PURE AND IMPURE (Yerushalmi Terumos Perek 2 Halachah 1 Daf 8b)
îùðä àéï úåøîéï îï äèäåø òì äèîà åàí úøîå úøåîúï úøåîä
(Mishnah): One may not separate Terumah from Tahor for Tamei produce, but if he did, it is valid. (The person will wish to avoid the Tamei produce causing Tumah to the Tahor produce, by separating the two parts. This means that he will separate 'She'lo Min HaMukaf' ('not from nearby' produce), which is prohibited.)
áàîú àîøå äòéâåì ùì ãáéìä ùðèîà î÷öúå úåøí îï äèäåø ùéù áå òì äèîà ùéù áå [ãó èæ òîåã à (òåæ åäãø)] åëï àâåãä ùì éø÷ åëï òøéîä
In truth they said (as a Halacha L'Moshe MiSinai) that if part of a fig cake became Tamei, he may separate from the Tahor part for the Tamei part. The same applies to a bundle of vegetables and a pile of produce.
äéå ùðé òéâåìéí ùðé àâåãåú ùúé òøéîåú àçú èäåøä åàçú èîàä ìà éúøåí îæä òì æä
If there were two fig cakes, two bundles or two piles, one was Tahor and the other was Tamei - he may not separate Terumah from one for the other.
øáé àìéòæø àåîø úåøîéï îï äèäåø òì äèîà.
(R. Eliezer): One may separate from Tahor for Tamei.
àéï úåøîéï îï äèîà òì äèäåø åàí úøí ùåââ úøåîúå úøåîä îæéã ìà òùä åìà ëìåí
One may not separate from Tamei for Tahor, but if he did - if it was Shogeg (an unintentional sin), it is valid; if it was Mezid (intentional), it is invalid.
åëï áï ìåé ùäéä ìå îòùø èáì äéä îôøéù òìéå åäåìê ùåââ îä ùòùä òùåé îæéã ìà òùä åìà ëìåí
Similarly, if a Levi who had (Tamei) Maaser Rishon (before its Terumas Maaser had been taken) and he kept taking (Terumas Maaser) from it (even for other Tahor Maaser) - if it was Shogeg, it is valid; if it was Mezid, it is invalid.
ø' éäåãä àåîø àí äéä éåãò áå îúçéìä àó òì ôé ùäåà ùåââ ìà òùä åìà ëìåí.
(R. Yehuda): If he knew of it originally, even if it was ultimately Shogeg, it is invalid.
äîèáéì ëìéí áùáú áùåââ éùúîù áäï åîæéã ìà éùúîù áäï
If a person immersed vessels on Shabbos - if it was Shogeg, he may use them; if it was Mezid, he may not use them.
äîòùø åäîáùì áùáú áùåââ éàëì îæéã ìà éàëì
If a person tithed or cooked on Shabbos - if it was Shogeg, he may eat it; if it was Mezid, he may not eat it.
äðåèò áùáú ùåââ é÷ééí îæéã éò÷åø åáùáéòéú áéï ùåââ áéï îæéã éò÷åø:
If a person planted on Shabbos - if it was Shogeg, he may allow it to remain; if it was Mezid, he must uproot it. If he planted in Sheviis year, whether Shogeg or Mezid, he must uproot it.
âîøà àéï úåøîéï îï äèäåø ëå'. øáé éåçðï áùí øáé éðàé åðçùá ìëí úøåîúëí ëãâï îï äâåøï åëîìàä îï äé÷á îä (âåøï å)é÷á [àé] àôùø ùéäà î÷öúå èîà åî÷öúå èäåø [ãó èæ òîåã á (òåæ åäãø)] åæä àò''ô ùàôùø ìîéãéï àôùø îùàé àôùø
(Gemara) (R. Yochanan citing R. Yannai): 'One may not separate Terumah from Tahor for Tamei produce' - the pasuk states (Bamidbar 18:27), "And your Terumah shall be considered for you (as grain from the threshing-floor and as the wine of the vat). Just as when some wine is Tamei, it's all Tamei (as it's all one liquid, so it's impossible to separate from one part for another); so too grain, even though it is possible (to separate without the Tumah spreading throughout it), we learn from wine (that one may not separate from Tahor for Tamei) where it's impossible.
