Menachot 14

ואילו מגביה את השולחן לא קתני

Now there is no mention here of lifting up [the table].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So as to avoid taking away the frankincense from a table that is standing upon the ground. Obviously then this does not matter at all. And it is to be observed that the services touching the frankincense and the Shewbread correspond with the services relating to the handful and the meal-offering in the following respects: the frankincense was taken away each week from the table, the handful was taken from of the meal-offering; frankincense was put upon the table each week, the meal for the meal-offering was put into a vessel of ministry. And just as the burning of the frankincense rendered the Shewbread permitted to be eaten, so the burning of the handful rendered the rest of the meal-offering permitted to be eaten, for each is described in the Torah as 'a memorial', cf. Lev. II, 2, and XXIV, 7.');">¹</span> But was not the answer given in the former case that the Tanna merely stated the order of the services?

לאו אמרת התם סדר עבודות נקט ה"נ סדר עבודות נקט

Then in this case too [we can say that] he only states the order of the services!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the main services; whereas lifting up is a service of little significance.');">²</span> - Surely there is no comparison; there the Tanna does not state the number of priests, but here he does state the number of the priests.

מי דמי התם לא נחית למניינא דכהנים הכא נחית למניינא דכהנים אם איתא ליתני מגביה אלא שמע מינה קומצין מכלי שעל גבי קרקע ש"מ

Now if [your contention were] right,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That whatsoever is put into a vessel of ministry that is upon the ground is not thereby hallowed.');">³</span> he certainly should have mentioned [the priest] who lifts up [the table]! This proves that one may take the handful from a vessel that is upon the ground.

אמר רבא פשיטא לי קומץ מכלי שעל גבי קרקע שכן מצינו בסילוק בזיכין מקדשין מנחה בכלי שעל גבי קרקע שכן מצינו בסידור בזיכין

This indeed proves it. Raba said, I am certain that one may take the handful from a vessel that is upon the ground, for we find that this was so at the taking away of the dishes [of frankincense].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' v. p. 38, n. 5.');">⁴</span>

בעי רבא קידוש קומץ מאי ממנחה ילפינן לה או מדם ילפינן לה הדר פשטה מדם ילפינן לה

Also that one may hallow the meal-offering by putting [the meal] into a vessel that is upon the ground, for we find that this was so at the setting down the dishes.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' v. p. 38, n. 5.');">⁴</span> Raba however was in doubt, What is the law with regard to the hallowing of the handful?

ומי אמר רבא הכי והא אתמר קומץ שחלקו בשני כלים רב נחמן אמר אינו קדוש ורבא אמר קדוש ואם איתא לילף מדם הדר ביה רבא מההיא

Are we to derive it from the meal-offering itself,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And just as the other services in connection with the meal-offering may be performed in a vessel that is upon the ground, so the handful would be hallowed if put into a vessel that is on the ground.');">⁵</span> or from the [receiving of the] blood?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It has already been stated that the four main services in the procedure of a meal-offering, viz., taking out the handful, hallowing it by putting it into a vessel, bringing it nigh to the altar and burning it, correspond respectively to the four main services of animal sacrifices, viz., slaughtering, receiving the blood, bringing it nigh to the altar and sprinkling it. Now just as the blood of an animal-offering may not be received in a vessel that is on the ground (v. Lev. I, 5: And Aaron's sons, the priests, shall present the blood, and Sifra thereon) , so the handful of the meal-offering may not be hallowed by putting it into a vessel that is upon the ground.');">⁶</span>

ודם מנלן דלא קדוש לחצאין דתני רב תחליפא בן שאול קידש פחות מכדי הזאה בכלי זה ופחות מכדי הזאה בכלי זה לא קידש

Later Raba decided that we must derive it from the [receiving of the] blood. But could Raba have said so?

ואיבעיא להו בדם מאי הלכתא היא ומהלכתא לא ילפינן

Surely it has been stated: If the handful was divided [and put] into two vessels, R'Nahman says, It is not hallowed; and Raba says, It is hallowed. Now if [the above decision] were right, then this too he should derive from the blood,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And the blood of an animal-offering may not be received in two separate vessels (v. infra) .');">⁷</span>

