Menachot — Daf 59a

מתני׳ יש טעונות שמן ולבונה שמן ולא לבונה לבונה ולא שמן לא לבונה ולא שמן

ואלו טעונות שמן ולבונה מנחת הסולת והמחבת והמרחשת והחלות והרקיקין

מנחת כהנים מנחת כהן משיח מנחת עובד כוכבים מנחת נשים מנחת העומר

מנחת נסכים טעונה שמן ואין טעונה לבונה לחם הפנים טעון לבונה ואין טעון שמן

שתי הלחם ומנחת חוטא ומנחת קנאות אין טעונין לא שמן ולא לבונה:

גמ׳ אמר רב פפא כל היכא דתנן עשר תנן לאפוקי מדרבי שמעון דאמר מחצה חלות ומחצה רקיקין יביא קמ"ל דלא

תנו רבנן (ויקרא ב, טו) ונתת עליה שמן ולא על לחם הפנים שמן

שיכול והלא דין הוא ומה מנחת נסכים שאינה טעונה לבונה טעונה שמן לחם הפנים שטעון לבונה אינו דין שטעון שמן ת"ל עליה עליה שמן ולא על לחם הפנים שמן

(ויקרא ב, טו) ושמת עליה לבונה עליה לבונה ולא על מנחת נסכים לבונה

שיכול והלא דין הוא ומה לחם הפנים שאינו טעון שמן טעון לבונה מנחת נסכים שטעונה שמן אינו דין שטעונה לבונה תלמוד לומר עליה עליה לבונה ולא על מנחת נסכים לבונה

מנחה לרבות מנחת שמיני ללבונה היא להוציא שתי הלחם שלא יטענו לא שמן ולא לבונה

אמר מר עליה שמן ולא על לחם הפנים שמן אימא עליה שמן ולא על מנחת כהנים שמן

מסתברא מנחת כהנים הוה ליה לרבויי שכן עשרון כלי

חוץ וצורה הגשה

ואישים

אדרבה לחם הפנים הוה ליה לרבויי שכן ציבורא חובה טמיא

דאכיל פיגולא בשבתא

מסתברא נפש

אמר מר עליה לבונה ולא על מנחת נסכים לבונה אימא עליה לבונה ולא על מנחת כהנים לבונה

מסתברא מנחת כהנים הוה ליה לרבויי שכן עשרון בלול בלוג

מוגש בגלל עצם

אדרבה מנחת נסכים הוה ליה לרבויי שכן ציבורא

חובה ואיטמי בשבתא

מסתברא נפש:

מנחה לרבות מנחת שמיני ללבונה ואימא להוציא האי מאי אי אמרת בשלמא לרבות שפיר

אלא אי אמרת להוציא למה לי שעה מדורות לא ילפינן:

היא להוציא שתי הלחם שלא יטענו לא שמן ולא לבונה ואימא להוציא מנחת כהנים מסתברא מנחת כהנים הוה ליה לרבויי שכן עשרון

כלי מצה ועצם הגשה ואישים

אדרבה

MISHNAH. SOME [MEAL-OFFERINGS] REQUIRE OIL AND FRANKINCENSE, SOME REQUIRE OIL BUT NOT FRANKINCENSE, SOME FRANKINCENSE BUT NOT OIL, AND SOME NEITHER OIL NOR FRANKINCENSE. THESE REQUIRE OIL AND FRANKINCENSE: THE MEAL-OFFERING OF FINE FLOUR,1 THAT PREPARED ON A GRIDDLE, THAT PREPARED IN A PAN, THE CAKES AND THE WAFERS,2 THE MEAL-OFFERING OF THE PRIESTS, THE MEAL-OFFERING OF THE ANOINTED HIGH PRIEST,3 THE MEAL-OFFERING OF A GENTILE,4 THE MEAL-OFFERING OF WOMEN,5 AND THE MEAL-OFFERING OF THE ‘OMER.6 THE MEAL-OFFERING OFFERED WITH THE DRINK-OFFERINGS7 REQUIRES OIL BUT NOT FRANKINCENSE. THE SHEWBREAD REQUIRES FRANKINCENSE BUT NOT OIL. THE TWO LOAVES,8 THE SINNER'S MEAL-OFFERING9 AND THE MEAL-OFFERING OF JEALOUSY10 REQUIRE NEITHER OIL NOR FRANKINCENSE. GEMARA. R. Papa said, All [the meal-offerings] enumerated in the Mishnah must consist of ten [cakes].11 He thus rejects R. Simeon's view who said, He may offer half in cakes and half in wafers;12 and so he teaches us [that it is not so]. Our Rabbis taught: It is written, And thou shalt put oil upon it,13 — upon it but not upon the Shewbread. For [without the verse] I would have argued by an a fortiori argument thus: if the meal-offering that is offered with the drink-offerings, which does not require frankincense, nevertheless requires oil, how much more does the Shewbread, which requires frankincense, require oil! The text therefore stated ‘Upon it’, — upon it shall be oil but not upon the Shewbread. [It is further written], And thou shalt lay frankincense upon it,14 — upon it shall be frankincense but not upon the meal-offering offered with the drink-offerings. For [without the verse] I would have argued by an a fortiori argument thus: if the Shewbread, which does not require oil, nevertheless requires frankincense, how much more does the meal-offering offered with the drink-offerings, which requires oil, require frankincense! The text therefore stated, ‘Upon it’ — upon it shall be frankincense but not upon the meal-offering offered with the drink-offerings. Meal-offering14 — this includes the meal-offering offered on the eighth day15 [of consecration], so that it too required frankincense. It is14 — this excludes the Two Loaves, so that they require neither oil nor frankincense. The Master said, ‘Upon it shall be oil but not upon the Shewbread’. Might I not say, Upon it shall be oil but not upon the meal-offering of the priests? — It is more reasonable to include the meal-offering of the priests, since [like the meal-offering of the ‘Omer it consists of] a tenth [of an ephah],16 [requires] a vessel of ministry,17 is prepared outside,18 [becomes unfit when] its appearance [is spoilt],19 requires bringing near [to the altar],20 and [is burnt upon] the fire [of the altar].21 On the contrary it is more reasonable to include the Shewbread since [like the meal-offering of the ‘Omer it is an offering on behalf of] the community,22 is obligatory,22 [may be offered in] uncleanness,23 is eaten,24 [is subject to] piggul,25 [and is offered] on the Sabbath!26 — The former is the more plausible since there is written, Any one.27 The Master said, ‘Upon it shall be frankincense but not upon the meal-offering offered with the drink-offerings’. Might I not say, Upon it shall be frankincense but not upon the meal-offering of the priests? — It is more reasonable to include the meal-offering of the priests, since [like the meal-offering of the ‘Omer it consists of] a tenth, is mixed [with a log of oil],28 is brought [near the altar], [and is offered] by itself.29 On the contrary it is more reasonable to include the meal-offering offered with the drink-offerings, since [like the meal-offering of the ‘Omer it is an offering on behalf of] the community,30 is obligatory, [and may be offered in] uncleanness [and] on the Sabbath? — The former is the more plausible since there is written, Any one.31 ‘Meal-offering-this includes the meal-offering offered on the eighth day [of consecration], so that it too required frankincense’. Perhaps it excludes it? — It is out of the question; if you say that it includes it, it is well,32 but if you say that it excludes it, the expression is then superfluous, for surely we would not infer a temporary enactment from a permanent law! ‘It is — this excludes the Two Loaves, so that they require neither oil nor frankincense’. Might I not say that it excludes the meal-offering of priests? — It is more reasonable to include the meal-offering of priests, since [like the meal-offering of the ‘Omer it consists of] a tenth, [requires] a vessel [of ministry], is unleavened, [is offered] by itself, must be brought near [to the altar], [and is burnt upon] the fire [of the altar].33 On the contrary, of fine flour, together with oil and frankincense; they were mixed together and then the priest took out a handful from it and burnt it on the altar. This is the only individual meal-offering for which the Torah expressly prescribes oil and frankincense. The others enumerated in the Mishnah are derived by analogy from this meal-offering. wafers; v. Gemara. Lev. V, 1-4. kind of meal-offering, namely that baked in an oven, for which an alternative is allowed, must consist nevertheless either of ten cakes or of ten wafers, but not of five cakes and five wafers, contra R. Simeon. Another interpretation is: The meal-offerings enumerated in our Mishnah (as requiring both oil and frankincense) are ten in number, reckoning ‘THE CAKES AND THE WAFERS’ as two. According to R. Simeon, however, it must be reckoned as three, since the meal-offering baked in an oven may consist of either ten cakes or ten wafers or five cakes and five wafers. hallowed until it was baked in the oven of the Sanctuary. of the loaves on the table, was performed in the Temple proper, in the kfhv. Shewbread, however, was kept for seven days upon the table, from Sabbath to Sabbath, part of the Shewbread was burnt upon the altar. not so with the offering of an individual. priests’ meal-offering was wholly burnt. certain rite (the mattir, v. Glos.), is subject to the law of piggul. V. Zeb. 43a. The priests’ meal-offering, however, since it is wholly burnt is outside the scope of this rule. set, on the Sabbath; but no individual offering was brought on the Sabbath. (as well as frankincense) is expressly prescribed, Scripture uses the term ‘any one’, it is inferred that every individual meal-offering requires oil (and also frankincense, v. infra). Hence the priests’ meal-offering is included. and three for a bullock; and the quantities of oil also varied, the tenth of the lamb requiring to be mixed with three logs of oil, and each tenth of the ram and the bullock with two logs of oil. V. Num. XV, 4ff. offered by itself but always accompanied an animal-offering. uncleanness and the laws of Sabbath. without frankincense, as one could not apply the general law of the meal-offering to a particular temporary enactment. baked in the oven of the Sanctuary. They were not an offering by themselves but were brought together with the two lambs of Pentecost, and were subsequently eaten by the priests.