Babylonian Talmud

Rodkinson 1918 — source 18, scan section 45

bath and " sanctify" to bring back to sacredness, whence it is ob- vious that even such vessels that were used in idol-worship are al- lowed to be brought into the temple for use, after passing through the legal bath (the more so are allowed the vessels of the Egyptian temple)? Thereupon said Rabbi: The blessing of the Lord upon you : you have recalled to my memory the forgotten verse ! " Put in order" means to hide them, and " sanctify " to substi- tute them by other vessels. Is Rabbi's interpretation supported by the following Mishna (Midath, i. 6) : There was a pantry in the temple, where the Maccabees heaped up the stones of the altar defiled by the Greeks; and R. Sheshith said: The Greeks have defiled the altar by their idol-worship, and though these stones are allowed for private use, yet they were not used in the temple. (Similar was the case with the vessels of the Egyptian temple, which were allowed only for private use)? Said R. Papa : From the case of the Maccabees is no support at all, since the stones there were prohibited even for private use, the Maccabees guiding themselves by [Ezek. vii. 21] : " And I will give it up into the hands of the strangers . . . and they shall pollute it " ; so that they could not do otherwise, for, in order that the stones be again allowed, they must be first profaned by breaking them, which is not permitted to do, as by law " whole stones must be used to build an altar " ; nor could the stones be sawed into two (thereby becoming profaned), since the law forbids " to bring iron thereon"; so that as there was no means to profane the said stones, they were of necessity set aside. But why did not the Maccabees have the stones profaned by a heathen and make of them private use? They could not do even this, for as R. Oshia said : The sages wanted once to forbid all use of gold and silver, because the enemy carried off the gold and silver of the temple, it was, namely, feared that the money coined therefrom might reach the Israelites, and by law it is prohibited to make use of what belongs to the sanctuary. It was, however, ob- jected : How could the sages have conceived such a wish, the gold arud silver of Jerusalem forming but an infinitesimal part of those in the whole world, and the smallest can never render TRACT ABUDA ZARA (IDOLATRY). 113 prohibited the greatest part. Abayi explained the words of R. Oshia thus : The sages wanted to forbid not all the gold and silver, but only the gold and silver dinars issued by both the kings Hadrian and Traion, on which the image has become of late undiscernible, and which were surely coined of the gold and silver of the temple. However, when their attention was called to the verse, " And will give it into the hands of strangers," etc., they abandoned the idea, seeing that an object once pro. faned is allowed for private use. Now, as to the altar, it was a sacred place to bring offerings to God, which is not the case with the gold and silver; hence it is below dignity to use its stones in private. MISHNA /v.: A heathen can profane his idol as well as that of his neighbor. An Israelite cannot profane that of a heathen. The idol once profaned, all that pertains to its service is abolished ; on the contrary, if only the pertainings were pro- faned, they alone are allowed, but not the idol. GEMARA : Rabbi taught to Simeon his son : A heathen may profane his idol as well as that of his neighbor; said he to him : Master, in your youth you used to teach that a heathen profanes his idol as well as that of an Israelite. (Says the Gemara) : Can then an Israelite's idol be profaned ? Was it not said above that such can never be profaned ? Said R. Hillel b. R. Wells : He spoke then of the case where the heathen owned the idol with the Israelite in partnership. But let us see what was the reason of both his statement in his youth and in his ad- vanced age. In his youth he thought that if an Israelite wor- ships an idol, he does it with the knowledge of the heathen, hence the heathen, when profaning his part, profanes also that of the Israelite; while in his later days he came to the conclu- sion that the Israelite is worshipping on his own account, hence the heathen profanes only his own part, that of the Israelite remaining unprofaned. There were others who taught the statement of R. Hillel as concerning the latter part of our Mishna : An Israelite cannot profane that of a heathen. And to the question, is this not self- understood ? Said R. Hillel b. Wells : It refers to a case where an Israelite and a heathen are the joint owners of the idol, in which case the former can profane neither his nor the heathen's part, while the latter may his own part but not that of the Israelite. Others, however, bring this, R. Hillel's explanation, in connection, not with the Mishna, but with the Boraitha fol- 114 THE BABYLONIAN TALMUD. lowing. R. Simeon b. Menasia said : The idol of an Israelite can never be profaned; and this " never" R. Hillel b. Wells interpreted to mean that, when an Israelite and a heathen are the joint owners of an idol, the latter, by profaning his own part, does by no means profane the other's part, though it may be assumed here that the Israelite is a partner to the idol only out of com- placence to the heathen. And he comes thereby to teach us that an Israelite worships an idol not on the knowledge of the heathen, but on his own. MISHNA F.: How is an idol to be profaned? By cutting off the tip of its ear, the point of the nose, or the ends of the fingers, or by disfiguring its face with a hammer, even if thereby nothing is broken off. But if he only spat or urinated before it, dragged it about in the dirt, or cast such upon it, it is not pro- faned. If a heathen sold or pawned his idol it is profaned ac- cording to Rabbi, but not according to the sages. GEMARA : "Disfiguring its face ivith a hammer,'' etc. Why should it be profaned when nothing of it was lost thereby? Said R. Zera : Because it has thus been made unrecognizable. " But if he Ofily spat," etc. Whence is this deduced? Said 'Hiskia, from [Is. viii. 21, 22] : " And when they shall be hun- gry, they will become enraged and curse their king and their god . . . and they will look unto the earth," etc., which means : Though the heathen curse his king and god and look up to the true God, he will still turn his eye back to the earth to worship his idol. " If a heathen sold," etc. In respect of this part of the Mishna Zeera in the name of R. Johanan and Jeremiah b. Abba in the name of Rabh expressed thus their respective opinions. The one says : The decision of the sages regards only the case when the heathen sold or pawned the idol to a heathen jewel- ler, but if to a Jewish one all agree that it is profaned;