Menachot 39

Chapter 39

א ברית אמורה במלח דברי ר' יהודה ר' שמעון אומר נאמר כאן ברית מלח עולם הוא ונאמר להלן (במדבר כה, יג) ברית כהונת עולם כשם שאי אפשר לקרבנות בלא כהונה כך אי אפשר לקרבנות בלא מלח

1 a covenant declared in regard to salt.1 So R'Judah.

ב אמר רב יוסף רב כתנא דידן ס"ל דאמר לא מלח כשר אמר ליה אביי אי הכי לא יצק נמי לא יצק כלל אלא לא יצק כהן אלא זר הכא נמי לא מלח כהן אלא זר

2 R'Simeon says, Here it is said, It is a covenant of salt f ever, and there it is said, The covenant of an everlasting priesthood,2 as it is impossible to conceive of sacrifices without the priesthood so it is impossible to conceive of sacrifices without salt!3

ג אמר ליה וכי תעלה על דעתך שזר קרב לגבי מזבח

3 - R'Joseph answered, Rab agrees with the Tanna of our [Mishnah] who said, IF HE DID NOT SALT IT. IT IS VALID.

ד ואי בעית אימא כיון דכתיבא ביה ברית כמאן דתנא ביה קרא דמיא

4 Thereupon Abaye said to him, Are you then suggesting that 'HE DID NOT POUR means he did not pour in [any oil] at all? It surely means that the priest did not pour in [the oil] but a non-priest did it; then here, it must be explained that the priest did not salt it but a non-priest did it.4

ה ולא תנא ביה קרא והכתיב (ויקרא ב, יג) וכל קרבן מנחתך במלח תמלח ההוא מיבעי ליה לכדתניא אילו נאמר קרבן במלח שומע אני אפילו עצים ודם שנקראו קרבן

5 - He replied, How can it even enter your mind that a non-priest shall draw near to the altar?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The suggestion that a non-priest salted the meal-offering cannot be entertained, since the salting took place at the head of the altar, and it is inconceivable that a non-priest would approach so near the altar.');">5 Alternatively, I can say, since with regard to [the salting] the expression 'covenant' is used, it is as though it were repeated in a verse.6

ו ת"ל מנחה מה מנחה מיוחדת שאחרים באין חובה לה אף כל שאחרים באין חובה לה

6 And is not [the salting actually] repeated in a verse? But it is written, And every offering of thy meal-offering shalt thou season with salt!7

ז אי מה מנחה מיוחדת שמתרת אף כל שמתיר אביא דם שמתיר ת"ל מעל מנחתך ולא מעל דמך

7 - This verse is required for the following which had been taught: If the verse had stated, 'And every offering shalt thou season with salt', I would have concluded that it also applied to the wood and the blood,8 since these are also termed 'offering';9

ח יכול תהא מנחה כולה טעונה מלח ת"ל קרבן קרבן טעון מלח ואין מנחה כולה טעונה מלח

8 the verse therefore adds meal-offering; thus as the meal-offering is distinguished in that other things are requisite for it,10 so everything for which other things are requisite [must be seasoned with salt].

ט ואין לי אלא קומץ (מנחה) מנין לרבות את הלבונה מרבה אני את הלבונה שכן באה עמה בכלי אחד

9 But I can argue: as the meal-offering is distinguished in that it renders something permissible,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The burning of the handful renders the remainder of the meal-offering permitted to be eaten; likewise the sprinkling of the blood renders the sacrifice permissible, i.e., the sacrificial portions to be burnt and the flesh to be eaten. The result of this argument would be that the blood would require salting since it is similar to the meal-offering in one respect (vis., it renders permissible) , and all other offerings would require salting since ht they, too, are similar to the meal-offering in another respect (viz., for each wood is requisite) , and only the wood is excluded. V. Rashi s.v. .');">11 so everything which renders something permissible [must be seasoned with salt]; I would thus include the blood since it renders something permissible!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The burning of the handful renders the remainder of the meal-offering permitted to be eaten; likewise the sprinkling of the blood renders the sacrifice permissible, i.e., the sacrificial portions to be burnt and the flesh to be eaten. The result of this argument would be that the blood would require salting since it is similar to the meal-offering in one respect (vis., it renders permissible) , and all other offerings would require salting since ht they, too, are similar to the meal-offering in another respect (viz., for each wood is requisite) , and only the wood is excluded. V. Rashi s.v. .');">11

