## Menachot Daf 27a

###### Menachot 27a:1
[Menachot 27a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/27a:1)

דְּעַל הָעֵצִים כְּתִיב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**as “upon [*al*]** the wood” **is written,** and not: Next to the wood.


###### Menachot 27a:2
[Menachot 27a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/27a:2)

כִּי תִּיבְּעֵי לָךְ, אַלִּיבָּא דְּמַאן דְּאָמַר ״עַל״ בְּסָמוּךְ, מַאי? הָכָא נָמֵי ״עַל״ בְּסָמוּךְ, אוֹ דִלְמָא ״עַל הָעֵצִים״ דּוּמְיָא דְּ״עַל הַמִּזְבֵּחַ״ – מָה הָתָם עַל מַמָּשׁ, אַף הָכָא נָמֵי עַל מַמָּשׁ? תֵּיקוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**When should you raise the dilemma?** Raise it **according to** the opinion **of the one who says** in the mishna (96a) that the term **“upon [*al*]”** (see Numbers 2:20) means **adjacent to.** According to that *tanna*, **what** is the *halakha* in this case? Is it explained that **here, too,** the phrase **“upon [*al*]** the wood” can mean **adjacent to** the wood? **Or perhaps,** the phrase “upon [*al*] the wood that is on the fire upon the altar” teaches that **“upon the wood”** is to be understood as **similar to “upon the altar”: Just as there “upon** the altar” is meant **literally, so too here,** the phrase **“upon** the wood” is meant **literally.** The Gemara comments: No answer was found, and the dilemma **shall stand** unresolved.


###### Menachot 27a:3
[Menachot 27a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/27a:3)

**מַתְנִי׳** הַקּוֹמֶץ מִיעוּטוֹ מְעַכֵּב אֶת רוּבּוֹ, עִשָּׂרוֹן מִיעוּטוֹ מְעַכֵּב אֶת רוּבּוֹ, הַיַּיִן מִיעוּטוֹ מְעַכֵּב אֶת רוּבּוֹ, הַשֶּׁמֶן מִיעוּטוֹ מְעַכֵּב אֶת רוּבּוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** With regard to **the handful,** failure to sacrifice **the minority of it prevents the majority of it,** which was sacrificed, from rendering it permitted for the priests to consume the remainder of the meal offering. With regard to **a tenth** of an ephah of flour brought as a meal offering, failure to sacrifice **the minority of it prevents the majority of it,** which was sacrificed, from qualifying as a proper meal offering. With regard to **the wine** poured as a libation, failure to pour **the minority of it prevents the majority of it,** which was poured, from qualifying as a proper libation. With regard to **the** *log* of **oil** that is required for the meal offering, failure to add **the minority of it prevents the majority of it,** which was added, from being a sufficient measure of oil.


###### Menachot 27a:4
[Menachot 27a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/27a:4)

הַסּוֹלֶת וְהַשֶּׁמֶן מְעַכְּבִין זֶה אֶת זֶה, הַקּוֹמֶץ וְהַלְּבוֹנָה מְעַכְּבִין זֶה אֶת זֶה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
With regard to **the fine flour and the oil,** failure to bring **each prevents fulfillment of the mitzva with the other.** With regard to **the handful and the frankincense,** failure to burn **each prevents fulfillment of the mitzva with the other.**


###### Menachot 27a:5
[Menachot 27a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/27a:5)

**גְּמָ׳** מַאי טַעְמָא? אָמַר קְרָא ״מְלֹא קֻמְצוֹ״ תְּרֵי זִימְנֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** **What is the reason** that the failure to sacrifice the minority of the handful disqualifies the entire offering? This is derived from the fact that **the verse states “his handful” twice,** once with regard to the voluntary meal offering (Leviticus 2:2) and once with regard to the meal offering of a sinner (Leviticus 5:12), and any *halakha* repeated in the verses is deemed indispensable.


