Menachot 119

הוי רבוי אחר רבוי ואין רבוי אחר רבוי אלא למעט

it is an amplification following an amplification, and whenever an amplification follows another amplification it signifies limitation only.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The fact that the term 'upon it', which is an amplification signifying a minimum of an olive's bulk, is repeated indicates that in the second case, re frankincense, this minimum quantity is not essential.');">¹</span> Others report it as follows: R'Isaac B'Joseph said that R'Johanan raised the following question, What is the law if a man put the minutest quantity of oil upon an olive's bulk of the [sinner's] meal-offering?

ואיכא דאמרי אמר רב יצחק בר יוסף בעי רבי יוחנן נתן משהו שמן על גבי כזית מנחה מהו מי בעינן שימה כנתינה או לא תיקו

Are we to say that in the putting [of oil] there must be the same quantity as the giving [of frankincense],<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Namely at least an olive's bulk.');">²</span> or not?

נתן שמן על שיריה ת"ר (ויקרא ה, יא) לא ישים עליה שמן ולא יתן יכול בשני כהנים

The question remains unanswered. IF HE PUT OIL ON THE REMAINDER'Our Rabbis taught: It is written, 'He shall not put', and 'He shall not give'.

תלמוד לומר עליה בגופה של מנחה הכתוב מדבר ולא בכהן

I might think that these prohibitions refer to two priests,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' But if the same priest put both oil and frankincense upon it he would only be liable once.');">³</span> the text therefore states 'upon it'; thus t [prohibitions in the] verse clearly refer to the meal-offering itself and not to the priest.

יכול לא יתן כלי על גבי כלי ואם נתן פסל תלמוד לומר עליה בגופה של מנחה הכתוב מדבר:

I might also think he should not put one vessel above the other vessel, and that if he did so he has rendered it invalid, the text therefore states 'upon it', the verse clearly refers to the actual meal-offering.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The oil (or frankincense) must not be put actually upon the flour of the meal-offering and mixed with it, but it is of no consequence if the oil, being in a vessel, was placed over the meal-offering.');">⁴</span> <big><b>MISHNAH: </b></big>SOME [MEAL-OFFERINGS] REQUIRE BRINGING NEAR<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., to be taken by the priest to the south-west corner of the altar.');">⁵</span>

<big><strong>מתני׳</strong></big> יש טעונות הגשה ואין טעונות תנופה הגשה ותנופה תנופה ולא הגשה לא תנופה ולא הגשה

BUT NOT WAVING,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The ceremony in which the priest put his hands under those of the person bringing the meal-offering and waved it to and fro before the altar; v. infra ');">⁶</span> SOME REQUIRE BRINGING NEAR AND ALSO WAVING, SOME REQUIRE WAVING BUT NOT BRINGING NEAR, AND SOME REQUIRE NEITHER BRINGING NEAR NOR WAVING.

ואלו טעונות הגשה ואין טעונות תנופה מנחת הסולת והמחבת ומרחשת והחלות והרקיקין מנחת כהנים ומנחת כהן משיח מנחת נכרים מנחת נשים ומנחת חוטא

THESE REQUIRE BRINGING NEAR BUT NOT WAVING: THE MEAL-OFFERING OF FINE FLOUR,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For the explanation of the various kinds of meal-offerings v. foregoing Mishnah, supra p. 346 and notes thereon.');">⁷</span> THAT PREPARED ON A GRIDDLE, THAT PREPARED IN A PAN, THE CAKES AND THE WAFERS, THE MEAL-OFFERING OF THE PRIESTS, THE MEAL-OFFERING OF THE ANOINTED HIGH PRIEST, THE MEAL-OFFERING OF A GENTILE, THE MEAL-OFFERING OF WOMEN, AND THE SINNER'S MEAL-OFFERING.

רבי שמעון אומר מנחת כהנים ומנחת כהן משיח אין בהן הגשה לפי שאין בהן קמיצה וכל שאין בהן קמיצה אין בהן הגשה:

R'SIMEON SAYS, THE MEAL-OFFERING OF THE PRIESTS AND THE MEAL-OFFERING OF THE ANOINTED HIGH PRIEST DO NOT REQUIRE BRINGING NEAR, SINCE NO HANDFUL IS TAKEN OUT OF THEM, AND WHERE NO HANDFUL IS TAKEN OUT BRINGING NEAR IS NOT NECESSARY. <big><b>GEMARA: </b></big>R'Papa said,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For the two interpretations of this statement of R. Papa v. supra p. 347, n. 10.');">⁸</span>

<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> אמר רב פפא כל היכא דתנן עשר תנן מאי קמ"ל

All [the meal-offerings] enumerated in the Mishnah must consist of ten [cakes]. What does he teach us? -He wishes to exclude thereby R'Simeon's view who said, He may offer half in cakes and half in wafers; and so he teaches us [that it is not so].

לאפוקי מדרבי שמעון דאמר מחצה חלות ומחצה רקיקין יביא קמ"ל דלא

Whence is it derived?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That the meal-offerings enumerated in our Mishnah require bringing near.');">⁹</span> - Our Rabbis taught:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The whole of the following Gemara till the next Mishnah is to be found in the Sifra, Lev. II, 8.');">¹⁰</span>

מנא הני מילי דתנו רבנן אילו נאמר (ויקרא ב, ח) והבאת אשר יעשה מאלה לה' והקריבה אל הכהן והגישה הייתי אומר אין לי שטעון הגשה אלא קומץ בלבד

Had [Scripture] stated, And thou shalt bring that which is made of these things unto the Lord, and he shall present it unto the priest and he shall bring it unto the altar,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The reference is to Lev. II, 8, and the verse in full reads: And thou shalt bring the meal-offering that is made etc.');">¹¹</span> I would have said that I learn from this that the handful alone required bringing near; but whence would I know this of the whole meal-offering?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That the whole meal-offering must be brought near before the taking of the handful.');">¹²</span>

מנחה מנין תלמוד לומר מנחה מנחת חוטא מנין תלמוד לומר את המנחה

The text therefore states 'meal-offering'. And whence would I know this of the sinner's meal-offering?

ודין הוא נאמר הכא

The text therefore states 'the meal-offering'. But surely this could be derived by the following argument:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That the sinner's meal-offering requires bringing near, so that " the"="" in="" the="" above="" verse="" is="" rendered="" superfluous.');"="">¹³</span> [Scripture] speaks of the offering of