Meilah, Chapter 3, Mishnah 6. Our chapter has been tracing which consecrated items the prohibition of me'ilah attaches to and which ones fall outside it. This mishnah widens the lens: it surveys every category of item a person might dedicate to the Beit Hamikdash and rules that no matter which category it belongs to, me'ilah applies.
Three Categories of Hekdesh
The list opens with "kol hara'uy lamizbe'ach", all that is suitable for the mizbe'ach, "velo lebedek habayit", and unsuitable for maintaining the structure. Under this heading fall unblemished animals: cattle, sheep and goats, together with the bird species used for korbanot, and the flour, oil and wine of the offerings. Every one of these can be placed upon the mizbe'ach, while not one of them has any role to play in repairing the Beit Hamikdash. An unblemished animal, indeed, cannot be dedicated toward bedek habayit at all; a declaration made over it takes effect for the mizbe'ach and for nothing else.
Next come items that are "lebedek habayit velo lamizbe'ach", fit for the upkeep of the building but not for the mizbe'ach: gold, silver and the full range of building materials. And third, items that are "lo lamizbe'ach velo lebedek habayit", suited to neither purpose, such as ordinary foodstuffs. Of all three groups the mishnah rules "mo'alin bo", they are subject to me'ilah, since any of them can become hekdesh.
What we have before us, then, is a ladder of three grades of sanctity. At the top stand objects possessing kedushat haguf, holiness resting upon the very substance of the thing, and it is that holiness which qualifies them for service upon the mizbe'ach. Beneath them sit objects that could never serve as a korban and bear no such bodily holiness, yet hold sanctity of value, kedushat damim, and are consumed in the work of bedek habayit. At the bottom lie objects with no function anywhere in the Beit Hamikdash; their sanctity too is monetary, and the treasury turns them into cash, which then buys korbanot or pays for repairs. The mishnah's point is that me'ilah pays no attention whatsoever to these gradations. Mizbe'ach, bedek habayit, or merely merchandise whose sale money supports the running of the Beit Hamikdash: in each instance, once sanctity rests upon the object, whoever takes benefit from it has transgressed me'ilah.
Keitsad: Five Illustrations
"Keitsad", how so? The mishnah now gives concrete cases for each level.
"Hikdish bor malei mayim", one who consecrated a pit filled with water. Such water belongs to the bedek habayit category alone: it can be mixed into mortar to repair the walls of the mizbe'ach, but it has no other use in the Beit Hamikdash. It cannot serve for the nisuch hamayim, the water libation poured on the mizbe'ach during Sukkot, because that requires fresh spring water and not water standing in a cistern.
"Ashpah mele'ah zevel", a refuse heap full of manure. Manure serves neither the mizbe'ach nor bedek habayit; nobody is bringing it into the Beit Hamikdash for either purpose. It is therefore sold, and the money is applied to bedek habayit.
"Shovach malei yonim", a dovecote full of doves. Here we have the opposite case: the doves are fit for the mizbe'ach, since they can be brought as korbanot, but they are of no use as building material.
"Ilan malei peirot", a tree laden with fruit, likewise belongs to the mizbe'ach side of the ledger, since the fruit can be brought as bikkurim, the first fruits carried up to the Beit Hamikdash and set down beside the mizbe'ach.
"Sadeh mele'ah asabim", a field covered with grass, belongs to neither category, serving no function on the mizbe'ach or in the repair of the building.
In all five cases the ruling is "mo'alin bahem uvemah shebetochan", me'ilah applies both to the item itself, the pit, the heap, the dovecote, the tree, the field, and to the contents, the water, the manure, the doves, the fruit, the grass. This holds even though the owner named only the container and said nothing about what was inside it. We assume that in dedicating the pit he meant to include its water as well, and the water is therefore bound by me'ilah along with it.
When the Contents Arrive Later
All of that assumes the contents were already in place at the moment of consecration; the water was sitting in the pit when the owner declared it hekdesh. The mishnah now turns to the case where the contents were absent at that moment and only appeared afterward.