###### Menachot 27a:6
[Menachot 27a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/27a:6)

עִשָּׂרוֹן מִיעוּטוֹ מְעַכֵּב אֶת רוּבּוֹ, מַאי טַעְמָא? אָמַר קְרָא: ״מִסׇּלְתָּהּ״, שֶׁאִם חָסְרָה כׇּל שֶׁהוּא – פְּסוּלָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The mishna teaches: With regard to **a tenth** of an ephah of flour brought as a meal offering, failure to sacrifice **the minority of it prevents the majority of it** from qualifying as a proper meal offering. **What is the reason? The verse states:** “The priest shall remove of it a handful **of its fine flour”** (Leviticus 2:2). The usage of the term “of its fine flour” instead of: Of the fine flour, teaches **that if any amount** of its flour **was missing,** it is **not valid.**


###### Menachot 27a:7
[Menachot 27a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/27a:7)

הַיַּיִן מִיעוּטוֹ מְעַכֵּב אֶת רוּבּוֹ, ״כָּכָה״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The mishna teaches: With regard to **the wine** poured as a libation, failure to pour **the minority of it prevents the majority of it** from qualifying as a proper libation. What is the reason? The verse states concerning the libations: **“So** shall it be done” (Numbers 15:11). The term “so” indicates that the libations must be sacrificed exactly in the manner described, without any deviation.


###### Menachot 27a:8
[Menachot 27a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/27a:8)

הַשֶּׁמֶן מִיעוּטוֹ מְעַכֵּב אֶת רוּבּוֹ, דְּמִנְחַת נְסָכִים – ״כָּכָה״, וּמִנְחַת נְדָבָה – אָמַר קְרָא: ״וּמִשַּׁמְנָהּ״, שֶׁאִם חָסַר כׇּל שֶׁהוּא – פְּסוּלָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The mishna teaches: With regard to **the** *log* of **oil** that is required for the meal offering, failure to add **the minority of it prevents the majority of it** from being a sufficient measure of oil. In the case of the oil **of the meal offering** that accompanies the **libations,** this *halakha* is learned from the term: **“So”** (Numbers 15:11), stated with regard to the libations. **And** in the case of the *log* of oil that accompanies **a voluntary meal offering, the verse states: “And of its oil”** (Leviticus 2:2), demonstrating **that if any amount** of its oil was **missing,** it is **not valid.**


###### Menachot 27a:9
[Menachot 27a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/27a:9)

הַשֶּׁמֶן וְהַסּוֹלֶת מְעַכְּבִין זֶה אֶת זֶה, ״מִסׇּלְתָּהּ וּמִשַּׁמְנָהּ״, ״מִגִּרְשָׂהּ וּמִשַּׁמְנָהּ״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The mishna teaches: With regard to **the fine flour and the oil,** failure to bring **each prevents fulfillment of the mitzva with the other.** The *halakha* that each is indispensable is derived from the fact that the two are juxtaposed in the verse: “The priest shall remove of it a handful **of its fine flour and of its oil”** (Leviticus 2:2), and the fact that this requirement is repeated in the verse: **“Of its groats, and of its oil”** (Leviticus 2:16), teaches that each is indispensable.


###### Menachot 27a:10
[Menachot 27a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/27a:10)

הַקּוֹמֶץ וְהַלְּבוֹנָה מְעַכְּבִין זֶה אֶת זֶה, ״עַל כׇּל לְבוֹנָתָהּ״, ״וְאֵת כׇּל הַלְּבוֹנָה אֲשֶׁר עַל הַמִּנְחָה״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The mishna teaches: With regard to **the handful and the frankincense,** failure to burn **each prevents fulfillment of the mitzva with the other.** The *halakha* that each is indispensable is derived from the repetition of the mention of the two together in the verse, as it is written: “The priest shall remove of it a handful of its fine flour and of its oil, **as well as all of its frankincense”** (Leviticus 2:2), and again with regard to the meal offering of a sinner it is stated: **“And all the frankincense which is upon the meal offering”** (Leviticus 6:8).


###### Menachot 27a:11
[Menachot 27a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/27a:11)

**מַתְנִי׳** שְׁנֵי שְׂעִירֵי יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים מְעַכְּבִין זֶה אֶת זֶה, שְׁנֵי כִּבְשֵׂי עֲצֶרֶת מְעַכְּבִין זֶה אֶת זֶה, שְׁתֵּי חַלּוֹת מְעַכְּבוֹת זוֹ אֶת זוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** With regard to **the two goats of Yom Kippur,** the absence of **each** goat **prevents fulfillment of the mitzva with the other.** With regard to **the two sheep** brought together with the meal offering of the two loaves on ***Shavuot*,** failure to bring **each** of the sheep **prevents fulfillment of the mitzva with the other.** With regard to the **two loaves** brought on *Shavuot*, failure to bring **each** of the loaves **prevents fulfillment of the mitzva with the other.**


