Mesorat%20hashas for Menachot 117:29

אדרבה

Might I not say, Upon it shall be oil but not upon the meal-offering of the priests? - It is more reasonable to include the meal-offering of the priests, since [like the meal-offering of the 'Omer it consists of] a tenth [of an ephah],<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Whereas each cake of the Shewbread was of two tenths of flour.');">¹⁶</span> [requires] a vessel of ministry,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Wherein to knead the meal-offering, at which time it was hallowed. The Shewbread, on the other hand, was not hallowed until it was baked in the oven of the Sanctuary.');">¹⁷</span> is prepared outside,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The offering is performed upon the altar in the Temple court, whereas the offering of the Shewbread, i.e., the setting of the loaves on the kfhv table, was performed in the Temple proper, in the .');">¹⁸</span> [becomes unfit when] its appearance [is spoilt],<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' An expression signifying that it must not be kept overnight, as it belonged to the Most Holy class of offerings. The Shewbread, however, was kept for seven days upon the table, from Sabbath to Sabbath,');">¹⁹</span> requires bringing near [to the altar],<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which is not the case with the Shewbread.');">²⁰</span> and [is burnt upon] the fire [of the altar].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The priest's meal-offering was wholly burnt upon the altar, and from the 'Omer-offering a handful was burnt; but no part of the Shewbread was burnt upon the altar.');">²¹</span> On the contrary it is more reasonable to include the Shewbread since [like the meal-offering of the 'Omer it is an offering on behalf of] the community,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which is not the case with the meal-offering of the priests.');">²²</span> is obligatory,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which is not the case with the meal-offering of the priests.');">²²</span> [may be offered in] uncleanness,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Every offering brought by the community as an obligation overrides the laws of uncleanness, cf. Pes. 76b. This is not so with the offering of an individual.');">²³</span> is eaten,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Shewbread and the remainder of the 'Omer-offering were shared amongst the priests and eaten, whereas the priests' meal-offering was wholly burnt.');">²⁴</span> [is subject to] piggul,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Glos. It is established law that every offering which is rendered permissible, either for the altar or for man, by a certain rite (the mattir, v. Glos.) , is subject to the law of piggul. V. Zeb. 43a. The priests' meal-offering, however, since it is wholly burnt is outside the scope of this rule.');">²⁵</span> [and is offered] on the Sabbath!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The 'Omer-offering was brought even on the Sabbath (v. infra 63a) , and the Shewbread was regularly offered, i.e., set, on the Sabbath; but no individual offering was brought on the Sabbath.');">²⁶</span> - The former is the more plausible since there is written, Any one.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. II, 1. Lit., 'a soul', i.e., an individual. Since here in connection with the meal-offering of fine flour, where oil (as well as frankincense) is expressly prescribed, Scripture uses the term 'any one', it is inferred that every individual meal-offering requires oil (and also frankincense, v. infra) . Hence the priests' meal-offering is included.');">²⁷</span> The Master said, 'Upon it shall be frankincense but not upon the meal-offering offered with the drink-offerings'. Might I not say, Upon it shall be frankincense but not upon the meal-offering of the priests? - It is more reasonable to include the meal-offering of the priests, since [like the meal-offering of the 'Omer it consists of] a tenth, is mixed [with a log of oil],<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Whereas the meal-offering offered with the drink-offerings varied in quantity: one tenth for a lamb, two for a ram, and three for a bullock; and the quantities of oil also varied, the tenth of the lamb requiring to be mixed with three logs of oil, and each tenth of the ram and the bullock with two logs of oil. V. Num. XV, 4ff.');">²⁸</span> is brought [near the altar], [and is offered] by itself.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The meal-offering offered with the drink-offerings did not require bringing near the altar; moreover it was not offered by itself but always accompanied an animal-offering.');">²⁹</span> On the contrary it is more reasonable to include the meal-offering offered with the drink-offerings, since [like the meal-offering of the 'Omer it is an offering on behalf of] the community,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For it was offered as an obligation with the communal Daily Offerings, accordingly it overrode the rules of uncleanness and the laws of Sabbath.');">³⁰</span> is obligatory, [and may be offered in] uncleanness [and] on the Sabbath? - The former is the more plausible since there is written, Any one.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. p. 349, n. 7.');">³¹</span> 'Meal-offering-this includes the meal-offering offered on the eighth day [of consecration], so that it too required frankincense'. Perhaps it excludes it? - It is out of the question; if you say that it includes it, it well,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For otherwise, without the Scriptural direction, I should have thought that that meal-offering of consecration was without frankincense, as one could not apply the general law of the meal-offering to a particular temporary enactment.');">³²</span> but if you say that it excludes it, the expression is then superfluous, for surely we would not infer a temporary enactment from a permanent law! 'It is - this excludes the Two Loaves, so that they require neither oil nor frankincense'. Might I not say that it excludes the meal-offering of priests? - It is more reasonable to include the meal-offering of priests, since [like the meal-offering of the 'Omer it consists of] a tenth, [requires] a vessel [of ministry], is unleavened, [is offered] by itself, must be brought near [to the altar], [and is burnt upon] the fire [of the altar].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Two Loaves, on the other hand, consisted of two tenths, had to be leavened, and were only hallowed when baked in the oven of the Sanctuary. They were not an offering by themselves but were brought together with the two lambs of Pentecost, and were subsequently eaten by the priests.');">³³</span> On the contrary,

Explore mesorat%20hashas for Menachot 117:29. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.