## Mishneh Torah, First Fruits and other Gifts to Priests Outside the Sanctuary Chapter 5

###### Mishneh Torah, First Fruits and other Gifts to Priests Outside the Sanctuary 5:1
[Mishneh Torah, First Fruits and other Gifts to Priests Outside the Sanctuary 5:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20First%20Fruits%20and%20other%20Gifts%20to%20Priests%20Outside%20the%20Sanctuary/r/5:1)

מִצְוַת עֲשֵׂה לְהַפְרִישׁ תְּרוּמָה מִן הָעִסָּה לַכֹּהֵן שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (במדבר טו כ) "רֵאשִׁית עֲרִסֹתֵיכֶם חַלָּה תָּרִימוּ תְרוּמָה". וְרֵאשִׁית זוֹ אֵין לָהּ שִׁעוּר מִן הַתּוֹרָה אֲפִלּוּ הִפְרִישׁ כִּשְׂעוֹרָה פָּטַר אֶת הָעִסָּה. וְהָעוֹשֶׂה כָּל עִסָּתוֹ חַלָּה לֹא עָשָׂה כְּלוּם עַד שֶׁיְּשַׁיֵּר מִקְצָתוֹ:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
It is a positive commandment to separate a portion that is raised up¹, for that term is also applied to *challah* in certain contexts. For that reason several of the laws that apply to *terumah* also apply to *challah*. from the dough [and given] to a priest,² (positive commandment 133) and *Sefer HaChinuch* (mitzvah 385) include this commandment among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. The Rambam considers separating the dough and giving it to the priests as two parts of the same mitzvah. The Ramban, by contrast, considers them as separate mitzvot. as [Numbers 15:20] states: "Raise up the first of your dough, the *challah*,³ because it also involves grain and is also called *terumah*. See Radbaz. as an offering...." According to Scriptural Law, this first portion does not have a minimum measure. Instead, even if one set aside a portion the size of a barley corn, he has absolved the entire dough. When a person designates his entire dough as *challah*, his deeds are of no consequence unless he leaves a portion of it [for himself].⁴ 1:9), based on the Jerusalem Talmud]. See also *Hilchot Terumah* 3:5 and note the contrast to Chapter 2, Halachah 17.

footnotes:
¹ This phrase translates the Hebrew terumah
² Sefer HaMitzvot
³ The heading of this set of halachot is "The Laws of the First Fruits and the Other Presents [Given] to Priests in the Outlying Areas." In the first four chapters, the Rambam discussed the first fruits. Now he proceeds to explain the other presents. He begins with challah
⁴ By calling it "the first," the Torah is implying that there is a second, i.e., that something is left over [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Challah


###### Mishneh Torah, First Fruits and other Gifts to Priests Outside the Sanctuary 5:2
[Mishneh Torah, First Fruits and other Gifts to Priests Outside the Sanctuary 5:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20First%20Fruits%20and%20other%20Gifts%20to%20Priests%20Outside%20the%20Sanctuary/r/5:2)

וּמִדִּבְרֵי סוֹפְרִים שֶׁמַּפְרִישִׁין אֶחָד מֵאַרְבָּעָה וְעֶשְׂרִים מִן הָעִסָּה כְּדֵי שֶׁיִּהְיֶה בָּהּ כְּדֵי מַתָּנָה לַכֹּהֵן שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים יח ד) "תִּתֶּן לּוֹ "תֵּן לוֹ דָּבָר הָרָאוּי לִתְּנוֹ מַתָּנָה. וְהַנַּחְתּוֹם הָעוֹשֶׂה לִמְכֹּר בַּשּׁוּק מַפְרִישׁ אֶחָד מִשְּׁמוֹנָה וְאַרְבָּעִים. לְפִי שֶׁעִסָּתוֹ מְרֻבָּה יֵשׁ בְּשִׁעוּר זֶה כְּדֵי מַתָּנָה:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
According to Rabbinic Law, one should separate one twenty-fourth of the dough, so that there will be a [significant] present for the priest. [This is derived from Deuteronomy 14:4 which] states: "Give him," i.e., give him something that is fit to be called a gift.
A baker who makes a dough to be sold in the market place should separate one forty-eighth. [The rationale is that] since his dough is larger,⁵ 2:7) gives another reason for the difference in measures. Ideally, the requirement would only be one forty-eighth. Nevertheless, generally, the one separating *challah* from the dough is a woman and women are by nature tightfisted. If they are told to give one twenty-fourth, they will ultimately give a forty-eighth. The *Siftei Cohen* 322:2 gives another reason for reducing the measure required of a baker. He is preparing the dough for profit and our Sages did not desire to cause him a loss. this measure contains [enough] to be a [significant] present.

footnotes:
⁵ The Jerusalem Talmud (Challah


###### Mishneh Torah, First Fruits and other Gifts to Priests Outside the Sanctuary 5:3
[Mishneh Torah, First Fruits and other Gifts to Priests Outside the Sanctuary 5:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20First%20Fruits%20and%20other%20Gifts%20to%20Priests%20Outside%20the%20Sanctuary/r/5:3)

