REFLECTIONS ON PE'AH 

By Asher Meir

I.  INTRODUCTION

            The agricultural commandments in the Land of Israel encompass the entire spectrum of agricultural production - they regulate sowing (kil'ayim), plowing (shevi'it), reaping (pe'ah), gathering (leket and shikhechah), and so on, up until the commandments relating to the proper treatment of the finished product, especially when it acquires a special sanctity, such as that of terumah or of shevi'it.

            One notable category of the land-based commandments is that of the various gifts that are separated from the produce.  Among these are the actual tithes - ma'aser rishon, ma'aser sheni, ma'aser 'ani, and terumat ma'aser -  which have a fixed measure of a tenth, as their name indicates.  Other gifts, namely terumah gedolah and the gifts to the poor - mattenot 'aniyyim (including the dropped and forgotten sheaf - leket and shikhechah, and the unharvested corner of the field - pe'ah), as well as bikkurim (the first fruits), are not given any fixed quantity by the Torah, though the sages gave them prescribed proportions.

II. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TERUMAH AND MATTENOT 'ANIYYIM

            Two of these latter categories - terumah and mattenot 'aniyyim - bear an interesting reciprocal relationship to each other.  Terumah is called by the Torah "the first" - "the first fruits of your grain, your wine, and your oil, and the first of your fleece, you shall give him."[1] This "priority" of terumah is its defining characteristic, and finds expression in every aspect of the commandment - from the kind of produce to which the commandment applies before it is separated, to the proper treatment of the final product after it has reached the kohen.

            Mattenot 'aniyyim are in some sense an exact mirror-image of terumah.  Their defining characteristic - particularly in the case of pe'ah - is "anteriority."  This article will try to trace the remarkable and consistent dialectical relationship of these two gifts.

            The relationship is built of two main components:  The parallel that exists between terumah and mattenot 'aniyyim in that each must start as an integral part of the produce which it exempts and stand in a specific representative relationship to it; and the contrast between them in the nature of this relationship:  terumah is the first of the crop, mattenot 'aniyyim the last or remainder of the crop.  We will discuss this contrast in particular with regard to two areas:

a) The way in which the gift acquires its special status;

b) The disposition of the gift.

Afterwards the significance of this contrasting relationship will be examined.

A.  The integral relationship of terumah and mattenot 'aniyyim to the rest of the crop

            A salient feature of the "precedence" of terumah is that it is not merely the "first," it is the "first of" - it stands in a relationship of precedence to the crop which it exempts.  Various commandments serve to emphasize this relationship.  Conversely, pe'ah as well as the other mattenot 'aniyyim consistently exhibit the opposite characteristic to constitute the "last," the "leftovers" of the agricultural process.

            This relationship finds expression in various laws which demand, or create, a degree of proximity between the gift and the rest of the crop.  This "proximity" may be literal geographical closeness, or conceptual proximity in the sense of similar characteristics.

1) Terumah

            Terumah must in the first instance be separated "out from" the crop.  The Torah commands us to "take the sanctified portion from it."[2]  The Sifri learns from this that the gift must come from the same location as the rest of the crop - min hamukaf,[3] which Rashi explains: "from the contiguous."[4]  According to many rishonim this requirement is de'oraita (although the separation is valid even if it is not mukaf).[5] Rashi explains this requirement as meaning that the terumah must come "from in and among" the store of produce.[6]

            Furthermore, there are numerous stringent requirements that the terumah have the same properties as the tevel which it exempts: all of the produce must be from the same species and the same growing year (these requirements are indispensable),[7] as well as from the same stage of production (as opposed to separating out grapes as terumah on wine etc.),[8] and the same state of ritual purity (but not tamei on tahor or vice versa).[9]

            In other words, the essential quality of terumah is not that I take one bundle of tevel and declare that it exempts another (as is the case for instance with ma'aser rishon with which it is permissible to stockpile tevel and separate out ma'aser from it as needed[10]), but rather that I take a united crop and designate an integral part of it as a representative first.  If these conditions of similarity and proximity were not met, then the status of the terumah as a representative of the entire crop would be compromised.

