Menachot 76a — the Talmud in English

Mishna:

All the meal-offerings require three hundred rubbings,

rubbing the wheat three hundred times, between his hands.

And

so

five hundred strikes,

he strikes them with the thickness of his fist, in the manner of the kneaders.

And the tannaim disputed the matter: According to the view of the first tanna,

rubbing

and striking,

these he performs

on wheat,

so that they will be easy for their husks to be stripped from them.

R. Yosei says: On dough

he does this, so that it will be attractive.

All the meal-offerings come ten by ten

loaves, he makes from the dough of the meal-offering ten loaves, and bakes them,

except for the showbread

that is on the table,

and the griddle-cakes of the High Priest

the great, [“

the meal-offering of the anointed priest”],

which come twelve

loaves,

the words of R. Yehuda.

Rabbi Meir

R. Meir

disagrees and

says: All of them come twelve

loaves,

except for the loaves of the thanksgiving-offering [

forty loaves: thirty unleavened loaves from three kinds—loaves, wafers, and scalded loaves—and another ten leavened loaves]

and

loaves

of the naziriteship [

from two kinds, loaves and wafers, which the nazirite brings on the day when he completes the days of the naziriteship that he vowed],

which come ten by ten

of each kind.

Gemara:

We learned in the Mishna: All the meal-offerings require three hundred rubbings and five hundred strikes:

The tanna

in a beraita taught: This is the order of the rubbing and the striking:

He rubs

once

one,

and

strikes twice.

He rubs twice and strikes three times.

Thus, for every three rubbings there are five strikes. And he again rubs once and strikes twice, rubs twice and strikes three times, until he completes three hundred rubbings and five hundred strikes.

R. Yirmeya raised a question

concerning the rubbing, in which he moves his hand forward and brings it back:

Whether

moving forward and bringing back is one [

the forward movement of the hand and its return for one rubbing are counted]

or perhaps: moving forward and bringing back are two,

the forward movement of the hand and its return are counted as two -

What ,

how does he count?

And we conclude:

teyku.

We learned in the Mishna:

Rubbing and striking on wheat; R. Yosei says: On dough:

It was asked of them [

the members of the academy were uncertain about the meaning of R. Yosei’s words]: Did R. Yosei come to disagree, saying that

on dough

alone does he rub and strike,

and not on wheat?

Or perhaps

R. Yosei came to add, saying that

even on dough

he performs three hundred rubbings and five hundred strikes, in addition to what he performs on wheat?

Ta shma

that he does not do this except on dough, from this:

as it was taught: Rubbing and striking on wheat.

R. Yosei

says: Rubbing and striking on dough.

It is thus implied: rubbing and striking on dough and not on wheat, like the words of the first tanna.

We learned in the Mishna:

All the meal-offerings come ten by ten, except for the showbread and the griddle-cakes of the High Priest, which come twelve:

a. It is written in the passage of the showbread [Leviticus 24:5]: “And you shall take fine flour and bake it, twelve loaves; two-tenths shall be in one loaf. And you shall place them in two arrangements. And you shall place on each arrangement pure frankincense, and it shall be for the bread as a memorial portion [the frankincense for the showbread is like the handful for a meal-offering, which is also called a ‘memorial portion.’ And through the burning of the frankincense the bread becomes permitted for eating, like a meal-offering made permitted through the burning of the handful], a fire-offering to the Lord. And it shall be for Aaron and his sons, and they shall eat it in a holy place, for it is most holy to him, from the fire-offerings of the Lord, an eternal statute.”

b. And it is written concerning the griddle-cake meal-offering [Leviticus 6:12]: “This is the offering of Aaron and his sons, a tenth of an ephah of fine flour as a regular meal-offering, half of it in the morning and half of it in the evening. On a griddle, with oil, it shall be made scalded; you shall bring it, baked, a meal-offering of broken pieces, you shall offer it as a pleasing fragrance to the Lord. And the anointed priest in his place from among his sons shall make it; an eternal statute for the Lord, it shall be burned entirely.”

