[א] "מִקָּדְשֵׁי יהוה" – המיוחדים לה', יצאו קדשים קלים שאינם לשם. אין לי אלא פרים הנשרפין ושעירים הנשרפין שכולם להשם; מנין לרבות עולה שעורה מתנה לכהן, קדשי קדשים – בשרם ואימוריהם לפני זריקת דמים ואימוריהם לאחר זריקת דמים, ואימורי קדשים קלים לאחר זריקת דמים? תלמוד לומר 'קדשי יהוה' – ריבה. 1) (Vayikra 5:15): "of the sanctified things of the L–rd" — which are designated for the L–rd, to exclude lower-order sanctities, which are not "for the L–rd" (but are the property of the owners, for which reason they are not subject to meilah, neither in the flesh nor in the devoted portions, before the sprinkling of the blood.) This tells me (as being subject to meilah) only of bullocks that are burnt (on the altar) and kids that are burnt, which are entirely "for the L–rd." Whence do I derive (for inclusion) a burnt-offering, whose skin is a gift to the Cohein; holy of holies, their flesh and their devoted portions, before the sprinkling of the blood; their devoted portions after the sprinkling of the blood; and lower-order offerings after the sprinkling of the blood? From "the sanctified things of the L–rd," which is inclusive (in connotation).
[ב] מנין לרבות את החלב למעילה? תלמוד לומר 'קדשי יהוה' – ריבה. יכול שאני מרבה את הדם? תלמוד לומר "מִקָּדְשֵׁי יהוה" – מיעט. מה ראית לרבות את החלב ולהוציא את הדם? אחר שריבה הכתוב, מיעט. מרבה אני את החלב ששוה לבשר בפגול ובנותר ובטמא, ומוציא אני את הדם שלא שוה לבשר בפיגול ובנותר ובטמא. 2) Whence do I derive forbidden fats as subject to meilah? (For I would say that the meilah prohibition does not "take" on that of forbidden fats.) From "the sanctified things of the L–rd." I might think that the blood (of holy of holies before sprinkling) was also included. It is, therefore, (to negate this) written "of (and not all of) the sanctified things." Why do you see fit to include forbidden fats and to exclude blood? After the verse includes, it excludes. I include (forbidden) fats, which are like flesh in that they are susceptible of pigul (Vayikra 7:18), nothar (Vayikra 7:17), and tumah and I exclude blood, which is not thus susceptible.
[ג] מנין לרבות קדשי בדק הבית למעילה? תלמוד לומר 'קדשי יהוה' – ריבה. אין לי אלא בזמן שהקדיש למזבח דברים הראוים למזבח, לבדק הבית דברים הראוים לבדק הבית. הקדיש לבדק הבית דברים הראוים למזבח, הקדיש למזבח דברים הראוים לבדק הבית, הקדיש לזה ולזה דברים שאין ראוים לזה ולזה (כגון ציר וחומץ דגים וחגבים) מנין? תלמוד לומר 'קדשי יהוה' – ריבה. 3) Whence is it derived that things dedicated to Temple maintenance are subject to meilah? From: "the sanctified things of the L–rd." This tells me only of his dedicating things appropriate for the altar to the altar; things appropriate for Temple maintenance, to Temple maintenance. But if he dedicated to Temple maintenance things appropriate for the altar; or to the altar, things appropriate for Temple maintenance; or to either of them things which are appropriate for neither of them, such as brine, vinegar, fish, or grasshoppers (the objects to be sold and the proceeds to revert to the source originally intended) — Whence is it derived that these objects are subject to meilah? From "the sanctified things of the L–rd."
[ד] הקדיש תרנוגלת למזבח – מועלים בה ובביצתה. חמורתא למזבח – מועלים בה ובחלבה. תורים לבדק הבית – מועלים בהם ובביציהם. בור מלא מים, אשפה מלאה זבל, שובך מלא יונים, אילן מלא פירות, שדה מלאה זרעים – מועלים בהן ובמה שבתוכם ומנין שמועלין במה שבתוכם? תלמוד לומר 'קדשי יהוה' – ריבה. 4) If he dedicated a hen to Temple maintenance, both it and its eggs are subject to meilah; a she-ass to Temple maintenance, both it and its milk are subject to meilah; turtle-doves to Temple maintenance, both they and their eggs are subject to meilah. A pit full of water; refuse full of foliage; a dove-cote full of doves; a tree full of fruits; a field full of seed — Whence is it derived that both they and what they contain are subject to meilah? From "the sanctified things of the L–rd."
[ה] יכול אפילו הקדיש תורים למזבח יהיו מועלים בביציהן? הקדיש בור ואחר כך נתמלא מים, אשפה ואחר כך נתמלא זבל, שובך ואחר כך נתמלא יונים, אילן ואחר כך נשא פירות, שדה ואחר כך נתמלאה עשבים – יכול יהיו מועלים בהן ובמה שבתוכן? תלמוד לומר "מִקָּדְשֵׁי יהוה" – מיעט. ר' יוסי אומר המקדיש את השדה ואת האילן – מועלין בהן ובגדוליהן מפני שהם גידולי הקדש. 5) I might think that even if he dedicated turtle-doves to the altar their eggs would be subject to meilah; a pit and it was afterwards filled with water; refuse and it was afterwards filled with foliage; a dove-cote and it was afterwards filled with doves; a tree and it was afterwards filled with fruits; a field and it was afterwards filled with grass — I might think that what it contained was subject to meilah. It is, therefore, written, to exclude these, "of the sanctified things of the L–rd." R. Yossi says: If one dedicates his field or his tree, both they and their growth are subject to meilah, for they are (regarded as) "growths of the sanctuary."
