ואי כתב רחמנא על מקום הוה אמינא דוקא נתקנח אבל איתיה אימא הוי חציצה קמ"ל על דם האשם:
- They are both necessary; for had the Divine Law only stated, upon the blood of the guilt-offering, I should have said that only if [the blood] was still there it is [valid], but if it had wiped off it is not [valid]; the Divine Law therefore stated, 'Upon the place of the blood of the guilt-offering And had the Divine Law only stated, 'Upon the place etc.' , I should have said that it [the blood] must first be wiped off, but if it was still there it would be regarded as an interposition;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For the oil must touch the body of the leper on the parts specified directly without any other substance interposing.');"><sup>4</sup></span>
Sefer HaChinukh
From the laws of the commandment is that which they said (Menachot 73b) that if they did not find new [wheat], they can bring it from the [storehouse]; and that one should not bring wheat that descended from the clouds at the outset, because there is a doubt if I call this, “from your inhabitations,” or not. But if he brought it, it is fit. The kneading of the two breads and their forming is outside [the courtyard] and its baking is inside, like all of the meal-offerings. And their baking does not push off [the prohibition of work on] the holiday, as it is stated (Exodus 12:16), “shall be done for you” — and not for the higher realm. The waving of the bread with the lambs of the peace-offerings was done while they were still alive. And the high priest takes one of the loaves, and the second is divided for all of the shifts. And the rest of its details are elucidated in Menachot, Chapters 4, 5, 8 and 11. (See Mishneh Torah, Laws of Daily Offerings and Additional Offerings 8.)
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
