Chumashחומש

מן העוף. וְלֹא כָּל הָעוֹף; לְפִי שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר תָּמִים זָכָר בַּבָּקָר בַּכְּשָׂבִים וּבָעִזִּים — תַּמּוּת וְזַכְרוּת בִּבְהֵמָה וְאֵין תַּמּוּת וְזַכְרוּת בְּעוֹפוֹת — יָכוֹל אַף מְחֻסַּר אֵבֶר, תַּ"ל מִן הָעוֹף (שם):

מן העוף [AND IF A BURNT OFFERING … BE] OF FOWLS — of (i.e. of some of) but not of every description of fowls (cf. Rashi on Leviticus 1.2 and Rashi on Leviticus 1:10). Since Scripture states, (Leviticus 22:19) “[Ye shall offer, to be accepted for you,] a male without blemish (תמים זכר) of the oxen, of the sheep and of the goats”, it is evident (cf. Rashi on Leviticus 1.2 and Rashi on Leviticus 1:10) that unblemished condition and male sex in sacrifices are required only in the case of cattle, but unblemished condition and male sex are not required in the case of fowls. If, then, the condition of the fowl is immaterial one might think that a fowl may be brought as a sacrifice even if it lacks a limb! Scripture therefore states: “of fowls” — but not all fowls (Sifra, Emor, Section 7 2; Kiddushin 24b).

תרים. גְּדוֹלִים וְלֹא קְטַנִּים:

התרים TURTLEDOVES — Grown-up ones only may be offered but not young ones.

בני יונה. קְטַנִּים וְלֹא גְּדוֹלִים:

בני יונה YOUNG DOVES — Young doves only may be offered but not grown-up ones (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Nedavah, Chapter 8 4; Chullin 22a).

מן התרים או מן בני היונה. פְּרָט לִתְחִלַּת הַצִּהוּב שֶׁבָּזֶה וְשֶׁבָּזֶה שֶׁהוּא פָּסוּל, שֶׁגָּדוֹל הוּא אֵצֶל בְּנֵי יוֹנָה וְקָטָן אֵצֶל תּוֹרִים (חולין כ"ב):

מן התרים או מן בני היונה OF TURTLEDOVES AND OF YOUNG DOVES — The word מן is intended to exclude birds in the first stage of their plumage becoming golden-coloured in the case of the one as of the other, for this stage makes the bird unfit for sacrifice, since such a bird is a grown-up one in the case of בני יונה and a young one in the case of תורים (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Nedavah, Chapter 8 5; Chullin 22b).

והקריבו. אֲפִלּוּ פְּרֵדָה אַחַת יָבִיא (ספרא):

והקריבו [AND THE PRIEST] SHALL OFFER IT — It — even a single bird he may offer (not necessarily more than one, as might be assumed from the plural תורים and בני יונה) (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Nedavah, Section 7 1; Zevachim 65a).

הכהן, ומלק. אֵין מְלִיקָה בִּכְלִי אֶלָּא בְּעַצְמוֹ שֶׁל כֹּהֵן, קוֹצֵץ בְּצִפָּרְנוֹ מִמּוּל הָעֹרֶף וְחוֹתֵךְ מַפְרַקְתּוֹ עַד שֶׁמַּגִּיעַ לַסִּימָנִין וְקוֹצְצָן (שם):

הכהן … ומלק THE PRIEST SHALL … NIP OFF [ITS HEAD] — The nipping of the bird’s head must not be done with an instrument but by the priest’s very self:) he nips with his finger-nail close by the nape, cuts right through the neck-bone until he comes to the “organs” (the wind pipe and the gullet) and cuts them through too (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Nedavah, Section 7 3; Zevachim 65a).

ונמצה דמו. לְשׁוֹן מִיץ אַפַּיִם (משלי ל'), כִּי אָפֵס הַמֵּץ (ישעיהו ט"ז), כּוֹבֵשׁ בֵּית הַשְּׁחִיטָה עַל קִיר הַמִּזְבֵּחַ וְהַדָּם מִתְמַצֶּה וְיוֹרֵד (זבחים ס"ה):

ונמצה דמו AND THE BLOOD THEREOF SHALL BE WRUNG OUT — The word ונמצה is connected in meaning with (Proverbs 30:33) “the pressing out (מיץ) of wrath”; (Isaiah 16:4) “for extortion (המץ) is at an end). — He presses the place where the neck has been cut (בית השחיטה) against the wall and the blood thus drains itself out) and runs down the wall (cf. Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Nedavah, Section 7 7; Zevachim 64b).

