Menachot 10b (י:) — the Talmud in English

And we raise an objection:

But what of the sprinkling, regarding which priesthood alone is written, and we learned in the Mishna: If he sprinkled with the left hand, it is invalid!

Yet Rabbi Shimon does not disagree; but we said that according to Rabbi Shimon, priesthood must be written?

And we answer:

Abaye said:

Although Rabbi Shimon does not disagree in the Mishna, we find that he

disagrees in a beraita. As it is taught: If he sprinkled with the left hand, it is invalid; but Rabbi Shimon deems it valid.

And we raise an objection:

But then, regarding that which Rava said

that we derive

“hand”

from “hand” for the handful

from the leper—

why do I need this

?

It can be derived from “priesthood,”

as it is written with regard to kemitza: “And the kohen shall take a handful”? And we answer: Both verses are necessary:

one for the handful,

that is, for the kemitza itself, which must be performed with the right hand;

and one for the consecration of the handful

in a vessel, teaching that he must place it into the service vessel with his right hand. 37 .

And we raise an objection:

According to Rabbi Shimon, who does not require

according to one of the amoraim

the consecration of the handful

in a vessel,

and according to the one who also says that he requires the consecration of the handful

in a vessel, he nevertheless holds that

the left hand renders it valid,

as will be explained below—if so, what do I need Rava's derivation of

“hand”

from “hand”?

And

if

you will say that the gzera shava is necessary to derive the right hand

for the kemitza itself according to Rabbi Shimon,

who does not derive it from “priesthood,” since he holds that priesthood requires “a finger,”

that too can be derived from Rabbi Yehuda, son of Rabbi Hiyya,

as Rabbi Yehuda, son of Rabbi Hiyya, said: What is the reason of Rabbi Shimon,

who deems valid the burning of the handful even when it is not performed from a service vessel?

For the verse says

with regard to a meal-offering:

“It is most holy, like a sin-offering and like a guilt-offering,”

and the comparison of a meal-offering to a sin-offering and a guilt-offering comes to teach you that if he

comes to perform its service by hand,

without consecrating it in a vessel,

he performs its service with the right hand, like a sin-offering,

whose blood he places with the right hand, as it is written with regard to it: “a finger” and “priesthood”;

if he comes to perform its service in a vessel, he performs its service with the left hand, like the guilt-offering

of a leper, with regard to which “left” is written, and whose blood is sprinkled from a vessel. We derive from the comparison of a meal-offering to a sin-offering that the right hand is required; if so, why was the derivation of “hand” from “hand” necessary?

And we answer:

“It is necessary only”

“hand from hand”

for the handful of the sinner's meal-offering. You might have thought: Since Rabbi Shimon said

that one does not place oil or frankincense on the sinner's meal-offering

so that his offering should not be enhanced, when he performs kemitza on it,

the sinner's meal-offering should be valid even when kemitza is performed with the left hand;

therefore it teaches us otherwise.