## Menachot Daf 19b

###### Menachot 19b:1
[Menachot 19b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/19b:1)

גֶּרֶשׂ וָשֶׁמֶן מְעַכְּבִין, וְאֵין דָּבָר אַחֵר מְעַכֵּב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
teaching that the **groats and oil are indispensable, and nothing else is indispensable,** despite the fact that the term statute appears.


###### Menachot 19b:2
[Menachot 19b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/19b:2)

גּוּפָא, אָמַר רַב: כׇּל מָקוֹם שֶׁהֶחְזִיר לְךָ הַכָּתוּב בַּתּוֹרָה מִנְחָה, אֵינוֹ אֶלָּא לְעַכֵּב. וּשְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר: גֶּרֶשׂ וָשֶׁמֶן מְעַכְּבִין, וְאֵין דָּבָר אַחֵר מְעַכֵּב. וְלִשְׁמוּאֵל, אַף עַל גַּב דִּתְנָא בֵּיהּ קְרָא לָא מְעַכְּבָא לֵיהּ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The Gemara discusses **the** matter **itself: Rav says:** With regard to **every** sacrificial **rite of the meal offering that the verse in the Torah repeats,** it is repeated **only to** teach that the failure to perform that rite **invalidates** the offering. **And Shmuel says:** Only the **groats and oil are indispensable, and nothing else is indispensable.** The Gemara asks: **And according to Shmuel,** is it true that **even though** a rite of the meal offering is **repeated** in another **verse he does not deem it indispensable?**


###### Menachot 19b:3
[Menachot 19b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/19b:3)

אֶלָּא, כֹּל הֵיכָא דִּתְנָא בֵּיהּ קְרָא וַדַּאי מְעַכְּבָא, וְהָכָא בִּ״מְלֹא קוּמְצוֹ״ ״בְּקוּמְצוֹ״ קָא מִיפַּלְגִי, דְּתַנְיָא: ״מְלֹא קֻמְצוֹ״ ״בְּקֻמְצוֹ״ – שֶׁלֹּא יַעֲשֶׂה מִדָּה לַקּוֹמֶץ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather,** Shmuel must agree that **wherever the verse repeats** a rite it is **certainly** understood to be **indispensable; and here,** Rav and Shmuel **disagree with regard to** the expressions **“his handful”** (Leviticus 2:2) and **“with his hand”** (Leviticus 6:8). **As it is taught** in a *baraita*: The verse states: “And he shall remove **his handful,”** and elsewhere it states: “And he shall take up from it **with his hand.”** The change in terminology between the two verses teaches **that** the priest **should not** use a utensil to **measure an amount for the handful** of a meal offering, but should use his hand.


###### Menachot 19b:4
[Menachot 19b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/19b:4)

רַב סָבַר: הָא נָמֵי תְּנָא בֵּיהּ קְרָא, דִּכְתִיב: ״וַיַּקְרֵב אֶת הַמִּנְחָה וַיְמַלֵּא כַפּוֹ מִמֶּנָּה״, וּשְׁמוּאֵל: דּוֹרוֹת מִשָּׁעָה לָא יָלְפִינַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav holds** that **this** *halakha* of using one’s hand and not a utensil is **also repeated** in another **verse, as it is written** in the context of Aaron’s service on the eighth day of the consecration of the Tabernacle: **“And he presented the meal offering; and he filled his hand from it”** (Leviticus 9:17), demonstrating that the handful is removed by hand and not with a utensil. **And Shmuel** holds that **we do not derive** the *halakha* for all **generations from a temporary** situation. Therefore, using one’s hand is not indispensable, as the general requirements of the rites of the meal offering cannot be derived from a verse referring to the meal offering that was sacrificed during the consecration of the Tabernacle.


###### Menachot 19b:5
[Menachot 19b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/19b:5)

וְלָא יָלֵיף שְׁמוּאֵל דּוֹרוֹת מִשָּׁעָה? וְהָתְנַן: כְּלֵי הַלַּח מְקַדְּשִׁין אֶת הַלַּח, וּמִדֹּת יָבֵשׁ מְקַדְּשִׁין אֶת הַיָּבֵשׁ, וְאֵין כְּלֵי הַלַּח מְקַדְּשִׁין אֶת הַיָּבֵשׁ, וְלֹא מִדֹּת יָבֵשׁ מְקַדְּשִׁין אֶת הַלַּח.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And does Shmuel not derive** the *halakha* for all **generations from a temporary** situation? **But didn’t we learn** in a mishna (*Zevaḥim* 88a): Service **vessels** used for **the liquids sanctify** only **the liquids** placed in them, **and** service vessels used to **measure dry** substances **sanctify** only **the dry** substances that are placed in them. **But** service **vessels** used for **the liquids do not sanctify the dry** substances placed in them, **and** service vessels used to **measure dry** substances **do not sanctify the liquids** placed in them.


