## Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim Chapter 4

###### Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:1:1
[Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:1:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Shekalim/r/4:1:1)

**משנה:** הַתְּרוּמָה מֶה הָיוּ עוֹשִׂין בָּהּ. לוֹקְחִין בָּהּ תְּמִידִין וּמוּסָפִין וְנִסְכֵּיהֶם הָעֹמֶר וּשְׁתֵּי הַלֶּחֶם וְלֶחֶם הַפָּנִים וְכָל קָרְבְּנוֹת הַצִּיבּוּר. שׁוֹמְרֵי סְפִחִים בַּשְּׁבִיעִית נוֹטְלִין שְׂכָרָן מִתְּרוּמַת הַלִּשְׁכָּה. רִבִּי יוֹסֵה אוֹמֵר אַף הָרוֹצֶה מִתְנַדֵּב שׁוֹמֵר חִנָּם. אָמְרוּ לוֹ אַף אַתָּה אוֹמֵר שֶׁאֵין בָּאִין אֶלָּא מִשֶּׁל צִיבּוּר:

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**MISHNAH:** For what was the disbursement used? One buys from it daily and *musaf* sacrifices and their libations, the *`omer*¹ 23:9–14., and the Two Breads² 23:17., and the shew-bread³ 24:5–9., and all public offerings⁴ 4:13–21.). The watchmen for aftergrowth in the sabbatical year⁵ and the Two Breads have to be produce of the Land, and no sowing is permitted in a Sabbatical, the grains have to be harvested from spontaneous aftergrowth. Fields from which such a yield is expected have to be watched lest the plants be eaten by animals or the grains be taken by humans. In this case the watch is an essential precondition for the possibility of the offering and therefore the expenses have to be borne by the Temple. take their wages from the disbursement from the lodge. Rebbi Yose says, he also may volunteer as unpaid trustee⁶. They told him, would you not also say that they only come from the public⁷?

footnotes:
¹ The offering of barley grain on the 16th of Nisan to permit consumption of grain from the new harvest; Lev.
² The two leavened breads on Pentecost, Lev.
³ Seven breads every week, Lev.
⁴ Including incense and public reparation offerings (Lev.
⁵ Since the `omer
⁶ Even though the unpaid trustee acquires rights to what he is watching, R. Yose holds that private property may be donated to the Temple as public offering.
⁷ The Sages deny that private property may be donated to the Temple as public offering. “They” are public offerings. Therefore the argument cannot be intended to convince R. Yose; rather it is a statement clarifying that they insist that only fully paid watchmen are acceptable.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:1:2
[Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:1:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Shekalim/r/4:1:2)

**הלכה:** הַתְּרוּמָה מֶה הָיוּ עוֹשִׂין בָּהּ כול׳. מָה רָאָה זְמַן עֲצֵי כֹהֲנִים וְהָעָם לְהִימָּנוֹת. אֶלָּא בְשָׁעָה שֶׁעָלוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל מִן הַגּוֹלָה וְלֹא מָצְאוּ עֵצִים בַּלִּישְׁכָּה וְעָמְדוּ אֵילּוּ וְנִתְנַדְּבוּ עֵצִים מִשֶּׁלְעַצְמָן וּמְסָרוּם לַצִּיבּוּר וְקָרְבוּ מֵהֶן קָרְבְּנוֹת צִיבּוּר. וְהִתְנוּ עִמָּהֶן הַנְּבִיאים שֶׁבֵּינֵיהֶן שֶׁאֲפִילוּ לִשְׁכָּה מְלֵיאָה עֵצִים וְעָמְדוּ אֵילּוּ וְנִתְנַדְּבוּ עֵצִים מִשֶּׁלְעַצְמָן שֶׁלֹּא יִהֵא קָרְבָּן מִתְקָרֵב אֶלָּא מִשֶּׁלָּהֶן תְּחִילָּה. אָמַר רִבִּי אָחָא. דְּרִבִּי יוֹסֵה הִיא. דְּרִבִּי יוֹסֵה אָמַר. אַף הָרוֹצֶה מִתְנַדֵּב שׁוֹמֵר חִנָּם. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי אִילָא. דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל הִיא. מַה פְלִיגִין. בְּגוּפוֹ שֶׁלְקָרְבָּן. אֲבָל בְּמַכְשִׁירֵי קָרְבָּן כָּל עַמָּא מוֹדֵיי שֶׁהוּא מִשְׁתַּנֶּה קָרְבָּן יָחִיד לְקָרְבָּן צִיבּוּר. תַּנֵּי. [אִ]שָּׁה שֶׁעָשָׂת כֻּתּוֹנֶת לִבְנָהּ צְרִיכָה לִמְסוֹר לְצִיבּוּר. אָמַר רִבִּי אָחָא. דְּרִבִּי יוֹסֵי הִיא. דְּרִבִּי יוֹסֵי אָמַר. אַף הָרוֹצֶה מִתְנַדֵּב שׁוֹמֵר חִנָּם. רִבִּי יוֹסֵה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי אִילָא. דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל הִיא. מַה פְלִיגִין. בְּגוּפוֹ שֶׁלְקָרְבָּן. אֲבָל בְּמַכְשִׁירֵי קָרְבָּן כָּל עַמָּא מוֹדֵיי שֶׁהוּא מִשְׁתַּנֶּה קָרְבָּן יָחִיד לְקָרְבָּן צִיבּוּר. מַתְנִיתָא פְלִיגָא עַל רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. אוֹתָן הַיָּמִים נוֹהֲגִין בִּשְׁעַת קָרְבָּן וְשֶׁלֹּא בִּשְׁעַת קָרְבָּן. רִבִּי יוֹסֵה אוֹמֵר. אֵינָן נוֹהֲגִין אֶלָּא בִּשְׁעַת קָרְבָּן. וְעוֹד מִן הָדָא דְתַנֵּי. אָמַר רִבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֵּירִבִּי צָדוֹק. אָנוּ הָיִינוּ מִבְּנֵי סְנָאָה בֶן בִּנְיָמִן וְחָל תִּשְׁעָה בְאָב לִהְיוֹת בַּשַּׁבָּת וְדָחִינוּ אוֹתוֹ לְמוֹצָאֵי שַׁבָּת וְהָיִינוּ מִתְעַנִּין וְלֻא מַשְׁלִימִין.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**HALAKHAH:** ⁹“For what was the disbursement used,” etc. For what reason were the times of wood by the priests and the people to be counted¹⁰4:6 (**ת**), also in *Megillah*1:2 (70c l. 1 ff.; **מ**). In fact, **ג** simply notes: “one repeats from *Ta`aniot* up to ‘and were fasting but not completing.’ ”? Only that at the time when Israel returned from the Diaspora and did not find wood in the chamber, those came forward and volunteered wood from their own, donated it to the public, and used it to offer public sacrifices. The prophets among them stipulated that even if the chamber was full of wood and those came and offered and volunteered wood from their own, that the sacrifice should only be brought first from theirs¹¹28a.. Rebbi Aḥa said, this is Rebbi Yose’s, since Rebbi Yose said, also he may volunteer as unpaid trustee. Rebbi Yose¹² in the name of Rebbi Ila, it is the opinion of everybody. Where do they disagree? About the body of the offering. But for enablers of the offering everybody agrees that a private offering can be turned into public offering¹³ 6:5)to be paid for from the public purse.. It was stated, a woman who made a coat for her son has to surrender it to the public¹⁴ 28:40–43), they must be public property. Babli *Yoma*35b.. Rebbi Aḥa said, this is Rebbi Yose’s, since Rebbi Yose said, also he may volunteer as unpaid trustee. Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Ila, it is the opinion of everybody. Where do they disagree? About the body of the offering. But for enablers of the offering everybody agrees that a private offering can be turned into public offering.. A *baraita* disagrees with Rebbi Yose¹⁵: ¹⁶3:6.“Those days are observed at the time of sacrifices and not at the time of sacrifices; Rebbi Yose says, they are observed only at the time of sacrifices.¹⁷” Also from the following¹⁶3:6.: “Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Ṣadoq said, we were of the descendants of Senaah ben Benjamin. When the Ninth of Av fell on a Sabbath, we postponed it to the end of the Sabbath and were fasting but not completing.¹⁸”

footnotes:
¹⁰ This paragraph is Halakhah Ta`aniot
¹¹ Babli Ta`anit
¹² This is R. Yose the fifth generation Amora. The reading of B (and M), R. Assi (= Yasa), is impossible since R. Ila was a student, not a teacher, of R. Yasa.
¹³ While holding that the firewood is ancillary, not intrinsic, to the sacrifice, they still would have to require that the two daily logs required before any sacrifices are brought to the altar (Lev.
¹⁴ Since the prescribed garments of a priest are part of the establishment of the Tabernacle (Ex.
¹⁵ The Amora, speaking in the name of R. Ila.
¹⁶ Tosephta Ta`aniot
¹⁷ The days enumerated on which certain families celebrated their offerings of firewood according to the Tanna R. Yose are treated as days of sacrificing. Therefore at least for him, firewood is part of the sacrifice, not ancillary, and may be given from private property as public sacrifice.
¹⁶ Tosephta Ta`aniot
¹⁸ Their holiday was on the 10th of Av. Since the 9th of Av is the day of remembering the destruction of the Temple, his story must be dated after the destruction, when there were no longer any sacrifices. If the family holiday is so important that one pushes aside the fasting for the 9th of Av, it must be that even for the majority the offering of firewood was the equivalent of a sacrifice, not an ancillary act. Therefore R. Aḥa is justified.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:1:3
[Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:1:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Shekalim/r/4:1:3)

הָעוֹמֶר וּשְׁתֵּי הַלֶּחֶם וְלֶחֶם הַפָּנִים. מַתְנִיתָא דְרִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל. דְרִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל אָמַר . אֵין הָעוֹמֶר בָּא מִן הַסּוּרִיָּא. תַּמָּן תַּנִּינָן. כָּל קָרְבְּנוֹת הַיָּחִיד וְהַצִּיבּוּר בָּאִין מִן הָאָרֶץ וּמִחוּצָה לָאָרֶץ. מִן הֶחָדָשׁ וּמִן הַיָּשָׁן. חוּץ מִן הָעוֹמֶר וּשְׁתֵּי הַלֶּחֶם. שֶׁאֵין בָּאִין אֶלָּא מִן הֶחָדָשׁ וּמִן הָאָרֶץ. רִבִּי חוּנָה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה. דְרִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל הִיא. דְרִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל אָמַר. אֵין הָעוֹמֶר בָּא מִן הַסּוּרִיָּא. תַּמָּן תַּנִּינָן. עֶשֶׂר קְדוּשּׁוֹת הֵן. אֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל מְקוּדֶּשֶׁת מִכָּל הָאֲרָצוֹת. וּמַה הִיא קְדוּשָּׁתָהּ. שֶׁמְּבִיאִין מִמֶּנָּה הָעוֹמֶר וְהַבִּיכּוּרִים וּשְׁתֵּי הַלֶּחֶם. מַה שֶּׁאֵין מְבִיאִין כֵּן מִכָּל הָאֲרָצוֹת. רִבִּי חוּנָה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה. דְּרִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל הִיא. דְרִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל אָמַר. אֵין הָעוֹמֶר בָּא מִן הַסּוּרִיָּא. תַּמָּן תַּנִּינָן. רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל אוֹמֵר. מֶה חָרִישׁ רְשׁוּת אַף קָצִיר רְשׁוּת. יָצָא קְצִיר הָעֹמֶר. שֶׁהוּא מִצְוָה. הֲוֵי מָאן תַּנָּא שׁוֹמְרֵי סְפִחִים בַּשְּׁבִיעִית נוֹטְלִין שְׂכָרָן מִתְּרוּמַת הַלִּשְׁכָּה. רִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵה. דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל הִיא. לֹא מָצָאוּ בְסוּרִיָּא מְבִיאִין אוֹתוֹ מִסְּפִחִין שֶׁבְּאֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל. הָהֵן עוֹמֶר מָהוּ שֶׁיִּזָּרַע לָכֵן מִתְּחִילָּה. רִבִּי חִיָיה בַּר אָדָא בְעָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי מָנָא. לֹא נִמְצָא כְקוֹמֵץ עַל הַשְּׁיֵרִיים שֶׁאֵינָן נֶאֱכָלִין. אָמַר לֵיהּ. נַעֲשֶׂה כַחֲמִשָּׁה דְבָרִים שֶׁהֵן בָּאִין בְּטוּמְאָה וְאֵינָן נֶאֱכָלִין בְּטוּמְאָה.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
“The *`omer*¹ 23:9–14., and the Two Breads² 23:17.., and the shew-bread.” The Mishnah¹⁹ are paid from public funds. If it were possible to import the grain during a sabbatical year, the expense would be unnecessary and therefore forbidden. is Rebbi Ismael’s, since Rebbi Ismael said, the *`omer* is not brought from Syria²⁰. There, we have stated:²¹8:1. The sacrifices referred to are offerings of flour and wine. “All private and public sacrifices come from the Land and from outside the Land, from new or old [grain], except for `*omer* and the Two Breads, which only come from new grain²² permits the profane use of new grain also from outside the Land and the Two Breads permit the use of new wheat in the Tabernacle which according to the Mishnah includes wheat imported from Syria. While the Mishnah states that grain is acceptable from outside the Land, this refers to grain from outside the Land on both sides of the Jordan and Syria only if it remained impervious to the impurity of Gentile lands (i. e., if it was guarded from any contact with water or fluids whose status is like water in this respect.) and from the Land.” Rebbi Ḥuna in the name of Rebbi Jeremiah, this is Rebbi Ismael’s, since Rebbi Ismael said, the *`omer* is not brought from Syria²³. There, we have stated²⁴1:6.: “There are ten levels of holiness. The Land of Israel is holier than other lands; and what is its holiness? That one brings from it the *`omer*, first fruits, and the Two Breads, which cannot be from other lands.” Rebbi Ḥuna in the name of Rebbi Jeremiah, this is Rebbi Ismael’s, since Rebbi Ismael said, the *`omer* is not brought from Syria. There, we have stated²⁵1:5.: “Rebbi Ismael says, since sowing is a voluntary act, also harvesting is a voluntary act. This excludes harvesting the *`omer*, which is a commandment²⁶ 34:21: *Six days you may work but on the Seventh Day you must rest, from ploughing and harvesting you must rest*. According to R. Ismael while this forbids any optional harvesting on the Sabbath, it implies that harvesting required by a religious commandment must be performed on the Sabbath. (Cf. *Ševi`it* Chapter 1, Notes 43 and 2.)
**ג** adds here the one-sentence Halakhah *Ševi`it*1:5 (Note 44)..” Who is the Tanna of “the watchmen for aftergrowth in the sabbatical year take their wages from the disbursement from the lodge”? Rebbi Ismael²⁰. Rebbi Yose said, it is everybody’s opinion. If one would not find in Syria,.one would bring from the aftergrowth in the Land of Israel²⁷. Could one sow from the start for the `*omer*²⁸ 25:3 introducing the Sabbatical year combines sowing and harvesting, one could make the point that only voluntary sowing in a Sabbatical is forbidden, therefore obligatory sowing leading to obligatory harvesting is permitted.? Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Ada asked before Rebbi Mana, would he not take the fistful for leftovers than cannot be eaten²⁹(a tenth of an *ephah,* about 3.8 l) is burned on the altar, the leftover has to be consumed by the priests in the Sanctuary. But produce sown in a Sabbatical is forbidden; the leftover of the flour could not be consumed.? He said to him, it has a status like the five kinds which can be brought in impurity but may not be eaten in impurity³⁰7:4..

