הַתּוֹדָה הָיְתָה בָאָה חָמֵשׁ סְאִין יְרוּשַׁלְמִיּוֹת, שֶׁהֵן שֵׁשׁ מִדְבָּרִיּוֹת, שְׁתֵּי אֵיפוֹת, הָאֵיפָה שָׁלשׁ סְאִין, עֶשְׂרִים עִשָּׂרוֹן, עֲשָׂרָה לֶחָמֵץ וַעֲשָׂרָה לַמַּצָּה. עֲשָׂרָה לֶחָמֵץ, עִשָּׂרוֹן לְחַלָּה. וַעֲשָׂרָה לַמַּצָּה, וּבַמַּצָּה שְׁלשָׁה מִינִין, חַלּוֹת וּרְקִיקִים וּרְבוּכָה. נִמְצְאוּ שְׁלשָׁה עֶשְׂרוֹנוֹת וּשְׁלִישׁ לְכָל מִין, שָׁלשׁ חַלּוֹת לְעִשָּׂרוֹן. בְּמִדָּה יְרוּשַׁלְמִית הָיוּ שְׁלשִׁים קַב, חֲמִשָּׁה עָשָׂר לֶחָמֵץ, וַחֲמִשָּׁה עָשָׂר לַמַּצָּה. חֲמִשָּׁה עָשָׂר לֶחָמֵץ, קַב וָחֵצִי לְחַלָּה. וַחֲמִשָּׁה עָשָׂר לַמַּצָּה, וְהַמַּצָּה שְׁלשָׁה מִינִין, חַלּוֹת וּרְקִיקִים וּרְבוּכָה, נִמְצְאוּ חֲמֵשֶׁת קַבִּים לְכָל מִין, שְׁתֵּי חַלּוֹת לְקָב:
The flour for the loaves accompanying the thanks offering would come from a measure of five Jerusalem se’a offering, which are equivalent to six wilderness se’a. The se’a referred to in the Bible when the Jewish people were in the wilderness is smaller than the se’a used later in Jerusalem. This is equivalent to two ephahs, each ephah being three wilderness se’a. These two ephahs are twenty measures of a tenth of an ephah. Ten of these tenths were used to make leavened loaves and ten of these tenths were used to make unleavened loaves, i.e., matza. The mishna elaborates: There are ten tenths for the loaves of leavened bread, a tenth of an ephah per loaf. And there are ten tenths for the loaves of matza. And among the loaves of matza there are three types: Loaves, wafers, and those poached in water, ten loaves of each type. Consequently, there are three-and-one-third tenths of an ephah for each and every type, three loaves per tenth of an ephah. And in the Jerusalem measure there were thirty kav, fifteen kav for the loaves of leavened bread and fifteen for the loaves of matza. The mishna elaborates: There are fifteen kav for the loaves of leavened bread, one and one-half kav per loaf. And there are fifteen kav for the loaves of matza. And among the loaves of matza there are three types: Loaves, wafers, and those poached in water. Consequently, there are five kav for each and every type, two loaves per kav.
הַמִּלּוּאִים הָיוּ בָאִים כַּמַּצָּה שֶׁבַּתּוֹדָה, חַלּוֹת וּרְקִיקִים וּרְבוּכָה. הַנְּזִירוּת הָיְתָה בָאָה שְׁתֵּי יָדוֹת בַּמַּצָּה שֶׁבַּתּוֹדָה, חַלּוֹת וּרְקִיקִים, וְאֵין בָּהּ רְבוּכָה, נִמְצְאוּ עֲשָׂרָה קַבִּים יְרוּשַׁלְמִיּוֹת, שֶׁהֵן שִׁשָּׁה עֶשְׂרוֹנוֹת וַעֲדוּיָן. וּמִכֻּלָּן הָיָה נוֹטֵל אֶחָד מֵעֲשָׂרָה תְּרוּמָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא ז), וְהִקְרִיב מִמֶּנּוּ אֶחָד מִכָּל קָרְבָּן תְּרוּמָה לַה'. אֶחָד, שֶׁלֹּא יִטֹּל פָּרוּס. מִכָּל קָרְבָּן, שֶׁיְּהוּ כָל הַקָּרְבָּנוֹת שָׁוִין, וְשֶׁלֹּא יִטֹּל מִקָּרְבָּן לַחֲבֵרוֹ. לַכֹּהֵן הַזֹּרֵק אֶת דַּם הַשְּׁלָמִים לוֹ יִהְיֶה, וְהַשְּׁאָר נֶאֱכָל לַבְּעָלִים:
The loaves that accompanied the ram of the inauguration of the Tabernacle would come parallel to the three types of matza that accompany the thanks offering: Loaves, wafers, and loaves poached in water and made with oil (see Leviticus 8:26). The loaves of leavened bread that accompany the thanks offering were not brought with the ram of inauguration. The loaves that accompany the offering that the nazirite brings upon completion of his period of naziriteship would come with only two parts of the three types of matza that accompany the thanks offering, namely, loaves and wafers, but there is no matza poached in water (see Numbers 6:15). Consequently, the loaves of the offering of a nazirite are from ten kav of fine flour according to the Jerusalem measure, as taught in the previous mishna that each type of the loaves of matza comes from five kav of flour, which equal six-and-two-thirds tenths of an ephah according to the wilderness measure, as each type of the loaves of matza comes from three-and-one-third tenths of an ephah. From all of the four types of loaves accompanying the thanks offering, one takes one loaf from each set of ten as teruma, to be given to a priest, as it is stated: “And he shall present from it one of each offering as a teruma unto the Lord; to the priest that sprinkles the blood of the peace offerings against the altar it shall be given” (Leviticus 7:14). The verse is analyzed: “One” indicates that one should not take a sliced loaf; “of each offering” indicates that all the offerings should be equal, i.e., that one should not take a loaf from one type of offering for another type; “to the priest that sprinkles the blood of the peace offerings against the altar it shall be given,” and the rest of the loaves are eaten by the owner.
