לא קא מיבעיא לי כי קא מבעיא לי לאו דכליל תהיה מאי I do not raise the dilemma. When I raise the dilemma, it is with regard to the prohibition of: “Shall be offered in its entirety; it shall not be eaten.” What is the halakha? Is this prohibition applicable only to the meal offering of a priest mentioned in the verse, or does it apply to a priest who eats from the sacrificial portions as well?
אמר רב אהרן לרבינא תא שמע דתניא ר' אליעזר אומר כל שהוא (ויקרא ו, טז) בכליל תהיה ליתן לא תעשה על אכילתו: Rav Aharon said to Ravina: Come and hear an answer to this question from that which is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Eliezer says: With regard to every sacrificial item, not just the meal offering of a priest, such as the sacrificial portions, which is included in the category of “shall be offered in its entirety” that requires it to be burned, the verse serves to impose a prohibition against eating it.
מתני׳ מנחת כהנים ומנחת כהן משיח ומנחת נסכים למזבח ואין בהן לכהנים ובזה יפה כח מזבח מכח הכהנים שתי הלחם ולחם הפנים נאכלין לכהנים ואין בהם למזבח ובזה יפה כח הכהנים מכח המזבח: MISHNA: The meal offering of priests, the meal offering of the anointed priest, i.e., the High Priest, and the meal offering brought with libations that accompany burnt offerings and peace offerings are burned in their entirety on the altar, and there is no part of them for the priests. And in the case of those offerings, the power of the altar is greater than the power of the priests. The two loaves, i.e., the public offering on Shavuot of two loaves baked from new wheat, and the shewbread, i.e., the twelve loaves that were placed on the sacred Table in the Sanctuary each Shabbat, are eaten by the priests, and there is no part of them burned on the altar. And in the case of those offerings, the power of the priests is greater than the power of the altar.
גמ׳ ותו ליכא והא איכא עולה איכא עורה לכהנים והא איכא עולת העוף איכא מוראה ונוצה והא איכא נסכים לשיתין אזלי GEMARA: The Gemara asks: And are there no additional cases of sacrificial items that are completely placed on the altar, with none of their parts given to the priests? But isn’t there the burnt offering, which is completely burned on the altar? The Gemara answers: There is the burnt offering’s hide, which is given to the priests. The Gemara asks: But isn’t there the bird sacrificed as a burnt offering, whose skin is not given to the priests? The Gemara answers: There is the bird burnt offering’s crop and its feathers, which are not burned upon the altar. The Gemara asks: But aren’t there wine libations, which are completely poured onto the altar? The Gemara answers: The libations go to the drainpipes, and pouring the wine into the drainpipes is not considered placing it upon the altar.
ומאי בזו לאפוקי מדשמואל דאמר שמואל המתנדב יין מביאו ומזלפו על גבי אישים קמ"ל דלשיתין אזלי The Gemara asks: And what is meant when the mishna emphasizes: And in the case of those offerings, the power of the altar is greater than the power of the priests, indicating that there are other items that one might have thought are burned entirely on the altar as well? The Gemara answers: The mishna’s wording serves to exclude the opinion of Shmuel, as Shmuel said: One who donates wine brings it and pours it over the fires of the altar, such that it is offered in the manner of an animal offering and not as a libation. Therefore, the mishna’s wording teaches us that wine donated in this manner goes to the drainpipes, unlike according to the opinion of Shmuel that it is entirely burned.
מסייע ליה לשמואל דאמר שמואל המתנדב שמן קומצו ושיריו נאכלין: The Gemara adds: With regard to another ruling, the mishna supports a different statement of Shmuel. As Shmuel said: One who donates oil to the Temple removes a handful and sacrifices it on the altar, and its remainder is eaten by the priests. Shmuel’s ruling is in accordance with the mishna, which does not list a donation of oil as one of the offerings given completely to the altar.
