תלמוד על שקלים 4:1

¹²The incense used in the Temple. As they disagreed: If it 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 holy¹⁴There is no such verse; similar verses about incense would be Ex. 30:36, 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 Sanctuary¹⁵It seems that the correct text is in Šeqalim: That its existence shall be in the holy space. The Babli text there adds: “and it shall be brought from the contributions to the treasury,” i. e., from the Temple tax.. What is Rebbi Joshua ben Levi’s reason? It is holy, that it shall be brought from the contributions to the treasury¹⁶In the Babli text: “that it shall be brought into the Sanctuary” which in our text is the Yoma version of R. Yose ben Ḥanina. In the Babli Šeqalim text it makes sense; the preparation may be in profane terrain, only the use must be in the Sanctuary.. 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 offerings¹⁷Mishnah Šeqalim 4:6..” Rebbi Joḥanan said, incense. Rebbi Hoshaia said, explain it about an artisan of the family Eutinos [who took incense as his wages.¹⁸Addition of the corrector from Šeqalim. As explained in Šeqalim, incense of each year has to bought by the proceeds of the Temple tax of that year. In order to avoid that any leftovers at the end of the year became disqualified, the leftovers are given to the workers and artisans working for the Temple as their wages. The Temple can then buy back the incense from the workers with money of the next year and the incense remains qualified. (Private use of incense compounded by the Temple’s formula is a deadly sin, Ex. 30:38.) R. Joḥanan ’s argument that the Mishnah can only be interpreted as referring to incense is given in the Babli, Keritut 6a.] And Rebbi Joshua ben Levi’s is like Samuel, as Rebbi Ḥuna¹⁹Read with Šeqalim: Rav Ḥuna. said in the name of Samuel, they made the mortar a vessel of sacred service²⁰Here one has to read with the Babli Šeqalim: did not make. The incense always is prepared in a profane vessel; it becomes dedicated by being used on the dedicated fire-pan or the interior altar.. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, Rebbi Ḥuna said this before Rebbi Yose: something sanctified in a vessel may be redeemed¹¹This would contradict Lev. 27:10 stating that anything dedicated and fit for Divine service may not be redeemed.. He said to him, is that not Samuel’s? Since Samuel said, it is slight in the case of leftovers²²Animals and supplies bought with Temple tax monies but not used by the end of a fiscal year, which cannot be used for the next year.. As they disagreed: If daily sacrifices were left over, Samuel says, they are redeemed unblemished²³It is impossible to redeem animals qualified to be sacrifices, Lev. 27:10. Samuel proposes to treat the surplus animals similar to how surplus incense was treated: The animals are redeemed with the past year’s excess money, which then is used for repair or improvement of the Temple building as explained in Šeqalim Chapter 4. Then the animals are bought again with money of the new fiscal year and become newly qualified.. Rebbi Joḥanan said, they are redeemed as disqualified sancta²⁴He requires that the excess sheep be let grazing until either they develop a defect or become disqualified by age; then they may be redeemed like any other disqualified animal. A different tradition Babli Ševuot11b.. Leftover he-goats²⁵Bought for public purification sacrifices on holidays and days of the New Moon., in Samuel’s opinion if elevation sacrifices are redeemed, a purification sacrifice so much more. In Rebbi Joḥanan ’s opinion? Rebbi Zeˋira said, they shall graze²⁶Same procedure as for sheep, Note 24.. Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac said, one uses them to adorn the altar²⁷To be used as elevation offerings in periods where the altar otherwise would be empty. These sacrifices not being obligatory cannot be bought with money from the Temple tax; one uses dedicated animals which are not being used for their original purpose. The statement is erroneously missing in the Babli Šeqalim.. 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 slaughter²⁸If they never had been dedicated as purification sacrifices, the rules of the latter do not apply. Accepted as opinion both by Samuel and R. Joḥanan in Babli Ševuot 12b.. Rebbi Ḥananiah ben Tradion²⁹With the Šeqalim texts delete the last two words; the tradent is a late Amora not the early Tanna.. said, it is a stipulation of the Court that all leftovers should be brought as elevation sacrifices³⁰Since the stipulation preceded the acquisition of the animals by the Temple, R. Yose’s answer is unnecessary..

¹⁴This and the following paragraphs also are found in Ševi`it 10:2 (Notes 41–55) and Sanhedrin 1:2 (Notes 213–215). Rebbi says, Nisan was never lengthened. But did we not state<sup>15</sup>Mishnah Šeqalim 4:5.: “If the New Moon appeared in time”? If it would appear; it did not appear. Rav said, Tishre was never lengthened. But did we not state<sup>16</sup>Mishnah Ševi`it 10:2.: “If the month was long”? If it would be; it never was.

⁴¹This paragraph and the three following ones are from Roš Haššanah3:1 (fol. 58c). They are included here only because the two days of the New Year are mentioned in the Mishnah. Rebbi says, Nisan never was lengthened⁴²This means that the start of Nisan (and Tishre) was never delayed when the New Moon was declared only after it had been observed. In these two months, messengers were sent to proclaim the exact dates of the holidays (Roš Haššanah 1:5). [For the details of the Tannaitic calendar, see the author’s Seder Olam (Northvale, NJ, 1998), p. 268–269.]. But did we not state⁴³Mishnah Šeqalim 4:5: Incense was prepared in one batch for an entire year, starting with the first of Nisan. Then it is stated that on the first of Nisan, “if the New Moon appeared in time, incense was taken from the new batch; otherwise, it was taken from the incense prepared the previous year.” This Mishnah implies that the month of Adar preceding Nisan could have either 29 or 30 days. Rebbi implies that this Mishnah is purely hypothetical.: “If the New Moon appeared in time”? If it would appear, it did not appear. Rav said, Tishre was never lengthened⁴⁴Babli Roš Haššanah 19b, also in the name of Rav, stating a tradition going back to the days of Ezra. The same statement is also in Yerushalmi Šeqalim 10:2 (fol. 39b), Sanhedrin 1:2 (fol. 18d).. But did we not state⁴⁵In the Mishnah here.: “If the month was long”? If it would be, it never was.