## Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings Chapter 7

###### Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:1
[Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Heave%20Offerings/r/7:1)

כֹּהֵן טָמֵא אָסוּר לֶאֱכל תְּרוּמָה בֵּין טְמֵאָה בֵּין טְהוֹרָה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא כב ד) "אִישׁ אִישׁ מִזֶּרַע אַהֲרֹן וְהוּא צָרוּעַ אוֹ זָב בַּקֳדָשִׁים לֹא יֹאכַל". אֵי זֶהוּ קֹדֶשׁ שֶׁאוֹכְלִין אוֹתוֹ כָּל זֶרַע אַהֲרֹן זְכָרִים וּנְקֵבוֹת הֱוֵי אוֹמֵר זוֹ תְּרוּמָה. אֶלָּא שֶׁכָּל טָמֵא הָאוֹכֵל תְּרוּמָה טְהוֹרָה חַיָּב מִיתָה בִּידֵי שָׁמַיִם. וּלְפִיכָךְ לוֹקֶה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא כב ט) "וְשָׁמְרוּ אֶת מִשְׁמַרְתִּי וְלֹא יִשְׂאוּ עָלָיו חֵטְא". וְטָמֵא שֶׁאָכַל תְּרוּמָה טְמֵאָה אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא בְּלָאו אֵינוֹ לוֹקֶה שֶׁהֲרֵי אֵינָהּ קֹדֶשׁ:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
A priest who is ritually impure is forbidden to partake of *terumah* whether it is ritually pure or ritually impure,¹ (Negative Commandment 136) and *Sefer HaChinuch* (Mitzvah 279) include this as one of 613 mitzvot of the Torah. as [Leviticus 22:4] states: "Any person from the seed of Aaron who is afflicted with *tzaraat*² is a physical affliction resembling, but not identical with leprosy, that comes as a result of gossip and imparts ritual impurity. or is a *zav*³ may not partake of consecrated food." Which consecrated food may be eaten by all the descendants of Aaron, both male and female? We must say: *terumah*.⁴ 74b).
[Thus] any impure person who eats *terumah* that is ritually pure is liable for death at the hand of heaven. Therefore he is given lashes,⁵ as [*ibid.*:9] states: "And you shall protect My charge and not bear sin because of it [and die because of it]."
When an impure person partakes of *terumah* that is ritually impure, he does not receive lashes, although he transgresses a negative commandment,⁶ 83a,b emphasizes that an impure priest is not liable for death for partaking of impure *terumah*, the Rambam concludes that a transgression is involved. for [impure *terumah*] is not holy.⁷

footnotes:
¹ Sefer HaMitzvot
² Tzara'at
³ This refers to a physical affliction resembling, but not identical with gonorrhea that imparts ritual impurity.
⁴ It does not refer to the breast and thigh of the peace offerings, for a woman of the priestly family who marries and is widowed or divorced may not partake of them (Yevamot
⁵ If his transgression is observed by witnesses and they issued a warning. Whenever lashes are given on the earthly plane, the transgressor receives atonement and is no longer held liable for death by God.
⁶ From the fact that Sanhedrin
⁷ Its impurity nullifies its holiness. See Chapter 6, Halachah 6 and notes, however.


###### Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:2
[Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Heave%20Offerings/r/7:2)

אֵין הַטְּמֵאִים אוֹכְלִין בִּתְרוּמָה עַד שֶׁיַּעֲרִיב שִׁמְשָׁן וְיֵצְאוּ שְׁלֹשָׁה כּוֹכָבִים בֵּינוֹנִיִּים, וְזֶה הָעֵת כְּמוֹ שְׁלִישׁ שָׁעָה אַחַר שְׁקִיעַת הַחַמָּה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא כב ז) "וּבָא הַשֶּׁמֶשׁ וְטָהֵר" עַד שֶׁיִּטְהַר הָרָקִיעַ מִן הָאוֹר (ויקרא כב ז) "וְאַחַר יֹאכַל מִן הַקָּדָשִׁים":

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
Impure [priests who have immersed to purify themselves] may not partake of *terumah* until the sun sets and three stars appear afterwards⁸ states that this is approximately 20 minutes after sunset. This applies in *Eretz Yisrael*. In different latitudes, the duration of this time period varies.
This represents a stringency over other laws where ritual purity is required. In many such instances, as soon as one immerses himself, his purification is completed and no further wait is necessary. See *Hilchot Ma'aser Sheni* 7:11. [on the day the impure person immerses himself], as [implied by *ibid.*:7]: "And the sun will set and he will become pure"⁹ - until the sky will become pure of the light - "afterwards he may partake of the consecrated foods."

footnotes:
⁸ The Kessef Mishneh
⁹ The simple meaning of the verse is that the person's purification process is not completed until the sun sets. The rules of Biblical exegesis, however, leave room for the meaning mentioned by the Rambam.


###### Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:3
[Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Heave%20Offerings/r/7:3)

כֹּהֵן טָהוֹר שֶׁאָכַל תְּרוּמָה טְמֵאָה אֵינוֹ לוֹקֶה מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא בַּעֲשֵׂה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא כב ז) "וְאַחַר יֹאכַל מִן הַקֳדָשִׁים" מִדָּבָר שֶׁהוּא בִּקְדֻשָּׁתוֹ הוּא שֶׁיֹּאכַל כְּשֶׁיִּטְהַר אֲבָל דָּבָר טָמֵא לֹא יֹאכַל אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁיִּטְהַר וְלָאו הַבָּא מִכְּלָל עֲשֵׂה עֲשֵׂה הוּא:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
A priest who is ritually pure who ate *terumah* that is ritually impure is not liable for lashes, because [the prohibition is the result of] a positive commandment. For the verse states: "Afterwards he may partake of the consecrated foods."¹⁰ [Implied is that,] after he becomes purified, he may partake of food that is in a state of holiness. Food which is impure, by contrast, he should not eat, even though he becomes purified. A prohibition that stems from a positive commandment¹¹," but from the positive commandment regarding pure *terumah*, we can conclude that partaking of the impure *terumah* is prohibited. has the status of a positive commandment.¹²

footnotes:
¹⁰ The Rabaz emphasizes that with regard to partaking of the sacrifices, in certain instances, an impure priest must also bring a sacrifice to mark his immersion from impurity.
¹¹ I,e., as in the case at hand, there is no verse that says "Do not eat impure terumah
¹² Hence, its violation is not punishable by lashes.


###### Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:4
[Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Heave%20Offerings/r/7:4)

מִי שֶׁהָיָה אוֹכֵל בִּתְרוּמָה וְהִרְגִּישׁ שֶׁנִּזְדַּעְזְעוּ אֵיבָרָיו לְהוֹצִיא שִׁכְבַת זֶרַע אוֹחֵז בָּאַמָּה וּבוֹלֵעַ אֶת הַתְּרוּמָה:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
When [a priest] was partaking of *terumah* and he feels his limbs shudder to ejaculate.¹³ He should hold his member¹⁴ first (*Niddah* 40a). and swallow the *terumah*.

footnotes:
¹³ Which would render him ritually impure.
¹⁴ For he does not become ritually impure until the semen actually emerges and in this way, he could swallow the terumah


###### Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:5
[Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Heave%20Offerings/r/7:5)

הַחֵרֵשׁ וְהַשּׁוֹטֶה מַטְבִּילִין אוֹתָן וּמַאֲכִילִין אוֹתָן תְּרוּמָה אַחַר שֶׁהֶעֱרִיב שִׁמְשָׁן. וּמְשַׁמְּרִין אוֹתָן שֶׁלֹּא יִישְׁנוּ אַחַר הַטְּבִילָה שֶׁאִם יִישְׁנוּ טְמֵאִים. אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן עָשׂוּ לָהֶם כִּיס שֶׁל נְחשֶׁת שֶׁמָּא יִרְאוּ קֶרִי:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
We may immerse a deaf-mute or intellectually or emotionally unstable [priest] and feed him *terumah* after nightfall on that day.¹⁵. We guard them to make sure that they do not sleep after immersing themselves, because if they sleep, they are [considered] impure for perhaps they had a seminal emission¹⁶ unless a copper container is made for them.¹⁷

footnotes:
¹⁵ These individuals are not responsible for their conduct. Nevertheless, their priesthood is intact. Hence, we immerse them to purify them and then enable them to partake of terumah
¹⁶ I.e., because of the doubt, we considered them impure.
¹⁷ Which would allow a seminal emission to be detected. Were the container to be made of cloth, the semen could be absorbed (Radbaz).


###### Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:6
[Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Heave%20Offerings/r/7:6)

רוֹכְבֵי גְּמַלִּים אֲסוּרִין לֶאֱכל בִּתְרוּמָה עַד שֶׁיִּטְבְּלוּ וְיַעֲרִיב שִׁמְשָׁן שֶׁהֵן בְּחֶזְקַת טֻמְאָה מִפְּנֵי הַחִמּוּם שֶׁהָרְכִיבָה עַל עוֹר הַגָּמָל מוֹצִיא טִפָּה שֶׁל שִׁכְבַת זֶרַע:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
Camel-riders are forbidden to partake of *terumah* until they immerse themselves and [wait] until nightfall, because we presume that they are ritually impure. [The rationale is that] the physical stimulation¹⁸ produced by riding on the flesh of a camel produces a drop of semen.¹⁹ (*Even HaEzer* 23:6)]. He also explains why it applies only to camel-riders and not those who ride on other animals.

footnotes:
¹⁸ The literal meaning of the Hebrew is "warmth."
¹⁹ See the gloss of the Radbaz who states that the Rambam's wording implies that this ruling applies only when one rides bareback [see Shulchan Aruch


###### Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:7
[Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Heave%20Offerings/r/7:7)

הַמְשַׁמֶּשֶׁת מִטָּתָהּ אִם לֹא נִתְהַפְּכָה בִּשְׁעַת תַּשְׁמִישׁ טוֹבֶלֶת וְאוֹכֶלֶת בִּתְרוּמָה לָעֶרֶב. וְאִם נִתְהַפְּכָה בִּשְׁעַת הַתַּשְׁמִישׁ הֲרֵי זוֹ אֲסוּרָה לֶאֱכל בִּתְרוּמָה כָּל שְׁלֹשָׁה יָמִים שֶׁאִי אֶפְשָׁר לָהּ שֶׁלֹּא תִּפְלֹט וְתִהְיֶה טְמֵאָה כְּמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר בִּמְקוֹמוֹ:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
When a woman engages in intimacy, she may immerse herself and partake of *terumah* in the evening,²⁰ and wait until nightfall (see Leviticus 15:18 . provided she did not turn over during intimacy.²¹ 5:9).
As long as the semen is in the woman's vagina, it is not considered to have touched her, because it is touching her body internally, not externally. If, however, it flows outside her vagina and touches her externally, she does become impure. According to the Rambam, if the woman does not turn over in intimate relations, the semen will remain in her vagina and not flow outside. Hence, after immersing herself and waiting until nightfall, she may partake of *terumah*. If, however, she turned over in the midst of intimacy, the semen will flow out. Moreover, it is possible that it will not flow out immediately, but will do so over the course of the coming days. Now, semen is considered to remain viable until the third day after intimacy. Hence for three days, the woman must consider the possibility that the semen flowed out from her body and made her impure. Hence, she cannot immerse herself in the *mikvah* to regain ritual purity until three days have passed.
The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam and maintains that even if the woman did not turn over during intimacy, as soon as she arises from bed, it is possible that semen will flow out from her vagina and touch her body. He quotes *Niddah* 41b in support of his explanation. The Radbaz and the *Kessef Mishneh* suggest that the Rambam had a different text of that Talmudic passage and they validate his ruling. If she turned over during intimacy she is forbidden to partake of *terumah* for a duration of three days. For it is impossible that she will not discharge [semen] and become impure,²² as will be explained in the appropriate place.²³:11. There the Rambam states that the intent is not that semen remains viable for three full days, but that it can remain viable until the third day after relations.

footnotes:
²⁰ I.e., intimate relations cause both the man and the woman to become impure. To emerge from that impurity, they must each immerse in the mikvah
²¹ Intimate relations can cause a woman to become impure for two reasons:a) as stated above, the very act of intimacy brings about ritual impurity;b) she comes in contact with semen and touching semen makes one ritually impure (Hilchot Sha'ar Avot HaTumah
²² Because of it touching her body.
²³ Ibid.


###### Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:8
[Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Heave%20Offerings/r/7:8)

תְּרוּמַת חוּצָה לָאָרֶץ הוֹאִיל וְעִקָּרָהּ מִדִּבְרֵיהֶן אֵינָהּ אֲסוּרָה בַּאֲכִילָה אֶלָּא לְכֹהֵן שֶׁטֻּמְאָה יוֹצְאָה עָלָיו מִגּוּפוֹ. וְהֵן בַּעֲלֵי קְרָיִין וְזָבִין וְזָבוֹת וְנִדּוֹת וְיוֹלְדוֹת. וְכֻלָּן שֶׁטָּבְלוּ מֻתָּרִין לַאֲכִילָה אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא הֶעֱרִיב שִׁמְשָׁן. אֲבָל טְמֵאֵי מַגַּע טֻמְאוֹת בֵּין שֶׁנָּגַע בְּמֵת שֶׁאִי אֶפְשָׁר לָנוּ הַיּוֹם לִטַּהֵר מִמֶּנּוּ בֵּין שֶׁנָּגַע בְּשֶׁרֶץ אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ לִטְבּל לִתְרוּמַת חוּצָה לָאָרֶץ:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
Since the primary obligation of *terumah* [separated] in the Diaspora is Rabbinic in origin,²⁴ applies only in *Eretz Yisrael*. The early Sages ordained that it should be observed in certain neighboring countries. it is forbidden only to a priest who becomes ritually impure because of a discharge from his body: i.e., men who had a seminal emission, *zavim*,²⁵ *zavot*,²⁶ *niddot*,²⁷ and women who give birth.²⁸, ch. 10. Since the obligation to separate *terumah* in these lands is only Rabbinic in origin, the Sages were lenient regarding the restrictions incumbent on those who partake of *terumah*. All of these individuals may partake [of *terumah*] after they immersed even if they did not [wait] until nightfall.²⁹ prescribed by Scriptural Law when such a wait is necessary, as stated in Halachah 2. The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam concerning this point and refers to *Bechorot* 27a in support of his position. The Radbaz and the *Kessef Mishneh* offer different explanations of that passage that support the Rambam's interpretation. Those who, by contrast, became impure because of contact with a source of ritual impurity - whether contact with a human corpse, a form of impurity which is impossible to purge in the present age³⁰ or contact with [the corpse of] a crawling animal - need not immerse themselves [to partake of] *terumah* separated in the Diaspora.

footnotes:
²⁴ As stated in Chapter 1, Halachah 1, according to Scriptural Law, the requirement to separate terumah
²⁵ This refers to a physical affliction resembling, but not identical with gonorrhea that imparts ritual impurity.
²⁶ Women who become impure because they experienced menstrual bleeding at times other than her ordinary cycle.
²⁷ Women who become impure because they experienced ordinary menstrual bleeding.
²⁸ Who becomes impure as explained in Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah
²⁹ In contrast to terumah
³⁰ For to purge the impurity resulting from contact with a human corpse, it is necessary to have the ashes from a Red Heifer sprinkled upon one's body and those ashes are not available in the present age.


###### Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:9
[Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Heave%20Offerings/r/7:9)

לְפִיכָךְ כֹּהֵן קָטָן שֶׁעֲדַיִן לֹא רָאָה קֶרִי וּקְטַנָּה שֶׁעֲדַיִן לֹא רָאֲתָה דַּם נִדָּה אוֹכְלִין אוֹתָהּ תָּמִיד בְּלֹא בְּדִיקָה שֶׁחֶזְקָתָן שֶׁלֹּא יָצְאָה טֻמְאָה עֲדַיִן עֲלֵיהֶם. וְהַמְצֹרָע הֲרֵי הוּא כְּמִי שֶׁטֻּמְאָה יוֹצְאָה עָלָיו מִגּוּפוֹ וְהוּא שֶׁיְּטַמֵּא אוֹתוֹ כֹּהֵן מְיֻחָס אֲבָל קֹדֶם שֶׁיְּטַמְּאֶנּוּ הַכֹּהֵן טָהוֹר הוּא:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
For this reason, a male priest who is a minor who has not yet had a seminal emission or a female of the priestly family who has never experienced menstrual bleeding may partake of [*terumah* from the Diaspora] at all times without undergoing an inspection, for the presumption that they did not have a discharge that would render them ritually impure applies to them.³¹ (Radbaz).
A *metzora*³² is somebody who has been afflicted with *tzara'at*. *Tzara'at* is a physical affliction resembling, but not identical with leprosy, that comes as a result of gossip and imparts ritual impurity. is considered as one who had a discharge that renders him impure,³³). provided he is declared impure by a priest whose lineage is established.³⁴ does not become ritually impure until a priest declares him so (*Hilchot Tuma'at Tzara'at* 9:2). With regard to the establishment of a priest's lineage, see the notes to Chapter 6, Halachah 2.
The Radbaz adds that the reason the impurity of *tzara'at* is not observed in the present age is that we have no priests whose lineage is established to declare people ritually impure. The physical conditions for the impurity may exist in the present age.

