In this lesson we will learn the tenth Mishnah of chapter 11, the Mishnah that concludes Maseches Terumos. The Mishnah deals with the laws of kindling oil of Terumah that has become tamei, and with the question of to what extent non-kohanim may benefit from that kindling.
Let us begin with the basic principle: Terumah that is tahor may be eaten only by a kohen, and there is a Torah prohibition against a non-kohen benefiting from it. Once the Terumah has become tamei, it is still given to the kohen, and he may burn it and use it as fuel. Therefore, if it is oil, the kohen may kindle it and benefit from that burning.
The Rabbis forbade a non-kohen to benefit from eating Terumah that is tamei, and therefore he must give it to a kohen. However, this prohibition was lifted, as we will see in our Mishnah, in the case of kindling for light: since the kohen benefits from the light, non-kohanim may also benefit from it at that same time.
The Mishnah divides into two separate parts, containing two entirely different cases.
The first part: kindling in a place where kohanim also benefit from it:
The Mishnah permits kindling "shemen sereifah" - literally, oil designated for burning, meaning oil of Terumah that became tamei, which halachah requires to be burned. The Mishnah lists four places where it may be kindled, even though a non-kohen will also benefit from it, since kohanim benefit from it:
A shul
A beis midrash
Mavoi afeil - a dark alleyway.
Al gabei choleh - for a sick person, and even though the sick person is not a kohen, his visitors are kohanim.
In all of these cases, provided that a kohen is present there and benefits from the light, there is nothing preventing others from benefiting as well, for it makes no difference: the light that serves the kohen serves everyone, and a candle for one is a candle for a hundred.
It is worth noting that the permission is not based simply on providing a public service, but on the assumption that kohanim are found in the place. In a dark alleyway one cannot assume that a kohen is there on a regular basis; rather, he passes through from time to time, or may pass through, and he is thereby provided with the benefit of a lit alleyway whenever he is there. It emerges that at least in this case non-kohanim benefit even at a time when no kohen is present.
The Mishnah uses the term "birshus", and there are two ways to explain it:
The common explanation: in the presence of the kohen.
The Rambam understands that it means with the kohen's permission, that is, that it may be burned only with his consent - an understanding that changes the picture considerably.
A bas Yisrael who married a kohen:
Here the Mishnah deals with a woman whose father is not a kohen, but who married a kohen. As a child she was an Israelite, and she could not burn oil of tamei Terumah; but once she married, as the wife of a kohen, she may benefit from Terumah permissibly. The Mishnah adds that she is "lemudah etzel aviha" - accustomed to visiting her father's house, and he is not a kohen, and the law is that "aviha madlik birshutah": the father may light the lamp so that there will be light around her - with her permission according to the Rambam, or in her presence according to the other commentators.
This needs to be understood: what is the novelty here, and what is the significance of the condition "lemudah," that she is accustomed to come? Seemingly her regular visiting should not be a factor, and even if this were her first visit in many years it should be permitted to light for her, since she too benefits from the light.
The ArtScroll commentary cites a fine explanation in the name of the Aruch HaShulchan: since she comes regularly - for example every Tuesday at eight o'clock - the father does not want her to stumble in the dark as she enters the house. He may therefore go out of the house even before she arrives and light the lamps at the entrance, so that she can come in safely. In other words, even though she is not yet present, since she comes regularly and will benefit from the light, he is permitted to do so.
The second part: the house of feasting and the house of mourning:
This part too deals with lighting oil of tamei Terumah, but in an entirely different case: public gatherings where one may assume that kohanim are present. Seemingly, based on the principle explained in the previous part, it should be permitted to light lamps there with oil designated for burning, since everyone benefits - kohanim and non-kohanim alike. But in both types of gathering there is room for concern, and this is because the atmosphere in each is completely different: the house of feasting, which is a party or a wedding meal, and the house of mourning.
The house of feasting: On the one hand, there is reason to be concerned that the guests behave with levity and that the company has been drinking, and perhaps they will lose control and take the lamp off to a private corner, so that a person derives private benefit with no kohen present. On the other hand, one could say that the participants are dressed in their finest clothes and will not touch dirty, grimy oil lamps.
The house of mourning: On the one hand, those who come to comfort are not dressed in fine clothing and are not worried about getting dirty, and they might therefore take the lamp that was lit for everyone and move it to a private corner. On the other hand, one could say that people in a house of mourning do not busy themselves with fire and lamps; they leave them where they are, and there is no concern that they will move them.
So there is a doubt in both directions in both situations, and one can draw up a two by two table: to be stringent or lenient in each of them. Corresponding to these four possibilities, the Mishnah brings four opinions of Tannaim:
Rabbi Yehudah - "madlikin b'veis hamishteh aval lo b'veis ha'evel": At a feast it is permitted, since those dressed in their fine clothes will not touch the dirty lamps; but in a house of mourning, where the clothing is not fine, there is reason to be concerned that they will move the fire.
Rabbi Yose - "b'veis ha'evel aval lo b'veis hamishteh": In a house of mourning it is permitted, since those present are occupied with other matters and do not move lamps; but at a meal, out of joy, they are liable to move the lamps.
Rabbi Meir - "oser kan v'chan": He adopts both stringencies and forbids in both cases.
Rabbi Shimon - "matir kan v'chan": In both scenarios, at a meal and in a house of mourning, it is permitted to light lamps for the benefit of kohanim together with non-kohanim.
The halachah follows Rabbi Shimon, who is lenient, that it is permitted to light the lamps in both cases.
In summary: We learned that oil of tamei Terumah, whose law is that it must be burned, may be lit in places where kohanim too benefit from the light - a synagogue, a beis midrash, a dark alleyway and at the bedside of a sick person - since a lamp for one is a lamp for a hundred; we examined the two understandings of the word "birshus," the law of an Israelite woman married to a kohen who regularly visits her father's house, and the dispute among the Tannaim regarding the house of feasting and the house of mourning, where the halachah follows Rabbi Shimon, who permits in both.
With this we complete and conclude Maseches Terumos - mazal tov, and from here we begin the next tractate, Maseches Maasros.