Commento su Menahot 3:1

הקומץ את המנחה לאכול – outside of its appropriate time period.

Introduction This mishnah deals with various cases where the disqualifying intention does not cause the sacrifice to be invalid. The same mishnah concerning animal sacrifices appeared in Zevahim 3:3.

דבר שאין דרכו לאכול – as for example, the handful of meal-offering and the frankincense.

If he took the handful from the minhah intending to eat [outside its proper place or after its proper time] a thing that it is not usual to eat or to burn [outside its proper place or after its proper time] a thing that it is not usual to burn, the offering is valid. But Rabbi Eliezer says it is invalid. Normally, having an intention to eat or burn something outside of the place or time it should be eaten or burned will invalidate the minhah. However, here he intends to burn or eat something that is not normally burned or eaten. Therefore, this improper intention does not render the sacrifice invalid. Rabbi Eliezer disagrees and holds that an improper intention even concerning that which is not normally eaten or burned will still render the sacrifice invalid.

ולהקטיר – outside of its appropriate time period.

If he intended to eat less than an olive's worth of a thing that it is usual to eat, or to burn less than an olive's worth of a thing that it is usual to burn, the offering is valid. Here his improper intention was to do the action with less than an olive’s worth of the minhah, and therefore the minhah is still valid.

דבר שאין דרכו להקטיר – the residue/remnants are accustomed to be consumed but are not accustomed to be offered as incense upon the altar.

If he intended to eat a half of an olive's worth and to burn a half of an olive’s worth, the offering is valid, for eating and burning cannot be reckoned together. As we learned in 1:4, improper intentions with regard to eating a minhah and burning the fistful taken out of it do not join together to add up to the requisite olive’s worth. Therefore, the minhah is still valid.

כשר – that this is not considered thought/intention, for he has rescinded his thought regarding all people.

רבי אליעזר פוסל – as it is written (Leviticus 7:18): “If any of the flesh of his sacrifice is eaten [on the third day, it shall not be acceptable],” Scripture speaks of two consumptions (i.e., האכל יאכל), one is the consumption of a human being and one is the consumption of the altar, to tell you that just as the consumption of a human being invalidates it for a person, as for example, residue/remnants if a person thought of consuming them outside of the appropriate time, and the consumption of the altar for the altar, as for example, a handful of meal-offering, if he considered/intended to offer it up on the altar not at its appropriate time, such his intention/thought invalidates the consumption of a human being if he thought about them regarding the altar to offer them up outside of their appropriate time, since the All-Merciful excluded both of them in the language of “eating,” we learn from this that they are the same, and we account from this one (i.e., food from sacrifices) to that one (i.e., “food” for the altar). But the Rabbis hold, that for thus, the All-Merciful excluded for burning on the altar in the language of “consuming/eating”, to tell you that just as eating is an olive’s bulk, so also consideration of burning on the altar is an olive’s bulk. But always, “eating” is in its manner is implied, the taking of a handful of meal-offering to the altar and the residue/remnants is for a person [for consumption]. And the Halakha is according to the Sages.