י׳
א׳אֲכִילַת הַחַטָּאת וְהָאָשָׁם מִצְוַת עֲשֵׂה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שמות כט לג) "וְאָכְלוּ אֹתָם אֲשֶׁר כֻּפַּר בָּהֶם". הַכֹּהֲנִים אוֹכְלִים וּבְעָלִים מִתְכַּפְּרִים. וְהוּא הַדִּין לִשְׁאָר הַקָּדָשִׁים שֶׁאוֹכְלִין אוֹתָן הַכֹּהֲנִים שֶׁאֲכִילָתָן מִצְוָה:
1It is a positive commandment for the sin offerings and the guilt-offerings1Sefer HaMitzvot (positive commandment 89) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 102) include this as one of the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. to be eaten,2This mitzvah is incumbent on the priests; it is not a dimension of the obligation to bring a given sacrifice. as [Exodus 29:33] states: "And they shall eat [the sacrifices] which convey atonement."3The choice of this prooftext and the concept it teaches sheds light on an issue debated by the commentaries: Is it a positive mitzvah to partake of the meat of the sacrifices of lesser sanctity? In his Sefer HaMitzvot, loc. cit., the Rambam explains that since eating the other sacrifices does not bring about atonement, it should not be considered as an independent mitzvah. Instead, it is an extension of this mitzvah. In this instance, however, since the atonement of the person bringing the sacrifice depends on the priests' consumption of the sacrifice, it is considered as an independent mitzvah. There is extensive discussion on this issue by other Rabbis. The priests eat the sacrifices and the owners receive atonement. This also applies to other sacrifices4E.g., the communal peace offerings. that are eaten by the priests; partaking of them is a mitzvah.
ב׳וְכֵן אֲכִילַת שְׁיָרֵי מְנָחוֹת מִצְוַת עֲשֵׂה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא ו ט) "וְהַנּוֹתֶרֶת מִמֶּנָּה יֹאכְלוּ אַהֲרֹן וּבָנָיו":
2Similarly, partaking of the portion that remains from the meal offerings5I.e., after the handful has been taken out to be offered on the altar. See Chapter 12, Halachah 9. is a positive commandment,6Sefer HaMitzvot (positive commandment 88) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 134) include this as one of the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. This mitzvah encompasses partaking of all the different types of meal offerings (Radbaz). as [Leviticus 6:9] states: "What remains of it shall be eaten by Aaron and his sons."
ג׳וְאֵין חַטָּאת וְאָשָׁם וּשְׁיָרֵי מְנָחוֹת נֶאֱכָלִין אֶלָּא לְזִכְרֵי כְּהֻנָּה בָּעֲזָרָה וְאִם נֶאֶכְלוּ בַּהֵיכָל נֶאֶכְלוּ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (במדבר יח ט) "לְכָל מִנְחָתָם וּלְכָל חַטָּאתָם וּלְכָל אֲשָׁמָם" (במדבר יח י) "בְּקֹדֶשׁ הַקֳדָשִׁים תֹּאכְלֶנּוּ כָּל זָכָר יֹאכַל אֹתוֹ". וְכֵן שַׁלְמֵי צִבּוּר הֲרֵי הֵן כַּחַטָּאת וְכָאָשָׁם כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ:
3The sin-offering, the guilt-offering, and the remnants of the meal-offering may be eaten only by males7Even minors; see Halachah 17. of the priestly family in the Temple Courtyard.8Indeed, as stated in Chapter 11, Halachah 5, there is a prohibition against partaking of these sacrifices outside the Temple Courtyard. If they were eaten in the Temple building, their consumption is [acceptable], as [indicated by Numbers 18:9-10]: "For all of their meal-offerings, for all of their sin-offerings, and for all of their guilt-offerings.... In the most holy place,9This includes the Temple building. you shall partake of it.10Zevachim 63a asks: From that verse, it would appear that it is desirable (not merely acceptable after the fact) to partake of the offerings inside the Temple building. Our Sages then cite Leviticus 6:9 which indicates that the sacrifices should be eaten in the Temple Courtyard. They explain that it is preferable to consider the Temple Courtyard the primary place where the sacrifices are eaten, for the Temple building is the resting place for the Divine Presence and it is not befitting for that to be the primary place for eating, an activity that is essentially a human need. All males shall partake of it." Similarly, the communal peace-offerings are similar to the sin-offerings and the guilt-offerings, as we explained.11Chapter 9, Halachah 4.
ד׳חָזֶה וְשׁוֹק שֶׁל שְׁלָמִים נֶאֱכָלִין לְכֹהֲנִים זְכָרִים וּנְקֵבוֹת שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר בָּהֶם (במדבר יח יא) "לְךָ נְתַתִּים וּלְבָנֶיךָ וְלִבְנֹתֶיךָ". וְכֵן הַמּוּרָם מִתּוֹדָה וְהַמּוּרָם מֵאֵיל נָזִיר שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (במדבר יח יט) "כּל תְּרוּמֹת הַקֳדָשִׁים אֲשֶׁר יָרִימוּ בְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל לַה' נָתַתִּי לְךָ וּלְבָנֶיךָ וְלִבְנֹתֶיךָ":
4The breast and the thigh of the peace-offerings are eaten by both males and females of the priestly family, for with regard to these [Numbers 18:11] states: "I have given it to you, to your sons and your daughters." This also applies to the elevated portions of the thanksgiving offering and the nazirite's ram,12The breads and the portions of meat given to the priest from those offerings; see Chapter 9, Halachah 12. [ibid.:19] states: "All of the elevated portions of the consecrated [offerings] that the children of Israel shall raise up have I given to you, your sons, and your daughters."
ה׳וְכֵן הַבְּכוֹר שֶׁהֲרֵי נֶאֱמַר בּוֹ (במדבר יח יח) "וּבְשָׂרָם יִהְיֶה לָּךְ כַּחֲזֵה הַתְּנוּפָה וּכְשׁוֹק הַיָּמִין". וְכָל אֵלּוּ הַנֶּאֱכָלִים לַכֹּהֲנוֹת נֶאֱכָלִים לְעַבְדֵי הַכֹּהֲנִים וְלִנְשֵׁיהֶם כִּתְרוּמָה. וְכֻלָּן נֶאֱכָלִים בְּכָל הָעִיר שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא י יד) "אֵת חֲזֵה הַתְּנוּפָה וְאֵת שׁוֹק הַתְּרוּמָה תֹּאכְלוּ בְּמָקוֹם טָהוֹר" לֹא נֶאֱמַר בָּהֶן בְּמָקוֹם קָדוֹשׁ שֶׁהִיא הָעֲזָרָה אֶלָּא טָהוֹר שֶׁהוּא כָּל מַחֲנֵה יִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁכְּנֶגְדוֹ לְדוֹרוֹת יְרוּשָׁלַיִם. וְהוּא הַדִּין לְמַעֲשֵׂר וּפֶסַח שֶׁהֲרֵי הֵן קָדָשִׁים קַלִּים כִּשְׁלָמִים. וְהַחַלּוֹנוֹת וָעֳבִי הַחוֹמָה כִּלְפָנִים:
5The same applies with regard to the firstborn offering, for concerning it [ibid.:18] states: "Their meat shall be yours, like the breast with which tenufah was performed and the right thigh."13I.e., they are comparable to the peace-offering.All of these14I.e., the portions from the sacrifices of lesser sanctity, including the breast and the thigh of the peace offering and the firstborn offering. [portions of sacrificial meat] that may be eaten by the women of the priestly family may be eaten by the priests' servants and their wives, like terumah. All [these sacrifices]15Not only the portions given to the priests, but also those given to the Israelites. may be eaten throughout the city [of Jerusalem],16See Chapter 11, Halachah 6, which delineates the prohibition against eating such sacrificial meat outside of Jerusalem. as [Leviticus 10:14] states: "And the breast with which tenufah was performed and the thigh that was lifted up shall you eat in a pure place." It was not specified that they [be eaten] "in a holy place," which would mean "the Temple Courtyard," but "in a pure place." This refers to the camp of the Israelites.17As related in Hilchot Beit HaBechirah 7:11, while the Jews were journeying through the desert, their encampment was considered as divided into three camps: the Camp of the Divine Presence, the Camp of the Levites, and the Camp of the Israelites. The parallel with regard to future generations is the city of Jerusalem.The same laws apply to the tithe offering and the Paschal sacrifice, for they are sacrifices of lesser sanctity like the peace-offerings. The windows and the thickness of the wall is considered as being within [the city].18See Hilchot Beit HaBechirah 6:9. See also parallel rulings in Hilchot Ma'aser Sheni 2:16; Hilchot Korban Pesach 9:1.The Radbaz clarifies that this is referring to instances where the windows are open to the city. If they are open only to the area outside the wall, he maintains that they should be considered as outside the city.
ו׳הַשְּׁלָמִים נֶאֱכָלִים בְּיוֹם הַזְּבִיחָה וְכָל הַלַּיְלָה וְכָל יוֹם הַמָּחֳרָת עַד שֶׁתִּשְׁקַע הַחַמָּה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא ז טז) "בְּיוֹם הַקְרִיבוֹ אֶת זִבְחוֹ יֵאָכֵל וּמִמָּחֳרָת" (ויקרא ז יח) "וְאִם הֵאָכל יֵאָכֵל מִבְּשַׂר זֶבַח שְׁלָמָיו בַּיּוֹם הַשְּׁלִישִׁי" וְגוֹ'. נִמְצֵאתָ לָמֵד שֶׁהֵן נֶאֱכָלִין לִשְׁנֵי יָמִים וְלַיְלָה אֶחָד בֵּין חֵלֶק הַכֹּהֲנִים בֵּין חֵלֶק הַבְּעָלִים וְהוּא הַדִּין לִבְכוֹר וּמַעֲשֵׂר שֶׁהֲרֵי הֵן קָדָשִׁים קַלִּים כִּשְׁלָמִים:
6The peace-offerings may be eaten on the day they were slaughtered, throughout the [following] night, and throughout the following day until sunset, as [Leviticus 7:16-18] states: "On the day when his sacrifice was offered, it shall be eaten and on its morrow... If one would partake of the peace-offering on the third day...."19The verse continues "he shall bear his sin," implying that there is a prohibition in partaking of the sacrifice at that time. Thus one can derive that they may be eaten for two days and one night. [This applies both] to the portion of the priests and the portions of the owners. This also applies to the firstborn and tithe offerings,20But not the Paschal sacrifice, as stated in Hilchot Korban Pesach 8:1, 15. for they are also sacrifices of a lesser degree of sanctity, like the peace-offerings.
ז׳אֲבָל הַתּוֹדָה אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהִיא קָדָשִׁים קַלִּים אֵינָהּ נֶאֱכֶלֶת אֶלָּא בְּיוֹם הַזְּבִיחָה עִם הַלַּיְלָה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר בָּהּ (ויקרא ז טו) "בְּיוֹם קָרְבָּנוֹ יֵאָכֵל לֹא יַנִּיחַ מִמֶּנּוּ עַד בֹּקֶר". וְכֵן אֵיל נָזִיר וְהַלֶּחֶם הַבָּא עִמָּהֶן וְכַיּוֹצֵא בָּהֶן בֵּין חֵלֶק הַכֹּהֲנִים בֵּין חֵלֶק הַבְּעָלִים וְהוּא הַדִּין לְחַטָּאת וּלְאָשָׁם וּלְשַׁלְמֵי צִבּוּר וְלִשְׁיָרֵי מְנָחוֹת שֶׁהַכּל נֶאֱכָל לְיוֹם וְלַיְלָה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר בְּיוֹם קָרְבָּנוֹ יֵאָכֵל כָּל הַקָּרְבָּנוֹת בְּמַשְׁמָע חוּץ מִן הַשְּׁלָמִים שֶׁפֵּרֵשׁ בָּהֶן הַכָּתוּב וּבְכוֹר וּמַעֲשֵׂר הַדּוֹמִים לָהֶם:
7The thanksgiving-offering, by contrast, even though it is one of the sacrifices of lesser sanctity, may be eaten only on the day of its sacrifice and the [following] night, as [ibid.:15] states: "It shall be eaten on the day it was offered. Do not leave anything from it until the morning." This also applies to the nazirite's ram and the bread which accompanies [these offerings], both to the portion of the priests and the portion of the owner. This also applies to the sin-offering, the guilt-offering, the communal peace-offerings, and the remainder of the meal-offerings. All of these are eaten for a day and [the following] night, as it is written: "It shall be eaten on the day it was offered."21I.e., the Rambam understands the verse as referring to all sacrifices unless it is specifically stated otherwise. This appears to include all of the sacrifices with the exception of the peace-offerings concerning which the Torah explicitly [stated otherwise] and the firstborn and tithe offerings which resemble the peace-offerings.
