We're going to dive into a fascinating passage from Sifrei Bamidbar, a collection of legal interpretations on the Book of Numbers, and explore the intricacies of terumah and ma'aser – tithes and offerings – in ancient Israel. It might seem like a distant topic, but understanding the underlying principles can offer profound insights into Jewish thought and practice.
Our journey begins with (Numbers 18:27): "And your terumah will be accounted for you as corn from the threshing floor and as the fullness of the pit." Rabbi Yishmael asks a crucial question: When is this terumah considered truly accounted for? His answer: When it’s taken properly – "a kind for its kind, new for new," as the text prescribes. If not, it doesn't count in the same way. It's a reminder that intention and proper execution matter in our offerings, both then and now.
But what exactly is terumah? And what's terumat ma'aser? Think of it as a system of giving back to God and supporting the Levites and Kohanim (priests) who served in the Temple. Terumah gedolah is the initial offering given to the Kohanim, while terumat ma'aser is the tithe that the Levites give from what they receive to the Kohanim.
The text draws an analogy: what can we learn from terumah gedolah to terumat ma'aser? The answer: Just as terumat ma'aser is obligatory, so too is terumah gedolah. It's a system of layered obligations, ensuring that everyone contributes to the upkeep of the spiritual and communal structure.
Abba Eliezer b. Gomel adds another layer: just as terumah gedolah can be designated by estimate and thought, so too can terumat ma'aser. It suggests a level of flexibility and intent; the act of setting aside the portion is what matters.
Why the phrase "as corn from the threshing floor and as the fullness of the pit?" Without it, we might assume that one could offer whatever they wanted for terumah. But this clarifies that offerings should come from what is processed – from the finished product, not just raw materials. As the rabbis ruled, from grain after it’s been evened, from wine after it's skimmed, from oil after it's dripped into the trough. It emphasizes the idea of offering from our best, from what we've already worked hard to produce.
Now, let’s tackle another verse, (Numbers 18:28): "Thus shall you, too, separate the terumah of the L-rd." Why is this written? To clarify that even the Kohanim, who receive the tithes, must also separate terumah and ma'aser from their own produce. Otherwise, one might think they could eat it tevel – untithed produce.
Rabbi Yishmael offers an alternative interpretation. He argues that it's obvious the Kohanim must tithe. Instead, he suggests the verse teaches that the Levites must separate terumat ma'aser even from their own tithes. The verse ensures everyone, regardless of their role, participates in the system of giving.
The text further emphasizes that ma'aser applies to all produce. From this, the rabbis derive an important principle: if ma'aser, which is considered "lighter" because it doesn't carry the death penalty, applies to all produce, then terumah, which is considered "graver" because it does, certainly applies to all produce as well! It's a fascinating use of logical reasoning to extrapolate from one rule to another.
A variant reading offers another comparison: If ma'aser sheni (second tithe), which isn’t given in the third and sixth years of the sabbatical cycle, still applies to all produce, then terumah certainly applies to all produce. Issi b. Menachem adds that if ma'aser, which is meant to encourage fear of God and learning, applies to all produce, then certainly the “graver” terumah should as well!
Finally, the passage touches on the qualifications of those who receive these gifts. (Numbers 18:8) states that the terumah should be given to Aaron the Kohen (a priest). We are told that just as Aaron was a chaver – a Torah scholar – so too should the other Kohanim who receive priestly gifts be chaverim. This emphasizes the importance of knowledge and understanding in those who hold positions of spiritual leadership.
The passage concludes with a discussion of what happens if terumah falls back into the produce it was taken from. The rabbis ruled that terumah is "neutralized" if it falls into one hundred parts of non-terumah, provided it's a 1:100 ratio. This rule applies to terumah that is ritually clean. The text then poses a question: what about terumah that is ritually impure? The answer remains elusive.
So, what do we take away from this deep dive into ancient tithes and offerings? It's more than just a set of outdated rules. It's a glimpse into a system designed to ensure fairness, support spiritual leadership, and remind us of our obligations to God and community. It’s about the importance of intention, the value of giving back, and the continuous effort to understand and apply ancient wisdom to our modern lives. Perhaps the next time we consider our own contributions, we can reflect on the lessons learned from terumah and ma'aser, and strive to give from our best, with intention, and with a spirit of generosity.