הַשּׁוֹחֵט אֶת הַתּוֹדָה בִּפְנִים, וְלַחְמָהּ חוּץ לַחוֹמָה, לֹא קָדַשׁ הַלָּחֶם. שְׁחָטָהּ עַד שֶׁלֹּא קָרְמוּ בַתַּנּוּר, וַאֲפִלּוּ קָרְמוּ כֻלָּן חוּץ מֵאַחַד מֵהֶן, לֹא קָדַשׁ הַלָּחֶם. שְׁחָטָהּ חוּץ לִזְמַנָּהּ וְחוּץ לִמְקוֹמָהּ, קָדַשׁ הַלָּחֶם. שְׁחָטָהּ וְנִמְצֵאת טְרֵפָה, לֹא קָדַשׁ הַלָּחֶם. שְׁחָטָהּ וְנִמְצֵאת בַּעֲלַת מוּם, רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, קָדָשׁ, וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, לֹא קָדַשׁ. שְׁחָטָהּ שֶׁלֹּא לִשְׁמָהּ, וְכֵן אֵיל הַמִּלוּאִים וְכֵן שְׁנֵי כִבְשֵׂי עֲצֶרֶת שֶׁשְּׁחָטָן שֶׁלֹּא לִשְׁמָן, לֹא קָדַשׁ הַלָּחֶם:
In the case of one who slaughters the thanks offering in its proper place inside the Temple courtyard, and at that time its forty loaves were outside the wall, the loaves were not consecrated. Likewise, if he slaughtered the thanks offering before the surface of the loaves formed a crust in the oven, and even if the surface of all the loaves formed a crust except for one of them, the loaves were not consecrated. If one slaughtered the thanks offering with the intent to partake of it or to burn the sacrificial portions beyond its designated time or outside its designated area, and the offering was rendered piggul or was disqualified, respectively, the loaves were consecrated and either rendered piggul or disqualified. If one slaughtered the thanks offering and it was discovered that it was an animal with a wound that would have caused it to die within twelve months [tereifa], the loaves were not consecrated, as the cause of the animal’s disqualification preceded its slaughter. If one slaughtered the thanks offering and it was discovered that it is a blemished animal that may not be sacrificed ab initio but if it ascended the altar it may be sacrificed, Rabbi Eliezer says: He has consecrated the loaves, since if the offering ascends the altar it is sacrificed. And the Rabbis say: He has not consecrated the loaves, since it may not be sacrificed ab initio. If one slaughtered the thanks offering not for its sake but for the sake of another offering, and likewise, if one slaughtered the ram of inauguration not for its sake, and likewise, if one slaughtered the communal peace offering of two sheep that accompany the two loaves on Shavuot not for their sake, the loaves were not consecrated.
נְסָכִין שֶׁקָּדְשׁוּ בִכְלִי וְנִמְצָא הַזֶּבַח פָּסוּל, אִם יֶשׁ שָׁם זֶבַח אַחֵר, יִקְרְבוּ עִמּוֹ. וְאִם לָאו, יִפָּסְלוּ בְלִינָה. וְלַד תּוֹדָה וּתְמוּרָתָהּ, וְהַמַּפְרִישׁ תּוֹדָתוֹ וְאָבְדָה וְהִפְרִישׁ אַחֶרֶת תַּחְתֶּיהָ, אֵינָן טְעוּנִים לֶחֶם, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא ז), וְהִקְרִיב עַל זֶבַח הַתּוֹדָה, הַתּוֹדָה טְעוּנָה לֶחֶם, וְלֹא וְלָדָהּ וְלֹא חֲלִיפָתָהּ וְלֹא תְמוּרָתָהּ טְעוּנִין לָחֶם:
In a case where the libations that accompany the offerings were sanctified in a service vessel when the animal was slaughtered and the offering was discovered to be unfit, if there is another offering that was slaughtered and requires libations, the libations should be sacrificed with that offering; and if not, they should be disqualified by being left overnight, and then burned. With regard to the offspring of an animal designated as a thanks offering, or an animal that is its substitute; or in a case where one separated an animal as a thanks offering and it was lost and he separated another in its stead, and the first animal was then found, in all three cases, the second animal, i.e., the offspring, the substitute, or the replacement, is sacrificed, but it does not require the bringing of accompanying loaves. This is as it is stated: “If he sacrifices it for a thanks offering, then he shall sacrifice with the thanks offering unleavened cakes mingled with oil, and unleavened wafers spread with oil, and cakes mingled with oil, of fine flour poached” (Leviticus 7:12). The verse indicates that the initial thanks offering requires loaves, but neither its offspring, nor its replacement, nor its substitute requires loaves.
