Menachot 57bמנחות נ״ז ב
The William Davidson Talmudתלמוד מהדורת ויליאם דוידסון
Save 'Menachot 57b'
Toggle Reader Menu Display Settings
57bנ״ז ב

ומי פירות אין מחמיצין אמר ריש לקיש אומר היה רבי יוסי הגלילי מנחת נסכים מגבלה במים וכשרה

and there is a principle that fruit juices do not leaven dough. Reish Lakish says that Rabbi Yosei HaGelili would say: Even though the oil of the meal offering brought with libations is plentiful, sometimes one might also knead a meal offering with some water, if he considers it necessary to add it, and it is fit. If so, it is possible for this meal offering to leaven due to the water, and therefore the verse: “That you shall bring,” teaches that the prohibition against leavening also applies to this type of meal offering.

לחם הפנים מדת יבש היא ושמענא ליה לר' עקיבא דאמר מדת יבש לא נתקדשה

The Gemara asks: With regard to Rabbi Akiva’s opinion, the vessel into which a tenth of an ephah of flour for baking the shewbread is placed in is a measuring vessel for dry items, and we have heard that Rabbi Akiva said: The measuring vessels for dry items were not consecrated as service vessels. This means the shewbread becomes consecrated only when it is placed on the Table in the Sanctuary, after it has been baked. If so, at this stage, the prohibition against leavening is not relevant.

שלח (רבי ראובן) משמיה דרבי יוחנן כך היא הצעה של משנה ואיפוך אשר תקריבו לרבות לחם הפנים לחימוץ דברי רבי יוסי הגלילי ר' עקיבא אומר לרבות מנחת נסכים לחימוץ

In answer to this question, the Gemara states that Rabbi Reuven sent a letter from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, in which he cited a statement in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan: This is the correct version [hetze’ah] of this baraita, and one should reverse the names of the Sages in it: The phrase “that you shall bring” serves to include the shewbread in the prohibition against leavening; this is the statement of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili. Rabbi Akiva says: This phrase serves to include the meal offering brought with libations in the prohibition against leavening. Consequently, there is no contradiction between Rabbi Akiva’s statement here and his statement with regard to measuring vessels for dry items.

ואזדא ר' יוחנן לטעמיה דאמר ר' יוחנן רבי יוסי הגלילי ואחד מתלמידי ר' ישמעאל אמרו דבר אחד ומנו רבי יאשיה

The Gemara comments: And Rabbi Yoḥanan, who holds that Rabbi Yosei HaGelili is the one who maintains that the measuring vessels for dry items were consecrated, follows [ve’azda] his line of reasoning stated elsewhere. As Rabbi Yoḥanan says: Rabbi Yosei HaGelili and one of the students of Rabbi Yishmael both said the same thing. And who is that student of Rabbi Yishmael? It is Rabbi Yoshiya.

דתניא (במדבר ז, א) וימשחם ויקדש אותם רבי יאשיה אומר מדת הלח נמשח בין מבפנים בין מבחוץ מדת יבש נמשחו מבפנים ואין נמשחו מבחוץ

As it is taught in a baraita: The verse states with regard to the consecration of the Tabernacle and its vessels before their inauguration: “And it came to pass on the day that Moses had made an end of setting up the Tabernacle, and had anointed it and sanctified it, and all its vessels, and the altar and all its vessels, and had anointed them and sanctified them” (Numbers 7:1). Rabbi Yoshiya says: The measuring vessels for liquid items, e.g., oil, and wine for libations, were anointed and thereby consecrated both on the inside and on the outside. The measuring vessels for dry items, such as the flour for meal offerings, were anointed and consecrated only on the inside, but were not anointed on the outside.

רבי יונתן אומר מדת הלח נמשחו מבפנים ואין נמשחו מבחוץ מדות יבש לא נמשחו כל עיקר תדע לך שהרי אין מקדשות דכתיב (ויקרא כג, יז) ממושבותיכם תביאו לחם תנופה שתים שני עשרונים סלת תהיינה חמץ תאפינה בכורים לה' אימתי הן לה' לאחר שנאפו

Rabbi Yonatan says: The measuring vessels for liquid items were anointed on the inside and were not anointed on the outside, whereas the measuring vessels for dry items were not anointed at all. Rabbi Yonatan cites a proof for his opinion: You can know that the measuring vessels for dry items were not consecrated at all, because it is taught that these vessels do not consecrate items placed inside them. As it is written: “You shall bring out of your dwellings two wave-loaves of two tenth-parts of a ephah. They shall be of fine flour; they shall be baked with leaven, for first produce to the Lord” (Leviticus 23:17). When are they considered consecrated to the Lord? Only after they are baked with leaven. This demonstrates that when the flour is placed into the tenth of an ephah measuring vessel the meal offering is not yet consecrated.