: "אם על תודה יקריבנו, והקריב על זבח התודה חלות מצות בלולות בשמן ורקיקי מצות משוחים בשמן, וסולת מורבכת חלות בלוות בשמן. על חלות לחם חמץ יקריב קרבנו, על זבח תודת שלמיו. והקריב ממנו אחד מכל קרבן [חלה אחת מכל מין] תרומה לה', לכהן הזורק את דם השלמים לו יהיה [והשאר נאכל לבעלים] "; וילפינן לקמן עז ב: נאמר כאן תרומה ונאמר בתרומת מעשר "תרומה", מה להלן אחד מעשרה אף כאן אחד מעשרה; ולמדנו שיהיה מכל מין עשר חלות]]c. It is written in the passage of the thanksgiving loaves [Leviticus 7:12]: “If he offers it for a thanksgiving-offering, then he shall offer with the sacrifice of the thanksgiving-offering unleavened loaves mixed with oil, and unleavened wafers smeared with oil, and scalded fine flour, loaves mixed with oil. With loaves of leavened bread he shall offer his offering, with the sacrifice of his thanksgiving peace-offerings. And he shall offer from it one from each offering [one loaf from each kind] as a gift to the Lord; to the priest who sprinkles the blood of the peace-offerings, it shall belong [and the remainder is eaten by the owners].” And we derive below, on 77b: It is stated here “a gift,” and it is stated concerning the gift of the tithe, “a gift”: just as there, one of ten, so here, one of ten; and we learn that there shall be ten loaves of each kind.

The Gemara asks: This works out

for the showbread,

that he makes it twelve loaves, for

explicitly it is written in it,

the verse explicitly says, “twelve loaves.”

And it also works out for

the griddle-cakes of the High Priest,

which come twelve, for

it comes “

a statute [“

an eternal statute”]

a statute [“

an eternal statute”]

from the showbread,”

and we learned: Just as the showbread is twelve loaves, so too the griddle-cake meal-offering is twelve.

But what we learned concerning the other meal-offerings, that

they

loaves of each kind,

come

ten by ten

loaves, this

from where do we know it?

And we answer: He derives

all the meal-offerings

from

the thanksgiving loaves: just as there,

in the thanksgiving loaves,

ten

loaves of each kind,

so here,

in all the meal-offerings,

ten

loaves come.

And we object: While you learn all the meal-offerings from the thanksgiving loaves,

let us learn

all the meal-offerings

from the showbread,

and say:

just as there,

in the showbread,

twelve

loaves,

so here,

all the meal-offerings,

twelve

loaves!?

And we answer:

It is more logical that he should learn from the thanksgiving loaves

for all the meal-offerings,

since

there are six similarities between them:

a.

An individual

brings all the meal-offerings and the thanksgiving loaves, and they are not communal meal-offerings like the showbread.

b.

That he vowed:

the other meal-offerings and the thanksgiving loaves come as voluntary offerings; can you say this concerning the showbread, which is a communal obligation?

c.

Oil:

all the meal-offerings and the thanksgiving loaves require oil; can you say this concerning the showbread, which does not require oil?

d.

It becomes invalid:

the other meal-offerings and the thanksgiving loaves become invalid through being left overnight, but the showbread does not become invalid, for it remains on the table for eight days.

e.

Not on Shabbat

the meal-offerings and the thanksgiving loaves come, whereas the showbread overrides Shabbat.

f.

And not in impurity

they come, whereas the showbread overrides impurity.

And we object:

On the contrary, he should have learned from the showbread

for all the meal-offerings,

since

they resemble it in four matters:

a.

Sanctity.

The meal-offerings and the showbread are most holy; can you say this concerning the thanksgiving loaves, which are lesser sanctity?

b.

