The Rules of Separating Trumot and Maaserot - Revision history

NachiScheiner: /* Min Hamukaf (lit. from that which is together) */

2025-12-29T16:47:22Z

Min Hamukaf (lit. from that which is together)

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:47, 29 December 2025
Line 31:		Line 31:

	# ''Mukaf'' means together, close by.<ref>Rashi Gittin 30b, amongst many others (see Derech Emunah Trumot chap. 3 Tziyun Halacha 260). </ref> Some explain it to mean surrounded by.<ref>Rambam Peirush Hamishnayot Trumot 4:3 (see Derech Emunah Trumot chap. 3 Tziyun Halacha 260). </ref>		# ''Mukaf'' means together, close by.<ref>Rashi Gittin 30b, amongst many others (see Derech Emunah Trumot chap. 3 Tziyun Halacha 260). </ref> Some explain it to mean surrounded by.<ref>Rambam Peirush Hamishnayot Trumot 4:3 (see Derech Emunah Trumot chap. 3 Tziyun Halacha 260). </ref>
	# Trumah Gedolah should be separated ''Min Hamukaf,'' i.e the Trumah should be ~~taken from produce that is~~ grouped together''.''<ref>Mishnah Challah 1:9; Rambam Trumot 3:17; Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 331:25.		# Trumah Gedolah should be separated ''Min Hamukaf,'' i.e the Trumah and the produce from which you are taking it from should all be grouped together''.''<ref>Mishnah Challah 1:9; Rambam Trumot 3:17; Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 331:25.

	*Most Rishonim (see Rashi Sotah 30a, Tosfot Yevamot 92b, Rash Bikkurim 2:5, Rashba, Ritva and Ran Gittin 30b, amongst many others- for a more detailed list see Derech Emunah Trumot 3:17 Tziyun Halacha 262) assume ''Min Hamukaf'' is a din Deoryta learned from the pasuk 'והרמותם ממנו', מן המוקף לו.		*Most Rishonim (see Rashi Sotah 30a, Tosfot Yevamot 92b, Rash Bikkurim 2:5, Rashba, Ritva and Ran Gittin 30b, amongst many others- for a more detailed list see Derech Emunah Trumot 3:17 Tziyun Halacha 262) assume ''Min Hamukaf'' is a din Deoryta learned from the pasuk 'והרמותם ממנו', מן המוקף לו.
Line 44:		Line 44:

	*The Tosfot Rid Bava Kamma 115b is of the opinion that the ''Mukaf'' that's needed for Maaser Rishon, Sheini and Ani is only that the produce all be in his possession, not that they actually are physically touching.</ref>		*The Tosfot Rid Bava Kamma 115b is of the opinion that the ''Mukaf'' that's needed for Maaser Rishon, Sheini and Ani is only that the produce all be in his possession, not that they actually are physically touching.</ref>
	#Regarding produce placed in an open area, as long as they are in a close proximity of each other they are considered to be ''Min Hamukaf.''<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 325:2 citing from the Rosh; Rash Maaser Sheini 3:13 quoted and explained by the Chazon Ish (Zeraim Likutim 4:5); Biur Hagra Y.D. 325:8. This is the main opinion cited in Mishpitei Aretz 12:5. </ref> Some are stringent and require the produce to be touching.<ref>This is the opinion of Rabbeinu Tam (Sefer Hayashar Sh"t page 172, cited in Mishpitei Aretz chap. 12 fn. 10; see also Tosfot Pesachim 46b s.v. Ho'il v'ie at the end). </ref>		#Regarding produce placed in an open area, as long as they are in a close proximity of each other they are considered to be ''Min Hamukaf.''<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 325:2 citing from the Rosh; Rash Maaser Sheini 3:13 quoted and explained by the Chazon Ish (Zeraim Likutim 4:5); Biur Hagra Y.D. 325:8. This is the main opinion cited in Mishpitei Aretz 12:5. </ref> Some are stringent and require the produce and the portion set for Trumah to be touching.<ref>This is the opinion of Rabbeinu Tam (Sefer Hayashar Sh"t page 172, cited in Mishpitei Aretz chap. 12 fn. 10; see also Tosfot Pesachim 46b s.v. Ho'il v'ie at the end). </ref>
	#The walls of a room combine the produce within them to make them ''Mukaf.''<ref>Rambam Trumot 3:18 (see comments of Derech Emunah Ad. Loc.); Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 331:26; Mishpitei Aretz 12:7. See also Biur Hagra Y.D. 325:8 and Derech Emunah Trumot Biur Halacha 3:18 who speak at legnth about this topic. </ref>		#The walls of a room combine the produce within them to make them ''Mukaf.''<ref>Rambam Trumot 3:18 (see comments of Derech Emunah Ad. Loc.); Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 331:26; Mishpitei Aretz 12:7. See also Biur Hagra Y.D. 325:8 and Derech Emunah Trumot Biur Halacha 3:18 who speak at legnth about this topic. </ref>
	#Produce of the same species<ref>See Rambam Trumot 3:19; Mishpitei Aretz 12:12 regarding a mixture of different species within one vessel. </ref> that is held in separate containers has the status of ''Mukaf'' only when the containers are in contact.<ref>Rambam Trumot 3:18 (according to Derech Emunah Ad. Loc. si'if katan 159); Biur Hagra Y.D. 325:8; Derech Emunah Trumot Biur Halacha 3:18; Mishpitei Aretz 12:8.</ref> This is necessary even when the containers are within the walls of a room.		#Produce of the same species<ref>See Rambam Trumot 3:19; Mishpitei Aretz 12:12 regarding a mixture of different species within one vessel. </ref> that is held in separate containers has the status of ''Mukaf'' only when the containers are in contact.<ref>Rambam Trumot 3:18 (according to Derech Emunah Ad. Loc. si'if katan 159); Biur Hagra Y.D. 325:8; Derech Emunah Trumot Biur Halacha 3:18; Mishpitei Aretz 12:8.</ref> This is necessary even when the containers are within the walls of a room.

