Arakhin 11

תנא חדא

One [Baraitha] taught: If an idol-worshipper offers a freewill- gift towards Temple repairs 'one accepts it from him, whilst another [Baraitha] taught: One does not accept it from him.

עובד כוכבים שהתנדב נדבה לבדק הבית מקבלים הימנו ותניא אידך

Said R'Ela in the name of R'Johanan: This is no difficulty: The first applies to the beginning,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' At the beginning of the building the intention of the idol-worshippers may not be a good one, their gift being made to give them entry into the building programmed which they plan to interfere with or delay. But according to the law they may be accepted for Temple repairs, hence the ruling of R. Judah.');">¹</span>

אין מקבלין

the latter to the end.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' When the building is completed.');">²</span>

א"ר אילא א"ר יוחנן לא קשיא

For R'Assi said in the name of R'Johanan: In the beginning one should not accept from them even salt or water, whereas at the end one may not accept a thing that can be easily identified,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which might cause the heathen to point Boastfully to their contribution, or to its importance for the Temple.');">³</span>

הא בתחילה הא בסוף

but something that cannot easily be identified one may accept.

דאמר ר' אסי אמר רבי יוחנן

What is a 'thing that can be easily identified'? - R'Joseph said: Like the cubit [of metal] keeping off the raven.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' An arrangement of iron points on the roof of the Temple designed to keep ravens away. V. M.K. 9a.');">⁴</span>

בתחילה אפילו מים ומלח אין מקבלין מהם בסוף דבר המסויים אין מקבלין דבר שאינו מסויים מקבלין

R'Joseph raised an objection: And a letter unto Asaph the keeper of the king's park [that he may give me timber to make beams, etc.]?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Neh. II, 8. From this passage it is evident that gifts were accepted from (Cyrus) an idolator, and that happened at the beginning of the building.');">⁵</span>

היכי דמי דבר המסויים

- Abaye said: It is different with the government because it will not retract.

אמר רב יוסף

For Samuel has said: If the government said, I will uproot a mountain, it will uproot the mountain and not retract! Rab Judah said in the name of Rab: If an idol-worshipper separated the terumah<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Glos.');">⁶</span>

כגון אמה כליא עורב

from his pile [of produce], then we examine him.

מתיב רב יוסף

If he said:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' One may not accept a gift for the sanctuary from a heathen. Hence, if he says: I want the terumah to go where the Jew's terumah goes, one may accept it from him and give it to the priest, who is permitted to receive it. Rashi: The reference is to the present day when there is no sanctuary, and when consequently things dedicated to the sanctuary must be hidden away, v. Bek. 53a.');">⁷</span>

(נחמיה ב, ח) ואיגרת אל אסף שומר הפרדס אשר למלך וגו'

I have separated it with the same intention as an Israelite, it is be handed to the priests but if not, it must be hidden, because we consider the possibility of his having in his heart intended it for the Lord.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' But a gift 'Unto the Lord', i.e., for the sanctuary must not be accepted from, him, and must be hidden.');">⁸</span>

אמר ליה אביי

An objection was raised [against that]: If an idol-worshipper had dedicated a beam to the Sanctuary upon which the Name [of God] is inscribed, he is to be examined.

שאני מלכותא דלא הדרא ביה דאמר שמואל

If he said: I have separated it with the same intention as an Israelite, then one should cut off [the part containing the Name of God] and use the rest.

אי אמר מלכותא עקרנא טורי עקר טורי ולא הדר ביה:

But if [he does] not [offer this explanation], it must be hidden away, because we fear his heart [intention] may have been [to dedicate it] to the Lord.

אמר רב יהודה אמר רב

The reason then [for this decision] is because the Name [of God] is inscribed thereon, and only therefore does it require to be hidden away, but if the Name [of God] were not inscribed thereupon, then indeed, it would not have to be hidden away!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This contradicts the earlier teaching!');">⁹</span>

עובד כוכבים שהפריש תרומה מכריו בודקין אותו אי בדעת ישראל הפרישה תינתן לכהן ואם לאו טעונה גניזה חיישינן שמא בלבו לשמים

- [No!] Even if the Name [of God] were not inscribed thereupon it would likewise have to be hidden away, and it is exactly this that we are told, that although the Name [of God] is thereon inscribed, he need but cut off that portion and use the rest For the Name of God not in its proper place is not considered sacred.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' There attaches no holiness whatsoever to the name inscribed on the wrong kind of place or material, the right kind would be parchment, or paper, everything else is not normally fit to have the name inscribed thereon.');">¹⁰</span>

מיתיבי

For it was taught: If it [the Name of God] was written upon the handles of a vessel, or upon the props of a bed, behold, it shall be cut off and hidden.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Shab. 61b.');">¹¹</span>

עובד כוכבים שהתנדב קורה ושם כתוב עליה בודקין אותו אם אמר

R'Nahman said in the name of R'Abbuha: If one says, This sela' is dedicated to charity, he is permitted to exchange it.