footnotes:
¹ The offering of barley grain on the 16th of Nisan to permit consumption of grain from the new harvest; Lev.
² The two leavened breads on Pentecost, Lev.
¹⁹ The part of the Mishnah which states that the watchmen over grain for the `omer
²⁰ Syria in matters of religious law is the area which was part of David’s empire but not permanently settled by one of the Twelve Tribes. The rules of the Land do not apply biblically but the land is not ritually impure. Therefore grain for use in the Temple could be bought from there.
²¹ Mishnah Menaḥot
²² This is not obvious since the `omer
²³ And certainly not from impure lands.
²⁴ Mishnah Kelim
²⁵ Mishnah Ševi`it
²⁶ This refers to Ex.
²⁰ Syria in matters of religious law is the area which was part of David’s empire but not permanently settled by one of the Twelve Tribes. The rules of the Land do not apply biblically but the land is not ritually impure. Therefore grain for use in the Temple could be bought from there.
²⁷ While not needed every year, in a year of drought in Syria it might be obvious that one has to look for any available grain in the Land.
²⁸ Since the verse Lev.
²⁹ Only a fistful of the grain brought for the `omer
³⁰ The leftover has to be burned. The same would happen if all available grain and all available personnel were impure, Mishnah Pesaḥim


###### Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:1:4
[Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:1:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Shekalim/r/4:1:4)

כֵּיצַד הוּא עוֹשֶׂה. נוֹטֵל מָעוֹת מִן הָשּׁוּלְחָנִי וְנוֹתֵן לַקּוֹצְרִין וּלְשׁוֹמְרִין עַד שֶׁלֹּא יַקְרִב הָעוֹמֶר. מֵבִיא מָעוֹת מִתְּרוּמַת הִַלִּשְׁכָּה וּמְחַלְלָן עָלָיו. וְטָבוּ כֵן. רִבִּי אָחָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי בָּא. כָּל מַה שֶׁיִּתֵּן הֵן הֵן דָּמֶיהָ מִשָּׁעָה הָרִאשׁוֹנָה. תַּנֵּי. אַף בְּפַתָּחֵי אֲבָנִים כֵּן. כֵּיצַד הוּא עוֹשֶׂה. נוֹטֵל מָעוֹת מִשּׁוּלְחָנִי וְנוֹתֵן לַחוֹצְבִין וּלְסַתָּתִין עַד שֶׁלֹּא תִינָּתֵן עַל גַּבֵּי הַדֹּימוֹס. [אַחַר כָּךְ] מֵבִיא מָעוֹת מִתְּרוּמַת הִַלִּשְׁכָּה וּמְחַלְלָן עָלֶיהָ. וְטָבָא הִיא כֵן. רִבִּי יוֹסֵה בֵּירִבִּי בּוּן בְּשֵׁם שְׁמוּאֵל. כָּל מַה שֶׁיִּתֵּן הֵן הֵן דָּמָיו מִשָּׁעָה הָרִאשׁוֹנָה.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
How does he do it³¹ are Temple property which can only be used to buy sacrifices. If the Temple administrator would pay workers with these monies, he would be guilty of *me`ilah*, larceny of sacred property.? He takes coins from the money changer and gives them to the harvesters and the watchmen before the *`omer* is presented. He brings coins from the disbursement from the lodge and redeems them for it³² is presented as flour. Therefore the value of the grain and the cost of all labor used in the preparation of the offering can be added and the *sheqalim* coins redeemed on the total value of the sacrifice. The redeemed coins can then be used to liquidate the debt incurred at the banker’s.; then it is in order³³, seems to be a grotesque misreading.. Rebbi Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Abba: Any which he gives are its coins from the start³⁴. 19.. It was stated: The same is the case with the stone-masons³⁵. He takes coins from the money changer and gives them to the quarry workers and the stone-cutters before it is fixed in the row³⁶. 19:6.. Then he brings coins from the disbursement from the lodge and redeems them for it; then it is in order. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun in the name of Samuel: Any which he gives are its coins from the start.

footnotes:
³¹ The problem is that the sheqalim
³² The `omer
³³ The reading of B, Rebbi Tibḥi ben Rebbi Yose
³⁴ The red cow whose ashes purify the impurity of the dead, Num
³⁵ The scapegoat of the day of Atonement.
³⁶ The strip of purple wool, together with a branch of cedar and a hyssop, which the Cohen has to throw into the pyre of the burning Cow, Num


###### Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:2:1
[Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:2:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Shekalim/r/4:2:1)

**משנה:** פָּרָה וְשָׂעִיר הַמִּשְׁתַּלֵּחַ וְלָשׁוֹן שֶׁל זְהוֹרִית בָּאִין מִתְּרוּמַת הַלִשְׁכָּה. כֶּבֶשׁ פָּרָה וְכֶבֶשׁ שָׂעִיר הַמִּשְׁתַּלֵּחַ וְלָשׁוֹן שֶׁבֵּין קַרְנָיו וְאַמַּת הַמַּיִם וְחוֹמַת הָעִיר וּמִגְדְּלוֹתֶיהָ וְכָל צָרְכֵי הָעִיר בָּאִין מִשְּׁיֵרֵי הַלִּשְׁכָּה. אַבָּא שָׁאוּל אוֹמֵר כֶּבֶשׁ פָּרָה כֹּהֲנִים גְּדוֹלִים עוֹשִׂין אוֹתוֹ מִשֶּׁל עַצְמָן: מוֹתַר שְׁיֵרֵי לִשְׁכָּה מֶה הָיוּ עוֹשִׂין בָּהֶן. לוֹקְחִין בָּהֶן יֵינוֹת שְׁמָנִים וּסְלָתוֹת וְהַשָּׂכָר לַהֶקְדֵּשׁ דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה אוֹמֵר אִין מִשְׁתַּכְּרִין בְּשֶּׁל הֶקְדֵּשׁ אַף לֹא מִשֶּׁל עֲנִיִּים: מוֹתַר הַתְּרוּמָה מֶה הָיוּ עוֹשִׂין בָּהּ. רִקּוּעֵי זָהָב צִיפּוּי לְבֵית קָדְשֵׁי הַקֳּדָשִׁים. רִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל אוֹמֵר מוֹתַר הַפֵּירוֹת קַיָיץ הַמִּזְבֵּחַ. מוֹתַר תְּרוּמָה לִכְלֵי שָׁרֵת. רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה אוֹמֵר מוֹתַר תְּרוּמָה קַיָיץ הַמִּזְבֵּחַ. מוֹתַר נְסָכִים לִכְלֵי שָׁרֵת. רִבִּי חֲנַנְיָה סְגַן הַכֹּהֲנִים אוֹמֵר מוֹתַר נְסָכִים קַיָיץ הַמִּזְבֵּחַ מוֹתַר תְּרוּמָה לִכְלֵי שָׁרֵת. זֶה וָזֶה לֹא הָיוּ מוֹדִין בַּפֵּירוֹת:

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**MISHNAH:** The Cow³⁴. 19., the he-goat which is sent away³⁵, and the shiny strip³⁶. 19:6. come from the money disbursed from the lodge³⁷. The ramp for the Cow³⁸, the ramp for the he-goat which is sent away³⁹6:4., the strip bound on its horns⁴⁰4:2, 6:6., the water canal⁴¹, the city wall and its towers⁴², and all needs of the city, come from the leftovers in the lodge⁴³. Abba Shaul says, the High Priests build the ramp for the Cow at their own expense.
What did one do with the leftover in the lodge⁴⁷? One buys with it wine, oil, and fine flour,⁴⁸ and the gain is the Temple’s, the words of Rebbi Ismael. Rebbi Aqiba says, one gains neither for the Temple nor funds for the poor⁴⁹.
What did they use the leftover of the disbursement⁷³ for? Gold sheets coating for the Holiest of Holies. Rebbi Ismael said, the leftover of produce⁷⁴ is for adornment of the altar⁷⁵, the leftover of the disbursement is for Service vessels⁷⁶. Rebbi Aqiba says, the leftover of the disbursement is for adornment of the altar, the leftover of the libations⁷⁷ is for Service vessels. Rebbi Ḥanania the executive officer of the Cohanim says, the leftover of the libations is for adornment of the altar, the leftover of the disbursement is for Service vessels. Neither of them did agree about produce⁷⁸.

footnotes:
³⁴ The red cow whose ashes purify the impurity of the dead, Num
³⁵ The scapegoat of the day of Atonement.
³⁶ The strip of purple wool, together with a branch of cedar and a hyssop, which the Cohen has to throw into the pyre of the burning Cow, Num
³⁷ These are explicitly prescribed by biblical verses.
³⁸ Leading directly from the Temple to the Mount of Olives.
³⁹ The ramp built to shield the scapegoat while it is lead away, Yoma
⁴⁰ Mishnah Yoma
⁴¹ The aqueduct which supplies water to the Temple. The need for a water supply is implicit in the biblical rules for the Tabernacle but is never explicitly mentioned.
⁴² By biblical rules, family sacrifices may be consumed “in the camp.” The “camp” of the Temple is the walled city of Jerusalem. Therefore the integrity of the walls are a requirement of the Temple service and the necessary expenditures may be made from the Temple tax.
⁴³ The items mentioned in this sentence are all necessary or customary parts of the Temple establishment, but are not mentioned in biblical verses. They are paid for from monies not directly used for the service of prior years.
⁴⁷ What is left from the Temple tax at the end of the fiscal year.
⁴⁸ For public sacrifices these are paid for from the coins disbursed from the lodge. Wine, oil, and flour for private sacrifices are bought from the Temple as explained in the next Chapter. R. Ismael holds that the original funds for this operation come from the surplus of the Temple tax; R. Aqiba must hold that this is a self-financing non-profit operation.
⁴⁹ He holds that the Temple may not be involved in commercial transaction. He objects to investing funds destined for the poor not only since avoidance of loss is more important than possible gain but also that money for the poor must be available at all times for possible emergencies.
⁷³ If money was left in the boxes into which it was taken from the lodge at the time when new money was disbursed, the amount of new money was not reduced but the old money was put into a separate account to be used for other needs of the Temple.
⁷⁴ The gain made by the Temple in providing flour, oil, and wine, for private sacrifices.
⁷⁵ It is given to the gift account to buy elevation sacrifices in times when the altar otherwise would have been idle.
⁷⁶ The vessels used in sacrificial acts.
⁷⁷ As explained in Halakhah 5, the income from the trading arrangements with the suppliers to the Temple.
⁷⁸ R. Ḥanania agrees with R. Aqiba that the Temple has to provide the produce at cost and cannot make a gain on this service.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:2:2
[Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:2:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Shekalim/r/4:2:2)

**הלכה:** פָּרָה וְשָׂעִיר כול׳. רִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר נַחְמָן בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹנָתָן. שְׁלֹשָׁה לְשׁוֹנוֹת הֵן. שֶׁלְשָׂעִיר בְּסֶלַע. שֶׁלְמְצוֹרָע בְּשֶׁקֶל. שֶׁלְפָּרָה בִּשְׁתֵּי סְלָעִים. רִבִּי חוֹנִיָיה דִבְרַת חַוְורָן רִבִּי בָּא בַּר זַבְדָּא בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן חַלְפוּתָא. שֶׁלְפָּרָה בִּשְׁתֵּי סְלָעִים וּמֶחֱצָה. וְאִית דְּמַפְקִין לִישְׁנָא . בָּעֲשָׂרָה (זִין) [זוּז] .