הָעוֹשֶׂה עִסָּה לְמִשְׁתֵּה בְּנוֹ אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא מְרֻבֶּה מַפְרִישׁ אֶחָד מֵעֶשְׂרִים וְאַרְבָּעָה. שֶׁלֹּא לְחַלֵּק בְּעִסַּת בַּעַל הַבַּיִת. וְהַנַּחְתּוֹם שֶׁעָשָׂה עִסָּה קְטַנָּה אֶחָד מֵאַרְבָּעִים וּשְׁמוֹנֶה. שֶׁלֹּא לְחַלֵּק בְּעִסַּת הַנַּחְתּוֹם:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
Even when a private person makes dough for [the wedding] celebration of his son, he should separate one twenty-fourth even though it is large, so as not to make a distinction in [the requirements of] a dough made by a private person.⁶ [Conversely,] when a baker makes a small dough, [he must separate only] one forty-eighth, so as not to make a distinction in [the requirements of] a dough made by a baker.

footnotes:
⁶ Our Sages desired that their laws be uniform out of fear that once distinctions were made, individuals would ultimately give less than the desired amount.


###### Mishneh Torah, First Fruits and other Gifts to Priests Outside the Sanctuary 5:4
[Mishneh Torah, First Fruits and other Gifts to Priests Outside the Sanctuary 5:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20First%20Fruits%20and%20other%20Gifts%20to%20Priests%20Outside%20the%20Sanctuary/r/5:4)

נִטְמֵאת הָעִסָּה בְּשׁוֹגֵג אוֹ בְּאֹנֶס מַפְרִישׁ אֶחָד מֵאַרְבָּעִים וּשְׁמוֹנָה. וְאִם טִמְּאָהּ בְּזָדוֹן מַפְרִישׁ אֶחָד מִכ"ד כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יִהְיֶה חוֹטֵא נִשְׂכָּר. וְחַלָּה טְמֵאָה [מֻתֶּרֶת] (לַכֹּהֵן) לְהַסָּקָה כִּתְרוּמָה טְמֵאָה:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
If a dough became impure unknowingly or because of forces beyond one's control, one need not separate more than one forty-eighth.⁷ which is impure may not be eaten by a priest and may be used only as fuel. An ordinary person may, however, partake of a loaf made from impure dough. Hence, rather than waste the dough, it is preferable to give a smaller portion as *challah*. If he purposefully made it impure, he must separate a twenty-fourth, so that the sinner will not benefit.⁸
Impure *challah* is permitted to be used by a priest as kindling fuel like impure *terumah*.⁹ 11:1. At present, since all dough is impure, theoretically, this is the measure which should be given (*Siftei Cohen* 322:3). In practice, however, at present, even impure *challah* is not given to a priest.

footnotes:
⁷ Challah
⁸ I.e. the person separating the dough would benefit from it becoming impure, because he will have to give a smaller portion to the priest.
⁹ See Hilchot Terumah


###### Mishneh Torah, First Fruits and other Gifts to Priests Outside the Sanctuary 5:5
[Mishneh Torah, First Fruits and other Gifts to Priests Outside the Sanctuary 5:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20First%20Fruits%20and%20other%20Gifts%20to%20Priests%20Outside%20the%20Sanctuary/r/5:5)

אֵין חַיָּבִין בְּחַלָּה מִן הַתּוֹרָה אֶלָּא בְּאֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל בִּלְבַד שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (במדבר טו יט) "וְהָיָה בַּאֲכָלְכֶם מִלֶּחֶם הָאָרֶץ" וְגוֹ'. וּבִזְמַן שֶׁכָּל יִשְׂרָאֵל שָׁם שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (במדבר טו יח) "בְּבֹאֲכֶם" בִּיאַת כֻּלְּכֶם וְלֹא בִּיאַת מִקְצַתְכֶם. לְפִיכָךְ חַלָּה בַּזְּמַן הַזֶּה אֲפִלּוּ בִּימֵי עֶזְרָא בְּאֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל אֵינָהּ אֶלָּא מִדִּבְרֵיהֶם כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ בִּתְרוּמָה:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
According to Scriptural law, we are only obligated to separate *challah* in *Eretz Yisrael*, as [Numbers 15:19] states: "When you partake of the bread of the land...," and only when the entire Jewish people are located there, as [*ibid.*:18] states: "When you enter," i.e., when you all enter and not only when a portion of you enter. For this reason, in the present era - and even in the era of Ezra¹⁰ in *Eretz Yisrael* - [the observance of] *challah* is only a Rabbinic decree, as we explained with regard to *terumah*.¹¹ 1:5, 26. Even the Ra'avad, who differs with the Rambam with regard to *terumah*, finds this position acceptable with regard to *challah*. See also *Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah* 20:3.

footnotes:
¹⁰ Who led the return to Zion after the Babylonian exile.
¹¹ See Hilchot Terumah


