MISHNAH: For what was the disbursement used? One buys from it daily and musaf sacrifices and their libations, the `omer¹ 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.

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 Megillah1:2 (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 Yoma35b.. 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 Taaniot ¹¹ Babli Taanit 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 Taaniot 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 Taaniot 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.

“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. *Ševiit Chapter 1, Notes 43 and 2.) ג adds here the one-sentence Halakhah *Ševiit*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 omer²⁸ 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 Ševiit 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

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 meilah*, 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

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.

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

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 Ketubot106a 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 sancta⁵²28:3), there have to be competent daily inspections. Babli Ketubot106a. 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 Ketubot13, 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 Ketubot105a. 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 meilah* 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 *meilah with leftovers? But it must follow Rebbi Meïr, for Rebbi Meïr said, one commits meilah* with leftovers. Rebbi Ḥinena said, Rebbi Meïr said this only during its year. But here we are after its year⁶¹ whose misuse is *meilah 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 Qiddušin54a..

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

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

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

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`

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 seah⁸⁷ 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 Menaḥot10:8 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 meilah 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 meilah 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

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.

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`ilah1:23 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.

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 holy¹⁰²30:36, 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.

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 meilah ¹⁰⁵ Which cannot be redeemed, cf. Note 100. ¹⁰⁶ Since Temple property cannot be given for wages, Tosephta Meilah 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 meilah 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 meilah ¹⁴⁶ Four-legged animals. Even though birds (pigeons and turtle doves) are valid elevation sacrifices (Lev.

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.

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 Eternal¹¹³ 27:14.. How do we hold? If for a dwelling, it already is written, if the dedicator redeem his house¹¹⁴ 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.

Rebbi Zeira, 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 Zeira 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 meilah 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 meilah

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 Temurah7:1.), “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 Temurah7:1.)? “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

The sanctity of the altar falls on defective animals. In which respect? For shearing and work¹²⁵. “¹²⁶9:19, Temurah2:5; Babli Temurah19b/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 Parshata6(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 Temurah7:1.), “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, Temurah2:5; Babli Temurah19b/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

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.

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.

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 Parshata6(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 Parshata6(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 cattle¹⁵¹. 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

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 offered¹⁵³ 27:11.. Why does the verse say, impure¹⁵⁴? But even impure for this denomination¹⁵⁵. This is difficult; about this is written, he shall stand, he shall appraise¹⁵⁶ 27:12.? Rebbi Zeira 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 Zeira: 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 appraise¹⁵⁶ 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.

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.

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.