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**HALAKHAH:** ⁴⁴ Halakhah 4:2 (**י**). Rebbi Samuel bar Naḥman in the name of Rebbi Jonathan: There are three strips. The one for the he-goat for a tetradrachma, for the sufferer from skin disease for a sheqel⁴⁵ 14:4,6)., for the Cow for two tetradrachmas. Rebbi Onias from Berat-Hauran in the name of Rebbi Abba bar Zavda in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Ḥalaphta, for the Cow for two tetradrachmas and a half; but some express it in the formulation ten (*zin*)⁴⁶10:7 (Note 80) as 1/100 of a (probably Roman) pound. 2.5 *tetradrachma* are 10 *denarii*. Since an Augustean *denar* was 1/96 of a Roman pound (silver), 10 *zin* are 9.6 *denarii*.
The corrector’s reading *zuz*(denar) is from B. [*zuz*].

footnotes:
⁴⁴ From Yoma
⁴⁵ For the purification ceremony of the person healed from skin disease (Lev.
⁴⁶ Defined in Terumot


###### Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:2:3
[Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:2:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Shekalim/r/4:2:3)

רַב יְהוּדָה בְשֵׁם שְׁמוּאֵל. תַּלְמִידֵי חֲכָמִים הַמְלַמְּדִין אֶת הַכֹּהֲנִים הִילְכוֹת שְׁחִיטָה הִילְכוֹת קַבָּלָה הִילְכוֹת זְרִיקָה נוֹטְלִין שְׂכָרָן מִתְּרוּמַת הַלִּשְׁכָּה. רִבִּי יִצְחָק בַּר רְדִיפָה בְשֵׁם אִימִּי. מְבַקְּרֵי מוּמֵי קֳדָשִׁים נוֹטְלִין שְׂכָרָן מִתְּרוּמַת הַלִּשְׁכָּה. רִבִּי אָחָא רִבִּי תַנְחוּם בַּר חִיָיה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי שִׂמְלַאי. מַגִּיהֵי סֵפֶר הֶעֲזָרָה נוֹטְלִין שְׂכָרָן מִתְּרוּמַת הַלִּשְׁכָּה. גִּידּוּל בַּר בִּנְיָמִן בְּשֵׂם אַסִּי. שְׁנֵי דַיָינֵי גְזֵילוֹת נוֹטְלִין שְׂכָרָן מִתְּרוּמַת הַלִּשְׁכָּה. שְׁמוּאֵל אַמַר. נָשִׁים הָאוֹרְגוֹת בַּפְּרָכוֹת נוֹטְלוֹת שְׂכָרָן מִתְּרוּמַת הַלִּשְׁכָּה. רַב חוּנָה אָמַר. מִתְּרוּמַת בֶּדֶק הַבַּיִת. מַה וּפְלִיג. שְׁמוּאֵל עֲבֲד לָהּ כְּקָרְבָּן. רַב חוּנָה עֲבֲד לָהּ כְּבִּינְיָין. אָמַר רִבִּי חִזְקִיָּה. תַּנָּא רִבִּי יְהוּדָה גְרוֹגְרוֹת. הַקְּטוֹרֶת וְכָל קָרְבְּנוֹת הַצִּיבּוּר בָּאִין מִתְּרוּמַת הַלִּשְׁכָּה. מִזְבַּח הַזָּהָב וְכָל כְּלֵי שָׁרֵת בָּאִין מִמּוֹתָרֵי נְסָכִים. מִזְבַּח הָעוֹלָה וְהַהֵיכָל וְהָעֲזָרוֹת בְּאִין מִשְּׁיֵּרֵי לִשְׁכָּה. חוּץ לָעֲזָרוֹת בָּאִין מִלִּשְׁכַּת בֶּדֶק הַבַּיִת. וְהָא תַנֵּי. אַבְנֵי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ הַהֵיכָל וְהָעֲזָרוֹת מוֹעֲלִין בָּהֶן. וְכִי יֵשׁ מְעִילָה בִּשְׁיֵרִים. אֶלָּא כְרִבִּי מֵאִיר. דְּרִבִּי מֵאִיר אָמַר. מוֹעֲלִין בִּשְׁיֵרִיִים. אָמַר רִבִּי חִינְנָא. כְּלוּם אָמַר רִבִּי מֵאִיר אֶלָּא בְתוֹךְ שְׁנָתוֹ. וְהָכָא חוּץ לִשְׁנָתוֹ אֲנָן קַיָימִין.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
Rav Jehudah in the name of Samuel⁵⁰. But since it is the impossible “Rav Huna in the name of Rebbi Samuel”, it has to be disregarded. **ג** is defective at this place. In the Babli *Ketubot*106a the statement is attributed to Rav Giddul in the name of Rav.: The scholars who teach the priests the rules of slaughter, rules of receiving, rules of sprinkling, take their wages from the disbursement from the lodge⁵¹106a.. Rebbi Isaac bar Redifa in the name of Immi: The inspectors of defects of *sancta*⁵²28:3), there have to be competent daily inspections. Babli *Ketubot*106a. take their wages from the disbursement from the lodge. Rebbi Aḥa, Rebbi Tanḥum bar Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Simlai: Those who correct the scroll of the Temple courtyard⁵³106a. take their wages from the disbursement from the lodge. Giddul bar Benjamin in the name of Assi: The two judges of robberies⁵⁴13:1. But it seems that the meaning of the term is that of the reading of **ג** and most Babylonian sources here and in *Ketubot*13, דַּיָנֵי גְזֵירוֹת “judges of decisions,” i. e., appeals judges. The reading here is the result of an exchange of liquids. The legal principles attributed to these judges in *Ketubot* Chapter 13 all refer to matters of civil, mostly matrimonial, law. Babli *Ketubot*105a. take their wages from the disbursement from the lodge. Samuel said, women who are weaving the gobelins⁵⁵ take their wages from the disbursement from the lodge; Rav Ḥuna said, from disbursements for repair of the House. How do they disagree? Samuel makes it a sacrifice, Rav Huna makes it part of the building. Rebbi Ḥizqiah said that Rebbi Jehudah Dried Figs⁵⁶ stated: The incense and all public sacrifices come from the disbursement from the lodge. The golden altar and vessels for the Service come from the excess of libations⁵⁷. The altar for elevation sacrifices, the building, and the courtyards⁵⁷ come from the leftover in the lodge. The outside of the courtyards come from the lodge for maintenance of the House⁵⁹. But was it not stated: One commits *me`ilah* with stones of the Temple or the courtyards⁶⁰ is defined (*Lev.* 5:15) as “larceny committed on the Eternal’s *sancta*”, where the usual interpretation is that *sancta* are only sacrifices and their appurtenances; cf. Halakhah 3:4, Note 66.. How can one commit *me`ilah* with leftovers? But it must follow Rebbi Meïr, for Rebbi Meïr said, one commits *me`ilah* with leftovers. Rebbi Ḥinena said, Rebbi Meïr said this only during its year. But here we are after its year⁶¹ whose misuse is *me`ilah* only if there is the possibility that it will be used to buy sacrifices. As explained earlier, any leftovers after disbursement still must be kept together since they might be needed if the money disbursed later was not sufficient for the Temple’s needs. But once a new year started, the old *sheqalim* cannot be used to buy sacrifices of any kind; they cannot cause *me`ilah*. The *baraita* is rejected. Babli *Qiddušin*54a..

footnotes:
⁵⁰ If the reading of B were “Rav Huna in the name of Samuel”, it would need consideration as lectio difficilior
⁵¹ Since every week another group of Cohanim comes to serve, which may bring with them young inexperienced members of the group, they are permanently occupied. Babli Ketubot
⁵² Since the animals chosen for the daily sacrifice have to be without defects (Num.
⁵³ From which the High Priest reads on the Day of Atonement and which is used to standardize the texts of copies of the Torah. The reading of B, “Ezra’s scroll”, has to be rejected. Babli Ketubot
⁵⁴ This is the translation of the text here and in Mishnah Ketubot
⁵⁵ For use in the Temple Hall, to separate between the holy and the holiest of holies.
⁵⁶ It is impossible to determine his time of activity.
⁵⁷ This statement endorses the position of R. Ismael in the Mishnah, that the operation to provide wine, oil, and flour to those who bring private sacrifices, routinely provides a surplus to the Temple.
⁵⁷ This statement endorses the position of R. Ismael in the Mishnah, that the operation to provide wine, oil, and flour to those who bring private sacrifices, routinely provides a surplus to the Temple.
⁵⁹ The place where the funds are kept which were given as vows to the Temple.
⁶⁰ Me`ilah
⁶¹ Money is a sanctum


###### Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:2:4
[Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:2:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Shekalim/r/4:2:4)

אָמַר רִבִּי חִזְקִיָּה. תַּנָּא רִבִּי יְהוּדָה גְרוֹגְרוֹת. הַשֻּׁלְחָן וְהַמְּנוֹרָה וְהַמִּזְבְּחוֹת וְהַפְּרָכוֹת מְעַכְּבִין אֶת הַקָּרְבָּן. דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי מֵאִיר. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְ‌ְרִין אֵין לָךְ מְעַכֵּב אֶת הַקָּרְבָּן אֶלָּא הַכֵּיּוֹר וְהַכָּן בִּלְבַד. וְלֹא אָמַר כֵּן. רִבִּי אֶלְעָזָר וְרִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּן חֲנִינָה תְּרֵיהוֹן אָ‍מְרִין. כָּל הֵן דִּכְתִיב נֹכַח מְעַכֵּב. צֶלַע אֵינוֹ מְעַכֵּב. וְאָמַר רִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר נַחְמָן בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹנָתָן. וַאֲפִילוּ צֶלַע מְעַכֵּב. וְאָמַר רִבִּי אִילָא בְשֵׁם שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר נַחְמָן. וַאֲפִילוּ שִׂימָה מְעַכֶּבֶת. אָמַר רִבִּי חֲנַנְיָה. כָּאן בָּעֲבוֹדוֹת שֶׁבִּפְנִים וְכָאן בָּעֲבוֹדוֹת שֶׁבַּחוּץ.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
Rebbi Ḥizqiah said that Rebbi Jehudah Dried Figs⁵⁶ stated: The table, the candelabrum, the altars⁶²62a., and the gobelins⁵⁵ obstruct the sacrifice, the words of Rebbi Meïr. But the Sages say, the sacrifice is only obstructed by the wash basin and its base⁶³ 30:17–21, 40:30–32.. Otherwise, Rebbi Eleazar and Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina both say, everywhere “opposite⁶⁴ 26:32–37; 40:1–16) and the report how this was executed ((*Ex.* 40:1–17–33.) The candelabrum was put “opposite the table”. (*Ex.* 40:24).” is written it is obstructive, “on the side⁶⁵ 26:35).” is not obstructive, but Rebbi Samuel bar Naḥman in the name of Rebbi Jonathan said, even “on the side” is obstructive, and Rebbi Ila in the name of Rebbi Jonathan said, even “putting⁶⁶ 40:18 ff.)” is obstructive. Rebbi Ḥananiah said, here for service inside, there for service outside⁶⁷8:6), for any offering on the large altar one only needs the wash basin and its base. But for any offering inside the Sanctuary, e. g., the daily incense burning, all pieces have to be available at the correct places..

footnotes:
⁵⁶ It is impossible to determine his time of activity.
⁶² Since obviously in the absence of an altar there can be no sacrifice, the reference is to the golden incense altar in the Sanctuary, not the large altar outside. Babli Zevaḥim
⁵⁵ For use in the Temple Hall, to separate between the holy and the holiest of holies.
⁶³ Since the priests are forbidden to officiate unless they wash hands and feet from the Temple wash basin on its base, Ex.
⁶⁴ The following refers to the commandment how the Tabernacle had to be organized (Ex.
⁶⁵ The table has to be put “on the North side”, the candelabrum “on the South side”; (Ex.
⁶⁶ Moses “put” all the furniture of the Tabernacle at its correct places (Ex.
⁶⁷ Since one may bring sacrifices on the altar without a Temple (Mishnah Idiut


###### Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:2:5
[Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:2:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Shekalim/r/4:2:5)

