42C Menochos 59A-86A
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
MENOCHOS – 59a-86a 42c The Soncino Babylonian Talmud Book III Folios 59a-86a MMEENNOOCCHHOOSS TRANSLATED INTO ENGLISH WITH NOTES Reformatted by Reuven Brauner, Raanana 5771 www.613etc.com 1 MENOCHOS III – 59a-86a Menachoth 59a [without the verse] I would have argued by an a fortiori argument thus: if the MISHNAH . SOME [MEAL-OFFERINGS] Showbread, which does not require oil, REQUIRE OIL AND FRANKINCENSE, SOME nevertheless requires frankincense, how REQUIRE OIL BUT NOT FRANKINCENSE, much more does the meal-offering offered SOME FRANKINCENSE BUT NOT OIL, AND with the drink-offerings, which requires oil, SOME NEITHER OIL NOR FRANKINCENSE. require frankincense! The text therefore THESE REQUIRE OIL AND FRANKINCENSE: stated, ‘Upon it’ — upon it shall be THE MEAL-OFFERING OF FINE FLOUR, 1 frankincense but not upon the meal-offering THAT PREPARED ON A GRIDDLE, THAT offered with the drink-offerings. Meal- PREPARED IN A PAN, THE CAKES AND THE offering 14 — this includes the meal-offering WAFERS, 2 THE MEAL-OFFERING OF THE offered on the eighth day 15 [of consecration], PRIESTS, THE MEAL-OFFERING OF THE so that it too required frankincense. It is 14 — ANOINTED HIGH PRIEST, 3 THE MEAL- this excludes the Two Loaves, so that they OFFERING OF A GENTILE, 4 THE MEAL- require neither oil nor frankincense. OFFERING OF WOMEN, 5 AND THE MEAL- OFFERING OF THE ‘OMER. 6 THE MEAL- The Master said, ‘Upon it shall be oil but not OFFERING OFFERED WITH THE DRINK- upon the Showbread’. Might I not say, Upon OFFERINGS 7 REQUIRES OIL BUT NOT it shall be oil but not upon the meal-offering FRANKINCENSE. THE SHEWBREAD of the priests? — It is more reasonable to REQUIRES FRANKINCENSE BUT NOT OIL. include the meal-offering of the priests, since THE TWO LOAVES, 8 THE SINNER'S MEAL- [like the meal-offering of the ‘Omer it OFFERING 9 AND THE MEAL-OFFERING OF consists of] a tenth [of an ephah], 16 [requires] JEALOUSY 10 REQUIRE NEITHER OIL NOR a vessel of ministry, 17 is prepared outside, 18 FRANKINCENSE. [becomes unfit when] its appearance [is spoilt], 19 requires bringing near [to the GEMARA . R. Papa said, All [the meal- altar], 20 and [is burnt upon] the fire [of the offerings] enumerated in the Mishnah must altar]. 21 On the contrary it is more consist of ten [cakes]. 11 He thus rejects R. reasonable to include the Showbread since Simeon's view who said, He may offer half in [like the meal-offering of the ‘Omer it is an cakes and half in wafers; 12 and so he teaches offering on behalf of] the community, 22 is us [that it is not so]. obligatory, 22 [may be offered in] uncleanness, 23 is eaten, 24 [is subject to] Our Rabbis taught: It is written, And thou piggul, 25 [and is offered] on the Sabbath! 26 — shalt put oil upon it, 13 — upon it but not The former is the more plausible since there upon the Showbread. For [without the verse] is written, Any one. 27 I would have argued by an a fortiori argument thus: if the meal-offering that is The Master said, ‘Upon it shall be offered with the drink-offerings, which does frankincense but not upon the meal-offering not require frankincense, nevertheless offered with the drink-offerings’. Might I not requires oil, how much more does the say, Upon it shall be frankincense but not Showbread, which requires frankincense, upon the meal-offering of the priests? — It is require oil! The text therefore stated ‘Upon more reasonable to include the meal-offering it’, — upon it shall be oil but not upon the of the priests, since [like the meal-offering of Showbread. [It is further written], And thou the ‘Omer it consists of] a tenth, is mixed shalt lay frankincense upon it, 14 — upon it [with a log of oil], 28 is brought [near the shall be frankincense but not upon the meal- altar], [and is offered] by itself. 