Menachot 166

מאי עביד ליה מבעי ליה לכדרב נחמן דאמר רב נחמן אמר רבה בר אבוה מנין למותר הפסח שקרב שלמים שנאמר (דברים טז, ב) וזבחת פסח לה' אלהיך צאן ובקר והלא אין פסח בא אלא מן הכבשים ומן העזים אלא מותר הפסח יהא לדבר הבא מן הצאן ומן הבקר

- He requires it for the following teaching of R'Nahman. For R'Nahman said in the name of Rabbah B'Abbuha,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Pes. 70b; Zeb. 9a.');">¹</span> Whence do we know that the surplus of the Passover-offering<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' E.g.. if a certain sum of money was put aside for the Passover-offering but it was not all expended. Or, if the animal set apart for the Passover-offering was lost and another was offered in its stead and later the original animal was found.');">²</span>

והא מהכא נפקא מדאבוה דשמואל נפקא דכתיב (ויקרא ג, ו) אם מן הצאן קרבנו לזבח שלמים ואמר אבוה דשמואל דבר הבא מן הצאן יהא לזבח שלמים

is brought as a peace-offering? Because it is said, And thou shalt sacrifice the Passover-offering unto the Lord thy God of the flock and the herd.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XVI, 2.');">³</span> But is not the Passover-offering brought only from the lambs and the goats?

ואכתי מהכא נפקא מהתם נפקא והתניא כבש לרבות את הפסח לאליה

It means that the surplus of the Passover-offering is to be [utilized] for something which comes from the flock and from the herd.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. peace-offerings.');">⁴</span> But is it<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That the surplus of the Passover-offering is offered as peace-offerings.');">⁵</span> derived from this verse?

כשהוא אומר אם כבש להביא פסח שעברה שנתו ושלמים הבאים מחמת פסח לכל מצות שלמים שיטענו סמיכה ונסכים ותנופת חזה ושוק

Surely it is derived from the following teaching of Samuel's father: It is written, And if his offering for a sacrifice of peace-offerings [unto the Lord] be of the flock:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. III, 6. The expression 'sacrifice of peace-offerings' is obviously superfluous in this verse as the whole passage is dealing with the peace-offering.');">⁶</span> and Samuel's father said, This teaches that what comes [only] from the flock<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. the Passover-offering.');">⁷</span> shall be offered as peace-offerings! And again,is it derived from this [latter] verse?

כשהוא אומר ואם עז הפסיק הענין לימד על העז שאינה טעונה אליה

Surely it is derived from the following: It was taught:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Pes. 96b, Zeb. 9a.');">⁸</span> Lamb;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. III, 7. This word is superfluous for since the preceding verse speaks of an offering 'of the flock' and the subsequent passage of 'a goat', this passage must obviously be dealing with lambs.');">⁹</span> this includes the fat tail of the Passover-offering.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That it must be burnt together with the other sacrificial portions upon the altar. With all other offerings of sheep the fat tail is expressly stated to be burnt, hence it was necessary to include the Passover-offering.');">¹⁰</span>

תלתא קראי כתיב חד לעברה זמנו ועברה שנתו וחד לעברה זמנו ולא עברה שנתו וחד ללא עברה זמנו ולא עברה שנתו

When it says, If [he bring] a lamb,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. III, 7. This word is superfluous for since the preceding verse speaks of an offering 'of the flock' and the subsequent passage of 'a goat', this passage must obviously be dealing with lambs.');">⁹</span> it is to include the Passover-offering that has passed the age of one year<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And so is unfit for its purpose, cf. Ex. XII, 5. rag vgcrt ,dhdj');">¹¹</span> and the peace-offerings which are brought by virtue of the Passover-offering<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the peace-offerings brought on the fourteenth day of Nisan as supplementary to the Passover-offering. These supplied the full meal for those members registered for the one Passover-offering, at the end of which the Passover-lamb was distributed, about an olive's bulk being given to each person. So Rashi MS. According to Rashi and Tos. the peace-offerings in the text are the surplus of the ohnkau Passover-offering; v. Tosaf.s.v. .');">¹²</span>

