Reference for Gittin 104:17
ולמאן דאמר מנסך מ"ט לא אמר מערב אמר לך מערב
OR MIXES [<i>TERUMAH</i> WITH THEM]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Thus rendering them forbidden to a layman. ');"><sup>13</sup></span> OR MAKES A LIBATION [WITH HIS WINE],<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The meaning of this is discussed infra. ');"><sup>14</sup></span> IF HE DOES SO INADVERTENTLY, IS FREE FROM LIABILITY, BUT IF DELIBERATELY IS LIABLE [TO COMPENSATE HIM].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Unclean terumah could not be eaten and could be used by the priests only for feeding cattle or for fuel. Non-sacred food also if unclean was rejected by the stricter sort (Perushim). Food mixed with terumah became prohibited to a layman and therefore had to be sold to a priest at a loss. Wine poured out in libation was forbidden. Hence in all these cases loss was involved. ');"><sup>15</sup></span> <b><i>GEMARA</i></b>. It has been stated: [With regard to the expression] 'MAKES A LIBATION', Rab says that it means literally making a libation<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., stirring it with his hand as preparatory to pouring it out. ');"><sup>16</sup></span> [to a heathen deity], while Samuel says that it means only mixing [Jewish with heathen wine].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which was sufficient to make it prohibited. ');"><sup>17</sup></span> Why did the one who says it means mixing not accept the view that it means making a libation? — He will tell you the latter offence involves a heavier penalty.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Viz., the death penalty; and the rule is that a lighter penalty is not inflicted when a heavier one is involved for the same offence. ');"><sup>18</sup></span> What does the other say [to this]? — Even as R. Jeremiah. For R. Jeremiah said that he [a robber] acquires possession from the moment he lifts the wine from the ground, whereas he does not become liable to capital punishment until he actually pours out the wine.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the defendant has become liable for the payment of the wine in the capacity of a robber even before he commenced to commit the capital offence of idolatrous libations, and since the civil liability is neither for the same act nor for the same moment which occasions the liability for capital punishment, each liability stands. ');"><sup>19</sup></span> Why does the one who says that it means making a libation not accept the view that it means mixing? — He will tell you, mixing wine