###### Menachot 27a:12
[Menachot 27a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/27a:12)

שְׁנֵי סְדָרִין מְעַכְּבִין זֶה אֶת זֶה. שְׁנֵי בָּזִיכִין מְעַכְּבִין זֶה אֶת זֶה. הַסְּדָרִין וְהַבָּזִיכִין מְעַכְּבִין זֶה אֶת זֶה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
With regard to the **two arrangements** of the shewbread, failure to place **each** of the arrangements **prevents fulfillment of the mitzva with the other.** With regard to the **two bowls** of frankincense that accompany the shewbread, failure to place **each** of the bowls **prevents fulfillment of the mitzva with the other.** With regard to **the arrangements** of the shewbread **and the bowls** of frankincense, failure to bring **each** of them **prevents fulfillment of the mitzva with the other.**


###### Menachot 27a:13
[Menachot 27a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/27a:13)

שְׁנֵי מִינִים שֶׁבַּנָּזִיר, שְׁלֹשָׁה שֶׁבַּפָּרָה, וְאַרְבָּעָה שֶׁבַּתּוֹדָה, וְאַרְבָּעָה שֶׁבַּלּוּלָב, (וארבע) [וְאַרְבָּעָה] שֶׁבַּמְּצוֹרָע – מְעַכְּבִין זֶה אֶת זֶה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
With regard to the **two types** of loaves **that** accompany the offerings **of a nazirite:** The bread and wafers (see Numbers 6:15); the **three** species **that** are part of the rite **of the** red **heifer:** The cedar, hyssop, and scarlet wool (see Numbers 19:6); **and** the **four** types of loaves **that** accompany **the thanks offering:** The loaves, wafers, loaves soaked in hot water, and leavened bread (see Leviticus 7:12); **and** the **four** species **of the *lulav*:** The *lulav*, *etrog*, myrtle, and willow (see Leviticus 23:40); **and** the **four** species **that are** used **in** the purification process of **the leper:** The cedar, hyssop, scarlet wool, and birds (see Leviticus 14:4), failure to bring **each** of the components **prevents fulfillment of the mitzva with the others.**


###### Menachot 27a:14
[Menachot 27a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/27a:14)

שֶׁבַע הַזָּאוֹת שֶׁבַּפָּרָה מְעַכְּבוֹת זוֹ אֶת זוֹ, שֶׁבַע הַזָּיוֹת שֶׁעַל בֵּין הַבַּדִּים, שֶׁעַל הַפָּרֹכֶת, שֶׁעַל מִזְבַּח הַזָּהָב – מְעַכְּבוֹת זוֹ אֶת זוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
With regard to the **seven sprinklings** of the blood **of the** red **heifer** that the priest sprinkles opposite the entrance to the Sanctuary (see Numbers 19:4), failure to sprinkle **each prevents fulfillment of the mitzva with the others.** With regard to the **seven sprinklings** of the blood of the bull and goat of Yom Kippur **that** are sprinkled **on** the Ark **between the staves** (see Leviticus 16:14–15), the seven sprinklings **that** are sprinkled **on the Curtain** separating the Sanctuary and Holy of Holies, and the sprinklings **that** are sprinkled **on the golden altar** on Yom Kippur, and from all other inner sin offerings, failure to sprinkle **each prevents fulfillment of the mitzva with the others.**


###### Menachot 27a:15
[Menachot 27a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/27a:15)

**גְּמָ׳** שְׁנֵי שְׂעִירֵי יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים מְעַכְּבִין זֶה אֶת זֶה – חוּקָּה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** The mishna teaches: With regard to **the two goats of Yom Kippur,** the absence of **each** goat **prevents fulfillment of the mitzva with the other.** This is derived from the verse that states with regard to the Yom Kippur service: “And it shall be **a statute** forever” (Leviticus 16:29), since wherever the term “statute” appears concerning a sacrificial rite, it signifies that the rite is an indispensable requirement.


###### Menachot 27a:16
[Menachot 27a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/27a:16)

שְׁנֵי כִּבְשֵׂי עֲצֶרֶת מְעַכְּבִין זֶה אֶת זֶה – הֲוָיָה, שְׁתֵּי חַלּוֹת – הֲוָיָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The mishna teaches: With regard to **the two sheep** brought together with the meal offering of the two loaves on ***Shavuot*,** failure to bring **each** of the sheep **prevents fulfillment of the mitzva with the other.** This is derived from the verse: “They shall be holy” (Leviticus 23:20), since the employment of a term of **being** indicates an indispensable requirement. Similarly, with regard to the **two loaves** brought on *Shavuot*, the reason failure to bring each of the loaves prevents fulfillment of the mitzva with the other is that the verse states: “They shall be of fine flour” (Leviticus 23:17), employing a term of **being.**


