Menachot 51a

הֲרֵי הִיא כְּמִנְחַת תְּמִידִין.

this teaches that the halakha of the griddle-cake offering of the High Priest is like that of the meal offering that is a component of the daily offerings. The daily offerings override Shabbat, as the verse says: “This is the burnt offering of every Shabbat, beside the continual burnt offering, and the drink offering thereof” (Numbers 28:10). Therefore, preparing the griddle-cake offering of the High Priest likewise overrides Shabbat.

רָבָא אָמַר: ״עַל מַחֲבַת״ – מְלַמֵּד שֶׁטְּעוּנָה כְּלִי, וְאִי אָפֵי לַהּ מֵאֶתְמוֹל – אִיפְּסִילָא לַיהּ בְּלִינָה. תַּנְיָא כְּוָותֵיהּ דְּרָבָא: ״עַל מַחֲבַת״ – מְלַמֵּד שֶׁטְּעוּנָה כְּלִי.

Rava said that the basis for it overriding Shabbat is the fact that the verse states: “On a griddle” (Leviticus 6:14), which teaches that the griddle-cake offering of the High Priest requires a vessel. Therefore, if he had baked it the previous day rather than on Shabbat, it would be disqualified by being left overnight, since the loaves had already been consecrated in a service vessel. It is taught in a baraita in accordance with the opinion of Rava: “On a griddle” teaches that the griddle-cake offering of the High Priest requires a vessel.

״בַּשֶּׁמֶן״ – לְהוֹסִיף לָהּ שֶׁמֶן, וְאֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ כַּמָּה.

The baraita continues: The continuation of the verse states: “It shall be made with the oil.” The fact that the verse makes reference to “the oil” rather than just oil indicates that one is supposed to add extra oil to it, but I do not know how much oil to add.

הֲרֵינִי דָּן: נֶאֱמַר כָּאן ״שֶׁמֶן״, וְנֶאֱמַר לְהַלָּן בְּמִנְחַת נְסָכִים ״שֶׁמֶן״ – מָה לְהַלָּן שְׁלֹשֶׁת לוּגִּין לְעִשָּׂרוֹן, אַף כָּאן שְׁלֹשֶׁת לוּגִּין לְעִשָּׂרוֹן.

Therefore I must deduce as follows: It is stated here, concerning the griddle-cake offering of the High Priest: “Oil,” and it is stated there, with regard to the meal offering brought with the libations that accompany animal offerings: “A tenth part of an ephah of fine flour mingled with the fourth part of a hin of beaten oil” (Exodus 29:40). Just as there, with regard to the meal offering brought with the libations, the amount of oil required is three log per tenth of an ephah of flour; so too here, in the case of the griddle-cake offering of the High Priest, one brings three log of oil per tenth of an ephah of flour.

אוֹ כְּלָךְ לְדֶרֶךְ זוֹ: נֶאֱמַר כָּאן ״שֶׁמֶן״, וְנֶאֱמַר בְּמִנְחַת נְדָבָה ״שֶׁמֶן״, מָה לְהַלָּן לוֹג אֶחָד, אַף כָּאן לוֹג אֶחָד.

Or perhaps, go this way: It is stated here, concerning the griddle-cake offering of the High Priest: “Oil,” and it is stated with regard to the voluntary meal offering: “And when anyone brings a meal offering to the Lord, his offering shall be of fine flour; and he shall pour oil upon it” (Leviticus 2:1). Just as there, with regard to the voluntary meal offering, one brings one log of oil for each tenth of an ephah of flour (see 88a); so too here, one brings one log of oil for each tenth of an ephah of flour.

נִרְאֶה לְמִי דּוֹמֶה? דָּנִין תבש״ט מתבש״ט: תָּדִיר, בָּאָה חוֹבָה, דּוֹחָה שַׁבָּת, דּוֹחָה טוּמְאָה.

The baraita analyzes these two possibilities: Let us see to which case it is more similar, i.e., which is a better comparison to the griddle-cake offering of the High Priest. Perhaps we should derive the halakha with regard to the griddle-cake offering of the High Priest, which has characteristics represented by the letters tav , beit , shin , tet , from the halakha with regard to a meal offering brought with libations, which also has the characteristics represented by the letters tav , beit , shin , tet . These characteristics are that they are frequent [ tadir ], as these offerings are sacrificed twice daily; they are brought [ ba’ah ] as an obligation; they override Shabbat; and they override impurity [ tuma ].

