Menachot 103

באפרה אין מועלין

but its ashes are not subject to the law of sacrilege! - Said R'Ashi: There were two ordinances.

אמר רב אשי שתי תקנות הואי דאורייתא בה מועלין באפרה אין מועלין כיון דחזו דקא מזלזלי בה וקא עבדי מיניה למכתן גזרו ביה מעילה

By the law of the Torah only it [the cow] is subject to the law of sacrilege but not its ashes; but when they saw that people treated [the ashes] lightly and applied them to wounds, they ordained they should be subject to the law of sacrilege.

כיון דחזו דקא פרשי מספק הזאות אוקמוה אדאורייתא:

When they saw, however, that people in doubtful cases of uncleanness would avoid the sprinkling,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For fear that they might be making unnecessary use of the ashes and would be liable to bring a guilt-offering for their sacrilege.');">¹</span>

ת"ר פר העלם דבר של ציבור ושעירי עבודת כוכבים בתחילה מגבין להן דברי ר' יהודה ר"ש אומר מתרומת הלשכה הן באין

they reverted to the law of the Torah.

והתניא איפכא הי מינייהו אחריתא

Our Rabbis taught: The [money for the] bullock offered when the whole community sinned in error or for the he-goats offered on account of the sin of idolatry must be collected for the purpose.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'in the beginning they collect them'. I.e., when the occasion arises it must be collected from the members of the community.');">²</span>

אמרוה רבנן קמיה דרב אשי לימא קמייתא אחריתא דשמעינן ליה לר"ש דחייש לפשיעה

So R'Judah.

אמר להו רב אשי אפי' תימא בתרייתא אחריתא כי קא חייש ר"ש לפשיעה במילתא דלית בהו כפרה בגווה במילתא דאית להו כפרה בגווה לא חייש ר"ש לפשיעה

R'Simeon says, It must be taken from the funds<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., from the funds of the community accumulated in the Temple treasury.');">³</span>

מאי הוי עלה

of the [Shekel] Chamber.

א"ל רבה זוטי לרב אשי ת"ש דתניא (במדבר כח, ב) את קרבני לחמי לאשי ריח ניחוחי תשמרו להקריב לי במועדו לרבות פר העלם דבר של ציבור ושעירי עבודת כוכבים שבאין מתרומת הלשכה דברי ר"ש:

But the reverse has been taught!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In Hor. 3b, where R. Simeon's opinion here is ascribed to R. Judah, and vice versa.');">⁴</span>

ושלימה היתה קריבה וכו': א"ר חייא בר אבא בעי רבי יוחנן שלימה שחרית ושלימה בין הערבים או דילמא שלימה שחרית ובטילה בין הערבים

Which of these was taught last?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The later version of a statement is regarded as the more reliable since the author may have reconsidered and changed his view. Moreover it is necessary to arrive at the correct version in order to establish the halachah which would follow R. Judah's view.');">⁵</span>

אמר רבא ת"ש שמיני בחביתים ואם איתא דבטילה בין הערבים הא זמנין דלא משכח ליה שמיני בחביתים ה"ד דמת כ"ג ולא מינו אחר תחתיו

Now the scholars argued before R'Ashi: Surely the former version was taught last for we already know that R'Simeon is concerned about possible neglect.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Mishnah supra where R. Simeon maintains that the High Priest's meal-offering is offered out of the funds of the community and not left to be offered by the heirs at their expense for fear of neglect. Accordingly here the more reliable view of R. Simeon would be that these offerings are also taken out of the funds of the community, which view agrees with the former version.');">⁶</span>

אמרוה רבנן קמיה דרבי ירמיה אמר בבלאי טפשאי משום דיתבו באתרא דחשוכא אמרי שמעתתא דמחשכן

Whereupon R'Ashi said to them, You may even say that the latter version was taught last, because R'Simeon is concerned about possible neglect only in that case where they themselves receive no atonement by it, but where they themselves receive atonement thereby R'Simeon is not apprehensive about neglect.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The heirs of the High Priest in as much as they receive no atonement from the meal-offering might conceivably be neglectful about it, but there is no such fear of neglect by the members of the community where the offering is to effect atonement on their behalf.');">⁷</span>

אלא דקתני שביעי בסלת תשיעי ביין ה"נ דלא בטלי

What is the decision? - Rabbah the Younger said to R'Ashi, Come and hear [the following teaching]: The verse, My food which is presented unto Me for offerings made by fire, of a sweet savour unto Me, shall ye observe to offer unto Me in its due season,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Num. XXVIII, 2.');">⁸</span>

(במדבר כט, יח) מנחתם ונסכיהם בלילה מנחתם ונסכיהם אפילו למחר

includes the bullock offered when the whole community sinned in error and the he-goats offered on account of the sin of idolatry, that these too are offered from the funds o the [Shekel] Chamber;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This is derived from the use of the plural 'for offerings' which includes other offerings to be offered like the Daily Offering from the funds of the Temple Treasury.');">⁹</span>

אלא דאי לא קתני ה"נ דאי לא קתני

so R'Simeon.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This view of R. Simeon, derived from the verse, is undoubtedly the correct one and, as it corresponds with the former version, that version must have been taught last.');">¹⁰</span>

אהדרוה קמיה דרבא אמר מבישותין אמרי קמייהו מטיבותין לא אמרי קמייהו

MOREOVER A WHOLE [TENTH] WAS OFFERED.

