Menachot 117:1-118:99

<big><strong>מתני׳</strong></big> יש טעונות שמן ולבונה שמן ולא לבונה לבונה ולא שמן לא לבונה ולא שמן

<big><b>MISHNAH: </b></big>SOME [MEAL-OFFERINGS] REQUIRE OIL AND FRANKINCENSE, SOME REQUIRE OIL BUT NOT FRANKINCENSE, SOME FRANKINCENSE BUT NOT OIL, AND SOME NEITHER OIL NOR FRANKINCENSE.

ואלו טעונות שמן ולבונה מנחת הסולת והמחבת והמרחשת והחלות והרקיקין

THESE REQUIRE OIL AND FRANKINCENSE: THE MEAL-OFFERING OF FINE FLOUR,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. Lev. II, 1. A promise of a meal-offering without further specification, entails the bringing of a tenth of an ephah of fine flour, together with oil and frankincense; they were mixed together and then the priest took out a handful from it and burnt it on the altar. This is the only individual meal-offering for which the Torah expressly prescribes oil and frankincense. The others enumerated in the Mishnah are derived by analogy from this meal-offering.');">¹</span>

מנחת כהנים מנחת כהן משיח מנחת עובד כוכבים מנחת נשים מנחת העומר

THAT PREPARED ON A GRIDDLE, THAT PREPARED IN A PAN, THE CAKES AND THE WAFERS,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of the meal-offering baked in an oven, Lev. II, 4. It may consist either of ten unleavened cakes or ten unleavened wafers; v. GEMARA: kusd ivf h,hcj');">²</span>

מנחת נסכים טעונה שמן ואין טעונה לבונה לחם הפנים טעון לבונה ואין טעון שמן

THE MEAL-OFFERING OF THE PRIESTS, THE MEAL-OFFERING OF THE ANOINTED HIGH PRIEST,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The daily meal-offering of the High Priest known as cf. Lev. VI, 13ff.');">³</span>

שתי הלחם ומנחת חוטא ומנחת קנאות אין טעונין לא שמן ולא לבונה:

THE MEAL-OFFERING OF A GENTILE,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' All freewill-offerings may be accepted from gentiles, v. Shek. I, 5.');">⁴</span>

<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> אמר רב פפא כל היכא דתנן עשר תנן לאפוקי מדרבי שמעון דאמר מחצה חלות ומחצה רקיקין יביא קמ"ל דלא

THE MEAL-OFFERING OF WOMEN,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., when a woman offers a meal-offering of her free will.');">⁵</span>

תנו רבנן (ויקרא ב, טו) ונתת עליה שמן ולא על לחם הפנים שמן

AND THE MEAL-OFFERING OF THE 'OMER.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Lev. II, 14, and XXIII, 9-14.');">⁶</span>

שיכול והלא דין הוא ומה מנחת נסכים שאינה טעונה לבונה טעונה שמן לחם הפנים שטעון לבונה אינו דין שטעון שמן ת"ל עליה עליה שמן ולא על לחם הפנים שמן

THE MEAL-OFFERING OFFERED WITH THE DRINK-OFFERINGS<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Num. XV, 4ff.');">⁷</span>

(ויקרא ב, טו) ושמת עליה לבונה עליה לבונה ולא על מנחת נסכים לבונה

REQUIRES OIL BUT NOT FRANKINCENSE.

שיכול והלא דין הוא ומה לחם הפנים שאינו טעון שמן טעון לבונה מנחת נסכים שטעונה שמן אינו דין שטעונה לבונה תלמוד לומר עליה עליה לבונה ולא על מנחת נסכים לבונה

THE SHEWBREAD REQUIRES FRANKINCENSE BUT NOT OIL.