###### Menachot 19b:6
[Menachot 19b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/19b:6)

וְאָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא מִדּוֹת, אֲבָל מִזְרָקוֹת מְקַדְּשִׁין, דִּכְתִיב ״שְׁנֵיהֶם מְלֵאִים סֹלֶת״!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And Shmuel says** concerning this mishna: **They taught** that *halakha* **only** with regard to service vessels used to **measure** liquids, e.g., wine or oil. **But cups,** which are used for collecting the blood of offerings, **sanctify** dry substances placed in them as well, **as it is written** with regard to the offerings of the princes during the inauguration of the Tabernacle: “One silver cup of seventy shekels, after the shekel of the Sanctuary; **both of them full of fine flour** mingled with oil for a meal offering” (Numbers 7:13), indicating that the cups were also fashioned for use with flour, a dry substance. In this case, Shmuel does derive the general *halakha* from a temporary situation, in this case the offerings of the princes.


###### Menachot 19b:7
[Menachot 19b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/19b:7)

שָׁאנֵי הָתָם, דִּתְנָא בָּהּ קְרָא תְּרֵיסַר זִימְנִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **There,** with regard to the offering of the princes, it **is different, as the verse is repeated twelve times,** once with regard to each and every prince. Therefore, Shmuel derives a *halakha* for all generations from it. Nevertheless, generally speaking, the *halakha* for all generations cannot be derived from a temporary situation.


###### Menachot 19b:8
[Menachot 19b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/19b:8)

אֲמַרוּ לֵיהּ רַב כָּהֲנָא וְרַב אַסִּי לְרַב: וַהֲרֵי הַגָּשָׁה, דִּתְנָא בָּהּ קְרָא, וְלָא מְעַכְּבָא! מַאן תְּנָא בֵּיהּ? דִּכְתִיב: ״זֹאת תּוֹרַת הַמִּנְחָה הַקְרֵב אוֹתָהּ בְּנֵי אַהֲרֹן לִפְנֵי ה׳״!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara returns to discussing Rav’s statement that a rite is deemed indispensable if it is repeated in the verses. **Rav Kahana and Rav Asi said to Rav: But** what of **bringing** the meal offering to the corner of the altar, **which** is **repeated** in **the verse,** as it is stated: “And he shall bring it to the altar” (Leviticus 2:8); **and** it is **not indispensable,** as stated in the mishna (18a)? The Gemara elaborates: **Where is it repeated? As it is written: “And this is the law of the meal offering: The sons of Aaron shall sacrifice it before the Lord,** in front of the altar” (Leviticus 6:7).


###### Menachot 19b:9
[Menachot 19b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/19b:9)

הָהוּא לִקְבּוֹעַ לָהּ מָקוֹם הוּא דַּאֲתָא, דְּתַנְיָא: ״לִפְנֵי ה׳״ – יָכוֹל בַּמַּעֲרָב? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״אֶל פְּנֵי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **That** verse is not a repetition of the mitzva for the priest to bring the meal offering to the corner of the altar; rather, it **comes** only **to establish the place for** the meal offering and describe where it should be brought. **As it is taught** in a *baraita*: The verse states: “And this is the law of the meal offering. The sons of Aaron shall sacrifice it before the Lord, in front of the altar” (Leviticus 6:7). From the phrase: **“Before the Lord,”** one **might** have thought that the meal offering must be brought **on the western** side of the altar, which faces the Sanctuary and is therefore “before the Lord.” Therefore, **the verse states: “In front of the altar,”** which is its southern side, where the priests ascend the ramp.