ומלק, והקטיר, ונמצה. אֶ"לֹ כֵּן מֵאַחַר שֶׁהוּא מַקְטִיר הוּא מוֹצֶה? אֶלָּא מַה הַקְטָרָה הָרֹאשׁ בְּעַצְמוֹ וְהַגּוּף בְּעַצְמוֹ, אַף מְלִיקָה כֵּן. וּפְשׁוּטוֹ שֶׁל מִקְרָא מְסֹרָס הוּא — וּמָלַק וְהִקְטִיר, וְקֹדֶם הַקְטָרָה וְנִמְצָה דָמוֹ כְּבָר:

ומלק … והקטיר …ונמצה AND HE SHALL NIP OFF … AND CAUSE IT TO ASCEND IN FUMES … AND [THE BLOOD] SHALL BE WRUNG OUT — Is it possible to say so? Since he has burnt it can he squeeze the blood out?! But the wording is intended to suggest the following: How is it with the burning of the sacrifice? The head is separate and the body is separate (since it states here ומלק את ראשו והקטיר, and in v. 17 it is enjoined והקטיר אתו i. e. the body; vv. 16—17 speaking of the rites performed on the body)! So, too, the nipping has to be thus (i. e. has to have the effect of severing the head from the body so that it may be burnt apart from the body; the מליקה accordingly denotes here complete severance, whilst in 5:8 this is forbidden. The translation therefore is: and he shall nip off the head so that he may burn it on the altar) (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Nedavah, Section 7 5; Zevachim 65a). According to the literal sense of the verse, however, the wording is inverted: he shall nip off [the head] and burn it, and before the burning the blood shall have been pressed out already (ונמצה has therefore a future-perfect meaning: “and its blood shall have been pressed out”).

מראתו. מְקוֹם הָרְעִי, זֶה הַזֶּפֶק (ספרא):

מראתו [AND HE SHALL REMOVE] ITS CROP — The word is connected in meaning with the word רעי in Rabbinical Hebrew (or the Biblical ראי; cf. Nahum 3:6); it thus denotes the place of the רעי, the digested food, i. e. the crop (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Nedavah, Section 7 9).

בנצתה. עִם בְּנֵי מֵעֶיהָ, וְנוֹצָה לְשׁוֹן דָּבָר הַמָּאוּס, כְּמוֹ כִּי נָצוּ גַּם נָעוּ (איכה ד'), וְזֶהוּ שֶׁתִּרְגֵּם אֻנְקְלוֹס בְּאוּכְלֵיהּ; וְזֶהוּ מִדְרָשׁוֹ שֶׁל אַבָּא יוֹסֵי בֶּן חָנָן שֶׁאָמַר נוֹטֵל אֶת הַקֻּרְקְבָן עִמָּהּ; וְרַבּוֹתֵינוּ זִ"לִ אָמְרוּ קוֹדֵר סְבִיב הַזֶּפֶק בְּסַכִּין כְּעֵין אֲרֻבָּה וְנוֹטְלוֹ עִם הַנּוֹצָה שֶׁעַל הָעוֹר (ספרא); בְּעוֹלַת בְּהֵמָה שֶׁאֵינָהּ אוֹכֶלֶת אֶלָּא בְּאֵבוּס בְּעָלֶיהָ, נֶאֱמַר וְהַקֶּרֶב וְהַכְּרָעַיִם יִרְחַץ בַּמָּיִם וְהִקְטִיר, וּבָעוֹף שֶׁנָּזוֹן מִן הַגָּזֵל, נֶאֱמַר וְהִשְלִיךְ אֶת הַמֵּעַיִם, שֶׁאָכַל מִן הַגָּזֵל (ויקרא רבה ג'):