וְאֵין דָּנִין תבש״ט מִשֶּׁאֵינוֹ תבש״ט.

And we should not derive the halakha with regard to the griddle-cake offering of the High Priest, which has the characteristics represented by the letters tav , beit , shin , tet , from the voluntary meal offering, which does not have the characteristics represented by the letters tav , beit , shin , tet .

אוֹ כְּלָךְ לְדֶרֶךְ זוֹ: דָּנִין יגי״ל מיגי״ל – יָחִיד, בִּגְלַל עַצְמָהּ, יַיִן, לְבוֹנָה.

Or perhaps, go this way: We should derive the halakha with regard to the griddle-cake offering of the High Priest, which has the characteristics represented by the letters yod , gimmel , yod , lamed , from the voluntary meal offering, which also has the characteristics represented by the letters yod , gimmel , yod , lamed , which stand for the following halakhot : Each of these offerings may be brought by an individual [ yaḥid ]; each is brought for [ biglal ] its own sake, rather than accompanying another offering; they are not accompanied by wine [ yayin ] for a libation; and they require frankincense [ levona ].

וְאֵין דָּנִין יגי״ל, מִשֶּׁאֵינוֹ יגי״ל.

And we should not derive the halakha with regard to the griddle-cake offering of the High Priest, which has the characteristics represented by the letters yod , gimmel , yod , lamed , from the halakha with regard to the meal offering brought with libations, which does not have the characteristics represented by the letters yod , gimmel , yod , lamed . Consequently, the comparisons in both directions are equally compelling.

רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל בְּנוֹ שֶׁל רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן בְּרוֹקָה אוֹמֵר: ״סֹלֶת מִנְחָה תָּמִיד״ – הֲרֵי הִיא לְךָ כְּמִנְחַת תְּמִידִין, מָה מִנְחַת תְּמִידִין שְׁלֹשָׁה לוּגִּין לְעִשָּׂרוֹן, אַף זוֹ שְׁלֹשָׁה לוּגִּין לְעִשָּׂרוֹן.

The baraita continues its determination of how much oil is brought with the griddle-cake offering of the High Priest. Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Beroka, says: “This is the offering of Aaron…the tenth part of an ephah of fine flour for a meal offering perpetually [ tamid ], half of it in the morning, and half of it in the evening” (Leviticus 6:13). The fact that the verse makes reference to the griddle-cake offering of the High Priest as tamid teaches that it is in the same category as the meal offering component of the daily offerings [ temidin ]. Just as the meal offering component of the daily offerings requires three log of oil for each tenth of an ephah of flour, so too this griddle-cake offering of the High Priest requires three log of oil for each tenth of an ephah of flour.

רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: רִיבָּה כָּאן שֶׁמֶן, וְרִיבָּה בְּמִנְחַת כְּבָשִׂים שֶׁמֶן, מָה לְהַלָּן שְׁלֹשֶׁת לוּגִּין לְעִשָּׂרוֹן, אַף כָּאן שְׁלֹשֶׁת לוּגִּין לְעִשָּׂרוֹן.

Rabbi Shimon says: The verse adds to the amount of oil that is required here, with regard to the griddle-cake offering of the High Priest, and it similarly adds to the amount of oil that is required there, in the case of the meal offering that accompanies the sacrifice of sheep. Just as there, in the case of the meal offering that accompanies the sacrifice of sheep, three log of oil are required for each tenth of an ephah of flour, so too here, in the case of the griddle-cake offering of the High Priest, three log of oil are required for each tenth of an ephah of flour.

אוֹ כְּלָךְ לְדֶרֶךְ זוֹ: רִיבָּה כָּאן שֶׁמֶן, וְרִיבָּה בְּמִנְחַת פָּרִים וְאֵילִים שֶׁמֶן, מָה לְהַלָּן שְׁנֵי לוּגִּין לְעִשָּׂרוֹן, אַף כָּאן שְׁנֵי לוּגִּין לְעִשָּׂרוֹן?