ח׳כָּל אֵלּוּ הַנֶּאֱכָלִין לְיוֹם וְלַיְלָה דִּין תּוֹרָה שֶׁהֵן נֶאֱכָלִין עַד שֶׁיַּעֲלֶה עַמּוּד הַשַּׁחַר וּכְדֵי לְהַרְחִיק מִן הָעֲבֵרָה אָמְרוּ חֲכָמִים שֶׁאֵין נֶאֱכָלִין אֶלָּא עַד חֲצוֹת הַלַּיְלָה:
8According to Scriptural Law, all of these [sacrifices] that may be eaten on the day [of their sacrifice] and the [following] night may be eaten until dawn.22The first appearance of the sun's rays - but not the sun itself - on the eastern hemisphere. According to different halachic views, it is between 72 minutes and two hours before sunrise. In order to separate a person from sin, our Sages said that they may only be eaten until midnight.23I.e., if a person would be given the entire night, he might become lax and delay the consumption of the meat and come to partake of the meat after dawn. Giving him a more restricted time serves as a safeguard to prevent the violation of this limit. See the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Berachot 1:1).
ט׳כָּל הַקָּרְבָּנוֹת בֵּין קָדְשֵׁי קָדָשִׁים בֵּין קָדָשִׁים קַלִּים אֵין אוֹכְלִין אוֹתָם אֶלָּא הַטְּהוֹרִים בִּלְבַד הַמּוּלִין. אֲפִלּוּ הֶעֱרִיב שִׁמְשׁוֹ וְלֹא הֵבִיא כַּפָּרָתוֹ אֵינוֹ אוֹכֵל בְּקָדָשִׁים. וְהַטֻּמְטוּם אָסוּר לֶאֱכל בְּקָדָשִׁים לְפִי שֶׁהוּא סְפֵק עָרֵל אֲבָל הָאַנְדְּרוֹגִינוּס יֵרָאֶה לִי שֶׁאוֹכֵל בְּקָדָשִׁים קַלִּים:
9All of the sacrifices - both those of the highest degree of sanctity and those of a lesser degree - may be eaten only by those who are ritually pure24Indeed, as stated in Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim 18:13, partaking of sacrificial meat in a state of ritual impurity violates a Scriptural prohibition. See also Hilchot Chagigah4. and who are circumcised.25As evident from Hilchot Sanhedrin 19:4, sec. 69, the prohibition against partaking of sacrificial meat while uncircumcised is an extension of the prohibition against partaking of terumah while uncircumcised. See Hilchot Terumah 7:10; Hilchot Korban Pesach 9:7. Even if the duration of the person's impurity has concluded,26The literal meaning of the words used by the Rambam is "his sun has set." For in most instances, it is at sunset when the duration of the term of a person's ritual impurity ends. but he has not brought the [necessary] atonement,27See Hilchot Mechusrei Kapparah, ch. 1, which explains that a zav, a zavah, a person who had been afflicted with tzara'at and a woman who gave birth or miscarried must immerse themselves in a mikveh (or in a stream) to regain ritual purity. Nevertheless, they may not partake of sacrifices until they bring the offerings required of them. See also Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim 18:14. he may not partake of sacrificial foods. A tumtum28A person whose gender is masked by an extra piece of flesh. may not partake of sacrificial foods, because there is an unresolved doubt whether he is uncircumcised.29I.e., if he is in fact male, circumcision will not have been performed upon him. It appears to me that an androgynus30One with both a male and female sexual organ. may partake of sacrifices of lesser sanctity.31For these sacrifices may be eaten by both males and females. Although there is a halachic uncertainty with regard to the definition of his gender (see Hilchot Nizirut 2:10), that should not prevent him from partaking of these sacrifices. He may not, however, partake of sacrifices of the highest degree of sanctity, for these may only be eaten by males and he is not categorically defined as male.The Kessef Mishneh clarifies that this leniency applies only when the male organ of the androgynus has been circumcised.
י׳וּמֻתָּר לֶאֱכל אֶת הַקָּדָשִׁים בְּכָל מַאֲכָל. אֲפִלּוּ הַכֹּהֲנִים מֻתָּרִין לֶאֱכל חֶלְקָם בֵּין מִקָּדָשִׁים קַלִּים בֵּין מִקָּדְשֵׁי קָדָשִׁים בְּכָל מַאֲכָל. וּלְשַׁנּוֹת בַּאֲכִילָתָן וּלְאָכְלָם צְלוּיִים שְׁלוּקִים וּמְבֻשָּׁלִים וְלָתֵת לְתוֹכָן תַּבְלִין שֶׁל חֻלִּין אֲבָל לֹא תַּבְלִין שֶׁל תְּרוּמָה שֶׁלֹּא יָבִיאוּ אֶת הַתְּרוּמָה לִידֵי פִּסּוּל. וְהָעֲצָמוֹת הַנִּשְׁאָרוֹת מֻתָּרוֹת וְעוֹשֶׂה אָדָם מֵהֶם כָּל כֵּלִים שֶׁיִּרְצֶה:
10It is permitted to eat sacrificial meat together with any other food. Even the priests are permitted to eat their portions - both from the sacrifices of the highest degree of sanctity and those of a lesser degree - together with any other food.32There is a slight difficulty with the Rambam's ruling, as noted by Rav Yosef Corcus in his gloss to the following halachah, for sacrifices of the highest degree of sanctity may only be eaten in the Temple Courtyard and ordinary food may not be brought into the Temple Courtyard. Rashi (Temurah 23a) explains that the intent is that one may partake of ordinary food outside the Temple Courtyard and then enter the Temple Courtyard to partake of the sacrificial food. Tosafot explains that the prohibition against bringing ordinary food into the Temple Courtyard applies only when it is not being brought there for a purpose connected with the Temple service. If, however, it is being brought there to be eaten together with the sacrifices, there is no prohibition. And they may change the manner [in which it is prepared] to be eaten, eating them roasted, lightly cooked, or thoroughly cooked33The Paschal sacrifice may only be eaten while roasted, but that is a specific obligation that does not apply to other sacrifices. and to spice them with spices that are not consecrated. They may not, however, spice them with spices that are terumah, lest this cause the terumah to be disqualified.34The sacrifices may be eaten only for a limited amount of time as mentioned above (Halachot 6-7), while there is no limit on the time terumah may be eaten. Thus if the sacrifices were cooked with terumah, the terumah could be disqualified with the sacrifices and the time in which it could be eaten would be reduced.The bones that remain are permitted [to be used for any purpose].35I.e., this is not considered as a desecration of consecrated articles (Radbaz). This applies provided there are not any portions of the bones that are fit to be eaten (Kessef Mishneh). A person may make any utensil he desires from them.
י״אהָיְתָה לָהֶם אֲכִילָה מוּעֶטֶת אוֹכְלִין עִמָּהּ חֻלִּין וּתְרוּמוֹת כְּדֵי שֶׁתִּהְיֶה נֶאֱכֶלֶת עִם הַשֹּׂבַע. הָיְתָה לָהֶן אֲכִילָה מְרֻבָּה אֵין אוֹכְלִין עִמָּהּ חֻלִּין וּתְרוּמָה כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא תִּהְיֶה נֶאֱכֶלֶת אֲכִילָה גַּסָּה. וְכֵן בִּשְׁיָרֵי הַמְּנָחוֹת:
11If there was only a small amount [of sacrificial meat], ordinary food and terumah should be eaten with it so that it will be eaten in a satisfying manner.36For it is not befitting for one to leave his master's table when he is hungry (Tosafot, Pesachim 120a). If there is a large amount [of sacrificial meat], ordinary food and terumah should not be eaten with it so that one will not have overeaten.37For that is also not becoming. Similar concepts apply with regard to the remainder of the meal offerings.38I.e., that other foods may be eaten with it if there is only a small amount (Kessef Mishneh). Indeed, the verse from which the above concepts are derived (Leviticus 6:9 concerns the meal offerings.
י״באֵין מְבַשְּׁלִין חַטָּאת אוֹ אָשָׁם עִם מוּרָם מִתּוֹדָה אוֹ מֵאֵיל נָזִיר מִפְּנֵי שֶׁמְּמַעֵט בְּאוֹכְלֵיהֶן וּבִמְקוֹם אֲכִילָתָן. וְלֹא מוּרָם מִתּוֹדָה וּמֵאֵיל נָזִיר עִם בְּכוֹר אוֹ עִם חָזֶה וְשׁוֹק שֶׁל שְׁלָמִים מִפְּנֵי שֶׁמְּמַעֵט זְמַן אֲכִילָתָן. וְלֹא מוּרָם מִשְּׁלָמִים שֶׁל אֶמֶשׁ עִם חַטָּאת וְאָשָׁם שֶׁל יוֹם מִפְּנֵי שֶׁמְּמַעֵט בְּאוֹכְלֵיהֶן וּבִמְקוֹם אֲכִילָתָן וּבִזְמַן אֲכִילָתָן. אֲבָל חַטָּאת וְאָשָׁם מִתְבַּשְּׁלִין זֶה עִם זֶה וְתוֹדָה וְאֵיל נָזִיר זֶה עִם זֶה וְהַבְּכוֹר וְחָזֶה וְשׁוֹק זֶה עִם זֶה. חֲתִיכָה שֶׁל קָדְשֵׁי קָדָשִׁים אוֹ שֶׁל פִּגּוּל אוֹ נוֹתָר שֶׁנִּתְבַּשְּׁלָה עִם חֲתִיכוֹת אֲחֵרוֹת. אוֹתָן הַחֲתִיכוֹת אֲסוּרוֹת לְזָרִים וּמֻתָּרוֹת לַכֹּהֲנִים:
12A sin-offering and a guilt-offering should not be cooked together with the elevated portion of the thanksgiving-offering or the elevated portion of the nazirite's ram because doing so restricts the type of people able to partake of them39A sin-offering and a guilt-offering may only be eaten by male priests, while the elevated portions of the thanksgiving offering and the nazirite's ram may also be eaten by their wives, their daughters, and their servants (Radbaz). and the place where they can be eaten.40A sin-offering and a guilt-offering may only be eaten in the Temple Courtyard, while the elevated portions of the thanksgiving offering and the nazirite's ram may also be eaten throughout the city of Jerusalem (ibid.).Needless to say, one may not cook a sin-offering or a guilt-offering with the portion of the thanksgiving offering and the nazirite's ram to be eaten by the owner, for doing so certainly places restrictions on that meat, preventing even the owner from partaking of it. Nor may one [cook] the elevated portion of the thanksgiving-offering or the elevated portion of the nazirite's ram with the breast and thigh of the peace-offering because doing so restricts the time in which they may be eaten.41The elevated portions of the thanksgiving offering and the nazirite's ram may be eaten only for a day and a night, while the breast and thigh of the peace-offering may be eaten on the following day as well (ibid.).The same concepts apply with regard to cooking the meat of the thanksgiving offering or the nazirite's ram together with the meat of a peace-offering. It is only that since the Rambam had been speaking about the portions eaten by the priests, he continued to do so. Nor may the elevated portion of yesterday's peace-offering [be cooked] with a sin-offering or a guilt-offering brought today because doing so restricts the type of people able to partake of them,42For sin-offering and a guilt-offering may only be eaten by male priests, while the peace-offerings may be eaten by Israelites and women (ibid.). the place where they can be eaten,43A sin-offering and a guilt-offering may only be eaten in the Temple Courtyard, while the peace-offering may also be eaten throughout the city of Jerusalem (ibid.). and the time in which they may be eaten.44Here the restrictions are reversed for the peace offering of the previous day may only be eaten until sunset, while the sin-offering and the guilt-offering may also be eaten until midnight of the following night (ibid.).One may, however, cook sin-offerings and guilt-offerings together, the thanksgiving offering and the nazirite's ram together, and the firstborn offering and the breast and the thigh [of the thanksgiving offering] together.45In all of these instances, the pairs of offerings mentioned may be eaten by the same type of individual, in the same places, and for the same duration of time.If one cooked a piece [of meat] from the sacrifices of the most sacred order,46Which may only be eaten by priests. one that was piggul,47Meat from a sacrifice that was slaughtered with the intent to sprinkle its blood, offer the portions required to be offered on the altar's pyre, or partake of its meat at an improper time (Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim 13:1). or one that was notar48Meat that remained after the required time for partaking of this type of sacrificial meat passed (ibid. 18:10). with other pieces of sacrificial meat,49There are others who include sacrificial meat that became impure in the list of prohibitions mentioned here and indeed this is the standard text of the Mishnah (Orlah 2:16) which serves as the source for this halachah. The Rambam does not, however, include that particular in his version of the mishnah. The rationale for this distinction is discussed by the commentaries. See the notes to the following halachah. those other pieces are forbidden to non-priests and permitted to priests.50In his Commentary to the Mishnah (ibid.), the Rambam explains that this is speaking about an instance when there is sixty times more permitted meat than the piece of meat that is piggul or notar and that forbidden piece of meat was removed. See Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot 16:5-6 with regard to the latter points. This addition satisfies the objections raised by the Ra'avad.According to this interpretation, the fundamental point of this ruling is that the meat is permitted only to priests and not to non-priests. Although the prohibitions against piggul and notar have been nullified since the sacrificial meat was originally to be eaten only by priests, that restriction still remains. There are, however, others who interpret the mishnah differently.