2) Pe'ah

            The parallel to these conditions with respect to pe'ah is nearly complete.  Pe'ah must be a "corner of" the entire harvest, not just any corner of standing corn.  The second chapter of tractate Pe'ah provides a lengthy list of all of the conditions which designate a unified field; pe'ah left in one part of the field will exempt the rest, but a corner of one field left unharvested does not exempt the harvest in any other field.

            The conditions with respect to pe'ah, as with terumah, are both geographical and conceptual.  Geographically, the mishnah enumerates certain natural boundaries which divide one field from another; conceptually we require a single species, and in some cases, even a single variety.  These requirements ensure that the abandoned section bears the character of being the representative remainder of the field as a whole.      Furthermore, whereas in terumah we required crops from a single year, in the case of pe'ah the requirement is even more stringent - a crop is not subject to the requirement of pe'ah  at all unless it satisfies "lekitato ke'achat" - namely, that the crop is typically harvested all at once, and not over the course of the year.[11]

3) A Distinguishable Remnant

            An illuminating expression of this principle of "representation" is found in the rule of "sheyareha nikkarim" - "a distinguishable remnant." The Mishnah in Terumot explains that one is allowed to give as much terumah as one wants, so long as some remains unconsecrated.[12]  This is derived in the Gemara from the word "first" - "first, indicating that there is a distinguishable remnant", i.e.  that some is left over.[13]

            The parallel condition exists regarding pe'ah.  The Tosefta teaches:  "If one makes his entire field pe'ah, it does not acquire the status of pe'ah."[14]  The reciprocal relationship is clear:  just as the separation of terumah must leave a remnant, so that the gift relates to what is left, the pe'ah must be a remnant, so that it relates to what was harvested.

            It is impossible to draw an exact parallel to these conditions with shikhechah and leket insofar as they do not "exempt" the crop. However, the halakhah establishes that leftover stalks and sheaves do not become leket and shikhechah unless they are abandoned in the process of harvesting the crop.  If they fall as a result of thinning out and the like, they do not acquire their special status as mattenot 'aniyyim.[15]  So they too are the leftovers "of" - what is leftover from the harvesting process, as contrasted to terumah and pe'ah which relate to a specific object, namely the store or field of produce respectively.[16]

B.  Creation of the gift

            The separation of terumah, though not difficult, may be described as a "charged" act:  there must be a specific intention, by a competent and authorized actor, to invest the separated gift with a special status, with its attendant sanctity.[17]  Many special conditions on the degree of intention and authorization which are relevant to the general laws of acquisition are actually learned from terumah.[18]  This befits terumah's premier status. The mattenot 'aniyyim, on the other hand, acquire their status by virtue, and only by virtue, of being an afterthought.  Only if a person devotes his attention to the crop which he wants for himself, does the unharvested corner or the dropped or forgotten sheaf become the dominion of the needy. Indeed, shikhechah - literally "forgetting" - can not acquire its special status at all if any attention is paid to it - it epitomizes the dimension of "distraction" which characterizes the creation of mattenot 'aniyyim.[19]

            This distinction is already implicit in the language the Torah uses to describe the separation of the two gifts.  Separating out terumah, as its name indicates, is an act of "haramah" - elevating; whereas the word the Torah uses to describe the leaving of the several mattenot 'aniyyim is "'azivah" - abandonment or neglect.[20]

            The "raw material" from which the gift is created presents us with a similar contrast.  Produce is considered tevel - subject to the requirement of taking terumah - only when it has reached the complete state of readiness for human enjoyment:  processing (gemar melakhah)[21] and storage (re'iyyat penei habayit).[22] Even though the separation of terumah is valid before this stage, it is forbidden to take terumah before the processing is finished, and one who does separate out such terumah is guilty of shortchanging (literally robbing) the kohanim.[23]

            Conversely, the mattenot 'aniyyim acquire their status when they are in a completely native state - pe'ah in the standing corn before any stage of processing has come to bear upon it, and leket and shikhechah in the plain severed stalks and sheaves.  To delay giving pe'ah until a later stage is actually a transgression.[24]

            The chronological precedence of leket, shikhechah and pe'ah, and antecedence of terumah, in the production process reflect the opposite qualitative distinction - terumah is at the first, highest level of preparation, mattenot 'aniyyim at the lowest.