Or perhaps, go this way: The verse adds to the amount of oil that is required here, and it similarly adds to the amount of oil that is required in the case of the meal offering that accompanies the sacrifice of bulls and rams. Just as there, in the case of the meal offering that accompanies the sacrifice of bulls and rams, two log of oil are required for each tenth of an ephah of flour, so too here, in the case of the griddle-cake offering of the High Priest, two log of oil are required for each tenth of an ephah of flour.

נִרְאֶה לְמִי דּוֹמֶה: דָּנִין מִנְחָה הַבָּאָה עִשָּׂרוֹן, מִמִּנְחָה הַבָּאָה בְּעִשָּׂרוֹן, וְאֵין דָּנִין מִנְחָה הַבָּאָה עִשָּׂרוֹן, מִמִּנְחָה הַבָּאָה שְׁנַיִם וּשְׁלֹשָׁה עֶשְׂרוֹנִים.

With regard to these two possibilities, let us see to which case it is more similar, i.e., which is a better comparison to the griddle-cake offering of the High Priest. Perhaps we should derive the halakha with regard to the griddle-cake offering of the High Priest, which is a meal offering that comes in the amount of a tenth of an ephah of flour, from the meal offering that accompanies the sacrifice of sheep, which is also a meal offering that comes in the amount of a tenth of an ephah of flour. And we should not derive the halakha with regard to a meal offering that comes in the amount of a tenth of an ephah of flour from the halakha in the case of a meal offering that comes in the amount of two or three tenths of an ephah of flour, such as the meal offerings that accompany the sacrifice of bulls and rams.

הָא גוּפַאּ קַשְׁיָא, אָמְרַתְּ ״בְּשֶׁמֶן״ לְהוֹסִיף לָהּ שֶׁמֶן, וַהֲדַר תָּנֵי: נֶאֱמַר כָּאן ״שֶׁמֶן״, וְנֶאֱמַר בְּמִנְחַת נְדָבָה ״שֶׁמֶן״.

The Gemara asks a question with regard to the beginning of the baraita : This baraita itself is difficult, as it contains an internal contradiction. First you said that the expression “with the oil” stated in the verse concerning the griddle-cake offering of the High Priest serves to add extra oil, which indicates that more than the basic amount of one log of oil is required. And then it teaches: It is stated here, concerning the griddle-cake offering of the High Priest: “Oil,” and it is stated with regard to the voluntary meal offering that it must be brought with “oil.” The baraita suggests that just as one log of oil is brought with the voluntary meal offering, so too one log is brought with the griddle-cake offering of the High Priest.

אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: מַאן תְּנָא בַּשֶּׁמֶן לְהוֹסִיף? רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן הִיא, וְאִילּוּ לֹא נֶאֱמַר קָאָמַר. וּבְדִינָא מַאן קָא מַהְדַּר? רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל.

In answer to this question, Abaye said: Who is the tanna who taught that the term “with the oil” with regard to the griddle-cake offering of the High Priest serves to add extra oil? It is Rabbi Shimon, who holds that three log of oil are required, as derived from the meal offering that accompanies the sacrifice of sheep. And Rabbi Shimon is speaking utilizing the style of: If it were not stated. If the verse had not indicated by the term “with the oil” that extra oil is required, it would have been possible to derive from the voluntary meal offering that only one log is required. And who is the tanna who responds to Rabbi Shimon’s derivation and suggests that in fact the amount of oil can be derived from the case of the voluntary meal offering? It is Rabbi Yishmael.

רַב הוּנָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אָמַר: כּוּלָּהּ רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל בְּנוֹ שֶׁל רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן בְּרוֹקָה הִיא.

Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, said that the baraita should be understood differently: The entire baraita is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Beroka, who derives that three log of oil are required in the griddle-cake offering based upon the amount required in the meal offering component of the daily offerings.

וְהָכִי קָאָמַר: ״בְּשֶׁמֶן״ – לְהוֹסִיף לָהּ שֶׁמֶן, דְּאִי לִקְבּוֹעַ שֶׁמֶן – לָא צְרִיךְ, כֵּיוָן דִּכְתִיב בָּהּ ״עַל מַחֲבַת״ – כְּמִנְחַת מַחֲבַת דָּמְיָא.

