Menachot 16

לא זו קדושה בלא זו ולא זו קדושה בלא זו

The one is not hallowed without the other.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., all the ingredients of the meal-offering must be put in together into the vessel of ministry.');">¹</span>

ולר' חנינא עשרון למה נמשח (והלא אינו עשוי אלא למדידת קמח בלבד והקמח אינו קדוש בלא שמן) למנחת חוטא

Then according to R'Hanina why was the tenth measure anointed?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To render it consecrated as a vessel of ministry. The tenth measure was a vessel of ministry holding the tenth part of an ephah which was used for measuring the flour of a meal-offering. But as the flour by itself, without oil and without frankincense, is not hallowed when put into this measuring vessel, then it was obviously unnecessary to have anointed this vessel as a sacred vessel. The same argument applies to the log, a vessel of ministry used for measuring oil only.');">²</span>

ולוג למה נמשח ללוג של מצורע

- To measure the sinner's meal-offering.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which consisted of flour only, without oil and frankincense; v. Lev. V, 11.');">³</span>

ואף שמואל סבר לה להא דרב דתנן כלי הלח מקדשין את הלח ומדות היבש מקדשין את היבש ואין כלי הלח מקדשין את היבש ולא מדות היבש מקדשין את הלח

And why was the log measure anointed? - To measure the log of oil of the leper.

ואמר שמואל ל"ש אלא מדות אבל מזרקות (של דם) מקדשות את היבש שנא' (במדבר ז, יג) שניהם מלאים סלת בלולה בשמן למנחה

Samuel, too, is of the same opinion as Rab.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That the vessel of ministry hallows the flour alone without the other ingredients.');">⁴</span>

א"ל רב אחא מדפתי לרבינא מנחה לחה היא א"ל לא נצרכא אלא ליבש שבה (דהיינו לבונה

For we have learnt:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Zeb. 88a.');">⁵</span>

ואי ס"ד קסבר שמואל אין מנחה קדושה עד שיהו כולן יבש שבה היכי משכחת לה והלא כולן לחים הן מפני השמן אלא ש"מ קסבר שמואל האי בלא האי)

The vessels for liquids hallow liquids, and the measuring vessels for dry stuffs hallow dry stuffs; the vessels for liquids cannot hallow dry stuffs neither can the measuring vessels for dry stuffs hallow liquids.

ואיבעית אימא מנחה לגבי דם כיבש דמיא

And Samuel had said, This applies only to the measuring vessels [for liquids], but the sprinkling bowls hallow also dry stuffs, for it is written, Both of them full of fine flour mingled with oil for a meal-offering.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Num. VII, 13. It is evident that the sprinkling bowl (mentioned previously in this verse) hallowed the flour that was put into it.');">⁶</span>

גופא א"ר אלעזר מנחה שקמצה בהיכל כשרה שכן מצינו בסילוק בזיכין

R'Aha of Difti said to Rabina, But this meal-offering is moist!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For it is mingled with oil. Hence there is no proof from this verse that the sprinkling bowl can hallow dry goods.');">⁷</span>

מתיב ר' ירמיה וקמץ משם ממקום שרגלי הזר עומדות

- He replied.

בן בתירא אומר מנין שאם קמץ בשמאל שיחזיר ויקמוץ בימין ת"ל וקמץ משם ממקום שקמץ כבר

It refers particularly to the dry parts of the flour.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Although the flour was mingled with oil, it is inconceivable that every particle of the flour was moistened; nevertheless all the flour was hallowed in this bowl, obviously because the sprinkling bowl can hallow dry goods.');">⁸</span>

איכא דאמרי הוא מותיב לה והוא מפרק לה איכא דאמרי א"ל ר' יעקב לר' ירמיה בר תחליפא אסברא לך לא נצרכא אלא להכשיר את כל עזרה כולה שלא תאמר הואיל ועולה קדשי קדשים ומנחה קדשי קדשים מה עולה טעונה צפון אף מנחה טעונה צפון

Alternatively,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In cur. edd. there is found here a passage of several lines enclosed within brackets. It is not found in any MS., and has been struck out by all commentators as a gloss.');">⁹</span>

מה לעולה שכן כליל מחטאת

I may say, In comparison with blood a meal-offering [though mingled with oil] is regarded as dry stuff.