NachiScheiner: /* Separating from the exempt for the obligated */

2025-12-28T16:41:32Z

Separating from the exempt for the obligated

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:41, 28 December 2025
Line 16:		Line 16:
	##Similarly, one shouldn't separate from safeik (uncertain) Tevel for definite Tevel or vise versa.<ref>Mishpitei Aretz 8:10. Similarly, 8:11 states that one who doubts a hashgacha and separates Trumot and Maaserot out of uncertainty should only separate from each batch onto itself, as each batch is a new safeik regarding the mashgiach's separation of Trumot and Maaserot.</ref> If one did take Trumah or Maaser in such a manner they should consult an expert.		##Similarly, one shouldn't separate from safeik (uncertain) Tevel for definite Tevel or vise versa.<ref>Mishpitei Aretz 8:10. Similarly, 8:11 states that one who doubts a hashgacha and separates Trumot and Maaserot out of uncertainty should only separate from each batch onto itself, as each batch is a new safeik regarding the mashgiach's separation of Trumot and Maaserot.</ref> If one did take Trumah or Maaser in such a manner they should consult an expert.
	##Ideally, one should not separate produce obligated in Trumot and Maaserot by one rabbinic enactment (e.g produce nowadays) for produce obligated by two rabbinic enactments (e.g produce nowadays that was grown to be sold<ref>The Chazon Ish (Demai 12:19; see also Derech Emunah Trumot 1:8 Biur Halacha s.v. m'heichan where he seems to disagree, see the next footnote to this page) gives this example. See Rambam Maaser 2:1 that produce grown to be sold is only obligated in Trumot and Maaserot on a derabanan level. See also Mishpitei Aretz chapter 8 fn. 28 for an extensive discussion on the topic.</ref>), or vise versa.<ref>Beit Yosef Y.D. 330; Mishneh L'melech Trumot 5:17 and Chazon Ish Demai 12:19. The Turei Even (Megillah 19b) disagrees with this entire idea and writes that all levels of derabanan are equal. Rav Chaim Kanievsky (Derech Emunah Trumot 1:8 Biur Halacha s.v. m'heichan) takes a middle approach in that there's no difference between one or two dinei derabanan, however, not all dinei derabanan are created equal [he thinks some are stringent and some are lenient].</ref> If one did take Trumah or Maaser in such a manner his actions are effective and the produce is permitted.<ref>Mishpitei Aretz 8:14 fn. 30 citing from many Achronim. There is a unique opinion of the Levushei Srad (cited Ibid.) who writes that the Trumah is completely ineffective.</ref>		##Ideally, one should not separate produce obligated in Trumot and Maaserot by one rabbinic enactment (e.g produce nowadays) for produce obligated by two rabbinic enactments (e.g produce nowadays that was grown to be sold<ref>The Chazon Ish (Demai 12:19; see also Derech Emunah Trumot 1:8 Biur Halacha s.v. m'heichan where he seems to disagree, see the next footnote to this page) gives this example. See Rambam Maaser 2:1 that produce grown to be sold is only obligated in Trumot and Maaserot on a derabanan level. See also Mishpitei Aretz chapter 8 fn. 28 for an extensive discussion on the topic.</ref>), or vise versa.<ref>Beit Yosef Y.D. 330; Mishneh L'melech Trumot 5:17 and Chazon Ish Demai 12:19. The Turei Even (Megillah 19b) disagrees with this entire idea and writes that all levels of derabanan are equal. Rav Chaim Kanievsky (Derech Emunah Trumot 1:8 Biur Halacha s.v. m'heichan) takes a middle approach in that there's no difference between one or two dinei derabanan, however, not all dinei derabanan are created equal [he thinks some are stringent and some are lenient].</ref> If one did take Trumah or Maaser in such a manner his actions are effective and the produce is permitted.<ref>Mishpitei Aretz 8:14 fn. 30 citing from many Achronim. There is a unique opinion of the Levushei Srad (cited Ibid.) who writes that the Trumah is completely ineffective.</ref>
			##Some say that one shouldn't separate from produce that has yet to enter the house for produce that has entered the house (for more on the laws of produce entering the house see [[Tevel and Demai]]).<ref>Derech Emunah Trumot chap. 5 si'if katan 47 and tziyun halacha 93 cites this halacha as a machloket Rishonim; Similarly, Sh"t Tzitz Eleizer (11:66) does so.

			Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Ma'adanei Aretz Trumot 5:4) brings the lenient opinion as the formative halacha.</ref>
	#Trumot and Maaserot may not be separated between produce attached to the ground and harvested produce, nor between two different batches of attached produce. Any separation performed in this manner is void, and the tithes must be retaken correctly.<ref>Kiddushin 62a; Rambam Trumot 5:9; Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 331:55; Mishpitei Aretz 8:15 fn. 53. See Mishpitei Aretz 8:16-17 who discusses the potential to separate onto the attached to the ground with the intent that the Trumot and Maaserot shouldn't take effect until they are harvested.</ref>		#Trumot and Maaserot may not be separated between produce attached to the ground and harvested produce, nor between two different batches of attached produce. Any separation performed in this manner is void, and the tithes must be retaken correctly.<ref>Kiddushin 62a; Rambam Trumot 5:9; Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 331:55; Mishpitei Aretz 8:15 fn. 53. See Mishpitei Aretz 8:16-17 who discusses the potential to separate onto the attached to the ground with the intent that the Trumot and Maaserot shouldn't take effect until they are harvested.</ref>
	===Separating from the bad for the good===		===Separating from the bad for the good===

NachiScheiner: /* General Rules of Separating */

2025-12-26T15:47:24Z

General Rules of Separating

Show changes

NachiScheiner: /* How is a year counted for Trumah and Maaser? */

2025-08-13T21:46:44Z

How is a year counted for Trumah and Maaser?

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:46, 13 August 2025
Line 3:		Line 3:
	===Separating produce from different years===		===Separating produce from different years===
	#One may not take [[Trumot and Maaserot]] from produce of one year for produce of another year. If one did take Trumah or Maaser in such a manner one’s action is ineffective and he must take Trumah and Maaser again properly.<ref>Mishnah Trumot 1:5, Rambam (Hilchot Terumot 5:11), Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 331:57, Chazon Ovadyah (Tu Beshevat pg 43), Mishpitei Aretz 8:5. In a scenario where fruits from different years get mixed up, see Mishpitei Aretz pg. 124 for what to do. With regards to when the year starts for each type of produce see Mishpitei Haaretz pg. 120-3. The general rule is that the year for grains and vegetables is determined by Rosh Hashanah, and for fruits that grow on trees it's the 15th of Shevat.</ref>		#One may not take [[Trumot and Maaserot]] from produce of one year for produce of another year. If one did take Trumah or Maaser in such a manner one’s action is ineffective and he must take Trumah and Maaser again properly.<ref>Mishnah Trumot 1:5, Rambam (Hilchot Terumot 5:11), Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 331:57, Chazon Ovadyah (Tu Beshevat pg 43), Mishpitei Aretz 8:5. In a scenario where fruits from different years get mixed up, see Mishpitei Aretz pg. 124 for what to do. With regards to when the year starts for each type of produce see Mishpitei Haaretz pg. 120-3. The general rule is that the year for grains and vegetables is determined by Rosh Hashanah, and for fruits that grow on trees it's the 15th of Shevat.</ref>
	====How is a year counted for ~~Trumah~~ and ~~Maaser~~?====		====How is a year counted for Trumot and Maaserot?====
	#For vegetables the year begins on [[Rosh Hashana]], the first of Tishrei.<ref>Mishnah Rosh Hashanah 1:1; Rambam Maaser Sheini 1:2.</ref> Trumot and Maaserot are counted from when the vegetables were harvested (before or after Rosh Hashana).<ref>Gemara [[Rosh Hashana]] 12a; Rambam (Trumot 5:11, Maaser Sheini 1:4), Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 331:57, 331:125; Chazon Ovadyah (Tu Beshevat pg 43-4); Mishpitei Aretz 8:6.</ref>		#For vegetables the year begins on [[Rosh Hashana]], the first of Tishrei.<ref>Mishnah Rosh Hashanah 1:1; Rambam Maaser Sheini 1:2.</ref> Trumot and Maaserot are counted from when the vegetables were harvested (before or after Rosh Hashana).<ref>Gemara [[Rosh Hashana]] 12a; Rambam (Trumot 5:11, Maaser Sheini 1:4), Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 331:57, 331:125; Chazon Ovadyah (Tu Beshevat pg 43-4); Mishpitei Aretz 8:6.</ref>
	##Some are of the opinion that Trumot and Maaserot are counted from when the vegetables complete their ripening (i.e continued growth is no longer helpful), even if they are still attached to the ground.<ref>See Tosfos Rosh Hashana 13b s.v. achar. The Chazon Ish (Shvi'it 27:7, cited in Mishpitei Aretz chapter 8 fn. 9) explains that the completion of ripening occurs when the produce no longer becomes better by remaining attached to the ground.</ref>		##Some are of the opinion that Trumot and Maaserot are counted from when the vegetables complete their ripening (i.e continued growth is no longer helpful), even if they are still attached to the ground.<ref>See Tosfos Rosh Hashana 13b s.v. achar. The Chazon Ish (Shvi'it 27:7, cited in Mishpitei Aretz chapter 8 fn. 9) explains that the completion of ripening occurs when the produce no longer becomes better by remaining attached to the ground.</ref>