בנצתה means together with its entrails (not with its feathers which meaning the word נוצה usually has). The word נוצה is really an expression for anything that is loathsome. Similar is (Lamentations 4:15) “[depart, depart, touch not:] for they are become loathsome (נצו) and are fled away”.) That is also what Onkelos means when he translates באוכליה, “with the digested food” found in the entrails (excrement). This, too, is the interpretation of the verse given by Abba José ben Chanan who states: he removes the stomach (being the organ which contains digested food) together with it (the crop). But our Rabbis, of blessed memory, taking נוצה; in its usual sense of “feathers”, say: with a knife he cuts out around the crop an opening like a flap and removes it together with the feathers on the skin (of that spot) (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Nedavah, Section 7 9; Zevachim 65a). — In the case of the burnt offering of the cattle which eats only from the crib of its owner it is stated, (v. 13) “But he shall lave the inwards and the legs with water: and [the priest] shall offer it”; in the case of a fowl, however, which feeds itself from what it picks up of other people’s property (lit., “of robbery”) it states, “he shall cast the entrails away”, because it (the bird) eats that which is stolen (Leviticus Rabbah 3 4).

אצל המזבח קדמה. בְּמִזְרָחוֹ שֶׁל כֶּבֶשׁ (ספרא):

אצל המזבח קדמה BESIDE THE ALTAR ON THE EAST — i. e. at the east of the כבש (the inclined ascent leading to the top of the altar which was on the south of the altar) (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Nedavah, Chapter 9 3).

אל מקום הדשן. מָקוֹם שֶׁנּוֹתְנִין שָׁם תְּרוּמַת הַדֶּשֶׁן בְּכָל בֹּקֶר וְדִשּׁוּן מִזְבֵּחַ הַפְּנִימִי וְהַמְּנוֹרָה, וְכֻלָּם נִבְלָעִים שָׁם בִּמְקוֹמָן:

אל מקום הדשן BY THE PLACE OF THE ASHES — i. e. that place where they deposited the ashes removed from the altar (תרומת הדשן) each morning (cf. Rashi on Leviticus 6:3, 4) and the ashes removed from the inner altar and the candelabrum (Meilah 12a;Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Nedavah, Chapter 9 3). All these miraculously sunk there in their place (i. e. on the very spot where they were deposited) (Yoma 21a).

ושסע. אֵין שִׁסּוּעַ אֶלָּא בַּיָּד, וְכֵן הוּא אוֹמֵר בְּשִׁמְשׁוֹן וַיְשַׁסְּעֵהוּ כְּשַׁסַּע הַגְּדִי וְגוֹ' (שופטים י"ד):

ושסע AND HE SHALL CLEAVE [IT] — The term שסע is used only for rending with the hands. Similarly it states in the story of Samson (Judges 14:6) “and he rent him (וישסעהו) as he would have rent a kid” (Zevachim 65b).

בכנפיו. עִם כְּנָפָיו — אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ לִמְרֹט כַּנְפֵי נוֹצָתוֹ:

בכנפיו means: he shall rend it together with its feathers he need not pluck out the feathers that form its plumage before doing so.

בכנפיו. נוֹצָה מַמָּשׁ; וַהֲלֹא אֵין לְךָ הֶדְיוֹט שֶׁמֵּרִיחַ רֵיחַ כְּנָפַיִם נִשְֹרָפִים וְאֵין נַפְשׁוֹ קָצָה עָלָיו, וְלָמָּה אָמַר הַכָּתוּב יַקְרִיב? כְּדֵי שֶׁיְּהֵא הַמִּזְבֵּחַ שָֹבֵעַ וּמְהֻדָּר בְּקָרְבָּנוֹ שֶׁל עָנִי (ויק"ר ג'):

בכנפיו means actually the feathers (not the wings). But surely you will not find even a common sort of man who can smell the odour of burnt feathers without being disgusted with it! Why, then, does Scripture say that it shall be offered with the feathers? In order that the altar should appear full up, as it were, and adorned with the sacrifice of the poor (since the bird with its feathers makes a finer show than without them) (Leviticus Rabbah 3:5).