במאי קא מיפלגי באותם רבי יאשיה סבר אותם למעוטי מדת יבש בחוץ ור' יונתן סבר מדת יבש חול הוא ולא אצטריך קרא למעוטי כי איצטריך קרא למעוטי מדת לח מבחוץ

The Gemara asks: With regard to what principle do Rabbi Yoshiya and Rabbi Yonatan disagree? They disagree with regard to the interpretation of the word “them” in the phrase: “And sanctified them” (Numbers 7:1). Both tanna’im agree that the term “them” serves to exclude something from the anointing and consecration, but they disagree over what is excluded. Rabbi Yoshiya maintains that “them” serves to exclude the consecration of the measuring vessels for dry items on the outside, i.e., only the inside of the vessels is consecrated. And Rabbi Yonatan maintains that the measuring vessels for dry items are non-sacred, i.e., not consecrated at all, and therefore it is not necessary for the verse to exclude them. Where it was necessary for the verse to exclude something, it was with regard to measuring vessels used for liquid items, to teach that they are consecrated only on the inside but not on the outside.

לימא נמי ר' עקיבא ואחד מתלמידי ר' ישמעאל אמרו דבר אחד ומנו רבי יונתן משום דלא שוו במדת לח להדדי

The Gemara asks: Since the dispute between Rabbi Yoshiya and Rabbi Yonatan concerns the halakha of measuring vessels for dry items, let Rabbi Yoḥanan say also, as he did with regard to Rabbi Yosei HaGelili and Rabbi Yoshiya: Rabbi Akiva and one of the students of Rabbi Yishmael both said the same thing, and who is that student? Rabbi Yonatan. The Gemara explains: Rabbi Yoḥanan did not say this due to the fact that their opinions are not the same with regard to measuring vessels used for liquid items: Rabbi Akiva maintains that these vessels are consecrated both on the inside and on the outside, whereas Rabbi Yonatan rules that they are consecrated only on the inside.

א"ל רב פפא לאביי והא איכא ביסא דלח הוא א"ל כגון שלש על גבי קטבליא

Rav Pappa said to Abaye: How can it be suggested, according to the opinion that the measuring vessels for dry items were not consecrated, that the shewbread is consecrated only when it is placed on the Table? But before that there is the stage in which the dough is placed into the receptacle [bisa] in which it is kneaded. Since this vessel is used for liquid items, the dough should be consecrated at that point. Abaye said to Rav Pappa: This is referring to a case where he kneaded the dough on top of a flat leather spread [katavliyya], which does not sanctify the dough.

אי הכי דקאמר ליה רבי יונתן תדע לך שהרי אינה מקדשת לימא ליה כגון דכיילא בעשרון דחול

The Gemara asks: If so, with regard to that which Rabbi Yonatan said to Rabbi Yoshiya as proof of his opinion, that you can know that it is so, as it is taught that these vessels do not consecrate items placed inside them, let Rabbi Yoshiya say to him in refutation of his claim: This is referring to a case where he measured the flour for the two loaves in a vessel used for measuring a tenth of an ephah, but it was a vessel that was non-sacred, and it is for this reason that the loaves are not consecrated.

הכי השתא בשלמא ביסא לא כתב רחמנא דלעביד ביסא למילש ביה כי לש לה על גבי קטבליא לית לן בה אלא עשרון כיון דאמר רחמנא עביד עשרון וכייל ביה שביק עשרון דקודש וכייל בעשרון דחול

The Gemara responds: How can these cases be compared? Granted, one can say that the shewbread was kneaded on a leather spread rather than in a receptacle, as the Merciful One does not write in the Torah that one should specifically use a receptacle to knead the shewbread. Therefore, when one kneads the dough of a meal offering on top of a leather spread, we have no problem with it. But in the case of the two loaves whose flour was measured in a vessel used for measuring a tenth of an ephah, since the Merciful One states explicitly to use a vessel of a tenth of an ephah and measure with it, can it be suggested that the one preparing the meal offering should leave aside the consecrated vessel for a tenth of an ephah and measure with a non-sacred vessel for a tenth of an ephah?