או דלמא התם מאי טעמא דכתיב (במדבר יט, יח) וטבל במים הכא נמי הכתיב (ויקרא ד, ו) וטבל בדם

should he not? - Raba retracted from that opinion.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And he subsequently accepted R. Nahman's view, namely that if the handful was divided and put into two vessels it is not hallowed.');">⁸</span> Whence do we know that if the blood was divided [in separate vessels] it is not hallowed? - From the following which R'Tahlifa B'Saul learnt: If one mixed<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'sanctified'. The reference is to the mixing of the ashes of the Red Cow with water; cf. Num. XIX, 17.');">⁹</span>

ואיתמר א"ר זריקא אמר רבי אלעזר אף בדם לא קידש אמר רבא תניא נמי הכי (בפני כהן מניח) וטבל ולא מספיג

less than the quantity required for sprinkling in one vessel and again less than the quantity required for sprinkling in another vessel, the mixing is not valid.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Even though subsequently the two quantities when combined in one vessel amounted to the required quantity. For the required quantity v. Parah XII, 5: 'Sufficient for the tips of the hyssop stalks to be dipped therein and water sufficient to be sprinkled.'');">¹⁰</span> And the question was raised, How is it with regard to the blood?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. the blood of offerings which had to be sprinkled seven times within, i.e., upon the golden altar and towards the veil. The question is: May the priest receive the blood, say sufficient for four sprinklings in one vessel and sufficient for three in another vessel?');">¹¹</span>

בדם שיהא בדם שיעור טבילה מעיקרו מן הדם מן הדם שבענין

Is that<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. the ruling in connection with the mixing of the ashes of the Red Cow.');">¹²</span> a traditional law, and from a traditional law one may not draw any inferences; or is it so there<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. the ruling in connection with the mixing of the ashes of the Red Cow.');">¹²</span>

ואיצטריך למכתב וטבל ואיצטריך למכתב בדם דאי כתב רחמנא וטבל הוה אמינא אע"ג דלא קיבל שיעור טבילות (דהיינו הזאה ז' פעמים) מעיקרו כתב רחמנא בדם

because it is written, And he shall dip it in the water,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Num. XIX, 18. The use of the definite article, 'in the water', indicates that all the water must be in one vessel.');">¹³</span> then here also it is written, And he shall dip [his finger] in the blood?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. IV, 6. Here too the definite article is used, 'in the blood'.');">¹⁴</span>

ואי כתב רחמנא בדם הוה אמינא אפילו מספיג כתב רחמנא וטבל

And it was stated: R'Zerika said in the name of R'Eleazar, Even in the case of the blood it is not hallowed.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If the blood was received half in one vessel and half in another.');">¹⁵</span> Raba said, There has been taught [a Baraitha] also to this effect: It is written, And he shall dip,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. ibid.');">¹⁶</span>

מן הדם שבענין למעוטי מאי אמר רבא למעוטי שירים שבאצבע מסייע ליה לר"א דאמר שירים שבאצבע פסולין

but not wipe up;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The priest must dip his finger in the blood and not scrape up the blood from the sides of the bowl with his finger.');">¹⁷</span> in the blood,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. ibid.');">¹⁶</span>

א"ל רבין בר רב אדא לרבא אמרי תלמידך אמר רב עמרם תניא היה מזה ונתזה הזאה מידו אם עד שלא הזה טעון כיבוס משהזה אין טעון כיבוס

that is, there must be at the very beginning sufficient blood [in the one vessel] fo dipping; [and shall sprinkle] of the blood,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. ibid.');">¹⁶</span> that is, of the blood spoken of in the context.

מאי לאו עד שלא גמר הזאתו ומשגמר הזאתו ש"מ דשירים שבאצבע כשרים

And the expressions 'and he shall dip' and 'in the blood' are both necessary. For had the Divine Law only stated, 'And he shall dip'.

לא עד שלא יצתה מידו הזאה טעון כיבוס ומשיצאה הזאה מידו ונתזה ממה שנשאר אין טעון כיבוס

I might have said that [it was valid] even though [the priest] had not received at the very beginning sufficient blood [in the one vessel] for dipping; it therefore stated, 'In the blood'. And had the Divine Law only stated, 'In the blood', I might have said that he may even wipe up [the blood]; it therefore stated, 'And he shall dip'.'

איתיביה אביי גמר מלהזות מקנח ידו בגופה של פרה גמר אין לא גמר לא

[Of the blood], that is, of the blood spoken of in the context'. What does this exclude? - Raba said, It excludes the blood that is still clinging to the finger.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The priest must dip his finger in the bowl of blood for each sprinkling and not sprinkle twice with one dipping. He must sprinkle each time of the blood that is mentioned in the context, that is of the blood in the bowl and not of the blood that is on his finger.');">¹⁸</span>

א"ל גמר מקנח ידו לא גמר מקנח אצבעו

This supports R'Eleazar who said, The blood that is still clinging<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'the remnant'.');">¹⁹</span> to the finger is not valid [for sprinkling].