And with regard to the possibility of deriving that only one log is required, as in the voluntary meal offering, this is what he is saying: The term “with the oil” stated with regard to the griddle-cake offering of the High Priest comes to add more oil to it than the single log required for the voluntary meal offering. As, if the purpose of that term were merely to establish the basic fact that the offering must include oil, a verse is not needed to teach that. Since it is written with respect to the griddle-cake offering of the High Priest: “On a griddle [ maḥavat ]” (Leviticus 6:14), it is comparable to a pan [ maḥavat ] meal offering, which requires oil.

אוֹ אֵינוֹ אֶלָּא לִקְבּוֹעַ לָהּ שֶׁמֶן, דְּאִי לָא כְּתַב רַחֲמָנָא ״בַּשֶּׁמֶן״, הֲוָה אָמֵינָא תֶּיהְוֵי כְּמִנְחַת חוֹטֵא.

Or perhaps the purpose of the verse is to establish only that the offering must include oil, and it is necessary to teach that because if the Merciful One had not stated: “With the oil,” I would say: Let it be like the meal offering of a sinner, which does not include oil.

הֲדַר אָמַר: תִּיהְוֵי נָמֵי לִקְבּוֹעַ לָהּ שֶׁמֶן, תֵּיתֵי מִדִּינָא, וְדָן דִּינָא וְלָא אָתְיָא לֵיהּ, וְאַצְרְכַהּ קְרָא ״סֹלֶת מִנְחָה תָּמִיד״, כְּדִמְסַיֵּים רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל מִילְּתֵיהּ.

Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Beroka, then said: Let it even be that the purpose of the verse is to establish only that it requires oil, and even so one can arrive at the conclusion that three log are required due to the derivation based upon the verbal analogy from the meal offering brought with the libations that accompany animal offerings. But although Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Beroka, attempts to employ this derivation he is unsuccessful, as there is a counter-indication from another verbal analogy to the voluntary meal offering. Therefore, Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Beroka, needed to derive the halakha from the verse: “Fine flour for a meal offering perpetually [ tamid ]” (Leviticus 6:13), as Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Beroka, concluded his statement in the baraita .

רַבָּה אָמַר: כּוּלַּהּ רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן [וְאִילּוּ לֹא נֶאֱמַר קָאָמַר].

Rabba said that the baraita should be understood differently: The entire baraita is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon, and Rabbi Shimon is speaking utilizing the style of: If it were not stated.

וְהָכִי קָאָמַר: ״בְּשֶׁמֶן״ לְהוֹסִיף לָהּ שֶׁמֶן, דְּאִי לִקְבּוֹעַ לָהּ שֶׁמֶן לָא צְרִיךְ, כֵּיוָן דִּכְתִיב בַּהּ ״עַל מַחֲבַת״ כְּמַחֲבַת דָּמְיָא, וְעַד שֶׁלֹּא יֵאָמֵר ״בְּשֶׁמֶן״ יֵשׁ לִי בַּדִּין.

And this is what Rabbi Shimon is saying: The term “with the oil” serves to add extra oil to it. As, if the purpose of that term were merely to establish that the offering must include oil, a verse is not needed to teach that. Since it is written with respect to the griddle-cake offering of the High Priest: “On a griddle [ maḥavat ]” (Leviticus 6:14), it is comparable to a pan [ maḥavat ] meal offering, which requires oil. And even if the verse had not stated: “With the oil,” I have a manner of derivation for the fact that more than one log of oil is required, based upon a verbal analogy.

וְדָן דִּינָא, לָא אָתְיָא לֵיהּ, וְאַצְרְכַהּ ״בְּשֶׁמֶן״, הֲדַר אָמַר: תֶּיהְוֵי כְּמִנְחַת פָּרִים וְאֵילִים.

But although Rabbi Shimon attempts to employ this derivation he is unsuccessful, as there is a counter-indication from another verbal analogy, and therefore the term “with the oil” is needed to teach that more than one log of oil is required. Nevertheless, this teaches only that more oil than usual is required, but the specific amount still must be clarified. Rabbi Shimon then said: Let the griddle-cake offering of the High Priest be like the meal offering that accompanies the sacrifice of bulls and rams, which require two log of oil per ephah of flour.

הֲדַר אָמַר: דָּנִין

Rabbi Shimon then said: We should derive the halakha