Commentary for Menachot 90:25

אמר ר' יוחנן הכל מודים

And why does not R'Akiba infer yiheyu from yiheyu? - One should infer that [offering] which provides a gift to the priest from that which provides a gift to the priest.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The two lambs for the peace-offerings provided a gift to the priest, for after the burning of the sacrificial portions the flesh was eaten by the priests, and so, too, did the two loaves, for they were entirely eaten by the priests.');">²⁸</span> but the others<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. the seven lambs etc.');">²⁹</span> are burnt-offerings. Alternatively I can say that they differ on the interpretation of this very verse: They shall be holy to the Lord for the priest.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXIII, 20.');">³⁰</span> R'Akiba maintains, What is it that is entirely for the priest? I should say, It is the Bread-offering. And Ben Nanos, [what does he say]? Does the verse say, 'They shall be holy to the priest'? It says, 'They shall be holy to the Lord for the priest' What is it that is partly to the Lord and partly for the priest? I should say, It is the lambs. And R'Akiba [wh does he say to this]? - Does the verse say, 'They shall be holy to the Lord and for the priest'? It says, 'To th Lord for the priest'. It is as stated by R'Huna, for R'Huna said, God<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'the Name'.');">³¹</span> acquired it and granted it to the priest. R'Johanan said, All agree

Explore commentary for Menachot 90:25. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.