MISHNAH-TOSEFTA TERUMOT CHAPTER FIVE
The chapter carries forward M. 4:7~13's discussion of the neutraliza tion of heave-offering. It is in two parts. M. 5:1 ~4 present cases in which either the heave-offering or the unconsecrated produce with which it is mixed is unclean. M. 5:5~8+9 are on whether or not pro duce taken to replace heave-offering which is neutralized is true heave offering. Both parts of the chapter flow from a single set of disputing opinions, Eliezer's, M. 5:2C, and that of sages, expressed first at M. 5:2D. Eliezer's view is that if heave-offering is neutralized in unconse crated produce, the produce the householder takes to replace it is the same produce that originally fell into the batch. This produce there fore is true heave-offering and, further, has the same status of clean ness as the heave-offering that was lost. The batch from which it was taken, likewise, is composed solely of unconsecrated produce, just as it was before the mixture occurred (M. 5:6~7). Sages disagree. They hold that the replacement heave-offering contains only that proportion of true heave-offering that is contained in the mixture from which it is separated. According to this view, if the original heave-offering, or the unconsecrated produce with which it was mixed, is unclean, the replace ment heave-offering is a mixture of clean and unclean produce. While the priest may consume this produce, he must do so in such a way as to prevent the unclean produce in the batch from imparting unclean ness either to the clean heave-offering or to himself. It also follows from this view that the batch in which the heave-offering was neu tralized still contains some heave-offering. This being the case, sages cannot agree to the anonymous rule of M. 5:7. Only M. 5:1 and M. 5:9 stand outside the framework of the dispute between Eliezer and sages. M. 5:1 introduces the problem of mixtures in which either the heave-offering or the unconsecrated produce is unclean, the topic of M. 5:2~4. Clean heave-offering is mixed with unclean unconsecrated produce and imparts its own status to that pro duce. M. 5: li~J rules that since the original heave-offering is clean, the batch must be given to a priest, who cooks and eats the produce in such a way that the unclean unconsecrated produce does not impart uncleanness either to the clean heave-offering or to himself If, how ever, the heave-offering in the mixture is unclean (M. 5: lA~C), the 1962 TEXT AND COMMENTARY batch is left to rot. The priest could not eat the original heave-offering and therefore may not benefit from the mixture. M. 5:9 is autonomous of the specific issues of the preceding pericopae, concluding M.'s dis cussion of the neutralization of heave-offering. In each of its three cases a mixture of heave-offering and unconsecrated produce changes in quantity. Unless it is certain that the ratio of heave-offering to uncon secrated produce has changed, the mixture retains its same status of consecration. As usual T. restates and expands M.'s rules, adding significant state ments of its own only at T. 5: 15 (on the neutralization of 'orlah and other forbidden produce), and at T. 6:lla (on the neutralization of heave-offering of one kind in a different kind of unconsecrated pro duce). As in Chapter Four, important attributions here are to Yavneans, most notably, to Eliezer. The Houses are cited pseudepigraphically, 1 M. 5:4. Simeon appears at M. 5:8. In T. we have Yose (T. 5:13), Judah (T. 5: 14), Eleazar b. 'Arakh and Simeon (T. 5: 15).
5:1 I. A A siah of unclean heave-offering which fell into less than a hun dred [siahs] of unconsecrated produce, B. or [which fell] into first tithe, or second tithe or [produce] dedi cated [to the Temple], C. whether these things are clean or uncle an- D. let [all of the produce in the mixture] rot. II. E. (Eight MSS. add: But) if that siah [of heave-offering that fell into the other produce] was clean-let [all of the produce in the mix ture] be sold to priests, at the [low] value of heave-offering, F. less the value of that same se' ah [of heave-offering which fell into the unconsecrated produce]. G. And if it fell into first tithe-let him designate [the mixture] heave offering of the tithe. H. And if it fell into second tithe or [produce] dedicated [to the Temple]- lo, these may be redeemed. III. I. (Five MSS. lack: And) if the unconsecrated produce [into which the heave-offering fell] was unclean- let [all of the produce in the mixture] be eaten2 in small bits, or roasted, or kneaded with fruit juice, or divided into [little] lumps [of dough],
1 I argue this m Neusner, Judaism, Appendix I, part iv, as well as below, pp. 1965-1967. 2 0 1, B, C and 0 2 read "[The heave-offering] is neutralized and eaten ...." Since heave-offering which is mixed with less than a hundred times its quantity in uncon-