אָמַר רִבִּי חֲנִינָה. שַׁחַצִית גְּדוֹלָה הָ‍יְתָה בִּבְנֵי כֹהֲנִים גְּדוֹלִים. שֶׁיּוֹתֵר מִשִּׁשִּׁים כִּכְּרֵי זָהָב [הָיוּ מוֹצִיאִין בָּהּ.] הָיָה כִבְשָׁהּ שֶׁלְפָּרָה עוֹמֵד וְלֹא הָיָה אֶחָד מֵהֶן מוֹצִיא פָּרָתוֹ בְכִבְשׁוֹ שֶׁלְחֲבֵירוֹ אֶלָּא סוֹתְרוֹ וּבוֹנֶה אוֹתוֹ מִשֶׁלּוֹ. הָתִיב רִבִּי עוּלָּא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי מָנָא. וְהָא תַנֵּי. שִׁמְעוֹן הַצַּדִּיק שְׁתֵּי פָרוֹת עָשָׂה. לֹא בְכֶבֶשׁ שֶׁהוֹצִיא אֶת זוֹ הוֹצִיא אֶת זוֹ. אִית לָךְ מֵימַר. שִׁמְעוֹן הַצַּדִּיק שִׁיחֵץ הָיָה. מַיי כְדוֹן. עַל שֶׁם מַעֲלָה הִיא בְפָרָה סִילְסוּל הוּא בְפָרָה. תַּנֵּי. זִיזִין וּכְתָלִין הָיוּ יוֹצְאִין מִיכָּן וּמִיכָּן כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יָצִיצוּ הַכֹּהֲנִים וְיִטַּמּוּ.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
⁶⁸ Rebbi Ḥanina said, there was much arrogance among the sons of the High Priests, for more than ⁶⁰ is defined (*Lev.* 5:15) as “larceny committed on the Eternal’s *sancta*”, where the usual interpretation is that *sancta* are only sacrifices and their appurtenances; cf. Halakhah 3:4, Note 66. talents of gold⁶⁹ or 360’000 *denar*. One should take note of the reading of B, “silver” instead of “gold”. [did they spend on it.]⁷⁰ If the ramp for the Cow was still standing, no one was leading out his cow on the other’s ramp, but he tore it down and was building it anew. Rebbi Ulla objected before Rebbi Mana: Was it not stated that Simeon the Just made two Cows; on the ramp on which he took out one he did not take out the other⁷¹. Could you say that Simeon the Just was arrogant? What about it? Because they gave eminence to the Cow, ornaments they made for the Cow. It was stated: Ledges and walls were on both sides so that the priests could not look down and become impure⁷²3:7..

footnotes:
⁶⁸ Discussion of the statement of Abba Shaul in Mishnah 2, that the ramp for the Cow (including a bridge over the Kidron valley) was made new every time on the High Priest’s expense. It is implied that the High Priest either oversaw the ceremony himself or appointed one of his sons.
⁶⁰ Me`ilah
⁶⁹ That would be 180’000 sheqel
⁷⁰ Addition by the corrector, an adaptation to the formulation in B; not supported by any Genizah fragment.
⁷¹ Since he was in office for 40 years, after about 35 years probably not much of the first ramp was still in existence.
⁷² Since the Kidron valley was used as burial ground at least from First Temple times, if the Cohen was not protected by the wooden floor of the ramp which separated him from the “tent impurity” emanating from the graves, the Cohen would become severely impure and not able to conduct the ceremony. Therefore one made it impossible for the Cohen to lean out over the railings. The scribe’s reading. “could not look down” is preferable over that of the other sources, “leave”. Tosephta Parah


###### Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:2:6
[Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:2:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Shekalim/r/4:2:6)

אֶלָּא אִם רָצָה יְהֵא הַהֶפְסֵד שֶׁלּוֹ. וְהַשָּׂכָר לְהֶקְדֵּשׁ מוּתָּר. כְּהָדָא בַּר זְמִינָא אִת פְקִיד גַּבֵּיהּ מֵדַל דְּיַתְמִין. אֲתַא וּשְׁאַל לְרִבִּי מָנָא. אֲמַר לֵיהּ. אִין בְּעִית דִּי הֶפְסֵדְה דִידָךְ וְאַגְרָה דִתְּרַוֵיכוֹן שָׁרֵי. רִבִּי חִיָיה בַּר אָדָא אִתְפְקִיד גַּבֵּיהּ מֵדַל דְּיַתְמִין וַעֲבַד כֵּן.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
⁷⁹ Only if he wants that the loss be his and the gain for the endowment⁸⁰ it is permitted⁸¹ 70a.. As the following: Bar Zemina was appointed for property of orphans. He came and asked Rebbi Mana, who told him, if you want that the loss be yours and the gain be split among you it is permitted. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Ada was appointed for property of orphans and acted in this way.

footnotes:
⁷⁹ This does not belong to Mishnah 4 but is the discussion of the statement of Rebbi Aqiba that one does not invest capital of funds for the poor.
⁸⁰ While originally this means “property of the Temple”, it is used in the sense common in the Middle Ages, “endowment of a fund for the poor”, “welfare fund.” The text shows that this includes property administered by a guardian for the benefit of underage orphans.
⁸¹ As agreement between adults, that the risk of investments is borne solely by the agent but any gain split between agent and investor, it is forbidden as hidden payment of interest. But if the investment is for a charitable fund for minor orphans it is permitted. Babli Bava Meṣia`


###### Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:2:7
[Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:2:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Shekalim/r/4:2:7)

כּוּלָּהּ דְּרִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל [הִיא]. רִבִּי חִיָיה בַּר יוֹסֵף פָּתַר מַתְנִיתָא. מוֹתַר פֵּירוֹת שָׂכָר לְהֶקְדֵּשׁ. מוֹתַר נְסָכִים זוֹ סְאָה רְבִיעִית. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן פָּתַר מַתְנִיתָא. מוֹתַר פֵּירוֹת זוֹ סְאָה רְבִיעית. מוֹתַר נְסָכִים לְבֵירוּצִים. וְלֵית לֵיהּ לְרִבִּי חִיָיה בַּר יוֹסֵף לְבֵירוּצִים. אָמַר רִבִּי חִזְקִיָּה. מַה דִנְפַל לְסְאָה רְבִיעִית נְפַל לְבֵירוּצִים. עַל דַּעְתִֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי חִיָיה בַּר יוֹסֵף נִיחָא. אֵין מִשְׂתַּכְּרִין מִשֶּׁלְהֶקְדֵּשׁ אַף לֹא מִשֶּׁלְעֲנִיִּים. לְפִיכָךְ זֶה וָזֶה לֹא הָיוּ מוֹדִין בַּפֵּירוֹת. עַל דַּעְתִֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן קַשְׁיָא. תַּנִּינָן עָ‍מְדוּ מִשָּׁלֹשׁ יְסַפֵּק מֵאַרְבַּע. וְתַנִּינָן. וְזֶה וָזֶה לֹא הָיוּ מוֹדִין בַּפֵּירוֹת לֹא הָיוּ מוֹדִין בַפֵּירוֹת בְּקַיִיץ לַמִּזְבֵּחַ. אֲבָל מוֹדִין הָיוּ בִכְלֵי שָׁרֵת. עַד כְּדוֹן בֵּירוּצֵי צִיבּוּר. וַאֲפִילוּ בֵירוּצֵי יָחִיד. וְלֹא נִמְצְאוּ כְלֵי שָׁרֵת בָּאִין מִשֶּׁל יָחִיד. כְּהָדָא דְתַנֵּי. אִשָּׁה שֶׁעָשָׂת כֻּתּוֹנֶת לִבְנָהּ צְרִיכָה לִמְסוֹר לְצִיבּוּר. עַד כְּדוֹן בֵּירוּצֵי לַח. וַאֲפִילוּ בֵירוּצֵי יָבֵשׁ. כַּהִיא דְתַנִּינָן תַּמָּן. הַנְּסָכִים שֶׁקָּדְשׁוּ בַכֶּלִי וְנִמְצָא הַזֶּבַח פָּסוּל. אִם יֵשׁ שָׁם זֶבַח אַחֵר יִקְרְבוּ עִמּוֹ. וְאִם לָאו יִיפָּסְלוּ בְלִינָה.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
It⁸⁵ is all Rebbi Ismael’s. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Joseph explains the Mishnah: The leftover of produce⁷⁴ is the gain of the Temple⁸⁶; the leftover of libations is the fourth *seah*⁸⁷ per tetradrachma and at the time of delivery it was 4 *seah* per tetradrachma, the provider has to deliver 4. But if the contract was for 4 and the price went up and now stands at 3 for a tetradrachma, the provider has to deliver 4 while the Temple will sell at the going rate.. Rebbi Joḥanan explains the Mishnah, The leftover of produce is the fourth *seah;* the leftover of libations is the overflow⁸⁸, the suppliers of produce of all kinds to the Temple have to deliver slightly more than the measure which was contracted for, while the Temple will distribute this product for private libations and flour offerings at the exact measure. The small differences will add up to a considerable amount during a full year; this kind of gain is approved also by the opponents of R. Ismael.. Does Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Joseph not have overflow? Rebbi Ḥizqiah said, what is counted for the fourth *seah* is overflow⁸⁹ infractions; both kinds of additions have the same status.. The opinion of Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Joseph is understandable. “one does not gain neither for the Temple nor funds for the poor,” therefore “neither of them did agree about produce.” The opinion of Rebbi Joḥanan is difficult. We have stated⁸⁷ per tetradrachma and at the time of delivery it was 4 *seah* per tetradrachma, the provider has to deliver 4. But if the contract was for 4 and the price went up and now stands at 3 for a tetradrachma, the provider has to deliver 4 while the Temple will sell at the going rate.: “if the going rate was three, he has to deliver for four” and we have stated, “neither of them did agree about produce.” They did not agree about produce to adorn the altar; they did agree for Service vessels⁹⁰. So far overflow of public {sacrifices}. Even overflow for private {sacrifices}. Would then not Service vessels come from private donations? It is as it was stated, “a woman who made a coat for her son has to surrender it to the public.⁹¹” So far the overflow of fluids; even the overflow of dry goods; as that which we stated⁹²7:4. This is not directly overflow but a third way in which the Temple accumulates a surplus. If a sacrifice was brought and the offerer bought the libations including the flour offering from the Temple, if then these flour offerings could not be used because the sacrifice was disqualified, the priests in charge may use the flour, etc., for the next sacrifice. In this case the Temple is paid twice for the same produce; Tosephta *Menaḥot*10:8 states that the money accumulated in this way is given to the gift account to buy elevation offerings for the idle altar., “in case libations were sanctified in a vessel when the sacrifice was found disqualified, if there is another sacrifice they should be brought with it; otherwise they will become disqualified by staying overnight.”

footnotes:
⁸⁵ The statement in Mishnah 4 about the leftover of produce, whose existence is denied by R. Aqiba and R. Ḥanina.
⁷⁴ The gain made by the Temple in providing flour, oil, and wine, for private sacrifices.
⁸⁶ The money made by the Temple in selling for a profit flour, oil, and wine, for flour offerings and libations.
⁸⁷ As explained in Mishnah 11, the Temple does not have to hedge its purchases of produce because it is protected against changes in the market place at all times. If the Temple contracted for flour at the rate of 3 seah
⁸⁸ In order to avoid the sin of me`ilah
⁸⁹ He holds that the reason that the Temple always is the beneficiary of changes in the market place also is to serve as a precaution against me`ilah
⁸⁷ As explained in Mishnah 11, the Temple does not have to hedge its purchases of produce because it is protected against changes in the market place at all times. If the Temple contracted for flour at the rate of 3 seah
⁹⁰ Since Mishnah 11 is unanimous opinion, the opponents of R. Ismael cannot deny that the Temple always makes money which has to be used for definite purposes.
⁹¹ This was discussed earlier, Note 14.
⁹² Mishnah Menaḥot


###### Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:3:1
[Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:3:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Shekalim/r/4:3:1)

**משנה:** מוֹתַר הַקְּטוֹרֶת מֶה הָיוּ עוֹשִׂין בָּהּ מַפְרִישִׁין מִמֶּנָּה שְׂכַר הָאוּמָּנִין וּמְחַלְּלִין אוֹתָהּ עַל מָעוֹת הָאוּמָּנִין וְנוֹתְנִין אוֹתָהּ לָאוּמָּנִין בִּשְׁכָרָן וְחוֹזְרִין וְלוֹקְחִין אוֹתָהּ מִתְּרוּמָה חֲדָשָׁה. וְאִם בָּא חָדָשׁ בִּזְמַנּוֹ לוֹקְחִין אוֹתָהּ מִתְּרוּמָה חֲדָשָׁה וְאִם לָאו מִן הַיְּשָׁנָה:

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**MISHNAH:** What did one do with the excess of incense⁸²? One sets apart the artisans’ wages and redeems them on the artisan’s money; one gives them to the artisans as their wages and then buys them back from them from the new disbursement⁸³ of that year, one cannot simply take the leftover as incense for the next year. On the other hand, since profane use of incense prepared in the proportions prescribed for Temple service is a deadly sin (*Ex.* 30:38), the incense cannot be used outside of the Temple. One takes money from the *sheqalim* to pay the artisans who prepare the next year’s batch of incense, then uses this money in order to redeem the incense and make it profane, a possible object of trade. Then one pays the artisans in kind with the incense, and since they could do nothing with it one buys the incense back from them with the money earmarked to this effect. Then the artisans are paid at the same time the incense for the new year is paid with money from the new Temple year starting at Nisan 1.. If the new money is available at its time one takes them from the new disbursement, otherwise from the old⁸⁴.

