Kiddushin

We have scrutinised R. Meir[‘s views] from every angle, and have not found that hekdesh, unwittingly used, is not secularised; if deliberately, it is.1 But our Mishnah refers to priestly tunics which were not worn out, since they stand2 to be used, for the Torah was not given to angels.3 Come and hear: Worn out priestly tunics involve trespass: this is R. Meir's view. Surely the same holds good even if they are not worn out?4 — No: only when they are worn out.5 Come and hear: Trespass can be committed with the new ones, but not with the old. R. Meir said: Trespass can be committed with the old too; for R. Meir used to say: Trespass can be committed with the surplus of the Chamber.6 Yet why; let us say, since they stand to be used, for the Torah was not given to angels [no trespass is committed with them]. For the walls of the city and its towers came out of the Chamber surplus, as we learnt: The city wall and its towers and all city requirements were provided for out of the chamber surplus!7 — Say not ‘R. Meir’, but ‘R. Judah’.8 Come and hear: For it was taught: R. Ishmael b. R. Isaac said: If the stones of Jerusalem fall out [of their place in the walls], no trespass is incurred with them: this is R. Meir's view! — Say not, ‘R. Meir’, but, ‘R. Judah’. If R. Judah, is then Jerusalem [the city itself] sanctified? But we learnt: ‘As the lamb’, ‘As the Temple sheds of cattle’ or ‘As the wood’, ‘As the [altar] fire’, ‘As the altar’, ‘As the Temple’, [or] ‘As Jerusalem . . .’ R. Judah said: He who says: ‘Jerusalem’, has said nothing.9 And should you answer, that is because he did not say: ‘As Jerusalem’,10 — surely it was taught: R. Judah said: He who says: ‘as Jerusalem’ has said nothing, unless he relates his vow to that which is sacrificed in Jerusalem!11 — explanation of the Mishnah. were sanctified in the first place on this tacit understanding. For the priests cannot be expected to disrobe immediately they finish the service and not wear them a moment after. Consequently, they do not pass out of the ownership of hekdesh through unwitting use, and therefore R. Meir holds that she is not betrothed. use of hekdesh.) Nisan. The money was placed in a chamber and with it were bought sacrifices between Passover and Pentecost. If the tax was paid between the second of Nisan and the first of Sivan in the year it fell due, it was placed in special chests, which bore the inscription, ‘New shekels’, with which were bought sacrifices between Pentecost and Tabernacles. The same applied to the shekels paid between the second of Sivan and first of Tishri. The chests were then placed in the shekel chamber where they were divided into three baskets, (v. Shek. III, I, 2.) If the tax was not paid in the year it was due but in the following, it was placed in other chests marked ‘old shekels.’ These, together with the surplus from the chamber fund each year, were not used for sacrifices but for general town purposes, such as repairing the walls, etc. liability is incurred. Hence the same should apply to the priestly tunics. the object forbidden. But R. Judah's reason is that the vower omitted ‘as’.