YitzchakSultan1 at 18:42, 12 August 2025

2025-08-12T18:42:56Z

Show changes

NachiScheiner: /* Min Hamukaf (lit. from that which is together) */

2025-07-30T03:20:06Z

Min Hamukaf (lit. from that which is together)

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:20, 30 July 2025
Line 28:		Line 28:

	# ''Mukaf'' means together, close by.<ref>Rashi Gittin 30b, amongst many others (see Derech Emunah Trumot chap. 3 Tziyun Halacha 260). </ref> Some explain it to mean surrounded by.<ref>Rambam Peirush Hamishnayot Trumot 4:3 (see Derech Emunah Trumot chap. 3 Tziyun Halacha 260). </ref>		# ''Mukaf'' means together, close by.<ref>Rashi Gittin 30b, amongst many others (see Derech Emunah Trumot chap. 3 Tziyun Halacha 260). </ref> Some explain it to mean surrounded by.<ref>Rambam Peirush Hamishnayot Trumot 4:3 (see Derech Emunah Trumot chap. 3 Tziyun Halacha 260). </ref>
	# Trumah Gedolah should be separated ''Min Hamukaf.''<ref>Mishnah Challah 1:9; Rambam Trumot 3:17; Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 331:25.		# Trumah Gedolah should be separated ''Min Hamukaf,'' i.e the Trumah should be taken from produce that is grouped together''.''<ref>Mishnah Challah 1:9; Rambam Trumot 3:17; Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 331:25.

	*Most Rishonim (see Rashi Sotah 30a, Tosfot Yevamot 92b, Rash Bikkurim 2:5, Rashba, Ritva and Ran Gittin 30b, amongst many others- for a more detailed list see Derech Emunah Trumot 3:17 Tziyun Halacha 262) assume ''Min Hamukaf'' is a din Deoryta learned from the pasuk 'והרמותם ממנו', מן המוקף לו.		*Most Rishonim (see Rashi Sotah 30a, Tosfot Yevamot 92b, Rash Bikkurim 2:5, Rashba, Ritva and Ran Gittin 30b, amongst many others- for a more detailed list see Derech Emunah Trumot 3:17 Tziyun Halacha 262) assume ''Min Hamukaf'' is a din Deoryta learned from the pasuk 'והרמותם ממנו', מן המוקף לו.
Line 42:		Line 42:
	*The Tosfot Rid Bava Kamma 115b is of the opinion that the ''Mukaf'' that's needed for Maaser Rishon, Sheini and Ani is only that the produce all be in his possession, not that they actually are physically touching.</ref>		*The Tosfot Rid Bava Kamma 115b is of the opinion that the ''Mukaf'' that's needed for Maaser Rishon, Sheini and Ani is only that the produce all be in his possession, not that they actually are physically touching.</ref>
	#Regarding produce placed in an open area, as long as they are in a close proximity of each other they are considered to be ''Min Hamukaf.''<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 325:2 citing from the Rosh; Rash Maaser Sheini 3:13 quoted and explained by the Chazon Ish (Zeraim Likutim 4:5); Biur Hagra Y.D. 325:8. This is the main opinion cited in Mishpitei Aretz 12:5. </ref> Some are stringent and require the produce to be touching.<ref>This is the opinion of Rabbeinu Tam (Sefer Hayashar Sh"t page 172, cited in Mishpitei Aretz chap. 12 fn. 10; see also Tosfot Pesachim 46b s.v. Ho'il v'ie at the end). </ref>		#Regarding produce placed in an open area, as long as they are in a close proximity of each other they are considered to be ''Min Hamukaf.''<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 325:2 citing from the Rosh; Rash Maaser Sheini 3:13 quoted and explained by the Chazon Ish (Zeraim Likutim 4:5); Biur Hagra Y.D. 325:8. This is the main opinion cited in Mishpitei Aretz 12:5. </ref> Some are stringent and require the produce to be touching.<ref>This is the opinion of Rabbeinu Tam (Sefer Hayashar Sh"t page 172, cited in Mishpitei Aretz chap. 12 fn. 10; see also Tosfot Pesachim 46b s.v. Ho'il v'ie at the end). </ref>
			#The walls of a room combine the produce within them to make them ''Mukaf.''<ref>Rambam Trumot 3:18 (see comments of Derech Emunah Ad. Loc.); Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 331:26; Mishpitei Aretz 12:7. See also Biur Hagra Y.D. 325:8 and Derech Emunah Trumot Biur Halacha 3:18 who speak at legnth about this topic. </ref>
			#For produce (of the same species<ref>See Rambam Trumot 3:19; Mishpitei Aretz 12:12 regarding a mixture of different species within one vessel. </ref>) to be considered ''Mukaf'', individual vessels must be touching.<ref>Rambam Trumot 3:18 (according to Derech Emunah Ad. Loc. si'if katan 159); Biur Hagra Y.D. 325:8; Derech Emunah Trumot Biur Halacha 3:18; Mishpitei Aretz 12:8.</ref>
			##If the vessels are sealed and opening them would impair the product's quality (e.g., wine barrels), Trumah must be separated from each vessel individually.<ref>Rambam Trumot 3:18 regarding wine barrels. Some extend this halacha to any sealed produce which opening it would harm the quality (see Derech Emunah Ad. Loc. 160 and Tziyun Halacha 227; Mishpitei Aretz 12:9 fn. 17). Nonetheless, Derech Emunah (in Tziyun Halacha Ibid.) specifies that even if the halacha applied to all products, it would only concern large, significant vessels sealed in a way that requires breaking to open, such as a glued wine barrel.</ref>
			#For Shabbat and Yom Tov, if pressed for time, one may separate not ''Min Hamukaf''.<ref>Tosfot Gittin 30b, Yevamot 93b, amonst other places. Other Rishonim leave out this leniency, but nevertheless it is cited as l'halacha in the Sha'arei Tzedek of the Chochmat Adam and in the Chalat Lechem (see Mishpitei Aretz chap. 12 fn. 23). It is brought down as the formative halacha in Mishpitei Aretz 12:13.</ref>