footnotes:
³¹ Once a male or a female attains majority, by contrast, we assume that they have become impure and they must immerse themselves before partaking of terumah
³² A metzora
³³ For his impurity is also a result of a physical condition (ibid.
³⁴ For a person afflicted by tzara'at


###### Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:10
[Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Heave%20Offerings/r/7:10)

כֹּהֵן עָרֵל אָסוּר לֶאֱכל בִּתְרוּמָה מִדִּין תּוֹרָה. שֶׁהֲרֵי נֶאֱמַר (ויקרא כב י) "תּוֹשָׁב וְשָׂכִיר" בִּתְרוּמָה וְנֶאֱמַר תּוֹשָׁב וְשָׂכִיר בְּפֶסַח. מָה תּוֹשָׁב וְשָׂכִיר הָאָמוּר בְּפֶסַח עָרֵל אָסוּר בּוֹ אַף תּוֹשָׁב וְשָׂכִיר הָאָמוּר בִּתְרוּמָה עָרֵל אָסוּר בּוֹ. וְאִם אָכַל לוֹקֶה מִן הַתּוֹרָה. מָשׁוּךְ מֻתָּר לֶאֱכל בִּתְרוּמָה וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁנִּרְאֶה כְּעָרֵל וּמִדִּבְרֵי סוֹפְרִים שֶׁיָּמוּל פַּעַם שְׁנִיָּה עַד שֶׁיֵּרָאֶה מָהוּל:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
A priest who is uncircumcised is forbidden to partake of *terumah* according to Scriptural Law.³⁵ [This concept is derived as follows: Leviticus 22:10] speaks of a resident worker and a hired worker with regard to [partaking of] *terumah* and [Exodus 12:45] speaks of a resident worker and a hired worker with regard to [partaking of] the Paschal sacrifice. Just as with regard to the Paschal sacrifice, the resident worker and the hired worker spoken about refer to those who are uncircumcised and who are forbidden [to partake of] it,³⁶ 9:7. so too, with regard to *terumah*, we learn that a resident worker and a hired worker who are uncircumcised are forbidden [to partake of] it. ³⁷ (Negative Commandment 135) and *Sefer HaChinuch* (Mitzvah 282) include this as one of 613 mitzvot of the Torah. There is, however, a slight difficulty with this classification. The Rambam maintains that any commandment that is derived through one of the Thirteen Principles of Biblical Exegesis does not have the status of a Scriptural command, nor is such a prohibition punishable by lashes (*Sefer HaMitzvot,* General Principle 2) and as the Rambam states here, there is no direct commandment prohibiting an uncircumcised person from partaking of *terumah*. Instead, it is derived by our Sages (*Yevamot* 70a) through an association of verses (*gezeirah shaveh*). Hence, seemingly, it should not be placed in that category. The Rambam notes this difficulty when discussing this mitzvah in *Sefer HaMitzvot* and states that since our Sages mentioned that this mitzvah was of Scriptural origin, he considered it as having that status. If such a person partakes [of *terumah*], he is liable for lashes according to Scriptural Law.
A person who extends his foreskin³⁸ is permitted to partake of *terumah* even though he appears uncircumcised.³⁹ According to Rabbinic Law, however, he must be circumcised again until he appears circumcised.⁴⁰ until he is circumcised again. Instead, the intent is that he is advised to undergo the operation and not to partake of *terumah* until he does so. The *Sefer HaMitzvot* and the *Sefer HaChinuch* (*loc. cit.*), however, say that such an individual is prohibited by the Rabbis from partaking of *terumah*.

footnotes:
³⁵ The Radbaz writes that this prohibition applies even if he is uncircumcised with the Torah's permission, e.g., his brothers died because of circumcision, in which instance, caution is shown before circumcising him.
³⁶ See Hilchot Korban Pesach
³⁷ Sefer HaMitzvot
³⁸ I.e., one was originally circumcised, but underwent an operation so that it would appear that he was not circumcised. In the Hellenist and Roman periods, there were Jews who underwent such operations so that they would resemble non-Jews.
³⁹ For according to Scriptural Law, his original circumcision was effective and he can never revert to being uncircumcised.
⁴⁰ The Radbaz writes that the intent is not that he is forbidden to partake of terumah


###### Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:11
[Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Heave%20Offerings/r/7:11)

הַנּוֹלָד מָהוּל אוֹכֵל בִּתְרוּמָה. וְהַטֻּמְטוּם אֵינוֹ אוֹכֵל מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא סְפֵק עָרֵל. וְאַנְדְּרוֹגִינוּס מָל וְאוֹכֵל:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
One who is born circumcised may partake of *terumah*.⁴¹ 1:11), it cannot be said that such a person is uncircumcised. Hence, he is permitted to partake of *terumah* (Radbaz). A *tumtum*⁴² may not partake of *terumah* for there is a doubt whether he is uncircumcised.⁴³ An *androgynus*⁴⁴ should be circumcised and then he may partake of *terumah*.⁴⁵ for both males and females of the priestly family are permitted to partake of it.

footnotes:
⁴¹ Although it is necessary to draw a drop of blood from such a person's organ (Hilchot Milah
⁴² A child whose genital area is covered by a mass of flesh and thus his gender cannot be determined.
⁴³ Since his gender is undetermined, we do not know whether or not he must be circumcised.
⁴⁴ A person with both male and female sexual organs.
⁴⁵ Although there are many unresolved questions about such a person's status vis-à-vis gender, there is no difficulty in him partaking of terumah


###### Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:12
[Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Heave%20Offerings/r/7:12)

הֶעָרֵל וְכָל הַטְּמֵאִין אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהֵן אֲסוּרִין לֶאֱכל בִּתְרוּמָה נְשֵׁיהֶן וְעַבְדֵיהֶן אוֹכְלִין:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
Although an uncircumcised priest and all those who are impure are forbidden to partake of *terumah*, their wives and their servants may partake [of it].⁴⁶ due to outside factors. Their membership in the priestly family is, however, intact. Hence, their wives and servants may partake of *terumah* (Radbaz).