י״גבְּשַׂר קָדְשֵׁי קָדָשִׁים אוֹ בְּשַׂר קָדָשִׁים קַלִּים שֶׁנִּתְבַּשֵּׁל עִם בְּשַׂר תַּאֲוָה הֲרֵי בְּשַׂר הַתַּאֲוָה אָסוּר לִטְמֵאִים וּמֻתָּר לִטְהוֹרִים:
13When meat from the sacrifices of the most sacred order or sacrifices of lesser sanctity is cooked together with ordinary meat,51The term the Rambam uses literally translates as "the meat of desire," i.e., meat that there is no mitzvah to partake of. the ordinary meat is forbidden to those who are ritually impure52Because it has absorbed the flavor of the sacrificial meat. The Radbaz states that even if there is enough ordinary meat to nullify the presence of the sacrificial meat, the prohibition against eating the sacrificial meat in a state of ritual impurity is not nullified. and permitted to those who are ritually pure.53As the Rambam states in his Commentary to the Mishnah (Orlah 2:17), the intent is that if the sacrificial meat was from sacrifices of the most sacred order, the ordinary meat may be eaten by priests. If it was of sacrifices of lesser sanctity, it may be eaten by ordinary individuals, provided they are ritually pure.In one of his responsa, the Radbaz mentions that only the ordinary meat is permitted to be eaten, the sacrificial meat is forbidden, because it is considered to have become ritually impure because of its contact with the ordinary meat. See Hilchot Sha'ar Avot HaTumah 11:5. In his Commentary to the Mishnah, however, the Rambam states that "everything may be eaten by pure priests" or "pure non-priests."
י״דנֶאֱמַר בְּעוֹלָה (ויקרא ז ח) "עוֹר הָעלָה אֲשֶׁר הִקְרִיב לַכֹּהֵן לוֹ יִהְיֶה". וְנֶאֱמַר בְּחַטָּאת (ויקרא ו יט) "הַכֹּהֵן הַמְחַטֵּא אֹתָהּ יֹאכְלֶנָּה". וְנֶאֱמַר בְּאָשָׁם (ויקרא ז ז) "הַכֹּהֵן אֲשֶׁר יְכַפֶּר בּוֹ לוֹ יִהְיֶה". וְנֶאֱמַר בִּשְׁלָמִים (ויקרא ז יד) "לַכֹּהֵן הַזֹּרֵק אֶת דַּם הַשְּׁלָמִים לוֹ יִהְיֶה". וְנֶאֱמַר בְּמִנְחָה (ויקרא ז ט) "הַכֹּהֵן הַמַּקְרִיב אוֹתָהּ לוֹ יִהְיֶה". אֵין הַכָּתוּב מְדַבֵּר בְּכָל אֵלּוּ אֶלָּא בְּרָאוּי. שֶׁהַכֹּהֵן הָרָאוּי לַעֲבוֹדָה זֶהוּ שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ חֵלֶק לֶאֱכל. וּמִי שֶׁאֵינוֹ רָאוּי בִּשְׁעַת הַקָּרְבָּן כְּגוֹן שֶׁהָיָה טָמֵא אֵין לוֹ חֵלֶק לֶאֱכל אֲפִלּוּ כְּשֶׁיִּטְהַר לָעֶרֶב. אֲבָל לְעִנְיַן חֲלוּקָה הַכּל לְאַנְשֵׁי בֵּית אָב שֶׁמַּקְרִיבִין בְּאוֹתוֹ הַיּוֹם. וְכֻלָּם חוֹלְקִים בְּכָל קָדְשֵׁי הַמִּקְדָּשׁ אִישׁ כְּאָחִיו. בֵּין זֶה שֶׁהִקְרִיב בֵּין אָחִיו שֶׁעִמּוֹ בַּמִּקְדָּשׁ שֶׁלֹּא הִקְרִיב:
14With regard to a burnt-offering, [Leviticus 7:8] states: "The hide of the burnt-offering which the priest sacrificed will belong to him." With regard to a sin-offering, [ibid. 6:19] states: "The priest who performs the sin-offering shall partake of it." With regard to a guilt-offering, [ibid. 7:7] states: "It will belong to the priest who brings about atonement because of it." With regard to a peace-offering, [ibid.:14] states: "It will belong to the priest who pours the blood of the peace-offering." And with regard to the meal-offering, it is written: "The priest who offers it shall partake of it."54The verse cited in the text of the Mishneh Torah does not exist. The commentaries have suggested that the intent is Leviticus 7:9 as stated in the following halachah.See the gloss of the Radbaz who explains why all the different verses are necessary, because the concepts cannot be derived from each other.In all the above instances, the verses are not referring [to the priest who actually brings the offering, but] to [any priest] who is fit to have done so. Any priest who is fit to perform the service has a right to share in the division [of the sacrifice] to partake of it.55As indicated by Halachah 17 [see also the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Zevachim 12:1)], priests with a disqualifying physical blemish are not excluded from receiving a portion of the division of the sacrifices even though they are unfit to offer them, because there is a special verse that teaches that they should receive a portion. [Conversely,] one who is not fit [to serve] at the time it is offered, e.g., he was ritually impure, does not have a right to share in the division [of the sacrifice] to partake of it even if he will regain ritual purity in the evening.With regard to the division, the entire [matter] is given to the men of the clan who offer sacrifices that day.56See Hilchot K'lei HaMikdash 4:11 with regard to what is meant by a clan. They all share in the division of all of the sacraments of the Temple, each man [receiving the same portion] as his brother, whether he was the one who offered the sacrifice or he was together with him in the Temple, but did not offer the sacrifice.
ט״ווְלָמָּה חִלֵּק הַכָּתוּב בִּמְנָחוֹת בֵּין מְנָחוֹת הָאֲפוּיוֹת וּמִנְחַת הַסּלֶת. שֶׁהֲרֵי בַּאֲפוּיוֹת הוּא אוֹמֵר (ויקרא ז ט) "כָּל הַמִּנְחָה אֲשֶׁר תֵּאָפֶה בַּתַּנּוּר לַכֹּהֵן הַמַּקְרִיב אֹתָהּ לוֹ תִהְיֶה". וּבְמִנְחַת הַסּלֶת הוּא אוֹמֵר (ויקרא ז י) "וְכָל מִנְחָה בְלוּלָה בַשֶּׁמֶן וַחֲרֵבָה לְכָל בְּנֵי אַהֲרֹן תִּהְיֶה אִישׁ כְּאָחִיו". שֶׁהָאֲפוּיָה כְּשֶׁחוֹלְקִין אוֹתָהּ אַנְשֵׁי בֵּית אָב כָּל שֶׁיַּגִּיעַ לוֹ חֶלְקוֹ אֲפִלּוּ כְּזַיִת פַּת הֲרֵי הוּא רָאוּי לוֹ שֶׁהֲרֵי אוֹכְלוֹ מִיָּד. אֲבָל הַסּלֶת אִם יְחַלְּקוּהָ בֵּינֵיהֶן נִמְצָא מַגִּיעַ לָזֶה מְלֹא כַּפּוֹ סלֶת אוֹ פָּחוֹת שֶׁאֵינוֹ רָאוּי לֹא לָלוּשׁ אוֹתוֹ וְלֹא לֶאֱפוֹתוֹ לְפִיכָךְ הָיָה עוֹלֶה עַל הַדַּעַת שֶׁיַּחְלְקוּ מִנְחָה כְּנֶגֶד מִנְחָה וְלֹא יַחְלְקוּ מִנְחָה זוֹ בִּפְנֵי עַצְמָהּ עַל כָּל אַנְשֵׁי בֵּית אָב. הֻצְרַךְ הַכָּתוּב לוֹמַר בָּהּ לְכָל בְּנֵי אַהֲרֹן תִּהְיֶה אִישׁ כְּאָחִיו לוֹמַר שֶׁיְּחַלְּקוּהָ בִּפְנֵי עַצְמָהּ. מִכָּאן אָמְרוּ חֲכָמִים אֵין חוֹלְקִין מִנְחָה כְּנֶגֶד מִנְחָה אֲפִלּוּ מַעֲשֵׂה מַחֲבַת כְּנֶגֶד מַעֲשֵׂה מַחֲבַת אוֹ סלֶת כְּנֶגֶד סלֶת. אֶלָּא כָּל אַחַת וְאַחַת חוֹלְקִין שְׁיָרֶיהָ בִּפְנֵי עַצְמָהּ:
15Why did the verse make a distinction between the meal-offerings that are baked and the meal-offerings of flour? For with regard to [the meal-offerings] that are baked, [Leviticus 7:9] states: "Any meal-offering that is baked in an oven... it will belong to the priest who offers it" and with regard to the meal-offerings of flour [ibid.:10] states: "Any meal-offering that is mixed with oil or that is parched shall belong to all the sons of Aaron, every man like his brother."[The following explanation can be given:]57The commentaries note that the explanation appears to be the Rambam's own, rather than to stem from a prior source. When [the meal-offerings] that are baked are divided among the members of the clan, whenever a person receives a portion, even if it is [merely] an olive-sized portion of bread, it is fit for him to partake of it, because it may be eaten immediately. When, however, we are speaking of flour, if [such an offering] will be divided among them, there will be those who will receive only a handful of flour or less. This is not fit either to be kneaded into dough or to be baked. Hence, one might think that one meal offering should be apportioned in consideration of another meal-offering instead of dividing each meal-offering individually among all the members of the clan.58I.e., if there were 20 meal-offerings and 60 priests, one might think that each of the meal-offerings would be divided among three priests rather than have all 20 divided among the 60. Hence, it is necessary to explicitly state that every priest receives a portion of a meal-offering of flour. Therefore it is necessary for the Torah to state [that it] "shall belong to all the sons of Aaron, every man like his brother," i.e., that it is divided individually.On this basis, our Sages said:59Sifra to the verse, Kiddushin 53a; Menachot 73a. that a meal offering is not divided in consideration of another meal-offering, not even one offering brought in a flat frying pan in consideration of another such offering or one flour-offering in consideration of another such offering. Instead, what remains60After the portions offered on the altar are taken. from every [offering] is divided individually.
ט״זוְכֵן אֵין חוֹלְקִין עוֹף כְּנֶגֶד עוֹף. וְלֹא חַטָּאת כְּנֶגֶד חַטָּאת. וְלֹא חָזֶה וְשׁוֹק כְּנֶגֶד חָזֶה וְשׁוֹק. אֶלָּא כָּל חֵלֶק וְחֵלֶק חוֹלְקִין אוֹתוֹ בֵּינֵיהֶן בְּשָׁוֵה:
16Similarly, an offering of fowl is not apportioned in consideration of another such offering, nor a sin-offering in consideration of another such offering, nor a breast and a thigh in consideration of another such portion.61In all these instances, one might think that it would be preferable to divide each of the sacrifices among a smaller number of priests. Instead, every [sacrificial portion] is divided among all [the members of the clan] equally.
