Commentary for Menachot 97:25

ואמר רבא העולה עולה ראשונה

We must say, therefore, that he believes it<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. the meal-offering prepared on a griddle.');">¹²</span> to be a meal-offering prepared in a pan and when taking the handful refers to it as such, but he is mistaken; now in this case only [is his intention of no consequence], since the preparation thereof clearly indicates the true nature of the offering, but in all other cases we say that a mistaken variation is considered a variation? - Abaye answered him, I can still say that the priest knows that it is in fact a meal-offering prepared on a griddle yet when taking the handful refers to it as one prepared in a pan, and as for the question, 'What does it matter that the preparation thereof clearly indicates the true nature of the offering? ' [I answer that] Rabbah is consistent wit his view, for Rabbah has said, only a wrongful intention which is not manifestly [absurd] does the Divine Law declare capable of rendering an offering invalid, but a wrongful intention which is manifestly [absurd] the Divine Law declares incapable of rendering invalid.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Where the priest's actions belie his expressed intention, obviously his words cannot be taken seriously, and they therefore cannot render the offering invalid.');">¹³</span> <big><b>MISHNAH: </b></big>THE [ABSENCE OF THE] DAILY OFFERINGS DOES NOT INVALIDATE THE ADDITIONAL OFFERINGS,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Offered on Sabbaths and on Festivals; cf. Num. XXVIII.');">¹⁴</span> NEITHER DOES [THE ABSENCE OF] THE ADDITIONAL OFFERINGS INVALIDATE THE DAILY OFFERINGS; MOREOVER OF THE ADDITIONAL OFFERINGS THE [ABSENCE OF] ONE DOES NOT INVALIDATE THE OTHER'EVEN THOUGH THEY<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. the priests.');">¹⁵</span> DID NOT OFFER THE LAMB<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of the Daily Offering.');">¹⁶</span> IN THE MORNING THEY MUST OFFER [THE LAMB] TOWARDS EVENING.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the lamb for the evening Daily Offering is nevertheless to be offered.');">¹⁷</span> R'SIMEON SAID, WHEN IS THIS? ONLY WHEN THEY HAD ACTED UNDER CONSTRAINT OR IN ERROR, BUT IF THEY ACTED DELIBERATELY AND DID NOT OFFER THE LAMB IN THE MORNING THEY MAY NOT OFFER [THE LAMB] TOWARDS EVENING. IF THEY DID NOT BURN THE INCENSE IN THE MORNING<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. Ex. XXX, 7, 8; one half-maneh of incense was offered every morning and the other half-maneh every evening.');">¹⁸</span> THEY BURN IT TOWARDS EVENING. R'SIMEON SAID, THE WHOLE OF IT WAS BURNT TOWARDS EVENING,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the whole maneh.');">¹⁹</span> FOR THE GOLDEN ALTAR WAS DEDICATED ONLY BY THE INCENSE OF SPICES,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Consisting of one whole maneh offered towards evening; v. Gemara infra.');">²⁰</span> THE ALTAR FOR THE BURNT-OFFERING ONLY BY THE DAILY OFFERING OF THE MORNING, THE TABLE ONLY BY THE SHEWBREAD ON THE SABBATH, AND THE CANDLESTICK ONLY BY [THE KINDLING OF] SEVEN LAMPS TOWARDS EVENING. <big><b>GEMARA: </b></big>R'Hiyya B'Abin enquired of R'Hisda, If the community had not [means enough] for the Daily Offerings as well as for the Additional Offerings, which take precedence? But what are the circumstances? If you say that the reference is to the Daily Offerings required for to-day and the Additional Offerings also for to-day, then surely it is obvious that the Daily Offerings take precedence, for they are more frequent<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For the one was offered daily whereas the other only on Sabbaths and Festivals.');">²¹</span> and holy!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., more holy. For on Sabbaths and Festivals the Daily Offering is offered prior to the Additional Offering. Aliter: 'holy' in that they are offered on a holy day.');">²²</span> We must therefore say, the reference is to the Daily Offerings required for the morrow and the Additional Offerings for to-day. Shall we say that the Daily Offerings take precedence for they are more frequent, or the Additional Offerings, since they are holy?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For these are to be offered on a holy day whereas the Daily Offerings are for the morrow, a weekday. Or, according to the first interpretation given on p. 297, n. 8: the Additional Offerings in this case are sacrificed prior to the Daily Offerings, since the former are offered to-day and the latter on the morrow.');">²³</span> - He replied, But you have learnt it: THE [ABSENCE OF THE] DAILY OFFERINGS DOES NOT INVALIDATE THE ADDITIONAL OFFERINGS NEITHER DOES [THE ABSENCE OF] THE ADDITIONAL OFFERINGS INVALIDATE THE DAILY OFFERINGS; MOREOVER OF THE ADDITIONAL OFFERINGS THE[ ABSENCE OF] ONE DOES NOT INVALIDATE THE OTHER'Now what are the circumstances? if you say that [both kinds of offerings] are available and it is only a question of precedence,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And by stating that one does not invalidate the other the Mishnah teaches us that any one may be offered first.');">²⁴</span> surely it has been taught: Whence do we know that no offering should be sacrificed prior to the Daily Offering of the morning? Because it is written, And he shall lay the burnt-offering in order upon it,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. VI, 5. vkugv');">²⁵</span> and Raba stated, 'The burnt-offering' implies the first burnt-offering.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The definite article, emphasizes the importance of this burnt-offering.');">²⁶</span>

Explore commentary for Menachot 97:25. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.