לא יבדיל. אֵינוֹ מְפָרְקוֹ לְגַמְרֵי, לִשְׁתֵּי חֲתִיכוֹת, אֶלָּא קוֹרְעוֹ מִגַּבּוֹ; נֶאֱמַר בָּעוֹף רֵיחַ נִיחוֹחַ וְנֶאֱמַר בַּבְּהֵמָה רֵיחַ נִיחוֹחַ, לוֹמַר לְךָ אֶחָד הַמַּרְבֶּה וְאֶחָד הַמַּמְעִיט וּבִלְבַד שֶׁיְּכַוֵּן אֶת לִבּוֹ לַשָּׁמַיִם (ספרא):

לא יבדיל BUT HE SHALL NOT SEPARATE IT — he must not break it entirely into two pieces, but only rends it from behind. — It is stated here of a bird-offering “a pleasing odour [to the Lord]” and it is stated (v. 13) of an animal-sacrifice “a pleasing odour [to the Lord]”, to tell you: whether one offers much or little it is equally pleasing to God provided that he directs his heart to Heaven (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Nedavah, Section 9 7; Menachot 110a).

ונפש כי תקריב. לֹא נֶאֱמַר נֶפֶשׁ בְּכָל קָרְבְּנוֹת נְדָבָה אֶלָּא בַּמִּנְחָה, מִי דַּרְכּוֹ לְהִתְנַדֵּב מִנְחָה? עָנִי. אָמַר הַקָּבָּ"ה, מַעֲלֶה אֲנִי עָלָיו כְּאִלּוּ הִקְרִיב נַפְשׁוֹ (מנחות ק"ד):

ונפש כי תקריב AND WHEN A PERSON (or “A SOUL”) WILL OFFER — Nowhere is the word נפש employed in connection with free-will offerings except in connection with the meal-offering. For who is it that usually brings a meal-offering? The poor man! The Holy One, blessed be He, says, as it were, I will regard it for him as though he brought his very soul (נפש) as an offering (Menachot 104b).

סלת יהיה קרבנו. הָאוֹמֵר הֲרֵי עָלַי מִנְחָה סְתָם, מֵבִיא מִנְחַת סֹלֶת, שֶׁהִיא הָרִאשׁוֹנָה שֶׁבַּמְּנָחוֹת וְנִקְמֶצֶת כְּשֶׁהִיא סֹלֶת, כְּמוֹ שֶׁמְּפֹרָשׁ בָּעִנְיָן; לְפִי שֶׁנֶּאֶמְרוּ כָּאן חֲמִשָּׁה מִינֵי מְנָחוֹת, וְכֻלָּן בָּאוֹת אֲפוּיוֹת קֹדֶם קְמִיצָה חוּץ מִזּוֹ, לְכָךְ קְרוּיָה מִנְחַת סֹלֶת:

סלת יהיה קרבנו [AND WHEN A PERSON WILL OFFER A MEAL OFFERING] HIS OFFERING SHALL BE OF SIFTED FINE FLOUR — i. e. if one says, “I take upon myself the obligation to bring a מנחה”, without further defining it, he must bring that which is termed “the meal-offering of fine sifted flour” (מנחת סלת) which is that mentioned first among the different meal-offerings) since the קומץ is taken from it whilst it is yet flour (whilst in the case of other meal-offerings this is done after they have been baked), as is explained further on in this section (cf. Menachot 104b). — Because there are five different meal-offerings enumerated here all of which had to be brought ready baked beforẹ the קמץ was taken of them with the exception of this, therefore this alone is technically termed “a meal-offering of flour’ (though the others too had to be made of sifted fine flour).

סלת. אֵין סֹלֶת אֶלָּא מִן הַחִטִּין, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר סֹלֶת חִטִּים (שמות כ"ט), וְאֵין מִנְחָה פְּחוּתָה מֵעִשָּׂרוֹן, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר וְעִשָּׂרוֹן סֹלֶת … לְמִנְחָה (ויקרא י"ד) — עִשָּׂרוֹן לְכָל מִנְחָה:

סלת — The term סלת always denotes “fine flour of wheat”, as it is said, (Exodus 29:2) “fine flour (סלת) of wheat” (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Nedavah, Chapter 10 2). No meal-offering is ever less than one tenth part of an ephah of flour, as it said, (Leviticus 14:21) “and one tenth deal of flour … for a meal-offering”, i. e. there must be a tenth part for every kind of meal-offering (cf. Menachot 99a).