בדעת ישראל הפרשתיה יגוד וישתמש במותר ואם לאו טעונה גניזה חיישינן שמא בלבו לשמים

Now it was assumed that this is permitted only for himself, but not for anybody else;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., to use this coin for his own purpose, to refund it to the Sanctuary afterwards. But it would be wrong for him to lend it to his neighbour, for it may be argued reasonably that he meant to use it meantime for himself, whilst conscious of his obligation to pay it later into the Temple treasury. But he surely did not, in his intention to use it, include ally benefit to his neighbour such as a loan to him of this sum.');">¹²</span>

טעמא דשם כתוב עליה דבעיא גניזה הא אין שם כתוב עליה לא בעיא גניזה

but it was stated that R'Ammi said in the name of R'Johanan that it is permitted both for oneself and for someone else.

הוא הדין דאע"ג דאין שם כתוב עליה נמי בעיא גניזה

R'Ze'ira said: We have learnt that only where he said: [I take] upon myself [generally], but if he said: take] upon myself to [give] this, then he is obliged to give this [sela'].

והא קמ"ל דאע"ג דשם כתוב עליה יגוד וישתמש במותר

Whereupon Raba demurred: On the contrary! The opposite is logical.

דשם שלא במקומו לאו קדוש דתנן

If he said: Behold this [sela' I take upon myself to pay], then he may use it for himself, so that he may be responsible for it, but when he said: [I take] upon myself [a sela'], he should not [be permitted to exchange it]?

היה כתוב על ידות הכלים ועל כרעי המטה הרי זה יגוד ויגנוז

But the fact is it makes no difference.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' One might argue with even force: If he said, I take upon myself to pay this sela' into the Temple treasury, then it thereby has become its property, and by using it one has incurred the obli gation, not only moral but legal, of restoring that property; whereas in the case of a general vow (I accept it upon myself to give a sela') a different argument is to be made. At any rate, since both claims have support, we recognize no practical difference between the one form and the other.');">¹³</span>

אמר רב נחמן אמר רבה בר אבהו

It was taught in accord with Raba: Vows are [like] charity, but consecrations [to the sanctuary] are not like charity.

האומר סלע זו לצדקה מותר לשנותה

What does that mean?

סבור מינה

Neither vows nor dedications are charity.

לעצמו אין לאחר לא

Is it not rather this that is meant: Charity [is like vows] in respect of the prohibition 'Thou shalt not delay it',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XXIII, 22.');">¹⁴</span>

איתמר אמר רב אמי אמר רבי יוחנן

but is not like a consecration [to the sanctuary] because anything so consecrated one must not use, whereas [money dedicated to] charity one may [meantime] use for oneself! R'Kahana said: I reported this teaching before R'Zebid of Nehardea whereupon he said: This is how you stated it;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., you reported R. Nahman's statement in general terms, relying on R. Ammi and Raba to explain its implications.');">¹⁵</span>

בין לעצמו בין לאחר

we, however, state it thus: R'Nahman in the name of R'Abbuha based on Rab said: If one said, This sela' is [dedicated to] charity, he may exchange it both for himself, or for someone else independent of whether he had said: [I take it] upon myself [in general], or [I take it upon myself to pay] this [sela'].

אמר רבי זעירא

Our Rabbis taught: [If one said:] This sela' shall be for charity, then before it has reached the hand of th [charity] treasurer, it is permitted to exchange it, but after it has come into the treasurer's hand, it is forbidden to exchange it.

לא שנו אלא דאמר עלי אבל אמר הרי זו בעינא בעי למיתבה

מתקיף לה רבא

אדרבה איפכא מיסתברא אמר זו משתמש בה כי היכי דליחייב באחריותה אבל אמר עלי לא

אלא לא שנא:

תניא כוותיה דרבא

נדר צדקה ואין הקדש צדקה

מאי קאמר

לא נדר ולא הקדש צדקה

אלא לאו הכי קאמר

צדקה הרי היא {דברים כג } בבל תאחר ואינה כהקדש דאילו הקדש אסור לאשתמושי ביה ואילו צדקה שרי לאשתמושי ביה

אמר רב כהנא

אמריתא לשמעתא קמיה דרב זביד מנהרדעא אמר

אתון הכי מתניתו לה אנן הכי מתנינן לה אמר רב נחמן אמר רבה בר אבוה אמר רב

האומר סלע זו לצדקה מותר לשנותה בין לעצמו בין לאחר בין אמר עלי בין אמר הרי זו:

ת"ר

סלע זו לצדקה עד שלא באתה ליד גבאי מותר לשנותה משבאתה ליד גבאי אסור לשנותה