###### Menachot 19b:10
[Menachot 19b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/19b:10)

אִי ״אֶל פְּנֵי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ״ יָכוֹל בַּדָּרוֹם, תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר ״לִפְנֵי ה׳״, הָא כֵּיצַד? מַגִּישָׁהּ בְּקֶרֶן דְּרוֹמִית מַעֲרָבִית כְּנֶגֶד חוּדָּהּ שֶׁל קֶרֶן וְדַיּוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* continues: **If** the verse had merely stated: **In front of the altar,** one **might** have thought that the meal offering is brought only **on the southern** side of the altar, as just mentioned. Therefore, **the verse states: “Before the Lord,”** which indicates the western side. **How** can **these** texts be reconciled? The *baraita* answers: The priest **brings it** near **on the southwest corner** of the altar, **opposite the edge of the corner** of the altar, **and** that will **suffice for him.**


###### Menachot 19b:11
[Menachot 19b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/19b:11)

רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: יָכוֹל יַגִּישֶׁנָּה לְמַעֲרָבָהּ שֶׁל קֶרֶן אוֹ לִדְרוֹמָהּ שֶׁל קֶרֶן? אָמַרְתָּ: כׇּל מָקוֹם שֶׁאַתָּה מוֹצֵא שְׁתֵּי מִקְרָאוֹת, אֶחָד מְקַיֵּים עַצְמוֹ וּמְקַיֵּים חֲבֵירוֹ, וְאֶחָד מְקַיֵּים עַצְמוֹ וּמְבַטֵּל אֶת חֲבֵירוֹ – מַנִּיחִין אֶת שֶׁמְּקַיֵּים עַצְמוֹ וּמְבַטֵּל חֲבֵירוֹ, וְתוֹפְשִׂין אֶת שֶׁמְּקַיֵּים עַצְמוֹ וּמְקַיֵּים חֲבֵירוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* continues: **Rabbi Eliezer says:** One **might** have thought that the verse presents the priest with the option that **he may bring it on the western side of** the **corner or on the southern side of** the **corner. You say** the following principle: **Any** time **you find two verses, one** of which **fulfills itself and fulfills the other, and one** of which **fulfills itself and negates the other, we set aside** the verse **that fulfills itself and negates the other, and we seize** the verse **that fulfills itself and fulfills the other.**


###### Menachot 19b:12
[Menachot 19b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/19b:12)

שֶׁכְּשֶׁאַתָּה אוֹמֵר ״לִפְנֵי ה׳״ בַּמַּעֲרָב, בִּטַּלְתָּה ״אֶל פְּנֵי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ״ בַּדָּרוֹם, וּכְשֶׁאַתָּה אוֹמֵר ״אֶל פְּנֵי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ״ בַּדָּרוֹם, קִיַּימְתָּה ״לִפְנֵי ה׳״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
He explains: **As, when you say** to bring the meal offering **“before the Lord,”** which indicates that it shall be brought **on the western** side, **you have nullified** the other part of the verse, which states to bring it **“in front of the altar,”** which is **on the southern** side. **But when you say** to bring the meal offering **“in front of the altar”** and offer it **on the southern** side, **you have** also **fulfilled** the other part of the verse, which states to bring it **“before the Lord.”**


###### Menachot 19b:13
[Menachot 19b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/19b:13)

וְהֵיכָא קִיַּימְתָּה? אָמַר רַב אָשֵׁי: קָסָבַר הַאי תַּנָּא כּוּלֵּיהּ מִזְבֵּחַ בְּצָפוֹן קָאֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But** if one brought the meal offering on the southern side, **where have you fulfilled:** “Before the Lord”? **Rav Ashi said: This *tanna*,** i.e., Rabbi Eliezer, **holds** that **the entire altar stood in the northern** part of the Temple courtyard. The southern side of the altar was aligned with the midpoint of the Temple courtyard, opposite the Holy of Holies, directly before the Lord. In any event, it can be seen in this *baraita* that the purpose of the verse: “The sons of Aaron shall offer it before the Lord, in front of the altar” is to establish the precise location where the meal offering is brought, and it does not serve as a repetition.


###### Menachot 19b:14
[Menachot 19b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/19b:14)

מַתְקֵיף לַהּ רַב הוּנָא: הֲרֵי מֶלַח, דְּלָא תְּנָא בֵּיהּ קְרָא, וּמְעַכְּבָא בֵּיהּ! דְּתַנְיָא: ״בְּרִית מֶלַח עוֹלָם הִוא״ – שֶׁתְּהֵא

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara cites another objection to Rav’s statement that a rite of the meal offering is deemed indispensable if it is repeated in the verses. **Rav Huna objects to this: But** what of the placement of the **salt** on the handful of the meal offering before it is burned, **which** is **not repeated** in **the verse, and** yet it is still **indispensable in its** sacrifice? **As it is taught** in a *baraita*: The verse states: **“It is an everlasting covenant of salt”** (Numbers 18:19), teaching **that there will be**