Commentaire sur Menachot 12:11

המנחות והנכסים. עד שלא קדשו בכלי – they are not sanctified as an object which is consecrated as such (i.e., irredeemable), but rather that which is consecrated for its value (i.e., redeemable), that one must redeem them and the monies are holy. And especially, when they were impure, they have redemption, before one has consecrated them in a [consecrated] utensil, but if they were defiled even though they had not been consecrated in a [consecrated] utensil, we don’t redeem them.

Introduction This mishnah deals with “redeeming” holy items. Redeeming is done by transferring the holiness of an item to money. The money then becomes holy and must be used to buy sacrifices or other items for the Temple. The item itself can now be used for secular purposes.

העופות והעצים והלבונה וכלי שרת שנטמאו אין להם פדיון – for redemption that is not stated with an object which is consecrated as such (i.e., irredeemable) other than with a animal having a blemish, as it is written (Leviticus 27:11-12): “If [the vow concerns] any impure animal that may not be brought as an offering to the LORD…and the priest shall assess it.” And the Scriptural verse is speaking about animals with blemishes that had been redeemed, for if it was an actual impure animal, when it (i.e., the Biblical verse) states (Leviticus 27:27): “But if it is of impure animals, it may be ransomed as its assessment, [with one-fifth added; if it is not redeemed, it shall be sold at its assessment],” behold, it is stated regarding an impure animal, and our Mishnah comes to inform us that even though we find with something holy an object which is consecrated as such (i.e., irredeemable) and a blemish befell it we redeem it, whereas the birds and the wood and the frankincense and the utensils of service that are sanctified as objects consecrated as such (i.e., irredeemable) and are made impure, we don’t redeem them.

If menahot and libation-offerings became unclean before they were sanctified in a vessel, they may be redeemed. If [they became unclean] after they were sanctified in a vessel, they may not be redeemed. Once a minhah or a libation offering (the wine or oil that accompanies a sacrifice) is put into a ministering vessel, it may no longer be redeemed. If it becomes impure at this point, it would have to be destroyed. However, if it becomes unclean before it is put into a ministering vessel, it can be redeemed and used for non-holy purposes.

Bird-offerings, the wood, the frankincense, and the ministering vessels, may not be redeemed, for the rule of redemption applies only to [offerings of] beasts. Leviticus 27:11-13 states that if one dedicates an unclean animal to the Temple, the priest evaluates the animal and takes money in place of the animal. This verse, however, was stated only with regard to “beasts” which would include sheep, goats, cows and other mammals. It is not stated in regard to bird-offerings, wood or vessels. Once these are dedicated to the Temple, they may no longer be redeemed.

מה שהביא הביא (see also Tractate Menahot, Chapter 5, Mishnah 8) – for we state that it was not for the purpose of his vow that the brought, but rather It is a different free-will offering/donation.

Introduction In this mishnah and in the following one, a person vows to bring a minhah offering, but then does not bring exactly what he vowed to bring. Our mishnah deals with the consequences of acting in such a way.

זו להביא במחבת – for there was an Issaron/one-tenth of an Ephah of choice four placed before him, and he said, [Lo, I pledge myself to bring this choice flour as a meal-offering prepared] in a pan/frying pan, etc.

If one said, “I take upon myself [to bring a minhah prepared] on a griddle”, and he brought one prepared in a pan, or “a minhah prepared in a pan”, and he brought one prepared on a griddle, what he has brought he has brought, but he has not fulfilled his obligation. [But if he said, “I take upon myself] to bring this [flour] as a minhah prepared on a griddle”, and he brought it prepared in a pan; or as “a minhah prepared in a pan”, and he brought it prepared on a griddle, it is invalid. A minhah can be prepared either on a pan or on a griddle. Both are valid. Therefore, if a person makes a vow to bring one type of minhah and he brings the other, his minhah is valid and can be offered. It is considered a voluntary offering, and not one in fulfillment of the vow. Since, he has not fulfilled his vow because he vowed to bring a specific type of minhah, he also must bring another minhah in its stead. However, if he has some flour and he vows to use it to make a certain type of minhah, either in a pan or on a griddle, and then he changes it to the other type, the minhah is not valid at all and cannot be offered, because it was supposed to be prepared in the manner he stated.

