That the priest not eat the first-fruits (bikkurim) before their placement in the [Temple] yard: That we were prevented (see Sefer HaMitzvot, Negative Commandments 149) from eating the first fruits. And about this was it stated (Deuteronomy 12:17), “You may not eat, etc. and the contribution of your hand.” And the masters of the tradition explained it (Makkot 17a), “‘The contribution (terumat) of your hand’ — these are the first-fruits.” And it is elucidated at the end of Tractate Makkot 17a, that we are only liable before they were placed in the [Temple] yard. But from when they were placed in the yard, a person is exempt [from punishment] for them. And the language of Sifrei Devarim 72:9 is “The verse only comes [...] with regard to one who eats the first-fruit but did not recite [the recital] over them, [to teach] that he is transgressing a negative commandment.” And the understanding of, “because he did not recite over them,” is because they were not placed in the yard; but if they were placed there, there is no liability for lashes, even if he did not recite over them. And so too (Makkot 17a; Sifrei Devarim 72:9) there is with them the condition that there is for the second tithe with regards to the liability for lashes, that we are not liable until they see the face of the [Temple] first, and afterwards he eats them before their placement in the yard. In this way is there a liability for lashes for the priest that eats from them. And an Israelite is liable for death by the hand of the Heavens any time he eats from them, even after he recited the famous recital over them. And [that recital] is explicit in the Order of Vehayah Ki Tavo. And they, may their memory be blessed, said (Mishnah Bikkurim 2:1), “The priestly tithe (terumah) and the first-fruits are liable for [the addition of] a fifth when inadvertent, and death when volitional.” And this is exactly like the law of the priestly tithe — because the verse called the first-fruits with the [same] name, terumah, they became obligated with the laws of the priestly tithe.
And understand, my son, the difference that there is between an Israelite and a priest and remember it. As when a priest eats the first-fruits from when [the fruits] see the face of the [Temple] before they are placed in the yard, he is lashed; and its warning is from “You may not, etc.” And do not wonder to say, how can the priest be liable for lashes for them, since he, himself, will eat them after they are placed in the yard. As behold, the same thing is done with the law of the second tithe, that an Israelite is liable for lashes when he eats it outside of Jerusalem, even though he, himself, eats it in the place that is fitting for it. And an Israelite that eats first-fruits is liable for death by the hand of the Heavens any time he eats them; and its warning is from “And any foreigner shall not eat the holy” (Leviticus 22:10), and as I wrote in the Order of Emor el HaKohanim in the commandment that no [non-priest] eat the priestly tithe (Sefer HaChinukh 280).
I have written what I have known about the thing from the roots of the matter of the bringing of the first-fruits to the Temple that the servants of God should eat them, in the section of Kessef Talveh [in] the Order of Mishpatim (Sefer HaChinukh 91). And the reason for this commandment that the priests not eat them before they are placed in the yard and that Israelites should not eat from them in any manner is drawn from the same root that is written there. Anyone who has intelligence to know the difference between good and evil will find it elucidated and revealed; “and much contemplation” when there is no need “is a tiring of the flesh.”
And this prohibition is practiced by males and females, but only at the time of the Temple (Mishneh Torah, Laws of First Fruits and other Gifts to Priests Outside the Sanctuary 2:5) — since the obligation to bring first-fruits is then. And the liability from Torah writ is specifically with the well-known fruits and the well-known places, as I have written in Kessef Talveh. And even though we said there that the obligation of the commandment of the bringing of first-fruits is only upon the males and not upon the females, a man and a woman are the same with the prohibition of eating them in every place. And [it is] like the matter that they, may their memory be blessed, said in the Gemara (Bava Kamma 15a) more generally on the verse, “A man or woman, when they do from all the sins of man” (Numbers 5:6), [that] “The verse made equal a woman to a man for all of the punishments of the Torah.” And a priest that ate a kazayit from the first-fruits in the way that we said has violated a negative commandment and is liable for lashes. And so [too,] is an Israelite [violating a negative commandment if he] eats a kazayit from them in any way — meaning whether before they are placed in the yard or afterwards.