ויצק עליה שמן. עַל כֻּלָּהּ:

ויצק עליה שמן AND HE SHALL POUR OIL UPON IT — upon the whole of it (of the flour) (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Nedavah, Chapter 10 14),

ונתן עליה לבנה. עַל מִקְצָתָהּ — מַנִּיחַ קֹמֶץ לְבוֹנָה עָלֶיהָ לְצַד אֶחָד. וּמָה רָאִיתָ לוֹמַר כֵּן? שֶׁאֵין רִבּוּי אַחַר רִבּוּי בַּתּוֹרָה אֶלָּא לְמַעֵט; דָּ"אַ: שֶׁמֶן עַל כֻּלָּהּ, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא נִבְלָל עִמָּהּ וְנִקְמָץ עִמָּהּ, כְּמוֹ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר מִסָּלְתָּהּ וּמִשַּׁמְנָהּ, וּלְבוֹנָה עַל מִקְצָתָהּ, שֶׁאֵינָהּ נִבְלֶלֶת עִמָּהּ וְלֹא נִקְמֶצֶת עִמָּהּ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר עַל כָּל לְבֹנָתָהּ, שֶׁלְּאַחַר שֶׁקָּמַץ מְלַקֵּט אֶת הַלְּבוֹנָה כֻּלָּהּ מֵעָלֶיהָ וּמַקְטִירָהּ (ספרא):

ונתן עליה לבנה AND PUT FRANKINCENSE THEREON — upon a part of it: he lays a fistful of frankincense upon one side of it. And what reason have you (lit., what do you see) to say so? Because there is a rule: when in the Torah a רבוי, i. e. a term usually intended to include a particular detail) follows one of a similarly inclusive character, the latter implies a restriction). Another explanation of why I say that oil has to be poured upon the whole meal-offering is, because it (the oil) has to be mingled with it (the מנחה) and has to undergo the קמיצה (the taking of a fistful of the mass) together with it, as it is stated, “[and he shall take thereout by grasping a fistful] of the flour thereof and of the oil thereof”; frankincense, however, has to be put only upon a part of it, since it is not mingled with it and has not to undergo the קמיצה together with it, because it is said immediately afterwards, “besides (i. e. in addition to) all the frankincense thereof” (cf. Rashi on that passage), — which implies that after he had taken the קמץ he picks all the frankincense from off it and offers it (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Nedavah, Chapter 10 14-18; cf. also Sota 14b)

ויצק, ונתן, והביאה. מְלַמֵּד שֶׁיְּצִיקָה וּבְלִילָה כְּשֵׁרִים בְּזָר (שם):

. … ויצק ונתן … והביאה AND HE SHALL POUR … AND HE SHALL PUT … AND then HE SHALL BRING IT [TO AARONS SONS] — This teaches us that the pouring of the oil and the mingling it (with the flour) is valid even if done by non-priests (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Nedavah, Chapter 10 19: Menachot 9a).

הכהנים וקמץ. מִקְּמִיצָה וָאֵילָךְ מִצְוַת כְּהֻנָּה (שם):

הכהנים וקמץ [AND HE SHALL BRING UNTO …] THE PRIESTS: AND HE SHALL TAKE A FISTFUL — from the קמיצה (the taking of the fistful) and onwards is the duty of the priesthood (Menachot 9a).

וקמץ משם. מִמָּקוֹם שֶׁרַגְלֵי הַזָּר עוֹמְדוֹת; לְלַמֶּדְךָ שֶׁהַקְּמִיצָה כְּשֵׁרָה בְּכָל מָקוֹם בָּעֲזָרָה, אַף בְּי"א אַמָּה שֶׁל מְקוֹם דְּרִיסַת רַגְלֵי יִשְֹרָאֵל (יומא ט"ז):

וקמץ משם AND HE SHALL TAKE A FISTFUL FROM THERE — from the place where the feel of the layman may stand; and this is stated in order to teach you that the קמיצה is valid at whatever place in the fore-court it is carried out, even in that eleven cubits) which are the area where the feet of the ordinary Israelites may tread (cf. Yoma 16b).