י״זאֵין הַקָּטָן חוֹלֵק אֲפִלּוּ בְּקָדָשִׁים קַלִּים אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁמֻּתָּר לְהַאֲכִילוֹ קָדְשֵׁי קָדָשִׁים. וְכֵן אִשָּׁה וְאַנְדְּרוֹגִינוּס אֵין חוֹלְקִין לָהֶם בְּקָדְשֵׁי הַמִּקְדָּשׁ כְּלָל שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא ז י) "אִישׁ כְּאָחִיו". אֲבָל בַּעַל מוּם בֵּין קָבוּעַ בֵּין עוֹבֵר בֵּין שֶׁנּוֹלַד בְּמוּמוֹ בֵּין שֶׁהָיָה תָּמִים וְנִפְסַל חוֹלֵק וְאוֹכֵל שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא כא כב) "לֶחֶם אֱלֹהָיו מִקָּדְשֵׁי הַקֳדָשִׁים" וְגוֹ'. וְהוּא שֶׁיִּהְיֶה רָאוּי לַאֲכִילָה. אֲבָל אִם הָיָה טָמֵא אֵינוֹ חוֹלֵק לֶאֱכל לָעֶרֶב:
17Even though it is permitted to feed a minor [meat even] from sacrifices of the highest degree of sanctity, he is not given a portion, even from sacrifices of a lesser degree of sanctity.62Instead, he may only partake of what the other priests give him from their portions. Similarly, a woman and an androgynus63I.e., since the halachic status of the gender of an androgynus is not defined, he is not given a portion as a male would be. are not given a portion of the sacrifices from the Temple at all, as [the above verse] states: "Every man like his brother."64The same phrase excludes both women and minors, because the term "man" implies that the recipient must be male and of age. Since they are not fit to perform service, they are not allocated a portion of the sacrifices.[A priest] who has a disqualifying physical blemish - whether permanent or temporary, whether he was born with it or born unblemished and later disqualified - receives a portion of the sacrifices and may partake of them,65Even though he is not fit to perform service, he is considered an ordinary member of the priestly clan and given a portion of the sacrifices. There is an explicit verse requiring this [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Zevachim 12:1)]. as [Leviticus 21:22] states: "The food of his God, of the most sacred order... he may eat." [The above applies] provided he is fit to partake [of the sacrifice at the time it is offered]. If, however, he is impure, he is not given a portion to eat in the evening.66Even if he would regain his ritual purity by the evening.
י״חוְכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל אוֹכֵל שֶׁלֹּא בַּחֲלוּקָה אֶלָּא נוֹטֵל כָּל מַה שֶּׁיִּרְצֶה:
18The High Priest may partake [of any of the sacrifices] without a division having been made. Rather, he may take whatever he desires.
י״טכָּל הָרָאוּי לַאֲכִילַת הַקָּדָשִׁים בִּשְׁעַת הַקָּרְבָּן חוֹלֵק לֶאֱכל. וְכָל מִי שֶׁאֵינוֹ רָאוּי לֶאֱכל בִּשְׁעַת הָעֲבוֹדָה אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא רָאוּי לַעֲבוֹדָה וַהֲרֵי הוּא רָאוּי לֶאֱכל לָעֶרֶב אֵינוֹ חוֹלֵק כְּדֵי לְהָנִיחַ חֶלְקוֹ לָעֶרֶב. כֵּיצַד. טְבוּל יוֹם וּמְחֻסַּר כִּפּוּרִים וְהָאוֹנֵן בְּיוֹם הַקְּבוּרָה בֵּין כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל בֵּין כֹּהֵן הֶדְיוֹט אֵין חוֹלְקִין לֶאֱכל לָעֶרֶב:
19All [priests] who are fit to partake of sacrificial foods at the time the sacrifice is offered receive a share [of the sacrifice] to partake of. All [priests] who are not fit to partake of sacrificial foods at the time the sacrifice is offered, even though they are fit to perform sacrificial service and will be fit to partake [of the sacrifice in the evening] do not receive a share [of the sacrifice] to set aside until the evening.67For everything depends on the priest's state at the time the sacrifice is offered (ibid.).What is implied?68I.e., which priests could be fit to perform service during the day and fit to partake of sacrifices after nightfall, but are unfit to partake of the sacrifices at the time they are offered. A priest who has immersed that day,69But will not regain purity until nightfall. one who is lacking in atonement,70A priest who had been a zav or who had been afflicted with tzara'at must immerse himself in a stream or a mikveh to regain ritual purity. In addition, he must bring a specific offering. Until he brings that offering, he is considered as lacking atonement, as explained in Hilchot Mechusrei Kapparah.These two categories of priests are considered as fit to serve, because they would be fit to offer a communal sacrifice if it were to be brought in a state of ritual impurity. See Hilchot Bi'at HaMikdash 4:10 and Halachah 23 and notes. or one who is onein on the day of burial,71The term onein refers to a person in the acute state of mourning experienced at the time of the death of any of seven close relatives. On the day of such a relative's death, one is an onein according to Scriptural Law. If the relative is not buried on the day of his death, the priest is considered an onein according to Rabbinic Law until after the day of burial. Once the relative is buried, however, the priest may perform service and partake of sacrifices in the evening. See Hilchot Bi'at HaMikdash 2:7, 9-10. whether a High Priest72Who is permitted to serve even though he is in the state of onein mourning. See the following halachah. or an ordinary priest, should not receive a share of the sacrifices in order to partake of them in the evening.
כ׳כָּל שֶׁאֵינוֹ רָאוּי לֶאֱכל אֵינוֹ רָאוּי לַעֲבֹד. חוּץ מִכֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל הָאוֹנֵן שֶׁהוּא מַקְרִיב וְאֵינוֹ אוֹכֵל כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ. וְכָל שֶׁאֵינוֹ רָאוּי לַעֲבֹד אֵינוֹ רָאוּי לֶאֱכל חוּץ מִבַּעַל מוּם שֶׁהֲרֵי נִתְפָּרֵשׁ בַּתּוֹרָה:
20All [priests] who are not fit to partake of sacrificial foods are not fit to perform sacrificial service with the exception of a High Priest who is an onein who may offer sacrifices, but may not partake [of sacrificial foods], as we explained.73Hilchot Bi'at HaMikdash 2:6-8. All [priests] who are not fit to perform sacrificial service are not fit to partake of sacrificial foods74The Or Sameach suggests that the text should read "are not fit to receive a portion of sacrificial foods," because women and children are fit to partake of the sacrifices, but are not fit to perform sacrificial service. except one disqualified because of a physical blemish [whose license to partake of sacrificial foods] is explicitly stated in the Torah.75As stated in Halachah 17.
כ״אכָּל שֶׁאֵין לוֹ חֵלֶק בַּבָּשָׂר אֵין לוֹ חֵלֶק בָּעוֹרוֹת. אֲפִלּוּ טָמֵא בִּשְׁעַת זְרִיקַת דָּמִים וְטָהוֹר בִּשְׁעַת הֶקְטֵר חֲלָבִים אֵינוֹ חוֹלֵק בַּבָּשָׂר שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא ז לג) "הַמַּקְרִיב אֶת דַּם הַשְּׁלָמִים וְאֶת הַחֵלֶב מִבְּנֵי אַהֲרֹן לוֹ תִהְיֶה שׁוֹק הַיָּמִין לְמָנָה". עַד שֶׁיִּהְיֶה טָהוֹר וְרָאוּי לַעֲבוֹדָה מִשְּׁעַת זְרִיקָה עַד אַחַר הֶקְטֵר חֲלָבִים:
21All [priests] who do not receive a portion of the sacrificial meat do not receive a portion of the hides of the sacrifices.76Zevachim 12:2 derives this concept from Leviticus 7:12: "The hide of the burnt-offering which he offered will belong to the priest," i.e., the priest must be fit to offer the sacrifice. If he is fit to offer it, he is fit to partake of it.The Radbaz explains that it is necessary for the Rambam to mention the allocation of the hides explicitly, because one might not necessarily derive this point from the allocation of the meat. Even if a priest was impure at the time when the blood [of a sacrifice] was sprinkled on the altar, but pure at the time its fats were offered on the altar's pyre,77This is speaking about an instance where a priest was impure at the time a sacrifice was slaughtered and its blood was sprinkled on the altar. Nevertheless, the offering of the fats of the sacrifice was delayed and not performed until after nightfall. In the interim, the priest immersed himself and thus was pure at the time the fats were offered. he does not receive a portion of the sacrificial meat, as [Leviticus 7:33] states: "One who offers the blood of the peace-offering and the fat from the sons of Aaron, to him the right thigh will be [given] as a portion." [Implied is that] the priest must be pure and fit to perform service from the time [the blood] is sprinkled until after the fats are offered.78For the prooftext mentions both these services.
כ״בנִטְמָא אַחַר זְרִיקָה וְטָבַל וַהֲרֵי הוּא טָהוֹר אַף בִּשְׁעַת הֶקְטֵר חֲלָבִים הַדָּבָר סָפֵק אִם חוֹלֵק אִם אֵינוֹ חוֹלֵק לְפִיכָךְ אִם תָּפַס אֵין מוֹצִיאִין מִיָּדוֹ:
22If [a priest] became impure after [the blood of the sacrifice] was sprinkled [on the altar] and immersed himself and thus was also pure when the fats were offered on the altar's pyre, there is an unresolved question whether or not he receives a portion.79For although he was pure when both these services were performed, he was impure in the interim. Therefore if he grabs a portion, it is not expropriated from him.80I.e., he is not given a portion, because he cannot prove that he is worthy of one, but it is not taken from him, since the other priests also cannot prove that he is not worthy. In both instances, the basis for the decision is the principle: When one seeks to expropriate money from a colleague, the burden of proof is on the plaintiff.
כ״גקָרְבַּן צִבּוּר הַבָּא בְּטֻמְאָה אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהַטְּמֵאִים מַקְרִיבִין אוֹתוֹ אֵין חוֹלְקִין עִם הַטְּהוֹרִין לֶאֱכל לָעֶרֶב מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאֵינָם רְאוּיִים לַאֲכִילָה:
23When a communal sacrifice is offered in a state of impurity,81I.e., as stated in Hilchot Bi'at HaMikdash 4:10,12, when the majority of priests are impure, the communal offerings may be offered by the impure priests. even though impure priests [could have] offered it,82The bracketed additions are made on the basis of the glosses of the Radbaz and Rav Yosef Corcus who note that if the sacrifice was offered by impure priests, its meat is not eaten (Hilchot Bi'at HaMikdash 4:11). Hence we are forced to say that we are speaking about a situation where the sacrifice could have been offered by impure priests, but in fact it was offered by pure priests. Thus the sacrifice may be eaten. One might think that the impure priests would receive a portion since they were fit to offer the sacrifice. Hence, the Rambam explains that they do not, because they were not fit to partake of it at the time it was offered. they do not receive a portion together with the priests who are pure to partake of it in the evening,83I.e., even if they would be fit to partake of it in the evening. because they are not fit to partake of it [at the time it is offered].
י״א
א׳כָּל הָאוֹכֵל כְּזַיִת מִבְּשַׂר הָעוֹלָה בֵּין לִפְנִי זְרִיקַת דָּמָהּ בֵּין לְאַחַר זְרִיקַת דָּמָהּ לוֹקֶה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים יב יז) "לֹא תוּכַל לֶאֱכל בִּשְׁעָרֶיךָ מַעְשַׂר דְּגָנְךָ תִּירשְׁךָ וְיִצְהָרֶךָ" וְגוֹ' (דברים יב יז) "וְכָל נְדָרֶיךָ אֲשֶׁר תִּדֹּר". מִפִּי הַשְּׁמוּעָה לָמְדוּ שֶׁזּוֹ אַזְהָרָה לְאוֹכֵל בְּשַׂר הָעוֹלָה:
1Anyone1This prohibition applies equally to priests and Israelites (Radbaz). who eats an olive-sized portion2This is a general principle with regard to all prohibitions involving eating. Lashes are given only for partaking of an olive-sized portion. of the meat of a burnt-offering, whether before its blood is sprinkled [on the altar] or afterwards,3Compare to Halachah 4. is liable for lashes,4Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 146) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 447) include this prohibition as one of the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. As explained in Hilchot Meilah 1:3, this negative commandment is also the source for the prohibition against deriving benefit from consecrated articles (meilah). as [implied by Deuteronomy 12:17]: "You may not eat in your gates the tithe of your grain...5This refers to the second tithe which must be brought to Jerusalem. and [the sacrifices brought because of] the vows that you take." According to the Oral Tradition,6Sifri to the above verse, Makkot 17a. it was taught that this is a warning against partaking of the meat of a burnt-offering.7For the latter term is understood as a reference to the burnt offering (ibid.).
ב׳וְחֶלְבָּהּ וּבְשָׂרָהּ וְסָלְתָּהּ וְשַׁמְנָהּ וְיַיִן שֶׁל נְסָכֶיהָ חֲמִשְּׁתָן מִצְטָרְפִין לִכְזַיִת:
2Its fat, its meat, and the flour, oil, and wine of its accompanying offering - all five [of these components] can be combined to comprise this olive-sized portion.8I.e., since they are all considered as components of the burnt offering, they are all forbidden. The Radbaz mentions that the omission of the blood of the sacrificial animal indicates that it is not included.
