must be the same] as the sanctified food he ate. [19] When a person eats zucchini from the sixth year, he should wait until [he acquires] the zucchini of the eighth year to make restitution from them. For he cannot pay his debt from the crops of the seventh year, as will be explained in that place. [20] When a person ate *terumah* that was ritually impure, he makes restitution from ordinary produce, whether pure or impure. If he partook of *terumah* that was ritually pure, he should make restitution with ordinary grain that is pure. If he made restitution from ordinary grain that was impure whether intentionally or unknowingly, the restitution he made is accepted, but he must make restitution again from ritually pure grain. [21] When a person partook of *terumah* belonging to a *chaver*, he should make restitution to him. If he partook of *terumah* belonging to a common person, he should make restitution to a *chaver*, and take its worth from him and give it to the common person whose *terumah* he ate. For we do not give articles that require ritually purity to a common person. [22] When [an Israelite] stole *terumah* from his maternal grandfather who was a priest and consumed it [unknowingly], and afterwards, his maternal grandfather died, he may not make restitution to himself, but rather to another heir from [the priestly] tribe. Similarly, if he inherited *terumah* from his maternal grandfather and partook of it, a creditor collected *terumah* [as payment] for a debt and he partook of it or a woman [received it as part of the money due her by virtue of] her *ketubah* and she partook of it, they must make restitution for the principal and the additional fifth to a priest who is a *chaver* and that *chaver* gives them the monetary equivalent of the *terumah* at the time they partook of it. [23] When a person steals *terumah* but does not consume it, he should pay twice its worth to the owners. He may make this payment according to the worth of *terumah*. If he stole it and ate it, he must pay twice the principal and a fifth of the principal: i.e., the principal and an additional fifth from ordinary grain, and the principal according to the worth of *terumah*. [24] When a person steals *terumah* that is consecrated to the Temple treasury and eats it, he is not required to pay a double amount, for a double amount is not paid to the Temple treasury, as explained in the appropriate place. He must, however, make restitution for the principal and add two fifths, one fifth [to atone] for partaking of *terumah* and one fifth [to atone] for benefiting from consecrated property.
To whom does he make restitution? If [the *terumah*] was the size of an olive and it was not worth a *p'rutah*, he should make restitution to the priests. If it is worth a *p'rutah* - whether or not it is the size of an olive - he should pay the Temple treasury. [25] Why does the prohibition against benefiting from consecrated property fall [on this grain when it is already forbidden because of] the prohibition against *terumah*? Because the *terumah* was forbidden to a non-priest and permitted to a priest. Once he consecrated it, it became forbidden to a priest. Therefore a prohibition was added to it even for an Israelite in the manner explained in the laws of forbidden relationships and forbidden foods. [26] When a person obtains *terumah* by robbery, he must make restitution for the principal and add one fifth. [The rationale is that] the fifth that he is liable for [to atone for partaking of] *terumah* fulfills his obligation for robbery, as [implied by Leviticus 22:14:] "And you shall give the priest the sacred [food]." He is liable only for the fifth [associated with atonement for] the sacred [food]. If he obtains *terumah* through robbery and feeds it to another person, that person must make restitution for the principal and add a fifth.
Whenever we have said that a person must make restitution for the principal and add a fifth, [the intent is that] if he ate grain worth four [*zuz*], he must pay five from the type of grain from which he partook. Whenever we mentioned [payment of] the principal and two fifths, [the intent is that] if he ate grain worth four [*zuz*], he must pay six. Whenever we mentioned [payment of] two principals and one fifth, [the intent is that] if he ate grain worth four [*zuz*], he must pay nine.
Whenever he makes restitution, he must pay for the worth of the grain at the time he partook of it whether its value depreciated at the time he made restitution or appreciated.
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