ומה ראית מסתברא קדש לא ממעיטנא שכן פנקעכ"ס
how much more so in respect of holy food the Sanctity of which is of a major character. If so, <i>terumah</i> also might be inferred a minori ad majus! — Surely 'thereof' was written. And what reason do you see?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For inferring holy food a minori ad majus, and for excluding terumah by the expression thereof?
');"><sup>25</sup></span> It is logical that holy food should not be excluded, since<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The mnemonic [H] represents the initials, or striking letters of Piggul. Nothar, Korban (sacrifice). me'ilah (the 'Ayin). Kareth. asur (forbidden).
');"><sup>26</sup></span> [the following restrictions also apply to it:] piggul,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Glos.
');"><sup>27</sup></span>
Tosefta Bikkurim
There is a stringency with Terumah (the priestly portion of produce) that there is not with second tithe (which is exchanged for money and brought to Jerusalem) or first fruits, and [a stringency] with second tithe that there is not with Terumah. [With respect to the stringency of Terumah], we may not take [Terumah] except out of a mass [of produce] in close proximity (המוקף), nor may we take it except from [produce that is in] a finished state, nor may we take it except from the pure on behalf of the impure, or the medumma (a forbidden mixture of Terumah and chullin), and we are liable on it for an extra fifth, and it applies to all [species of] produce, which is not the case with first fruits. And it applies to all the years [of the seven-year agricultural cycle other than the seventh year], all of which is not the case with second tithe [which only applies to the first, second, fourth, and fifth years].
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