And frankincense:

the meal-offerings and the showbread require it, which is not so with the thanksgiving loaves.

c.

Unleavened bread

they come, whereas the thanksgiving loaves contain leaven.

d.

And essentially.

They come for themselves, whereas the thanksgiving loaves come because of the sacrifice.

And we answer:

These

comparisons between the meal-offerings and the thanksgiving loaves

are more numerous [

they are more numerous] than the comparisons with the showbread.

The Gemara adds to object: This works out if we hold that “a matter learned through a gzera shava does not return and teach through a binyan av,” for then the following objection will not arise.

And

however,

if we hold [

if this is indeed the rule] that

a matter learned through a gzera shava,

such as the griddle-cake meal-offering, which comes twelve loaves through a gzera shava from the showbread,

returns and teaches

to others

through a binyan av [

through “what do we find”], then there is a difficulty:

Let us learn

all the meal-offerings

from the griddle-cakes of the High Priest,

and say:

Just as there—

in the griddle-cake meal-offering, which was learned through a gzera shava from the showbread—

twelve

loaves,

so here,

in all the meal-offerings,

twelve

loaves come and not ten!?

And we answer:

It is more logical

that all the meal-offerings

should have been learned from the thanksgiving loaves [

we have to learn] and not from the griddle-cake meal-offering,

since

they resemble them in six matters:

a.

An ordinary person

brings the meal-offerings and the thanksgiving loaves, whereas the griddle-cake meal-offering is brought by the High Priest.

b.

That he vowed:

they come as voluntary offerings, whereas the griddle-cake meal-offering is obligatory.

c.

In halves:

the meal-offerings and the thanksgiving loaves do not come in halves, whereas the griddle-cake meal-offering comes half in the morning and half in the evening.

d.

For piggul,

that is, there is piggul in all the meal-offerings and in the thanksgiving loaves, for if he offered their permitting component with a thought of piggul, they became piggul, whereas the griddle-cake meal-offering has no permitting component, since it is entirely offered up, and anything that has no permitting component has no piggul.

e.

Not on Shabbat

they come, but the griddle-cake meal-offering comes every day and overrides Shabbat.

f.

And not in impurity

they come, but the griddle-cake meal-offering overrides impurity.

And we object:

On the contrary,

all the meal-offerings

should have been learned from the griddle-cakes of the High Priest, since

they resemble one another in eight matters:

a. One

tenth of an ephah

they come, whereas the thanksgiving loaves come from several tenths of an ephah.

b.

A vessel,

that is, service vessels sanctify the meal-offerings and the griddle-cake meal-offering, whereas the thanksgiving loaves become sanctified through the slaughtering of the sacrifice.

c.

Sanctity:

they are most holy, whereas the thanksgiving loaves are lesser sanctity.

d.

And frankincense

the meal-offerings and the griddle-cake meal-offering require it, but not the thanksgiving loaves.

e.

Unleavened bread

they come, whereas there is leaven in the thanksgiving loaves.

f.

And essentially,

they come because of themselves, and not like the thanksgiving loaves, which come because of the sacrifice.

g.

Presentation

to the altar is required for all the meal-offerings and for the griddle-cake meal-offering, whereas the thanksgiving loaves do not require presentation.

h.

And fire-offerings,

a handful is burned from all the meal-offerings, and the entire griddle-cake meal-offering is burned on the fire-offerings, whereas the thanksgiving loaves are all eaten by the priests -

And

these

these

comparisons of all the meal-offerings with the griddle-cake meal-offering

are more numerous

than the comparisons of all the meal-offerings with the thanksgiving loaves, and all the more so should we learn all the meal-offerings from the griddle-cake meal-offering and not from the thanksgiving loaves!?

And we answer: Nevertheless, the sacrifice of

an ordinary person’s

sacrifice

of an ordinary person is preferable for him to learn from, rather than from the griddle-cake meal-offering, which is the meal-offering of the High Priest.

