intended to increase the knowledge, interest, and anticipation of the reader, thereby hastening the realization of our hopes and prayers for the rebuilding of Jerusalem and the Beit HaMikdash.

Bringing Bikurim to the Beit HaMikdash
The Festival of Shavu'ot has a number of names. One very descriptive name cited in the Torah, is Chag HaKatzir, the Harvest Festival. Even more picturesque, is the beautiful appellation, Chag Habikurim, the Festival of First Fruits. Bikurim can be defined as the produce of fields, or the fruit of trees, that ripen first. The farmer would gather his Bikurim, bring them to the Beit HaMikdash, and, after a brief predesignated recitation from the Torah, present them to the officiating Kohein. The Torah ordains: "It will be when you enter the land which the Lord your G-d gives you as an inheritance and you possess it and dwell in it, that you shall take of the first fruit of the ground, that you bring in from your land that the Lord your G-d gives you, and you shall put it in a basket, and go to the place which the Lord your G-d will choose, to make His Name rest there." (Devarim 16). Not all the newly ripened produce of Eretz Yisrael was acceptable for Bikurim. The Mishna states: "Bikurim may be brought only from the Sheva Minim" - the seven species for which Eretz Yisrael is praised in the Torah. "A land of wheat, barley, grapes, figs, pomegranates, oil-olives and honey." (Devarim 8:8).

The Sifri notes that "honey" quoted in the pasuk cited above, is not bee's honey, but rather the sweet juicy extract of dates. By paraphrasing Rashi, we can understand the underlying principle of this ancient tradition. The Torah says Mei'rieshit, "from the first ripened fruits", implying not all first ripened fruit were subject to the obligation of Bikurim. When the Torah discusses Bikurim, it employs the term 'Eretz' (land) The Torah uses the same word, Eretz, when it lists the Sheva Minim. Since both quoted verses contain the word Eretz, by verbal analogy, we may conclude that only the Sheva Minim were subject to the law of Bikurim.

As a rule liquid extracts (fruit juice, wine etc.) were ineligible to be brought as Bikurim. "Yosef Hakohein brought wine and oil (as Bikurim) but (the Mikdash authorities) did not accept them." (Challah 4:11). First fruits brought to the Mikdash which were not of the Sheva Minim did not acquire the sanctity of Bikurim. The Bikurim had to be of superior quality "and not from dates in the hill country or from (other) fruit from the valleys and not olives of poor quality." Dates from the hot Beit She'an Valley and the steaming Jericho oasis are far superior to the dates grown in the cooler mountainous areas of the Judean Hills and the Galil. Bikurim were brought from east of the Jordan River as well as from western Eretz Yisrael, even though Transjordania was not considered a "land flowing with milk and honey." Surprisingly, Bikurim were brought from Syria! "Ariston brought his Bikurim from Apamea and they accepted them from him. They said, 'One who buys (land) in Syria is considered just like one who purchases (land) on the outskirts of Jerusalem." (Challah 4:11). Understandably, the purchaser would have the same obligations as the man who bought land "on the outskirts of Jerusalem."

In contradistinction to Terumot and Ma'asrot (for the Kohein and Levi), where the harvest of a field or an orchard is forbidden to be eaten, until the Terumot and Ma'asrot are separated, the produce of a field or an orchard may be eaten even before Bikurim are set aside. Interestingly, for this reason, the Rashba suggests that the Mitzva of Bikurim could possibly be regarded as Chovat HaGuf, i.e., applying to the person of the Jewish farmer to fulfill the Mitzva, and not one of the "Mitzvot Telu'yot Ba'aretz" ("Mitzvot depen- dent on the land"). The Halacha did not assign a specific percentage of the crop which was required to be brought as Bikurim, but the Sages did recommend that the farmer set aside one-sixtieth part of the harvest to fulfill his obligation. Unlike Terumot and Ma'asrot which are Mitzvot still observed today (albeit in token form), Bikurim were only obligatory when the Beit HaMkidash stood; "When you have the Mizbei'ach - the altar - you are obligated to bring Bikurim, but when you do not have the Mizbei'ach, you do not have the obligation of bringing Bikurim." (Sifri).

The Mitzva of bringing Bikurim was applied only if both the produce and the land belonged to that particular farmer. "'The first fruits of your land' - until the whole of the growth shall be from your land." (Bikurim 1:2). If a viniculturist bent the branch of a vine into the soil belonging to another, to root and grow a new independent plant, the grapes of the new vine would be unacceptable for Bikurim. If a man bought one tree growing in someone else's land, he did not bring Bikurim from the fruit of that tree because he was not considered the owner of the soil nourishing the tree. If he bought two trees, there was a question but if he bought three trees, he was reckoned as if he acquired the trees and their nourishing soil. In this case, he was obligated to bring Bikurim. "Working tenants (who receive an agreed upon part of the produce), lessees (who paid a fixed quantity of produce to the landlord), Sikrikin ("daggermen") or robbers may not bring… because it is written, 'The first fruits of your land." (Bikurim 1:2) The four examples cited in this Mishna were not legitimate owners. Particularly instructive is the case of the Sikrikin. During the stormy history of the Second Temple period, whole- sale confiscation of land in Eretz Yisrael by the occupying power was not uncommon. The land would be distributed to those whom the government wanted to reward or to those who were well connected. Often the legitimate owners would simply be intimidated and forced to "sell" to "Ba'alei Zero'ah - "strong-armed men". Chazal scorned to legitimize these forms of "legal theft" and refused to grant their produce an undeserved aura of sanctity, even after the rightful owners despaired of ever recovering their property. The Bikurim of these new "owners" were not welcome in the Beit Hamikdash.

"The men of Har Tzevo'im brought their Bikurim before Shavu'ot and the (Mikdash authorities) did not accept them…" Why not? Shavu'ot was the time when the Shtei HaLechem, the two wheat loaves, were brought and "waved" in the Beit HaMikdash. (Vayikra 23:16,17) This "waving" of the Shtei Halechem, which the Torah also calls Bikurim (Vayikra 23:17), permitted Chadash, the new produce, to be utilised in the Mikdash.

Therefore Bikurim were not brought before the "waving" of the Shtei HaLechem. However, the normative Halacha is, that, if Bikurim accidentally were brought to the Mikdash too early, they were temporarily put aside, and then accepted after Shavu'ot (Menachot 10:6) But in this specific case, since the men of Har Tzevo'im were prominent people in the community and should have known better, the Mikdash authorities were apprehensive that K'lal Yisrael would interpret their bringing Bikurim early, as an undesirable precedent, and as a result, many others might be encouraged to follow their inappropriate example. <mtc>

Catriel Sugarman gives illustrated lectures on the Beit Hamikdash and related topics. He can be reached at (02) 652-7531 or by email at acatriel@netvision.net.il. Catriel is in the process of writing a book entitled: The Temple of Jerusalem, A Pilgrim's Perspective: A Guided Tour through the Temple and the Divine Service.