והרי זריקה דלא כתב ביה אלא כהונה ותנן זרק בשמאל פסול ולא פליג ר' שמעון אמר אביי פליג בברייתא דתניא קבל בשמאל פסול ור"ש מכשיר זרק בשמאל פסול ורבי שמעון מכשיר The Gemara asks: But isn’t there the sprinkling of the blood, concerning which only the priesthood is written in the verse, and we learned: If one sprinkled the blood with his left hand it is disqualified; and Rabbi Shimon does not disagree with this ruling, indicating that Rabbi Shimon holds that a mention of the priesthood does not require a mention of the word finger? Abaye says: He disagrees with this ruling in a baraita, as it is taught in a baraita: If one collected the blood with his left hand it is disqualified, and Rabbi Shimon deems it fit. Additionally, if one sprinkled the blood with his left hand it is disqualified, and Rabbi Shimon deems it fit.
ואלא הא דאמר רבא יד יד לקמיצה למה לי מכהונה נפקא The Gemara asks: But that which Rava says with regard to the superfluous terms in the passage discussing a leper: One derives a verbal analogy between the word “hand” written in that passage and the word “hand” written with regard to the removal of a handful from a meal offering, to indicate that the latter must also be performed with the right hand, why do I need this verbal analogy? One can derive that the handful must be removed with the right hand from the verse’s mention of the priesthood, as it is stated: “And the priest shall remove his handful” (Leviticus 5:12).
חד לקומץ וחד לקידוש קומץ The Gemara responds: Both derivations are necessary, one for the removal of the handful from a meal offering, and one for the sanctification of the handful, i.e., placing it into a second service vessel. Both must be performed with the right hand.
לרבי שמעון דלא בעי קידוש קומץ ולמאן דאמר נמי דבעי קידוש קומץ לר' שמעון ובשמאל אכשורי מכשר יד יד דרבא למה לי The Gemara asks: And according to Rabbi Shimon, who does not require sanctification of the handful, or according to the one who says that Rabbi Shimon also requires the sanctification of the handful but that he deems the sanctification fit when performed with the left hand (see 26a), why do I need the verbal analogy of Rava between “hand” and “hand”?
אי לקמיצה גופה אליבא דר' שמעון מדר' יהודה בריה דר' חייא נפקא דאמר ר' יהודה בריה דר' חייא מאי טעמא דר"ש דאמר קרא (ויקרא ו, י) קדש קדשים היא כחטאת וכאשם If one suggests that it is necessary to indicate that the removal of the handful itself must be performed with the right hand, this cannot be, since this is derived from the verse cited by Rabbi Yehuda, son of Rabbi Ḥiyya. As Rabbi Yehuda, son of Rabbi Ḥiyya, says: What is the reason that Rabbi Shimon does not require that the handful be sanctified in a service vessel? As the verse states with regard to the meal offering: “It is most holy, as the sin offering, and as the guilt offering” (Leviticus 6:10).
בא לעובדה ביד עובדה בימין כחטאת בא לעובדה בכלי עובדה בשמאל כאשם Rabbi Yehuda, son of Rabbi Ḥiyya, elaborates: The verse compares the meal offering to a sin offering and a guilt offering. Therefore, if the priest comes to perform the burning of the handful with his hand, he performs it with his right hand, like in the case of a sin offering, whose blood is sprinkled with the hand. And if he comes to perform it with a vessel, i.e., if he first sanctifies the handful in a service vessel, then he may perform it with his left hand, like in the case of a guilt offering, whose blood is sprinkled from a vessel. Since the removal of the handful is performed with the hand, the verse indicates that it must be performed with the right hand, and the verbal analogy is unnecessary.
לא נצרכא אלא לקומץ דמנחת חוטא סלקא דעתך אמינא הואיל ואמר רבי שמעון שלא יהא קרבנו מהודר כי קמיץ לה נמי בשמאל תתכשר קמשמע לן: The Gemara responds: The verbal analogy is necessary only for the handful of the meal offering of a sinner, to teach that it must be removed with the right hand. It might enter your mind to say: Since Rabbi Shimon says that this offering does not require oil and frankincense so that a sinner’s offering will not be of superior quality, perhaps when the priest removed the handful with his left hand, which is a manner of inferior quality, it should be fit as well. The verbal analogy therefore teaches us that the handful must always be removed with the right hand, even in the case of the meal offering of a sinner.
קמץ ועלה בידו צרור או גרגר מלח § The mishna teaches: If a priest removed the handful of flour, and a stone or a grain of salt emerged in his hand,