###### Mishneh Torah, First Fruits and other Gifts to Priests Outside the Sanctuary 5:6
[Mishneh Torah, First Fruits and other Gifts to Priests Outside the Sanctuary 5:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20First%20Fruits%20and%20other%20Gifts%20to%20Priests%20Outside%20the%20Sanctuary/r/5:6)

פֵּרוֹת חוּצָה לָאָרֶץ שֶׁנִּכְנְסוּ לָאָרֶץ חַיָּבִין בְּחַלָּה. וּפֵרוֹת הָאָרֶץ שֶׁיָּצְאוּ חוּצָה לָאָרֶץ פְּטוּרִין שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (במדבר טו יח) "אֲשֶׁר אֲנִי מֵבִיא אֶתְכֶם שָׁמָּה" שָׁמָּה אַתֶּם חַיָּבִין בֵּין עַל פֵּרוֹת הָאָרֶץ בֵּין עַל פֵּרוֹת חוּצָה לָאָרֶץ:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
When the produce of the Diaspora is brought to *Eretz [Yisrael]*, *challah* must be separated from it.¹². The converse applies with regard to the following clause. The dough must be made in the Diaspora (Radbaz). When produce from *Eretz [Yisrael]*, are brought to the Diaspora, they are exempt.¹³ must be separated from such dough by Rabbinic decree. The *Kessef Mishneh* states that this is obvious from the following halachah. [This is derived from *ibid.*:] "to which I will bring you." [Implied is that in that land,] you are liable, whether for the produce of the land itself or for that of other lands.

footnotes:
¹² Provided the dough is made in Eretz Yisrael
¹³ The Ra'avad maintains that challah


###### Mishneh Torah, First Fruits and other Gifts to Priests Outside the Sanctuary 5:7
[Mishneh Torah, First Fruits and other Gifts to Priests Outside the Sanctuary 5:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20First%20Fruits%20and%20other%20Gifts%20to%20Priests%20Outside%20the%20Sanctuary/r/5:7)

מַפְרִישִׁין חַלָּה בְּחוּצָה לָאָרֶץ מִדִּבְרֵי סוֹפְרִים כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא תִּשְׁתַּכַּח תּוֹרַת חַלָּה מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל. וְאֵין מְבִיאִין חַלּוֹת חוּצָה לָאָרֶץ לָאָרֶץ כְּשֵׁם שֶׁאֵין מְבִיאִין תְּרוּמָה וּבִכּוּרִים מִשָּׁם. וְאִם הֵבִיא מַנִּיחָהּ עַד עֶרֶב הַפֶּסַח וְתִשָּׂרֵף כִּתְרוּמָה:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
*Challah* should also be separated in the Diaspora by Rabbinic decree so that the Jewish people will not forget the laws of *challah. Challah* from the Diaspora should not be brought to *Eretz Yisrael*, just as *terumah*¹⁴ 2:17. Since the Diaspora is ritually impure by Rabbinic decree, any dough brought from there to *Eretz Yisrael* would be consigned to destruction. However, it should not be burnt immediately, because we do not know that it definitely contracted ritual impurity in *Eretz Yisrael*, and it is forbidden to burn *challah* unnecessarily. Nor may it be returned to the Diaspora, lest people think it is permitted to take *challah* from *Eretz Yisrael* to the Diaspora [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (*Challah* 4:10)]. and first fruits¹⁵ from there should not be brought [to *Eretz Yisrael*]. If one should bring [such *challah*], it should be left to the day before Pesach and burned¹⁶, "leavened," it must be destroyed before the onset of the Pesach holiday. like *terumah*.

footnotes:
¹⁴ See Hilchot Terumah
¹⁵ See Chapter 2, Halachah 1.
¹⁶ Since the dough is chametz


###### Mishneh Torah, First Fruits and other Gifts to Priests Outside the Sanctuary 5:8
[Mishneh Torah, First Fruits and other Gifts to Priests Outside the Sanctuary 5:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20First%20Fruits%20and%20other%20Gifts%20to%20Priests%20Outside%20the%20Sanctuary/r/5:8)