footnotes:
⁴⁶ They are prohibited from partaking of terumah


###### Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:13
[Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Heave%20Offerings/r/7:13)

פְּצוּעַ דַּכָּא וּכְרוּת שָׁפְכָה הֵם וְעַבְדֵיהֶן אוֹכְלִין. וּנְשֵׁיהֶן לֹא יֹאכְלוּ. וְאִם לֹא יָדַע אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ מִשֶּׁנַּעֲשָׂה פְּצוּעַ דַּכָּא וּכְרוּת שָׁפְכָה הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ יֹאכְלוּ. וְכֵן אִם נָשָׂא בַּת גֵּרִים הֲרֵי זוֹ אוֹכֶלֶת:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
[The following laws apply to a priest] who has maimed testicles or a severed member. They and their servants may partake of *terumah*.⁴⁷. Their wives may not partake of *terumah*.⁴⁸, ch. 16, a person with such wounds is forbidden to marry a natural born Jewess. Hence, if a priest is intimate with his wife after suffering such wounds, she becomes a *zonah* and a *chalalah* and hence, is forbidden to partake of *terumah*. If [such a priest] was not intimate with his wife after suffering these wounds, [his wife] may partake of *terumah*.⁴⁹ and may partake of *terumah*. The *Kessef Mishneh* states that this refers to an instance where the couple were married and then he suffered this wound. If, however, a priest suffers such a wound and then consecrates a woman, she may not partake of *terumah*. See the notes to the following halachah. Similarly, if he married the descendent of converts, she may partake of *terumah*.⁵⁰ 16:1). Once he marries such a woman, she is entitled to partake of *terumah*, because she is the wife of a priest.

footnotes:
⁴⁷ Although their wounds prevent such priests from serving at the Altar, they are still members of the priestly family. Hence, they and their servants may partake of terumah
⁴⁸ As stated in Deuteronomy 23:2 and Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah
⁴⁹ Since they were not intimate, she has not become a chalalah
⁵⁰ Ordinarily, a priest cannot marry a convert or the descendant of a convert. In this instance, however, because of his injury, the full measure of the holiness of the priesthood does not rest upon him and he may marry such a woman (Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah


###### Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:14
[Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Heave%20Offerings/r/7:14)

פְּצוּעַ דַּכָּא כֹּהֵן שֶׁקִּדֵּשׁ בַּת כֹּהֵן אֵינָהּ אוֹכֶלֶת. סְרִיס חַמָּה הוּא וְאִשְׁתּוֹ וַעֲבָדָיו אוֹכְלִין. טֻמְטוּם וְאַנְדְּרוֹגִינוּס עַבְדֵיהֶן אוֹכְלִין אֲבָל לֹא נְשׁוֹתֵיהֶן:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
When a priest with maimed testicles consecrates the daughter of a priest, she may not partake of *terumah*.⁵¹ even though she had not actually engaged in such relations. Moreover, she is no longer permitted to partake of *terumah* by virtue of her being a member of the priestly family, because she was consecrated, as stated in Chapter 8, Halachah 1. [When a priest is] a eunuch who was brought to this state through natural means,⁵² 2:14 for a more precise definition of the term used by the Rambam. As stated in *Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah* 16:9, such a person is permitted to marry a native-born Jewess. Hence, there is no difficulty with the wife of a priest with such a condition partaking of *terumah*. he, his wife, and his servants may partake of *terumah*. [When a priest is] a *tumtum* or an *androgynus*, their servants may partake of *terumah*,⁵³ but not their wives.⁵⁴ undergoes an operation and it is determined that he is a male, his wife may partake of *terumah* even if he consecrated her before the operation.

footnotes:
⁵¹ Since this woman is prepared to engage in intimate relations that are forbidden to her, our Sages prohibited her from partaking of terumah
⁵² See Hilchot Ishut
⁵³ For in this context, there is no difference between them and the servants of an ordinary priest.
⁵⁴ For there is an unresolved doubt if their marriages are acceptable. Needless to say, if a tumtum


###### Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:15
[Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Heave%20Offerings/r/7:15)

חֵרֵשׁ שׁוֹטֶה וְקָטָן שֶׁקָּנוּ לָהֶן עֲבָדִים אֵינָן אוֹכְלִין. אֲבָל אִם קָנוּ לָהֶם בֵּית דִּין אוֹ אַפּוֹטְרוֹפּוֹס אוֹ שֶׁנָּפְלוּ לָהֶן בִּירֻשָּׁה הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ אוֹכְלִין:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
When a [priest who was] a deaf-mute, a mentally or emotionally unstable person, or a minor purchased servants, they may not partake of *terumah*.⁵⁵. If, however, the local court or their guardian purchases servants for them or they acquire them by inheritance, [the servants] may partake of *terumah*.⁵⁶

footnotes:
⁵⁵ These individuals are considered as not being responsible for their actions and their acquisitions are not valid. Hence, the servants they purchase by themselves are not their property according to Scriptural Law and may not partake of terumah
⁵⁶ Because the acquisitions are binding and they have become the property of a priest.


###### Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:16
[Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Heave%20Offerings/r/7:16)

אַנְדְּרוֹגִינוּס שֶׁנִּבְעַל לְפָסוּל מִן הַתְּרוּמָה בֵּין דֶּרֶךְ זִכְרוּתוֹ בֵּין דֶּרֶךְ נְקֵבוּתוֹ נִפְסַל מִלֶּאֱכל בִּתְרוּמָה כְּנָשִׁים. וְאֵין עֲבָדָיו אוֹכְלִין. וְכֵן אִם נִבְעַל לְאַנְדְּרוֹגִינוּס אַחֵר שֶׁהוּא פּוֹסֵל בְּבִיאָתוֹ לְאִשָּׁה נִפְסַל וְאֵינוֹ אוֹכֵל וְלֹא מַאֲכִיל עֲבָדָיו. וְהוּא שֶׁיִּבְעל אוֹתוֹ דֶּרֶךְ נְקֵבוּתוֹ. אֲבָל דֶּרֶךְ זִכְרוּתוֹ אֵין זָכָר פּוֹסֵל זָכָר מִן הַכְּהֻנָּה:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
When an *androgynus* [of the priestly family] engages in intimacy - whether through anal intercourse⁵⁷ or vaginal intercourse - with a person who is disqualified from partaking of *terumah*, he is disqualified from partaking of *terumah* as a woman would be.⁵⁸. Since there is an unresolved question regarding the gender of an *androgynus*, we are stringent and consider the possibility that he is a female. And a female is disqualified from *terumah* if she engages in intimacy that would render her a *chalalah* regardless of whether it is vaginal or anal intercourse (Radbaz). His servants also may not partake of *terumah*.⁵⁹ is dependent on that of their owner.
Similarly, if he engages in intimacy with another *adrogynus* with whom relations would disqualify a woman from partaking of *terumah*, he is disqualified. Neither he nor his servants may partake of *terumah*. [The latter law] applies when he engages in intimacy through vaginal intercourse.⁶⁰ and, because of the unresolved question regarding the status of the *androgynus*, we apply that stringency to him as well. If, however, he is intimate through anal intercourse,⁶¹ [the above does not apply], because a male does not disqualify another male from priestly [privileges].⁶² because he entered into a forbidden sexual relationship.
The Ra'avad and the *Kessef Mishneh* question the Rambam's ruling, noting that, seemingly, the person should be disqualified from partaking of *terumah* based on the same rationale as the first clause of the halachah: i.e., that the *androgynus* also has a feminine dimension and that feminine dimension will be disqualified through anal intercourse. Hence, they ask: Why does the Rambam only view this relationship as intimacy between males and hence, not able to disqualify the *androgynus*? Why not see it as a relation between a male and a female? Among the explanations given is that since both of the *androgynies* are engaging in relations as males, it is not appropriate to deem one a male and one a female.

footnotes:
⁵⁷ The literal translation of the Rambam's words would be "as a male would be the object of intimacy."
⁵⁸ For such relations would cause a woman to be considered as a chalalah
⁵⁹ For their right to partake of terumah
⁶⁰ For such relations would render a woman a chalahah
⁶¹ The literal translation of the Rambam's words would be "as a male would be the object of intimacy."
⁶² A male priest does not become a chalal


###### Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:17
[Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Heave%20Offerings/r/7:17)

עֶבֶד שֶׁל שְׁנֵי שֻׁתָּפִין שֶׁהָיָה אֶחָד מֵהֶן כֹּהֵן אֵינוֹ מַאֲכִיל הֲרֵי זֶה הָעֶבֶד אָסוּר לֶאֱכל. וְכָל הַמַּאֲכִיל בִּתְרוּמָה מַאֲכִיל בֶּחָזֶה וְשׁוֹק:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
When a servant belongs to partners and one of them is a priest that does not entitle others to partake of *terumah*,⁶³) states that for a servant to partake of *terumah*, he must belong to priests entirely. If an Israelite has even a one-hundredth share in the ownership of the servant, he may not partake of *terumah*. this servant is forbidden to partake [of *terumah*]. Whenever [the ownership of a servant] entitles him to partake of *terumah*, it also entitles him to partake of the breast and the thigh [of the peace sacrifices].⁶⁴

footnotes:
⁶³ The Jerusalem Talmud (the conclusion of tractate Terumot
⁶⁴ Which may be eaten by all the members of the priest's household.


###### Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:18
[Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Heave%20Offerings/r/7:18)

בַּת יִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁנִּשֵּׂאת לְכֹהֵן וְהִכְנִיסָהּ לוֹ בֵּין עַבְדֵי מְלוֹג בֵּין עַבְדֵי נִכְסֵי צֹאן בַּרְזֶל הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ יֹאכְלוּ. וְכֵן עַבְדֵי כֹּהֵן שֶׁקָּנוּ עֲבָדִים וְעַבְדֵי אִשְׁתּוֹ שֶׁקָּנוּ עֲבָדִים יֹאכְלוּ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא כב יא) "כִּי יִקְנֶה נֶפֶשׁ קִנְיַן כַּסְפּוֹ" אֲפִלּוּ קִנְיַן הַקִּנְיָן. וְקִנְיַן הָאוֹכֵל מַאֲכִיל (אֲחֵרִים) וְקִנְיָן שֶׁאֵינוֹ אוֹכֵל אֵינוֹ מַאֲכִיל:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
When a daughter of an Israelite marries a priest and brings servants [to his domain] - regardless of whether they are classified as *nichsei milog* or *nichsei tzon barzel*⁶⁵, ch. 16, there are two arrangements under which a husband is allowed to benefit from his wife's property:
*nichsei milog* - in this instance, in the event of divorce or the husband's death, the property reverts to the ownership of the woman according to its value at that time, regardless of the profit or loss she suffers;
*nichsei tzon barzel* - in this instance, the property is evaluated at the time of marriage; in the event of divorce or the husband's death, the woman receives that amount, regardless of the worth of the property at that time.
Servants can be classified in either of these categories. In both instances, they have the right to partake of *terumah*. With regard to servants who are *nichsei tzon barzel*, they are the husband's (the priest's) acquisitions, for it is as if he acquired them when he accepted financial responsibility for their worth. With regard to those who are *nichsei milog*, they are "the acquisition of his acquisition," i.e., property belonging to his wife whom he has acquired. See Halachah 20. - they may partake [of *terumah*]. Similarly, when the servants of priests purchase servants or the servants of a priest's wife purchase servants, they may partake of *terumah*, as [intimated by Leviticus 22:11]: "[When a priest] will purchase a soul, the acquisition of his money, [he shall partake of it]." Implied is even an acquisition of an acquisition.⁶⁶ - "acquire." An acquisition of [a priest] who is permitted to partake of *terumah* may entitle others to partake [of *terumah*]. An acquisition who does not partake of *terumah* may not entitle others to partake [of *terumah*].⁶⁷ (see Halachot 20-22), her servants may also not partake of *terumah*.