מנחה לרבות מנחת שמיני ללבונה היא להוציא שתי הלחם שלא יטענו לא שמן ולא לבונה

THE TWO LOAVES,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of Pentecost. V. Lev. XXIII, 17.');">⁸</span>

אמר מר עליה שמן ולא על לחם הפנים שמן אימא עליה שמן ולא על מנחת כהנים שמן

THE SINNER'S MEAL-OFFERING<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Brought by a person of poor means as a sin-offering on the commission of any one of the transgressions mentioned in Lev. V, 1-4.');">⁹</span>

מסתברא מנחת כהנים הוה ליה לרבויי שכן עשרון כלי

AND THE MEAL-OFFERING OF JEALOUSY<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Brought by a woman suspected by her husband of adultery; v. Num. V, 15.');">¹⁰</span>

חוץ וצורה הגשה

REQUIRE NEITHER OIL NOR FRANKINCENSE.

ואישים

<big><b>GEMARA: </b></big>R'Papa said, All [the meal-offerings] enumerated in the Mishnah must consist of ten [cakes].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The first four meal-offerings mentioned in our Mishnah must each be baked into ten cakes, so that even the fourth kind of meal-offering, namely that baked in an oven, for which an alternative is allowed, must consist nevertheless either of ten cakes or of ten wafers, but not of five cakes and five wafers, contra R. Simeon. Another interpretation is: The meal-offerings enumerated in our Mishnah (as requiring both oil and frankincense) are ten in number, reckoning 'THE CAKES AND THE WAFERS' as two. According to R. Simeon, however, it must be reckoned as three, since the meal-offering baked in an oven may consist of either ten cakes or ten wafers or five cakes and five wafers.');">¹¹</span>

אדרבה לחם הפנים הוה ליה לרבויי שכן ציבורא חובה טמיא

He thus rejects R'Simeon's view who said, He may offer half in cakes and half in wafers;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. infra ');">¹²</span>

דאכיל פיגולא בשבתא

and so he teaches us [that it is not so].

מסתברא נפש

Our Rabbis taught: It is written, And thou shalt put oil upon it,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. II, 15, with reference to the meal-offering of the 'Omer.');">¹³</span>

אמר מר עליה לבונה ולא על מנחת נסכים לבונה אימא עליה לבונה ולא על מנחת כהנים לבונה

- upon it but not upon the Shewbread.

מסתברא מנחת כהנים הוה ליה לרבויי שכן עשרון בלול בלוג

For [without the verse] I would have argued by an a fortiori argument thus: if the meal-offering that is offered with the drink-offerings, which does not require frankincense, nevertheless requires oil, how much more does the Shewbread, which requires frankincense, require oil! The text therefore stated 'Upon it', - upon it shall be oil but not upon the Shewbread.

מוגש בגלל עצם

[It is further written], And thou shalt lay frankincense upon it,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid.');">¹⁴</span>

אדרבה מנחת נסכים הוה ליה לרבויי שכן ציבורא

- upon it shall be frankincense but not upon the meal-offering offered with the drink-offerings.

חובה ואיטמי

For [without the verse] I would have argued by an a fortiori argument thus: if the Shewbread, which does not require oil, nevertheless requires frankincense, how much more does the meal-offering offered with the drink-offerings, which requires oil, require frankincense! The text therefore stated, 'Upon it' - upon it shall be frankincense but not upon the meal-offering offered with the drink-offerings.

בשבתא מסתברא נפש:

Meal-offering<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid.');">¹⁴</span>

מנחה לרבות מנחת שמיני ללבונה ואימא להוציא האי מאי אי אמרת בשלמא לרבות שפיר

- this includes the meal-offering offered on the eighth day<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. Lev. IX, 4.');">¹⁵</span>

אלא אי אמרת להוציא למה לי שעה מדורות לא ילפינן:

[of consecration], so that it too required frankincense It is<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid.');">¹⁴</span>

היא להוציא שתי הלחם שלא יטענו לא שמן ולא לבונה ואימא להוציא מנחת כהנים מסתברא מנחת כהנים הוה ליה לרבויי שכן עשרון

- this excludes the Two Loaves, so that they require neither oil nor frankincense.

כלי מצה ועצם הגשה ואישים

The Master said, 'Upon it shall be oil but not upon the Shewbread'.

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,