שבועות 11:1 — Soncino English Talmud

for it has [only] a monetary holiness. — If so, let it not become invalid by [the touch of] a tebul yom, and yet it has been taught: As soon as it [the incense] is placed in the mortar it becomes liable to invalidation by [the touch of] a tebul yom! But perhaps you will say, all things which have only a monetary holiness are liable to invalidation by [the touch of] a tebul yom — [that cannot be,] for we have learnt: The meal-offerings are liable to be trespassed against as soon as they are verbally consecrated; when they are consecrated in the vessel, they become liable also to invalidation by [the touch of] a tebul yom, and one lacking atonement, and by linah. [Hence we may deduce:] ‘When they are consecrated in the vessel’ — yes, [they become liable to invalidation by the touch of a tebul yom,] but before they are consecrated in the vessel — no! — Well then, is it [the incense] holy bodily? If so, let it become invalidated [also] by linah, and yet we have learnt: The handful, and the frankincense, and the incense, and the meal-offering of the priests, and the meal-offering of the anointed [High] Priest, and the meal-offerings brought with libations, are liable to be trespassed against as soon as they are verbally consecrated; when they are consecrated in the vessel, they become liable also to invalidation by [the touch of] a tebul yom, and one lacking atonement, and by linah, [Hence we may deduce:] When ‘they are consecrated in the vessel’ — yes, [they become liable to invalidation by linah,] but before they are consecrated in the vessel — no. He said to him: You argue from [the fact that it is not invalidated by] linah [that therefore the incense is not bodily holy]! Incense is different [it is bodily holy even in the mortar, but is not invalidated by linah], because it retains its form all the year. Nevertheless, the question remains [since the incense is bodily holy]: whither has the holiness in them departed? — Rabbah said: The Beth din make a mental stipulation that if they are required, they are required [i.e., utilised]; but if not, they shall be holy only for their value. Said Abaye to him: But you, Sir, yourself said, if one consecrates a male [ram] to be holy only for its value, it nevertheless becomes bodily holy? This is no question: [I said it becomes bodily holy] in the case where he said it should be holy for its value to buy a burnt offering; but if he said it should be holy for its value to buy libations [it does not become bodily holy]. — Abaye asked him, [It was taught:] The bullock and [inner] goat of the Day of Atonement which were lost, others being set apart in their stead,^ᵃ^ᵇ^ᶜ^ᵈ^ᵉ^ᶠ^ᵍ^ʰ^ⁱ^ʲ^ᵏ^ˡ^ᵐ^ⁿ^ᵒ^ᵖ^ᵠ^ʳ^ˢ^ᵗ^ᵘ^ᵛ^ʷ

^ᵃnote:It is holy only for its value, and not bodily holy. The mortar in which it is pounded is not deemed to be a holy vessel; the incense can, therefore, be redeemed for money and become hullin, but why should the daily offerings which are actually holy bodily, be redeemable if unblemished?
^ᵇnote:Lit., ‘bathed on that day’: a person who, having become unclean, and bathed, is not restored to perfect ritual cleanliness till sunset (Lev. XXII, 6, 7). His touch, before sunset, defiles holy objects. If the incense is not holy bodily, it should not become invalid by the touch of a tebul yom. (The holier the object the more easily it is liable to defilement.)
^ᶜnote:Me'i. 9a.
^ᵈnote:Of an individual who had sinned (Lev. V, II), tyuj ,jbn; or a voluntary meal-offering (Men. 103a); or that which is brought with a thanksgiving sacrifice (Lev. VII, 12, 13).
^ᵉnote:Lev. V, 15: unlawful use of sacred property constitutes vkhgn, trespass.
^ᶠnote:Having been brought to the Temple, and placed in the appropriate holy vessel, their holiness is increased.
^ᵍnote:An unclean person such as a cz; (gonorrhoeist: Lev. XV, 1-15); vcz (woman having irregular issue of blood: Lev. XV, 25-30); woman after childbirth (Lev. XII, 1-8); and leper (Lev. XIV, 1-32); must bring a sacrifice on becoming clean. Before the sacrifice is brought the person is ohrupf rxujn; v. Ker. 8b. Strictly speaking, these four do not ‘lack atonement’, for they have committed no sin; they merely have to bring a sacrifice in order to be permitted to partake of holy food.
^ʰnote:Being kept over night.
^ⁱnote:Hence things which have only a monetary, and not a bodily, holiness, are not liable to invalidation by the touch of a tebul yom; why then should the incense, if it has only a monetary holiness, become invalidated by the touch of a tebul yom?
^ʲnote:Me'i. 10a.
^ᵏnote:Lev. II, 2: a handful (three middle fingers bent over the hollow of the palm) was taken by the priest from an individual's meal-offering, and burnt on the altar; the rest was eaten by the priest.
^ˡnote:Ibid. I: frankincense was put on the meal-offering to flavour it.
^ᵐnote:Lev. VI, 16: a priest's meal-offering was wholly burnt on the altar.
^ⁿnote:Ibid. 15.
^ᵒnote:Num. XXVIII and XXIX: these meal-offerings are wholly burnt.
^ᵖnote:This vessel is not the mortar in which the incense is pounded, but the vessel in which it is placed when brought to the altar to be burnt; for, while in the mortar, the Baraitha states, it is invalidated by the touch of a tebul yom, and not by linah, whereas this Mishnah states that when the incense is consecrated in the vessel it is invalidated also by linah; obviously, therefore, this is a different (holier) vessel. The incense, then, before it is placed in this holier vessel is not bodily holy.
^ᵠnote:Linah does not alter its appearance or freshness as it would, for example, in the case of meat. When consecrated in the vessel, however, it is liable to invalidation by linah (though it still retains its form), because all other things consecrated in a vessel are liable to invalidation by linah; if incense were not so liable, it might sometimes be erroneously inferred that the others were also not so liable.
^ʳnote:Both in the case of incense and the daily offerings; why should they be redeemable if bodily holy?
^ˢnote:The authorities, when buying animals for the daily offerings, or when having the incense compounded, decide that only that which is necessary for that year shall become bodily holy; and that the rest shall become holy only for their value, and therefore be redeemable.
^ᵗnote:And cannot be redeemed, because it is itself fit for a sacrifice. Accordingly, even granted that the Beth din do make the stipulation that they shall be holy only for their value, the daily offerings and incense ought still to retain their bodily holiness, and the question. ‘Whither has the holiness in them departed?’ remains.
^ᵘnote:And since the ram is itself fit for a burnt offering, it cannot be sold in order that for its money another ram may be bought.
^ᵛnote:Similarly, the Beth din have the power to stipulate at the outset that the daily offerings or incense not required shall become holy only for their value to provide gold plates for the floor and walls of the Holy of Holies.
^ʷnote:Tosaf. Yom Hakkip. IV.