Reference for Menachot 35:12
<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> מאי לא יצק אילימא לא יצק כלל עיכובא כתב בה אלא לא יצק כהן אלא זר אי הכי לא בלל נמי לא בלל כהן אלא זר הא לא בלל כלל פסולה
OR WAVE IT,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. the 'Omer meal-offering (ibid. XXIII, 11) or the meal-offering of suspicion (Num. V, 25) . V. infra 61a.');"><sup>13</sup></span> OR BRING IT NIGH,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To the southwestern horn of the altar; cf. Lev. II, 8.');"><sup>14</sup></span> OR IF HE BROKE IT UP INTO LARGE PIECES,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Or, he broke it up too fine; v. Gemara infra 18b.');"><sup>15</sup></span> OR DID NOT ANOINT IT<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Those cakes which were not mingled with oil but were, after baking, anointed with oil; cf. ibid. VII, 12.');"><sup>16</sup></span> [WITH OIL], IT IS VALID. <big><b>GEMARA: </b></big>What is meant by HE DID NOT POUR IN [THE OIL]? Shall we say that he did not pour in [any oil] at all? But Scripture has indicated that this is indispensable!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For the rite of pouring in oil is stated twice (Lev. II, 1 and 6) , and whatsoever rite is repeated in connection with the meal-offering is accounted indispensable. V. infra 19b.');"><sup>17</sup></span> - We must say therefore that it means, the priest did not pour in [the oil] but a non-priest did. If so, the next item HE DID NOT MINGLE IT, would also mean, the priest did not mingle it but a non-priest did; from which it follows that if it was not mingled at all it would be invalid,