תנו רבנן מנין למעלה מבשר חטאת ומבשר אשם ומבשר קדשי הקדשים ומקדשים קלים וממותר העומר וממותר שתי הלחם ומלחם הפנים ומשירי מנחות שהוא בלא תעשה

§ The Sages taught in a baraita: From where is it derived that one who offers up outside the Temple courtyard a portion of the meat of a sin offering, or a portion of the meat of a guilt offering, or a portion of the meat of offerings of the most sacred order, or a portion of the meat of offerings of lesser sanctity, or a portion of the surplus of the omer offering, or a portion of the leftover of the two loaves, i.e., the public offering on Shavuot of two loaves from the new wheat, or the shewbread, or the remainder of meal offerings, that in all these cases he violates a prohibition, although these items are not meant to be sacrificed on the altar?

ת"ל (ויקרא ב, יא) כי כל שאור וכל דבש לא תקטירו ממנו אשה לה' כל שהוא ממנו לאישים הרי הוא בבל תקטירו

The baraita answers: The verse states: “For any leaven, and any honey, you shall not burn any of it as an offering made by fire to the Lord” (Leviticus 2:11). The extra term “of it” teaches that any item that has already had some part of it burned in the fire on the altar is included in the prohibition: Do not burn, stated in that verse explicitly with regard to honey and leaven.

ושתי הלחם ולחם הפנים יש מהן לאישים והתניא יצאו שתי הלחם ולחם הפנים שאין מהם לאישים

The Gemara asks: And with regard to the two loaves and the shewbread, is there some part of them burned in the fire? But isn’t it taught in a baraita: A portion of every offering is sacrificed on the altar, except for the two loaves and the shewbread, as no part of them is burned in the fire?

אמר רב ששת אין מגופו לאישים

Rav Sheshet said: Although no part of the two loaves or the shewbread themselves is burned in the fire, nevertheless, they are included in the prohibition against offering them up to the altar, since they are not viewed as independent entities but rather as parts of larger offerings. The two loaves accompany the sheep sacrificed as burnt offerings on Shavuot, and are permitted for consumption only once those sheep have been burned on the altar. Similarly, the shewbread is permitted for consumption only after the bowls of frankincense that were on the Table with it have been burned on the altar.

איתמר המעלה מכולם על גבי הכבש רבי יוחנן אמר חייב ר' אלעזר אמר פטור

§ The Gemara discusses the prohibition against offering up on the altar parts of offerings after their sacrificial portions have already been burned. It was stated: With regard to one who brings up any part of any of the items listed in the baraita onto the ramp leading to the altar, but not to the altar itself, Rabbi Yoḥanan says he is liable and Rabbi Elazar says he is exempt.

ר' יוחנן אמר חייב דתניא המזבח אין לי אלא מזבח כבש מנין תלמוד לומר (ויקרא ב, יב) ואל המזבח לא יעלו לרצון

The Gemara elaborates. Rabbi Yoḥanan says he is liable, as it is taught in a baraita: After the verse: “As any leaven and any honey, you shall not burn any of it as an offering made by fire to the Lord,” the next verse states: “As an offering of first fruits you may bring them to the Lord, but they shall not come up to the altar for a pleasing aroma” (Leviticus 2:12). I have derived only that this halakha applies to an item that is brought on the altar. From where is it derived that the same applies if it is brought to the ramp of the altar? The verse states: “But they shall not come up to the altar for a pleasing aroma,” to be accepted, and the ramp is the means to ascend to the altar.

ור' אלעזר אמר פטור מ"ט דאמר קרא (ויקרא ב, יא). שאור ודבש קרבן ראשית תקריבו אותם אותם

And what is the reason that Rabbi Elazar says that one who brings up parts to the ramp is exempt? As the verse states: “For any leaven, and any honey, you shall not burn any of it as an offering made by fire to the Lord. As an offering of first produce you may bring them to the Lord, but they shall not come up to the altar for a pleasing aroma” (Leviticus 2:11–12).

הוא דרבי לך כבש כמזבח אבל מידי אחרינא לא

The Gemara explains: The term “them” indicates that this halakha applies only to those offerings that come from leaven or honey and which are called: “An offering of first produce.” This category consists of first fruits, which are brought from dates and other sweet fruit and which are called: “The choicest first fruits of your land” (Exodus 23:19), and the two loaves, which are leaven and are the first meal offerings brought from the new crop each year. In other words, it is with regard to this category that the verse amplifies for you the halakha that the ramp of the altar is considered like the altar itself. But with regard to other items, e.g., the meat of sin offerings and guilt offerings, the ramp of the altar is not treated like the altar itself.