	==Who Can Separate?==		==Who Can Separate?==

NachiScheiner: /* Min Hamukaf (lit. from that which is together) */

2025-07-28T18:13:44Z

Min Hamukaf (lit. from that which is together)

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:13, 28 July 2025
Line 27:		Line 27:
	== ''Min Hamukaf'' (lit. from that which is together) ==		== ''Min Hamukaf'' (lit. from that which is together) ==

			# ''Mukaf'' means together, close by.<ref>Rashi Gittin 30b, amongst many others (see Derech Emunah Trumot chap. 3 Tziyun Halacha 260). </ref> Some explain it to mean surrounded by.<ref>Rambam Peirush Hamishnayot Trumot 4:3 (see Derech Emunah Trumot chap. 3 Tziyun Halacha 260). </ref>
	# Trumah Gedolah should be separated ''Min Hamukaf.''<ref>Mishnah Challah 1:9; Rambam Trumot 3:17; Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 331:25.		# Trumah Gedolah should be separated ''Min Hamukaf.''<ref>Mishnah Challah 1:9; Rambam Trumot 3:17; Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 331:25.

	* Most Rishonim (see Rashi Sotah 30a, Tosfot Yevamot 92b, Rash Bikkurim 2:5, Rashba, Ritva and Ran Gittin 30b, amongst many others- for a more detailed list see Derech Emunah Trumot 3:17 Tziyun Halacha 262) assume ''Min Hamukaf'' is a din Deoryta learned from the pasuk 'והרמותם ממנו', מן המוקף לו.		*Most Rishonim (see Rashi Sotah 30a, Tosfot Yevamot 92b, Rash Bikkurim 2:5, Rashba, Ritva and Ran Gittin 30b, amongst many others- for a more detailed list see Derech Emunah Trumot 3:17 Tziyun Halacha 262) assume ''Min Hamukaf'' is a din Deoryta learned from the pasuk 'והרמותם ממנו', מן המוקף לו.

	* Some Rishonim (see Rashi Gittin 30b, Ritva Bava Metziah 38a quoting from his Rebbe, Raavad Trumot 3:20, amongst others- for a more detailed list see Derech Emunah Trumot 3:17 Tziyun Halacha 265) are of the opinion that it is only a din Derabanan and the ''drasha'' is only an ''asmachta''. </ref> Nevertheless, if it wasn't, the Trumah is still effective.<ref>Rambam Trumot 3:17; Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 331:25; Mishpitei Aretz 12:1.		*Some Rishonim (see Rashi Gittin 30b, Ritva Bava Metziah 38a quoting from his Rebbe, Raavad Trumot 3:20, amongst others- for a more detailed list see Derech Emunah Trumot 3:17 Tziyun Halacha 265) are of the opinion that it is only a din Derabanan and the ''drasha'' is only an ''asmachta''.</ref> Nevertheless, if it wasn't, the Trumah is still effective.<ref>Rambam Trumot 3:17; Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 331:25; Mishpitei Aretz 12:1.

