A while back we discussed the concept of “permitter,” an act or a substance that allows the service to go forward. For example, for animal sacrifices the “permitter” is the blood of it, when it is thrown on the Altar, and for flour offerings it is a handful of flour that a Kohen takes off of it.
As we just saw, the ”permitter” is what serves as a marker, when the misappropriation laws either begin or end. However, there are sacrifices that have no permitter, either because they themselves are permitters, or because they are completely burned on the Altar. What is their progression, for example, in the case of the handful of flour offering?
It becomes subject to misappropriation as soon as the owner says that he consecrates the offering. Once it has been put in a Temple vessel, it achieves complete consecration. Therefore, it is then susceptible to be disqualified, such as if it comes in contact with someone who went to the mikvah to purify himself, but the sun did not set yet; or with one who needs an atonement offering but has not brought it yet; or it was left beyond permitted time.
However, unlike most other offerings, wrong intentions do not disqualify a permitter. Why not? Because the law of thought disqualifications (such as planning to eat it after allowed time) were only stated for peace and similar offerings which have a permitter.
Art: Vincent Van Gogh - Pollard Willow with Setting Sun