Because the text states, And every meal-offering that is baked in the oven...shall all the sons of Aaron have. I might think that meal-offerings may not be set off against animal-offerings seeing that in a case of poverty they do not replace them, but meal-offerings [I would say] may be set off against bird-offerings since in a case of poverty they do replace them; therefore the text states, And all that is prepared in the pan — shall all the sons of Aaron have. I might think that meal-offerings may not be set off against bird-offerings seeing that the latter are of the class of blood-offerings and the former of the class of cereal-offerings, but bird-offerings [I would say] may be set off against animal-offerings since both are of the class of blood-offerings; therefore the text states, And on the griddle...shall all the sons of Aaron have. I might think that bird-offerings may not be set off against animal-offerings seeing that the preparation of the former is by hand whereas that of the latter is with a utensil, but one kind of meal-offering [I would say] may be set off against another kind of meal-offering since the preparation of both is by hand; therefore the text states, And every meal-offering mingled with oil... shall all the sons of Aaron have. I might think that the meal-offering prepared on a griddle may not be set off against that prepared in a pan nor that prepared in a pan against that prepared on a griddle, for what is cooked in the one is soft and what is cooked in the other is hard, but one that is prepared on a griddle [I would say] may be set off against another that is also prepared on a griddle, and so, too, one that is prepared in a pan may be set off against another that is also prepared in a pan; therefore the text states, Or dry, shall all the sons of Aaron have. I might think that sacrifices which are most holy may not be set off against each other, but those which are less holy may; therefore the text states, [Shall all the sons of Aaron have,] a man as well as his brother, and [in proximity thereto], If he offers it for a thanksgiving: just as most holy sacrifices may not be set off against each other, so also less holy sacrifices may not be set off against each other. ‘A man’ [signifies that] a man takes a share even though he has a physical blemish, but not a minor even though he is without blemish! -This teaching is derived from, the expression ‘every’. But has not this expression been used for the teaching of R. Jose son of R. Judah? -That [teaching of R. Jose son of R. Judah] is derived from the expression, ‘and every’. Rabina said, It can be inferred from Levi's teaching, for Levi taught: [It is written,] Every offering of theirs, even every meal-offering of theirs, and every sin-offering of theirs, and every guilt-offering of theirs. ‘Every offering of theirs’ includes the log of oil of the leper. For I might have thought that [it shall not be the priest's since] the Divine Law expressly stated, reserved from the fire; hence we are informed [that it is not so]. ‘Every meal-offering of theirs’ includes the meal-offering of the ‘Omer and the meal-offering of jealousy. For I might have thought that [these shall not be the priest's since] the Divine Law expressly stated, And they shall eat those things wherewith atonement was made, whereas the one serves to render permitted and the other to ascertain [the truth]; hence we are informed [that it is not so]. ‘Every sin-offering of theirs’ includes the sin-offering of a bird. For I might have thought that [it shall not be the priest's since] it is nebelah; hence we are informed [that it is not so]. ‘Every guilt-offering of theirs’ includes the guilt-offering of the Nazirite and the guilt-offering of the leper. But with regard to the guilt-offering of the leper, is it not expressly stated, For as the sin-offering is the priest's so is the guilt-offering? — Rather it includes the guilt-offering of the Nazirite, that it be like the guilt-offering of the leper. For I might have thought that [it shall not be the priest's since] it but serves to render permitted; hence we are informed [that it is not so]. ‘which they may render unto Me’, this is the [restitution for the] robbery committed on a proselyte. [‘Shall be most holy] for thee and for thy sons’, this teaches that it is thine own and thy son's own, even to betroth a woman therewith. R. Huna said,ᵃᵇᶜᵈᵉᶠᵍʰⁱʲᵏˡᵐⁿᵒᵖᵠʳˢᵗᵘᵛʷˣʸᶻᵃᵃᵃᵇᵃᶜᵃᵈᵃᵉᵃᶠ