	*See, however, Maadanei Aretz (volume 2 Halachot Pesukot 3:17) who suggests to revoke the separation. For more details on revoking separation see Mishpitei Aretz chapter 18.</ref>		*See, however, Maadanei Aretz (volume 2 Halachot Pesukot 3:17) who suggests to revoke the separation. For more details on revoking separation see Mishpitei Aretz chapter 18.</ref>
	## Ideally one should separate Trumat Maaser ''Min Hamukaf''.<ref>The Rambam (Trumot 3:20; cited also in the Rama Y.D. 331:24) writes that Trumat Maaser does not need to be separated ''Min Hamukaf,'' nonetheless, Talmidei Chachamim are careful to separate ''Min Hamukaf.'' The Shach (Y.D. 331:24) explains that Talmidei Chachamim are careful as the most ideal (''Mitzvah Min Hamuvchar'') way to separate Trumat Maaser is ''Min Hamukaf''. This is the formative halacha brought down in Mishpitei Aretz 12:4.		## Ideally one should separate Trumat Maaser ''Min Hamukaf''.<ref>The Rambam (Trumot 3:20; cited also in the Rama Y.D. 331:24) writes that Trumat Maaser does not need to be separated ''Min Hamukaf,'' nonetheless, Talmidei Chachamim are careful to separate ''Min Hamukaf.'' The Shach (Y.D. 331:24) explains that Talmidei Chachamim are careful as the most ideal (''Mitzvah Min Hamuvchar'') way to separate Trumat Maaser is ''Min Hamukaf''. This is the formative halacha brought down in Mishpitei Aretz 12:4.

	*There are some Rishonim (Tosfot Gittin 30b, amongst many others- see Derech Emunah Trumot 3:20 Tziyun Halacha 361) who write that ''Min Hamukaf'' is a regular din Derabanan, not just a ''Mitzvah Min Hamuvchar''. Contrarily, the Raavad (Trumot 3:20) writes that ''Min Hamukaf'' by Trumat Maaser only applies to a Levi that separates from his Maaser. </ref>		*There are some Rishonim (Tosfot Gittin 30b, amongst many others- see Derech Emunah Trumot 3:20 Tziyun Halacha 361) who write that ''Min Hamukaf'' is a regular din Derabanan, not just a ''Mitzvah Min Hamuvchar''. Contrarily, the Raavad (Trumot 3:20) writes that ''Min Hamukaf'' by Trumat Maaser only applies to a Levi that separates from his Maaser.</ref>
	## Maaser Rishon, Sheini and Ani do not need to be separated ''Min Hamukaf.''<ref>The Rambam (Maaser 1:6 based off of the Yerushalmi Trumot 2:2; cited also in Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 331:71) writes that Maaser Rishon does not need to be separated ''Min Hamukaf.'' This is the formative halacha cited in Shaarei Tzedek of the Chochmat Adam (10:11) and Mishpitei Aretz (12:5). </ref> However, some are of the opinion that they should be separated ''Min Hamukaf''.<ref>Some Rishonim (Ritva Niddah 7a, Meiri Kiddushin 51a, amongst others- see Derech Emunah Maaser 1:6 Tziyun Halacha 67) are of the opinion that there is a din derabanan of ''Mukaf'' by Maaser Rishon, Sheini and Ani.		## Maaser Rishon, Sheini and Ani do not need to be separated ''Min Hamukaf.''<ref>The Rambam (Maaser 1:6 based off of the Yerushalmi Trumot 2:2; cited also in Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 331:71) writes that Maaser Rishon does not need to be separated ''Min Hamukaf.'' This is the formative halacha cited in Shaarei Tzedek of the Chochmat Adam (10:11) and Mishpitei Aretz (12:5). </ref> However, some are of the opinion that they should be separated ''Min Hamukaf''.<ref>Some Rishonim (Ritva Niddah 7a, Meiri Kiddushin 51a, amongst others- see Derech Emunah Maaser 1:6 Tziyun Halacha 67) are of the opinion that there is a din derabanan of ''Mukaf'' by Maaser Rishon, Sheini and Ani.