שֶׁלֹּא יֹאכַל כֹּהֵן בִּכּוּרִים קֹדֶם הַנָּחָתָם בַּעֲזָרָה – שֶׁנִּמְנַעְנוּ (עי' רמב"ם ספה"מ ל"ת קמט) מִלֶּאֱכֹל בִּכּוּרִים, וְעַל זֶה נֶאֱמַר (דברים יב יז) לֹא תּוּכַל לֶאֱכֹל וְגוֹ' וּתְרוּמַת יָדֶךָ, וּפֵרְשׁוּ בַּעֲלֵי הַקַּבָּלָה (מכות יז, א). וּתְרוּמַת יָדֶךָ אֵלּוּ הַבִּכּוּרִים, וְנִתְבָּאֵר בְּסוֹף מַסֶּכֶת מַכּוֹת (שם יז א), שֶׁאֵין חַיָּבִים עֲלֵיהֶן אֶלָּא קֹדֶם שֶׁיֻּנְּחוּ בָּעֲזָרָה, אֲבָל מִשֶּׁהֻנְּחוּ בָּעֲזָרָה אָדָם פָּטוּר עֲלֵיהֶם. וּלְשׁוֹן סִפְרִי, לֹא בָּא הַכָּתוּב אֶלָּא לָאוֹכֵל בִּכּוּרִים שֶׁלֹּא קָרָא עֲלֵיהֶן שֶׁהוּא עוֹבֵר בְּלֹא תַעֲשֶׂה. וּפֵרוּשׁ הָעִנְיָן מִפְּנֵי שֶׁלֹּא קָרָא עֲלֵיהֶן מִפְּנֵי שֶׁלֹּא הֻנְּחוּ בָּעֲזָרָה, אֲבָל אִם הֻנְּחוּ שָׁם, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא קָרָא עֲלֵיהֶן אֵין בָּהֶן חִיּוּב מַלְקוּת, וּכְמוֹ כֵן (שם) יֵשׁ בָּהֶן לְעִנְיַן חִיּוּב הַמַּלְקוּת הַתְּנַאי שֶׁהוּא בְּמַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי, שֶׁאֵין חַיָּבִין עַל אֲכִילָתָן עַד שֶׁיִּרְאוּ פְּנֵי הַבַּיִת תְּחִלָּה, וְאַחַר כָּךְ שֶׁיֹּאכַל מֵהֶם קֹדֶם הַנָּחָה בָּעֲזָרָה, בְּעִנְיָן זֶה יֵשׁ בָּהֶן חִיּוּב מַלְקוּת לַכֹּהֵן הָאוֹכֵל מֵהֶם, וְיִשְׂרָאֵל חַיָּב בָּהֶם מִיתָה בִּידֵי שָׁמַיִם כָּל זְמַן שֶׁיֹּאכַל מֵהֶם, וַאֲפִילּוּ אַחַר שֶׁקָּרָא עֲלֵיהֶם הַקְּרִיאָה הַיְּדוּעָה, וְהִיא הַמְּפֹרֶשֶׁת בְּסֵדֶר וְהָיָה כִּי תָבֹא. וְכֵן אָמְרוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה (בכורים פ"ב מ"א) הַתְּרוּמָה וְהַבִּכּוּרִים חַיָּבִים עֲלֵיהֶן חֹמֶשׁ בְּשׁוֹגֵג, וּמִיתָה בְּמֵזִיד, וְזֶהוּ כְּדִין הַתְּרוּמָה בְּשָׁוֶה, שֶׁאַחַר שֶׁקְּרָאָן הַכָּתוּב לַבִּכּוּרִים בְּשֵׁם תְּרוּמָה נִתְחַיְּבוּ בְּדִינֵי הַתְּרוּמָה.
That the priest not eat the first-fruits (bikkurim) before their placement in the [Temple] yard: That we were prevented (see Sefer HaMitzvot, Negative Commandments 149) from eating the first fruits. And about this was it stated (Deuteronomy 12:17), “You may not eat, etc. and the contribution of your hand.” And the masters of the tradition explained it (Makkot 17a), “‘The contribution (terumat) of your hand’ — these are the first-fruits.” And it is elucidated at the end of Tractate Makkot 17a, that we are only liable before they were placed in the [Temple] yard. But from when they were placed in the yard, a person is exempt [from punishment] for them. And the language of Sifrei Devarim 72:9 is “The verse only comes [...] with regard to one who eats the first-fruit but did not recite [the recital] over them, [to teach] that he is transgressing a negative commandment.” And the understanding of, “because he did not recite over them,” is because they were not placed in the yard; but if they were placed there, there is no liability for lashes, even if he did not recite over them. And so too (Makkot 17a; Sifrei Devarim 72:9) there is with them the condition that there is for the second tithe with regards to the liability for lashes, that we are not liable until they see the face of the [Temple] first, and afterwards he eats them before their placement in the yard. In this way is there a liability for lashes for the priest that eats from them. And an Israelite is liable for death by the hand of the Heavens any time he eats from them, even after he recited the famous recital over them. And [that recital] is explicit in the Order of Vehayah Ki Tavo. And they, may their memory be blessed, said (Mishnah Bikkurim 2:1), “The priestly tithe (terumah) and the first-fruits are liable for [the addition of] a fifth when inadvertent, and death when volitional.” And this is exactly like the law of the priestly tithe — because the verse called the first-fruits with the [same] name, terumah, they became obligated with the laws of the priestly tithe.