מלא קמצו. יָכוֹל מְבֹרָץ — מְבַצְבֵּץ וְיוֹצֵא לְכָל צַד, תַּ"לֹ בְּמָקוֹם אַחֵר וְהֵרִים מִמֶּנּוּ בְּקֻמְצוֹ (ויקרא ו') — לֹא יְהֵא כָּשֵׁר אֶלָּא מַה שֶּׁבְּתוֹךְ הַקֹּמֶץ, אִי בְּקֻמְצוֹ יָכוֹל חָסֵר, תַּ"לֹ מְלֹא, הָא כֵּיצַד? חוֹפֶה שְׁלוֹשׁ אֶצְבְּעוֹתָיו עַל פַּס יָדוֹ, וְזֶהוּ קֹמֶץ בְּמַשְׁמַע לָשׁוֹן הָעִבְרִית (מנחות י"א):

מלא קמצו HIS FISTFUL — One might think that it (the fist) may be full to overflowing — that it may burst through his fist and come out on every side! Scripture, however, states in another passage, (Leviticus 6:8) “and he shall take from it in his closed hand [some of the flour … and burn it on the altar)”, which shows that only that is fitted to be burnt which is within his closed hand. If, then, he has to take what is בקמצו, within his closed hand, one might assume that it may be defective (underfull)? Scripture, however, states here, מלא, “his full [closed hand]”. How then does he do it that it shall be neither overfull nor underfull? After placing his hand in the vessel containing the meal-offering he (the priest) bends his three fingers (those next to his thumb) at full length over on to the palm of his hand, removing with his thumb and little finger all the flour that shows outside these three fingers. This is the literal meaning that the word קמץ has in the Hebrew language (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Nedavah, Section 9 6; Menachot 11a; Yoma 47a).

על כל לבנתה. לְבַד כָּל הַלְּבוֹנָה יְהֵא הַקֹּמֶץ מָלֵא:

‎ על כל לבנתה‎‎ [HIS FISTFUL OF FLOUR …] BESIDES ALL THE FRANKINCENSE — i. e. apart from all the frankincense shall his fist be full.

לבנתה והקטיר. אַף הַלְּבוֹנָה בְּהַקְטָרָה:

לבנתה והקטיר ITS FRANK-INCENSE. AND HE SHALL BURN — The frankincense too comes under the law of burning (cf. Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Nedavah, Section 9 10).

מלא קמצו מסלתה ומשמנה. הָא אִם קָמַץ וְעָלָה בְּיָדוֹ גַּרְגֵּר מֶלַח אוֹ קֹרֶט לְבוֹנָה פְּסוּלָה (שם ו'):

מלא קמצו מסלתה ומשמנה [AND HE SHALL TAKE THEREOUT] HIS HANDFUL OF THE FLOUR THEREOF AND OF THE OIL THEREOF — Consequently if when he takes the handful of the flour a grain of salt (for salt was mingled with every offering; cf. v. 13) or a particle of frankincense comes into his hand with the flour it (the offering) is invalid (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Nedavah, Section 9 10; Menachot 6a).

אזכרתה. הַקֹּמֶץ הָעוֹלֶה לְגָבוֹהַּ הוּא זִכְרוֹן הַמִּנְחָה — שֶׁבּוֹ נִזְכָּר בְּעָלֶיהָ לְטוֹבָה וּלְנַחַת רוּחַ:

אזכרתה THE MEMORIAL PORTION THEREOF — The handful of flour that is offered to the Most High God forms the memorial portion of the meal-offering, being that part of it through which the owner is remembered for good and for having caused satisfaction to the Lord.

לאהרן ולבניו. כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל נוֹטֵל חֵלֶק בָּרֹאשׁ שֶׁלֹּא בְּמַחֲלֹקֶת וְהַהֶדְיוֹט בְּמַחֲלֹקֶת (ספרא):

לאהרן ולבניו AND THAT WHICH IS LEFT OF THE MEAL OFFERING] SHALL BE AARON’S AND HIS SONS’ — The High Priest takes a portion first, just as he pleases, without having to take part in the equal division of the מנחה, whilst the ordinary priest shares in an equal division (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Nedavah, Chapter 11 1; Yoma 14a and Yoma 17b).