footnotes:
⁸² Which from the start was intended to be sufficient for an intercalary year and therefore had guaranteed leftovers in a regular year.
⁸³ Since the expenses of the Temple service each year have to be paid by the sheqalim
⁸⁴ Since the insistence on new money is customary, not biblical, if the new Temple tax was not collected by Nisan 1, one takes the money from the prior disbursement to effect the trade.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:3:2
[Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:3:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Shekalim/r/4:3:2)

**הלכה:** וְלֹא נִמְצָא הַהקֲדֵּשׁ מִתָחַלֵּל עַל הַהֶקְדֵּשׁ. כֵּיצַד הוּא עוֹשֶׂה. אָמַר רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בַּר כַּרְסָנָה. מֵבִיא מָעוֹת וּמְחַלְלָן עַל הַבִּנְיָין וּמֵבִיא קְטוֹרֶת וּמְחַלְלָן עֲלֵיהֶן וְנוֹתְנִין אוֹתָן לָאוּמָנִין בִּשְׂכָרָן. אוֹתָן הַמָּעוֹת מַה יֵעָשֶׂה בָהֶן. רִבִּי אוֹמֵר. אוֹמֵר אֲנִי. יִינָתְנוּ לְבֵית גַרְמוּ וּלְבֵית אַבְטִינָס שֶׁהָיוּ בְקִיאִין בְּפִיטּוּם הַקְּטוֹרֶת וּבְמַעֲשֶׂה לֶחֶם הַפָּנִים. אָמַר רִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר רַב. וְהֵן שֶׁיְּהוּ חַיָיבִין לָהֶן מָעוֹת מִשָּׁעָה רִאשׁוֹנָה. רִבִּי חִיָיה בַּר בָּא בָעֵי. לֹא הָיוּ חַיָיבִין לָהֶן מָעוֹת מִשָּׁעָה הָרִאשׁוֹנָה. אָתָא רִבִּי בָּא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי חִיָיה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחְנָן. מְקַיְּיצִין בָּהֶן אֶת הַמִּזְבֵּחַ . רִבִּי בָּא בַּר כֹּהֶן בְּעָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי יוֹסֶה. מִחְלְפָא שִׁיטָּתֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי חִיָיא בַּר בָּא. תַּמָּן צְרִיכָה לֵיהּ וְהָכָא פְשִׁיטָא לֵיהּ. הֵן דִּצְרִיכָה לֵיהּ. בִּכְלֵי שָׂרֵת. הֵן דִּפְשִׁיטָא לֵיהּ. בְּקַיָיץ לַמִּזְבֵּחַ.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**HALAKHAH:** ⁹⁴ Would not Temple property be redeemed by Temple property? What does he do? Rebbi Simeon bar Carsana said, he brings coins and redeems them for the building⁹⁵14a), once it is sacred it cannot be redeemed. If the money is legitimately paid for a sacrificial animal, it belongs to the owner of the animal and is no longer available for Temple use. Tosephta *Me`ilah*1:23 reads: “A worker who did work for the Temple for a *mina* or two may not say, give me this cow for a *mina* or this garment for 50 {denar} since Temple property cannot be redeemed for work but only for coins. What does one do? One takes the wages of the artisans {from the *sheqalim*} and redeems them on the artisans’ money, gives them to the artisans as their wages; then buys them back from the disbursement of the lodge to pay back the workers for the coins they earlier gave to the Temple.” A similar text seems to be intended here.; brings incense and redeems it for them, and gives it⁹⁶ to the artisans as their wages. What should be done with those coins? Rebbi says, I am saying that they should be given to the family Garmu and the family Eutinos who were experts in compounding the incense and in making the shew-bread⁹⁷3:11.. Rebbi Samuel bar Rav isaac⁹⁸ said, only if they were due to them beforehand⁹⁹. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba asked, what if they were not due beforehand? There came Rebbi Abba in the name of Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: One uses them to adorn the altar⁷⁵. Rebbi Abba bar Cohen asked before Rebbi Yose: The opinion of Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba seems inverted. Here it is questionable for him; there it is obvious for him¹⁰⁰. He told him, where it is questionable for him, for Service vessels; where it is obvious for him, to adorn the altar.

footnotes:
⁹⁴ Here starts the discussion of Mishnah 5. What is gained by redeeming incense with Temple money, which is not profane?
⁹⁵ Both the scribe’s text and that of B are difficult to understand. While it is accepted that the Temple is built as profane building and only sanctified when completed (Babli Me`ilah
⁹⁶ The incense.
⁹⁷ Cf. Mishnah Yoma
⁹⁸ Name added from B.
⁹⁹ Since Temple money can only become profane for actual debts incurred by the Temple. Advance payments are not possible.
⁷⁵ It is given to the gift account to buy elevation sacrifices in times when the altar otherwise would have been idle.
¹⁰⁰ How can he ask when he himself teaches the answer which his teacher had given? He does not question that a possible use is to give the money to the gift account; he questions whether this is the only possible use.The inverse order in B must be a scribal error.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:3:3
[Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:3:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Shekalim/r/4:3:3)

דְּאִיתְפַּלְּגוֹן. פִיטְּמָהּ בַחוּלִין. רִבִּי יוֹסֶה בֵּירִבִּי חֲנִינָה אָמַר. פְּסוּלָה. רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לִֵוי אָמַר. כְּשֵׁירָה. מַה טַעֲמָא דְרִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי חֲנִינָה. קוֹדֶשׁ הִיא. שֶׁתְּהֵא הֲוָיָיתָהּ בַּקוֹדֶשׁ. מַה טַעֲמָא דְרִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי. קוֹדֶשׁ הִיא. שֶׁתְּהֵא בָאָה מִתְּרוּמַת הַלִּישְׁכָּה. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי בּוּן. אַתְיָא דְרִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֶּן חֲנִינָה כִשְׁמוּאֵל וּדְרִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי כְרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. דְּתַנִּינָן. הַמַּקְדִּישׁ נְכָסָיו וְהָיוּ בָּהֶן דְּבָרִים רְאוּיִין לְכָל קָרְבְּנוֹת צִיבּוּר. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר. קְטוֹרֶת. אָמַר רִבִּי הוֹשַׁעְיָה. תִּיפְתָּר בְּאוֹמָּן מִשֶּׁלְבֵּית אֶבְטִינָס שֶׁהָיָה נוֹטֵל בִּשְׂכָרוֹ קְטוֹרֶת. וּדְרִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּיּרִבִּי חֲנִינָא כִשְׁמוּאֵל. דְּאָמַר רַב הוּנָא בְשֵׁם שְׂמוּאֵל. מַכְתֶּשֶׁת עָשׂוּ אוֹתָהּ כִּכְלִי שָׁרֵת לְקַדֵּשׁ. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֶי בֵּירִבִּי בּוּן. אָ‍מְרָהּ רַב חוּנָה קוֹמֵי רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. דָּבָר שֶׁקָּדַשׁ בְּכֶלִי שָׁרֵת נִפְדֶּה. אָמַר לֵיהּ. וְלֹא דִשְׁמוּאֵל הִיא. דִשְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר. קַל הוּא בְמוֹתָר. דְּאִיתְפַּלְּגוֹן. הוֹתִירוּ תְמִימִים. שְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר. נִפְדִּים כִתְמִימִים. וְרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר. נִפְדִּין כִפְסוּלֵי הַמּוּקְדָּשִׁין. הוֹתִירוּ שְׂעִירִים. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דִּשְׁמוּאֵל. אִם עוֹלָה נִפְדִּית לֹא כָּל שֶׁכֵּן חַטָּאת. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דִּרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. אָמַר רִבִּי זְעוּרָא. יִרְעוּ. אָמַר רִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר רַב יִצְחָק. מְקַיְיצִין בָּהֶן אֶת הַמִּזְבֵּחַ. וְקַשְׁיָא. יֵשׁ חַטָּאת קְרֵיבָה עוֹלָה. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵה. שַׁנְיָיא הִיא. שֶׁאֶין קָרְבְּנוֹת צִיבּוּר נִקְבָּעִין אָלָּא בִשְׁחִיטָה. אָמַר רִבִּי חֲנַנְיָה. תְּנַיי בֵית דִּין הוּא עַל הַמּוֹתָרוֹת שֶׁיָּקְרְבוּ עוֹלוֹת.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
¹ 5:1, explained there in Notes 12-30. The introductory sentence is missing, but is partially present in B. The question is, why does the Mishnah prescribe that leftover incense should be redeemed and used as payment of the artisans. Since it is a biblical decree (Lev. 27:10) that unblemished animals dedicated as sacrifices cannot be redeemed, would it not be reasonable to assume that sacrificial objects sanctified in a Service vessel cannot be redeemed? If one accepts this, a second question arises. Was the incense prepared in a Service vessel and therefore is sanctified from the start, or does only the daily portion become sanctified when it is filled into a Service vessel, and the leftovers are intrinsically redeemable as Temple property? As they disagreed: If it¹⁰¹ was compounded as profane, Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina said, it is disqualified; Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said, it is qualified. What is Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina’s reason? *It is holy*¹⁰²30:36, *most holy it shall be for you, Ex.* 30:37, *holy it shall be for you*. Babli *Keritut* 6a., that it shall be brought into the Sanctuary. What is Rebbi Joshua ben Levi’s reason? *It is holy*, that it shall be brought from the disbursement from the lodge. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Bun said, Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina’s parallels Samuel and Rebbi Joshua ben Levi’s Rebbi Joḥanan, as we have stated, “if one dedicated his property to the Temple and there were objects appropriate as public offerings¹⁰³.” Rebbi Joḥanan said, incense. Rebbi Hoshaia said, explain it about an artisan of the family Eutinos who took incense as his wages. And Rebbi Joshua ben Levi’s is like Samuel, as Rav Ḥuna said in the name of Samuel, they made the mortar a vessel to sanctify. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, Rebbi Ḥuna said this before Rebbi Yose: something sanctified in a vessel may be redeemed. He said to him, is that not Samuel’s? Since Samuel said, one is lenient in the case of leftovers. As they disagreed: If unblemished animals were left over, Samuel says, they are redeemed unblemished. Rebbi Joḥanan said, they are redeemed as disqualified *sancta*. Leftover he-goats, in Samuel’s opinion if elevation sacrifices are redeemed, a purification sacrifice so much more. In Rebbi Joḥanan’s opinion? Rebbi Ze`ira said, they shall graze. Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac said, one uses them to adorn the altar. This is difficult. May a purification sacrifice be brought as elevation sacrifice? Rebbi Yose said, there is a difference, for public sacrifices are determined only by slaughter. Rebbi Ḥananiah said, it is a stipulation of the Court that all leftovers should be brought as elevation sacrifices.

footnotes:
¹ This is a copy from Yoma
¹⁰¹ The incense.
¹⁰² There is no such verse; similar verses about incense would be Ex.
¹⁰³ Mishnah 6.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:4:1
[Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:4:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Shekalim/r/4:4:1)

**משנה:** הַמַּקְדִּישׁ נְכָסָיו וְהָיוּ בָּהֶן דְּבָרִים רְאוּיִין לְקָרְבְּנוֹת הַצִּיבּוּר יִנָּתְנוּ לָאוּמָּנִין בִּשְׂכָרָן דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי עֲקִיבָה. אָמַר לוֹ בֶּן עֲזַאי אֵינָהּ הִיא הַמִּידָּה אֶלָּא מַפְרִישִׁין מֵהֶן שְׂכַר הָאוּמָּנִין וּמְחַלְּלִין אוֹתָן עַל מָעוֹת הָאוּמָּנִין וְנוֹתְנִין אוֹתָן לָאוּמָּנִין בִּשְׂכָרָן וְחוֹזְרִין וְלוֹקְחִין אוֹתָן מִתְּרוּמָה חֲדָשָׁה: הַמַּקְדִּישׁ נְכָסָיו וְהָ‍יְתָה בָּהֶן בְּהֵמָה רְאוּיָה עַל גַּבֵּי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ זְכָרִים וּנְקֵבוֹת. רִבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר זְכָרִים יִמָּ‍כְרוּ לִצְרִיכֵי עוֹלוֹת וּנְקֵיבוֹת יִמָּ‍כְרוּ לִצְרִיכֵי זִבְחֵי שְׁלָמִים וּדְמֵיהֶן יִפְּלוּ עִם שְׁאָר נְכָסִים לְבֶדֶק הַבָּיִת. רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר. זְכָרִים עַצְמָן יִקָּרְבוּ עוֹלוֹת וּנְקֵבוֹת יִמָּכְרוּ לִצְרִיכֵי זִבְחֵי שְׁלָמִים וְיָבִיא בִּדְמֵיהֶן עוֹלוֹת. וּשְׁאָר נְכָסִים יִפְּלוּ לְבֶדֶק הַבָּיִת. אָמַר רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה רוֹאֶה אֲנִי אֶת דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר מִדִּבְרֵי רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ שֶׁרִבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר הִשְׁוָה אֶת מִדּוֹתָיו וְרִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ חָלַק. אָמַר רַבִּי פַּפָּיָס שָׁמַעְתִּי אֶת דִּבְרֵי שְׁנֵיהֶן הַמַּקְדִּישׁ בְּפֵרוּשׁ כְּדִבְרֵי רִבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר וְהַמַּקְדִּישׁ סְתָם כְּדִבְרֵי רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ: הַמַּקְדִּישׁ נְכָסָיו וְהָיוּ בָּהֶן דְּבָרִים רְאוּיִין לְגַבֵּי מִזְבֵּחַ יֵינוֹת וּשְׁמָנִים וְעוֹפוֹת. רִבִּי לָעְזָר אוֹמֵר יִימָּכְרוּ לִצְרִיכֵי אוֹתוֹ הַמִּין וְיָבִיא בִּדְמֵיהֶן עוֹלוֹת וּשְׁאָר נְכָסִים יִפְּלוּ לְבֶדֶק הַבָּיִת:

