לע"נ מרת אסתר בת ר' שמואל ומרת חנה בת אסתר

[Based on אתוון דאורייתא כלל ב]

We all know that terumah is forbidden to a non-Kohen.  How do we view this איסור? Is it a new  איסור of terumah that never existed before or do we say that for the Kohen it is permitted terumah while for the Yisrael is it a continuation of the איסור tevel that was already in existence before. The second possibility is plausible because both terumah and tevel mandate a חיוב מיתה בידי שמים.

In Tosfos Yevamos 66b there is an almost explicit revelation that will solve our dilemma. Tosfos says that just as we learn that tevel is forbidden in הנאה של כילוי [benefit that is derived through the destruction of the food], from the same place we can learn that terumah is forbidden in הנאה של כילוי. Concludes Tosfos דמשעת הרמה לא הותרה אלא לכהנים ולא לישראל - From the time of the separation it becomes permitted only to kohanim but not to yisrael.  Sounds a lot like the איסור of תרומה is a continuation of the איסור טבל.

Further research reveals that this question is actually a machlokes in the Yerushalmi [Shabbos 2/5]!:-)
If a non-Kohen [זר] serves in the Beis Hamikdash on Shabbos, R' Chiya says that he must bring two korbanos - one for serving as a non-Kohen and one for chillul Shabbos, because avoda on Shabbos was permitted only to Kohanim and not for non-Kohanim. Bar Kappara says that he must only atone for serving as a זר but not for chillul Shabbos, because the avoda may be done on Shabbos. This argument is mentioned in the Bavli [Yevamos 32b] but the Yerushalmi adds:

הרי טבל על שלא ניתקן אסור לזה ולזה משניתקן אסור לזרים ומותר לכהנים [פירוש מביא ראיה שלא אומרים כשהותרה לכל הותרה שהרי טבל משניתקן הותרה גם התרומה ואף על פי כן לא הותרה לכל רק לכהנים]

אמר ליה שנייא היא דכתיב 'וכל זר לא יאכל קודש' [פירוש שגם שם לכל הותרה ואיסור תרומה לזר איסור חדש הוא דכתיב וכל זר לא יאכל קודש] על כאן לשונו

R' Chiya says "Look at tevel - before it was fixed it was אסור to both kohanim and זרים and once it was fixed it remains forbidden to זרים and becomes permitted to kohanim. [So too, even after the avoda was permitted on Shabbos to kohanim it remains forbidden to זרים.]

Bar Kappara answers that the premise of R' Chiya is inaccurate. After terumah is fixed it becomes permitted to all and the איסור תורמה to a זר is a new one. [So too, the איסור עבודה on Shabbos was permitted to all and thus a זר is only חייב for serving a זר but not for chillul Shabbos]. 

We see then that according to R' Chiya איסור תרומה is a continuation of the איסור טבל while according to בר קפרא it is a new איסור.  

This understanding is echoed by the Ohr Sameach [Shabbos 23/12] and his good friend and neighbor, the Heilige Rogochover [Tzafnas Paaneach, Maachalos Assuros 10/20]

Rashi [Yevamos 86a ד"ה מה תרומה טובלת] says that the reason tevel is forbidden is because there is terumah mixed in with the tevel. This is in contrast to what we learned in a previous post that terumah is a continuation of the איסור טבל [for non-kohanim]. Here we see just the opposite: טבל is אסור because it contains terumah.

Tosfos [ד"ה מה תרומה טובלת] asks on Rashi: If he is correct then why is tevel not permitted to kohanim? If the whole problem is the terumah that is mixed in - kohaim are allowed to eat terumah. Problem solved!

When one is sick and needs to eat for pikuach nefesh there is a gradation of forbidden foods that one may eat. We must first give the foods that are the least stringently prohibited. This is called הקל הקל תחילה. There is an argument in the gemara [Yoma 83a] as to whether terumah is more stringent or tevel is more stringent. The rabbis hold that terumah is more stringent because you can't fix the איסור unlike tevel where you can fix the איסור. Ben Teima avers that טבל is more stringent because it is forbidden to all while terumah is only forbidden to זרים.

The machlokes can be explained by first answering the aforementioned question on Rashi asked by Tosfos. Rashi would answer Tosfos' question by saying that just as we find with respect to kodshim that before the throwing of the blood and buring of the innards the animal is forbidden and afterwards the owner "eats from G-d's table" - משלחן גבוה קזכי [Kiddushin 52b]. So too, tevel is essentially terumah mixed in with chullin and forbidden as kodshim before the throwing of the blood and after the separation the kohanim "eat from G-d's table". That answers Tosfos' question as to why according to Rashi the tevel is forbidden to kohanim before the separation if it is terumah and chullin mixed together. [See R' Elchonon in the Kovetz He-aros 38/10 and Mases Moshe of HaGaon R' Moshe Chevroni Pesachim 14].

This thesis is borne out by the magical language of the Rambam [Terumos 12/19] who write about terumah שעל שלחן המקום אוכלים  - they are eating from G-d's table which parallels the language of the gemara משלחן גבוה קזכו that it says about kodshim in numerous places in the gemara.