שְׁלֹשָׁה דִּינִין לְחַלָּה בְּשָׁלֹשׁ אֲרָצוֹת. כָּל הָאָרֶץ שֶׁהֶחֱזִיקוּ בָּהּ עוֹלֵי בָּבֶל עַד כְּזִיב מַפְרִישִׁין בָּהּ חַלָּה אַחַת כַּשִּׁעוּר וְהִיא נֶאֱכֶלֶת לַכֹּהֲנִים. וּשְׁאָר אֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁהֶחֱזִיקוּ בָּהּ עוֹלֵי מִצְרַיִם וְלֹא עוֹלֵי בָּבֶל שֶׁהִיא מִכְּזִיב וְעַד אֲמָנָה מַפְרִישִׁין בָּהּ שְׁתֵּי חַלּוֹת הָאַחַת נִשְׂרֶפֶת וְהָאַחַת נֶאֱכֶלֶת. וּמִפְּנֵי מָה מַפְרִישִׁין בָּהּ שְׁתֵּי חַלּוֹת מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהַחַלָּה הָרִאשׁוֹנָה טְמֵאָה שֶׁהֲרֵי לֹא נִתְקַדְּשָׁה אוֹתָהּ הָאָרֶץ בִּימֵי עֶזְרָא. וּקְדֻשָּׁה רִאשׁוֹנָה בָּטְלָה מִשֶּׁגָּלוּ. וְהוֹאִיל וְהִיא אֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל מַפְרִישִׁין בָּהּ חַלָּה אֶחָד מֵאַרְבָּעִים וּשְׁמוֹנָה וְשׂוֹרְפִין אוֹתָהּ. וּמַפְרִישִׁין חַלָּה שְׁנִיָּה וְנוֹתְנִין אוֹתָהּ לַכֹּהֵן לְאָכְלָהּ. כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יֹאמְרוּ תְּרוּמָה טְהוֹרָה נִשְׂרֶפֶת שֶׁהֲרֵי נִשְׂרְפָה הָרִאשׁוֹנָה אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא נִטְמְאָה טֻמְאָה יְדוּעָה לַכּל. וְזוֹ שְׁנִיָּה אֵין לָהּ שִׁעוּר אֶלָּא כָּל שֶׁרוֹצֶה מַפְרִישׁ מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהִיא מִדִּבְרֵיהֶם. וְכָל הָאָרֶץ מֵאֲמָנָה וְלַחוּץ בֵּין בְּסוּרְיָא בֵּין בִּשְׁאָר הָאֲרָצוֹת מַפְרִישִׁין שְׁתֵּי חַלּוֹת. אַחַת לִשְׂרֵפָה כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יֹאמְרוּ רָאִינוּ תְּרוּמָה טְמֵאָה נֶאֱכֶלֶת. וְאַחַת לַאֲכִילָה כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא תִּשְׁתַּכַּח תּוֹרַת חַלָּה מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל. וְהוֹאִיל וְזוֹ וְזוֹ מִדִּבְרֵיהֶם מוּטָב לְרַבּוֹת בַּנֶּאֱכֶלֶת לְפִיכָךְ שֶׁל שְׂרֵפָה אֵין לָהּ שִׁעוּר אֶלָּא כָּל שֶׁהוּא. וְשֶׁל אֲכִילָה אֶחָד מִמ"ח. וּמֻתֶּרֶת לְזָבִים וּלְזָבוֹת וְאֵין צָרִיךְ לוֹמַר לִשְׁאָר טְמֵאִים:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
There are three different sets of laws that apply to *challah* in three different lands. In the entire area that was settled by those who returned from Babylonia until Kziv,¹⁷ 1:8. one *challah* should be separated according to the appropriate measure¹⁸ and the priests may partake of it. In the remaining portions of *Eretz Yisrael* that were settled by the Jews who came out of Egypt, but not by those who returned from Babylonia - i.e., from Kziv until Amanah¹⁹ 1:7. - two *challot* should be separated. One should be burnt and one should be eaten.
Why do we separate two *challot* there? Because the first *challah* is impure, because this land was not sanctified in the time of Ezra and the first sanctification was nullified after the Jews were exiled.²⁰ [Nevertheless,] since [the land] is from *Eretz Yisrael*, a *challah* - one forty-eighth [of the dough] is separated and is burnt. A second *challah* is also separated and given to a priest to eat, so that people will not say that pure *terumah* should be burnt. For the first *challah* was burnt even though it did not contract impurity in a manner that was known to all.²¹, not everyone knows that it is impure like the Diaspora. This second *challah* does not have a minimum measure. Instead, one may separate whatever he desires, because it is a Rabbinic ordinance.
In all of the lands from Amanah and beyond, whether in Syria²² are observed. See *Hilchot Terumah* 1:4. or other lands, two *challot* should be separated: One is burnt so that people should not say we saw impure *terumah* being eaten²³ and one is eaten so that the laws of *challah* will not be forgotten by the Jewish people. [Since] both of these are Rabbinic institutions, it is preferable to make the one that is eaten larger.²⁴ Accordingly, there is no minimum measure for the one that is burnt. Even the slightest amount [is acceptable]. The one which is eaten should be one forty-eighth [of the dough]. It is permitted to be eaten by *zavim* and *zavot*²⁵ when he has an emission from his urinary tract similar, but not identical to that which results from gonorrhea. A woman becomes a *zavah* when she experiences vaginal bleeding at times other than would be expected due to her menstrual cycle. In both cases, the individuals are ritually impure. See Leviticus, ch. 15.- and needless to say, other people who are ritually impure.²⁶ is forbidden to any priest who is ritually impure, citing his statements in *Hilchot Terumah* 7:8.
The Rambam's ruling here appears to differ from his ruling in that source. The *Kessef Mishneh* explains that the leniency here applies only after the priests have immersed in a *mikveh*. The Radbaz explains that here we are speaking about two *challot*, with one being burnt. Hence the one given to the priest may be eaten.