###### Menachot 27a:17
[Menachot 27a:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/27a:17)

שְׁנֵי סְדָרִין – חוּקָּה, שְׁנֵי בָּזִיכִין – חוּקָּה, הַסְּדָרִין וְהַבָּזִיכִין – חוּקָּה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
With regard to the **two arrangements** of the shewbread, the reason failure to place each of the arrangements prevents fulfillment of the mitzva with the other is that the verse employs the term **statute** concerning them (see Leviticus 24:9). With regard to the **two bowls** of frankincense that accompany the shewbread, the reason failure to place each of the bowls prevents fulfillment of the mitzva with the other is that the verse employs the term **statute** concerning them (see Leviticus 24:9). With regard to **the arrangements** of the shewbread **and the bowls** of frankincense, the reason failure to bring each of them prevents fulfillment of the mitzva with the other is that the verse employs the term **statute** concerning them, as that verse addresses each of these two components.


###### Menachot 27a:18
[Menachot 27a:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/27a:18)

שְׁנֵי מִינִים שֶׁבַּנָּזִיר, דִּכְתִיב: ״כֵּן יַעֲשֶׂה״, שְׁלֹשָׁה שֶׁבַּפָּרָה – חוּקָּה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
With regard to the **two types** of loaves **that** accompany the offerings **of a nazirite,** each prevents fulfillment of the mitzva with the others, **as it is written** with regard to the nazirite: **“So he must do** after the law of his naziriteship” (Numbers 6:21), demonstrating that he must bring his offerings precisely as detailed in the verse. With regard to the **three** species **that** are part of the rite **of the** red **heifer,** each prevents fulfillment of the mitzva with the others, since the term **statute** is written about them: “This is the statute of the law” (Numbers 19:2).


###### Menachot 27a:19
[Menachot 27a:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/27a:19)

אַרְבָּעָה שֶׁבַּתּוֹדָה, דְּאִיתַּקַּשׁ לְנָזִיר, דִּכְתִיב: ״עַל זֶבַח תּוֹדַת שְׁלָמָיו״, וְאָמַר מָר: ״שְׁלָמָיו״ – לְרַבּוֹת שַׁלְמֵי נָזִיר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
With regard to the **four** types of loaves **that** accompany **the thanks offering,** each prevents fulfillment of the mitzva with the others, **since** the thanks offering **is juxtaposed to** the offerings of **a nazirite, as it is written** with regard to the thanks offering: **“With the sacrifice of his peace offerings for thanksgiving”** (Leviticus 7:13). **And the Master said:** The term **“his peace offerings”** serves **to include** the loaves of **the peace offering of a nazirite,** and it has already been demonstrated that with regard to the loaves that accompany the offerings of a nazirite, each prevents fulfillment of the mitzva with the others.


###### Menachot 27a:20
[Menachot 27a:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/27a:20)

וְאַרְבָּעָה שֶׁבִּמְצוֹרָע, דִּכְתִיב: ״זֹאת תִּהְיֶה תּוֹרַת הַמְּצֹרָע״, וְאַרְבָּעָה שֶׁבַּלּוּלָב – ״וּלְקַחְתֶּם״, לְקִיחָה תַּמָּה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** with regard to the **four** species **that are in** the purification process of **the leper,** each prevents fulfillment of the mitzva with the others, **as it is written: “This shall be the law of the leper”** (Leviticus 14:2), and the term “shall be” indicates an indispensable requirement. **And** with regard to the **four** species **of the *lulav*,** each prevents fulfillment of the mitzva with the others, as the verse states: **“And you shall take” [*ulkaḥtem*]”** (Leviticus 23:40), which alludes to: **A complete taking [*lekiḥa tamma*],** comprising all four species.


###### Menachot 27a:21
[Menachot 27a:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/27a:21)

אָמַר רַב חָנָן בַּר רָבָא: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא שֶׁאֵין לוֹ, אֲבָל יֵשׁ לוֹ – אֵין מְעַכְּבִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **Rav Ḥanan bar Rava says:** The mishna **taught** that the four species of the *lulav* are necessary for the fulfillment of the mitzva **only** in a case **where one did not have** all four species; **but** if **one has** all four species, failure to take each of the components **does not prevent** fulfillment of the mitzva with the others, and he fulfills the mitzva by taking each species individually.