הרי זו פסולה – for he appointed it for the utensil that he mentioned and he is not able to change it to t

If one said, “I take upon myself to bring two tenths in one vessel”, and he brought them in two vessels, or [he said] “in two vessels,” and he brought them in one vessel, what he has brought he has brought, but he has not fulfilled his obligation. But [if he said, “I take upon myself to bring] these [two tenths] in one vessel”, and he brought them in two vessels, or “in two vessels”, and he brought them in one vessel, they are invalid. Similarly in this case, where he vowed to bring two tenths in either one or two vessels and then he brought in the opposite number of vessels, the minhah is valid but he has not fulfilled his vow because he performed the mitzvah differently from the way he said he would. Again, if he specifies that these specific two tenths of flour will be brought in either one or two vessels, and then he brings them in the wrong number of vessels, they are invalid and cannot be offered.

אלו להביא בכלי אחד – these that were placed/lying before him.

If he said, “I take upon myself to bring two tenths in one vessel” and he brought them in two vessels, and when they said to him, “You vowed to bring them in one vessel”, if he brought them in one vessel, they are valid, but if he still offered them in two vessels, they are invalid. In these cases, the priests tell him that he is offering the minhah in the wrong number of vessels. If he changes the minhah back to the correct number of vessels, it is valid and he has fulfilled his obligation. However, if he nevertheless offers the minhah in the wrong number of vessels, it is invalid. In this case, it cannot be considered a voluntary offering, since he didn’t respond, “I will then bring this as a voluntary offering.” Rather, it is clear that he thinks he is bringing the minhah in fulfillment of his vow, in which case it is invalid because he vowed differently.

הרי אלו פסולים – for where he made a vow for one utensil and brought in two utensils, he sets aside/dedicates from it two handfuls, but he did not vow other than one handful. And further, that the meal -offering is lacking in each and every utensil. But where he vowed for two utensils, but brought [only] for one utensil, it would be an extra meal-offering but where he diminished/reduced the handfuls, for he sifted/selected for it two handfuls, but only took one handful.

If he said “I take upon myself to bring two tenths in two vessels”, and he brought them in one vessel, and when they said to him, “You vowed to bring them in two vessels”, if he offered them in two vessels they are valid; but if he still kept them in one vessel, they are considered as two menahot which have been mixed. Here he vows to bring two tenths in two vessels, and instead brings them in one vessel. If, after having been told that he should have brought them in two vessels, he puts them in two vessels, they are still valid. However, if he keeps them in one vessel, they are treated as two menahot which have been mixed up. This was a situation dealt with in 3:3. If one can take a handful out of each minhah and put it on the altar, then they are valid, but if not they are invalid. The same would be true in section two. If he had said “I take upon myself to bring two tenths in two vessels” and he brought them in one vessel, if they can still be somewhat separated, they would be valid.

אמרו לו בכלי אחד נדרת – but he was not troubled by their words and he offered it in two utensils, it is invalid, but even though that he did not state that these would be brought in one utensil. Because that now, one cannot say that I have brought another free-will offering, for since they said to him that he made a votive offering in one utensil, he could have said to them: “I because of another vow bring this.”

כשתי מנחות שנתערבו – for we said in the chapter of the “The One Who Takes a Handful”/הקומץ (Chapter 3, Mishnah 3 of Tractate Menahot)that if he is able to take a handful from this one on its own and from that one on its own, they are kosher/fit, but if not they are invalid. But that which is taught above [in our Mishnah]: “these which are to be brought in two utensils but he brought them in one utensil, they are invalid,” speaks, as for example, that he was not able to take a handful from each one of them on its own.

הרי עלי מנחה מן השעורים יביא מן החטים – for the free-will offerings of meal offerings do not come other than from wheat, and as for example that he said, “Had I known that we don’t bring a meal-offering from barley, I would not have made a votive offering other than from wheat.” But if he said, “I would not vow anything,” he is not liable for anything.

Introduction A minhah must consist of a tenth of an ephah of fine wheat flour. It must be accompanied by oil and frankincense. Our mishnah discusses what happens if one vows to bring a minhah that does not fulfill all of these requirements.

יביא סלת – as it is written (Leviticus 2:1): “[When a person presents an offering of grain to the LORD,] his offering shall be of choice flour.”

[If one said,] “I take upon myself to bring a minhah of barley,” he must bring one of wheat. A minhah must come from wheat, not barley. If he vows to bring a barley minhah, he must bring one of wheat.

ר' שמעון פוטר – Rabbi Shimon holds that a person is made responsible for the his concluding words, for since he concluded his words not in accordance with the law of the meal-offering, he is not liable for anything. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Shimon (see Talmud Menahot 103b).

“Of coarse flour,” he must bring it of fine flour. Similarly, if he vows to bring it from coarse flour, he must bring it from fine flour.

