Terumos, Chapter 9, Mishnah 2. In the previous Mishnah we began discussing the law that when a person plants Terumah in the ground, the produce that grows from it is considered, by Torah law, completely ordinary produce - tevel that requires the usual tithing - while by rabbinic law it is treated as Terumah. This creates a complex situation: by Torah law it is ordinary produce, subject to all the stringencies and requirements that apply to non-sacred crops, and by rabbinic law it is Terumah, subject to the laws of Terumah. Since we rule stringently in both directions, our Mishnah and the one that follows it come to address the practical consequences.
The obligation of gifts to the poor:
The Mishnah opens: "Vechayav b'leket uv'shichechah uv'pe'ah" - since by Torah law the produce growing from this field is ordinary grain that is obligated in tithes, the obligation of gifts to the poor applies to it:
Leket: individual stalks, one or two, that fall to the ground during the wheat harvest. Whatever falls stays where it is and may not be gathered up.
Shichechah: the forgotten sheaves. The harvester gathers small bundles of wheat in the field and brings them to the threshing floor for processing; if he forgot one or two bundles and left them in the field, he may not go back and take them, but leaves them for the poor.
Pe'ah: a portion of the field, about one sixtieth, that is left unharvested, and the poor come and gather it for themselves.
These gifts do not apply to actual Terumah, but here it is not Terumah by Torah law. However, since by rabbinic law it has the status of Terumah, a restriction arises: although we permit leaving this produce as gifts to the poor, a poor person who is not a kohen may not eat it, since by rabbinic law what grows from the ground is considered Terumah.
So how should they proceed? The Mishnah states: "Aniyei Yisrael v'aniyei kohanim melaktin" - both a Yisrael who is not a kohen and a kohen may gather these gifts. However, "aniyei Yisrael mochrin es shelahen l'kohanim bidmei terumah, v'hadamim shelahen" - the Yisrael gathers but does not eat, and sells what he gathered to a kohen.
The price charged to the kohen is the going price for Terumah, not the price of ordinary produce. Terumah sells for far less than ordinary food, since only a kohen, and only a ritually pure kohen, may eat it, and therefore the demand for it is not great. The Yisrael who gathered it therefore sells it to a kohen at the standard Terumah prices, and the proceeds remain in his hands to do with as he wishes - this is "v'hadamim shelahen".
The view of Rabbi Tarfon:
Rabbi Tarfon disagrees and rules: "Lo yelaktu ela aniyei kohanim, shema yishkechu v'yitnu l'soch pihen". In his opinion, we have here a mishap waiting to happen: since this grain is treated as Terumah by rabbinic law, a non-kohen who is busy gathering the leket, shichechah and pe'ah is liable to forget this and put a bit into his mouth, and he will have eaten rabbinic Terumah. For this reason, poor people who are not kohanim should not be permitted to gather these gifts, lest they eat them unintentionally.
Rabbi Akiva's response:
Rabbi Akiva responds: "Im kein, lo yelaktu ela tehorim" - if there really is a concern that a person will put the food into his mouth out of forgetfulness, limiting it to kohanim alone is not enough, for a ritually impure kohen, who may not eat Terumah, is also liable to forget and eat it.
There are two ways to understand his words:
The approach of the Bartenura: Rabbi Akiva accepts Rabbi Tarfon's premise that we must be concerned that someone may eat it by mistake, but in his view Rabbi Tarfon did not go far enough: gathering must indeed be restricted, yet limiting it to kohanim is not sufficient, since even a kohen who is tamei is liable to stumble, and gathering should be permitted only to a kohen who is tahor. This is indeed the implication of the Bartenura, for he rules that the halachah follows Rabbi Akiva - meaning that Rabbi Akiva disagrees with the first Tanna, states a different halachah, and the halachah is decided like him: only a kohen who is tahor may gather this Terumah.
A second explanation: Rabbi Akiva is speaking rhetorically and is rejecting Rabbi Tarfon's concern. In his view, it is inconceivable that a person would absentmindedly eat from the food he is gathering and forget that it is Terumah; he therefore responds: by your reasoning you would have to restrict even those who are tahor. And since we certainly do not conduct ourselves that way, it follows that we should not prevent even a non-kohen from gathering.
As stated, the Bartenura, and the Rambam along with him, take Rabbi Akiva's words at face value and rule like him as a matter of halachah: one who takes produce that was Terumah and improperly plants it in the ground, what grows from it is Terumah by rabbinic law. Therefore, by Torah law he is obligated to leave leket, shich'chah and pe'ah; and by rabbinic law, since this is Terumah and we must be concerned that the gatherer may eat it by mistake out of forgetfulness, these gifts may be gathered only by kohanim who are tahor.
In summary: In this Mishnah we examined the practical consequences of the overlap between Torah law and rabbinic law in the case of one who plants Terumah: by Torah law the field is obligated in leket, shich'chah and pe'ah, and by rabbinic law its growths have the status of Terumah. Accordingly, the first Tanna rules that everyone may gather, and the poor of Israel sell their portion to kohanim at the price of Terumah and keep the money; Rabbi Tarfon limits the gathering to poor kohanim out of concern for a mishap; and Rabbi Akiva adds that only those who are tahor may gather - and this is how the halachah is decided according to the Bartenura and the Rambam.
In the next Mishnah we will continue to deal with the further consequences of the law of one who plants Terumah.