י מנין לרבות את הלבונה הבאה בפני עצמה ולבונה הבאה בבזיכין והקטרת

10 The verse therefore states, [Neither shalt thou suffer the salt. to be lacking] thy meal-offering,7

יא מנחת כהנים ומנחת כהן משיח ומנחת נסכים אימורי חטאת ואימורי אשם ואימורי קדשי קדשים ואימורי קדשים קלים ואברי עולה ועולת העוף מנין

11 but not 'from thy blood'. I might conclude then that the whole meal-offering requires salting; the verse therefore states, offering, [signifying that] only what is offered12

יב תלמוד לומר (ויקרא ב, יג) על כל קרבנך תקריב מלח

12 requires salting, but the whole meal-offering does not require salting. I know now that the handful [requires salting] but whence do I know to include the frankincense?

יג אמר מר אין לי אלא קומץ (מנחה) מנין לרבות את הלבונה מרבה אני את הלבונה שכן באה עמה בכלי אחד והא אמרת מה מנחה מיוחדת שאחרים באין חובה לה

13 I include the frankincense since it is offered with [the handful] in the same vessel. And whence do I know to include the frankincense that is offered by itself,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As a separate offering, e.g., if a man said, 'I vow to offer frankincense'; v. infra 106b. Whence do we know that this and all the other offerings mentioned, which are burnt upon the altar, must first be salted?');">13

יד הכי קאמר אימא קרבן כלל ומנחה פרט כלל ופרט אין בכלל אלא מה שבפרט מנחה אין מידי אחרינא לא

14 the frankincense that is offered in the dishes,14 the incense-offering, the meal-offering of priests, the meal-offering of the anointed [High] Priest,15

טו הדר אמר על כל קרבנך חזר וכלל כלל ופרט וכלל אי אתה דן אלא כעין הפרט מה הפרט מפורש שאחרים באין חובה לה אף כל שאחרים באין חובה לה

15 the meal-offering that is offered together with the drink-offerings,16 the sacrificial parts of the most holy and the lesser holy sacrifices, the limbs of the burnt-offering [of an animal] and the burnt-offering of a bird?

טז אחרים דבאין חובה לה מאי ניהו עצים אף כל עצים

16 The verse therefore states, With all thine offerings thou shalt offer salt.17 The Master stated: 'I know now that the handful [requires salting], but whence do I know to include the frankincense?

יז אימא (אחרים דבאין חובה לה ניהו) לבונה ואייתי דם דאיכא נסכים נסכים בהדי אימורין הוא דאתו מ"ט אכילה ושתיה אדרבה כפרה ושמחה

17 I include the frankincense since it is offered with [the handful] in the same vessel'. But have you not stated previously, 'As the meal-offering is distinguished in that other things are requisite for it'?18

יח אלא לבונה באה עמה בכלי אחד [נסכים אין באין בכלי אחד] אבל עצים כי היכי דמתכשרא בהו מנחה הכי מתכשרא בהו כולהו קרבנות

18 - This is what he meant: I might argue that the expression 'offering' is a general proposition and 'meal-offering' a particular item, so that we would have here a general proposition followed by a particular item, in which case the scope of the proposition is limited to the particular item specified, hence only the meal-offering [would require salting] but no other thing! The verse therefore added, With all thine offerings, which is another general proposition; so that we have now two general propositions separated from each other by a particular item, in which case they include only such things as are similar to the particular item specified: as the item specified19 is clearly something for which other things are requisite, so everything for which other things are requisite [requires salting].