	* The Tosfot Rid Bava Kamma 115b is of the opinion that the ''Mukaf'' that's needed for Maaser Rishon, Sheini and Ani is only that the produce all be in his possession, not that they actually are physically touching. </ref>		*The Tosfot Rid Bava Kamma 115b is of the opinion that the ''Mukaf'' that's needed for Maaser Rishon, Sheini and Ani is only that the produce all be in his possession, not that they actually are physically touching.</ref>
	#Regarding produce placed in an open area, as long as they are in a close proximity of each other they are considered to be ''Min Hamukaf.''<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 325:2 citing from the Rosh; Rash Maaser Sheini 3:13 quoted and explained by the Chazon Ish (Zeraim Likutim 4:5); Biur Hagra Y.D. 325:8. This is the main opinion cited in Mishpitei Aretz 12:5. </ref> Some are stringent and require the produce to be touching.<ref>This is the opinion of Rabbeinu Tam (Sefer Hayashar Sh"t page 172, cited in Mishpitei Aretz chap. 12 fn. 10; see also Tosfot Pesachim 46b s.v. Ho'il v'ie at the end). ~~The Kaftor Vaferach lays out both opinions and is undecided on the matter.~~ </ref>		#Regarding produce placed in an open area, as long as they are in a close proximity of each other they are considered to be ''Min Hamukaf.''<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 325:2 citing from the Rosh; Rash Maaser Sheini 3:13 quoted and explained by the Chazon Ish (Zeraim Likutim 4:5); Biur Hagra Y.D. 325:8. This is the main opinion cited in Mishpitei Aretz 12:5. </ref> Some are stringent and require the produce to be touching.<ref>This is the opinion of Rabbeinu Tam (Sefer Hayashar Sh"t page 172, cited in Mishpitei Aretz chap. 12 fn. 10; see also Tosfot Pesachim 46b s.v. Ho'il v'ie at the end). </ref>

	==Who Can Separate?==		==Who Can Separate?==

NachiScheiner: /* Min Hamukaf (lit. from that which is together) */

2025-07-27T20:21:30Z

Min Hamukaf (lit. from that which is together)

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:21, 27 July 2025
Line 37:		Line 37:

	*There are some Rishonim (Tosfot Gittin 30b, amongst many others- see Derech Emunah Trumot 3:20 Tziyun Halacha 361) who write that ''Min Hamukaf'' is a regular din Derabanan, not just a ''Mitzvah Min Hamuvchar''. Contrarily, the Raavad (Trumot 3:20) writes that ''Min Hamukaf'' by Trumat Maaser only applies to a Levi that separates from his Maaser. </ref>		*There are some Rishonim (Tosfot Gittin 30b, amongst many others- see Derech Emunah Trumot 3:20 Tziyun Halacha 361) who write that ''Min Hamukaf'' is a regular din Derabanan, not just a ''Mitzvah Min Hamuvchar''. Contrarily, the Raavad (Trumot 3:20) writes that ''Min Hamukaf'' by Trumat Maaser only applies to a Levi that separates from his Maaser. </ref>
	## ~~Some are of the opinion that~~ Maaser Rishon ~~should~~ be separated ''Min Hamukaf''.<ref>The Rambam (Maaser 1:6 based off of the Yerushalmi Trumot 2:2; cited also in Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 331:71) writes that Maaser Rishon does not need to be separated ''Min Hamukaf.'' </ref>		## Maaser Rishon, Sheini and Ani do not need to be separated ''Min Hamukaf.''<ref>The Rambam (Maaser 1:6 based off of the Yerushalmi Trumot 2:2; cited also in Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 331:71) writes that Maaser Rishon does not need to be separated ''Min Hamukaf.'' This is the formative halacha cited in Shaarei Tzedek of the Chochmat Adam (10:11) and Mishpitei Aretz (12:5). </ref> However, some are of the opinion that they should be separated ''Min Hamukaf''.<ref>Some Rishonim (Ritva Niddah 7a, Meiri Kiddushin 51a, amongst others- see Derech Emunah Maaser 1:6 Tziyun Halacha 67) are of the opinion that there is a din derabanan of ''Mukaf'' by Maaser Rishon, Sheini and Ani.

			* The Tosfot Rid Bava Kamma 115b is of the opinion that the ''Mukaf'' that's needed for Maaser Rishon, Sheini and Ani is only that the produce all be in his possession, not that they actually are physically touching. </ref>
			#Regarding produce placed in an open area, as long as they are in a close proximity of each other they are considered to be ''Min Hamukaf.''<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 325:2 citing from the Rosh; Rash Maaser Sheini 3:13 quoted and explained by the Chazon Ish (Zeraim Likutim 4:5); Biur Hagra Y.D. 325:8. This is the main opinion cited in Mishpitei Aretz 12:5. </ref> Some are stringent and require the produce to be touching.<ref>This is the opinion of Rabbeinu Tam (Sefer Hayashar Sh"t page 172, cited in Mishpitei Aretz chap. 12 fn. 10; see also Tosfot Pesachim 46b s.v. Ho'il v'ie at the end). The Kaftor Vaferach lays out both opinions and is undecided on the matter. </ref>

	==Who Can Separate?==		==Who Can Separate?==

NachiScheiner: /* Min Hamukaf (lit. from that which is together) */

2025-07-27T17:12:13Z

Min Hamukaf (lit. from that which is together)

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:12, 27 July 2025
Line 34:		Line 34:

	*See, however, Maadanei Aretz (volume 2 Halachot Pesukot 3:17) who suggests to revoke the separation. For more details on revoking separation see Mishpitei Aretz chapter 18.</ref>		*See, however, Maadanei Aretz (volume 2 Halachot Pesukot 3:17) who suggests to revoke the separation. For more details on revoking separation see Mishpitei Aretz chapter 18.</ref>
	## Ideally one should separate Trumat Maaser ''Min Hamukaf''.<ref>The Rambam (Trumot 3:20; cited also in the Rama Y.D. 331:24) writes that Trumat Maaser does not need to be separated ''Min Hamukaf,'' nonetheless, Talmidei Chachamim are careful to separate ''Min Hamukaf.'' The Shach (Y.D. 331:24) explains that Talmidei Chachamim are careful as the ideal is to separate Trumat Maaser ''Min Hamukaf''. This is the formative halacha brought down in Mishpitei Aretz 12:4.		## Ideally one should separate Trumat Maaser ''Min Hamukaf''.<ref>The Rambam (Trumot 3:20; cited also in the Rama Y.D. 331:24) writes that Trumat Maaser does not need to be separated ''Min Hamukaf,'' nonetheless, Talmidei Chachamim are careful to separate ''Min Hamukaf.'' The Shach (Y.D. 331:24) explains that Talmidei Chachamim are careful as the most ideal (''Mitzvah Min Hamuvchar'') way to separate Trumat Maaser is ''Min Hamukaf''. This is the formative halacha brought down in Mishpitei Aretz 12:4.

	* There are some Rishonim </ref>		*There are some Rishonim (Tosfot Gittin 30b, amongst many others- see Derech Emunah Trumot 3:20 Tziyun Halacha 361) who write that ''Min Hamukaf'' is a regular din Derabanan, not just a ''Mitzvah Min Hamuvchar''. Contrarily, the Raavad (Trumot 3:20) writes that ''Min Hamukaf'' by Trumat Maaser only applies to a Levi that separates from his Maaser. </ref>
	## Some are of the opinion that Maaser Rishon should be separated ''Min Hamukaf''.		## Some are of the opinion that Maaser Rishon should be separated ''Min Hamukaf''.<ref>The Rambam (Maaser 1:6 based off of the Yerushalmi Trumot 2:2; cited also in Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 331:71) writes that Maaser Rishon does not need to be separated ''Min Hamukaf.'' </ref>

	==Who Can Separate?==		==Who Can Separate?==

NachiScheiner: /* Min Hamukaf (lit. from that which is together) */

2025-07-27T16:42:03Z

Min Hamukaf (lit. from that which is together)

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:42, 27 July 2025
Line 33:		Line 33:
	* Some Rishonim (see Rashi Gittin 30b, Ritva Bava Metziah 38a quoting from his Rebbe, Raavad Trumot 3:20, amongst others- for a more detailed list see Derech Emunah Trumot 3:17 Tziyun Halacha 265) are of the opinion that it is only a din Derabanan and the ''drasha'' is only an ''asmachta''. </ref> Nevertheless, if it wasn't, the Trumah is still effective.<ref>Rambam Trumot 3:17; Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 331:25; Mishpitei Aretz 12:1.		* Some Rishonim (see Rashi Gittin 30b, Ritva Bava Metziah 38a quoting from his Rebbe, Raavad Trumot 3:20, amongst others- for a more detailed list see Derech Emunah Trumot 3:17 Tziyun Halacha 265) are of the opinion that it is only a din Derabanan and the ''drasha'' is only an ''asmachta''. </ref> Nevertheless, if it wasn't, the Trumah is still effective.<ref>Rambam Trumot 3:17; Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 331:25; Mishpitei Aretz 12:1.

	* See, however, Maadanei Aretz 4:17:3 who suggests to revoke the separation. For more details on revoking separation see Mishpitei Aretz chapter 18.</ref>		*See, however, Maadanei Aretz (volume 2 Halachot Pesukot 3:17) who suggests to revoke the separation. For more details on revoking separation see Mishpitei Aretz chapter 18.</ref>
	## Ideally one should separate Trumat Maaser ''Min Hamukaf''.		## Ideally one should separate Trumat Maaser ''Min Hamukaf''.<ref>The Rambam (Trumot 3:20; cited also in the Rama Y.D. 331:24) writes that Trumat Maaser does not need to be separated ''Min Hamukaf,'' nonetheless, Talmidei Chachamim are careful to separate ''Min Hamukaf.'' The Shach (Y.D. 331:24) explains that Talmidei Chachamim are careful as the ideal is to separate Trumat Maaser ''Min Hamukaf''. This is the formative halacha brought down in Mishpitei Aretz 12:4.

			* There are some Rishonim </ref>
	## Some are of the opinion that Maaser Rishon should be separated ''Min Hamukaf''.		## Some are of the opinion that Maaser Rishon should be separated ''Min Hamukaf''.