ג׳וְכֵן הָאוֹכֵל כְּזַיִת מִכָּל הָאֵימוּרִין בֵּין לִפְנֵי זְרִיקָה בֵּין לְאַחַר זְרִיקָה בֵּין כֹּהֵן בֵּין יִשְׂרָאֵל לוֹקֶה. שֶׁהָאֵימוּרִין כָּלִיל לַמִּזְבֵּחַ כְּכָל הָעוֹלָה וַהֲרֵי נֶאֱמַר בְּמִנְחַת כֹּהֲנִים (ויקרא ו טז) "כָּלִיל תִּהְיֶה לֹא תֵאָכֵל" כָּל שֶׁהוּא כָּלִיל לַמִּזְבֵּחַ אֲכִילָתוֹ בְּלֹא תַּעֲשֶׂה וְלוֹקִין עָלָיו בִּכְזַיִת. וְכֵן הָאוֹכֵל כְּזַיִת מִבְּשַׂר חַטָּאוֹת הַנִּשְׂרָפוֹת לוֹקֶה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא ו כג) "וְכָל חַטָּאת אֲשֶׁר יוּבָא מִדָּמָהּ אֶל אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד" (ויקרא ו כג) "לֹא תֵאָכֵל בָּאֵשׁ תִּשָּׂרֵף":
3Similarly, one who partakes of an olive-sized portion9The Radbaz explains that the Rambam explicitly mentions that one must partake of an olive-sized portion to be liable - instead, of allowing a reader to reach that conclusion on his own - because one might think that since the verse states that "It shall be totally consumed," as long as a person prevents it from being totally consumed, he is liable. of any of the portions of the sacrifices to be offered on the altar's pyre, whether before the blood [of the sacrifice] is sprinkled [on the altar] or afterwards, whether he is a priest or an Israelite, is liable for lashes.10Besides the prohibitions mentioned here, a person who partakes of these sacrificial components also violates the prohibition against meilah. For the portions to be offered on the altar's pyre must be totally consumed like the totality of the burnt offering. Now [Leviticus 6:16] states with regard to a meal-offering of a priest: "It shall be totally consumed; it should not be eaten." [From this, we derive that] there is a negative commandment [prohibiting] partaking of anything that should be consumed by [the fire of] the altar.11Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 138) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 137) include this prohibition as one of the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. Although the commandment specifically refers to the meal offering brought by a priest, the Sifra understands it as applying to a greater scope of sacrificial foods, as the Rambam explains. One is liable for lashes for eating an olive-sized portion [of such substances].Similarly, anyone who eats an olive-sized portion of any of the sin-offerings that must be burnt12See Chapter 7, Halachot 2-4. is liable for lashes,13Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 139) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 139) include this prohibition as one of the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. A separate commandment is necessary, for these sin-offerings are not burnt on the altar of the Temple. as [ibid.:23] states: "Any sin-offering whose blood is brought into the Tent of Meeting... should not be eaten. It should be burnt with fire."
ד׳כָּל הָאוֹכֵל כְּזַיִת מִבְּשַׂר הַקָּדָשִׁים אֲפִלּוּ קָדָשִׁים קַלִּים קֹדֶם זְרִיקַת דָּמָם לוֹקֶה. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים יב יז) "לֹא תוּכַל לֶאֱכל בִּשְׁעָרֶיךָ מַעְשַׂר דְּגָנְךָ תִּירשְׁךָ וְיִצְהָרֶךָ" (דברים יב יז) "וְנִדְבֹתֶיךָ". כְּלוֹמַר לֹא תוּכַל לֶאֱכל נִדְבוֹתֶיךָ בִּשְׁעָרֶיךָ קֹדֶם שֶׁזּוֹרְקִין דָּמָן בְּשַׁעֲרֵי הַמָּקוֹם. מִפִּי הַשְּׁמוּעָה לָמְדוּ שֶׁזּוֹ אַזְהָרָה לְאוֹכֵל תּוֹדָה אוֹ שְׁלָמִים קדֶם זְרִיקַת דָּמִים. וְהוּא הַדִּין לִשְׁאָר קָדָשִׁים בֵּין קַלִּים בֵּין חֲמוּרִים. וְשִׁשָּׁה דְּבָרִים שֶׁבְּתוֹדָה שֶׁהֵם הַחֵלֶב וְהַבָּשָׂר וְהַסּלֶת וְהַשֶּׁמֶן וְהַיַּיִן וְהַלֶּחֶם כֻּלָּן מִצְטָרְפִין לִכְזַיִת:
4Anyone who partakes of an olive-sized portion of the meat of any of the sacrifices - even sacrifices of a lesser degree of sanctity - before their blood is sprinkled [on the altar]14As stated in Hilchot Meilah 2:1, after the blood is sprinkled on the altar, even one who is not permitted to partake of these sacrifices is not liable for meilah, misappropriating the sacred articles for one's personal use. is liable for lashes,15Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 147) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 448) include this prohibition as one of the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. Significantly, in his listing of the mitzvot at the beginning of this set of halachot, the Rambam mentions this prohibition only with regard to sacrifices of a lesser degree of sanctity. as it is written: "You may not eat in your gates the tithe of your grain, your wine, and your oil... and [the sacrifices brought because of] your pledges." Implied is that you may not eat [the sacrifices brought because of] your pledges in your gates before their blood is sprinkled [on the altar] in God's gates.According to the Oral Tradition,16For this is not the simple meaning of the verse (Rav Yosef Corcus). it was taught that this is a warning against partaking of [the meat of] a thanksgiving-offering or a peace-offering before the sprinkling of its blood. This also applies to [the meat of] other sacrifices, whether sacrifices of the highest order of sanctity or those of a lesser degree.17Makkot 17a explains the process of exegesis through which the prohibitions against partaking of the other sacrifices are derived. The six components of the thanksgiving offering, the fat, the meat, the flour, the oil, the wine,18I.e., the flour, the oil, the wine that comprise the accompanying offering that is brought together with the thanksgiving-offering. and the bread, may all be combined to comprise the olive-sized portion [for which one is liable].
ה׳כָּל הָאוֹכֵל כְּזַיִת מִבְּשַׂר קָדְשֵׁי קָדָשִׁים חוּץ לָעֲזָרָה לוֹקֶה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים יב יז) "לֹא תוּכַל לֶאֱכל בִּשְׁעָרֶיךָ מַעְשַׂר דְּגָנְךָ תִּירשְׁךָ וְיִצְהָרֶךָ וּבְכֹרֹת בְּקָרְךָ וְצֹאנֶךָ". מִפִּי הַשְּׁמוּעָה לָמְדוּ שֶׁזּוֹ אַזְהָרָה לְאוֹכֵל מִבְּשַׂר חַטָּאוֹת וַאֲשָׁמוֹת חוּץ לָעֲזָרָה. וְהוּא הַדִּין לְאוֹכֵל קָדָשִׁים קַלִּים חוּץ לִירוּשָׁלַיִם שֶׁהוּא לוֹקֶה. שֶׁחוֹמַת יְרוּשָׁלַיִם לְקָדָשִׁים קַלִּים כְּחוֹמַת הָעֲזָרָה לְקָדְשֵׁי קָדָשִׁים. וְאֶחָד בְּשַׂר חַטָּאת וְאָשָׁם אוֹ שְׁיָרֵי מְנָחוֹת:
5Anyone who partakes of an olive-sized portion of the meat of any of the [sacrifices of] the most sacred order that was taken outside of the walls of the Temple Courtyard, and meat from [sacrifices of] a lesser degree of sanctity that was taken outside Jerusalem, is liable for lashes,19Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 145) and the Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 446) include this prohibition as one of the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. Significantly, in Sefer HaMitzvot and in his listing of the mitzvot at the beginning of this set of halachot, the Rambam mentions this prohibition only with regard to sacrifices of the highest degree of sanctity although he does state that one who partakes of other sacrifices outside of Jerusalem is liable for lashes. When listing the prohibitions for which lashes are given in Hilchot Sanhedrin 19:4, the Rambam lists these two activities separately. as [implied by] the verse: "You may not eat in your gates the tithe of your grain, your wine, your oil, and the firstborn of your cattle and your sheep...." According to the Oral Tradition, it was taught that this is a warning against partaking of [the meat of] a sin-offering or a guilt-offering outside the Temple Courtyard. Similarly, one who partakes of [the meat of] the sacrifices of lesser sanctity outside Jerusalem is liable for lashes. For with regard to sacrifices of a lesser degree of sanctity, the walls of Jerusalem are comparable to the walls of the Temple Courtyard with regard to sacrifices of the most sacred order. [Included equally are] the meat of the sin-offerings and the guilt-offerings and what remains of the meal-offerings.20After the handful was taken to be offered on the altar. All of these are considered as sacrifices of the most sacred order.
ו׳בְּשַׂר קָדְשֵׁי קָדָשִׁים שֶׁיָּצָא חוּץ לְחוֹמַת הָעֲזָרָה וּבְשַׂר קָדָשִׁים קַלִּים שֶׁיָּצָא חוּץ לְחוֹמַת יְרוּשָׁלַיִם נִפְסַל וְנֶאֱסַר לְעוֹלָם. וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁחָזַר לִמְקוֹמוֹ אָסוּר לְאָכְלוֹ וְהָאוֹכֵל מִמֶּנּוּ כְּזַיִת לוֹקֶה. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שמות כב ל) "וּבָשָׂר בַּשָּׂדֶה טְרֵפָה לֹא תֹאכֵלוּ". כֵּיוָן שֶׁיָּצָא בָּשָׂר חוּץ לִמְחִיצָתוֹ נַעֲשָׂה כִּטְרֵפָה כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ בְּהִלְכוֹת מַאֲכָלוֹת אֲסוּרוֹת:
6Meat from [sacrifices of] the most sacred order that was taken outside of the walls of the Temple Courtyard, and meat from [sacrifices of] a lesser degree of sanctity that was taken outside Jerusalem, is disqualified and is forbidden forever. Even if it is taken back to its place, it is forbidden to partake of it. One who eats an olive-sized portion of it21Whether it was returned to its place or not. is liable for lashes, as [implied by Exodus 22:30]: "Meat in a field [from an animal that is] treifah, you shall not eat." Once meat has left its designated place, it is considered as treifah, as we explained in Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot.22Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot 5:9. As the commentaries explain there, the term "field" is referring to a place which is not the natural place for the meat to be found. Being there causes it to be considered treifah, unfit to be eaten. Similarly, the fact that this meat is taken outside its natural place causes it to become forbidden.
ז׳נִכְנַס בְּשַׂר קָדָשִׁים קַלִּים לַהֵיכָל הֲרֵי זֶה כָּשֵׁר:
7If meat from [sacrifices of] a lesser degree of sanctity was taken into the Temple Building, it is acceptable.23Since, as stated in Chapter 10, Halachah 3, after the fact, sacrifices of the most sacred order may be eaten in the Temple Building, taking sacrificial meat there is not considered as taking it outside its designated place. The Radbaz questions whether it is acceptable to eat meat from sacrifices of lesser sanctity in the Temple Building.