footnotes:
⁶⁵ When a woman marries, her husband receives the right to benefit from her property. As explained in Hilchot Ishut
⁶⁶ I.e., servants acquired by servants who were acquired by the priest. The inference is derived based on the fact that the verse contains two derivatives of the word koneh
⁶⁷ When the wife of a priest is not entitled to partake of terumah


###### Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:19
[Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Heave%20Offerings/r/7:19)

בַּת כֹּהֵן שֶׁנִּשֵּׂאת לְיִשְׂרָאֵל וְהִכְנִיסָה לוֹ בֵּין עַבְדֵי מְלוֹג בֵּין עַבְדֵי צֹאן בַּרְזֶל הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ לֹא יֹאכְלוּ:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
When the daughter of a priest marries an Israelite and brings servants [to his domain] - regardless of whether they are classified as *nichsei milog* or *nichsei tzon barzel* - they may not partake [of *terumah*].⁶⁸ certainly may not partake of *terumah* for they are now the property of an Israelite. Even the servants who are *nichsei milog* may not partake of *terumah*, for at this time, their owner - the Israelite's wife - is disqualified from partaking of *terumah*.

footnotes:
⁶⁸ The servants who are nichsei tzon barzel


###### Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:20
[Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Heave%20Offerings/r/7:20)

אַלְמָנָה לְכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל גְּרוּשָׁה וַחֲלוּצָה לְכֹהֵן הֶדְיוֹט בֵּין כֹּהֶנֶת בֵּין יִשְׂרְאֵלִית וְכֵן שְׁאָר חַיָּבֵי לָאוִין וְהִכְנִיסָה לוֹ עַבְדֵי מְלוֹג וְעַבְדִּי צֹאן בַּרְזֶל. עַבְדֵי מְלוֹג לֹא יֹאכְלוּ אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא חַיָּב בִּמְזוֹנוֹתָם. וְעַבְדֵי צֹאן בַּרְזֶל יֹאכְלוּ מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵם שֶׁל בַּעַל. נָשָׂא שְׁנִיָּה הִיא אוֹכֶלֶת וְעַבְדֵי מְלוֹג שֶׁלָּהּ לֹא יֹאכְלוּ:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
[The following laws apply when] a widow marries a High Priest or a divorcee or a woman who underwent *chalitzah* - whether the daughter of a priest or an Israelite - marries an ordinary priest⁶⁹ and hence, forbidden to partake of *terumah*. Since she is forbidden to partake of *terumah*, her servants are likewise forbidden. or [a priest] marries another one of the women with whom marriage is prohibited [by Scriptural Law].⁷⁰ and thus prohibited against partaking of *terumah*. In this instance as well, since she is forbidden to partake of *terumah*, her servants are likewise forbidden. If she brings servants [to his domain] which are classified as *nichsei milog* or *nichsei tzon barzel* [to his domain], those classified as *nichsei milog* may not partake [of *terumah*],⁷¹ even though he is required to provide for their sustenance. Those classified as *nichsei tzon barzel* may partake of *terumah*, for they are the husband's property. If [a priest] married a *shniyah*,⁷² 1:6. she may partake [of *terumah*],⁷³ or a *chalalah*. but her servants who are *nichsei milog* may not partake [of *terumah*].⁷⁴, her servants should also be so entitled. The Radbaz explains that since her marriage is not sanctioned by Rabbinic Law, her husband is under no obligation to sustain her. Hence, her servants do not receive the right to partake of *terumah*. Those servants that are *nichsei tzon barzel* are permitted to partake of *terumah* according to all authorities, for they are her husband's acquisitions as explained above.

footnotes:
⁶⁹ These three types of relationships are forbidden, the first two by Scriptural Law, the latter by Rabbinic Law. Thus the woman will become a chalalah
⁷⁰ I.e., a woman who is forbidden to him because of one of the prohibitions that apply to all Jews, even non-priests. Nevertheless, if he engages in relations with that woman, she becomes a zonah
⁷¹ For they are the woman's property, it is just that they are "on loan" to her husband, as it were.
⁷² A relatively distant female relative with whom our Sages prohibited marriage as a safeguard against the Scriptural prohibitions of incest. See Hilchot Ishut
⁷³ For according to Scriptural Law, she is the priest's wife and relations with him do not disqualify her, neither as a zonah
⁷⁴ Seemingly, since such a woman has the right to partake of terumah


###### Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:21
[Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Heave%20Offerings/r/7:21)

כֹּהֶנֶת אַלְמָנָה שֶׁנִּתְאָרְסָה לְכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל אוֹ גְּרוּשָׁה לְכֹהֵן הֶדְיוֹט הוֹאִיל וְהֵן מְשַׁמְּרוֹת לְבִיאָה פְּסוּלָה שֶׁל תּוֹרָה הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ לֹא יֹאכְלוּ. וְכֵן אִם נִכְנְסוּ לַחֻפָּה בְּלֹא אֵרוּסִין אֵינָן אוֹכְלוֹת שֶׁהַחֻפָּה פּוֹסַלְתָּן מִלֶּאֱכל. נִתְאַלְמְנוּ אוֹ נִתְגָּרְשׁוּ מִן הָאֵרוּסִין חָזְרוּ לְהֶכְשֵׁרָן וְאוֹכְלוֹת. מִן הַנִּשּׂוּאִין לֹא יֹאכְלוּ שֶׁכְּבָר נִתְחַלְּלוּ:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
When the daughter of a priest who is a widow is consecrated by a High Priest or one who is divorced is consecrated by an ordinary priest, they may not partake of *terumah*,⁷⁵ by virtue of their membership in the Priestly family. because they are designated for intimate relations that are forbidden according to Scriptural Law. Similarly, if they enter the *chupah*⁷⁶ means entering a private place with her husband. This is the act that constitutes the beginning of the second phase of the marriage relationship, *nissuin*. without being consecrated, they may not partake [of *terumah*]. For [entering into] the *chupah* disqualifies them.⁷⁷ without consecration, that act causes her to be considered as designated for intimate relations that are forbidden.
If such a woman is widowed or divorced after consecration [but before marriage], she returns to suitability and may partake of *terumah*. If, however, she had married, she may not partake of *terumah*, because she already became a *chalalah.*⁷⁸