îòúä ìà éäà úøåîúå úøåîä
Question: If this pasuk is the source, it should not be valid Terumah at all?
îîðå ëúéá ëì äãáøé'
Answer: The (following) pasuk says "(and you shall give) from it'' (meaning - in any way - even from Tahor for Tamei).
ìîéãéï åîìîãéï úøåîú îòùø äéà îìîãú åàéðä ìîéãä úøåîú îòùø ìéîãä òì úøåîä âãåìä ùìà úäà ðéèìú îï äèäåø òì äèîà åäéà ðéèìú îï äèäåø òì äèîà îðééï
All pesukim that are expounded teach about themselves and about others; Terumas Maaser teaches only about others but not about itself - it teaches about Terumah Gedolah that it should not be taken from Tahor for Tamei, but Terumas Maaser itself may be taken from Tahor for Tamei. What's the source for this?
ø' éåñé áùí çæ÷éä ø' éåðä áùí ø' éðàé åðúúí îîðå àú úøåîú ä' ìàäøï äëäï òùä ùéðúðå ìàäøï äëäï áëäåðúå
Answer (R. Yosi citing Chizkiyah/ R. Yona citing R. Yannai): The same pasuk states, "And you shall give from it the Terumah of Hash-m to Aharon the Kohen'' - give Terumas Maaser to Aharon HaKohen in a form that he can eat it (i.e. Tehorah. This applies as long as the actual Terumas Maaser is Tehorah, even if it is separated for Tameh.)
ëäðà àîø îëì çìáå àú î÷ãùå îîðå èåì îï äî÷åãù ùáå
Answer #2 (Kahana): The pasuk there states (Bamidbar 18:29), "from its choicest part, that part of it which is to be consecrated''. The Torah was only particular about the Terumas Maaser being Tehorah.
úøåîú îòùø ìéîãä òì úøåîä âãåìä ùäéà ðéèìú îï äîå÷ó åäéà ðéèìú ùìà îï äîå÷ó
The pasuk also teaches - 'Terumas Maaser' - Terumah Gedolah should be separated in close proximity to the produce, but Terumas Maaser does not require this.
îðééï ùúøåîú îòùø ðéèìú ùìà îï äîå÷ó
Question: What's the source that Terumas Maaser may be separated when not in close proximity?
[ãó è òîåã à] îëì îòùøåúéëí àçã áéäåãä åàçã áâìéì
Answer: The pasuk states (Bamidbar 18:28), "from all of your Ma'asros'' - whether in Yehuda or in the Galil, you may separate for them.
úøåîú îòùø ìéîãä òì úøåîä âãåìä ùìà úäà ðéèìú àìà îï äâîåø åàó äéà ðéèìú îï äâîåø
Terumas Maaser also teaches about Terumah Gedolah that just as Terumas Maaser may only be taken from completed produce, so too Terumah Gedolah.
[ãó éæ òîåã à (òåæ åäãø)] úøåîú îòùø ðéèìú îï äèäåø òì äèäåø åîï äèîà òì äèîà îï äèäåø òì äèîà åàéðä ðéèìú îï äèîà òì äèäåø
Terumas Maaser may be separated from Tahor for Tahor produce, from Tamei for Tamei and from Tahor for Tamei, but not from Tamei for Tahor.
øáé ðçîéä àåîø ëùí ùàéðä ðéèìú îï äèîà òì äèäåø ëê àéðä ðéèìú îï äèîà òì äèîà
(R. Nechemia): Just as it may not be separated from Tamei for Tahor, so too from Tamei for Tamei.
åîåãä øáé ðçîéä áãîàé
R. Nechemia agrees in the case of Demai produce, that one may separate from Tamei for Tamei.