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**MISHNAH:** If somebody gives his property to the Temple¹⁰⁴. and in it there were items usable for public sacrifices¹⁰⁵, they shall be given to the artisans as their wages, the words of Rebbi Aqiba. Ben Azzai said to him, this is not they way¹⁰⁶1:23, Note 95. One has to apply the rules of Mishnah 5 in their entirety., but from it one sets apart the artisans’ wages and redeems it on the artisan’s money; one gives it to the artisans as their wages and then buys it back from them from the new disbursement⁸³ of that year, one cannot simply take the leftover as incense for the next year. On the other hand, since profane use of incense prepared in the proportions prescribed for Temple service is a deadly sin (*Ex.* 30:38), the incense cannot be used outside of the Temple. One takes money from the *sheqalim* to pay the artisans who prepare the next year’s batch of incense, then uses this money in order to redeem the incense and make it profane, a possible object of trade. Then one pays the artisans in kind with the incense, and since they could do nothing with it one buys the incense back from them with the money earmarked to this effect. Then the artisans are paid at the same time the incense for the new year is paid with money from the new Temple year starting at Nisan 1..
If somebody gives his property to the Temple¹⁰⁴. and in it there was an animal fit for the altar¹⁰⁷ 27:10. Since they were given to the Temple to be sold, the easiest way to satisfy the will of the donor and the rules is to sell the animals as sacrifices to those who have vowed a sacrifice., males or females. Rebbi Eliezer says, males should be sold to those who need an elevation offering¹⁰⁸ 1:3,10)., and females be sold to those who need well-being offerings, and the revenue together with the remainder be for upkeep of the Temple.
Rebbi Joshua says, the males themselves should be brought as elevation sacrifices, and the females be sold to those who need well-being offerings, and the remaining property be used for upkeep of the Temple.
Rebbi Aqiba says, I agree with the words of Rebbi Eliezer against the words of Rebbi Joshua, since Rebbi Eliezer is uniform in his rules but Rebbi Joshua splits¹⁴². Rebbi Pappaeus said, I heard according to the words of both of them. If somebody dedicates explicitly¹⁴³, following the words of Rebbi Eliezer; if the dedication is unspecified¹⁴⁴, following the words of Rebbi Joshua.
If somebody gives his property to the Temple¹⁰⁴. and in it there were things fit for the altar, wines, oils, or birds. Rebbi Eleazar says, they shall be sold to people needing these kinds and from the proceeds one shall bring elevation sacrifices¹⁴⁶ 1:14–17), only four-legged animals can be brought “to adorn the altar.”; but the remainder of the property shall be used for the upkeep of the Temple.

footnotes:
¹⁰⁴ The Temple is supposed to sell the property and to use the proceeds for its needs. As Temple property, the proceeds are under the laws of me`ilah
¹⁰⁵ Which cannot be redeemed, cf. Note 100.
¹⁰⁶ Since Temple property cannot be given for wages, Tosephta Me`ilah
⁸³ Since the expenses of the Temple service each year have to be paid by the sheqalim
¹⁰⁴ The Temple is supposed to sell the property and to use the proceeds for its needs. As Temple property, the proceeds are under the laws of me`ilah
¹⁰⁷ An unblemished bovine, sheep, or goat, which may not be redeemed, Lev.
¹⁰⁸ Who in contrast to well-being offerings must be male (Lev.
¹⁴² According to R. Eliezer the entire property is for the upkeep of the Temple; R. Joshua excludes male unblemished animals. Also R. Eliezer treats male and female animals by the same rules.
¹⁴³ He says, the animals are to be sacrifices.
¹⁴⁴ He simply hands over his property to the Temple.
¹⁰⁴ The Temple is supposed to sell the property and to use the proceeds for its needs. As Temple property, the proceeds are under the laws of me`ilah
¹⁴⁶ Four-legged animals. Even though birds (pigeons and turtle doves) are valid elevation sacrifices (Lev.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:4:2
[Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:4:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Shekalim/r/4:4:2)

**הלכה:** הַמַּקְדִּישׁ נְכָסָיו וְהָיוּ בָּהֶן דְּבָרִים רְאוּיִין לְכָל קָרְבְּנוֹת צִיבּוּר. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר. קְטוֹרֶת. אָמַר רַב הוֹשַׁעְיָה. תִּיפְתָּר בְּאוֹמָּן מִשֶּׁלְבֵּית אֶבְטִינָס שֶׁהָיָה נוֹטֵל בִּשְׂכָרוֹ קְטוֹרֶת. מַה טַעֲמֵיהּ דָּבֶן עַזַּאי. שָׁאֵין הַהֶקְדֵּשׁ מִתְחַלֵּל עַל הַמְּלָאכָה אֶלֵּא עַל הַמָּעוֹת.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**HALAKHAH:** “If somebody gives his property to the Temple and in it there were items usable for any public sacrifices.” Rebbi Joḥanan said, incense. Rebbi Hoshaia said, explain it about an artisan of the family Eutinos who took incense as his wages. What is Ben Azzai’s reason? For Temple property cannot be redeemed by work, only by coins.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:4:3
[Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:4:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Shekalim/r/4:4:3)

תַּמָּן תַּנִּינָן. יֵשׁ בְּקָדְשֵׁי בֶדֶק הַבַּיִת שֶׁסְּתָם הֶקְדֵּישׁוֹת לְבֶדֶק הַבַּיִת. הֶקְדֵּשׁ בֶּדֶק הַבַּיִת חָל עַל הַכֹּל וּמוֹעֲלִין בְּגִידּוּלֵיהֶן וְאֵין בָּהֶן הֲנָיָיה לַכֹּהֲנִים. אָמַר רִבִּי חֲנַנְיָה. דְּרִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר הִיא. דְּתַנִּינָן. הַמַּקְדִּישׁ נְכָסָיו וְהָ‍יְתָה בָּהֶן בְּהֵמָה רְאוּיָה עַל גַּבֵּי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ זְכָרִים וּנְקֵיבוֹת. רִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר. זְכָרִים יִימָּ‍כְרוּ לִצְרִיכֵי עוֹלוֹת וּנְקֵיבוֹת יִימָּ‍כְרוּ לִצְרִיכֵי זִבְחֵי שְׁלָמִים וּדְמֵיהֶן יִפְּלוּ עִם שְׁאָר נְכָסִים לְבֶדֶק הַבָּיִת. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. טַעֲמֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי לִעֶזֶר. וְאִישׁ כִּ‍י יַקְדִּשׁ אֶת בֵּיתוֹ קוֹדֶשׁ לַ‍יי. מַה אֲנָן קַיָימִין. אִם בְּבֵית דִּירָה. כְּבַר כָּתוּב אִם הַמַּקְדִּישׁ יִגְאַל אֶת בֵּיתָוֹ. אֶלָּא כֵן אֲנָן קַיָימִין. בְּמַקְדִּישׁ נְכָסָיו. מִיכָּן שֶׁסְּתָם הֶקְדֵּישׁוֹת לְבֶדֶק הַבַּיִת.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
There we have stated¹⁰⁹7:2.: “There is about gifts for the upkeep of the Temple that unspecified gifts to the Temple are for the upkeep of the Temple. Sanctification for the upkeep of the Temple falls on everything¹¹⁰, and *me`ilah* applies to what grows from it¹¹¹ laws as is the original donation., and priests have no usufruct from it.” Rebbi Ḥanania said, this is Rebbi Eliezer’s, as we have stated: “If somebody gives his property to the Temple and in it there was an animal fit for the altar, males or females. Rebbi Eliezer says, males should be sold to those who need an elevation offering, and females be sold to those who need well-being offerings, and the revenue together with the remainder be for upkeep of the Temple¹¹².” Rebbi Joḥanan said, the reason of Rebbi Eliezer : *If a man dedicate his house holy to the Eternal*¹¹³ 27:14.. How do we hold? If for a dwelling, it already is written, *if the dedicator redeem his house*¹¹⁴ 27:15.. Therefore we hold that he dedicates his property. From here that unspecified dedications to the Temple are for the upkeep of the Temple¹¹⁵.

footnotes:
¹⁰⁹ Mishnah Temurah
¹¹⁰ Anything of value can be donated to the Temple.
¹¹¹ Not only growth from seeds donated but all income from the principal are protected by me`ilah
¹¹² Since the Mishnah starts “if somebody gives his property,” this means it is unspecified, given to the Temple to use it as it sees fit, and R. Eliezer says that all proceeds go to the upkeep of the Temple.
¹¹³ Lev.
¹¹⁴ Lev.
¹¹⁵ Verse 14 states that if a person dedicates his house, a priest has to determine its value. V. 15 the notes that if the donor wants to regain his house, he has to pay 125% of the value. Since it is assumed that a dwelling is always needed, the donation of a house could have been described in one sentence, combining valuation and redemption. Since the verses are split, it is understood that also property not used as dwelling is included and is given to produce money for the Temple, not the priests (in contrast to agricultural property, vv.21.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:4:4
[Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:4:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Shekalim/r/4:4:4)

רִבִּי זְעוּרָה רַב חוּנָה בְשֵׁם רַב. פְּלִיגִין בַּמַּקְדִּישׁ נְכָסָיו. אֲבָל בַּמַּקְדִּישׁ עֶדְרוֹ כָּל עַמָּא מוֹדֵיי שֶׁהוּא לַמִּזְבֵּחַ. רִבִּי בָּא רַב חוּנָה בְשֵׁם רַב. מַה פְלִיגִין. בַּמַּקְדִּישׁ עֶדְרוֹ. אֲבָל בַּמַּקְדִּישׁ נְכָסָיו כָּל עַמָּא מוֹדֵיי שֶׁהוּא לְבֶדֶק הַבַּיִת. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי זְעוּרָא נִיחָא. וְקַשְׁיָא עַל דְּרִבִּי בָּא. בְּהֵמָה לֹא לַמִּזְבֵּחַ הִיא. בְּהֵמָה לַמִּזְבֵּחַ הִיא. וְלָמָּה סָתַם הָאִישׁ הַזֶּה. שֶׁהוּא כָאוֹמֵר. לֹא יְהוּ אֶלָּא לְבֶדֶק הַבַּיִת. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר. לֹא שַׁנְיָיא. הִיא הַמַּקְדִּישׁ נְכָסָיו הִיא הַמַּקְדִּישׁ עֶדְרוֹ. הִיא הַמַּחֲלוֹקֶת.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
Rebbi Ze`ira, Rav Huna in the name of Rav: They disagree¹¹⁶ about one who gives his property to the Temple. But if he gives his flock to the Temple, everybody agrees that it is for the altar¹¹⁷. Rebbi Abba, Rav Huna in the name of Rav: Where do they disagree? About one who gives his flock to the Temple, but if he gave his property to the Temple, everybody agrees that it is for the upkeep of the Temple¹¹⁸. The opinion of Rebbi Ze`ira can be understood¹¹⁹ as Temple property, are not sacrifices and *Lev.*27:9–10 does not apply to them. The disagreement between RR. Eliezer and Joshua is purely about rabbinic rules and these apply equally to both cases.. It is difficult for Rebbi Abba. Is an animal not for the altar? An animal is for the altar. But why did this man not specify? It is as if he said, it only should be for the upkeep of the Temple. Rebbi Joḥanan said, there is no difference. The disagreement is both about one who gives his property to the Temple as about one who gives his flock to the Temple¹¹⁹ as Temple property, are not sacrifices and *Lev.*27:9–10 does not apply to them. The disagreement between RR. Eliezer and Joshua is purely about rabbinic rules and these apply equally to both cases..

footnotes:
¹¹⁶ R. Eliezer in Mishnah 7 and R. Joshua in Mishnah 8.
¹¹⁷ The animals should not be sold for the benefit of the Temple to people who need sacrificial animals but be directly used as elevation offerings of the Temple in times of need. The only animals to be sold are the blemished ones.
¹¹⁸ As explained in the preceding paragraph.
¹¹⁹ Since an animal becomes a sacrifice only by a dedication, the animals given to the Temple in a will, while becoming subject to the laws of me`ilah
¹¹⁹ Since an animal becomes a sacrifice only by a dedication, the animals given to the Temple in a will, while becoming subject to the laws of me`ilah


###### Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:4:5
[Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:4:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Shekalim/r/4:4:5)

