Menachot

he expressed the intention [of eating the remainder] outside the prescribed place or outside the prescribed time it is invalid, but there is no penalty of kareth; if1 while it was in his right hand he expressed the intention [of eating the remainder] outside the prescribed place it is invalid but there is no penalty of kareth, but if [he intended to eat it] outside the prescribed time it is piggul and there is also the penalty of kareth. This is the opinion of R. Eleazar and R. Simeon. But the Sages say, As soon as he transferred it into his left hand the transfer rendered it invalid, the reason being that it still required sanctification in a vessel, and since it has been transferred into the left hand it is on the same footing as when the blood of an offering had poured out from the throat on to the ground and had been gathered up, in which case it is invalid.2 Hence it is clear that according to R. Eleazar and R. Simeon the putting into the vessel of ministry is not essential. This surely refutes R. Nahman's view, and supports the view of R. Judah the son of R. Hiyya.3 Is it also a refutation of R. Jannai's view?4 — R. Jannai can answer, I am in agreement with the Tanna who taught the Baraitha concerning the burning [of the fat etc.], and the terms thereof are not to be taken as separate cases. 5 IF HE BURNT THE HANDFUL TWICE IT IS VALID. R. Joshua b. Levi said, Twice but not more than twice. But R. Johanan said, Twice and even more than twice. What is the issue between them? — R. Zera answered, The issue between them is as to whether the handful may be less than the quantity of two olives’ bulk and whether the burning of a quantity less than an olive's bulk counts as an offering.6 R. Joshua b. Levi is of the opinion that the handful may not be less than two olives’ bulk and also that the burning of a quantity less than an olive's bulk does not count as an offering;7 but R. Johanan maintains that the handful may be less than the quantity of two olives’ bulk and that the burning of a quantity less than an olive's bulk counts as an offering.8 It was stated: From what time does the handful render the remainder permissible to be eaten? R. Hanina says, As soon as the fire has taken hold of it;9 and R. Johanan says, Only when the fire has burnt the greater part of it. Rab Judah said to Rabbah b. R. Isaac, I will explain to you the reason for R. Johanan's view; for it is written, And lo, the smoke of the land went up as the smoke of a furnace,10 and a furnace does not send up smoke until the fire has burnt up the greater part. 11 Rabin b. R. Adda said to Raba, Your pupils report that R. Amram pointed out [the following difficulty]: It was taught: I only know that things that are usually offered by night, e.g., the limbs and the fat parts of the offering, may be offered up and burnt after sunset and are allowed to continue burning throughout the night; but whence do I know that things that are usually offered by day, e.g., the handful, the frankincense, the incense-offering, the meal-offering of the priests,the anointed High Priest's meal-offering and, the meal-offering offered with the drink-offerings, may also be offered up and burnt after sunset? — But have you not said, ‘Things that are usually offered by day’?12 Say rather: at sunset,13 — whence then do I know that these also are allowed to continue burning throughout the night? From the verse, This is the law of the burnt-offering,14 an inclusive expression. Now if it is offered up at sunset it can hardly be possible that the fire will have burnt the greater portion of it [by sunset]!15 — This is no difficulty, for here [in the latter case] it deals with the handful being taken up, and there with it rendering the remainder permissible.16 R. Eleazar reads [in the above]: ‘after sunset’, and explains it as referring to the pieces that have burst off the altar,17 And so, too, when R. Dimi came [from Palestine] he explained it in the name of R. Jannai as referring to the pieces that had burst off the altar. But could R. Jannai have said so? Surely R. Jannai has said, Any part of the incense which had burst off the altar, even if it was a whole grain, may not be put back! Moreover, R. Hanina b. Minyomi taught at the school of R. Eliezer b. Jacob: It is written, Whereto the fire hath consumed the burnt-offering on the altar,18 that is, you may put back unconsumed parts of the burnt-offering [if they had burst off the altar], but you must not put back unconsumed parts of the incense! — Omit ‘incense’.19 R. Assi said, When R. Eleazar was studying the laws of the meal-offering he raised the following question: How is it if he placed the handful [upon the altar] and then put the wood-pile on top of it?20 Is this regarded as a way of burning or not? — This question remains undecided. Hezekiah raised the question: How is it if he placed the limbs [of an offering upon the altar] and then put the wood-pile above them? [Shall we say,] since the Divine Law says, Upon the wood,21 then they must actually be upon the wood; or, since there is another verse which reads, Whereto the fire hath consumed the burnt-offering on the altar,22 he may do it either the one way or the other? — This, too, remains undecided. R. Isaac Nappaha raised the question: How is it if he placed the limbs by the side of the wood-pile? Of course according to him who maintains23 that ‘upon’ must be taken in its literal meaning, there can be no question here, the same footing as when the blood of an animal-offering had poured out from the vessel on to the ground, in which case all agree that it may be gathered up again and it is valid. Cf. Yoma 48a. that if the hand is used it must be the right hand only. nevertheless this Baraitha insists upon its being transferred back again into the right hand. be an olive's bulk for each burning, but this would not be so if it were divided into more than two parts. to go up. things that are brought up on the altar. be placed upon the altar just before sunset, as soon as the fire has taken hold of it it is deemed to be offered, which is contrary to R. Johanan. taken up and accepted by the altar as an offering on the same day before sunset, so that it is valid. But, maintains R. Johanan, it will only render the remainder permissible to be eaten when the fire has burnt the greater part of it. before sunset. put back. necessarily upon the wood.