שתי הלחם ולחם הפנים: ותו ליכא והא איכא חטאת העוף איכא דמה § According to the mishna, with regard to the two loaves and the shewbread, the power of the priests is greater than the power of the altar. The Gemara asks: And are there no more cases of sacrificial items that are given completely to the priests, with none of their parts placed upon the altar? But isn’t there the bird sacrificed as a sin offering, which is eaten entirely by the priests, and none of it is placed upon the altar? The Gemara answers: There is its blood, which is sprinkled upon the altar.
והאיכא לוג שמן של מצורע איכא מתנותיו The Gemara asks: But isn’t there the log of oil of a leper that he brings on the day that he becomes ritually clean, which is given completely to the priests? The Gemara answers: It is not given completely to the priests, as there are its placements, when oil is sprinkled seven times “before the Lord” (Leviticus 14:16), and applied to the leper’s right ear, thumb, and big toe (see Leviticus 14:17).
ומאי בזו לאפוקי ממאן דאמר שתי הלחם הבאות בפני עצמן לשריפה אתיין קמשמע לן דבזו יפה כח כהנים לעולם: The Gemara asks: And what is meant when the mishna emphasizes: And in the case of those offerings, the power of the priests is greater than the power of the altar? The Gemara answers: This wording serves to exclude the opinion of the one who says: The two loaves that are brought by themselves, unaccompanied by the requisite two lambs, may not be offered, and instead of being eaten they go to be burned. By emphasizing that the two loaves and the shewbread are eaten by the priests and not placed on the altar, the mishna teaches us that in this case, the power of the priests is always greater, even if the two lambs are not offered with the two loaves.
מתני׳ כל המנחות הנעשות בכלי טעונות שלשה מתנות שמן יציקה ובלילה ומתן שמן בכלי קודם לעשייתן MISHNA: All the meal offerings that are prepared in a vessel, e.g., the offerings prepared in a pan or deep pan, require three placements of oil, listed here in the reverse order of their placement: Pouring oil on the cakes after they have been cooked, and mixing oil into the flour, and placement of oil into the vessel prior to preparation of the meal offerings.
חלות בוללן דברי רבי וחכמים אומרים סולת החלות טעונות בלילה ורקיקין משיחה כיצד מושחן כמין כי והשאר נאכלין לכהנים: In the meal offerings that come as loaves, it is after the flour has been baked into loaves that one breaks them into pieces and mixes them with oil; this is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. And the Rabbis say: It is with fine flour that one mixes the oil. Although the loaves of the meal offering baked in an oven require mixing of their flour with oil, wafers do not require mixing, but rather a smearing of oil on them after baking. How does one smear oil on them? He does so in a shape similar to the Greek letter chi, Χ, and the rest of the oil remaining after smearing is eaten by priests.
גמ׳ למעוטי מאי אמר רב פפא למעוטי מנחת מאפה GEMARA: With regard to the statement of the mishna that all the meal offerings prepared in a vessel require three placements of oil, the Gemara asks: To exclude what does the mishna specify: Meal offerings prepared in a vessel? Rav Pappa said: The mishna serves to exclude the oven-baked meal offering, whose preparation does not require the use of a service vessel, as it is merely baked in an oven. Such a meal offering does not require the pouring of the oil.
תנו רבנן (ויקרא ב, ז) ואם מנחת מרחשת קרבנך סלת בשמן תעשה מלמד שטעונה מתן שמן בכלי קרבנך קרבנך לגזירה שווה With regard to the three placements of oil in a pan meal offering and a deep-pan meal offering, the Sages taught that the verse states: “And if your offering is a deep-pan meal offering, it shall be made of fine flour in oil” (Leviticus 2:7). This teaches that it requires the placement of oil in an empty vessel, and the flour is added afterward. In addition, the term “your offering” in this verse and the term “your offering” (Leviticus 2:5), written with regard to the meal offering prepared in a pan, are understood to teach a verbal analogy: