Previous Daf

BAVA METZIA 53

Ask A Question

1) TERUMAH AND BIKURIM ARE "ASURIM L'ZARIM"
QUESTION: The Beraisa (end of 52b) lists differences between the laws of Terumah and Bikurim and the laws of Ma'aser. The Beraisa says that the punishment for one who intentionally eats Terumah and Bikurim is death, and one who eats them unintentionally must pay an extra fifth. The Beraisa adds that Terumah and Bikurim are forbidden for Zarim (non-Kohanim) to eat.

The second statement of the Beraisa seems entirely unnecessary. The Beraisa has already said that one who eats Terumah and Bikurim is punishable by death, and one who eats them unintentionally must pay an extra fifth. The Beraisa clearly refers to a non-Kohen who eats Terumah and Bikurim. Why does it need to add that a non-Kohen may not eat Terumah and Bikurim?

ANSWERS:
(a) RASHI (DH v'Asurim l'Zarim) writes that there is no reason why the Beraisa needs to add that Terumah and Bikurim are forbidden to Zarim. It adds this statement only because of the contrast which the end of the Beraisa teaches: "Mah she'Ein Ken b'Ma'aser" -- "this is not the case for Ma'aser." If the Beraisa would not have explicitly stated that Terumah and Bikurim are forbidden to Zarim, one might have thought that Zarim are forbidden from eating Ma'aser as well, although they are not punished with the same strict punishments as those who eat Terumah and Bikurim. The Beraisa therefore says that Zarim are forbidden from eating Terumah and Bikurim so that it can contrast Ma'aser with Terumah and Bikurim and teach that Zarim are permitted to Ma'aser.

TOSFOS (DH v'Asurim l'Zarim) points out that the Mishnah in Chalah (1:9) uses this same terminology, but does not mention Ma'aser at all. Why does the Mishnah in Chalah mention that Zarim may not eat Terumah and Bikurim, if it has already said that they are punished by death for eating it intentionally, and they must pay an extra fifth if they eat it unintentionally?

(b) Tosfos quotes the Yerushalmi which answers that the Beraisa means that Zarim are not allowed to eat even a Chatzi Shi'ur (less than the minimum amount for which one is punishable) of Terumah or Bikurim. Tosfos apparently understands that this is true according to both Rebbi Yochanan (Yoma 74a), who maintains that the Torah prohibits one from eating a Chatzi Shi'ur of any forbidden item, and Reish Lakish, who maintains that a Chatzi Shi'ur is prohibited only mid'Rabanan. According to Rebbi Yochanan, the Beraisa means that a Chatzi Shi'ur of Terumah or Bikurim is forbidden mid'Oraisa. According to Reish Lakish, the Beraisa means that a Chatzi Shi'ur is forbidden mid'Rabanan.

The RASHBA questions this explanation. Why should the Beraisa need to point out that one may not eat less than the amount punishable by Torah law? Everyone agrees that a Chatzi Shi'ur of every Isur is forbidden, either mid'Oraisa (Rebbi Yochanan) or mid'Rabanan (Reish Lakish)! Why does the Beraisa need to mention the prohibition of Chatzi Shi'ur specifically with regard to Terumah and Bikurim?

The Rashba answers that the prohibition of Chatzi Shi'ur is derived from the verse that prohibits Chelev (forbidden fats; see Yoma 74a). One might have thought that the prohibition against eating a Chatzi Shi'ur applies only to Isurim which apply to every Jew equally, but not to Isurim which apply only to some Jews and not to others, such as the Isur of Terumah and Bikurim to Zarim. The Beraisa therefore mentions specifically that a Chatzi Shi'ur of Terumah and Bikurim is forbidden to Zarim. (Y. Montrose)

Next Daf