            Another distinction which illustrates this contrast is the quality of the produce.  Terumah is required to be given from the choice fruits,[25] whereas no such requirement exists by mattenot 'aniyyim.[26]

C.  Disposition of the gift

            Once we have reached the stage where the previously undistinguished produce has acquired its special status, what do we do with it?  The recipients and treatment of terumah and pe'ah provide further examples of our "reflective principle."

            Terumah is designated for the highest stratum of society, in the highest state of spiritual elevation - it can only be eaten by kohanim (and their families) in a state of purity.[27]  The terumah itself must also be kept tahor,[28] and there are many rigid conditions dictating that it be eaten in a refined way.[29]  In fact, the Gemara tells us more than this: terumah (as well as the other mattenot kehunah - priestly gifts) are actually given to God, and the kohanim "eat from [His] exalted table."[30]

            Mattenot 'aniyyim, the "leftovers" of the crop, are designated for the "leftovers" of society.  The abandoned and forgotten souls who are not self-supporting and rely on the more established strata for their livelihood, are the ones who receive the abandoned and forgotten produce of their more fortunate brethren.  "It shall be for the sojourner, the orphan, and the widow" states the Torah.[31]  It goes without saying that no special restrictions relate to its consumption.

III.  CONCLUSION

            The various agricultural gifts are not merely taxes to provide for communal needs.  After all, outside of Eretz Yisra'el we also are required to donate money for those who study Torah and otherwise provide for the spiritual needs of the community, thus fulfilling the functional role of terumah, as well as money for the needs of the poor, fulfilling the functional role of leket, shikhechah and pe'ah.  However, in general in Eretz Yisra'el the practical arrangements for communal and national needs are unified and harmonized with provisions for individual spiritual development.

            In Eretz Yisra'el, the separation of terumah - the "stipend" for the kohanim - is suffused with requirements which symbolize that the first of everything belongs to God.  Just when the agricultural produce is completely ready for my consumption, I must perform a conscious act of separating out some of it - the first, the best - and sanctifying it, and it is from this symbolic first that we provide for the kohanim, the first of the nation, who learn and teach Torah and perform the Divine service in the Temple.

            Just as we are not so haughty as to take the very first and choice fruits for ourselves, so also we are not so debased as to worry to harvest every last bit of our field, and to stoop to pick up every last dropped and forgotten sheaf.  This is the humanistic message of the gifts to the poor.  And this remnant, which signifies our dignity and moderation, is what the Torah designates to provide for the needy, the lost and forgotten of society, to provide them a dignified source of sustenance which they gather and process themselves.

IV.  AFTERWORD

            Mattenot 'aniyyim, for all of their "backwardness" in relation to terumah, have precedence over it in one area - they themselves are exempt from terumah and the other tithes, even if they reach the stage of processing and storage.

            From a purely halakhic standpoint, this is actually a consequence of the backward status of leket, shikhechah and pe'ah. Not having a specific owner and destination, they are not "civilized" enough to reach the table of the Most High, from which the kohanim will eat.  However, it seems that this exemption carries an interesting lesson.  If we view terumah as fundamentally a commandment "between man and his Creator" and mattenot 'aniyyim as a commandment "between man and his fellow," we could see in the contrast presented the following idea:  Commandments between man and his Creator, which tend to be symbolic in nature, require a high degree of pomp and circumstance, and attention to details, which are not necessary for interpersonal commandments which are result-oriented.  Nonetheless, the latter, with all of their coarseness, should be the first to occupy us, and the Holy One exempts the resources devoted to their performance from being separately consecrated to Him.  It seems that the poor and needy have a special place at God's table which even His holy priests can not occupy.