Comentario sobre Meilá 3:7
שָׁרְשֵׁי אִילָן שֶׁל הֶדְיוֹט בָּאִין בְּשֶׁל הֶקְדֵּשׁ וְשֶׁל הֶקְדֵּשׁ בָּאִין בְּשֶׁל הֶדְיוֹט, לֹא נֶהֱנִין וְלֹא מוֹעֲלִין. הַמַּעְיָן שֶׁהוּא יוֹצֵא מִתּוֹךְ שְׂדֵה הֶקְדֵּשׁ, לֹא נֶהֱנִין וְלֹא מוֹעֲלִין. יָצָא חוּץ לַשָּׂדֶה, נֶהֱנִין מִמֶּנּוּ. הַמַּיִם שֶׁבְּכַד שֶׁל זָהָב, לֹא נֶהֱנִין וְלֹא מוֹעֲלִין. נִתְּנוּ בִצְלוֹחִית, מוֹעֲלִין בָּהֶם. עֲרָבָה, לֹא נֶהֱנִין וְלֹא מוֹעֲלִין. רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי צָדוֹק אוֹמֵר, נוֹתְנִין הָיוּ מִמֶּנָּה זְקֵנִים בְּלוּלְבֵיהֶם:
Las raíces de un árbol que pertenece a un laico que se extiende en un área santificada y las raíces de un árbol santificado que se extienden en el área de un laico, no se pueden obtener beneficios de ellas, pero no están sujetas a meilah . Un manantial que emana [fluye] de un campo santificado no se puede obtener beneficio de él, pero no está sujeto a meilah . Si fluye fuera del campo, uno puede obtener beneficios de él. El agua en las jarras doradas [utilizadas para libaciones en Sucot] no puede obtener beneficios de ella, pero no está sujeta a meilah . Si luego se colocó en una jarra [para ser vertido en el altar] está sujeto a meilah . La rama de sauce [usada en el Templo durante Sucot] no se puede obtener beneficio de ella, pero no está sujeta a meilah . El rabino Elazer, hijo del rabino Tsadok, dice que los ancianos solían [beneficiarse de él] y lo usaban en sus lulavim.
Bartenura on Mishnah Meilah
English Explanation of Mishnah Meilah
The water of a spring which comes out of a dedicated field may not be used, but the law of sacrilege does not apply to it When it has left the field it may be used.
The water in the golden jar may not be used, but the law of sacrilege does not apply to it.
When it has been poured into the flask, it is subject to the law of sacrilege.
The willow branch may not be used, but is not subject to the law of sacrilege. Rabbi Elazar son of Rabbi Zadok says: the elders used to put it with their palm tree branches.
Section one: In this case, either the tree grows on privately owned, non-sacred ground but its roots spread out onto dedicated ground, or the opposite. Since part of the tree is on sacred ground, it is forbidden to benefit from any of the tree. However, since the entire tree is not on sacred ground, it is not subject to the law of sacrilege.
Section two: This refers to a case where a person dedicated his field to the Temple, but he did not dedicate the spring. While the spring is on the field, the water may not be used because it is on dedicated ground. However, since he didn’t dedicate the spring itself, the water is not subject to the law of sacrilege. Once the water has left the field, it can be used. This is different from the case of the tree because all parts of a tree are interconnected. When its roots leave the sacred ground they are not disconnected from that ground, unlike water which is.
Section three: This section refers to the water used for the water libation on Sukkot (see Sukkah 4:9-10). The day before Shabbat, they would fill a golden jar with water drawn from the Shiloah spring in Jerusalem, so that the next day they could pour it onto the altar without having to carry from the Shiloah to the Temple. When in this jar, the water cannot be used for other purposes, but it has not yet been sanctified so it is not subject to the law of sacrilege. The golden flask was used on most days to directly draw water from the Shiloah, and on Shabbat they would pour from the golden jar into the golden flask. The flask serves to sanctify the water and therefore once in this flask it is subject to the law of sacrilege.
Section four: On Sukkot there was a custom to place willows on the side of the altar (see Sukkah 4:5). That willow cannot be used for other purposes, but it is not subject to the law of sacrilege, because it is not sanctified. Rabbi Elazar son of Rabbi Zadok notes that before putting it next to the altar, the elders used to put it with their palm branches (the lulav). This is not considered illicit use, because when one performs a mitzvah with an object, it is not considered that he has “derived benefit” from the object.