ח׳זָר שֶׁאָכַל כְּזַיִת מִבְּשַׂר קָדְשֵׁי קָדָשִׁים בָּעֲזָרָה אַחַר זְרִיקַת דָּמִים לוֹקֶה. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שמות כט לג) "וְאָכְלוּ אֹתָם אֲשֶׁר כֻּפַּר בָּהֶם" וְגוֹ' (שמות כט לג) "וְזָר לֹא יֹאכַל" וְגוֹ'. בְּמָקוֹם שֶׁהַכֹּהֵן אוֹכֵל וּבְעֵת שֶׁרָאוּי לֶאֱכל אִם אֲכָלוֹ שָׁם הַזָּר לוֹקֶה. אֲבָל אִם אָכַל הַזָּר בְּשַׂר קָדְשֵׁי קָדָשִׁים בַּחוּץ לוֹקֶה מִשּׁוּם אוֹכֵל בַּחוּץ לֹא מִשּׁוּם זָר שֶׁאָכַל קֹדֶשׁ. שֶׁהֲרֵי אֵינָם רְאוּיִין שָׁם לַכֹּהֲנִים. וְכֵן אִם אֲכָלָן בָּעֲזָרָה קֹדֶם זְרִיקָה לוֹקֶה מִשּׁוּם אוֹכֵל קֹדֶם זְרִיקָה בִּלְבַד לֹא מִשּׁוּם זָרוּת:
8A non-priest who ate an olive-sized portion of meat from sacrifices of the most sacred order24The Radbaz emphasizes that this applies only to meat from a sin-offering or a guilt-offering. If, however, a non-priest partakes of meat from a burnt-offering, he is liable only for the prohibition against partaking of the meat of a burnt-offering (see Halachah 1) and not because of the prohibition against a non-priest partaking of sacrificial meat. in the Temple Courtyard after their blood was sprinkled [on the altar] is liable for lashes,25Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 148) includes this prohibition as one of the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. The Sefer HaChinuch, however, does not include it. as [Exodus 29:33] states: "And they shall partake of [the sacrifices] which bring them atonement... and a non-priest shall not partake of them." [The association teaches26I.e., as Makkot 18b states, the prohibition against a non-priest partaking of this sacrificial meat applies only in an instance where atonement would be granted were a priest to partake of the meat there. that when sacrificial meat] was eaten by a non-priest in a place where a priest partakes of it and at a time when it is fit to be eaten, he is liable for lashes. If, however, a non-priest ate an olive-sized portion of meat from sacrifices of the most sacred order outside [the Temple Courtyard], he is liable for lashes for partaking of the sacrificial meat outside [the Temple Courtyard]27As stated in Halachah 5. and not because [of the prohibition against] a non-priest partaking of sacrificial foods,28The Radbaz explains that there is a practical as well as a theoretical difference resulting from this concept, for if the non-priest was given a warning for partaking of the meat because he was a non-priest and not because he was partaking of it outside the Temple Courtyard, he is not liable. for they are not fit to be eaten by priests there. Similarly, if [a non-priest] partook of [such meat] in the Temple Courtyard before [the blood] was sprinkled [on the altar], he is liable for lashes only for partaking [of the meat] before the sprinkling of the blood, not because of [partaking of it] as a non-priest.
ט׳זָר שֶׁאָכַל כְּזַיִת מֵחַטַּאת הָעוֹף לוֹקֶה שְׁתַּיִם. אַחַת מִשּׁוּם זָר שֶׁאָכַל אֶת הַקֹּדֶשׁ. וְאַחַת מִשּׁוּם אוֹכֵל נְבֵלָה. שֶׁכָּל מְלִיקָה נְבֵלָה הִיא וּכְשֶׁהֻתְּרָה לַכֹּהֲנִים הֻתְּרָה לֹא לְזָרִים. וַהֲרֵי הֵן שְׁנֵי אִסּוּרִין הַבָּאִין כְּאֶחָד כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ:
9A non-priest who ate an olive-sized portion of meat from a sin-offering from fowl is liable for two sets of lashes: one because he is non-priest partaking of sacred meat29This law also applies only when the meat of the fowl was eaten in a time and a place when the fowl would have been permitted to be eaten by the priests (Radbaz). and one because he is partaking of a neveilah.30An animal that died without proper ritual slaughter. For every [fowl killed by] melikah31Snipping off its head, as stated in Chapter 6, Halachah 21. is a neveilah.32For this is not an acceptable process of ritual slaughter. When license was granted to partake of it, it was granted to priests, but not to non-priests. These two prohibitions are considered as two prohibitions that take effect at the same time,33At the time the fowl's head was snipped off, it becomes both forbidden to non-priests and a neveilah. as we explained.34Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah 17:8 states:There is a major general principle that applies with regard to all of the Torah's prohibitions. One prohibition does not take effect when another prohibition is in effect unless:a) both of the prohibitions take effect at the same time;b) the latter prohibition forbids additional entities besides [the entity that was originally] prohibited;c) the scope of the [latter] prohibition encompasses other entities together with [the entity that was originally] prohibited.
י״ב
א׳הַמְּנָּחוֹת הֵם מִן הַקָּרְבָּנוֹת. וְהַמְּנָחוֹת הַבָּאוֹת בִּפְנֵי עַצְמָן וִאֵינָן בָּאוֹת מִשּׁוּם נְסָכִים. מֵהֶם מִנְחַת צִבּוּר. וּמֵהֶם מִנְחַת יָחִיד:
1Meal-offerings are a type of sacrifice.1Sefer HaMitzvot (positive commandment 67) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 116) include bringing the meal-offerings as one of the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. The meal-offerings that are offered independently and not as part of the accompanying offerings2See Chapter 2, Halachah 1. include both communal meal-offerings and individual meal-offerings.
ב׳וְכָל הַמְּנָחוֹת סלֶת חִטִּין חוּץ מִמִּנְחַת סוֹטָה וְעֹמֶר הַתְּנוּפָה שֶׁהֵם מִן הַשְּׂעוֹרִים:
2All of the meal-offerings are brought from fine wheat flour with the exception of the meal offering of a sotah,3A woman suspected of adultery. See Hilchot Sotah 3:12. and the omer with which tenufah is performed,4This refers to the omer offering which is brought on the second day of the Pesach holiday. See Hilchot Temidim UMusafim 7:3-12. which are brought from barley.
ג׳שָׁלֹשׁ מְנָחוֹת לַצִּבּוּר. עֹמֶר הַתְּנוּפָה וְהוּא קָרֵב לַמִּזְבֵּחַ כְּמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר. וּשְׁתֵּי הַלֶּחֶם שֶׁמְּבִיאִין בְּיוֹם עֲצֶרֶת. וְאֵלּוּ נִקְרְאוּ מִנְחָה וְאֵינָן קְרֵבִין לְגַבֵּי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ וְהֵן חָמֵץ. וַעֲלֵיהֶם נֶאֱמַר (ויקרא ב יב) "קָרְבַּן רֵאשִׁית תַּקְרִיבוּ אֹתָם לַה' וְאֶל הַמִּזְבֵּחַ לֹא יַעֲלוּ". וְהַמִּנְחָה הַשְּׁלִישִׁית הוּא לֶחֶם הַפָּנִים שֶׁעוֹשִׂין בְּכָל שַׁבָּת וְאֵינוֹ קָרֵב לְגַבֵּי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ אֶלָּא כֻּלּוֹ נֶאֱכָל לַכֹּהֲנִים כְּמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר:
3There are three types of communal meal-offerings:a) the omer with which tenufah is performed.5This refers to the omer offering which is brought on the second day of the Pesach holiday. See Hilchot Temidim UMusafim 7:3-12. [A portion of] it is offered on the altar, as will be explained.6See ibid.:12.b) the two breads offered on Shavuot.7See Hilchot Temidim UMusafim 8:1-16. They are called a meal-offering, but are not offered on the altar and are chametz.8Leavened bread in contrast to almost all the other meal-offerings that are unleavened. Concerning them, [Leviticus 2:12] states: "You shall offer them as a sacrifice of first fruits to God, but they shall not be offered on the altar."c) The third meal-offering is the showbread that is brought every Sabbath. They are not offered on the altar, but instead are eaten entirely by the priests, as will be explained.9See Hilchot Temidim UMusafim 4:10-12; 5:5.
ד׳וְתֵשַׁע מִנְחוֹת הַיָּחִיד וְכֻלָּן קְרֵבִין לַמִּזְבֵּחַ וְאֵלּוּ הֵן. מִנְחַת חוֹטֵא וְהוּא הַמִּנְחָה שֶׁמַּקְרִיב הֶעָנִי כְּשֶׁיִּתְחַיֵּב חַטָּאת וְלֹא תַּגִּיעַ יָדוֹ. מִנְחַת סוֹטָה וְהִיא מִנְחַת הַקְּנָאוֹת שֶׁכְּבָר נִתְפָּרְשׁוּ מַעֲשֶׂיהָ. הַמִּנְחָה שֶׁמַּקְרִיב כָּל כֹּהֵן תְּחִלָּה כְּשֶׁיִּכָּנֵס לַעֲבוֹדָה שֶׁמַּקְרִיב אוֹתָהּ בְּיָדוֹ וְהִיא הַנִּקְרֵאת מִנְחַת חִנּוּךְ. הַמִּנְחָה שֶׁמַּקְרִיב כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל בְּכָל יוֹם וְהִיא הַנִּקְרֵאת חֲבִיתִין. מִנְחַת הַסּלֶת וְהִיא בָּאָה בְּנֵדֶר וּנְדָבָה. מִנְחַת הַמַּחֲבַת וְהִיא בָּאָה בְּנֵדֶר וּנְדָבָה. מִנְחַת הַמַּרְחֶשֶׁת וְהִיא בָּאָה בְּנֵדֶר וּנְדָבָה. מִנְחַת מַאֲפֵה תַּנּוּר וְהִיא בָּאָה בְּנֵדֶר וּנְדָבָה. מִנְחַת רְקִיקִין וְהִיא בָּאָה בְּנֵדֶר וּנְדָבָה:
4There are nine types of individual meal-offerings. They are all offered on the altar.10I.e., they are brought to the southwestern corner of the altar as described in Halachah 6 and a handful from them (or with regard to offerings brought by priests, the entire offering) is offered on the altar's pyre, as described in Halachah 9. They include:a) the meal-offering of a sinner when he is obligated to bring a sin-offering, but is financially incapable.11See Leviticus 5:11; Hilchot Shegagot 1:4;10:4.b) the meal offering of a sotah; it is the meal-offering of jealously. The manner in which it was offered has already been described.12A woman suspected of adultery. See Hilchot Sotah 3:12.c) the meal-offering that every priest brings at the outset when he enters the Temple service the first time. He brings it himself. It is called the meal-offering of initiation.13See Hilchot K'lei HaMikdash 5:16. See also Chapter 13, Halachah 4.d) the meal-offering that the High Priest would offer every day. It is called the chavitin [offering];14See Leviticus 6:13-15; Chapter 13, Halachot 2-4; Hilchot Temidim UMusafim 3:18. The above four offerings are obligatory. The five that follow are voluntary.e) a meal-offering of fine flour.15See Leviticus 2:1; Chapter 13, Halachah 5. It is brought as either a vow or a pledge;16See Hilchot Nedarim 1:2 with regard to the distinction between these two types of commitments.f) a flat-pan flour-offering.17See Leviticus 2:5; Chapter 13, Halachah 6. It is brought as either a vow or a pledge;g) a deep-pan flour-offering.18See Leviticus 2:7; Chapter 13, Halachot 6-7. It is brought as either a vow or a pledge;h) a flour-offering baked in an oven.19See Leviticus 2:4; Chapter 13, Halachah 8. It is brought as either a vow or a pledge;i) an offering of wafers.20This offering is also baked in an oven, as stated in Chapter 13, Halachah 8. It is brought as either a vow or a pledge.
ה׳כָּל הַמְּנָחוֹת הַקְּרֵבוֹת לְגַבֵּי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ אֵין כָּל אַחַת מֵהֶן פְּחוּתָה מֵעִשָּׂרוֹן. וּמִעוּטוֹ מְעַכֵּב אֶת כֻּלּוֹ. וְחָמֵשׁ מְנָחוֹת הַבָּאוֹת בְּנֵדֶר וּנְדָבָה יֵשׁ לוֹ לְהִתְנַדֵּב וְלִנְדֹּר מֵהֶן כָּל מַה שֶּׁיִּרְצֶה אֲפִלּוּ אֶלֶף עִשָּׂרוֹן. אֲבָל מִנְחַת הָעֹמֶר וּמִנְחַת חוֹטֵא וּמִנְחַת קְנָאוֹת וּמִנְחַת חִנּוּךְ וְהַחֲבִיתִין כָּל אַחַת מֵהֶן עִשָּׂרוֹן אֶחָד לֹא פָּחוֹת וְלֹא יֶתֶר:
5With regard to all of the meal-offerings that are brought to the altar, none may be less than an isaron,21An isaron is 2500 cc in contemporary measure according to Shiurei Torah, and 4320 cc according to Chazon Ish. this an absolute requirement for the offering to be acceptable.A person may pledge and vow as large a quantity as he desires, even 1000 isaronim22The offerings must, however, be of complete isaronim. for any of the five meal-offerings that are brought as a pledge or a vow. By contrast, the meal-offering of the omer, the meal-offering of a sinner, the meal-offering of jealously, the meal-offering of initiation, and the chavitin offering must each be one isaron, neither more or less.