מה לחטאת שכן מכפרת על חייבי כריתות מאשם

The text [above] stated: R'Eleazar said, If the taking of the handful from the meal-offering was performed in the Temple it is valid, since we find that the taking away of the dishes [of frankincense was regularly performed there]'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. p. 42, nn. 7 and 8.');">¹⁰</span>

מה לאשם שכן מיני דמים מכולהו נמי שכן מיני דמים

R'Jeremiah raised an objection: It is written, And he shall take his handful from there,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. II, 2.');">¹¹</span>

אלא איצטריך ס"ד אמינא הואיל וכתיב (ויקרא ב, ח) והקריבה אל הכהן והגישה אל המזבח וקמץ מה הגשה בקרן דרומית מערבית אף קמיצה נמי בקרן דרומית מערבית קמ"ל

that is, from the place where the feet of the non-priest may stand.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra p. 34, n. 7. It is, however, evident from this that the rite of taking the handful must be performed in the Temple court only, and not in the Temple, contra R. Eleazar. The teaching of Ben Bathyra which follows is merely the continuation of the Baraitha quoted but it does not affect the argument at all.');">¹²</span>

גופא א"ר יוחנן שלמים ששחטן בהיכל כשרין שנאמר ושחטו פתח אהל מועד ולא יהא טפל חמור מן העיקר

Ben Bathyra says, Whence do we know that if he took the handful with the left hand he should put it back again and then take it with his right hand?

מיתיבי ר' יהודה בן בתירא אומר מנין שאם הקיפו עובדי כוכבים את העזרה שהכהנים נכנסין להיכל ואוכלין בקדשי קדשים ושירי מנחות ת"ל

Because the verse says, 'And he shall take his handful from there', that is, from the place from which he has already taken a handful! - Some say that he [R'Jeremiah] raised the objection and he himself answered it [as stated below]. Others report that R'Jacob said to R'Jeremiah B'Tahlifa, I will explain it to you: That [verse] merely serves to teach us that [the rite of taking the handful] may be performed in any part of the Temple court; and you should not argue that since the burnt-offering is most holy and the meal-offering is most holy, therefore as the burnt-offering must be [slaughtered] on the north side [of the Temple court]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid I, 11.');">¹³</span> so the meal-offering must be [attended to] on the north side. But surely the case of the burnt-offering is different, since it is wholly burnt!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' How then could one apply the same to the meal-offering?');">¹⁴</span> - Then [one could argue in the same way] from the sin-offering.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which is also a most holy offering and must be slaughtered in the north.');">¹⁵</span> But surely the case of the sin-offering is different, since it atones for those [who committed an act inadvertently which, had they committed it wilfully, would have made them] liable to kareth!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Glos.');">¹⁶</span> - Then [one could argue in the same way] from the guilt-offering.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which is also a most holy offering and must be slaughtered in the north.');">¹⁵</span> Again the case of the guilt-offering is different, since it effect atonement by blood!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. Lev. XVII, 11. The meal-offering, however, does not effect atonement by blood.');">¹⁷</span> Nor [could one argue in the same way] from all these [sacrifices taken together].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By arriving at the points they all have in common, viz., they are all most holy, and all must be slaughtered on the north side of the Temple court. Similarly it would be said of the meal-offering, that the rite of taking the handful must be performed at the north side of the Temple court only!');">¹⁸</span> since all these [are different from the meal-offering since they] effect atonement by blood! - That [verse] is indeed necessary, for I might have thought that since it is written, And it shall be presented unto the priest, and he shall bring it unto the altar,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid II, 8.');">¹⁹</span> and [then it says] 'and he shall take out the handful',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This is the purport of verse (9) which follows: And the priest shall take off from the meal-offering the memorial thereof.');">²⁰</span> therefore just as the meal-offering was brought unto the south-west corner of the altar<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. infra 19b.');">²¹</span> so the handful was to be taken out at the south-west corner of the altar; we are therefore taught<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By the verse And he shall take the handful from there (ibid 2) .');">²²</span> [that it may be performed in any part of the Temple court]. The text [above] stated: R'Johanan said, If a peace-offering was slaughtered in the Temple it is valid, fo is written, And he shall slaughter it at the door of the tent of meeting,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. III, 2. V. supra 45, n. 2.');">²³</span> and surely the accessory cannot be more important than the principal!' An objection was raised: R'Judah B'Bathyra said, Whence do we know that, if the Temple court was surrounded by gentiles,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And so it became dangerous to remain in the Temple court or to eat there consecrated meat.');">²⁴</span> the priests may enter the Temple and eat there the most holy meat and the remainder of the meal-offerings? Because the verse says,