וְהָבֵן בְּנִי זֶה הַחִלּוּק שֶׁיֵּשׁ בָּהֶן בֵּין יִשְׂרָאֵל לְכֹהֵן, וּזְכֹר אוֹתוֹ, שֶׁהַכֹּהֵן כְּשֶׁיֹּאכַל בִּכּוּרִים מִשֶּׁיִּרְאוּ פְּנֵי הַבַּיִת קֹדֶם הַנָּחָה בָּעֲזָרָה לוֹקֶה, וְאַזְהָרָתֵהּ מִלֹּא תוּכַל וְגוֹ', וְאַל תִּתְמַהּ לוֹמַר אֵיךְ יִתְחַיֵּב מַלְקוּת הַכֹּהֵן עֲלֵיהֶם, אַחַר שֶׁהוּא בְּעַצְמוֹ יֹאכְלֵם אַחַר הַנָּחָה בָּעֲזָרָה? שֶׁהֲרֵי כְּמוֹ כֵן בְּשָׁוֶה, הַדִּין בְּמַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי שֶׁיִּתְחַיֵּב הַיִּשְׂרָאֵל עָלָיו מַלְקוּת בְּאָכְלוֹ אוֹתוֹ חוּץ לִירוּשָׁלַיִם, וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא בְּעַצְמוֹ אוֹכֵל אוֹתוֹ בַּמָּקוֹם הָרָאוּי לוֹ. וְיִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁיֹּאכַל בִּכּוּרִים כָּל זְמַן שֶׁיֹּאכְלֵם חַיָּב מִיתָה בִּידֵי שָׁמַיִם, וְאַזְהָרָתֵהּ מִוְּכָל זָר לֹא יֹאכַל קֹדֶשׁ, וּכְמוֹ שֶׁכָּתַבְתִּי בְּסֵדֶר אֱמֹר אֶל הַכֹּהֲנִים בְּמִצְוַת שֶׁלֹּא יֹאכַל שׁוּם זָר תְּרוּמָה (מצוה רפ).
And understand, my son, the difference that there is between an Israelite and a priest and remember it. As when a priest eats the first-fruits from when [the fruits] see the face of the [Temple] before they are placed in the yard, he is lashed; and its warning is from “You may not, etc.” And do not wonder to say, how can the priest be liable for lashes for them, since he, himself, will eat them after they are placed in the yard. As behold, the same thing is done with the law of the second tithe, that an Israelite is liable for lashes when he eats it outside of Jerusalem, even though he, himself, eats it in the place that is fitting for it. And an Israelite that eats first-fruits is liable for death by the hand of the Heavens any time he eats them; and its warning is from “And any foreigner shall not eat the holy” (Leviticus 22:10), and as I wrote in the Order of Emor el HaKohanim in the commandment that no [non-priest] eat the priestly tithe (Sefer HaChinukh 280).
מִשָּׁרְשֵׁי עִנְיַן הֲבָאַת הַבִּכּוּרִים לְבֵית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ שֶׁיֹּאכְלוּם מְשָׁרְתֵי הַשֵּׁם כָּתַבְתִּי בַּדָּבָר מָה שֶׁיָּדַעְתִּי בְּפָרָשַׁת כֶּסֶף תַּלְוֶה סֵדֶר מִשְׁפָּטִים (מצוה צא). וְטַעַם מִצְוָה זוֹ, שֶׁלֹּא יֹאכְלוּם הַכֹּהֲנִים קֹדֶם שֶׁיַּנִּיחוּ אוֹתָם בָּעֲזָרָה, וְשֶׁלֹּא יֹאכַל מֵהֶם יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּשׁוּם עִנְיָן, נִמְשָׁךְ אַחַר אוֹתוֹ הַשֹּׁרֶשׁ הַכָּתוּב שָׁם, יִמְצָאֵהוּ מְבֹאָר וְנִגְלֶה, כָּל שֶׁיֵּשׁ בּוֹ דֵּעָה לָדַעַת טוֹב וָרָע, וְלַהַג הַרְבֵּה בְּמָה שֶׁאֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ יְגִיעַת בָּשָׂר.
