- 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 ' 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 , or 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-