footnotes:
⁷⁵ I.e., were it not for the reason stated by the Rambam, they would be permitted to partake of terumah
⁷⁶ Entering the chupah
⁷⁷ Even though a woman enters the chupah
⁷⁸ Through intimate relations with her husband.


###### Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:22
[Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:22](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Heave%20Offerings/r/7:22)

כֹּהֶנֶת שֶׁמֵּת בַּעְלָהּ כֹּהֵן וְנָפְלָה לִפְנֵי יְבָמִים שֶׁיֵּשׁ בָּהֶן חָלָל לֹא תֹּאכַל מִפְּנֵי זִקַּת הֶחָלָל. וַאֲפִלּוּ עָשָׂה בָּהּ אֶחָד מִן הַכְּשֵׁרִים מַאֲמָר. שֶׁאֵין הַמַּאֲמָר קוֹנֶה בִּיבָמָה קִנְיָן גָּמוּר:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
When the husband of the daughter of a priest who is himself a priest dies and she falls before *yevamim*, one of which is a *challal*,⁷⁹. she may not partake of *terumah* because of her connection to the *challal*.⁸⁰, she is disqualified even though she is a member of the priestly family. [This applies] even if one of the acceptable [brothers] issued a *mamar*⁸¹ is a Rabbinic institution in which a *yevam* declares his intention to marry his brother's childless widow by consecrating her through giving her money (*Hilchot Yibbum* 2:1). to her, for a *maamar* does not constitute a complete acquisition of a *yevamah*.⁸² with the widow, he would become her husband despite the *maamar* given by his brother. Thus the connection to the *yevam* who is a *challal* is still intact.

footnotes:
⁷⁹ I.e., her husband, the priest, had several brothers, one of whom was born from a relationship forbidden to the priesthood, and thus had the status of a challal
⁸⁰ Since she could be married by the challal
⁸¹ A maamar
⁸² If another brother would perform yibbum


###### Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:23
[Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 7:23](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Heave%20Offerings/r/7:23)

כֹּהֵן שֶׁנָּתַן גֵּט לִיבִמְתּוֹ הַכֹּהֶנֶת שֶׁהֲרֵי נֶאֶסְרָה עָלָיו וַעֲדַיִן זִקָּתוֹ עָלֶיהָ הֲרֵי זוֹ אוֹכֶלֶת בִּתְרוּמָה מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהִיא מְשַׁמֶּרֶת לְבִיאָה פְּסוּלָה שֶׁל דִּבְרֵיהֶן. שֶׁאֵין הַגֵּט פּוֹסֵל הַיְבָמָה אֶלָּא מִדִּבְרֵיהֶן. וְכֵן כֹּהֶנֶת חֲלוּצָה אוֹ שְׁנִיָּה שֶׁנִּתְאָרְסָה לְכֹהֵן אוֹכֶלֶת. כֹּהֵן הֶדְיוֹט שֶׁנָּשָׂא אַיְלוֹנִית הֲרֵי זוֹ אוֹכֶלֶת בִּתְרוּמָה:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
[Although a *yavam* who is] a priest gives a bill of divorce⁸³ which would absolve the connection between him and his *yevamah*, he gave her a bill of divorce. According to Scriptural Law, the bill of divorce is not effective at all. Nevertheless, according to Rabbinic Law, it disqualifies the woman from carrying out *yibbum* with any of the brothers (*Hilchot Yibbum VeChalitzah* 5:1). to his *yevamah*, [despite the fact that] she becomes forbidden to him, she still remains connected to him.⁸⁴ Hence, she is entitled to partake of *terumah*. [She is not disqualified,] because she is designated for relations that are forbidden [only] by Rabbinic decree, since a bill of divorce disqualifies a *yevamah* only according to Rabbinic decree.
Similarly, the daughter of a priest who underwent the rite of *chalitzah*⁸⁵ or is a *shniyah*⁸⁶ 1:6. who became consecrated to a priest may partake of *terumah*.⁸⁷ to be the daughter of an Israelite, she would not be permitted to partake of *terumah* despite the fact that she is bound to a priest through the obligation of *yibbum* (Radbaz). [Also,] when an ordinary priest marries an *ailonot*,⁸⁸ she may partake of *terumah*.⁸⁹.

footnotes:
⁸³ I.e., instead of performing chalitzah
⁸⁴ For according to Scriptural Law, their connection is still intact.
⁸⁵ And thus became forbidden to a priest by Rabbinic decree.
⁸⁶ A relatively distant female relative with whom our Sages prohibited marriage as a safeguard against the Scriptural prohibitions of incest. See Hilchot Ishut
⁸⁷ Because she is a member of the priestly family. In contrast to the women mentioned in Halachah 21, these women are designated for relations that are forbidden only by Rabbinic decree. Hence, they are not disqualified.Were the yevamah
⁸⁸ A women whose female sexual characteristics are underdeveloped.
⁸⁹ Although the priest may divorce her because she cannot have children, until he does so, he may be intimate with her. Hence, she is entitled to partake of terumah