Study Temurah folio 32B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
גזברין בלבד!
the treasurers alone preventing the offering from being sacrificed. In other words, the owner of an offering must stand over the animal when it is sacrificed, and in the case of a burnt offering that was associated with a consecration for Temple maintenance, the Temple treasurer is the owner. Evidently, Ulla maintains that the offering does not require an appraisal for a consecration of its value before it may be sacrificed, despite the fact that it was associated with a consecration for Temple maintenance.
לעולם רבנן, וקרא למעילה [הוא] דאתא.
The Talmud responds: Actually, this halakha, that one who associates an animal consecrated for the altar with a consecration for Temple maintenance must give the value of the animal for Temple maintenance, was instituted by the rabbis; by Torah law, there is only the delay attributed to the treasurers. This is also the opinion of Ulla. And as for the verse that Ulla cites as a source for the halakha that an animal consecrated for the altar can be associated with dedications to priests (Leviticus 27:28), it is mere support for this rabbinic law. The verse actually comes to teach that one is subject to the halakhot of misuse in the case of dedications to priests.
למעילה למה ליה קרא? קדשי קדשים כתיב ביה!
The Talmud asks: If the term in the verse “every dedicated item” serves to teach only that one is subject to the halakhot of misuse in the case of dedications to priests, why does one need this verse at all? After all, an expression of most holy is written in the verse, as it states: “Is most holy to YHWH,” and the halakhot of misuse apply to all sanctified items.