הָאוֹמֵר הֲרֵי עָלַי תּוֹדָה, יָבִיא הִיא וְלַחְמָהּ מִן הַחֻלִּין. תּוֹדָה מִן הַחֻלִּין וְלַחְמָהּ מִן הַמַּעֲשֵׂר, יָבִיא הִיא וְלַחְמָהּ מִן הַחֻלִּין. תּוֹדָה מִן הַמַּעֲשֵׂר וְלַחְמָהּ מִן הַחֻלִּין, יָבִיא. הַתּוֹדָה הִיא וְלַחְמָהּ מִן הַמַּעֲשֵׂר, יָבִיא. וְלֹא יָבִיא מֵחִטֵּי מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי, אֶלָּא מִמְּעוֹת מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי:
One who says: It is incumbent upon me to bring a thanks offering, must bring it and its loaves from non-sacred money in his possession and not second-tithe money. Since he said: It is incumbent upon me, bringing the offering is an obligation, and one may not fulfill an obligation with second-tithe money. If one said: It is incumbent upon me to bring a thanks offering from non-sacred money and its loaves from second-tithe money, he must bring the thanks offering and its loaves from non-sacred money. If one said: It is incumbent upon me to bring a thanks offering from second-tithe money and its loaves from non-sacred money, he may bring it in that manner. Likewise, if one said: It is incumbent upon me to bring a thanks offering and its loaves from second-tithe money, he may bring it in that manner. And he may not bring the loaves from second-tithe wheat; rather, he purchases the flour with second-tithe money.
מִנַּיִן לָאוֹמֵר הֲרֵי עָלַי תּוֹדָה, לֹא יָבִיא אֶלָּא מִן הַחֻלִּין, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים טז), וְזָבַחְתָּ פֶּסַח לַה' אֱלֹהֶיךָ צֹאן וּבָקָר, וַהֲלֹא אֵין פֶּסַח בָּא אֶלָּא מִן הַכְּבָשִׂים וּמִן הָעִזִּים. אִם כֵּן, לָמָּה נֶאֱמַר צֹאן וּבָקָר. אֶלָּא לְהָקִישׁ כֹּל הַבָּא מִן הַבָּקָר וּמִן הַצֹּאן לַפֶּסַח, מַה הַפֶּסַח, שֶׁהוּא בָא בְחוֹבָה, אֵינוֹ בָא אֶלָּא מִן הַחֻלִּין, אַף כָּל דָּבָר שֶׁהוּא בָא בְחוֹבָה, לֹא יָבֹא אֶלָּא מִן הַחֻלִּין. לְפִיכָךְ, הָאוֹמֵר הֲרֵי עָלַי תּוֹדָה, הֲרֵי עָלַי שְׁלָמִים, הוֹאִיל וְהֵם בָּאִים חוֹבָה, לֹא יָבֹאוּ אֶלָּא מִן הַחֻלִּין. וְהַנְּסָכִים בְּכָל מָקוֹם לֹא יָבֹאוּ אֶלָּא מִן הַחֻלִּין:
From where is it derived with regard to one who says: It is incumbent upon me to bring a thanks offering, that he may bring it only from non-sacred money? It is derived from a verse, as the verse states: “And you shall sacrifice the Paschal offering to the Lord your God, of the flock and the herd” (Deuteronomy 16:2). The verse is difficult: Doesn’t the Paschal offering come only from lambs and goats? If so, why does the verse state: “The flock and the herd”? It is to juxtapose all offerings that come from the flock and from the herd to the Paschal offering, teaching that just as the Paschal offering is a matter of obligation and comes only from non-sacred money, so too any matter of obligation comes only from non-sacred money. Therefore, in the case of one who says: It is incumbent upon me to bring a thanks offering, or: It is incumbent upon me to bring a peace offering, since these offerings come as an obligation due to his vow, they may be brought only from non-sacred money. And libations, in any case, may be brought only from non-sacred money, and not from second-tithe money, because second-tithe money must be used to purchase items eaten by people, while libations are poured out next to the altar.