(Bamidbar 18:27) "And your terumah will be accounted for you as corn from the threshing floor and as the fullness of the pit": R. Yishmael says: When is your terumah accounted for you as corn from the threshing floor? When you have taken it as prescribed (i.e., a kind for its kind, new for new, etc. [see above]). If you have not taken it as prescribed, it is not thus accounted for you. Variantly: "And your (the Levites') terumah (terumath ma'aser) will be accounted for you as corn from the threshing floor" (terumah gedolah). Now what do we learn from terumah (gedolah) to terumath ma'aser? It (terumah gedolah) comes (apparently) to teach (something), and it ends up being learned (i.e.,) Just as terumath ma'aser is obligatory, so, terumah (gedolah) is obligatory. Abba Eliezer b. Gomel says: Scripture comes to teach you that just as terumah (gedolah) may be taken by estimate and by thought (i.e., without actually handling it), so, terumath ma'aser may be taken by estimate and by thought. "as corn from the threshing floor and as the fullness of the pit": Why is this stated? From (26) "then you shall separate from it," I might think that he could take ears (of grain as terumah) for grain; grapes, for wine; and olives, for oil; it is, therefore, written "as corn from the threshing floor," i.e., (he may take) from what is processed — whence they ruled; (He may take terumah:) from grain, from the time that it (i.e., its pile) has been evened; from wine, from the time that it is skimmed; from oil, from the time that it has dripped down into the trough. (Ibid. 28) "Thus shall you, too, separate the terumah of the L-rd": Why is this written? From (26) "And to the Levites shall you speak, and you shall say to them: When you take from the children of Israel, etc.", (I would say:) The children of Israel give ma'aser to the Levites, but the Cohanim do not give ma'aser to the Levites. And since they do not give ma'aser to the Levites, I might think that they could eat it (the produce) tevel (i.e., untithed); it is, therefore, written: "thus shall you separate, you (the Cohanim), too, the terumah of the L-rd." (i.e., the Cohanim separate terumah, and ma'aser, and terumath ma'aser which reverts to them.) R. Yishmael says: This (derivation) is not needed, for if challah, which does not obtain with all produce (i.e., with all the varieties of grain), obtains with the produce of Cohanim, then ma'aser, which does obtain with all produce, how much more so should it obtain with all the produce of Cohanim! What, then, is the intent of "Thus shall you separate, you, too"? I might think that only the ma'aser of an Israelite (is subject to terumath ma'aser). Whence do I derive the (same for) their (the Levites') own tithe (i.e., the tithe that they separate from what is theirs)? It is, therefore, written "Thus shall you separate, you, (the Levites,) too." (Ibid. 29) "From all of your gifts, etc." Scripture hereby teaches that ma'aser obtains with all (produce [see above]) — whence you rule to terumah (i.e., terumath ma'aser), viz.: If ma'aser, the "lighter," (not being subject to the death penalty), obtains with all produce), then terumah, the "graver," (being subject to the death penalty, [viz. Vayikra 22:9]), how much more so does it obtain with all (produce [of first tithe])! Variantly: If ma'aser (second tithe), which does not obtain in the third and sixth year (of shemitah, [being replaced by poor-tithe]), obtains with all (produce), then terumah, the graver, how much more so should it obtain with all (produce [of second tithe])! Issi b. Menachem says: If ma'aser (second tithe), which comes only as an incentive to fear and to learning (viz. Devarim 14:23), obtains with all (produce), how much more so does it obtain with the "graver," terumah! (Bamidbar, Ibid.) "And you shall give of it the terumah of the L-rd to Aaron the Cohein": Just as Aaron was a chaver (a Torah scholar, so the (other) Cohanim (to receive the priestly gifts, should be chaverim) — whence it was ruled: Priestly gifts should be given only to a chaver. (Ibid. 29) "From all of your gifts shall you separate all the terumah of the L-rd. From all of its best (shall you separate) its hallowed part from it." Is Scripture here speaking of terumah gedolah or of terumath ma'aser? "from all of your tithes" (28) speaks of terumath ma'aser. How, then, is "From all of your gifts shall you separate all the terumah of the L-rd" to be understood? As referring to terumath gedolah. (Devarim 18:4) "The first of your corn, your wine, and your oil … shall you give to him": This is obligatory. You say it is obligatory, but perhaps it is optional! It is, therefore, written (Bamidbar 11:29) "shall you separate all the terumah of the L-rd" — It is obligatory and not optional. These are the words of R. Yonathan. "from all of its best, its hallowed part from it.": So that if it (terumath ma'aser) fell (back) into it (what it was taken from), it "hallows" it — whence they ruled: Terumah is "neutralized" (from its hallowed state) if it fell into one hundred parts of non-terumah when (it is) one to (that) one hundred. This tells me only of terumah that is (ritually) clean. Whence do I derive (the same for) terumah that is tamei, (that if it fell into a hundred of clean terumah, it is neutralized in such a mixture?) It follows a fortiori, viz.: [Note: The translator, with all his consultation of the commentaries, has not been able to render meaningfully what follows (from here until #122)]