“Without oil and without frankincense,” he must bring it with oil and frankincense. He must bring the minhah in its normal fashion, with oil and frankincense.

“Half a tenth,” he must bring a whole tenth. If he tries to bring less than the prescribed amount, he must bring the prescribed amount.

“A tenth and a half,” he must bring two. If he tries to bring 1 ½ tenths, what he has really done is vowed to bring one minhah and a half of a minhah. Since one can’t bring half of a minhah he must bring two full menahot.

Rabbi Shimon declares him exempt, because he did not make his offering in the manner in which people usually make their offerings. Rabbi Shimon says that the person is not liable to bring a minhah at all. His vow to bring a minhah does not count, since he didn’t promise to make the offering in the way it is normally made.

שמן צבור מביאים וכו' – three Esronim (i.e., three-tenths of an Omer) for a bull, for thirteen bulls they are thirty-nine Esronim, and an Issaron (i.e., one-tenth of an Omer) for a lamb; for fourteen lambs they are fourteen Esronim, and two Esronim; for two rams they are four Esronim, that is fifty seven, and for the two daily offerings/Tamidim, two, and for the two lambs for the Musaf/additional offering for Shabbat is two, this is sixty one. But Rabbi Shimon said to them: But were all of them for that self-same day in one utensil, but weren’t these for bulls and these for rams and lambs, for if he mixed/combined them, he invalidated them, for the meal-offering of bulls – their mixture was thick, two LOG (i.e., a LOG equals the volume of six eggs bulk) for an Issaron, one-half of a Hin for thee Esronim, but for the meal offering of lambs, their mixture was thin, one-quarter of a Hin for an Issaron, which is three LOG, and they absorb one from another , and it is found that this one is less and that one has more. But for what reason does an individual not bring sixty-one Esronim in one utensil, for up to sixty, one can thoroughly mix in one LOG. But this Tanna/teacher holds like Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov who stated in the chapter [nine, Mishnah three of Tractate Menahot] “Two Measures”/שתי מדות – even a meal offering of sixty Esronim, it does not have any ought one Log. But even though it was all mixed, since it was appropriate to be mixed, the mixing does not make it indispensable., for such we hold that everything wherever from the proportions and properties of the mixture a perfect fusion is possible, the real act of mixing thoroughly is not indispensable (see Talmud Hullin 83b), but that which is not appropriate for a thorough mixture, the thorough mixture makes it indispensable.

A man may offer a minhah consisting of sixty tenths and bring them in one vessel. As we shall see in the argument below between Rabbi Shimon and the other sages, all agree that a person can voluntary bring a minhah of up to sixty tenths and put it all into one vessel. The rabbis will argue below as to why this is permissible.

וששים ואחד אין נבללים – in astonishment!

If one said, “I take upon myself to offer sixty-one tenths,” he must bring sixty in one vessel and the one in another vessel, since the congregation brings on the first day of the festival [of Sukkot] when it falls on Shabbat sixty-one tenths [as a minhah], it is enough for an individual that [his minhah] should be one tenth less than that of the congregation. However, if he offers to bring a minhah of sixty-one tenths, he must put sixty in one vessel and one in another vessel. The number sixty-one is the number of tenths that would have been brought when the first day of Sukkot falls on Shabbat. Fifty-seven would cover the bullocks (13 x 3 tenths), rams (2 x 2 tenths) and lambs (14 x 1 tenth) that the musaf (additional offering), required. Two more tenths are for the tamid (daily) offering and two more tenths are for the musaf of Shabbat. This brings the total to sixty-one. According to the first opinion, if an individual wishes to bring sixty-one tenths, he can only bring up to sixty in one vessel, such that he will have one less than the congregation brings.

קרטוב (1/64th of a LOG or 3/32 of an egg-bulk) – a fourth of a fourth of a LOG.

Rabbi Shimon said: but some of these [sixty-one tenths] are for the bullocks and some for the lambs, and they may not be mixed one with the other! Rather sixty tenths mingles [in one vessel]. Rabbi Shimon points out that these sixty-one tenths are not mixed in together on Sukkot, since they are for different animals. The reason that one can bring sixty tenths in one vessel has nothing to do with the amount brought on Sukkot. Rather sixty tenths of flour can mix with one log of oil, but sixty-one cannot.

אין מתנדבים לוג – wine for libations. For we have not found a meal-offering of libations of one LOG and not of two nor of five [of wine].

They said to him: can sixty be mingled [in one vessel] and not sixty-one? The other rabbis question Rabbi Shimon. If sixty-tenths can mix in with one log of oil, then surely sixty-one tenths can also be mixed. Is one extra tenth really going to make that much of a difference!

