## Ketubot Daf 25a

###### Ketubot 25a:1
[Ketubot 25a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/25a:1)

וְאֶלָּא, מַאי גְּדוֹלָה חֲזָקָה? מֵעִיקָּרָא אֲכוּל בִּתְרוּמָה דְּרַבָּנַן, הַשְׁתָּא אֲכוּל בִּתְרוּמָה דְּאוֹרָיְיתָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And what, then,** is the meaning of: **Great is** the legal authority of **presumptive status?** This is a standard case of presumptive status, as the practice of the priests remained as it was. There is nothing novel in the application of the principle of presumptive status in this case. The Gemara answers: **Initially,** in the Babylonian exile, they would **partake of *teruma*** taken from produce obligated **by rabbinic** law. **Now,** upon their return to Eretz Yisrael, **they partake of *teruma*** taken from produce obligated **by Torah** law: Grain, wine, and oil, based on their presumptive status.


###### Ketubot 25a:2
[Ketubot 25a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/25a:2)

וְאִי בָּעֵית אֵימָא: הַשְׁתָּא נָמֵי בִּתְרוּמָה דְּרַבָּנַן אֲכוּל, בִּתְרוּמָה דְּאוֹרָיְיתָא לָא אֲכוּל. וְכִי מַסְּקִינַן מִתְּרוּמָה לְיוּחֲסִין — בִּתְרוּמָה דְּאוֹרָיְיתָא, בִּתְרוּמָה דְּרַבָּנַן — לָא מַסְּקִינַן. וְאֶלָּא, מַאי גְּדוֹלָה חֲזָקָה? דְּאַף עַל גַּב דְּאִיכָּא לְמִיגְזַר מִשּׁוּם תְּרוּמָה דְּאוֹרָיְיתָא — לָא גָּזְרִינַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if you wish, say** instead: **Now too,** upon their return to Eretz Yisrael, **they partake of *teruma*** taken from produce obligated **by rabbinic** law. However, **of *teruma*** taken from produce obligated **by Torah** law **they may not partake. And when we elevate from *teruma* to lineage,** this is only **with regard to** one who partakes of ***teruma* by Torah** law. However, in the case of one who partakes of ***teruma* by rabbinic** law, **we do not elevate** him to priestly lineage. The Gemara asks: **And what,** then, is the meaning of: **Great is** the legal authority of **presumptive status?** The Gemara answers: It means that **although there is** reason **to issue a decree** in Eretz Yisrael prohibiting consumption of *teruma* by rabbinic law, **due to *teruma*** that is forbidden **by Torah** law, **we do not issue that decree** because: Great is the legal authority of presumptive status.


###### Ketubot 25a:3
[Ketubot 25a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/25a:3)

וּבַתְּרוּמָה דְּאוֹרָיְיתָא לָא אֲכוּל? וְהָא כְּתִיב: ״אֲשֶׁר לֹא יֹאכְלוּ מִקֹּדֶשׁ הַקֳּדָשִׁים״. מִקֹּדֶשׁ הַקֳּדָשִׁים הוּא דְּלָא אֲכוּל, הָא בִּתְרוּמָה דְּאוֹרָיְיתָא אֲכוּל!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And did they** in fact **not partake of *teruma* by Torah** law? **But isn’t it written: “That they should not partake of the most sacred items [*kodesh hakodashim*]”** (Ezra 2:63), from which it may be inferred: It is **of the most sacred items,** i.e., offerings, **that they did not partake; of *teruma* by Torah** law, **they did partake.**


###### Ketubot 25a:4
[Ketubot 25a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/25a:4)

הָכִי קָאָמַר: לָא בְּמִידֵּי דְּאִיקְּרִי ״קֹדֶשׁ״, דִּכְתִיב: ״וְכׇל זָר לֹא יֹאכַל קֹדֶשׁ״, וְלָא בְּמִידֵּי דְּאִיקְּרִי ״קָדָשִׁים״, דִּכְתִיב: ״וּבַת כֹּהֵן כִּי תִהְיֶה לְאִישׁ זָר הִיא בִּתְרוּמַת הַקֳּדָשִׁים לֹא תֹאכֵל״, וְאָמַר מָר: בְּמוּרָם מִן הַקֳּדָשִׁים — לֹא תֹאכֵל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers that **this is** what the verse **is saying: Neither** did they partake **of items called *kodesh*, as it is written: “And no common man may eat of *kodesh*”** (Leviticus 22:10), referring to *teruma*, **nor** did they partake **of items called *kodashim*, as it is written: “And if a priest’s daughter be married to a common man, she shall not eat of *terumat hakodashim*”** (Leviticus 22:12). **The Master said** that this means: **Of** that which is **set aside from the offerings [*kodashim*]** to the priests, i.e., the loaves of the thanks-offering and the breast and the shoulder, **they may not partake.** According to neither explanation can any proof be cited from the *baraita* as to whether or not one elevates from *teruma* or from the Priestly Benediction to lineage.