footnotes:
¹⁷ See Hilchot Terumah
¹⁸ See Halachah 2.
¹⁹ See Hilchot Terumah
²⁰ Thus in a strict halachic sense, this land has the status of the Diaspora.
²¹ Since this land was once Eretz Yisrael
²² Where certain of the agricultural laws that must be observed in Eretz Yisrael
²³ For everyone knows that the Diaspora is impure.
²⁴ So that food is not wasted.
²⁵ A man becomes a zav
²⁶ In certain instances, a distinction is made between impurity that results from a physical condition in one's body - such as the above - and other types of impurity (see Halachah 10). However, no such distinction is made here.The Ra'avad differs with this ruling and maintains that the challah


###### Mishneh Torah, First Fruits and other Gifts to Priests Outside the Sanctuary 5:9
[Mishneh Torah, First Fruits and other Gifts to Priests Outside the Sanctuary 5:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20First%20Fruits%20and%20other%20Gifts%20to%20Priests%20Outside%20the%20Sanctuary/r/5:9)

בַּזְּמַן הַזֶּה שֶׁאֵין שָׁם עִסָּה טְהוֹרָה מִפְּנֵי טֻמְאַת הַמֵּת מַפְרִישִׁין חַלָּה אַחַת בְּכָל אֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶחָד מִמ"ח וְשׂוֹרְפִין אוֹתָהּ מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהִיא טְמֵאָה וְיֵשׁ לָהּ שֵׁם מִן הַתּוֹרָה. וּמִכְּזִיב עַד אֲמָנָה מַפְרִישִׁין שְׁנִיָּה לַכֹּהֵן לַאֲכִילָה וְאֵין לָהּ שִׁעוּר, כְּשֶׁהָיָה הַדָּבָר מִקֹּדֶם:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
In the present age when there is no pure dough,²⁷ and also makes for an easier reading of the text. because of the impurity [imparted] by a human corpse,²⁸ one *challah* - one forty-eighth [of the dough]²⁹ that became impure because of factors beyond one's control (Halachah 4). - is separated in all *Eretz Yisrael* [in the present era]. [This applies even though] it is burnt, because it is impure, since the fundamental obligation to separate it is Scriptural.³⁰ in *Eretz Yisrael* is Rabbinic in origin (Halachah 5). Nevertheless, since the original obligation there was Scriptural, the *challah* that is separated must have a minimum measure even though it is burnt. As was the law in previous ages, from Kziv to Amanah, a second *challah* is also separated for a priest to eat.³¹ There is no mimimum measure for it.

footnotes:
²⁷ The shifting of this phrase from the previous halachah to this halachah is based on authoritative manuscripts of the Mishneh Torah
²⁸ Which affects everyone in the present age, for we do not have a red heifer to purify ourselves.
²⁹ As is the law with regard to challah
³⁰ At present the obligation to separate challah
³¹ Although at present, everyone knows that all the people living there are ritually impure, no deviation was made from the original ruling.


###### Mishneh Torah, First Fruits and other Gifts to Priests Outside the Sanctuary 5:10
[Mishneh Torah, First Fruits and other Gifts to Priests Outside the Sanctuary 5:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20First%20Fruits%20and%20other%20Gifts%20to%20Priests%20Outside%20the%20Sanctuary/r/5:10)

חַלַּת חוּצָה לָאָרֶץ אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהִיא טְמֵאָה הוֹאִיל וְעִקַּר חִיּוּבָהּ מִדִּבְרֵיהֶם אֵינָהּ אֲסוּרָה בַּאֲכִילָה אֶלָּא עַל כֹּהֵן שֶׁטֻּמְאָה יוֹצְאָה עָלָיו מִגּוּפוֹ וְהֵם בַּעֲלֵי קְרָיִין וְזָבִים וְזָבוֹת וְנִדּוֹת וְיוֹלְדוֹת וּמְצֹרָעִין. אֲבָל שְׁאָר הַטְּמֵאִים בְּמַגַּע שְׁאָר הַטֻּמְאוֹת אֲפִלּוּ טְמֵאֵי מֵת מֻתָּרִים לְאָכְלָהּ. לְפִיכָךְ אִם הָיָה שָׁם כֹּהֵן קָטָן בְּחוּצָה לָאָרֶץ בֵּין בְּסוּרְיָא בֵּין בִּשְׁאָר אֲרָצוֹת וְרָצָה לְהַפְרִישׁ חַלָּה אַחַת מַפְרִישׁ אֶחָד מִמ"ח. וְנֶאֱכֶלֶת לְקָטָן שֶׁעֲדַיִן לֹא רָאָה קֶרִי אוֹ לִקְטַנָּה שֶׁעֲדַיִן לֹא רָאֲתָה נִדָּה. וְאֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ לְהַפְרִישׁ שְׁנִיָּה:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
Although *challah* from the Diaspora is impure, since its fundamental requirement is a Rabbinic ordinance,³² it is forbidden to be eaten only by priests who are impure because of impurity that result from a physical condition.³³ 4:8)]. See also *Hilchot Terumot* 7:8-9. As mentioned there, the Ra'avad differs with this ruling. These include [priests] who had a seminal emission, *zavim, zavot, niddot,*³⁴ women who give birth, and people afflicted by *tzara'at*.³⁵ Others who are impure because they have been in contact with other sources of impurity, even those who are impure because of contact with a corpse, are permitted to partake of it.
Accordingly, if there was a priest who was a minor in the Diaspora - whether in Syria or in other lands - and one desired to separate [only] one *challah*, he could separate one forty-eighth of the dough. It could be eaten by a priest who is a minor who never had a seminal emission or a female from the priestly family who never menstruated. The person need not separate a second [*challah*].³⁶, the law is more stringent than in Halachah 8, which can be eaten by priests with this level of impurity (Radbaz).

