THE SOURCES THAT TEACH ABOUT ME'ILAH
Question: One (a non-Kohen) is liable for Terumah for (eating it, thereby) making it Chulin. (If we learn from Terumah, there should be Me'ilah only for making Hekdesh Chulin);
What is the source to obligate one who changes Hekdesh to another kind of Hekdesh, e.g. he took Hekdesh money and used it to buy Kinim (birds) needed for Korbanos of a Zav, Zavah or Yoledes, to give his half-Shekel, or to bring his Chatas or Asham?
According to R. Shimon, he is Mo'el from the time he was Motzi (spent the money. We explain like R. Peretz, unlike Rashi);
According to R. Yehudah, he is Mo'el from the time of Zerikah.
Answer: "Sim'ol Ma'al" includes this.
(Beraisa): "Nefesh" refers to a commoner, Nasi or Mashu'ach.
Objection: This is obvious. Each is a "Nefesh"! (Why must the Tana teach it?)
Answer - Suggestion: Since it says "va'Asher Yiten Minenu Al Zar," and one may anoint a Mashu'ach (and in some cases, a Nasi) with (Hekdesh) Shemen ha'Mishchah, this shows that Me'ilah does not apply to him!
Rejection: The Tana teaches that this is not so.
It was necessary for the Torah to equate Me'ilah to Sotah, idolatry and Terumah;
A Sotah is called Mo'eles even without Pegam. We learn that also Me'ilah applies without Pegam, e.g. wearing a Hekdesh ring;
Version #1 (Rashi): From idolatry we learn that Me'ilah always connotes Shinuy, e.g. chopping (Chulin) with a Hekdesh axe;
Version #2 (Tosfos): From idolatry we learn that Me'ilah applies when there is a Shinuy (even without benefit, if an act of Kinyan was done), e.g. chopping with a Hekdesh axe. (This effects a loan of an axe, according to Rav Huna); (end of Version #2)
Regarding Terumah it says "Ki Yochal" to exclude one who damages. We learn that likewise, one who damages Hekdesh food (Tosfos - or eats it in a way that harms himself) is exempt. (Most Rishonim exempt one who damages inedible Hekdesh. R. Gershom obligates him.)
WHEN PEGAM IS REQUIRED
(Mishnah): (One is Mo'el without Pegam... ) she wore a choker on her neck...
Question (Rav Kahana): How can the Mishnah say that gold is not prone to Pegam? Nan (a certain wealthy man) gave gold ornaments to his daughter-in-law, and later it was found that they weighed less!
Answer #1 (Rav Zevid): Perhaps she was careless with it, like your daughters-in-law! (However, if she guarded properly, there would be no Pegam.)
Answer #2 (Rav Zevid): Even if you will say that there is Pegam, it does not come immediately, only over time. (Therefore, one is Mo'el now without a Shavah Perutah of Pegam.)
(Mishnah): If one benefits from a live Chatas (he was not Mo'el unless he was Pogem).
Question: If it is Tam, it should be like a cup of Hekdesh (it is not prone to Pegam. Even if he shears or weakens it, it is Mechaper for him, and it does not lose value with regard to Hekdesh.)
Answer (Rav Papa): The Mishnah discusses a Ba'al Mum.
MO'EL ACHAR MO'EL
(Mishnah): If one benefited a half Perutah (from Hekdesh) and was Pogem a half Perutah, or benefited a Perutah in one object and was Pogem a Perutah in another object, he was not Mo'el;
To be Mo'el, one must benefit a Perutah and be Pogem a Perutah in the same object.
(Normally, after one is Mo'el in an object, it becomes Chulin, and Me'ilah no longer applies.) The only cases of Mo'el after Mo'el (if different people benefited from the same item of Hekdesh one after the other, are all Mo'el) are a Behemah (or other Kodshei Mizbe'ach) and a Kli Shares. (They have Kedushas ha'Guf. They do not become Chulin as long as they are Kosher for Avodah);
Mo'el after Mo'el applies to people who rode on a Korban (one after the other), or drank from a Hekdesh cup, or detached wool from a Chatas.
Rebbi says, Mo'el after Mo'el applies to anything that cannot be redeemed.
(Gemara) Question: Who is the Tana of the Mishnah?
Answer: It is R. Nechemyah:
(Beraisa): Mo'el after Mo'el applies only to a Behemah;
R. Nechemyah says, it applies also to a Kli Shares.
Question: What is the first Tana's reason?
Answer: In the Parshah of Asham Me'ilos, "b'Eil ha'Asham" is repeated. (Rashi - even after one was Mo'el in the ram, it is still called Asham, so Me'ilah still applies to it. Pirush Kadmon (A) - "Sim'ol Ma'al" includes Mo'el after Mo'el. This was taught regarding a Korban, to teach that Mo'el after Mo'el applies only to Korbanos.)
R. Nechemyah learns from a Kal va'Chomer. Klei Shares are Mekadesh what is put inside them (Shitah - the contents gets Kedushas ha'Guf, so Mo'el after Mo'el applies), all the more so the Kli itself has Kedushah for Mo'el after Mo'el!
(Mishnah - Rebbi): Mo'el after Mo'el applies to anything that cannot be redeemed.
Question: How does Rebbi argue with the first Tana?
Answer #1 (Rava): They argue about wood Hukdash to Hekdesh. (Rebbi says that it has Kedushas ha'Guf, so there is Mo'el after Mo'el):
(Beraisa): If one vowed to bring wood he must bring at least two large logs;
Rebbi says, wood is considered a Korban. It requires salt and Hagashah. (A verse compares it to a Minchah.)
(Rava): According to Rebbi, wood requires (must be burned on) other wood (on the Mizbe'ach).
(Rav Papa): According to Rebbi, wood requires Kemitzah. (Rashi in Menachos 106b - the wood is ground up until Kemitzah can be taken. R. Gershom there - Kohanim receive the Shirayim. Tosfos in Menachos 20b - the Shirayim are burned on the Mizbe'ach after the Kometz. Pirush Kadmon - a Minchah is brought with Korban Etzim. Kemitzah is taken from it.)
Version #1 (our text) Answer #2 (Rav Papa): They argue about Tam Kodshei Mizbe'ach that became blemished and were slaughtered (this was forbidden. Rebbi holds that Ha'amadah and Ha'arachah is required (but cannot be done), so they cannot be redeemed, so there is Mo'el after Mo'el. Chachamim do not require Ha'amadah and Ha'arachah, so they allow redemption.)
Version #2 (Tosfos) Answer #2 (Rav Papa): They argue about Tam Kodshei Mizbe'ach that became blemished (and are still alive). (Rebbi holds that since even with a Mum they still cannot be redeemed (until Ha'amadah and Ha'arachah), they still are not considered prone to Pegam, so there is Mo'el after Mo'el. Chachamim say, since redemption is possible (after Ha'amadah and Ha'arachah), they are prone to Pegam, so there is not Mo'el after Mo'el.) (end of Version #2)
Support (Beraisa - Rebbi): If a Tam Korban became blemished and was slaughtered, it must be buried. (It is as if has Kedushas ha'Guf);
Chachamim say, it is redeemed.