I have written what I have known about the thing from the roots of the matter of the bringing of the first-fruits to the Temple that the servants of God should eat them, in the section of Kessef Talveh [in] the Order of Mishpatim (Sefer HaChinukh 91). And the reason for this commandment that the priests not eat them before they are placed in the yard and that Israelites should not eat from them in any manner is drawn from the same root that is written there. Anyone who has intelligence to know the difference between good and evil will find it elucidated and revealed; “and much contemplation” when there is no need “is a tiring of the flesh.”
דִּינֵי הַמִּצְוָה. מְבֹאָרִים בְּמַסֶּכֶת מַכּוֹת.
And the laws of the commandment are elucidated in Tractate Makkot.
וְנוֹהֵג אִסּוּר זֶה בִּזְכָרִים וּנְקֵבוֹת, וְדַוְקָא בִּזְמַן הַבַּיִת (רמב"ם בכורים פ"ב ה"א), כִּי אָז הַחוֹבָה עָלֵינוּ בַּהֲבָאַת הַבִּכּוּרִים. וְהַחִיּוּב מִן הַתּוֹרָה דַּוְקָא בְּפֵרוֹת יְדוּעִים וּבִמְקוֹמוֹת יְדוּעִים, וּכְמוֹ שֶׁכָּתַבְתִּי שָׁם בְּכֶסֶף תַּלְוֶה, וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאָמַרְנוּ שָׁם, שֶׁחִיּוּב מִצְוַת הֲבָאַת הַבִּכּוּרִים, הוּא עַל הַזְּכָרִים לְבַד, וְלֹא עַל הַנְּקֵבוֹת, בְּאִסּוּר אֲכִילָתָן בְּכָל מָקוֹם, שָׁוָה אִשָּׁה לְאִישׁ, וּכְעִנְיָן שֶׁאָמְרוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה בַּגְּמָרָא (ב"ק טו א) דֶּרֶךְ כְּלָל בַּפָּסוּק אִישׁ אוֹ אִשָּׁה כִּי יַעֲשׂוּ מִכָּל חַטֹּאת הָאָדָם (במדבר ה ו) הִשְׁוָה הַכָּתוּב אִשָּׁה לָאִישׁ לְכָל עֳנָשִׁין שֶׁבַּתּוֹרָה. וְכֹהֵן הָעוֹבֵר עַל זֶה וְאָכַל מִבִּכּוּרִים כַּזַּיִת בָּעִנְיָן שֶׁאָמַרְנוּ עָבַר עַל לָאו וְחַיָּב מַלְקוּת, וְכֵן יִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁיֹּאכַל מֵהֶן כַּזַּיִת בְּשׁוּם צַד, כְּלוֹמַר בֵּין קֹדֶם שֶׁהֻנְּחוּ בָּעֲזָרָה אוֹ לְאַחַר מִכֵּן.
And this prohibition is practiced by males and females, but only at the time of the Temple (Mishneh Torah, Laws of First Fruits and other Gifts to Priests Outside the Sanctuary 2:5) — since the obligation to bring first-fruits is then. And the liability from Torah writ is specifically with the well-known fruits and the well-known places, as I have written in Kessef Talveh. And even though we said there that the obligation of the commandment of the bringing of first-fruits is only upon the males and not upon the females, a man and a woman are the same with the prohibition of eating them in every place. And [it is] like the matter that they, may their memory be blessed, said in the Gemara (Bava Kamma 15a) more generally on the verse, “A man or woman, when they do from all the sins of man” (Numbers 5:6), [that] “The verse made equal a woman to a man for all of the punishments of the Torah.” And a priest that ate a kazayit from the first-fruits in the way that we said has violated a negative commandment and is liable for lashes. And so [too,] is an Israelite [violating a negative commandment if he] eats a kazayit from them in any way — meaning whether before they are placed in the yard or afterwards.