שקלים ב

שקלים ב

מְצָרְפִין שְׁקָלִים לְדַרְכּוֹנוֹת מִפְּנֵי מַשּׂוֹי הַדֶּרֶךְ. כְּשֵׁם שֶׁהָיוּ שׁוֹפָרוֹת בַּמִּקְדָּשׁ, כָּךְ הָיוּ שׁוֹפָרוֹת בַּמְּדִינָה. בְּנֵי הָעִיר שֶׁשָּׁלְחוּ אֶת שִׁקְלֵיהֶן וְנִגְנְבוּ אוֹ שֶׁאָבָדוּ, אִם נִתְרְמָה הַתְּרוּמָה, נִשְׁבָּעִין לַגִּזְבָּרִים. וְאִם לָאו נִשְׁבָּעִין לִבְנֵי הָעִיר, וּבְנֵי הָעִיר שׁוֹקְלִין תַּחְתֵּיהֶן. נִמְצָאוּ, אוֹ שֶׁהֶחֱזִירוּם הַגַּנָּבִים, אֵלּוּ וָאֵלּוּ שְׁקָלִים, וְאֵין עוֹלִין לָהֶן לְשָׁנָה הַבָּאָה:

When people who live far from Jerusalem wish to send to Jerusalem the shekels that have been levied from their community, they may combine their shekels and exchange them for darics [darkonot], which are large gold coins, due to the burden of the way. Instead of carrying large amounts of shekels, the agents who deliver the funds will bring a much lighter burden of gold coins with them. The mishna adds: Just as there were collection horns in the Temple to receive the half-shekel contributions, so too there were collection horns in the rest of the country, i.e., areas outside of Jerusalem. The local inhabitants placed their half-shekels in these horns, which were later brought to Jerusalem. § With regard to the residents of a town who sent their shekels to the Temple and they were stolen from the agent on the way or were lost, if the collection of the chamber had already been collected before these shekels arrived, the agents must take the oath of a bailee to the treasurers [gizbarin]. After the collection of the chamber, all the shekels that have been contributed become the property of the Temple, so the Temple treasurers who are in charge of this property become the opposing litigants of the agents. If the ceremony has not yet been performed and the contributions have not yet been collected into the baskets, the shekels are considered the property of the residents of the town, and therefore the agents must take an oath to absolve themselves to the residents of the town. Since those shekels are still considered the property of the residents of the town because the shekels never reached the Temple, they have not fulfilled their obligation. Therefore, the residents of the town must contribute other shekels in their place. If, after the residents of the town contributed other shekels, the original shekels were found or the thieves returned them, both these original shekels and those newly contributed ones have the status of consecrated shekels and belong to the Temple. However, they do not count for the following year. The people cannot claim that since they contributed twice in one year they are exempt from contributing the next year.

הַנּוֹתֵן שִׁקְלוֹ לַחֲבֵרוֹ לִשְׁקֹל עַל יָדוֹ, וּשְׁקָלוֹ עַל יְדֵי עַצְמוֹ, אִם נִתְרְמָה תְּרוּמָה מָעַל. הַשּׁוֹקֵל שִׁקְלוֹ מִמְּעוֹת הֶקְדֵּשׁ, אִם נִתְרְמָה תְרוּמָה וְקָרְבָה הַבְּהֵמָה מָעַל. מִדְּמֵי מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי, מִדְּמֵי שְׁבִיעִית, יֹאכַל כְּנֶגְדָּן:

With regard to one who gives his shekel to his fellow to contribute on his behalf by placing it in the collection horn for him, and the fellow instead contributed it for himself, if at the time that he placed the shekel in the collection horn the collection of the chamber had been collected, the fellow is guilty of misuse of consecrated property. When they perform the collection of the chamber, the treasurers also have in mind the shekels that have been contributed but are not yet in the possession of the Temple treasury, so that all those who have contributed shekels will have a part in the communal sacrifices. Therefore, when the agent gives this shekel for himself, he is considered to be deriving benefit from a consecrated item and is guilty of unintentional misuse of consecrated property. With regard to one who mistakenly contributes his shekel from consecrated money, and then the collection of the chamber was collected and an animal purchased with those funds was sacrificed as a communal offering, he is guilty of misuse of consecrated property once the animal has been offered. This is because at that point the money used to purchase the animal is transferred to non-sacred status. However, before that point, merely contributing consecrated money is not considered misuse. If one mistakenly contributed his shekel from money used to redeem the fruits of the second tithe or from money from the permitted sale of produce grown during the Sabbatical Year, he must eat non-sacred fruits besides the ones he already possesses, corresponding to the value of the shekel, and he must treat them with the sanctity of second tithes or Sabbatical Year fruits.