29 On the offering offered with the drink-offerings. For contrary it is more reasonable to include the 2 MENOCHOS III – 59a-86a meal-offering offered with the drink- (10) Brought by a woman suspected by her offerings, since [like the meal-offering of the husband of adultery; v. Num. V, 15. (11) The first four meal-offerings mentioned in ‘Omer it is an offering on behalf of] the our Mishnah must each be baked into ten cakes, community, 30 is obligatory, [and may be so that even the fourth kind of meal-offering, offered in] uncleanness [and] on the namely that baked in an oven, for which an Sabbath? — The former is the more alternative is allowed, must consist nevertheless plausible since there is written, Any one. 31 either of ten cakes or of ten wafers, but not of five cakes and five wafers, contra R. Simeon. Another ‘Meal-offering-this includes the meal-offering interpretation is: The meal-offerings enumerated offered on the eighth day [of consecration], so in our Mishnah (as requiring both oil and that it too required frankincense’. Perhaps it frankincense) are ten in number, reckoning ‘THE excludes it? — It is out of the question; if you CAKES AND THE WAFERS’ as two. According say that it includes it, it is well, 32 but if you to R. Simeon, however, it must be reckoned as three, since the meal-offering baked in an oven say that it excludes it, the expression is then may consist of either ten cakes or ten wafers or superfluous, for surely we would not infer a five cakes and five wafers. temporary enactment from a permanent law! (12) V. infra 63a and b. ‘It is — this excludes the Two Loaves, so that (13) Lev. II, 15, with reference to the meal- they require neither oil nor frankincense’. offering of the ‘Omer. (14) Ibid. Might I not say that it excludes the meal- (15) Cf. Lev. IX, 4. offering of priests? — It is more reasonable (16) Whereas each cake of the Showbread was of to include the meal-offering of priests, since two tenths of flour. [like the meal-offering of the ‘Omer it (17) Wherein to knead the meal-offering, at which consists of] a tenth, [requires] a vessel [of time it was hallowed. The Showbread, on the other hand, was not hallowed until it was baked in the ministry], is unleavened, [is offered] by itself, oven of the Sanctuary. must be brought near [to the altar], [and is (18) The offering is performed upon the altar in burnt upon] the fire [of the altar]. 33 On the the Temple court, whereas the offering of the contrary, Showbread, i.e., the setting of the loaves on the table, was performed in the Temple proper, in the היכל (1) Cf. Lev. II, 1. A promise of a meal-offering . without further specification, entails the bringing (19) An expression signifying that it must not be of a tenth of an ephah of fine flour, together with kept overnight, as it belonged to the Most Holy oil and frankincense; they were mixed together class of offerings. The Showbread, however, was and then the priest took out a handful from it and kept for seven days upon the table, from Sabbath burnt it on the altar. This is the only individual to Sabbath. meal-offering for which the Torah expressly (20) Which is not the case with the Showbread. prescribes oil and frankincense. The others (21) The priest's meal-offering was wholly burnt enumerated in the Mishnah are derived by upon the altar, and from the ‘Omer-offering a analogy from this meal-offering. handful was burnt; but no part of the Showbread (2) Of the meal-offering baked in an oven, Lev. II, was burnt upon the altar. 4. It may consist either of ten unleavened cakes or (22) Which is not the case with the meal-offering ten unleavened wafers; v. Gemara. of the priests. (3) The daily meal-offering of the High Priest (23) Every offering brought by the community as .cf. Lev. VI, 13ff. an obligation overrides the laws of uncleanness, cf חביתי כהן גדול known as (4) All freewill-offerings may be accepted from Pes. 76b. This is not so with the offering of an gentiles, v. Shek. I, 5. individual. (5) I.e., when a woman offers a meal-offering of (24) The Showbread and the remainder of the her free will. ‘Omer-offering were shared amongst the priests (6) V. Lev. II, 14, and XXIII, 9-14. and eaten, whereas the priests’ meal-offering was (7) V. Num. XV, 4ff. wholly burnt. (8) Of Pentecost. V. Lev. XXIII, 17. (25) V. Glos. It is established law that every (9) Brought by a person of poor means as a sin- offering which is rendered permissible, either for offering on the commission of any one of the the altar or for man, by a certain rite (the Mattir, transgressions mentioned in Lev. V, 1-4. v. Glos.), is subject to the law of Piggul. V. Zeb. 3 MENOCHOS III – 59a-86a 43a. The priests’ meal-offering, however, since it is and here we have more points in common! 4 wholly burnt is outside the scope of this rule. — The former is the more plausible since (26) The ‘Omer-offering was brought even on the 5 Sabbath (v. infra 63a), and the Showbread was there is written, Any one. regularly offered, i.e., set, on the Sabbath; but no individual offering was brought on the Sabbath. MISHNAH . [A MAN IS] LIABLE BECAUSE OF (27) Lev. II, 1. Lit., ‘a soul’, i.e., an individual.