וכי נאמר קרבן קרבן שני פעמים והלא לא נאמר אלא קרבן אחד ונאמר בו חלות ורקיקין And is it stated with regard to a meal offering baked in an oven: “Offering,” and again: Offering, for a total of two times, once in connection to a meal offering of loaves and once in connection to a meal offering of wafers? If that were the case, it would indicate that these are two types of offerings. But doesn’t it actually say “offering” only one time: “And when you bring a meal offering baked in an oven, it shall be unleavened loaves of fine flour mixed with oil, or unleavened wafers spread with oil” (Leviticus 2:4)? And it is stated with regard to this meal offering both loaves and wafers, which indicates that these are two varieties of the same offering.
מעתה רצה להביא חלות מביא רקיקין מביא מחצה חלות ומחצה רקיקין מביא ובוללן וקומץ משניהם ואם קמץ ועלה בידו מאחד על שניהם יצא Rabbi Shimon continues: From now it may be inferred that if one wants to bring ten loaves he may bring ten loaves, and if he prefers to bring ten wafers, he may bring ten wafers, and if he decides that half of them should be loaves and half of them wafers, he may bring it in this manner. And if he brings part as loaves and part as wafers, how does he proceed? He mingles all of them and removes a handful from both of them. And if he removed a handful and it happened that only part of one type, either loaves or wafers, came up in his hand for both of them, he has fulfilled his obligation, as they are both part of a single offering.
רבי יוסי ב"ר יהודה אומר מנין לאומר הרי עלי מנחת מאפה שלא יביא מחצה חלות ומחצה רקיקין תלמוד לומר (ויקרא ז, ט) וכל מנחה אשר תאפה כתנור וכל נעשה במרחשת ועל מחבת לכהן המקריב אותה לו תהיה וכל מנחה בלולה בשמן וחרבה לכל בני אהרן תהיה Rabbi Yosei bar Rabbi Yehuda says: From where is it derived with regard to one who says: It is incumbent upon me to bring a baked meal offering, that he may not bring half of the offering as loaves and half as wafers? He answers: The verse states: “And every meal offering that is baked in an oven, and every one that is made in the deep pan, and on the shallow pan, shall belong to the priest who sacrifices it. And every meal offering, mixed with oil, or dry, shall belong to all the sons of Aaron, one as well as another” (Leviticus 7:9–10).
מה וכל האמור למטה שני מינין חלוקין אף וכל האמור למעלה שני מינין חלוקין The verses juxtapose the meal offering baked in an oven to the meal offering prepared on the pan and the meal offering prepared in the deep pan, and similarly to the meal offering brought as a gift, alluded to by the phrase: “Mixed with oil,” and to the meal offering of a sinner, which is called: “Dry.” This teaches that just as the term: “And every” (Leviticus 7:10), stated below with regard to those meal offerings, is referring to two different types of meal offering, so too, the term: “And every” (Leviticus 7:9), stated above, with regard to the two forms of meal offering baked in an oven, is referring to two different types of meal offering, and therefore one may not bring part as loaves and part as wafers.
ורבי יהודה שפיר קאמר ר' שמעון אמר לך כיון דכתיב בשמן בשמן כמאן דכתיב קרבן קרבן דמי The Gemara asks: And how does Rabbi Yehuda, who maintains that loaves and wafers are two different types of meal offerings baked in an oven, respond to Rabbi Shimon’s proof? After all, Rabbi Shimon is saying well when he points out that the verse mentions “offering” only once. The Gemara explains: Rabbi Yehuda could have said to you: Since it is written: “With oil,” and: “With oil,” in the verse: “It shall be unleavened loaves of fine flour mixed with oil, or unleavened wafers spread with oil” (Leviticus 2:4), it is considered as though it is written “offering” and “offering,” and therefore these are deemed two different types of meal offering.
ורבי שמעון אי לא כתיב בשמן בשמן הוה אמינא דווקא מחצה חלות ומחצה רקיקין אבל חלות לחודייהו ורקיקין לחודייהו אימא לא קא משמע לן The Gemara asks: And how does Rabbi Shimon respond to this claim? The Gemara answers: Rabbi Shimon maintains that the repetition of the term “with oil” teaches a different halakha. If it were not written “with oil,” and again “with oil,” I would say that a meal offering baked in an oven must be specifically brought half as loaves and half as wafers, and if he wanted to bring only loaves alone or wafers alone, I would say that he may not bring a meal offering in this manner. The repetition of the term “with oil” teaches us that a meal offering baked in an oven can comprise ten loaves, or ten wafers, or a combination of both types.
רבי יוסי בר' יהודה היינו אבוה איכא בינייהו דאי עבד: The Gemara further inquires: The baraita states that Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, holds that loaves and wafers are two different types of meal offerings. The opinion of Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, is the same as that of his father, Rabbi Yehuda, whose opinion is also mentioned in the baraita. Why is it necessary to cite Rabbi Yosei bar Rabbi Yehuda’s opinion separately? The Gemara explains: It is necessary to cite the opinion of Rabbi Yosei bar Rabbi Yehuda, because there is a practical difference between his ruling and that of his father; as, if someone transgressed and performed the sacrifice of a meal offering baked in an oven by bringing a mixture of loaves and wafers, according to Rabbi Yehuda the offering is valid after the fact, whereas Rabbi Yosei bar Rabbi Yehuda deems it not valid even after the fact.