הַמְכַנֵּס מָעוֹת וְאָמַר, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ לְשִׁקְלִי, בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים, מוֹתָרָן נְדָבָה. וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים, מוֹתָרָן חֻלִּין. שֶׁאָבִיא מֵהֶן לְשִׁקְלִי, שָׁוִין שֶׁמּוֹתָרָן חֻלִּין. אֵלּוּ לְחַטָאת, שָׁוִין שֶׁהַמּוֹתָר נְדָבָה. שֶׁאָבִיא מֵהֶן לְחַטָאת, שָׁוִין שֶׁהַמּוֹתָר חֻלִּין:

With regard to one who gathers together small coins and said: These are for my shekel, and subsequently discovered that it amounted to more than a half-shekel. Beit Shammai say: The leftover coins are placed in the collection horn designated for a free-will offering, as the money is consecrated property but it does not have the status of a shekel. Beit Hillel say: The leftover money is non-sacred property since, ab initio, he had in mind to consecrate a half-shekel and no more. An item that was consecrated by mistake does not have the status of consecrated property. However, if he originally said: I am gathering together this money so that I will bring my shekel from these, they agree that the leftover money is non-sacred property. If one who was obligated to bring a sin-offering gathered together coins and said: These are for my sin-offering, then if he had accumulated more than was needed, they agree that the leftover money must be designated as a free-will offering. However, if he originally said: That I will bring my sin-offering from these, they agree that the leftover money is non-sacred property.

אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן, מַה בֵּין שְׁקָלִים לְחַטָאת. שְׁקָלִים יֵשׁ לָהֶם קִצְבָה, וְחַטָאת אֵין לָהּ קִצְבָה. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, אַף לִשְׁקָלִים אֵין לָהֶן קִצְבָה, שֶׁכְּשֶׁעָלוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל מִן הַגּוֹלָה הָיוּ שׁוֹקְלִים דַּרְכּוֹנוֹת, חָזְרוּ לִשְׁקוֹל סְלָעִים, חָזְרוּ לִשְׁקוֹל טְבָעִין, וּבִקְּשׁוּ לִשְׁקֹל דִּינָרִים. אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן, אַף עַל פִּי כֵן, יַד כֻּלָּן שָׁוָה. אֲבָל חַטָאת, זֶה מֵבִיא בְּסֶלַע וְזֶה מֵבִיא בִּשְׁתַּיִם וְזֶה מֵבִיא בְּשָׁלשׁ:

Rabbi Shimon said: What is the difference between shekels and a sin-offering? Why do Beit Hillel say that the leftover money is non-sacred property in the case of shekels, while with regard to a sin-offering they say that the leftover money is consecrated for a free-will offering? Rather, the issue is that shekels have a fixed value, a half-shekel and no more. Therefore, there is a clear amount beyond which one did not intend the money to become consecrated property. However, a sin-offering has no fixed value. Since the entire sum that one collected could have been used to purchase a sin-offering, whatever he didn’t use must at least be designated for a free-will offering. Rabbi Yehuda says: Even for shekels there is no real fixed value. For when the Jewish people ascended from the exile, they would contribute darics, which are Median coins worth two shekels by Torah law. They brought these coins with them and would give a half of one to fulfill their half-shekel obligation. Later on, when the Median Empire was dissolved, they reverted to contributing with a sela, a silver coin of equal weight to the the shekel mentioned in the Torah. People would contribute a half-sela for their half-shekel requirement. When the value of this currency changed later on, they reverted to contributing with a tiva, a different coin which is worth a half-shekel. Some people wished to contribute only dinars, which are half the value of the tiva, i.e., one quarter shekel in value. The Sages refused to accept it and required them to contribute at least the half-shekel mentioned in the Torah. Nevertheless, it is clear that the obligation of contributing shekels does not have a fixed value. Rabbi Shimon said in response: Even so, despite the fact that during different periods there were different amounts used to fulfill the obligation of the half-shekel, everyone has equal standing, i.e., at any particular time, everyone contributes the same amount. Therefore, any sum collected beyond that amount was not intended to be consecrated. However, a sin-offering has no fixed amount whatsoever; this person may bring an animal worth a sela, and that one may bring one worth two, and this one may bring one worth three. Therefore, it cannot be supposed that there was no intention to consecrate the whole sum.