footnotes:
³² For according to Scriptural Law, there is no need to separate it.
³³ Because there is a more serious dimension to their ritual impurity [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Challah
³⁴ A woman who is impure because of menstrual bleeding.
³⁵ A skin malady resembling - but not entirely similar to - leprosy which renders a person ritually impure.
³⁶ To be burnt. Since he is not separating a second challah


###### Mishneh Torah, First Fruits and other Gifts to Priests Outside the Sanctuary 5:11
[Mishneh Torah, First Fruits and other Gifts to Priests Outside the Sanctuary 5:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20First%20Fruits%20and%20other%20Gifts%20to%20Priests%20Outside%20the%20Sanctuary/r/5:11)

וְכֵן אִם הָיָה שָׁם כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל שֶׁטָּבַל מִשִּׁכְבַת זַרְעוֹ אוֹ מִזִּיבָתוֹ אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא הֶעֱרִיב שִׁמְשׁוֹ וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא טְמֵא מֵת הֲרֵי זֶה מֻתָּר לֶאֱכל הַחַלָּה הָרִאשׁוֹנָה וְאֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ לְהַפְרִישׁ שְׁנִיָּה בְּחוּצָה לָאָרֶץ. כָּל הַמַּפְרִישׁ חַלָּה מְבָרֵךְ תְּחִלָּה אֲשֶׁר קִדְּשָׁנוּ בְּמִצְוֹתָיו וְצִוָּנוּ לְהַפְרִישׁ חַלָּה בֵּין בָּאָרֶץ בֵּין בְּחוּצָה לָאָרֶץ. וּכְשֵׁם שֶׁמְּבָרֵךְ עַל הַטְּהוֹרָה כָּךְ מְבָרֵךְ עַל הַטְּמֵאָה. לְפִיכָךְ אֵין הָאִישׁ עֵרוֹם מַפְרִישׁ חַלָּה שֶׁאֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לְבָרֵךְ. אֲבָל הָאִשָּׁה הָעֲרוּמָה שֶׁיָּשְׁבָה וְכָל פָּנֶיהָ טוּחוֹת בַּקַּרְקַע מְבָרֶכֶת וּמַפְרֶשֶׁת חַלָּה:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
Similarly, if a priest who was an adult immersed himself [in a *mikveh* and thus purified himself from the impurity resulting from] the emission of semen or *zivut*, he may partake of this first *challah*. Then [the one who separated it] need not separate a second *challah* in the Diaspora. [This applies] even though the sun has not set [after he immersed himself]³⁷ until sunset of the day he immersed himself (*Hilchot Terumah* 7:4).
The Rambam's ruling is quoted by the *Shulchan Aruch* (*Yoreh De'ah* 322:5). The Rama cites the opinion of Rabbenu Nissan who requires the priest to wait until sunset. and although he remains ritually impure due to the impurity imparted by a corpse.³⁸. The *Shulchan Aruch* (*Yoreh De'ah* 322:3-5) quotes the Rambam's rulings in all the above matters. The Rama writes that since at present, it is not customary to partake of *challah* in any place, even in *Eretz Yisrael*, only one *challah* is separated. There is no minimum measure to it (although it is desirable that it be the size of an olive). This *challah* is burnt. Anyone who separates *challah* should recite the blessing: "[Blessed are You...] Who sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us to separate *challah*."³⁹," for *challah* is also referred to as *terumah*. The *Shulchan Aruch* (*Yoreh De'ah* 328:1) quotes the Ra'avad's ruling. The Rama states that the Rambam's version of the blessing is also acceptable. The *Turei Zahav* and the *Siftei Cohen* 328:1 speak of a conclusion that combines both terms "to separate *terumah, challah*." [This applies both] in *Eretz Yisrael* and in the Diaspora.⁴⁰ in the Diaspora is only Rabbinic in origin, it is appropriate to recite a blessing, as it is appropriate to do so when fulfilling other Rabbinic commandments (Radbaz). Just as one recites a blessing when [separating *challah* that] is ritually pure, he should recite a blessing when separating the impure.
Therefore a naked man should not separate *challah*, because he may not recite the blessing.⁴¹ A naked woman who is sitting with her entire genital area covered by the ground may separate *challah* and recite a blessing.⁴²

footnotes:
³⁷ And a priest who immersed himself to emerge from ritual impurity could not partake of terumah
³⁸ For purification from such impurity requires the ashes of the Red Heifer and those were not available after the destruction of the Temple.The Ra'avad differs with this ruling as well and maintains that even after immersing, such a priest may not partake of challah
³⁹ The Ra'avad states that one should conclude "to separate terumah
⁴⁰ Even though the obligation to separate challah
⁴¹ And it is not fitting to observe a mitzvah without reciting a blessing.
⁴² For her nakedness is covered by the ground. A man's, by contrast, projects outward.