###### Menachot 27a:22
[Menachot 27a:22](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/27a:22)

מֵיתִיבִי: אַרְבָּעָה מִינִין שֶׁבַּלּוּלָב, שְׁנַיִם מֵהֶן עוֹשִׂין פֵּירוֹת, וּשְׁנַיִם מֵהֶם אֵין עוֹשִׂין פֵּירוֹת; הָעוֹשִׂין פֵּירוֹת יִהְיוּ זְקוּקִין לְשֶׁאֵין עוֹשִׂין, וְשֶׁאֵין עוֹשִׂין פֵּירוֹת יִהְיוּ זְקוּקִין לְעוֹשִׂין פֵּירוֹת, וְאֵין אָדָם יוֹצֵא יְדֵי חוֹבָתוֹ בָּהֶן עַד שֶׁיְּהוּ כּוּלָּן בַּאֲגוּדָּה אֶחָת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara **raises an objection** from a *baraita*: With regard to the **four species of the *lulav*, two of them,** the *lulav* and *etrog*, **produce fruit, and two of them,** the myrtle and willow, **do not produce fruit. Those that produce fruit have a bond with those that do not produce fruit, and those that do not produce fruit have a bond with those that produce fruit. And a person does not fulfill his obligation** of taking the *lulav* **until they are all** bound together **in a single bundle.**


###### Menachot 27a:23
[Menachot 27a:23](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/27a:23)

וְכֵן יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּהַרְצָאָה, עַד שֶׁיְּהוּ כּוּלָּן בַּאֲגוּדָּה אֶחָת, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״הַבּוֹנֶה בַשָּׁמַיִם מַעֲלוֹתָיו וַאֲגֻדָּתוֹ עַל אֶרֶץ יְסָדָהּ״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And so too,** when **the Jewish people** fast and pray **for acceptance** of their repentance, this is not accomplished **until they are all** bound together **in a single bundle, as it is stated: “It is He that builds His upper chambers in the Heaven, and has established His bundle upon the earth”** (Amos 9:6), which is interpreted as stating that only when the Jewish people are bound together are they established upon the earth. This *baraita* contradicts Rav Ḥanan bar Rava’s statement, since it teaches that the four species of the *lulav* must be taken together in order for one to fulfill his obligation of taking the *lulav*.


###### Menachot 27a:24
[Menachot 27a:24](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/27a:24)

תַּנָּאֵי הִיא, דְּתַנְיָא: לוּלָב בֵּין אָגוּד בֵּין שֶׁאֵינוֹ אָגוּד – כָּשֵׁר; רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: אָגוּד – כָּשֵׁר, שֶׁאֵינוֹ אָגוּד – פָּסוּל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: Whether the different species must be taken together **is** a dispute between ***tanna’im*; as it is taught** in a *baraita*: **A *lulav*, whether** it is **bound** with the myrtle and willow or **whether** it is **not bound,** is **fit. Rabbi Yehuda says:** If it is **bound,** it is **fit;** if it is **not bound,** it is **unfit.**


###### Menachot 27a:25
[Menachot 27a:25](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/27a:25)

מַאי טַעְמָא דְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה? גָּמַר קִיחָה קִיחָה מֵ״אֲגוּדַּת אֵזוֹב״,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **What is the reasoning of Rabbi Yehuda?** The Gemara answers: By means of a verbal analogy, he **derives** the term **taking,** written with regard to the four species, **from** the term **taking** written with regard to **the bundle of hyssop.** It is written there, in the context of the sacrifice of the Paschal offering in Egypt: “Take a bundle of hyssop” (Exodus 12:22), and it is written here, with regard to the four species: “And you shall take for you on the first day the fruit of a beautiful tree, branches of a date palm, boughs of dense-leaved trees, and willows of the brook” (Leviticus 23:40).


###### Menachot 27a:26
[Menachot 27a:26](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/27a:26)

מָה לְהַלָּן בַּאֲגוּדָּה – אַף כָּאן בַּאֲגוּדָּה. וְרַבָּנַן, לָא גָּמְרִי ״קִיחָה קִיחָה״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Just as there,** with regard to the Paschal offering, the mitzva to take the hyssop is specifically **in a bundle, so too here,** the mitzva to take the four species is specifically **in a bundle.** The Gemara asks: **And** what is the reasoning of **the Rabbis?** The Gemara answers: **They do not derive** the meaning of the term **taking** from the meaning of the term **taking** by means of the verbal analogy.