קדש קדשים. הִיא לָהֶם:

קדש קדשים MOST HOLY is it for them.

מאשי ה'. אֵין לָהֶם חֵלֶק בָּהּ אֶלָּא לְאַחַר מַתְּנוֹת הָאִשִּׁים (שם):

'מאשי ה OF THE FIRE OFFERING OF THE LORD — they have no portion in it (in what is left) except after the gifts (the prescribed quantity) for the fire (i. e. the קומץ) have been offered (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Nedavah, Chapter 11 2).

וכי תקריב וגו'. שֶׁאָמַר הֲרֵי עָלַי מִנְחַת מַאֲפֵה תַּנּוּר; וְלִמֵּד הַכָּתוּב שֶׁיָּבִיא אוֹ חַלּוֹת אוֹ רְקִיקִין, הַחַלּוֹת בְּלוּלוֹת וְהָרְקִיקִין מְשׁוּחִין; וְנֶחְלְקוּ רַבּוֹתֵינוּ בִּמְשִׁיחָתָן, יֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים מוֹשְׁחָן וְחוֹזֵר וּמוֹשְׁחָן עַד שֶׁכָּלֶה כָּל הַשֶּׁמֶן שֶׁבַּלֹּג — שֶׁכָּל הַמְּנָחוֹת טְעוּנוֹת לֹג שֶׁמֶן — וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים מוֹשְׁחָן כְּמִין "כִי" וּשְׁאָר הַשֶּׁמֶן נֶאֱכָל בִּפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ לַכֹּהֲנִים (מנחות ע"ה); מַה תַּ"ל בַּשֶּׁמֶן בַּשֶּׁמֶן שְׁנֵי פְּעָמִים? לְהַכְשִׁיר שֶׁמֶן שֵׁנִי וּשְׁלִישִׁי הַיּוֹצֵא מִן הַזֵּיתִים, וְאֵין צָרִיךְ שֶׁמֶן רִאשׁוֹן אֶלָּא לַמְּנוֹרָה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר בּוֹ זָךְ (שמות כ"ז), וְשָׁנִינוּ בִּמְנָחוֹת כָּל הַמְּנָחוֹת הָאֲפוּיוֹת לִפְנֵי קְמִיצָתָן וְנִקְמָצוֹת עַל יְדֵי פְּתִיתָה, כֻּלָּן בָּאוֹת עֶשֶֹר עֶשֶֹר חַלּוֹת, וְהָאָמוּר בָּה רְקִיקִין בָּאָה עֲשָׂרָה רְקִיקִין (מנחות ע"ו):

וכי ‎‎'ו גו‎תקריב‎‎‎‎‎ AND IF THOU OFFER [AN OFFERING OF AN OBLATION BAKEN IN THE OVEN] in that one said, “I take upon myself the obligation to bring a meal-offering taken in the oven. Scripture teaches you that he may bring either cakes or wafers, the cakes being mingled with oil and the wafers being anointed with oil (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Nedavah, Section 10 2). Our Rabbis are of different opinions as to their anointing. Some hold that they smeared them with oil and then repeatedly smeared them until the oil in the log was at an end, for every kind of meal-offering required a log of oil: whilst others hold that they smeared them only in the form of a Greek X (cf. Rashi on Exodus 29:7 and Note thereon) and that the rest of the oil was consumed separately by the priests (Menachot 75a; cf. Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Nedavah, Chapter 11 6). — Why is the word בשמן used twice in this verse (it would have sufficed to state: חלות מצות בלולות בשמן ורקיקי מצות משוחים בו)? In order to permit for use with the meal-offering the “second grade of oil” and the “third grade of oil” which comes out of the olives) (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Nedavah, Chapter 11 6), and to teach that “the first oil” is required only for the candelabrum of which it is stated, (Exodus 27:20) “clear [olive oil for the light]”. — We read in Treatise Menachoth 76a: All the meal-offerings that were baked before the “fistful” was taken from them and at which the קמיצה could therefore be performed only by first breaking them into pieces — each of them had to be offered of ten cakes, and that at which “wafers” are prescribed was offered of ten wafers.