אבל מתנדבים ג' לוגים – that are appropriate for a lamb. And four [LOG] that are appropriate for a ram. And six LOG which is one-half of Hin that are appropriate for a bull. But from six [LOG] and above, they volunteer as a free-will offering, for seven are appropriate for three of them for a lamb and four for a ram, and eight are appropriate for two rams, and nine are appropriate for a lamb and a bull, ten are appropriate for a ram and a bull, eleven are appropriate for two rams and a lamb. And similarly throughout.

He answered, so it is with all the measures prescribed by the sages: a man may immerse himself in forty seahs of water, but he may not immerse himself in forty seahs less one kortob. Rabbi Shimon responds by simply noting that this is the way that halakhah works. When the rabbis set an arbitrary number, that arbitrary number is mandatory and even the smallest deviation is not accepted. For instance, a mikveh is valid if it has 40 seahs of water. If even the smallest amount, a kortov, is missing, the mikveh is invalid, even though such a small absence would not be at all noticeable. Thus, the rabbis have established that sixty seahs can be mixed in one vessel with one log of oil, but sixty-one cannot.

One may not offer one [log], two, or five [logs], but one may offer three, four, six, or anything above six. This section begins a new topic. One can voluntary offer three, four, six or more logs of wine, but not one, two or five, for these numbers are never found in the libation offerings mentioned in the Numbers 14:5-10. Three logs are for a lamb, four for a ram and six for a bullock (see also Menahot 9:3). Any number above six is a possible combination of 3, 4 and 6. For instance, 7 would be a lamb and a ram. Eight would be two rams, nine, three lambs and so on. Thus one can make a voluntary offering of wine consisting of any number higher than six logs.

מתנדבים יין – without choice flour and oil, and we offer it as a libation for sixty on its own.

One may offer wine but not oil, the words of Rabbi Akiva. But Rabbi Tarfon says: one may also offer oil. According to Rabbi Akiva, while one can make a voluntary offering of wine, one cannot make a voluntary offering of just oil, without an accompanying minhah. Rabbi Tarfon holds that just as one can voluntarily offer wine on its own, so too one can voluntarily offer oil on its own.

ואין מתנדבים שמן – without choice flour and wine.

Rabbi Tarfon said: just as we find that wine is offered as an obligation may be offered as a freewill-offering, so oil which is offered as an obligation may be offered as a freewill-offering. Both Rabbi Tarfon and Rabbi Akiva agree that one can voluntarily offer wine on its own. And of course, there are situations where one is obligated to bring wine and oil to accompany sacrifices. From here Rabbi Tarfon concludes that just as wine can be brought on its own voluntarily, so too oil can be brought on its own voluntarily.

מתנדבין שמן – and he takes a fistful and offers up the handful [of the meal-offering] which is offered up as incense but the remnants are consumed.

Rabbi Akiva said to him: No, if you say so of wine it is because it is offered by itself even when offered as an obligation, can you say the same of oil which is not offered by itself when offered as an obligation? Rabbi Akiva responds by pointing out a hole in his argument. Wine is brought on its own as an obligation, when it accompanies a sacrifice. Oil, on the other hand, is always mixed in with the minhah offering. Since it is never brought on its own to fulfill an obligation, it cannot be brought on its own voluntarily.

שכן הוא קרב חובתו בפני עצמו – with his obligation it is offered on its own. Even though it comes as an obligation with the meal offering, it is not indispensable to the meal-offering.

Two [men] may not jointly offer one tenth [of flour for a minhah]; but they may jointly offer an olah or a shelamim, and bird sacrifices even a single bird. This section is independent of the previous debate. Two people cannot jointly bring one tenth of flour for a minhah offering. However, they can jointly bring an animal sacrifice, and even jointly bring a bird. The difference between a minhah and an animal offering is derived midrashically.

תאמר בשמן כו' – for since we do not find it in it, for it is not in a utensil on its own, now also it is not brought.

אפילו פרידה אחת – one turtle-dove or one pigeon, we make a free-will offering among the two [of them]. And the Halakah is that we make free-will offerings of wine and oil on their own, and we make a free-will offering of a meal-offering of libations, whether the libations of a bull or whether the libations of a ram or a lamb. And all of the sacrifices come as a jointly owned free-will offering, except for the meal-offering, because it is stated regarding it "נפש"/an individual soul, as it is written (Leviticus 2:1): “When a person presents an offering of grain [to the LORD, his offering shall be of choice flour].”