ו׳כָּל הַמְּנָחוֹת הַקְּרֵבוֹת לְגַבֵּי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ טְעוּנוֹת הַגָּשָׁה בַּמַעֲרָב כְּנֶגֶד חֻדָּהּ שֶׁל קֶרֶן דְּרוֹמִית מַעֲרָבִית. וְאֵינָן טְעוּנוֹת תְּנוּפָה. חוּץ מִמִּנְחַת סוֹטָה וְעֹמֶר הַתְּנוּפָה שֶׁשְּׁנֵיהֶן טְעוּנוֹת תְּנוּפָה וְהַגָּשָׁה:
6All of the meal-offerings23The Radbaz explains that this includes the meal offerings brought by priests even though a handful of flour is not removed from them. It does not, however, include the meal-offerings brought as part of the accompanying offerings. The rationale for the distinction is that this rite is required only for the meal-offerings that are brought as independent offerings, not for those that merely accompany other offerings. The showbread and the two loaves offered on Shavuos are not brought close to the altar, because they are not offered on the altar at all. that are brought to the altar must be brought close to the altar on its western side, facing the tip of its southwest corner.24Leviticus 6:7 states: "The sons of Aaron will bring it close, before God, towards the face of the altar." Sotah 14b interprets this as referring to the southwest corner of the altar." Tenufah25See Chapter 9, Halachah 7, where this rite is described. is not required for them with the exception of the meal-offering of a sotah26See Chapter 9, Halachah 16. and the omer [offering].27See Hilchot Temidim UMusafim 7:12. Both of them require both tenufah and being brought close to the altar.
ז׳כָּל הַמְּנָחוֹת הַקְּרֵבוֹת לְגַבֵּי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ טְעוּנוֹת שֶׁמֶן וּלְבוֹנָה. לוֹג שֶׁמֶן לְכָל עִשָּׂרוֹן. וְקֹמֶץ לְבוֹנָה לְכָל מִנְחָה. בֵּין שֶׁהָיְתָה עִשָּׂרוֹן אֶחָד בֵּין שֶׁהָיְתָה שִׁשִּׁים עֶשְׂרוֹנִים. שֶׁאֵין מְבִיאִין בִּכְלִי אֶחָד יֶתֶר עַל שִׁשִּׁים עִשָּׂרוֹן כְּמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר. חוּץ מִמִּנְחַת קְנָאוֹת וּמִנְחַת חוֹטֵא שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא ה יא) "לֹא יָשִׂים עָלֶיהָ שֶׁמֶן וְלֹא יִתֵּן עָלֶיהָ לְבֹנָה":
7All of the meal-offerings that are brought to the altar28This term excludes the showbread and the two loaves offered on Shavuos, as mentioned above. require that oil and frankincense be placed upon them,29With the exception of the meal-offering of a sinner and a sotah, it is explicitly stated that oil must be brought with every meal-offering. Including frankincense is mentioned only with regard to the offering of fine flour. Nevertheless, Menachot 59a uses techniques of Biblical exegesis to derive that it should be included with every meal-offering. a log30A log is 344 cc in contemporary measure according to Shiurei Torah, and 600 cc according to Chazon Ish. of oil for every isaron [of flour]31This represents the minimum. More oil is placed on certain offerings as mentioned in Halachah 8. and a handful of frankincense for every meal-offering whether it comprised one isaron or 60 isaronim32In contrast to the oil which is added proportionately to the flour, a uniform measure of frankincense is included for every meal offering. - [the latter measure is mentioned because] more than 60 isaronim are never brought in one container, as will be explained33See Chapter 17, Halachah 6. - with the exception of the meal-offering of jealously and the meal-offering of a sinner, as [Leviticus 5:11] states:34This verse applies to the meal-offering of a sinner. Similar statements are made with regard to the meal-offering brought by a sotah in Numbers 5:15. In both instances, the commentaries explain that the reason for the prohibition is so that the sinner's (or the suspected adulteress') sacrifice should not appear attractive. "He shall not place oil upon it,35Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 104) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 366) include the prohibition against placing oil on the meal-offering of a sotah as one of the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. See also Hilchot Sotah 3:13. nor shall he place frankincense upon it."36Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 105) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 367) include the prohibition against placing frankincense on the meal-offering of a sotah as one of the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
ח׳נָתַן וְהִקְרִיב לוֹקֶה עַל הַשֶּׁמֶן בִּפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ וְעַל הַלְּבוֹנָה בִּפְנֵי עַצְמָהּ. נָתַן כְּלִי שֶׁיֵּשׁ בּוֹ שֶׁמֶן אוֹ לְבוֹנָה עַל גַּבֶּיהָ אֵינוֹ עוֹבֵר וְלֹא פָּסַל. מִנְחַת חִנּוּךְ וְהַחֲבִיתִין מוֹסִיף לְכָל אַחַת מֵהֶן שֶׁמֶן כְּמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר:
8If one placed [oil and/or frankincense on these offerings] and offered them,37The Rambam's understanding is that one is not liable unless he offers these meal-offerings on the altar after placing the oil and frankincense on them (Radbaz). he is liable for the oil individually and the frankincense individually.38For they are considered as independent prohibitions. If one placed a container holding oil or frankincense on the offering, he does not transgress,39Even if he offers the meal-offering on the altar in this manner (Radbaz). nor does he disqualify [the offerings].40If, however, he placed oil and/or frankincense directly on the meal-offering, he does disqualify it. Should one remove the frankincense after placing it upon the offering, the offering becomes acceptable again (Radbaz). Oil must be added to each of the initiation and chavitin meal-offerings, as will be explained.41Chapter 13, Halachah 2.
ט׳כָּל הַמְּנָחוֹת הַקְּרֵבוֹת לְגַבֵּי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ נִקְמָצוֹת וּמַקְטִיר הַקֹּמֶץ כֻּלּוֹ עַל גַּבֵּי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ וְהַשְּׁאָר נֶאֱכָל לַכֹּהֲנִים חוּץ מִמִּנְחַת זִכְרֵי כְּהֻנָּה שֶׁאֵינָהּ נִקְמֶצֶת אֶלָּא מַקְטִירִין אוֹתָהּ כֻּלָּהּ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא ו טז) "וְכָל מִנְחַת כֹּהֵן" וְגוֹ'. הָא לָמַדְתָּ שֶׁמִּנְחַת חִנּוּךְ וְהַחֲבִיתִין וְכֹהֵן שֶׁהֵבִיא מִנְחַת חוֹטֵא אוֹ מִנְחַת נְדָבָה כֻּלָּן נִשְׂרָפוֹת עַל גַּבֵּי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ וְאֵינָן נִקְמָצוֹת:
9A handful is taken42See Chapter 13, Halachah 13, for a description of how this handful is taken. from all of the meal-offerings that are brought to the altar.43The Radbaz states that this does not include the meal-offerings that are brought as part of the accompanying offerings, for they are offered on the altar in their entirety. That handful is offered on the altar in its entirety and the remainder [of the offering] is eaten by the priests with the exception of a meal-offering brought by a male priest. A handful is not taken from such an offering. Instead, the entire offering is offered on the altar's pyre, as [Leviticus 6:16] states: "Every meal-offering from a priest [is offered on the pyre in its entirety]."44The passage from which the prooftext is taken speaks about the initiation offering and the High Priest's chavitin offering. Nevertheless, since it includes the word "every," the concept it states is applied to other offerings brought by priests (Radbaz). From this we learn that all [of the following offerings]: an initiation and chavitin meal-offering or a meal-offering of a sinner or a free-will meal-offering brought by a priest are all offered on the altar's pyre and a handful is not taken from them.
י׳הַכֹּהֶנֶת מִנְחָתָהּ נִקְמֶצֶת כְּמִנְחַת יִשְׂרָאֵל וּשְׁיָרֶיהָ נֶאֱכָלִין:
10A handful is taken from a meal-offering brought by a woman of the priestly family45I.e., one unmarried, alternatively, one married to an Israelite as evident from Halachah 12 (Radbaz; Kessef Mishneh). as it is taken from the meal-offerings brought by Israelites and the remainder of it is eaten.46Sotah 23b derives this concept from the fact that the prooftext cited above uses a male term for priest.
י״אוְלָדוֹת שֶׁנִּתְעָרְבוּ וַהֲרֵי כָּל אֶחָד מֵהֶן סָפֵק מִנְחָתָם נִקְמֶצֶת כְּמִנְחַת יִשְׂרָאֵל וְאֵינָהּ נֶאֱכֶלֶת כְּמִנְחַת כֹּהֲנִים. כֵּיצַד עוֹשִׂים. הַקֹּמֶץ קָרֵב בִּפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ וְהַשְּׁיָרִים מִתְפַּזְּרִין עַל בֵּית הַדֶּשֶׁן:
11When sons [from a priestly family and one of Israelites] become intermingled and each of their identities are doubtful, a handful is taken from a meal-offering [brought by either], as is done with regard to a meal-offering brought by an Israelite, but [the remainder] is not eaten, as is done with a meal-offering brought by a priest.47I.e., since there is a doubt involved, the offering is treated with both the stringencies applying to one brought by priests and those applying to one brought by Israelites (Yevamot 99b).What is done? The handful alone is offered on the altar and the remainder is scattered over the ash heap.48Rashi (ibid. 100a) interprets this as referring to the place outside the Temple Courtyard where the ashes from the altar are deposited. Tosafot interprets it as the place inside the Temple Courtyard where sacrifices of the most sacred order that are disqualified are burnt. This difference of opinion is possible, because the term ash-pile is used for several different places.The offering may not be eaten, for perhaps the person bringing it is a priest and meal-offerings a priest brings may not be eaten. Nor may it be burnt entirely on the altar, for perhaps the person bringing it is an Israelite and an Israelite's offerings may not be burnt entirely.
י״בכָּל הַנְּשׂוּאוֹת לַכֹּהֲנִים בֵּין כֹּהֶנֶת בֵּין יִשְׂרְאֵלִית אֵין שְׁיָרֵי מִנְחוֹתֵיהֶן נֶאֱכָלִים מִפְּנֵי חֵלֶק הַבַּעַל שֶׁאֵינוֹ אוֹכֵל. וְאֵינָהּ כֻּלָּהּ לָאִשִּׁים מִפְּנֵי חֵלֶק הָאִשָּׁה. אֶלָּא הַקֹּמֶץ קָרֵב לְעַצְמוֹ וְהַשְּׁיָרִים מִתְפַּזְּרִין עַל בֵּית הַדֶּשֶׁן. הַקְּמִיצָה בְּכָל מָקוֹם בָּעֲזָרָה וְאִם קָמַץ בַּהֵיכָל כְּשֵׁרָה:
12The meal-offerings brought by all women married to a priest - whether from the priestly family or Israelites - are not eaten, because of the portion of the husband [present within them],49For a woman will bring her offering from flour that belongs to her husband (Rashi, Sotah 23a). nor is it offered on the pyre in its entirety, because of the portion of the woman.50For she is bringing it for her atonement. Instead, a handful alone is offered on the altar and the remainder is scattered over the ash heap.The handful may be taken in any place within the Temple Courtyard. If it was taken in the Temple Building, it is acceptable.
י״גוּמְקַדְּשִׁין מִנְחָה בִּכְלִי שֶׁעַל גַּבֵּי קַרְקַע וְקוֹמְצִין מִכְּלִי שֶׁעַל גַּבֵּי קַרְקַע. וְאֵין מַקְדִּישִׁין הַקֹּמֶץ בִּכְלִי שֶׁעַל גַּבֵּי קַרְקַע. וּמֵאֵימָתַי יֻתְּרוּ הַשְּׁיָרִים בַּאֲכִילָה מִשֶּׁיַּצִּית הָאוּר בְּרֹב הַקֹּמֶץ:
13A meal-offering may be consecrated by [placing the flour] in a container [even] while it is placed on the ground.51I.e., it need not be held by a priest. [Similarly,] the handful may be taken from a container [placed] on the ground, [but] the handful may not be consecrated52The consecration of the handful is discussed in Chapter 13, Halachah 12. in a container [placed] on the ground.53Menachot 7b derives this concept from a parallel to the receiving of the blood. Just as that is only acceptable when the priest holds the container in his hands, so too, the consecration of the meal-offering is acceptable only when the priest holds the container.When is the remainder of a meal-offering permitted to be eaten? When the fire [of the altar] has consumed most of the handful.