[ו] "והביא" אף לאחר יום הכפורים. "איל" – קשה בן שתי שנים. 'צאן' – לרבות כל צאן משמע, אף חרש אף שוטה אף הננס. "מן הצאן" – ולא הפלגס. "בערכך כסף" – יכול דינרים? תלמוד לומר "שקלים". יכול שקלי נחשת? תלמוד לומר "כסף". יכול בבליות מדיות קפטקיות? תלמוד לומר "בשקל הקדש" – סלעים של קדש, סלעים של צורים. "לאשם" – שהוא מפריש מעות לשם אשם. 6) "Then he shall bring": Even after Yom Kippur (see Section 10:3). "a ram": a sturdy one, a two-year-old. "flock": anything that can be subsumed in flock, even one that is mute, imbecilic, or dwarfish. "of the flock": not a pilgess (see Section 10:5) ("by your valuation, silver shekalim, according to the shekel of the sanctuary, for a guilt-offering.") "by your valuation, silver": I might think dinarim (the cheapest of silver coins) was intended; it is, therefore, written "shekalim." I might think copper shekalim; it is, therefore, written "silver." I might think Babylonian, Median, or Cappaducian shekalim; it is, therefore, written "according to the shekel of the sanctuary" — selaim of kodesh, selaim of Tyre, (where all the weights of Moses were left). "for a guilt-offering": the money must be designated for a guilt-offering.
[ז] "וְאֵת אֲשֶׁר חָטָא מִן הַקֹּדֶשׁ יְשַׁלֵּם" – לאותו הקדש. מנין לרבות פחות משוה פרוטה? שיכול שאין חייבים עליו משום מעילה – לא יהיו חייבים עליו בתשלומין… תלמוד לומר "מִן הַקֹּדֶשׁ" – לרבות פחות משוה פרוטה. מנין שמשלם חומש ואשם על התשלומין האלו? תלמוד לומר "הַקֹּדֶשׁ יְשַׁלֵּם". 7) (Vayikra 5:16) "And for what he sinned from the holy he shall pay": to that specific "holy" (area that he profaned. If that of the altar, he pays to the altar; if that of Temple maintenance, to Temple maintenance. Whence is it derived (that he is liable for meilah) for even less than the amount of a perutah? For I would think that since he is not (technically) liable for meilah (of less than a perutah), he should not be liable for payment; it is, therefore, written: "from the holy," to make him liable for meilah of less than the amount of a perutah). Whence do I derive that one pays the fifth and the guilt-offering on meilah of these (the first) payments? From: "the holy he shall pay" (connoting that the payments themselves become holy and one who profanes them must add a fifth and bring a guilt-offering).
[ח] 'וחמישיתו יוסף עליו' – שיהיה הוא וחומשו חמשה. "וְנָתַן אֹתוֹ" – פרט לחמש חטאות מתות. "וְנָתַן אֹתוֹ לַכֹּהֵן וְהַכֹּהֵן" מה תלמוד לומר? שיכול, הואיל ומעילה בא על ידי כהן – לא יהא הכהן מועל… תלמוד לומר "וְנָתַן אֹתוֹ לַכֹּהֵן וְהַכֹּהֵן" – מלמד שהכהן מועל. 8) "and its fifth he shall add to it": so that it and its fifth equal five (i.e., if the value is four, he shall not take one-fifth of that, but add an additional part). "and he shall give it to the Cohein": to exclude (his deriving benefit from) five dead sin-offerings, (which have no monetary value, in which instance he does not bring a meilah offering and does not add a fifth). "and he shall give it to the Cohein and the Cohein": I would think that if the meilah money came to the hands of the Cohein (to give to the Temple treasurer, and he did not do so, but used the money to purchase the intended offering), (I would think that) the Cohein would not be guilty of meilah; it is, therefore, written: "and he shall give it to the Cohein and the Cohein" to teach us that the Cohein is guilty of meilah.
[ט] "והכהן יכפר עליו [באיל האשם]" מה תלמוד לומר? מנין אתה אומר הביא מעילתו ולא הביא אשמו – לא יצא? תלמוד לומר "באיל האשם". הביא אשמו [עד] שלא הביא מעילתו (לא יצא)? תלמוד לומר "לאשם". יכול כשם שאיל אשם מעכב כך יהא חומש מעכב? תלמוד לומר "באיל האשם ונסלח לו" – איל האשם מעכב ואין החומש מעכב. "ונסלח" – מלמד שאין משיירין לו ליום הכפורים. יכול אף על פי שישב ולא הביא? תלמוד לומר "לו". 9) "and the Cohein shall make atonement for him (with the ram of the guilt-offering"): What is the intent of this? Whence is it derived that if he brought his meilah (the principal) and he did not bring his guilt-offering (the ram) or that if he brought his guilt-offering and he did not bring his meilah, he has not complied (and is not forgiven)? From "with the ram of the guilt-offering (the principal) and it shall be forgiven," which indicates that both are required. I would think that just as "the ram of the guilt-offering is a categorical requirement (for forgiveness) so the one-fifth is a categorical requirement; it is, therefore, written: "with the ram of the guilt-offering" — The ram of the guilt-offering is a categorical requirement, but not the one-fifth. "and it shall be forgiven": This teaches us that his sin is not left "suspended" until Yom Kippur. I might think that even if he (the Cohein) "sat" and did not offer it (the owner nevertheless receives atonement); it is, therefore, written ("and it shall be forgiven) him" (i.e., only him for whom the service has been performed.)