###### Menachot 27a:27
[Menachot 27a:27](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/27a:27)

כְּמַאן אָזְלָא הָא דְּתַנְיָא: לוּלָב מִצְוָה לְאוֹגְדוֹ, וְאִם לֹא אֲגָדוֹ – כָּשֵׁר? כְּמַאן? אִי כְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה, לֹא אֲגָדוֹ אַמַּאי כָּשֵׁר? אִי רַבָּנַן, מַאי מִצְוָה?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **In accordance with whose** opinion **is that which is taught** in a *baraita*: There is **a mitzva to bind** the myrtle and the willow together with the ***lulav*, but if one did not bind it,** it is **fit? In accordance with whose** opinion is the *baraita*? **If** it is **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yehuda,** if **one did not bind it, why** is it **fit? If** it is in accordance with the opinion of **the Rabbis, what mitzva** is one fulfilling by binding it?


###### Menachot 27a:28
[Menachot 27a:28](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/27a:28)

לְעוֹלָם רַבָּנַן, וּמַאי מִצְוָה? מִשּׁוּם ״זֶה אֵלִי וְאַנְוֵהוּ״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **Actually,** it is in accordance with the opinion of **the Rabbis. And what mitzva** is one fulfilling? The mitzva is **due to** the fact that it is stated: **“This is my God and I will beautify Him”** (Exodus 15:2), which is interpreted to mean that one should beautify himself before God in the performance of the mitzvot. The Rabbis agree that although failure to bind the three species does not render them unfit for performing the mitzva, the performance of the mitzva is more beautiful when the *lulav* is bound.


###### Menachot 27a:29
[Menachot 27a:29](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/27a:29)

שֶׁבַע הַזָּאוֹת שֶׁבַּפָּרָה מְעַכְּבוֹת זוֹ אֶת זוֹ – חוּקָּה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches: With regard to the **seven sprinklings** of the blood **of the heifer** that the priest sprinkles opposite the entrance to the Sanctuary, failure to sprinkle **each prevents fulfillment of the mitzva with the others,** since the term **statute** is written about them (see Numbers 19:2).


###### Menachot 27a:30
[Menachot 27a:30](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/27a:30)

שֶׁבַע הַזָּאוֹת שֶׁעַל בֵּין הַבַּדִּים, וְשֶׁעַל מִזְבַּח הַזָּהָב, וְשֶׁעַל הַפָּרוֹכֶת – מְעַכְּבוֹת זוֹ אֶת זוֹ; דְּיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים כְּתִיב חוּקָּה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The mishna further teaches: With regard to the **seven sprinklings** of the blood of the bull and goat of Yom Kippur **that** are sprinkled **on** the Ark **between the staves, and** the sprinklings **that** are sprinkled **on the golden altar** on Yom Kippur, and the sprinklings from all other inner sin offerings that are sprinkled on the golden altar, **and** the seven sprinklings **that** are sprinkled **on the Curtain** separating the Sanctuary and Holy of Holies, failure to sprinkle **each prevents fulfillment of the mitzva with the others.** With regard to the sprinklings **of Yom Kippur,** the reason that each prevents fulfillment of the mitzva with the others is that the term **“statute” is written** about the Yom Kippur service (see Leviticus 16:29).


###### Menachot 27a:31
[Menachot 27a:31](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/27a:31)

דְּפַר כֹּהֵן מָשׁוּחַ, וּדְפַר הֶעְלֵם דָּבָר שֶׁל צִיבּוּר, וְדִשְׂעִירֵי עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה – כִּדְתַנְיָא: ״וְעָשָׂה לַפָּר כַּאֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה לְפַר״, מָה תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר? לִכְפּוֹל בְּהַזָּאוֹת,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
With regard to the sprinklings **of the bull of** the **anointed priest,** i.e., the High Priest, **and of the bull for an unwitting communal sin, and** those **of the goats of idol worship,** which are sprinkled on the Curtain and on the golden altar, the reason that each prevents fulfillment of the mitzva with the others is **as it is taught** in a *baraita*: The verse states with regard to the bull for an unwitting communal sin: **“So shall he do with the bull; as he did with the bull** of the sin offering” of the anointed priest (Leviticus 4:20). **Why** must **the verse state** that the bull offering for an unwitting communal sin is sacrificed in the same manner as the bull of the anointed priest, when the Torah has already explicitly specified the manner in which the service should take place? The reason it states it is in order **to repeat** the command **of the sprinklings,**