###### Ketubot 25a:5
[Ketubot 25a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/25a:5)

תָּא שְׁמַע: חֲזָקָה לִכְהוּנָּה — נְשִׂיאוּת כַּפַּיִם בְּבָבֶל, וַאֲכִילַת חַלָּה בְּסוּרְיָא, וְחִילּוּק מַתָּנוֹת בִּכְרַכִּין. קָתָנֵי מִיהַת נְשִׂיאוּת כַּפַּיִם, מַאי לָאו לְיוּחֲסִין? לָא, לִתְרוּמָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests: **Come** and **hear** proof from a *baraita*: **Presumptive status for priesthood** is established by **the lifting of hands in Babylonia;** by **partaking of *ḥalla* in Syria; and** by **distributing** priestly **gifts,** i.e., the foreleg, the jaw, and the maw, **in the cities. In any event,** the *tanna* **teaches** that **the lifting of hands** establishes the presumptive status of priesthood. The Gemara asks: **What,** does **it not** establish presumptive status **for lineage?** The Gemara answers: **No,** it establishes presumptive status **for *teruma*.**


###### Ketubot 25a:6
[Ketubot 25a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/25a:6)

וְהָא דּוּמְיָא דַּאֲכִילַת חַלָּה קָתָנֵי, מָה אֲכִילַת חַלָּה לְיוּחֲסִין — אַף נְשִׂיאוּת כַּפַּיִם לְיוּחֲסִין! לָא, אֲכִילַת חַלָּה גּוּפַהּ לִתְרוּמָה. קָסָבַר חַלָּה בִּזְמַן הַזֶּה דְּרַבָּנַן, וּתְרוּמָה דְּאוֹרָיְיתָא. וּמַסְּקִינַן מֵחַלָּה דְּרַבָּנַן לִתְרוּמָה דְּאוֹרָיְיתָא. וְכִדְאָפֵיךְ לְהוּ רַב הוּנָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב יְהוֹשֻׁעַ לְרַבָּנַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But isn’t** lifting of hands **taught parallel to partaking of *ḥalla*? Just as** with regard to **partaking of *ḥalla*** the *tanna* teaches that it establishes presumptive status **for lineage, so too** with regard to **the lifting of hands** the *tanna* teaches that it establishes presumptive status **for lineage.** The Gemara answers: **No, partaking of *ḥalla* itself** establishes presumptive status only **for *teruma*** and not for lineage. This *tanna* **holds** that **today** the obligation to separate ***ḥalla*** from dough **is by rabbinic** law **and** the obligation to separate ***teruma* is by Torah** law. The *tanna* teaches that **we elevate from *ḥalla*,** which is an obligation **by rabbinic** law, to ***teruma*,** which is **by Torah** law. **And** this explanation is **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua,** cited below, **who reversed** the opinion of **the Rabbis** and posited that *ḥalla* today is an obligation by rabbinic law.


###### Ketubot 25a:7
[Ketubot 25a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/25a:7)

תָּא שְׁמַע: חֲזָקָה לִכְהוּנָּה — נְשִׂיאוּת כַּפַּיִם וְחִילּוּק גֳּרָנוֹת בְּאֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל. וּבְסוּרְיָא, וּבְכׇל מָקוֹם שֶׁשְּׁלוּחֵי רֹאשׁ חוֹדֶשׁ מַגִּיעִין — נְשִׂיאוּת כַּפַּיִם רְאָיָה, אֲבָל לֹא חִילּוּק גֳּרָנוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests: **Come and hear** proof from a *baraita*: **Presumptive status for priesthood** is established **in Eretz Yisrael** by **the lifting of hands and distribution** of *teruma* at the **threshing floors. And in Syria and everyplace** outside Eretz Yisrael **that emissaries** informing residents of the Diaspora of sanctification of **the New Moon arrive, the lifting of hands** constitutes **proof** of presumptive status for priesthood, as the court would investigate the lineage of everyone who recited the Priestly Benediction. **But distribution** of *teruma* at the **threshing floors** does **not** constitute proof of that status. Since there is no obligation of *teruma* by Torah law, the courts were not as resolute in examining the lineage of those to whom *teruma* was distributed.


###### Ketubot 25a:8
[Ketubot 25a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/25a:8)

וּבָבֶל כְּסוּרְיָא. רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר: אַף אֲלֶכְּסַנְדְּרִיָּא שֶׁל מִצְרַיִם בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁבֵּית דִּין קְבוּעִין שָׁם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** the status in **Babylonia** is **like** that in **Syria,** as there, too, there are permanent courts that examine the lineage of those reciting the Priestly Benediction. **Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: Even Alexandria of Egypt initially** had the same status as Syria, **due to** the fact **that there** was **a permanent court there** ensuring that the lifting of hands was performed only by a priest.


