Sefer HaChinuch ספר החינוך

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 the laws of the commandment are elucidated in Tractate Makkot.

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.