Commentary for Menachot 146:20

תלמוד לומר והיתה לכהן כמנחה מקיש חובתו לנדבתו מה נדבתו אינה נאכלת אף חובתו אינה נאכלת אמר רבי שמעון וכי נאמר והיתה לכהן כמנחתו והלא לא נאמר אלא כמנחה אלא להקיש

are to be offered; but if he did not, they are to be offered at the expense of the community.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Shek. VII, 6. V. supra 51b.');">¹⁸</span> Shall we say that this teaching<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which permits the offering of drink-offerings by a gentile.');">¹⁹</span> agrees with R'Jose the Galilean and not with R'Akiba? -You may even say that it agrees with R'Akiba, for [he meant to say, They may offer] burnt-offerings and everything appertaining thereto.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. the drink-offerings which accompany the burnt-offering. In most MSS., in the Aruch, Rashi MS., and Yalkut there is here used a rare trzhct tvrzhct v,rhcj word , (var.) 'appertunances'. Cur. edd. read: .');">²⁰</span> Who is the Tanna of the following Baraitha which the Rabbis taught:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Zeb. 45a; Tem. 3a.');">²¹</span> Home-born:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Num. XV, 13. This verse refers to the drink-offerings that must accompany the sacrifices.');">²²</span> the home-born brings drink-offerings,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Zeb. 45a; Tem. 3a.');">²¹</span> but a gentile may not bring drink-offerings. I might then think that his burnt-offering does not require drink-offerings [to be offered with it]; the text therefore states, After this manner.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Num. XV, 13. This verse refers to the drink-offerings that must accompany the sacrifices.');">²²</span> Now who is [the Tanna of this Baraitha]? It is neither R'Jose the Galilean nor R'Akiba! It is not Jose the Galilean for he says [that the gentile may offer] even wine<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As a separate freewill-offering.');">²³</span> [for a drink-offering]; neither is it R Akiba for he says [that he may offer] only a burnt-offering but nothing else! - If you wish,I can say it is R'Jose the Galilean; and if you wish, I can say it is R'Akiba. If you wish, I can say it is R'Jose the Galilean' you must strike out the word 'wine' from that teaching.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Thus the gentile may bring every offering except the drink-offering of wine.');">²⁴</span> 'And if you 'wish, I can say it is R'Akiba', for [h may offer] burnt-offerings and everything appertaining thereto. R'SIMEON SAYS, FROM THE SINNER'S MEAL-OFFERING BROUGHT BY PRIESTS etc. Whence is it derived? - Our Rabbis taught: And it shall be the priest's as the meal-offering:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. V, 13. The verse refers to the sinner's meal-offering, i.e., the obligatory meal-offering; and the conclusion of the verse, that quoted in the text, according to Rabbinic interpretation, implies that the priest's obligatory meal-offering shall be like 'the meal-offering'. The arguments which follow serve to elucidate the point of the comparison with 'the meal-offering'.');">²⁵</span> that is to say, the service thereof may be performed by [the priest] himself.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If a priest sinned and is obliged to offer a meal-offering, he may perform the service of his own meal-offering. The verse accordingly means: the priest's obligatory meal-offering shall be as the meal-offering of an Israelite; just as the priest performs the service for the latter so he may perform the service for his own meal-offering.');">²⁶</span> You say it signifies that the service thereof may be performed by [the priest] himself, but perhaps it is not so, but rather it signifies that the [remainder of the] sinner's meal-offering brought by a priest is permitted [to be eaten];<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Thus this verse informs us that the priest's obligatory meal-offering is like the meal-offering of an Israelite which is eaten by the priests after the handful has been taken out.');">²⁷</span> and as for the verse, And every meal-offering of the priest shall be wholly burnt; it shall not be eaten,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. VI, 16.');">²⁸</span> that refers to his<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. the priest's.');">²⁹</span> freewill meal-offering, but his obligatory meal-offering may indeed be eaten! The text therefore states, 'And it shall be the priest's as the meal-offering', thereby comparing his obligatory meal-offering with his freewill meal-offering; thus as his freewill meal-offering may not be eaten, so his obligatory meal-offering may not be eaten. But R'Simeon said, Is it written, 'And it shall be the priest's as his meal-offering'? It says, As th meal-offering; thereby comparing

Explore commentary for Menachot 146:20. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.