Menachot

it is an amplification following an amplification, and whenever an amplification follows another amplification it signifies limitation only.1 Others report it as follows: R. Isaac b. Joseph said that R. Johanan raised the following question, What is the law if a man put the minutest quantity of oil upon an olive's bulk of the [sinner's] meal-offering? Are we to say that in the putting [of oil] there must be the same quantity as the giving [of frankincense],2 or not? The question remains unanswered. IF HE PUT OIL ON THE REMAINDER. Our Rabbis taught: It is written, ‘He shall not put’, and ‘He shall not give’. I might think that these prohibitions refer to two priests,3 the text therefore states ‘upon it’; thus the [prohibitions in the] verse clearly refer to the meal-offering itself and not to the priest. I might also think that he should not put one vessel above the other vessel, and that if he did so he has rendered it invalid, the text therefore states ‘upon it’, the verse clearly refers to the actual meal-offering.4 MISHNAH. SOME [MEAL-OFFERINGS] REQUIRE BRINGING NEAR5 BUT NOT WAVING,6 SOME REQUIRE BRINGING NEAR AND ALSO WAVING, SOME REQUIRE WAVING BUT NOT BRINGING NEAR, AND SOME REQUIRE NEITHER BRINGING NEAR NOR WAVING. THESE REQUIRE BRINGING NEAR BUT NOT WAVING: THE MEAL-OFFERING OF FINE FLOUR,7 THAT PREPARED ON A GRIDDLE, THAT PREPARED IN A PAN, THE CAKES AND THE WAFERS, THE MEAL-OFFERING OF THE PRIESTS, THE MEAL-OFFERING OF THE ANOINTED HIGH PRIEST, THE MEAL-OFFERING OF A GENTILE, THE MEAL-OFFERING OF WOMEN, AND THE SINNER'S MEAL-OFFERING. R. SIMEON SAYS, THE MEAL-OFFERING OF THE PRIESTS AND THE MEAL-OFFERING OF THE ANOINTED HIGH PRIEST DO NOT REQUIRE BRINGING NEAR, SINCE NO HANDFUL IS TAKEN OUT OF THEM, AND WHERE NO HANDFUL IS TAKEN OUT BRINGING NEAR IS NOT NECESSARY. GEMARA. R. Papa said,8 All [the meal-offerings] enumerated in the Mishnah must consist of ten [cakes]. What does he teach us?-He wishes to exclude thereby R. Simeon's view who said, He may offer half in cakes and half in wafers; and so he teaches us [that it is not so]. Whence is it derived?9 — Our Rabbis taught:10 Had [Scripture] stated, And thou shalt bring that which is made of these things unto the Lord, and he shall present it unto the priest and he shall bring it unto the altar,11 I would have said that I learn from this that the handful alone required bringing near; but whence would I know this of the whole meal-offering?12 The text therefore states ‘meal-offering’. And whence would I know this of the sinner's meal-offering? The text therefore states ‘the meal-offering’. But surely this could be derived by the following argument:13 [Scripture] speaks of the offering of indicates that in the second case, re frankincense, this minimum quantity is not essential. no consequence if the oil, being in a vessel, was placed over the meal-offering. and fro before the altar; v. infra 61a Mishnah.