יט ואימא מה הפרט מפורש שאחרים באין חובה לה ומתרת אף כל שאחרים באין חובה לה ומתרת ומאי ניהו לבונה הבאה בבזיכין דשריא לחם אבל מידי אחרינא לא

19 And what are the other things that are requisite for it? It the wood.20

כ מדאיצטריך מעל מנחתך ולא מעל דמך מכלל דהנך כולהו אתו בחד צד

20 So that everything [which requires] wood [must be seasoned with salt]. But perhaps it is the frankincense, so that I would include the blood since there go with it the drink-offerings!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The suggestion is that the expression 'other things are requisite' does not refer to the wood, but to any act or service that accompanies the offering, e.g., the burning of the frankincense that goes with the offering of the handful, and in the same way the drink-offerings that go with the sprinkling of the blood of animal-offerings.');">21

כא אמר מר מעל מנחתך ולא מעל דמך ואימא מעל מנחתך ולא מעל איבריך

21 - The drink-offerings go rather with the burning of the sacrificial parts, for eating and drinking' [go together].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It is more logical to say that the drink-offerings go with the sacrificial parts, for in this way the 'meal' is complete, consisting of 'eating' (the burning of the sacrificial parts) and 'drinking' (the libation of the drink-offerings) , rather than with the sprinkling of the blood.');">22 On the contrary atonement and joy [go well together]!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The drink-offerings, it is now argued, are closely associated with the sprinkling of the blood, for the joy at atonement which is brought about by the sprinkling is now expressed in the libations of wine.');">23

כב מסתברא אברים הוה ליה לרבויי שכן (אשב"נ טמ"א סימן)

22 - This is what was meant: the frankincense goes together [with the handful] in the same vessel, whereas the drink-offerings do not go together [with the blood] in the same vessel; the wood, on the other hand, just as it is essential for the meal-offering so it is essential for all offerings.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And therefore the relation of the frankincense to the handful is a closer one than that of the drink-offerings to the blood. The wood, too, is closely connected with the offering since without it the offering is not possible.');">24 But I could argue thus: As the item specified25

כג אחרים באין חובה לה כמותה אישים כמותה בחוץ כמותה נותר כמותה

23 is clearly something for which other things are requisite and also renders aught permissible, so everything for which other things are requisite and which renders aught permissible [requires salting]; and in this way only the frankincense that is in the dishes [would be included] since it renders the Shewbread permissible, but no other offering! - Since the expression, 'From thy meal-offering' was necessary to exclude the blood,26 it follows that everything else is included by [its similarity with the meal-offering in] one respect.

כד טומאה כמותה מעילה כמותה

24 The Master stated: '[Neither shalt thou suffer the salt. to be lacking] from thy meal-offering, but not from thy blood'. But perhaps it is to be interpreted: From thy meal-offering, but not from thy sacrificial limbs!27 - It is more reasonable to include the limbs since (mnemonic: A. Sh. B. N. T. M. A).<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' These are the initial or characteristic letters of the points in common between the meal-offering and the sacrificial limbs. It will be observed t that the mnemonic contains seven letters whilst the Gemara enumerates but six points in common. Tosaf. explain that the seventh letter ( kfut standing for 'a foodstuff') was a point too obvious to be mentioned. The last letter of this mnemonic, however, is wanting in MS.M.');">28 other things are requisite for them as for [the meal-offering], they are burnt by fire like it, they are treated outside like it,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., both the sacrificial limbs and the meal-offering are offered upon the altar that is outside in the Temple Court, whereas the blood in the case of certain offerings is sprinkled inside the Temple upon the veil and between the staves. r,ub');">29 they are subject to the law of nothar<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Heb. 'what is left over'. A person is liable if he eats of the meal-offering or of the sacrificial limbs outside the appointed time, or if he eats them whilst in a state of uncleanness. This is not so with regard to the blood.');">30 like it, to the law of uncleanness like it and to the law of sacrile like it,31

Previous Chapter Next Chapter