###### Mishneh Torah, First Fruits and other Gifts to Priests Outside the Sanctuary 5:12
[Mishneh Torah, First Fruits and other Gifts to Priests Outside the Sanctuary 5:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20First%20Fruits%20and%20other%20Gifts%20to%20Priests%20Outside%20the%20Sanctuary/r/5:12)

הַנִּדָּה וְכַיּוֹצֵא בָּהּ מְבָרֶכֶת וּמַפְרֶשֶׁת חַלַּת חוּצָה לָאָרֶץ שֶׁאֵינָהּ מֻזְהֶרֶת עַל מַגָּעָהּ אֶלָּא עַל אֲכִילָתָהּ. וְאִם הָיָה שָׁם כֹּהֵן קָטָן אוֹ כֹּהֵן שֶׁטָּבַל שֶׁהִיא מֻתֶּרֶת לוֹ לַאֲכִילָה כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ הֲרֵי זֶה מֻתָּר לְאָכְלָהּ עִם הַזָּר עַל שֻׁלְחָן אֶחָד לְפִי שֶׁאֵינָהּ מְדַמַּעַת. וַאֲפִלּוּ נִתְעָרְבָה שָׁוֶה בְּשָׁוֶה. וְנוֹתְנִין אוֹתָהּ לְכֹהֵן עַם הָאָרֶץ מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהִיא טְמֵאָה בַּאֲוִיר אֶרֶץ הָעַמִּים [וְאֵין בָּהּ מִשּׁוּם כֹּהֵן הַמְּסַיֵּעַ בְּמַתְּנוֹתָיו שֶׁהוּא אָסוּר. וְאִם רָצָה לֶאֱכל תְּחִלָּה] וְאַחַר כָּךְ יַפְרִישׁ הַחַלָּה בְּחוּץ לָאָרֶץ מֻתָּר שֶׁאֵין עִקָּרָהּ אֶלָּא מִדִּבְרֵיהֶם:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
A *niddah* and the like⁴³ may recite a blessing and separate *challah* in the Diaspora. For she is not cautioned against touching the *challah*,⁴⁴ only against partaking of it. If there is a priest who was a minor or [an adult] priest who immersed himself who is permitted to partake of it as we explained,⁴⁵ he may partake of it, [eating] together with a non-priest at the same table. [The rationale is that] it does not create a forbidden mixture,⁴⁶ used by the Rambam refers to a mixture of *terumah* (or *challah* of Scriptural status) with other substances. even if there are equal quantities of it and ordinary food.⁴⁷). In this instance, it is not necessary to have a majority of permitted food, half and half is sufficient, for this *challah* is forbidden only as a Rabbinic injunction.
The Radbaz and the *Kessef Mishneh* explain that although *Bechorot* 27a indicates that a majority is necessary, the Rambam's ruling is based on the Jerusalem Talmud (*Challah* 4:8), from which it is evident that half and half is acceptable. Moreover, the *Tur* (*Yoreh De'ah* 323) states that according to the Rambam's understanding that at the outset, it is permitted to nullify a Rabbinic prohibition, one may intentionally make such a mixture.
The Rambam's ruling is cited by the *Shulchan Aruch* (*Yoreh De'ah* 323:1). The *Tur* and the Rama cite Rabbenu Asher's view that, like *terumah*, there must be 101 times the forbidden amount before the *challah* is nullified. It may be given to an unlearned priest⁴⁸ 6:2, an unlearned priest is unfamiliar with and/or careless in the observance of the laws of ritual purity. Hence, he is not given *terumah*, lest he cause it to become impure. because [the woman] is impure because of the air of the Diaspora, and the prohibition against a priest actively seeking to receive his presents⁴⁹ 27a is "[the decree against] a priest helping in the granary does not apply to him." As stated in *Hilchot Terumah* 12:19, our Sages forbade that because it would appear that he is working for the *terumah*. Instead, the *terumah* should be given him in a manner that connotes respect and reverence. does not apply in this instance.
If a person desires to eat first and then separate the *challah* in the Diaspora, he is permitted, for the fundamental obligation is Rabbinic in origin.⁵⁰ (or *terumah*) afterwards is forbidden. As explained in *Hilchot Terumah* 1:21, the principle of *bereirah* - that retroactively, an action performed afterwards is considered as if it was performed at the outset - applies only with regard to matters of Rabbinic Law and not with regard to matters of Scriptural Law.
The *Siftei Cohen* 323:1 emphasizes that the leniencies in this halachah apply only with regard to *challah* from the Diaspora, for there never was an obligation to separate it according to Scriptural Law. Although, at present, separating *challah* in *Eretz Yisrael* is also a Rabbinic obligation, since originally the obligation was Scriptural, none of these leniencies are granted.

