Study Avodah Zarah folio 46B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
יש נעבד במחובר אצל גבוה, או אין נעבד במחובר אצל גבוה?
The Talmud explains the dilemma: An animal that was worshipped is rendered unfit to be sacrificed as an offering in the Temple. The Talmud previously established a principle that objects attached to the ground are not rendered forbidden by idol worship. The question here is this: With regard to an item that is attached to the ground and that was worshipped, is it rendered unfit for the Most High, i.e., for the Temple, just like an animal? Or is the halakha that with regard to an item that is attached to the ground and that was worshipped, it is not rendered unfit for the Most High, just as it is not forbidden with regard to an individual’s deriving benefit from it?
אם תמצי לומר יש נעבד במחובר אצל גבוה, מכשירי קרבן כקרבן דמו או לא?
Furthermore, if you say that with regard to an item that is attached to the ground and that was worshipped, it is rendered unfit for the Most High, are the items that merely facilitate the sacrifice of an offering, such as the altar, viewed the same way as an offering itself, or not? Perhaps the principle that items worshipped in idolatrous practice are disqualified for use in the Temple applies only to offerings, and not to the items used to facilitate the bringing of offerings.
אמר רבא, קל וחומר: ומה אתנן שמותר בתלוש להדיוט, אסור במחובר לגבוה, דכתיב: ״לא תביא אתנן זונה ומחיר כלב״, לא שנא תלוש ולא שנא במחובר, נעבד שאסור בתלוש להדיוט — אינו דין שאסור במחובר לגבוה?
Rava says: The dilemma can be resolved with an a fortiori inference. The Torah prohibits the sacrifice of an animal as an offering or a donation to the Temple if it was given in payment to a prostitute or exchanged in the sale of a dog. And if it is so that concerning deriving benefit from an item that served as payment to a prostitute, which is permitted to an ordinary person even in a case where the item is detached from the ground, nevertheless, such an item is forbidden to use for the Most High even in a case where it is attached to the ground, as it is written: “You should not bring the payment to a prostitute or the price of a dog into the House of YHWH your God for any vow” (Deuteronomy 23:19), where there is no difference whether the payment is unattached to the ground and there is no difference whether it is attached; concerning an object worshipped in idolatrous practice, which is rendered forbidden in a case where it is detached even for the use of an ordinary person, is it not logical that it should be prohibited to use it for the Most High even in the case of an object attached to the ground?