רַב חוּנָה בְשֵׁם רַב רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. קָדְשֵׁי בֶדֶק הַבַּיִת שֶׁפּוֹדִין תְּמִימִין יָצְאוּ לְחוּלִין. מַתְנִיתַא אָמְרָה כֵן. וּוְלָדָן וַחֲלָבָן מוּתָּר לְאַחַר פִּדְיוֹנָם. רִבִּי חִזְקִיָּה בְשֵׁם רַב חִסְדָּא. תִּיפְתָּר שֶׁפּוֹדִין תְּמִימִין וְהוּמְמוּ. רִבִּי יּוֹסֵה בְשֵׁם רַב חִסְדָּא. מַתְנִיתַא אָמְרָה כֵן. וּוְלָדָן וַחֲלָבָן אָסוּר לְאַחַר פִּדְיוֹנָן. רִבִּי חִזְקִיָּה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יּוֹסֵה. קָדְשֵׁי בֶדֶק הַבַּיִת שֶׁפָּדְיָין תְּמִימִים יָצְאוּ לְחוּלִין. אִין תֵּימַר. לֹא יָצְאוּ לְחוּלִין. הֵיאַךְ קָדְשֵׁי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ חָלִין עַל קָדְשֵׁי בֶדֶק הַבַּיִת.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
Rav Ḥuna in the name of Rav, Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: *Sancta* given for the upkeep of the Temple which were redeemed unblemished become profane¹²⁰. A Mishnah says so¹²¹10:2. The Mishnah states that blemished animals which were dedicated as sacrifices never become intrinsically holy; if they are redeemed they are fully profane, their offspring and their milk is profane (first quote). If they were validly dedicated and later developed a blemish, they have to be redeemed and used as profane food, but cannot totally lose their sacred status; they cannot be used for work nor are their offspring and their milk permitted (second quote, also *Temurah*7:1.), “their offspring and their milk are permitted after their redemption.” Rebbi Ḥizqiah in the name of Rav Ḥisda: Explain it if they were redeemed unblemished and then became defective. Rebbi Yose in the name of Rav Ḥisda: Does the Mishnah say so¹²¹10:2. The Mishnah states that blemished animals which were dedicated as sacrifices never become intrinsically holy; if they are redeemed they are fully profane, their offspring and their milk is profane (first quote). If they were validly dedicated and later developed a blemish, they have to be redeemed and used as profane food, but cannot totally lose their sacred status; they cannot be used for work nor are their offspring and their milk permitted (second quote, also *Temurah*7:1.)? “Their offspring and their milk are forbidden after their redemption.” Rebbi Ḥizqiah in the name of Rebbi Yose: *Sancta* given for the upkeep of the Temple which were redeemed unblemished become profane. If you are saying they did not become profane, how could the sanctity of the altar fall on *sancta* given for the upkeep of the Temple¹²³ cannot be changed to another, both R. Eliezer and R. Joshua must agree that the sale of the animal by the Temple makes it profane; the dedication of the buyer is the valid dedication of a profane animal.?

footnotes:
¹²⁰ While dedicated unblemished animals cannot be redeemed and cannot revert to profane status, animals willed to the Temple are not in this category as explained in the preceding Note. While selling the animals to be used as sacrifice is the prescribed proceeding, if the rules are not followed and they are sold for profane use the sale is valid on condition that the Temple receive its money.
¹²¹ Mishnah Ḥulin
¹²¹ Mishnah Ḥulin
¹²³ Since what is dedicated for one category of sancta


###### Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:4:6
[Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:4:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Shekalim/r/4:4:6)

בַּעֲלֵי מוּמִין קְדוּשַׁת הַמִּזְבֵּחַ חָלָה עֲלֵיהֶן. לֵיְידְא מִילָּה. לַגִּיזָה וְלָעֲבוֹדָה. הִפְרִישׁ נְקֵיבָה לְעוֹלָתוֹ וּלְפִּסְחוֹ וּלְאֲשָׁמוֹ עוֹשֶׂה תְמוּרָה. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר. לְעוֹלָתוֹ עוֹשֶׂה תְמוּרָה. לְפִסְחוֹ וּלְאֲשָׁמוֹ אֵינוֹ עוֹשֶׂה תְמוּרָה. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר מִשּׁוּם רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן. לְעוֹלָתוֹ. וּלְפִּסְחוֹ וּלְאֲשָׁמוֹ אֵינוֹ עוֹשֶׂה תְמוּרָה. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. טַעֲמֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן. שֶׁכֵּן מָצָאנוּ נְקֵיבָה בָעוֹף כְשֵׁירָה לָבוֹא עוֹלָה. [וְ]אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. טַעֲמֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן. אִם מִין בְּמִינוֹ הוּא חָלוּק עָלָיו לֹא כָל שֶׁכֵּן מִין בְּשֶׁאֵינוֹ מִינוֹ. אֵי זֶהוּ מִין בְּמִינוֹ שֶׁהוּא חָלוּק עָלָיו. כְּהָדָא דְתַנֵּי. אָשָׁם בֶּן שָׁנָה הֵבִיא בֶּן שְׁתַּיִם יָצָא. בֶּן שְׁתַּיִם וְהֵבִיא בֶּן שָׁלֹשׁ לֹא יָצָא. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן וְרִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ שְׁנֵיהֶן אָמְרוּ דָבָר אֶחָד. כְּמַה דְרִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אָמַר. נְקֵיבָה לְעוֹלָה לֹא קָדְשָׁה אֶלָּא הֶקְדֵּשׁ דָּמִים. כֵּן רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אָמַר. נְקֵיבָה לְעוֹלָה לֹא קָדְשָׁה אֶלָּא הֶקְדֵּשׁ דָּמִים. אִין תֵּימַר. קָדְשָׁה הֶקְדֵּשׁ גּוּף יִרְעוּ. אָמַר רִבִּי. אֲנִי רוֹאֶה אֶת דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בְּפֶסַח שֶׁמָּא הֶקְדֵּשׁ פֶּסַח בָּא שְׁלָמִים. וְלֹא אֶרְאֶה אֶת דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בָּאָשָׁם שֶׁמָּא הֶקְדֵּשׁ אָשָׁם בָּא עוֹלָה. אָמַר רִבִּי אַבִּין. אִם הֶקְדֵּישׁ פֶּסַח בָּא שְׁלָמִים גּוּפוֹ קָרֵב שְׁלָמִים. אִם הֶקְדֵּשׁ אָשָׁם בָּא עוֹלָה אֵין גּוּפוֹ קָרֵב עוֹלָה. מַאי כְדוֹן. הָהֵין אָמַר. הֶקְדֵּשׁ דָּמִים קָדַשׁ. וְהָהֵין אָמַר. הֶקְדֵּשׁ גּוּף קָדַשׁ.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
The sanctity of the altar falls on defective animals. In which respect? For shearing and work¹²⁵. “¹²⁶9:19, *Temurah*2:5; Babli *Temurah*19b/20a. The text of B in the anonymous statement, “does not effect substitution”, is a scribal error as shown by the later text in B.
The reference is to *Lev.* 27:10, that it is forbidden to make a substitution for a dedicated animal, but if such a substitution was made, both the original animal and its substitute are *sancta*. Therefore “to effect substitution” implies “the original dedication is valid.” Everybody agrees that even if the dedication is void as dedication for the altar, it is valid as a gift of the animal or its value for the upkeep of the Temple. If somebody dedicated a female for his elevation offering, or his *Pesaḥ*, or his reparation offering, it effects substitution. Rebbi Simeon says, for his elevation offering it effects substitution; for his *Pesaḥ* or his reparation offering it does not effect substitution.” “¹²⁷20b. Rebbi Simeon ben Jehudah says in the name of Rebbi Simeon, neither for his elevation offering, nor his *Pesaḥ*, nor his reparation offering, does it effect substitution.” Rebbi Joḥanan said, the reason of Rebbi Simeon is that we find that a female is qualified as elevation offering of a bird¹²⁸ 1:3,10, but not for birds, 1:14 (*Sifra Wayyiqra I Parshata*6(2,5). Argument missing in B.. [And]¹²⁹ Rebbi Joḥanan said, the reason of Rebbi Simeon¹²⁰ is, if there are differences in its own kind, so much more if it is not its own kind. What are differences in its own kind? As it was stated¹²¹10:2. The Mishnah states that blemished animals which were dedicated as sacrifices never become intrinsically holy; if they are redeemed they are fully profane, their offspring and their milk is profane (first quote). If they were validly dedicated and later developed a blemish, they have to be redeemed and used as profane food, but cannot totally lose their sacred status; they cannot be used for work nor are their offspring and their milk permitted (second quote, also *Temurah*7:1.), “a yearling as reparation offering, and he brought one of two years, he satisfied his obligation; a two-year old as reparation offering, and he brought one of three years, he did not satisfy his obligation”. Rebbi Joḥanan said, Rebbi Simeon and Rebbi Joshua said the same. As Rebbi Joshua said, a female as elevation offering is sanctified only for its money’s worth¹²², so Rebbi Simeon¹²³ cannot be changed to another, both R. Eliezer and R. Joshua must agree that the sale of the animal by the Temple makes it profane; the dedication of the buyer is the valid dedication of a profane animal. said, a female as elevation offering is sanctified only for its money’s worth. If you would say that they are *sancta* as to their body, they should graze¹²⁴ money but not used at the end of the tax year. Since these animals become dedicated only at the moment they are used (end of the text for Note 100), their status as far as dedication goes is identical to that of animals willed to the Temple.. “Rebbi said, I agree with Rebbi Simeon about the *Pesah*; could the *Pesaḥ* be brought as a well being offering? But I do not agree with the words of Rebbi Simeon for reparation offerings; could a reparation offering be brought as an elevation offering?¹²⁵” Rebbi Abbin said, in case a *Pesaḥ* be brought as a well being offering, its body is brought as well-being offering; in case a reparation offering be brought as an elevation offering, its body cannot be brought as elevation offering. What about it? In one case one says, it is sanctified for its money’s worth; in one case one says, it is sanctified in its body¹²⁶9:19, *Temurah*2:5; Babli *Temurah*19b/20a. The text of B in the anonymous statement, “does not effect substitution”, is a scribal error as shown by the later text in B.
The reference is to *Lev.* 27:10, that it is forbidden to make a substitution for a dedicated animal, but if such a substitution was made, both the original animal and its substitute are *sancta*. Therefore “to effect substitution” implies “the original dedication is valid.” Everybody agrees that even if the dedication is void as dedication for the altar, it is valid as a gift of the animal or its value for the upkeep of the Temple..

footnotes:
¹²⁵ It is sinful to dedicate a defective animal to the altar. The question is whether such a dedication is effective at all. The statement here shows that the animal has to be treated according to the rules of an animal dedicated unblemished which later developed a defect (Note 121). B correctly adds prohibition of its offspring or its milk.
¹²⁶ Tosephta Pesaḥim
¹²⁷ This is known only as a quote in the Babli, Temurah
¹²⁸ Male animals are prescribed for four-legged elevation sacrifices, Lev.
¹²⁹ Corrector’s addition, unwarranted.
¹²⁰ While dedicated unblemished animals cannot be redeemed and cannot revert to profane status, animals willed to the Temple are not in this category as explained in the preceding Note. While selling the animals to be used as sacrifice is the prescribed proceeding, if the rules are not followed and they are sold for profane use the sale is valid on condition that the Temple receive its money.
¹²¹ Mishnah Ḥulin
¹²² If willing one’s property to the Temple were a genuine dedication, the animal which was unblemished at the time of donation but later developed a defect never could regain full profane status. Therefore the rule only is possible if the position of R. Joḥanan (Note 119) is adopted.
¹²³ Since what is dedicated for one category of sancta
¹²⁴ This sentence added to the truncated text of B repeats the prior argument. Animals which are leftovers are animals bought with sheqel
¹²⁵ It is sinful to dedicate a defective animal to the altar. The question is whether such a dedication is effective at all. The statement here shows that the animal has to be treated according to the rules of an animal dedicated unblemished which later developed a defect (Note 121). B correctly adds prohibition of its offspring or its milk.
¹²⁶ Tosephta Pesaḥim


###### Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:4:7
[Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:4:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Shekalim/r/4:4:7)

רִבִּי זְעוּרָה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ. טַעֲמֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ. דַּבֵּר אֶל אַהֲרֹן וְאֶל בָּנָיו וְאֶל כָּל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְאָמַרְתָּ אֲלֵהֶם אִישׁ אִישׁ מִבֵּית יִשְׂרָאֵל וגומ׳. אֲשֶׁר יַקְרִיב לַיי לְעוֹלָה. הַכֹּל קָרֵב לְעוֹלָה. לִרְצ‍וֹנְכֶם תָּמִים זָכָר. מְנַיִין אֲפִילוּ נְקֵיבוֹת. תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר בַּבָּקָר לְרַבּוֹת אֶת הַנְּקֵבוֹת. רִבִּי יִצְחָק בֵּירִבִּי אֶלְעָזָר. כָּתוּב זָכָר. וְאַתְּ אָמַרְתָּ בַּבָּקָר לְרַבּוֹת אֶת הַנְּקֵבוֹת. וְדִכְוָתָהּ כָּתָב תָּמִים. וְאַתְּ אָמַרְתָּ בַּבָּקָר לְרַבּוֹת בַּעֲלֵי מוּמֵין.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
Rebbi Ze`ira in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish. The reason of Rebbi Joshua¹³⁷: ¹³⁸ 22:18–19.*Speak to Aaron, and his sons, and to all Children of Israel, and say to them: each single man from Israel*, etc. *who will**offer an elevation sacrifice to the Eternal*, anything could be elevation sacrifice, *voluntarily from you, unblemished, male.* From where even females? The verse says, *in cattle*, to include females¹³⁹ 1:3, whereמִן הַבָּקָר clearly is partitive, only the select from the cattle, here בַּבָּקָר, “in the herd”, is inclusive. While females cannot be elevation sacrifices, they can be dedicated that their proceeds be used for elevation sacrifices.. Rebbi Isaac ben Rebbi Eleazar¹⁴⁰: It says *male*, and you are saying *in cattle*, to include females. Then similarly it is written *unblemished*, and you are saying *in cattle*, to include the blemished¹⁴¹?