We learned in the Mishna:

R. Meir says: All of them come twelve

loaves,

except for the thanksgiving loaves and the loaves of naziriteship, which come ten by ten:

The Gemara explains his reasoning in two ways:

a.

If

if

he holds

R. Meir

that a matter

learned through a gzera shava returns and teaches through a binyan av,

then his reason is that he

learns from the griddle-cakes of the High Priest [

which are learned through a gzera shava from the showbread] -

And therefore he learns all the meal-offerings from the griddle-cakes of the High Priest and not from the thanksgiving loaves, because

these

comparisons between all the meal-offerings and the griddle-cakes of the High Priest

are more numerous [

they are more numerous] than the comparisons with the thanksgiving loaves, as was explained above.

b.

If he holds

R. Meir

that a matter learned through a gzera shava does not return and teach through a binyan av,

and it is impossible to learn all the meal-offerings from the griddle-cakes of the High Priest, since they too come twelve only by virtue of a gzera shava, then R. Meir’s reason is:

for

he derives

all the meal-offerings

from the shewbread

which comes as twelve loaves, and not from the loaves of thanksgiving-offerings, which come as ten, because

a sacred offering from a sacred offering

sacred offerings of the highest degree from sacred offerings of the highest degree

is preferable for him

to derive from, rather than to learn from the loaves of thanksgiving-offerings, which are sacred offerings of lesser degree, even though in the total of all the comparisons there is greater similarity to the loaves of thanksgiving-offerings than to the shewbread, as was explained above.

We learned in the Mishna:

except for the loaves of thanksgiving-offerings and naziriteship, which come as ten and ten:

And the Gemara explains the source for this:

With regard to the loaves of thanksgiving-offerings, it is explicitly written concerning them

that they should be ten. And the loaves of

naziriteship

also come as ten and ten, like the loaves of thanksgiving-offerings, because

the master said:

the Master said:

This is what Scripture says regarding the loaves of thanksgiving-offerings: “Upon the loaves of leavened bread he shall offer his offering, together with the sacrifice of the thanksgiving-offering of his

peace-offerings,”

to include the peace-offerings of a nazirite,

that the loaves that come with them are to be brought as ten and ten of each kind, like the loaves of thanksgiving-offerings.

Rav Tovi bar Kisna said in the name of Shmuel: The loaves of thanksgiving-offerings

which by the essence of their law must be forty loaves, ten and ten of each kind—

if he baked them as four loaves,

one large loaf for each kind—

he has fulfilled his obligation.

And we object:

But we require

forty

loaves!?

And we answer: Only

for the mitzva

must he bring forty, but it does not invalidate the offering.

And we object:

But he must separate a gift from them,

for he must separate from the loaves one loaf as a gift from each kind, that is, one from ten; and since he does not have ten loaves, how can he separate it!?

And if you say that he separates from each and every one, perhaps you will say: He cuts off a tenth from each loaf and gives it to the priest—

But “and he shall offer from it

one

from each offering” [which implies an entire one],

the Merciful One said,

and we learned

that he may not take a piece [

he may not break off a piece]!?

And we answer: What are we dealing with here? With a case where

he separated them

the gift

during kneading,

he took one from ten as the gift, and the remaining nine for the owners from each and every kind—he baked them as one loaf.

He took one out of ten as the gift, and baked the remaining nine belonging to the owner from each type in a single loaf.

They raise an objection from a source

Meitivi

to Shmuel from that which is taught in a beraita:

All

the meal-offerings in which he increased the measure of [

in the number of]

their loaves, or in which he decreased the measure of [

in the number of]

their loaves,

they are

valid, except for the shewbread, the griddle-offering of the high priest, and the loaves of thanksgiving-offerings and naziriteship,

for the number of their loaves is indispensable. It is explicitly clear that the number of the loaves is indispensable for the loaves of thanksgiving-offerings, and not in accordance with Shmuel’s words?