However it is not so simple: The mishna says that one can be mekadesh a woman with terumah [kiddushin 58a] but not with kodshim [Kiddushin 52b]. The gemara explains that the reason for this distinction is that kodshim משלחן גבוה קזכי and thus you can't use it for your own needs and marry a woman with it. So we see that terumah is NOT considered משלחן גבוה and thus one MAY marry a woman with it. Question!

This can be answered by saying that maybe there is some pasuk somewhere that permits one to use terumah to be mekdesh a woman despite the fact that it is משלחן גבוה just as we find with respect to גזל הגר [if one stole from a ger who has no יורשים and he swore that he didn't, he gives the principle and an added fifth to the kohanim] that one may use it to be mekadesh a woman even though משלחן גבוה קזכי [see Tosfos Zevachim 44b ואפילו לקדש בו אשה]. There is actually an explicit Tosfos in Beitza [21a ד"ה אבל] that says that even if משלחן גבוה קזכי there are instances where the object belongs to a person to the extent that he can be mekadesh a woman.

According to this we can say that terumah is an איסור השוה בכל - forbidden equally to all even though it is permitted to kohanim. This is based on on a gemara in Chullin [120] that a neveila is not considered הותרה מכללה [permitted from its usual איסור] with regard to melika [which is not shchita so it should be considered a neveila but it is not] "דשאני כהנים דמשלחן גבוה קזכי" - Rashi HaKadosh explains "והיתירא משום גבוה הוא אבל לגבי הדיוט לא אשכחן דהותר" - Meaning, this is not regular eating. This is a Divine, משלחן גבוה type of eating and is thus not considered הותר מכללה - released from the previous איסור because it is a different category אין גאנצן [like, totally!]. But with regard to regular eating we find no heter of the איסור נבילה.

This allows us a firm basis to say that terumah is forbidden to ALL, even kohanim, and when kohanim eat it is viewed as אכילת גבוה - Divine eating. So there is really no regular heter for eating terumah. [Reb Elchonon in Kovetz Hearos 47/5 and 10/5 seems to be saying the same sevara]. 

The gemara [Zevachim 88a] says that one may not bring a mincha from מדומע because it is not ממשקה ישראל - permitted for Jewish consumption.  Rashi explains that מדומע is a mixture of chullin and terumah. Tosfos asks: What is the problem with מדומע? Kohanim are allowed to eat terumah. ממשקה ישראל doesn't require that it be permitted to ALL Jews, only to some. Therefore, Tosfos offers an alternative explanation. 

Based on the foregoing, we can answer that Rashi holds that terumah is eaten by the kohanim משלחן גבוה from that table from upon high. They are not eating their own. Hence, the food is not ממשקה ישראל at all. It is Divine food, not people food.

Now, we were compelled to explain that according to Rashi terumah is משלחן גבוה in order to explain why kohanim may not eat tevel [because it is a mixture of tevel and terumah and forbidden until its separation]. But Tosfos follows a completely different line of thought. They say that tevel is an איסור עצמי - an independent prohibition. Based on this understanding they correctly asked - Why should מדומע be אסור? Terumah is מותר as is חולין and they don't subscribe to the notion of משלחן גבוה with respect to terumah. But according to Rashi, Tosfos' question is properly answered - terumah can't be considered ממשקה ישראל because it is not our own food but G-d's. 

As you will recall, we saw a machlokes in the gemara between the Rabbis and Ben Teima as to whether terumah or tevel is more a serious איסור. Based on what we learned we can understand the root of their machlokes.

The Rabbis hold that terumah is more serious because they subscribe to Rashi's theory that tevel is forbidden because it is chullin and terumah mixed together. Therefore, we must say that eating terumah - which is pure איסור - is a more serious aveirah. That is what they mean when they say טבל קל משום שאפשר לתקוניה - This is another way of saying that tevel is less חמור because it is terumah mixed in with chullin and therefore by separating the terumah one may eat it. So tevel is just a mixture while terumah is pure איסור and unfixable [for a yisrael] - as the gemara says. The inescapable conclusion is that תרומה is more חמור.

And the fact that טבל is אסור לכל [Ben Teima's reason for saying that טבל is more חמור] doesn't bother the Rabbis because according to the them, since tevel can't be consumed by kohanim it must be that terumah is considered אכילה משלחן גבוה [as we explained earlier] and is thus also חמור and considered אסור לכל. So both טבל and תרומה are אסור לכל and תרומה can't be fixed while טבל can be fixed so תרומה is more חמור and a choleh should eat טבל.

Ben Teima follows the approach that we outlined according to Tosfos, namely that טבל is an איסור עצמי an independent איסור and not a mixture of terumah and chullin. Thus, we are not compelled to say that תרומה is משלחן גבוה. Since tevel may not be eaten for its own independent reason and not because of its terumah status we have no difficulty understanding why kohanim can't eat it. This difficulty forced us to say [according to Rashi] that tevel and terumah are like a korban before the zrikas ha-dam and after. But now we assume that tevel is independently אסור and have no problem explaining the איסור אכילה to kohanim. If so, תרומה is more קל because it is permitted to kohanim [as אכילה הדיוטית - regular eating and not from the Divine table] while טבל is more חמור because [as the gemara says] it is אסור לכל.

AHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!