וצריכי דאי אשמעינן עברה זמנו ועברה שנתו משום דאידחי ליה לגמרי אבל עברה זמנו ולא עברה שנתו דחזי לפסח שני אימא לא

for all the regulations of peace-offerings, viz. , that they require the laying on of hands, the drink-offerings, and the waving of the breast and the thigh. Again, when it says, And if [his offering be] a goat.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev.III, 12.');">¹³</span> this interrupts the subject [and thereby] teaches that in the case of a goat [the burning of] the fat tail [upon the altar] is not required!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The 'and if' at the head of the passage is a disjunctive term, indicating that the provisions that apply to a lamb do not apply to a goat, unless expressly stated; and the fat tail is mentioned in connection with the former (v. 9) but not with the latter.');">¹⁴</span>

ואי אשמעינן עברה זמנו ולא עברה שנתו דאידחי ליה מפסח ראשון אבל לא עברה זמנו ולא עברה שנתו דאפילו לפסח ראשון נמי חזי אימא לא צריכא:

- There are three Scriptural texts;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The above three verses, viz., Deut. XVI, 2, Lev. III, 6, and ibid. 7, each informing us that the surplus of the Passover-offering must be offered as a peace-offering.');">¹⁵</span> one is required for [the Passover-offering] which has passed the age of one year and whose time [for offering]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. the fourteenth day of Nisan.');">¹⁶</span> has also passed, another for that which has not passed the age of one year but whose time [for offering] has passed.

<br><br><big><strong>הדרן עלך התודה היתה באה</strong></big><br><br>

and a third for that which has not passed the age of one year and whose time [for offering] has not passed.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the lamb was set apart for a Passover-offering but was slaughtered before the Passover.');">¹⁷</span> And all [three texts] are necessary; for had [Scripture] taught us it only of that [Passover-offering] which had passed the age of one year and whose time [for offering] had also passed, I would have said that it was so<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That it is offered as a peace-offering.');">¹⁸</span> only in that case seeing that it was absolutely rejected [from being offered as a Passover-offering], but I would not have said so of that [Passover-offering] whose time [for offering] had passed but which had not passed the age of one year, since it is fit for the Second Passover.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Observed on the fourteenth day of the second month (Iyar) by those who were prevented from keeping the first Passover either by reason of uncleanness or absence on a journey; v. Num. IX, 10ff.');">¹⁹</span>

מתני׳ <big><strong>כל</strong></big> קרבנות הציבור והיחיד באין מן הארץ ומחוצה לארץ מן החדש ומן הישן חוץ מן העומר ושתי הלחם שאינן באין אלא מן החדש ומן הארץ

And had [Scripture] taught us it only of that [Passover-offering] whose time [for offering] had passed but which had not passed the age of one year, I would have said that it was so<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That it is offered as a peace-offering.');">¹⁸</span> only in that case seeing that it was rejected [from being offered] for the fir Passover, but I would not have said so of that [Passover-offering] whose time [for offering] had not passed and which had not passed the age of one year, since it is even fit for the first Passover. Hence [all texts] are necessary.

וכולן אינן באין אלא מן המובחר ואיזהו מובחר שלהם מכניס וזטחא אלפא לסלת שנייה להן עפוריים בבקעה

<big><b>MISHNAH: </b></big>ALL THE OFFERINGS<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. meal-offerings.');">²⁰</span> OF THE CONGREGATION OR OF THE INDIVIDUAL MAY BE OFFERED FROM [PRODUCE GROWN] IN THE LAND [OF ISRAEL] OR OUTSIDE THE LAND, FROM THE NEW [PRODUCE] OR FROM THE OLD, EXCEPTING THE 'OMER-OFFERING AND THE TWO LOAVES, WHICH MUST BE OFFERED ONLY FROM THE NEW PRODUCE AND FROM [PRODUCE GROWN] IN THE LAND. ALL [OFFERINGS] MUST BE OFFERED FROM THE CHOICEST PRODUCE.

כל הארצות היו כשרות אלא מכאן היו מביאין:

AND WHICH IS THE CHOICEST? MICHMAS<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So according to many MSS.; in cur. edd. these names are corrupt. All three are Biblical place-names; for Michmas (var: Machnis, Machmis) v. Ezra II, 27; for Zanoha (var: Zatha, Zinuha) v. Jos. XV, 34, 56; for Hafaraim (var. lec: 'Afraim (cf. Ephrain in II Chron. XIII, 19) . 'Aforaim, Kufraim) v. Jos. XIX, 19.');">²¹</span> AND ZANOHA<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So according to many MSS.; in cur. edd. these names are corrupt. All three are Biblical place-names; for Michmas (var: Machnis, Machmis) v. Ezra II, 27; for Zanoha (var: Zatha, Zinuha) v. Jos. XV, 34, 56; for Hafaraim (var. lec: 'Afraim (cf. Ephrain in II Chron. XIII, 19) . 'Aforaim, Kufraim) v. Jos. XIX, 19.');">²¹</span>