ואם מנחה על המחבת. שֶׁאָמַר הֲרֵי עָלַי מִנְחַת מַחֲבַת; וּכְלִי הוּא שֶׁהָיָה בַּמִּקְדָּשׁ, שֶׁאוֹפִין בּוֹ מִנְחָה זוֹ עַל הָאוּר בְּשֶׁמֶן, וְהַכְּלִי אֵינוֹ עָמֹק אֶלָּא צָף, וּמַעֲשֵׂי הַמִּנְחָה שֶׁבְּתוֹכוֹ קָשִׁין, שֶׁמִּתּוֹךְ שֶׁהִיא צָפָה, הָאוּר שׂוֹרֵף אֶת הַשֶּׁמֶן. וְכֻלָּן טְעוּנוֹת שָׁלוֹשׁ מַתְּנוֹת שֶׁמֶן — יְצִיקָה וּבְלִילָה וּמַתַּן שֶׁמֶן בִּכְלִי קֹדֶם לַעֲשִֹיָּתָן (שם ע"ד):

ואם מנחה על המחבת AND IF AN OBLATION BAKEN IN THE PAN [BE THY OFFERING], in that one said, “I take upon myself the obligation to bring a meal-offering baken in the pan” (cf. Rashi on previous. verse and Note thereon). This (the מחבת) was a vessel employed in the Temple in which they baked this particular meal-offering on the open fire in oil. The vessel was not deep but flat; therefore the meal-offering made in it was hard, for just because it (the מחבת) was flat the fire burnt the oil. (Menachot 63a). — All of them (i.e. both the meal-offerings prepared in a vessel) require a three-fold use of oil — pouring upon them after they ware prepared, mingling with their dough, and placing of oil in the vessel prior to preparing them (Menachot 74b; cf. Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Nedavah, Chapter 12 1).

סלת בלולה בשמן. מְלַמֵּד שֶׁבּוֹלְלָן בְּעוֹדָן סֹלֶת (מנחות ע"ד):

סלת בלולה בשמן FLOUR MINGLED WITH OIL — This teaches us that he mingles them together when they (the cakes) are yet flour (are not yet baked, and not, as might be assumed, when the dough is already formed into cakes, as is the case with לחמי תודה. the cakes of the sacrifice of acknowledgment, Leviticus 7:12, where Scripture prescribes חלות בלולת בשמן, “Cakes” mingled with oil; cf. Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Nedavah, Chapter 12 2).

פתות אתה פתים. לְרַבּוֹת כָּל הַמְּנָחוֹת הַנֶּאֱפוֹת קֹדֶם קְמִיצָה לִפְתִיתָה (שם ע"ה):

פתות אתה פתים — THOU SHALT SUNDER IT INTO MORSELS — This is stated to include all meal-offerings that are baked before the קמיצה (i. e. all mentioned here with the exception of מנחת סלת; cf. לחם משנה on Maim. הל' מעשה קרבנות פי״ג ה"י) in the law of breaking into pieces (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Nedavah, Chapter 12 5; Menachot 75a).

ויצקת עליה שמן מנחה הוא. לְרַבּוֹת כָּל הַמְּנָחוֹת לִיצִיקָה; יָכוֹל אַף מִנְחָה מַאֲפֵה תַּנּוּר כֵּן, תַּ"ל עָלֶיהָ; אוֹצִיא אֶת הַחַלּוֹת וְלֹא אוֹצִיא אֶת הָרְקִיקִין, תַּ"ל הִוא (שם):

ויצקת עליה שמן מנחה הוא AND THOU SHALT POUR OIL THEREON: IT IS A MEAL OFFERING — This is intended to include all meal-offerings (with the exception of one; cf. Rashi below) in the law of pouring oil upon them after the מנחה is prepared. One might think the meal-offering baken in an oven (v. 4) should also be treated thus, Scripture, however, states עליה, “[thou shalt pour oil] upon it”, but not upon that baken in the oven. But perhaps I should exclude only The cakes of the מנחת מאפה תנור and not also the wafers of which that מנחה may consist! Scripture, however, states היא, — “it is a meal-offering” using this limitative word to the exclusion of wafers too (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Nedavah, Chapter 12 6; Menachot 75a).