Avodah Zarah

R. Simeon b. Lakish asked: How is it if a man had worshipped a palm-tree, may its branch be used for the fulfilment of the commandment?  If it was a tree originally planted for idolatry the question does not arise, because it is prohibited even for secular use; but the question does arise with a tree which had been planted and subsequently worshipped. Now according to the view of R. Jose son of R. Judah,  [even then] the question does not arise because it is prohibited by him even for secular use; but the question does arise according to the view of the Rabbis.  How, then, is [the branch] to be regarded in connection with the fulfilment of a commandment; is it to be rejected in the divine Service or not? — When R. Dimi came  he said: [R. Simeon b. Lakish] asked the question in connection with an Asherah  which had been annulled: Does a disability continue in respect of commandments or not?  — You can solve this problem from what we have learnt: If one covered it,  and it became uncovered,  he is free from the obligation to cover it again; but if the wind covered it,  he is obliged to cover it himself. And Rabbah b. Bar Hanah said in the name of R. Johanan: This teaching only applies when the wind again uncovered it,  but if the wind did not again uncover it, he is free from the obligation to cover it. And we raised the question against this point of view: If the wind again uncovered it, what of it?  Since [the blood] has been obliterated [by the covering], it is obliterated [once for all]! Thereupon R. Papa said: This proves that a disability does not continue in respect of commandments.  But there is a question in connection with this very statement of R. Papa, viz., Is it quite clear to R. Papa that disability does not continue in respect of commandments either to take a lenient  or strict  view; or perhaps he is doubtful; and we apply [accordingly] this rule to the strict view only and not to the lenient?  — The question remains unanswered. R. Papa asked: How is it if a man worshipped an animal; may its wool be used for blue thread? 'Blue thread' for what purpose? If it is for the blue material of the priests' [garments], that is dealt with in the question of Rami b. Hama!  If it is for the blue thread of the zizith,  that is dealt with in the question of R. Simeon b. Lakish!  — Quite so, there was no need [for R. Papa] to ask about this; but the reason why he raised the question is because there are other similar matters [about which he asked, viz.]: May its wool be used for blue thread, its horns for trumpets, the bones of its legs for flutes, its intestines for harp-strings?  According to him, who says that the basis of [Temple-] music is in the instrument, the question does not arise because these are certainly prohibited; but the question does arise according to him who says that the basis of [Temple-] music is in the mouth. Is, then, the purpose [of the instrument] only to sweeten the sound  and we may introduce them [when made of these materials], or perhaps even then it is prohibited? — The question remains unanswered. Rabbah asked: How is it if a man worshipped a fountain; may its water be used for the drink-offerings? What is the point of his question? Is it whether the man worshipped his reflection [in the water],  or perhaps he worshipped the water itself?  He could, then, have put the same question about a bowl of water and its use for secular purposes!  — Certainly [it is assumed] that he worshipped the water; and this is the point of his question: Did he worship the water which was in front of him and that water has flowed away,  or did he worship the whole stream of water? But can [water which has been worshipped] be prohibited at all; for behold R. Johanan said in the name of R. Simeon b. Jehozedek: Water which is public property is not prohibited [if an individual worshipped it]! — No, it was necessary [to ask the question] where it is water which wells up front the earth. MISHNAH. IF [AN ISRAELITE] HAS A HOUSE ADJOINING AN IDOLATROUS SHRINE AND IT COLLAPSED, HE IS FORBIDDEN TO REBUILD IT.  HOW SHOULD HE ACT? HE WITHDRAWS A DISTANCE OF FOUR CUBITS INTO HIS OWN GROUND AND THERE BUILDS. [IF THE WALL] BELONGED BOTH TO HIM AND THE SHRINE, IT IS JUDGED