footnotes:
¹³⁷ Since R. Joshua requires that the male animals be used as elevation offerings, why does he not require that the females be used directly as well-being offerings, but sold and the proceeds used for elevation offerings?
¹³⁸ Lev.
¹³⁹ In contrast to Lev.
¹⁴⁰ B adds, probably correctly, “asked”.
¹⁴¹ Since Mishnah 7 starts “if there was an animal fit for the altar,” clearly excluding defective animals also according to R. Joshua, the argument is invalid and so is the prior statement of R. Ze`ira.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:4:8
[Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:4:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Shekalim/r/4:4:8)

מַה בֵינֵיהוּן. רַב אָמַר. שִׁיבְטָא דְכַרְכָדָא בֵינֵיהוֹן.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
What is between them? The stick of a weaver’s shuttle is between them¹⁴⁵.

footnotes:
¹⁴⁵ There is very little between them since R. Aqiba only says that R. Eliezer is more logically consistent; he does not decide that practice has to follow R. Eliezer. The weaver’s shuttle is Greek κερκίς, -ίδος. The reading of B, “the statement of Bar Pada” does not seem to make any sense; probably it is a misreading of the version of M, “a matter of invention”, i. e., of formulation.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:4:9
[Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:4:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Shekalim/r/4:4:9)

רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ בְשֵׁם רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ. טַעֲמֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי לָעְזָר. דַּבֵּר אֶל אַהֲרֹן וְאֶל בָּנָיו וגו׳. אֲשֶׁר יַקְרִיב לַיי לְעוֹלָה. הַכֹּל קָרֵב עוֹלָה. לִרְצ‍וֹנְכֶם תָּמִים זָכָר. יָכוֹל אֲפִילוּ עוֹפוֹת. תַּלָמוּד לוֹמַר בַּבָּקָר. לֹא עוֹפוֹת. רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה וְרִבִּי בּוּן בַּר חִיָיה הֲווֹן יָתְבִין וְאָמְרִין. תַּמָּן אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. טַעֲמֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן. שֶׁכֵּן נְקֵיבָה שֶׁבָּעוֹף כְשֵׁירָה לָבוֹא עוֹלָה. וְהָכָא הוּא אָמַר הָכֵן. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵה. קִיַימְתִּיהָ כָּהִיא דְאָמַר רִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי זְעוּרָה. כָּל שֶׁאֵינָהּ יְכוֹלָה לִקָּרֵב לֹא הִיא וְלֹא דָמֶיהָ לֹא קָדְשָׁה אֶלָּא הֶקְדֵּשׁ דָּמִים. וְאָמַרְתָּ יְאוּת. לְהַקְרִיבוֹ אֵין אַתְּ יָכוֹל. דִּכְתִיב בַּבָּקָר. לֹא עוּפוֹת. לִפְדוֹתוֹ אֵין אַתְּ יָכוֹל. שֶׁאֵין לָעוֹף פִּדְיוֹן. לְפוּם כֵּן צָרַךְ מֵימַר. לֹא קָדְשָׁה אֶלָּא קְדוּשַׁת דָּמִים.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish. The reason of Rebbi Eleazar: ¹³⁸ 22:18–19.*Speak to Aaron and to his sons*, etc., *who would sacrifice to the Eternal as elevation sacrifice;* everything may be brought as elevation sacrifice, *by your volition, unblemished, male*. I could think that this includes birds. The verse says, *in cattle*, not birds¹⁴⁸7(20), *Wayyiqra I Parshata*6(3)]. In addition, since *Lev.* 1:14–17 is addressed to the individual, but *Lev.* 22:18–19 to the public, it is inferred that birds as elevation offerings are possible only to the individual; the public is restricted to four-legged animals. Since a gift to the Temple is a gift to the public, birds given to the Temple as part of an estate may not be sacrificed.. Rebbi Jeremiah and Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya were sitting and saying, there said Rebbi Joḥanan said, the reason of Rebbi Simeon is that we find that a female is qualified as elevation offering of a bird¹²⁸ 1:3,10, but not for birds, 1:14 (*Sifra Wayyiqra I Parshata*6(2,5). Argument missing in B.. And here, he¹⁴⁹ says so? Rebbi Yose said, I confirmed it following what Rebbi Samuel said in the name of Rebbi Ze`ira: Anything which could be sacrificed neither itself nor its money’s worth is sanctified only as money’s worth¹⁵⁰. And you are saying, this is correct. You cannot sacrifice it, for it is written *in cattle*¹⁵¹. You cannot redeem it since birds cannot be redeemed.¹⁵²12:1. Not only birds, but also dedicated wine and flour cannot be redeemed since the rules of redemption in *Lev.* 27 are formulated referring to four-legged animals only.

footnotes:
¹³⁸ Lev.
¹⁴⁸ Since the verse restricts elevation offerings from four-legged animals to unblemished males, it is inferred that the restriction does not apply to birds [Sifra Emor Parashah
¹²⁸ Male animals are prescribed for four-legged elevation sacrifices, Lev.
¹⁴⁹ Even though the statement is transmitted in the name of R. Simeon ben Laqish, we do not hear that R. Joḥanan disagrees; the statement is coming from R. Joḥanan’s Academy.
¹⁵⁰ If an animal is not dedicated as sacrifice and if sold, the money cannot be used to buy an animal which can validly be dedicated (Note 119), the animal is given for the upkeep of the Temple, not to the gift account.
¹⁵¹ And the public to whom the bird was given may not dedicate it as sacrifice.
¹⁵² Mishnah Menaḥot


###### Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:4:10
[Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:4:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Shekalim/r/4:4:10)

חֲבֵרַיָיא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. רִבִּי אַיְיבוֹ בַּר נַגָּרִי אָמַר קוֹמֵי רִבִּי אִילָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. טַעֲמָא דְהֵין תַּנָּיָיא. וְאִם כָּל בְּהֵמָה טְמֵיאָה אֲשֶׁר לֹא יַקְרִיבוּ מִמֶּנָּה קָרְבָּן לַיי. מַה תַלְמוּד לוֹמַר טְמֵאָה. אֶלָּא אֲפִילוּ טְמֵיאָה בְאוֹתוֹ הַשֵּׁם. וְקַשְׁיָא. בְּדָא כְתִיב וְהֶעֱמִיד וְהֶעֱרִיךְ. רִבִּי זְעוּרָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי אֶלְעָזָר. לֹא אָמַר כֵן אֶלָּא וְאִם כָּל בְּהֵמָה טְמֵאָה אֲשֶׁר לֹא יַקְרִיבוּ מִמֶּנָּה קָרְבָּן לַיי. כָּל שֶׁאֵינָהּ רְאוּיָה לִיקָּרֵב לֹא כָאן וְלֹא בְמָקוֹם אַחֵר אֵינָהּ עוֹשָׂה תְמוּרָה. יָצָאת נְקֵיבָה שֶׁבָּעוֹף שֶׁאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵינָהּ רְאוּיָה לִיקָּרֵב כָּאן רְאוּיָה לִיקָּרֵב בְּמָקוֹם אַחֵר. רִבִּי בּוּן וְרִבִּי בּוּן בְּעוֹן קוֹמֵי רִבִּי זְעוּרָה. הֲרֵי הַרוֹבַע וְהַנִּרְבַּע הֲרֵי אֵינָן רְאוּיִין לִיקָּרֵב לֹא כָאן וְלֹא בְמָקוֹם אַחֵר וַהֲרֵי הֵן עוֹשִׂין תְּמוּרָה. אָמַר לוֹן. אַף אֲנִי לֹא אָמַרְתִּי אֶלָּא טְמֵאָה מַמָּשׁ. וְקַשְׁיָא. בְּדָא כְתִיב וְהֶעֱמִיד וְהֶעֱרִיךְ.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
The colleagues in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan; Rebbi Ayvo bar Nagari said before Rebbi Ila in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan. The reason of this Tanna: *But if any impure animal from which no sacrifice to the Eternal may be offered*¹⁵³ 27:11.. Why does the verse say, *impure*¹⁵⁴? But even impure for this denomination¹⁵⁵. This is difficult; about this is written, *he shall stand, he shall appraise*¹⁵⁶ 27:12.? Rebbi Ze`ira in the name of Rebbi Eleazar did not say so but, *but if any impure animal from which no sacrifice to the Eternal may be offered*; anything which could be sacrificed neither here nor at any other place does not effect substitution¹⁵⁷. This excludes the female of a bird which even though it cannot be sacrificed here is fit to be sacrificed at another place. Rebbi Abbin and Rebbi Abun asked before Rebbi Ze`ira: Are there not the animals used for active or passive bestiality, which can be sacrificed neither here nor at any other place, and they effect substitution¹⁵⁸1:12 states that dedicating such an animal, while sinful, is equivalent to dedicating an unblemished animal which after dedication becomes blemished; all rules of *me`ilah* do apply and it may be redeemed only after it develops a permanent bodily defect.? He said to them, also I did speak only about really impure ones¹⁵⁹. This is difficult; about this is written, *he shall stand, he shall appraise*¹⁵⁶ 27:12.?

footnotes:
¹⁵³ Lev.
¹⁵⁴ Since no impure animal can be sacrificed, either the mention of “impure” or that of “cannot be sacrificed” seems to be superfluous.
¹⁵⁵ If an animal was dedicated in a category for which it was not appropriate, and it never could be sacrificed in that category, it never was dedicated to the altar and therefore can be redeemed.
¹⁵⁶ Lev.
¹⁵⁷ If “impure” really means “unfit”, e. g. cattle or sheep with a broken leg, it is not dedicated to the altar and must be redeemed with the money going for the upkeep of the Temple. However, it cannot be made to stand as required by the verse.
¹⁵⁸ Tosephta Temurah
¹⁵⁹ B reads: “defective ones.”
¹⁵⁶ Lev.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:5:1
[Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:5:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Shekalim/r/4:5:1)

**משנה:** אַחַת לִשְׁלֹשִׁים יוֹם מְשַׁעֲרִין אֶת הַלִּשְׁכָּה. כָּל הַמְקַבֵּל עָלָיו לְסַפֵּק סְלָתוֹת מֵאַרְבַּע עָמְדוּ מִשָּׁלֹשׁ יְסַפֵּק מֵאַרְבַּע. מִשָּׁלֹשׁ וְעָמְדוּ מֵאַרְבַּע יְסַפֵּק מֵאַרְבַּע שֶׁיַּד הֶקְדֵּשׁ עַל הָעֶלְיוֹנָה. אִם הִתְלִיעָה סוֹלֶת הִתְלִיעָה לוֹ וְאִם הֶחְמִיץ יַיִן הֶחְמִיץ לוֹ. אֵינוֹ מְקַבֵּל אֶת מְעוֹתָיו עַד שֶׁיְּהֵא הַמִּזְבֵּחַ מְרַצֶּה:

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**MISHNAH:** Once every thirty days one sets the prices for the office¹⁶⁰. Anyone who accepts to supply fine flour at a rate of four¹⁶¹ of flour for one tetradrachma., if the going rate goes up to three he has to supply at the rate of four¹⁶⁴; if at the rate of three and the going rate went down to four he has to supply at four since the hand of the sanctuary is privileged. If the flour turned out worm-infected, it was infected in his possession¹⁶³; and if the wine turned into vinegar it was vinegar in his possession. He is not paid until the altar did atone¹⁶⁴.

footnotes:
¹⁶⁰ One lets contracts to supply the Temple with wine and flour to accompany the sacrifices. This lets the Temple set the prices for these items as explained in the next Chapter.
¹⁶¹ The contract is to supply 4 seah
¹⁶⁴ When at the time of use the items were found to be in good order.
¹⁶³ Even if the worms were not detected at the time of delivery, only at the time of use.
¹⁶⁴ When at the time of use the items were found to be in good order.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:5:2
[Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 4:5:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Shekalim/r/4:5:2)

**הלכה:** תַּנֵּי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן. מִיַּד הָיוּ מְקַבְּלִין אֶת מָעוֹתָיו. וְהַכֹּהֲנִים זְרִיזִין הֵן.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**HALAKHAH:** It was stated in the name of Rebbi Simeon: he receives his money immediately, for the priests are quick¹⁶⁵.

footnotes:
¹⁶⁵ Chapter 2, Note 33. The text there is reproduced in B and M.