י״דכָּל הַמְּנָחוֹת הַקְּרֵבוֹת לְגַבֵּי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ מַצָּה. וְכֵן שְׁיָרֵי הַמְּנָחוֹת שֶׁאוֹכְלִין הַכֹּהֲנִים אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהֵן מֻתָּרִין לְאָכְלָן בְּכָל מַאֲכָל וּבִדְבַשׁ אֵין אוֹכְלִין אוֹתָן חָמֵץ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא ו י) "לֹא תֵאָפֶה חָמֵץ חֶלְקָם". אֲפִלּוּ חֶלְקָם לֹא יַחְמִיצוּ. וְאִם הֶחְמִיץ שְׁיָרֶיהָ לוֹקֶה. וְהַמְחַמֵּץ אַחַר הַמְחַמֵּץ חַיָּב. וְלוֹקִין עַל כָּל עֲשִׂיָּה וַעֲשִׂיָּה שֶׁבָּהּ:
14All of the meal-offerings that are brought to the altar are unleavened.54The only meal-offerings that are leavened are the two loaves brought on Shavuos and ten of the loaves brought for the thanksgiving offering and these are not brought to the altar. Similarly, although the remaining portions of the meal-offerings that may be eaten by the priests may be eaten with all foods and with a sweetener,55Although a sweetener may not be offered on the altar (Hilchot Issurei Mizbeiach 5:1), it may be eaten with sacrificial foods. they may not be eaten while leavened, as [Leviticus 6:10] states: "It shall not be baked leavened; their portion...." [Implied is that] even their portion may not be leavened. If they cause the remaining portion to become leavened, they are liable for lashes.56Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 124) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 135) include this prohibition as one of the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. One who performs an act that causes [the remaining portion of the meal-offering] to be leavened after it was leavened,57E.g., one allowed it to leaven while kneading it and then another baked it. is liable. One is liable for each act [that causes the remnants of the meal-offering to leaven].58As explained in the following halachah.
ט״וכֵּיצַד. לָשָׁהּ חָמֵץ אוֹ עֲרָכָהּ חָמֵץ אוֹ קְטָפָהּ חָמֵץ אוֹ אֲפָאָהּ חָמֵץ לוֹקֶה. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא ב יא) "לֹא תֵעָשֶׂה חָמֵץ" וְנֶאֱמַר (ויקרא ו י) "לֹא תֵאָפֶה חָמֵץ" לְחַיֵּב עַל כָּל מַעֲשֶׂה יְחִידִי שֶׁבָּהּ. עָשָׂה חָמֵץ מִתְּחִלָּה וְעַד סוֹף לוֹקֶה עַל כָּל מַעֲשֶׂה מֵהֶן:
15What is implied? If one mixed [the remnants of a meal-offering] with water in a manner that causes them to leaven, one kneaded them in a manner that causes them to leaven, 59Our translation is based on the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Menachot 5:2). one shaped the loaves in such a manner, or baked them in such a manner, he is liable for lashes,60Each of these acts carries liability individually, as the Rambam proceeds to explain. as [Leviticus 2:11] states: "It shall not be prepared as leavened." [Now it is also written:] "It shall not be baked leavened." [Why are the two verses necessary?] To make one liable for every individual act performed [in its preparation]. If one prepared it as leavened from the beginning to the end, one is liable for lashes for every individual act performed.
ט״זהִנִּיחַ שְׂאוֹר עַל גַּבֵּי הָעִסָּה וְהָלַךְ וְיָשַׁב לוֹ וְנִתְחַמְּצָה מֵאֵלֶיהָ לוֹקֶה. שֶׁהַנָּחַת הַשְּׂאוֹר הוּא הַמַּעֲשֶׂה:
16If one left yeast on a dough and then departed and sat elsewhere and [let] it leaven on its own accord, he is liable for lashes, for placing yeast [on the dough] is a deed.61And thus the person caused the dough to leaven.
י״זתִּבֵּל הַשְּׁיָרִים בְּקֶצַח אוֹ בְּשֻׁמְשְׁמִין אוֹ בְּכָל מִינֵי תַּבְלִין וּשְׁמָנִים כְּשֵׁרָה. מַצָּה הִיא אֶלָּא שֶׁנִּקְרֵאת מַצָּה מְתֻבֶּלֶת:
17If one dipped the remainder [of a meal-offering] in caraway or sesame seeds or any type of spice or oil, it is acceptable. It is matzah; it is merely called spiced matzah.62See Hilchot Chametz UMatzah 5:20 where the Rambam rules that the addition of such substances does not cause matzah to leaven.The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam, stating that it is permissible to dip baked matzah in the substances mentioned in this halachah, but not to mix them into the dough used to prepare matzah. The Radbaz, Kessef Mishneh, and others support the Rambam's position.
י״חהַמְחַמֵּץ מִנְחָה פְּסוּלָה פָּטוּר. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא ב יא) "אֲשֶׁר תַּקְרִיבוּ לַה' לֹא תֵעָשֶׂה חָמֵץ". הַכְּשֵׁרָהּ לְהַשֵּׁם לֹא הַפְּסוּלָה. חִמְּצָהּ כְּשֶׁהִיא כְּשֵׁרָה וְיָצָאת לַחוּץ וְחָזַר וְחִמְּצָהּ אַחַר שֶׁנִּפְסְלָה בִּיצִיאָתָהּ אֵינוֹ לוֹקֶה. חִמְּצָהּ בְּרֹאשׁוֹ שֶׁל מִזְבֵּחַ אֵינוֹ לוֹקֶה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר אֲשֶׁר תַּקְרִיבוּ וּכְבָר קָרְבָה זוֹ וְהִיא כְּשֵׁרָה:
18A person who causes a meal-offering that was disqualified63Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim, ch. 11, describes many different factors that can cause a meal offering to become disqualified. to become leavened is exempt, as [implied by Leviticus 2:11]: "which will be offered to God; it should not be prepared as leaven." [We can infer that the prohibition applies when the offering is] acceptable to God, not when it is disqualified.If one caused [a meal-offering] to become leaven while it was acceptable and then it was taken outside the Temple Courtyard,64Which disqualifies it, as evident from Chapter 11, Halachah 6. and he then caused it to leaven again after it was disqualified, he is not liable65For the second leavening. He is, however, liable for the first leavening (Rav Yosef Corcus). for lashes.66Although generally one who causes a meal-offering to leaven a second time is liable (Halachah 14), in this instance, since it was disqualified in the interim, he is exempt. If one caused [a meal-offering] to become leavened at the top of the altar, he is not liable for lashes, for it is written "which will be offered," and this [offering] was already offered and it is acceptable.67It should not, however, be offered on the altar's pyre (but should be taken from the altar and discarded), because no leaven should be offered on the altar, as stated in Hilchot Issurei Mizbeiach 5:1 (Radbaz).
י״טהַמְחַמֵּץ לֶחֶם הַפָּנִים לוֹקֶה. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא ב יא) "כָּל הַמִּנְחָה". אֲבָל מִנְחַת נְסָכִים אֵין בָּהּ מַלְקוֹת שֶׁאִם גִּבְּלָהּ בְּמַיִם הֲרֵי נִפְסְלָה קֹדֶם שֶׁתִּתְחַמֵּץ. וְאִם גִּבְּלָהּ בְּיַיִן שֶׁל נְסָכִים מֵי פֵּרוֹת הֵן וְאֵין מַחְמִיצִין:
19One who causes the showbread to become leaven is liable for lashes, for [the verse cited] states: "Any meal-offering."68And this also includes the showbread. The commentaries note that Menachot 57a derives this concept from a different prooftext. [Causing] the meal-offering of the accompanying offering [to leaven] does not incur liability for lashes. For if [the flour] was mixed with water, it was disqualified before it became leavened.69For the flour of the accompanying offerings should be mixed with oil, not water (Chapter 2, Halachah 4). And if it was mixed with the oil70Our translation is based on authoritative manuscripts and early printings of the Mishneh Torah. The standard printed text states "wine" and hence, has been questioned by many. of the accompanying offerings, it is considered as fruit-juice and it does not cause [dough] to leaven.71See Hilchot Chametz UMatzah 5:2.
כ׳הַחִטִּים שֶׁל מְנָחוֹת אֵין לוֹתְתִין אוֹתָן שֶׁמָּא יַחְמִיצוּ שֶׁהֲרֵי בַּחוּץ לוֹתְתִין אוֹתָן וְאֵין הַכּל זְרִיזִין לְשָׁמְרָן. אֲבָל מִנְחַת הָעֹמֶר הוֹאִיל וְהִיא שֶׁל צִבּוּר לוֹתְתִין אוֹתָהּ. שֶׁהֲרֵי הַצִּבּוּר זְרִיזִין הֵן וּמְשַׁמְּרִין אוֹתָהּ:
20We do not soak the wheat kernels72In the Talmudic era, when preparing fine flour, the wheat kernels would be soaked and then ground in a mill so that the shell of coarse bran would be removed. See Hilchot Chametz UMatzah 5:7 which states that in order that the kernels not become leaven, they should be ground immediately. for the meal-offerings, lest they leaven. For they would be soaked outside [the Temple Courtyard]73By private individuals. and not everyone is ardent [enough] to watch them [so that they do not leaven]. With regard to the meal-offering of the omer, since it is a communal offering, [the kernels] are soaked, for [those acting on behalf of] the Jewish people as a whole are ardent74Rashi (Pesachim 36a) states that this sacrifice would be prepared by the agents of the court and those individuals would certainly act with the proper care and energy. and watch it.
כ״אכָּל הַמְּנָחוֹת הַנֶּאֱפוֹת נִלּוֹשׁוֹת בְּפוֹשְׁרִין וּמְשַׁמְּרָן שֶׁלֹּא יַחְמִיצוּ. הוֹאִיל וְלִישָׁתָן וַאֲפִיָּתָן בִּפְנִים בָּעֲזָרָה אַנְשֵׁי פְּנִים זְרִיזִין הֵן:
21All of the meal-offerings that are baked should be mixed with lukewarm water75Even though lukewarm water will serve as a catalyst to cause the dough to leaven faster (Hilchot Chametz UMatzah 5:11), since the priests inside the Temple Courtyard are performing the service, we are not concerned that they will allow it to leaven. and watched so that they do not leaven. [This is permitted,] because they are mixed and baked within the Temple Courtyard and [the priests] inside [the Temple Courtyard] are ardent.76And will not allow the flour to leaven.
כ״בוּבְמָקוֹם שֶׁמְּבַשְּׁלִין קָדְשֵׁי קָדָשִׁים שָׁם אוֹפִין אֶת הַמְּנָחוֹת שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (יחזקאל מו כ) "זֶה הַמָּקוֹם אֲשֶׁר יְבַשְּׁלוּ שָׁם הַכֹּהֲנִים אֶת הָאָשָׁם וְאֶת הַחַטָּאת אֲשֶׁר יֹאפוּ אֶת הַמִּנְחָה" וְגוֹ':
22In the place where the sacrifices of the most sacred order are cooked, the meal-offerings are baked,77For their status is the same. as [Ezekiel 46:20] states: "This is the place where the priests will cook the guilt-offering and the sin-offering, where they will bake the meal-offering...."
כ״גכָּל הַמְּנָחוֹת טְחִינָתָן וְהַרְקָדָתָן בַּחוּץ. וְלִישָׁתָן וַעֲרִיכָתָן וַאֲפִיָּתָן בִּפְנִים. וְכָל מַעֲשֵׂיהֶן כְּשֵׁרִים בְּזָר עַד שֶׁיָּבוֹאוּ לְבֵית הַקְּמִיצָה. וּמַחֲבַת וּמַרְחֶשֶׁת הָיוּ בָּעֲזָרָה. וּשְׁתֵּיהֶם מִכְּלֵי הַשָּׁרֵת וּמְקַדְּשִׁין. וְתַנּוּר שֶׁל מִקְדָּשׁ שֶׁל מַתֶּכֶת הָיָה:
23The grinding and the sifting [of the flour] for the meal-offerings is performed outside [the Temple Courtyard],78See Chapter 13, Halachah 12; Hilchot Temidim UMusafim 3:19. while the mixing of the dough, the kneading, and the baking are performed inside.79Exceptions to this general principle were the showbread and the two loaves offered on Shavuos which were also kneaded outside the Temple Courtyard, as stated in Hilchot Temidim UMusafim 5:7; 8:7).All of the acts [necessary to prepare it] are acceptable [when performed] by a non-priest until it reaches the stage where the handful [of flour] is separated.80See Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim 11:7. There were a flat frying pan and a deep frying pan in the Temple Courtyard. They were both considered as sacred utensils and caused [the substances placed in them] to be sanctified.81For anything placed in a sacred utensil becomes sanctified, as stated in Hilchot K'lei HaMikdash 1:19. The oven in the Temple Courtyard was made of metal.82Zevachim 96a explains that it could not be made of earthenware, because it had the status of a sacred utensil since the showbread and the two loaves offered on Shavuos were sanctified because they were baked inside of it and it is not befitting to make a sacred utensil from earthenware.