###### Ketubot 25a:9
[Ketubot 25a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/25a:9)

קָתָנֵי מִיהַת נְשִׂיאוּת כַּפַּיִם, מַאי לָאו לְיוּחֲסִין? לָא, לְחַלָּה. הָא דּוּמְיָא דְּחִילּוּק גֳּרָנוֹת קָתָנֵי: מָה חִילּוּק גֳּרָנוֹת לְיוּחֲסִין, אַף נְשִׂיאוּת כַּפַּיִם לְיוּחֲסִין! לָא, חִילּוּק גֳּרָנוֹת גּוּפֵהּ לְחַלָּה. קָסָבַר תְּרוּמָה בַּזְּמַן הַזֶּה דְּרַבָּנַן, וְחַלָּה דְּאוֹרָיְיתָא. וּמַסְּקִינַן מִתְּרוּמָה דְּרַבָּנַן לְחַלָּה דְּאוֹרָיְיתָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**In any event,** the *tanna* **teaches** that **the lifting of hands** establishes the presumptive status of priesthood. The Gemara asks: **What,** does **it not** establish presumptive status **for lineage?** The Gemara answers: **No,** the lifting of hands establishes presumptive status **for *ḥalla*.** The Gemara asks: **But isn’t** the *halakha* of lifting of hands **taught parallel to** the *halakha* of **distribution** of *teruma* at the **threshing floors? Just as distribution** of *teruma* at the **threshing floors** in Eretz Yisrael establishes presumptive status **for lineage, so too, the lifting of hands** establishes presumptive status **for lineage.** The Gemara answers: **No, distribution** of *teruma* at the **threshing floors** establishes presumptive status only **for *ḥalla*** but not for lineage. This *tanna* **holds** that **today** the obligation to separate ***teruma* is by rabbinic** law, **and *ḥalla* is by Torah** law. The *tanna* teaches that **we elevate from *teruma*,** which is an obligation **by rabbinic** law, to ***ḥalla*,** which is **by Torah** law.


###### Ketubot 25a:10
[Ketubot 25a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/25a:10)

וְכִדְאַשְׁכְּחִינְהוּ רַב הוּנָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב יְהוֹשֻׁעַ לְרַבָּנַן. דְּאָמַר רַב הוּנָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב יְהוֹשֻׁעַ: אַשְׁכַּחְתִּינְהוּ לְרַבָּנַן בְּבֵי רַב, דְּיָתְבִי וְקָאָמְרִי: אֲפִילּוּ לְמַאן דְּאָמַר תְּרוּמָה בַּזְּמַן הַזֶּה דְּרַבָּנַן, חַלָּה דְּאוֹרָיְיתָא. שֶׁהֲרֵי שֶׁבַע שֶׁכִּיבְּשׁוּ וְשֶׁבַע שֶׁחִילְּקוּ — נִתְחַיְּיבוּ בְּחַלָּה, וְלֹא נִתְחַיְּיבוּ בִּתְרוּמָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** the dispute with regard to the legal status of *teruma* and *ḥalla* today is **as** in the incident **where Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, found** that this is the opinion of **the Rabbis, as Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, said: I found the Sages in the** study **hall of Rav, who were sitting and saying: Even according to the one who said that *teruma* today is** an obligation **by rabbinic** law, the obligation to separate ***ḥalla* is by Torah** law, **as** during the **seven** years **that** the Israelites **conquered** the land of Canaan led by Joshua **and** during the **seven** years **that they divided** the land, **they were obligated in *ḥalla* but were not obligated in *teruma*.** Today, too, although there is no obligation to take *teruma* in Eretz Yisrael by Torah law, the obligation to separate *ḥalla* is by Torah law.


###### Ketubot 25a:11
[Ketubot 25a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/25a:11)

וְאָמֵינָא לְהוּ אֲנָא: אַדְּרַבָּה, אֲפִילּוּ לְמַאן דְּאָמַר תְּרוּמָה בִּזְמַן הַזֶּה דְּאוֹרָיְיתָא — חַלָּה דְּרַבָּנַן. דְּתַנְיָא: ״בְּבוֹאֲכֶם אֶל הָאָרֶץ״. אִי ״בְּבוֹאֲכֶם״, יָכוֹל מִשֶּׁנִּכְנְסוּ לָהּ שְׁנַיִם וּשְׁלֹשָׁה מְרַגְּלִים — תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״בְּבוֹאֲכֶם״. בְּבִיאַת כּוּלְּכֶם אָמַרְתִּי, וְלֹא בְּבִיאַת מִקְצַתְכֶם. וְכִי אַסְּקִינְהוּ עֶזְרָא,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And I said to them: On the contrary, even according to the one who said that *teruma* today is** an obligation **by Torah** law, the obligation to separate ***ḥalla* is by rabbinic** law, **as it is taught** in a *baraita* with regard to the verse concerning *ḥalla*: **“When you come into the land**…from the first of your dough you should separate *teruma*” (Numbers 15:18–19). **If** the obligation is **when you come,** one **might** have thought that it took effect **from** the moment **that two or three spies entered** the land, therefore **the verse states: “When you come,”** from which it is derived that God is saying: **I said** that the obligation takes effect **with the coming of all of you and not with the coming of some of you.** Separating *ḥalla* is an obligation by Torah law only when the entire Jewish people comes to Eretz Yisrael, **and when Ezra took them up** to Eretz Yisrael at the beginning of the Second Temple period,