מוֹתַר שְׁקָלִים, חֻלִּין. מוֹתַר עֲשִׂירִית הָאֵפָה, מוֹתַר קִנֵּי זָבִין, קִנֵּי זָבוֹת, קִנֵּי יוֹלְדוֹת, וְחַטָאוֹת וַאֲשָׁמוֹת, מוֹתְרֵיהֶן נְדָבָה. זֶה הַכְּלָל, כָּל שֶׁהוּא בָּא לְשֵׁם חַטָאת וּלְשֵׁם אַשְׁמָה, מוֹתָרָן נְדָבָה. מוֹתַר עוֹלָה, לָעוֹלָה. מוֹתַר מִנְחָה, לַמִּנְחָה. מוֹתַר שְׁלָמִים, לַשְּׁלָמִים. מוֹתַר פֶּסַח, לַשְּׁלָמִים. מוֹתַר נְזִירִים, לַנְּזִירִים. מוֹתַר נָזִיר, לַנְּדָבָה. מוֹתַר עֲנִיִּים, לָעֲנִיִּים. מוֹתַר עָנִי, לְאוֹתוֹ עָנִי. מוֹתַר שְׁבוּיִים, לַשְּׁבוּיִים. מוֹתַר שָׁבוּי, לְאוֹתוֹ שָׁבוּי. מוֹתַר הַמֵּתִים, לַמֵּתִים. מוֹתַר הַמֵּת, לְיוֹרְשָׁיו. רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר, מוֹתַר הַמֵּת, יְהֵא מֻנָּח עַד שֶׁיָּבֹא אֵלִיָּהוּ. רַבִּי נָתָן אוֹמֵר, מוֹתַר הַמֵּת בּוֹנִין לוֹ נֶפֶשׁ עַל קִבְרוֹ:

The leftover money from what was set aside for shekels is non-sacred property, in accordance with the opinion of Beit Hillel in the previous mishna. The mishna now discusses similar cases for other sacred items: However, with regard to the leftover money from what one set aside to purchase the tenth of an ephah of fine flour for a meal-offering and the leftover money from what one set aside to purchase offerings that he is liable to sacrifice due to ritual impurity or a sin, such as the pairs of birds of a zav, the pairs of birds of a zava, and the pairs of birds of a woman after childbirth, sin-offerings, or guilt-offerings, in these cases, its leftover money must be used for free-will offerings that are offered as repletion of the altar, i.e., burnt-offerings sacrificed at times when the altar was idle. This is the principle: Whatever money is designated for a sin-offering or for a guilt-offering, its leftover money must be used for a free-will offering. The leftover money from what one set aside to purchase a burnt-offering that he owes, due to a vow or to volunteering, must be used for another burnt-offering that he will bring in the future. The leftover money from what one set aside to purchase fine flour for a meal-offering must be used for another meal-offering. The leftover money from what one set aside to purchase a peace-offering must be used for another peace-offering. The leftover money from what one set aside to purchase a lamb for his Paschal lamb is not used for another Paschal lamb, such as for the following year. Rather, it is used for purchasing a peace-offering. The leftover money from what one set aside to purchase sacrifices for a number of nazirites must be used to purchase sacrifices for other nazirites. The leftover money from what a single nazirite set aside for his own offering must be used for a free-will offering. The leftover money collected for freeing unspecified captives must be allocated to freeing captives. The leftover money collected for freeing a specific captive is given as a gift to that captive. The leftover money collected as charity for the poor must be allocated to the poor. The leftover money collected for a specific poor person is given as a gift to that poor person. The leftover money collected for burying the dead must be allocated to burying the dead. The leftover money collected to bury or provide burial shrouds for a particular deceased person is given to his heirs. Rabbi Meir says: It is uncertain what should be done, and therefore the leftover money for the deceased should be placed in a safe place until Elijah comes and teaches what should be done. Rabbi Natan says: With the leftover money collected for a deceased person they build a monument [nefesh] on his grave for him.