Menachot

Because the text states, And every meal-offering that is baked in the oven...shall all the sons of Aaron have.1 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,2 but meal-offerings [I would say] may be set off against bird-offerings since in a case of poverty they do replace them;2 therefore the text states, And all that is prepared in the pan — shall all the sons of Aaron have.3 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.4 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,5 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.6 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 one7 is soft and what is cooked in the other8 is hard,9 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.10 I might think that sacrifices which are most holy11 may not be set off against each other, but those which are less holy12 may; therefore the text states, [Shall all the sons of Aaron have,] a man as well as his brother,10 and [in proximity thereto], If he offers it for a thanksgiving:13 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!14 -This teaching is derived from, the expression ‘every’.15 But has not this expression been used for the teaching of R. Jose son of R. Judah?16 -That [teaching of R. Jose son of R. Judah] is derived from the expression, ‘and every’.17 Rabina said, It18 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.19 ‘Every offering of theirs’ includes the log of oil of the leper.20 For I might have thought that [it shall not be the priest's since] the Divine Law expressly stated, reserved from the fire;21 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,22 whereas the one serves to render permitted23 and the other to ascertain [the truth];24 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;25 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?26 — 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;27 hence we are informed [that it is not so]. ‘which they may render unto Me’,28 this is the [restitution for the] robbery committed on a proselyte.29 [‘Shall be most holy] for thee and for thy sons’,30 this teaches that it31 is thine own and thy son's own, even to betroth a woman therewith.32 R. Huna said, only in extreme poverty, whereas the meal-offering replaces the bird-offering in ordinary poverty. under no circumstances may one's portion in one offering be set off against another's portion in another offering. Hezekiah from ‘meal-offering’. priests. priest's. interrupted by involuntary defilement. And as it is not an atoning offering it might be said that it may not be eaten by priests. 52b.