Kedushas Sheviyis and Tumas Ochlin

The first Mishnah in the seventh Perek of Sheviyis states a general rule about Kedushas Sheviyis: Kedushas Shviyis applies equally to food that is fit for human consumption, food that is fit only for animal consumption, and to plants that are used to make dyes. The Laws of kedushas Sheviyis then, are more stringent than the Laws of terumos and maasros, which apply only to foods that are fit for human consumption.

The Talmud Yerushalmi queries whether the laws governing kedushas shviyis on food that is fit for humans, are subject to the same guidelines as the laws of tumas ochlin:

It is possible that, in the same way as kedushas shviyis is more stringent than terumos and maasros, it may likewise be more stringent than tumas ochlin, and so certain foods that are not subject to tumas ochlin may be subject to kedushas shviyis.

The Rash Mi'Sirelav (who lived in Sefas at the time of the Beis Yosef and the Arizal) wrote an all encompassing commentaryon the Yerushalmi. In this commentary, he explains that, according to the Yerushalmi, the laws of kedushos Sheviyis and tumas ochlin are equal in their application – in all aspects. For example:

1. Just as the leaves of luf, a bitter plant, do not receive tumas ochlin until they have been prepared for eating through a process of pickling or extensive cooking called "mituk", so they do not receive kedushas shviyis until they have undergone this process of mituk.
   
   
2. Similarly, just as ulshin (a bitter plant, which is mentioned in the Mishnah in Pesachim with regard to Marror), does not receive tumas ochlin unless it is picked or grown with the intention of being eaten (in other words, it requires "machashavah" – forethought ), so it does not receive kedushas shviyis unless it was picked or grown with the intention of eating it.

However, the Rash Mi'Shantz (a Rishon and one of the Baalei Tosefos) writes, in his commentary on the Mishnah, that the laws of tumas ochlin and kedushas sheviyis each apply differently in different circumstances. According to the Rash Mi'Shantz the halachah would apply to the above two examples as follows:

1. Although luf requires mituk in order to receive tumas ochlin, it is subject to kedushas sheviyis even without mituk. In this case then, kedushas sheviyis is more stringent than tumas ochlin.
   
   
2. Ulshin, however, which is subject to Tumas Ochlin only if one had machashavah (as described above), is likewise subject to kedushas sheviyis only if one had such machashavah.

The Chazon Ish raises a strong question on the explanation of the Rash Mi'Shantz. Why is it, asks the Chazon Ish, that in the case of luf, kedushas shviyis is more stringent than tumas ochlin (in other words, it receives kedushas shviyis more readily than it receives tumas ochlin), whereas in the case of ulshin, kedushas shviyis seems to be equal in its application to tumas ochlin. The Chazon Ish leaves this question unanswered.

(In fact, the Chazon Ish himself, in his commentary to the Yerushalmi, understands differently to the Rash Mi'Shantz. He concludes that ulshin does not even require machashavah in order to be subject to kedushas sheviyis. According to this understanding, kedushas sheviyis is consistently more stringent than of tumas ochlin.)

Rav Tzvi Webber, shlita,suggested an answer to the question of the Chazon Ish. We can explain Rash Mi'Shantz as follows:

The Yerushalmi asks how it is possible for a plant to receive kedushas sheviyis after it has been picked. The Yerushalmi answers that since the plant can receive kedushas sheviyis through machashavah whilst it is still growing (or at the time of picking), so too it can receive kedushas sheviyis through machashavah even after it has been picked. However, a plant which does not receive kedushas sheviyis whilst it is growing or at the time of picking, can not receive kedushas sheviyis at a later point in time.

The Tosefos Anshei Shem explains, that since mituk can not be done before the plant is picked, then according to the above rule, it would be impossible for the luf to ever receive kedushas sheviyis. It follows then, that according to our mishnah, which states that luf does have kedushas sheviyis, it must have received the kedushah prior to being picked, and without mituk. Ulshin,however, which receives kedushas sheviyis through machashavah, may receive kedushah either prior to being picked, or at any point afterwards.

Rav Webber explained, that according to the above reasoning in the Yerushalmi, it would appear that luf should not have kedushas sheviyis at all, since mituk can only be done after the plant has been picked. It follows then, that the only way kedushas sheviyis could apply to luf would be through a rabbinical decree. It appears that Chazzal decreed that the luf should be subject to the laws of kedushas sheviyis, even without mituk,in order that kedushas sheviyis will be either the same or more stingent than the laws of tumas ochlin.If luf would not have kedushas sheviyis,but would be subject to tumas ochlin after mituk, tumas ochlin would then be more stingent than kedushas sheviyis, and thus would not follow the general rules of our Mishna.

The articles on this website are not not intended as halachic rulings.
Where necessary, one should consult a competent halachic authority.