בשלמא גמר מקנח ידו בגופה של פרה דכתיב (במדבר יט, ה) ושרף את הפרה לעיניו אלא לא גמר מקנח אצבעו במאי מקנח (דאי אמרת בגופה של פרה איבעי ליה למיתני מקנח ידו ואצבעו בגופה של פרה מדלא קתני הכי ש"מ דלא בעי קינוח)

Rabin son of R'Adda said to Raba, Your pupils report that R''Amram raised [an objection from the following]: It was taught: If, while sprinkling, some blood dripped from his hand [on to a garment], if this happened<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc., the splashing of the blood on to the garment.');">²⁰</span> before he had made the sprinkling it must be washed,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. Lev. VI, 20.');">²¹</span>

אמר אביי בשפת מזרק כדכתיב (עזרא א, י) כפורי זהב וגו'

but if after he had made the sprinkling it need not be washed. Presumably the meaning is: before he had finished the sprinkling, and after he had finished the sprinkling.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., if some blood had splashed on the garment at any time during the course of the seven sprinklings. e.g., after the second sprinkling but before the priest had dipped his finger into the bowl a third time, it must be washed, for the blood that fell upon the garment might well have been used for a further sprinkling; hence it is evident that blood still clinging to the finger is valid for sprinkling, contra R. Eleazar and Raba. On the other hand, if the blood fell on to the garment after the seven sprinklings had been performed, it does not require to be washed, for the blood could not have been used for sprinkling.');">²²</span>

ומי אמר רבי אלעזר הכי והא איתמר חביתי כהן גדול רבי יוחנן אמר אינה קדושה לחצאין רבי אלעזר אמר מתוך שקרבה לחצאין קדושה לחצאין

- No, the meaning is: if it happened before the blood had left his hand in an act of sprinkling it must be washed, but if after the blood had left his hand<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., after an act of sprinkling some blood that was still clinging to his finger fell upon the garment.');">²³</span> it need not be washed. Abaye raised an objection: [We have learnt:] When he had finished sprinkling<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. the blood of the Red Cow seven times towards the Holy of Holies. V. Parah III, 9.');">²⁴</span> he wiped his hand on the cow's body. [Now] only when he had finished then did he [wipe his hand], but before he had finished he did not!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For presumably the blood still clinging to his finger is valid for sprinkling, and therefore he need not wipe it away; contra R. Eleazar and Raba.');">²⁵</span> - He replied. When he had finished he wiped his hand, before he had finished he wiped his finger only.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., between each sprinkling.');">²⁶</span> It is well [to say] 'When he had finished he wiped his hand on the cow's body', for it is written, And the cow shall be burnt in his sight;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Num. XIX, 5. After sprinkling the blood towards the Holy of Holies the priest would come down from the Temple mount, wipe his hand on the cow's body, and then the cow would be burnt in his presence.');">²⁷</span> but [to say] 'Before he had finished he wiped his finger' [is difficult], on what would he wipe it?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It surely cannot be suggested that after each of the seven sprinklings the priest must come down from the Temple mount and wipe his finger on the cow's body. Indeed if he did so the sprinkling that followed might be invalid, for some hairs of the cow's body might adhere to his finger. In cur. edd. there is an obvious gloss added in the text, but it has been struck out by all commentators. It is not found in MS.M. hrupf rpf');">²⁸</span> - Abaye answered, On the edge of the basin, as it is written, Bowls of gold.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ezra I, 10. The sprinkling bowls are here designated , which word is derived from the root 'to wipe'; i.e., bowls on whose rim the priests used to wipe away the blood from their fingers.');">²⁹</span> But could R'Eleazar have said that?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That if the blood was received half in one vessel and half in another, it is not hallowed thereby. oh,hcj ,cjn');">³⁰</span> Behold it has been stated: The meal-offering of the High Priest<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Lev. VI, 13, 14. This meal-offering prepared on a griddle (hence from) . consisting of a tenth part of an ephah of fine flour, was offered by the High Priest daily; half of it in the morning and half in the evening.');">³¹</span> R'Johanan says, is not hallowed [if brought] a half at a time. R'Eleazar says. Since it is offered a half at a ti is hallowed [if brought] a half at a time.