Meilah 37

עד שיצא מן הקדש לחול

there is no liability except when [the food] has been transferred from sacred possession<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., in this connection the possession of the priest.');">¹</span>

מן הקדש לקדש כגון לקח קיני זבים וקיני זבות וקיני יולדות ושקל שקלו והביא חטאתו ואשמו מן ההקדש כיון שהוציא מעל דברי ר' שמעון

into secular ownership,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By eating the terumah one necessarily becomes the owner thereof.');">²</span>

רבי יהודה אומר

[so also with the word 'sin' used in connection with sacrilege]; whence do we know [that the Law of Sacrilege applies] when consecrated money has been misappropriated and used for other sacred purposes; e.g. , if he purchased with it the bird-offerings of a zab or a zabah,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., a man or a woman respectively who have recovered from gonorrhoea; v. Lev. XV.');">³</span>

עד שיזרוק הדם

or of a woman after confinement,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Lev. XII.');">⁴</span>

מנין

or has paid therewith his shekel,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Shek. II, 1.');">⁵</span>

ת"ל

or if one has offered his sin- or guiltoffering from sacred money, in which case one is liable to sacrilege at the moment of misappropriation according to R'Simeon and at the time of the sprinkling according to R'Judah.

(ויקרא ה, טו) תמעול מעל מכל מקום

Whence do we know all this?

אמר מר

The text reads: 'Commit a trespass': whatever the form may be.

נפש אחד היחיד ואחד הנשיא ואחד המשוח במשמע

The Master said: It is written, 'If any one [commit a trespass]', to imply the ordinary man as well as the Prince or the Anointed [Priest].

שיכול מאי

What else might one have assumed?

פשיטא נפש כתיב

Is this not obvious, 'If any one' is written [distinctly]? - I might have thought, The Divine Law says: And whosoever putteth any of it upon a stranger [he shall be cut off from among his people],<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ex. XXX, 33. The text deals with the anointing oil. From which it follows that he upon whom the oil is put by law is not to be considered a 'stranger' in respect of Temple property.');">⁶</span>

מהו דתימא

and this one<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Viz., the anointed.');">⁷</span>

אמר רחמנא (שמות ל, לג) ואשר יתן ממנו על זר והאי לאו זר הוא דהא אימשח בגוויה קמ"ל

is not a stranger, since he had been anointed therewith.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And consequently would not be liable to the Law of Sacrilege.');">⁸</span>

ואקשה רחמנא לסוטה ולעבודת כוכבים ולתרומה

Therefore the amplification mentioned was necessary.

לסוטה דאף על גב דלא פגם

The Divine Law has drawn an analogy between [the Law of Sacrilege on the one hand] and [the laws concerning] the suspected woman,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Num. V, 12-31.');">⁹</span>

גבי הקדש נמי נתנה טבעת בידה מעלה

idolatry and terumah [on the other].

כי אקשה רחמנא לעבודת כוכבים דעד דאית בה שינוי גבי הקדש נמי עד דביקע בקרדום ויפגם ופגום

[It is compared] to the law concerning the suspected woman: [Just as the law applies] even though there was no deterioration,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., no physical change has taken place with the woman.');">¹⁰</span>

אקשה רחמנא לתרומה מה תרומה (ויקרא כב, יד) כי יאכל פרט למזיק גבי הקדש נמי כל דבר אכילה כי מזיק ליה פטור

so also with consecrated property;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Viz., regarding things which do not deteriorate through use.');">¹¹</span>

כיצד נתנה קטלא כו'

if [a woman] has [e.g. ,] put a ring on her finger she is guilty of sacrilege.

אמר ליה רב כהנא לרב זביד

And the Divine Law compared it to the law of idolatry: Just as the latter [applies] only when a change has taken place,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The worshipper transfers his allegiance from God to the idol (Rashi) .');">¹²</span>

ודהבא לאו בר איפגומי הוא

so also in the case of consecrated property.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Referring this time to things which do deteriorate through use.');">¹³</span>

והא דהבא דכלתיה דנון להיכא אזל

One is not guilty when one has chopped wood with an axe [belonging to the Temple] unless it has been impaired.

אמר ליה

The Divine Law was compared to the law of terumah: Just as in the case of terumah [the words] 'if one has eaten'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXII, 14 dealing with terumah.');">¹⁴</span>

דלמא דהבא דרמיין כלתיך הוא

exclude the one who damages [terumah],<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., if he damaged terumah he is not liable to the payment of the additional Fifth. Pes. 32b.');">¹⁵</span>

ועוד

so also with consecrated things: If one has damaged anything eatable,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Terumah, from which this restrictive law is derived, consists always of edibles. The derived rule applies, therefore, also in the case of sacred property to edibles only.');">¹⁶</span>

נהי דלא איכא נהנה ופגם לאלתר לעולם מי לא איכא פגימה

he is exempted from the Law of Sacrilege.

הנהנה מן החטאת וכו'

FOR INSTANCE, IF [A WOMAN] HAS PUT A NECKLACE.

מכדי אי בבהמה תמימה היינו כוס של זהב

Said R'Kahana to R'Zebid: Does gold indeed not deteriorate?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The general rule of the Mishnah is exemplified by a golden cup. It must, therefore, be assumed that gold is considered a material which does not deteriorate through use.');">¹⁷</span>

א"ר פפא

Whither, then, has the gold of Nun's daughter-in-law gone?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This alludes according to Rashi and Tosaf. to a man called Nun who presented his daughters-in-law with golden vessels which after a time were found to have lost in weight.');">¹⁸</span>

בבעלת מום עסקינן

- He retorted: Perhaps the gold was thrown about<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., treated with little care.');">¹⁹</span> as your daughter in-law used to do. And besides, admitted this is not a case where there is enjoyment and immediate deterioration [of the used article], but [can you say] it will never deteriorate.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Thus lit.: When the rule of the Mishnah speaks of deterioration it can only mean immediate deterioration, for nothing remains unimpaired after a sufficiently long time.');">²⁰</span> IF ONE HAS DERIVED A BENEFIT FROM A SIN-OFFERING etc. Now, consider:, if this refers to an animal that has no blemish,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As it is to be offered upon the altar, whether it be fat or grows lean, any deterioration of the animal is irrelevant with regard to its purpose. Consequently it is to be compared to the case of the golden cup.');">²¹</span> [do you not agree that] it would be analogous to the case of the golden cup? - Said R'Papa: It refers indeed to one with a blemish.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The offering is then to be redeemed, and any deterioration will express itself in the price offered for it.');">²²</span>