Now consider the reverse sequence, where the declaration came first and the contents accumulated only afterward. The mishnah opens with "aval im", but if: "hikdish bor", he consecrated a pit, and only later "nitmalei mayim", it became full of water; "ashpah", a heap, into which "nitmale'ah zevel", manure was subsequently gathered; "shovach", a dovecote, which then "nitmalei yonim", came to be full of doves; "ilan", a tree, on which "nitmalei peirot", fruit later appeared; "sadeh", a field, in which "nitmale'ah asabim", grass afterward sprouted. For all of these the ruling reads "mo'alin bahen ve'ein mo'alin bemah shebetochan": the consecrated object falls under me'ilah while its later contents do not. Benefit taken from the pit is a transgression; benefit taken from the water that collected inside it is not.
The principle is that me'ilah attaches to what was actually consecrated, which means the object together with whatever it contained at that time. Something that arrived later, even something that grew there afterward, is outside the scope of the dedication. The later contents may well take on holiness once they become part of the consecrated item, but since they were never themselves the subject of the owner's declaration, me'ilah does not apply to them.
Rabbi Shimon on Gidulei Hekdesh
Everything stated until here is presented as "divrei Rabbi Yehudah", the position of Rabbi Yehudah. Rabbi Shimon qualifies it. Regarding "hamakdish sadeh ve'ilan", one who dedicates a field or a tree and later finds grass or fruit upon it, he holds "mo'alin bahem uvegiduleihem", me'ilah covers the dedicated item and its yield alike, "mipnei shehein gidulei hekdesh", since whatever grew there sprang from hekdesh. For Rabbi Shimon, anything a consecrated object generates shares that object's status: the fruit and the grass did not wander in from elsewhere but emerged from the hekdesh, and they are therefore absorbed into it. Water collecting in a consecrated pit is a wholly different matter, and there Rabbi Shimon does not dispute the exemption, for the water merely arrived later rather than growing out of the object.
Offspring Nursing from Consecrated Animals
The previous mishnah taught that the milk of a consecrated animal is not subject to me'ilah, though one may still not derive benefit from it. The mishnah now applies that to the offspring of consecrated animals: may they nurse from their mothers?
"Velad me'useret", the young of a cow designated as ma'aser, born before its mother received that designation, "lo yinak min hame'useret", is forbidden to nurse from her. The calf itself is chullin, and were it to nurse, the owner of an unconsecrated animal would be drawing benefit from the milk of a sanctified one. Hence "ve'acherim mitnadevim kein", others step forward with a donation: people would contribute unconsecrated milk for the animal's sake. Cut off from its own mother, the young animal is provided for by private donors who make sure it is fed and looked after.
The same holds for korbanot: "velad mukdashin", the young of animals dedicated as offerings, born prior to their mothers' consecration, "lo yinak min hamukdashin", may not take milk from those consecrated mothers, and here as well "ve'acherim mitnadevim kein", donors supply milk so that the nursling is sustained.
Workers and Animals Handling Hekdesh
A hired laborer working with produce is entitled to eat from the produce he is handling, as the mishnayot in Bava Metzia set out. Animals too are permitted to eat as they work, as the pasuk teaches, "lo tachsom shor bedisho", do not muzzle an ox while it threshes. The mishnah now asks what the law is when the produce belongs to hekdesh.
"Hapo'alim lo yochelu", the laborers are not to eat, "migrogerot shel hekdesh", of consecrated dried figs. A worker's entitlement to eat from what passes through his hands covers ordinary produce alone; where the produce is sanctified it is closed to him, even though his employment was arranged with the Temple treasury. The treasury settles his wages out of its money, but its food remains forbidden to him.
"Vechein parah", and so too a cow, "lo tochal mikarsheinei hekdesh", may not feed on consecrated karsheinin (a variety of bean) while threshing them. In such a case the owner is obliged to hold the animal back and muzzle her, because the pesukim establish that the prohibition of muzzling does not extend to produce belonging to hekdesh.