<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> מתניתין דלא כי האי תנא דתניא עומר הבא מן הישן כשר שתי הלחם הבאות מן הישן כשרות אלא שחיסר מצוה

RANK FIRST FOR THE QUALITY OF THEIR FINE FLOUR; SECOND TO THEM IS HAFARAIM<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So according to many MSS.; in cur. edd. these names are corrupt. All three are Biblical place-names; for Michmas (var: Machnis, Machmis) v. Ezra II, 27; for Zanoha (var: Zatha, Zinuha) v. Jos. XV, 34, 56; for Hafaraim (var. lec: 'Afraim (cf. Ephrain in II Chron. XIII, 19) . 'Aforaim, Kufraim) v. Jos. XIX, 19.');">²¹</span> IN THE VALLEY. THE [PRODUCE OF THE] WHOLE LAND<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'all the lands'; i.e., the various districts in the Land of Israel.');">²²</span>

עומר דכתיב (ויקרא ב, יד) תקריב את מנחת בכוריך ואפילו מן העלייה

WAS VALID, BUT THEY USED TO BRING IT FROM THESE PLACES. <big><b>GEMARA: </b></big>Our Mishnah is not in accordance with the following Tanna. For it was taught: If the 'Omer-offering was offered from the old produce it is valid, and so, too, if the Two Loaves were offered from the old produce they are valid, save that the precept has not been duly performed; the 'Omer-offering-for it is written, Thou shalt bring for the meal-offering of thy first-fruits.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. II, 14.');">²³</span>

שתי הלחם דכתיב (ויקרא כג, יז) ממושבותיכם תביאו ולא מן חוצה לארץ ממושבותיכם ואפילו מן העלייה

that is, even from the store-room;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'the upper-room', 'the attic'. I.e., produce from the previous year that has been stored up.');">²⁴</span> and the Two Loaves-for it is written, Out of your dwellings,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. XXIII, 17.');">²⁵</span> but not from [the produce grown] outside the Land; 'Out of your dwellings', even from the store-room.

הא אפיקתיה אמר קרא תביאו ואפילו מן העלייה

But has not a deduction already been drawn [from that expression]?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The expression 'out of your dwellings' is in the first place interpreted to exclude the produce grown outside Palestine, how then can it be interpreted a second time to include the old produce?');">²⁶</span> The verse reads, Ye shall bring.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXIII, 17.');">²⁷</span> even from the store-room.

והאי מיבעי ליה שכל שאתה מביא ממקום אחר הרי הוא כזה אם כן ליכתוב קרא תביא מאי תביאו שמע מינה תרתי

But is not this [latter expression] required to teach that every other offering that you make of a similar kind shall be like this!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra p. 463.');">²⁸</span> - If for this only the verse should have read, 'Thou shalt bring'; why does it say, Ye shal bring? You can therefore draw two deductions therefrom.

והכתיב (ויקרא כג, י) ראשית למצוה

But is it not written, The first?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Both with regard to the 'Omer-offering and the Two Loaves, Lev. II, 12 and XXIII, 10, respectively. The first clearly implies the new produce.');">²⁹</span> - That is only a recommendation.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Nevertheless if old produce was used it is valid.');">³⁰</span> But does it not say.

הכתיב (ויקרא כג, טז) חדשה האי מיבעי ליה לכדתניא רבי נתן ור' עקיבא אמרו שתי הלחם הבאות מן הישן כשרות ומה אני מקיים חדשה שתהא חדשה לכל המנחות

New?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. XXIII, 16.');">³¹</span> - That is required for [the following Baraitha] which was taught: R'Nathan and R'Akiba<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' According to Sh. Mek.: 'R. Jacob'.');">³²</span> said, If the Two Loaves were brought from the old produce they are none the less valid.

עד כאן לא פליגי אלא בחדש

How then am I to interpret the expression 'new'? To signify that they shall be the first<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'the newest'.');">³³</span> of all meal offerings.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., no meal-offering of the new corn shall be offered before the offering of the Two Loaves, even though the latter are offered of the old produce.');">³⁴</span> Now they<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. the Tanna of our Mishnah and the Tanna of the Baraitha quoted.');">³⁵</span> differ only concerning the new produce.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., whether only the new produce must be used or even the old is valid.');">³⁶</span>