והדר אמר רבא הני נמי טיבותין היא אמר קרא (ויקרא ו, יג) סלת מנחה תמיד הרי היא לך כמנחת תמידין

R'Hiyya B'Abba said that R'Johanan had raised the question: Does it mean a whole tenth in the morning and a whole tenth in the evening, or a whole tenth in the morning and in the evening it was dispensed with? - Come and hear, said Raba, for we have learnt: The eighth bore the [High Priest's] meal-offering.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Tamid 31b, where it is stated that thirteen priests were engaged in the sacrifice of the Daily Offering and all that accompanied it in the morning, and likewise in the evening.');">¹¹</span>

מאי הוי עלה אמר ר"נ בר יצחק ת"ש דתניא שלימה שחרית ושלימה בין הערבים

Now if it were so, that it was dispensed with in the evening, then it would sometimes happen that the eighth did not bear the [High Priest's] meal-offering, for example, at the time when the High Priest died and they did not appoint another in his stead.

א"ר יוחנן פליגי בה אבא יוסי בן דוסתאי ורבנן

When the scholars repeated this in the presence of R'Jeremiah he exclaimed, These foolish Babylonians! because they dwell in a dark country they must say dark sayings!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Pes., Sonc. ed., P 158, n. 1.');">¹²</span>

אבא יוסי בן דוסתאי אומר מפריש לה שני קמצים של לבונה קומץ שחרית וקומץ בין הערבים ורבנן אמרי מפריש לה קומץ אחד חצי קומץ שחרית וחצי קומץ בין הערבים

That Mishnah also states: The seventh bore the fine flour;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The fine flour for the meal-offering and the wine for the drink-offering which accompanied the Daily Offering.');">¹³</span>

במאי קמיפלגי אבא יוסי בן דוסתאי סבר לא אשכחן חצי קומץ דקריב ורבנן סברי לא אשכחן עשרון דבעי שני קמצים

the ninth bore the wine.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Pes., Sonc. ed., P 158, n. 1.');">¹²</span>

בעי רבי יוחנן כהן גדול שמת ולא מינו אחר תחתיו

Now were these never omitted? Surely it has been taught: Their meal-offering and their drink-offerings,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Num. XXIX, 18.');">¹⁴</span> even at night; their meal-offering and their drink-offerings,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Num. XXIX, 18.');">¹⁴</span> even on the following day.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra 44b. It can thus happen that the meal-offering and the drink-offerings were, for some reason, not offered during the day, in which case the seventh and ninth priest would not be required. And yet these are included in the list.');">¹⁵</span> We must say that the Tanna of that Mishnah is not concerned with the exception,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'if', i.e., with the exceptional case when part of the service was omitted. The Tanna merely states the number of priests engaged in the service and the function of each when in normal circumstances everything was in accordance with the manner prescribed.');">¹⁶</span> so here too he is not concerned with the exception.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Although in fact the High Priest's meal-offering might very well be dispensed with in the evening in the circumstances of our MISHNAH:');">¹⁷</span> When this was reported back again to Raba he remarked, They always report to them<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To the Palestinian Rabbis.');">¹⁸</span> any indiscreet saying of ours, our wise sayings they never report to them. Later Raba said, This too is one of our wise sayings, for the verse says, Of fine flour for a meal-offering daily,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. VI, 13.');">¹⁹</span> it is like th meal-offering which accompanies the Daily Offering.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which under no circumstances may be dispensed with; so it is, too, with the High Priest's meal-offering.');">²⁰</span> What is the decision then?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Whose opinion is to prevail? Raba's or R. Jeremiah's?');">²¹</span> R'Nahman B'Isaac said, Come and hear; for it was taught: A whole tenth was offered in the morning and a whole tenth in the evening. R'Johanan said, There is a difference of opinion between Abba Jose B'Dosethai and the Rabbis. Abba Jose B'Dosethai says, He<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The High Priest in bringing daily for his meal-offering a tenth of fine flour which he divided and offered half in the morning and half in the evening.');">²²</span> must set aside for [his meal-offering] two handfuls of frankincense, one handful to be offered in the morning and the other in the evening. But the Rabbis say, He must set aside for it one handful, half to be offered in the morning and the other half in the evening. On what principle do they differ? - Abba Jose B'Dosethai maintains that we know of no case when half a handful was offered; but the Rabbis maintain that we know of no case when a tenth required two handfuls.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' With the one meal-offering, notwithstanding the handfuls are offered one at a time.');">²³</span> R'Johanan raised the following question: If the High Priest died and they had not appointed another in his stead,