הדרן עלך כל המנחות
מתני׳ רבי ישמעאל אומר עומר היה בא בשבת משלש סאין ובחול מחמש וחכמים אומרים אחד שבת ואחד חול משלש היה בא MISHNA: Rabbi Yishmael says: When the day of the sacrifice of the omer meal offering would occur on Shabbat, the labors performed that would otherwise be prohibited were kept to a minimum, and the one-tenth of an ephah of flour that was brought as an offering was processed from three se’a of reaped barley. And if it occurred during the week, the flour was processed from five se’a of reaped barley. And the Rabbis say: Both on Shabbat and during the week, the omer offering would come from three se’a of reaped barley.
רבי חנינא סגן הכהנים אומר בשבת היה נקצר ביחיד ובמגל אחד ובקופה אחת ובחול בשלשה בשלש קופות ושלש מגלות וחכמים אומרים אחד שבת ואחד חול בשלשה בשלש קופות ובשלש מגלות: Rabbi Ḥanina, the deputy High Priest, says: On Shabbat the barley was reaped by an individual and with one sickle and with one basket into which the barley was placed; and during the week, it was reaped by three people with three baskets and three sickles. And the Rabbis say: Both on Shabbat and during the week, it was reaped by three people with three baskets and with three sickles.
גמ׳ בשלמא רבנן קא סברי עשרון מובחר בשלשה סאין אתי ולא שנא בחול ולא שנא בשבת GEMARA: Rabbi Yishmael and the Rabbis disagree in the mishna with regard to how many se’a of barley were reaped for the omer meal offering on Shabbat. According to Rabbi Yishmael three se’a were reaped when the offering was brought on a Shabbat, and five se’a were reaped when the offering was brought on a weekday. The Rabbis maintain that both during the week and on Shabbat, three se’a were reaped. The Gemara asks: Granted the opinion of the Rabbis is clear, as they maintain that a select tenth of an ephah of flour comes from three se’a of reaped barley, and therefore there is no difference whether the barley is reaped during the week or whether it is reaped on Shabbat, as a select tenth is required.
אלא רבי ישמעאל מאי קסבר אי קסבר עשרון מובחר לא אתי אלא מחמש אפילו בשבת נמי אי משלש אתי אפילו בחול נמי Rather, there is a question with regard to the opinion of Rabbi Yishmael, who differentiates between Shabbat and during the week. What does he hold? If he holds that a select tenth of an ephah of flour can come only from five se’a of reaped barley, then even on Shabbat five se’a should also be required. And if the select tenth of an ephah of flour can come from even three se’a, then even on a weekday three should suffice.
אמר רבא קסבר ר' ישמעאל עשרון מובחר בלא טירחא אתי מחמש בטירחא אתי משלש בחול מייתינן מחמש דהכי שביחא מילתא בשבת מוטב שירבה במלאכה אחת בהרקדה ואל ירבה במלאכות הרבה Rava said: Rabbi Yishmael holds that a select tenth of an ephah of flour can come without exertion from five se’a, and with exertion from three. Therefore, on a weekday we reap and bring flour from five se’a, as this produces a better final product, since only the highest-quality flour of each se’a is selected. On Shabbat, it is preferable that one should increase the effort involved in one prohibited labor, that of sifting the flour numerous times, and one should not increase the number of prohibited acts involved in performing many prohibited labors, such as reaping and winnowing, which are required for the processing of five se’a.
אמר רבה ר' ישמעאל ור' ישמעאל בנו של ר' יוחנן בן ברוקה אמרו דבר אחד דתניא ארבעה עשר שחל להיות בשבת מפשיט את הפסח עד החזה דברי רבי ישמעאל בנו של ר' יוחנן בן ברוקה וחכמים אומרים עד שיפשיט את כולו § Rabba said: Rabbi Yishmael and Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Beroka, said the same thing. As it is taught in a baraita: If the fourteenth of Nisan occurs on Shabbat, when the Paschal offering is sacrificed but not roasted until Shabbat ends, one flays the Paschal offering up to the breast, to enable removal of the parts of the animal that are sacrificed upon the altar on Shabbat, and flays the rest of the animal after Shabbat. Further skinning is only to facilitate eating the animal and therefore it does not override Shabbat. This is the statement of Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Beroka. And the Rabbis say: One has not performed the obligation properly unless he flays it in its entirety.
מי לא אמר ר' ישמעאל בנו של ר' יוחנן בן ברוקה התם כל היכא דאפשר לא טרחינן הכא נמי כיון דאפשר לא טרחינן The Gemara explains why the statements of Rabbi Yishmael and Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Beroka, are the same. Didn’t Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Beroka, say there that anywhere that it is possible to perform the necessary task without an additional action, we do not exert ourselves on Shabbat? Here, too, since it is possible to perform the necessary task without the extra flaying, we do not exert ourselves.
ממאי דלמא עד כאן לא קאמר ר' ישמעאל הכא אלא דליכא בזיון קדשים אבל התם דאיכא בזיון קדשים The Gemara rejects this comparison: From where is this conclusion reached? Perhaps Rabbi Yishmael states his ruling only here, in the case of reaping three se’a on Shabbat, where there is no degradation of consecrated items. But there, where there is degradation of consecrated items, as the animal will be left half-flayed overnight,