footnotes:
⁴³ I.e., the individuals who are impure because of a physical condition mentioned in Halachah 10.
⁴⁴ Although her touch would render an article ritually impure, it is ritually impure regardless because we are all impure due to contact with a human corpse. Hence, there is no difficulty with her touching it.
⁴⁵ See Halachot 10-11.
⁴⁶ The term midama'at
⁴⁷ I.e., according to Scriptural Law, the presence of a forbidden substance is nullified when it is mixed with a greater quantity of permitted substances (bittul berov
⁴⁸ As stated in Hilchot Terumah
⁴⁹ Our translation is slightly loose. The literal meaning of the Rambam's words, quoted from Bechorot
⁵⁰ When the obligation is Scriptural in origin, partaking of the food on the basis of a stipulation that one will separate challah


###### Mishneh Torah, First Fruits and other Gifts to Priests Outside the Sanctuary 5:13
[Mishneh Torah, First Fruits and other Gifts to Priests Outside the Sanctuary 5:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20First%20Fruits%20and%20other%20Gifts%20to%20Priests%20Outside%20the%20Sanctuary/r/5:13)

הַחַלָּה נִקְרֵאת תְּרוּמָה לְפִיכָךְ אֵינָהּ נִטֶּלֶת אֶלָּא מִן הַמֻּקָּף כִּתְרוּמָה. וְאֵינָהּ נִטֶּלֶת מִן הַטָּהוֹר עַל הַטָּמֵא לְכַתְּחִלָּה:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
*Challah* is called *terumah*. Therefore it may only be separated from [dough] in the same location⁵¹ 1:9). like *terumah*.⁵² 3:17. And as an initial preference, one may not separate pure [dough as *challah*] for impure dough.⁵³ 5:7. After the fact, however, the separation is effective.

footnotes:
⁵¹ Our translation is taken from the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Challah
⁵² See Hilchot Terumah
⁵³ See Hilchot Terumah


###### Mishneh Torah, First Fruits and other Gifts to Priests Outside the Sanctuary 5:14
[Mishneh Torah, First Fruits and other Gifts to Priests Outside the Sanctuary 5:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20First%20Fruits%20and%20other%20Gifts%20to%20Priests%20Outside%20the%20Sanctuary/r/5:14)

וְכָל שֶׁאָמַרְנוּ בִּתְרוּמָה לֹא יִתְרֹם וְאִם תָּרַם אֵינָהּ תְּרוּמָה כָּךְ בְּחַלָּה. וְכָל שֶׁאָמַרְנוּ בִּתְרוּמָה לֹא יִתְרֹם מִזֶּה עַל זֶה כָּךְ בְּחַלָּה. וְכָל שֶׁאֵינוֹ אוֹכֵל תְּרוּמָה אֵינוֹ אוֹכֵל חַלָּה. וְכָל הָאוֹכֵל תְּרוּמָה אוֹכֵל חַלָּה:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
All of those individuals concerning whom it was said they should not separate *terumah* and if they separate it, the separation is invalid,⁵⁴ from produce belonging to a Jew, even with his permission, and a person who separated *terumah* from produce that does not belong to him without the owner's permission (*Hilchot Terumah* 4:2). are governed by the same laws with regard to *challah*. In all situations concerning which it was said that *terumah* should not be separated from this type of produce for another,⁵⁵, ch. 5. *challah* should also not be separated. Whoever may not partake of *terumah*,⁵⁶ may not partake of *challah*. Whoever may partake of *terumah*⁵⁷ may partake of *challah*.

footnotes:
⁵⁴ A deaf-mute, a mentally or emotionally unstable person, a minor, a gentile who separated terumah
⁵⁵ See Hilchot Terumah
⁵⁶ A non-priest and an impure person.
⁵⁷ A priest, his wife, and his servants.


###### Mishneh Torah, First Fruits and other Gifts to Priests Outside the Sanctuary 5:15
[Mishneh Torah, First Fruits and other Gifts to Priests Outside the Sanctuary 5:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20First%20Fruits%20and%20other%20Gifts%20to%20Priests%20Outside%20the%20Sanctuary/r/5:15)

הַסּוּמָא וְהַשִּׁכּוֹר מַפְרִישִׁין חַלָּה לְכַתְּחִלָּה שֶׁאֵין בְּעִסָּה רַע וְיָפֶה כְּדֵי שֶׁיְּכַוְּנוּ וְיַפְרִישׁוּ מִן הַיָּפֶה:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
A blind person and an intoxicated person⁵⁸ 29:18. may separate *challah* as an initial preference. For with regard to dough, there is no inferior or superior portions that he must distinguish and separate from the superior portion.⁵⁹, such individuals are told not to separate *terumah* as an initial preference, because *terumah* must be separated from the superior produce and they are incapable of making that distinction (*Hilchot Terumah* 4:4). Nevertheless, this rationale does not apply with regard to *challah*.

footnotes:
⁵⁸ We are speaking of a person who is still in control of his faculties, but whose judgment is slightly blurred. If he loses control of his faculties entirely, he is considered as an emotionally unstable person. See Hilchot Mechirah
⁵⁹ I.e., with regard to terumah