We begin Maseches Terumos. Alongside the shiurim there is a full introduction that has been recorded, and it is recommended to listen to it first, as well as to review the study sheet for anyone unfamiliar with the order in which Terumos and Ma'asros are separated. We now turn to Chapter 1, Mishnah 1 - the opening Mishnah of the tractate, which lists five categories of people who may not separate Terumah, and even if they did separate it, their separation is not valid: the produce set aside for the kohen remains tevel, with no sanctity and no validity whatsoever.
The source of the law:
The source for these five is a comparison between the Terumah given to the kohanim and the terumah that the Jewish people gave in the wilderness for the building of the Mishkan. In Parashas Terumah, which deals with the gifts donated for the construction of the Mishkan, the Torah says: "Speak to the Children of Israel and let them take for Me a portion; from every man whose heart moves him you shall take My portion," and the verse continues: "And this is the portion that you shall take from them: gold, silver and copper," and so on. Several derivations are learned from this verse: just as in the building of the Mishkan there were limitations on who was able to donate, so too regarding the separation of Terumah as a gift to the kohen.
The language of the Mishnah: "Chamishah lo yisromu, ve'im tarmu - ein terumasan terumah" - five types of people may not separate Terumah, and if they did separate it, what they separated has no status of Terumah at all, and the food they tithed remains in its state of tevel.
The first - a cheresh:
The cheresh of the Mishnah is a deaf-mute, who is considered someone who lacks da'as, and he is excluded by the verse "whose heart moves him." It is worth noting that when the Torah uses the word "lev" or "libo," it almost always refers to a person's mind - not to the rational part of it, which is called seichel, but to that part which is driven by emotion and intuition; da'as, by contrast, means understanding the consequences of one's actions. The cheresh is not presumed to be of sound mind, and since he lacks da'as, he cannot separate Terumah.
Let us picture the situation: we are speaking of someone born deaf, who therefore never learned to speak, since no information ever entered his mind through his ears. In earlier times it was taken for granted that such a person was entirely lacking in mental capacity. In our day, wonders have been achieved in teaching people to communicate through sign language, and the question of whether a deaf person who has learned to speak changes the law lies beyond the scope of our Mishnah. The Mishnah assumes that the deaf-mute neither hears nor speaks, has no da'as, and is therefore excluded by the verse "whose heart moves him," since he is not considered to possess sufficient da'as to donate from his heart. And if he did separate Terumah, his separation has no validity at all.
The second - a shoteh:
The shoteh is not mentally competent, and he too cannot donate from his heart, since he lacks clear da'as. Many people mistakenly understand that a shoteh means a fool, someone who is not clever enough - but that is not the definition. Chazal describe the shoteh in one of two ways: either he does not know how to look after himself, and wanders alone in dangerous places at night or sleeps in a cemetery without realizing that he is endangering himself; or he destroys his own property, without giving any thought to why a person would ruin what belongs to him. The shoteh, then, is one who is detached from reality and does not understand the consequences of his actions, and for that reason he is incapable of fulfilling "whose heart moves him" and giving with da'as.
To sharpen the distinction, a parable is often told: a man was stranded with a flat tire opposite a mental institution. He changed the wheel, but the bolts fell into the sewer and he had no way to attach it. One of the patients called out to him through the window: "Take one bolt from each of the other three wheels, and you will have three bolts for the fourth wheel; three bolts will hold each wheel, and you can drive that way to the garage and replace what is missing." The man was astonished that the idea had never occurred to him, and asked: "If you are so clever, what are you doing in there?" He answered: "I am crazy, but I am not stupid."
We must therefore distinguish between being detached from reality and lacking intelligence. Someone who is not bright is not the subject here; our concern is with someone who is detached from reality in terms of the consequences of his actions - that is the shoteh, who cannot separate Terumah.
The third - a katan:
A katan is a child. Usually a deaf-mute, an imbecile and a minor are listed together as those who lack understanding, so one might have thought that all three are excluded by the same part of the verse, the part dealing with the need for a "heart," for the full understanding that moves a person to give. But that is not the case, at least according to the Bartenura. The reason: a child in the year before his bar mitzvah may reach the "age of vows," at which his vows and prohibitions take effect, and that is possible only if he possesses a certain intellectual maturity and some level of understanding. For that reason the verse "yidvenu libo" is not enough to exclude him.
The exclusion of the minor is therefore derived from a different part of the verse: "me'eis kol ish" - a man, to the exclusion of a minor. This is not an exclusion of a woman, but an exclusion of one who is not an adult. The language of Chazal has two categories: an adult is called an ish, and a minor is called a tinok. In modern Hebrew a tinok is an infant, but in the language of the Mishnah and of Chazal even an eleven or twelve year old is still a tinok, since he has not yet reached adulthood.
Two conditions are required for adulthood in a male: the age of thirteen, and the growth of two hairs - these are the simanim, the physical signs of maturity. Physical signs that appeared before the age of thirteen are not relevant. Once he has reached thirteen, there is a discussion whether we assume that he grew signs and they fell out, and that is indeed the assumption in practice; but for our purposes let us keep matters simple: we are speaking of someone who is thirteen and also has the signs of maturity, two hairs.
For women the age is twelve, and they too require the same signs, the growth of two hairs. There are other possible signs of physical maturity, but the standard definition is the two hairs.
A clarification: halachah always says "thirteen years and a day." The reason is simple: a person born on the tenth of Shevat has completed a full year of life on the ninth of Shevat, and the tenth of Shevat begins the following year - so he is a year and a day old. Accordingly, on his thirteenth birthday he completed his thirteenth year the previous evening, and now the first day of his fourteenth year begins. That is the reason for the phrase "thirteen years and a day," and nevertheless what we call the birthday is the birthday.
It emerges that one who has reached adulthood - thirteen for a male and twelve for a female - and has grown two hairs may separate Terumah; and if not, he cannot. These are the first three categories.
The fourth - one who separates Terumah from what is not his:
One who separates Terumah from produce that does not belong to him has accomplished nothing, as the verse states, "And this is the Terumah that you shall take from them" - from what is yours, and not from what belongs to others. An important qualification: there is no problem at all with a person appointing another Jew as his agent. An agent is an extension of the one who appointed him, and there is nothing wrong with a person authorizing his friend to separate Terumah on his behalf. The Mishnah is dealing with someone who takes unilateral initiative and separates Terumah from his friend's produce without authorization - such a separation is entirely ineffective, by force of the verse.
The fifth - a non-Jew:
"Nochri shetaram es shel Yisrael, afilu birshus - ein terumaso terumah" - a non-Jew cannot separate Terumah on behalf of a Jew, even if the Jew explicitly authorized him to do so; he is simply not capable of it. The reason is a derivation based on a different verse, not the one we saw, but a verse dealing with the laws of Terumas Ma'aser, in which there is a superfluous word: "gam" - "gam atem." From this superfluous word we learn that only a Jew can effect the separation from another Jew's produce, even as an agent, and not a non-Jew.
In summary: in this Mishnah we counted five whose Terumah is not Terumah: the deaf-mute and the imbecile, who lack full understanding and are excluded by "yidvenu libo"; the minor, who is excluded by "me'eis kol ish" until he reaches adulthood - thirteen for a male and twelve for a female, together with the growth of two hairs; one who separates from produce that is not his without permission, who is excluded by "me'itam"; and a non-Jew who separates from a Jew's produce, even with permission, who is excluded by the superfluous "gam atem." In all these cases nothing has been accomplished, and the produce remains untithed.