## Menachot Daf 52b

###### Menachot 52b:1
[Menachot 52b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/52b:1)

לְרַבָּנַן הוּכְפְּלָה לְבוֹנָתוֹ, אוֹ לָא? מִי אָמְרִינַן: מִתּוֹךְ שֶׁהוּכְפְּלָה סׇלְתּוֹ הוּכְפְּלָה לְבוֹנָתוֹ, אוֹ דִילְמָא מַאי דְּגַלִּי גַּלִּי, מַאי דְּלָא גַּלִּי לָא גַּלִּי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**according to the Rabbis,** who hold that generally one handful of frankincense is divided between the morning and afternoon offerings, **is the** amount of **frankincense doubled or not? Do we say** that **since** in this case **its fine flour is doubled,** as a complete tenth of an ephah of fine flour is sacrificed in both the morning and evening, **its frankincense** is also **doubled? Or perhaps that which** the verse **reveals,** i.e., that a complete tenth of an ephah is sacrificed in the morning and afternoon, **it reveals,** and **that which** it **does not reveal,** it **does not reveal;** and therefore, since the verse does not indicate that the amount of frankincense is doubled, only one handful is brought.


###### Menachot 52b:2
[Menachot 52b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/52b:2)

וְשֶׁמֶן, בֵּין לְאַבָּא יוֹסֵי בֶּן דּוֹסְתַּאי וּבֵין לְרַבָּנַן – מַהוּ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** furthermore, **what is** the *halakha* concerning the **oil** of the griddle-cake offering in a case where the High Priest died and was not yet replaced, **both** according **to Abba Yosei ben Dostai and** according **to the Rabbis?** Is the required amount three *log*, as it is when the High Priest brings the griddle-cake offering, or is the amount of oil doubled just as the amount of fine flour is doubled?


###### Menachot 52b:3
[Menachot 52b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/52b:3)

אָמַר רָבָא תָּא שְׁמַע: חֲמִשָּׁה קְמָצִין הֵן, וְאִם אִיתָא, זִימְנִין דְּמַשְׁכַּחַתְּ לַהּ שִׁבְעָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava said: Come** and **hear** a resolution to the dilemma concerning the quantity of frankincense that is brought in this case, based upon a mishna (106b): **There are five** *halakhot* pertaining to **a handful.** The *halakha* of the frankincense sacrificed with the griddle-cake offering of the High Priest is not included in this number, because only half a handful of frankincense is sacrificed at one time. **And if it is so** that when there is no High Priest a complete handful is brought in the morning and in the afternoon, then **sometimes you find** that there are **seven** *halakhot* pertaining to a handful.


###### Menachot 52b:4
[Menachot 52b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/52b:4)

דְּאִי לָא קָתָנֵי, יָתֵיב רַב פָּפָּא וְקָאָמַר לַהּ לְהָא שְׁמַעְתָּא. אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב יוֹסֵף בַּר שְׁמַעְיָה לְרַב פָּפָּא: וְהָא מַעֲלֶה קוֹמֶץ בַּחוּץ, דְּאִי הֲוָה, וְקָתָנֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this proof: The *tanna* **does not teach** cases of **what if** the High Priest died, and is speaking only about a typical case. The Gemara relates that **Rav Pappa was sitting and teaching this *halakha*. Rav Yosef bar Shemaya said to Rav Pappa: But** the mishna does list the case of **one who** intentionally **offers up** the **handful** from a meal offering **outside** the Temple courtyard, who is liable to receive *karet*. This **is** not a standard case but rather a case of **what if, and** nevertheless it **is taught** in the mishna. Accordingly, Rava’s proof is valid.


###### Menachot 52b:5
[Menachot 52b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/52b:5)

מַאי הָוֵי עֲלַהּ? אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק: תָּא שְׁמַע, דְּתַנְיָא: כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל שֶׁמֵּת וְלֹא מִינּוּ אַחֵר תַּחְתָּיו – שְׁלֵימָה שַׁחֲרִית, וּשְׁלֵימָה בֵּין הָעַרְבָּיִם, וּמַפְרִישׁ לָהּ שְׁנֵי קְמָצִין – קוֹמֶץ שַׁחֲרִית וְקוֹמֶץ בֵּין הָעַרְבָּיִם, וּמַפְרִישׁ לָהּ שְׁלֹשֶׁת לוּגִּין – לוֹג וּמֶחֱצָה שַׁחֲרִית, לוֹג וּמֶחֱצָה בֵּין הָעַרְבָּיִם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **What** conclusion **was** reached **about** this matter? **Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: Come** and **hear** a resolution, **as it is taught** in a *baraita*: In the case of a **High Priest who died and they did not** yet **appoint another in his stead, a complete** tenth of an ephah of fine flour is brought for the griddle-cake offering in the **morning and** another **complete** tenth of an ephah is brought **in the afternoon. And one separates two handfuls** of frankincense **for it,** and sacrifices one **handful** with the **morning** offering **and** one **handful** with the **afternoon** offering. **And** one **separates three *log*** of oil **for it,** and brings **a *log* and a half** with the **morning** offering **and a *log* and a half** with the **afternoon** offering.


###### Menachot 52b:6
[Menachot 52b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/52b:6)

מַנִּי? אִילֵּימָא רַבָּנַן – מַאי שְׁנָא לְבוֹנָתָהּ דְּהוּכְפְּלָה, וּמַאי שְׁנָא שַׁמְנָהּ דְּלֹא הוּכְפְּלָה?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: In accordance with **whose** opinion is this *baraita*? **If we say** that it is in accordance with the opinion of **the Rabbis, what is different** about **its frankincense** such **that it is doubled** in the case where the High Priest died, **and what is different** about **its oil** such **that it is not doubled?**


###### Menachot 52b:7
[Menachot 52b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/52b:7)

אֶלָּא, אַבָּא יוֹסֵי בֶּן דּוֹסְתַּאי הִיא, דְּאָמַר: חֲבִיתֵּי כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל בְּעָלְמָא שְׁנֵי קְמָצִין בָּעֲיָא, וּלְבוֹנָה לֹא הוּכְפְּלָה, וְשֶׁמֶן לֹא הוּכְפַּל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather,** the *baraita* **is** in accordance with the opinion of **Abba Yosei ben Dostai, who said:** The **griddle-cake** offering of the **High Priest generally requires two handfuls. And** therefore when the *baraita* requires two handfuls of frankincense in the case where the High Priest died and another has not yet been appointed, the **frankincense is not** being **doubled and the oil is** also **not doubled.** Therefore, three *log* of oil are required, as usual.


###### Menachot 52b:8
[Menachot 52b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/52b:8)

וּמִדְּשֶׁמֶן לְאַבָּא יוֹסֵי בֶּן דּוֹסְתַּאי לֹא הוּכְפְּלָה לְבוֹנָתָהּ וְשַׁמְנָהּ, לְרַבָּנַן נָמֵי לָא הוּכְפְּלוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And from** the fact **that** according **to Abba Yosei ben Dostai** the requisite **oil is not doubled,** one can conclude that **also** according **to the Rabbis its frankincense and its oil are not doubled.**


###### Menachot 52b:9
[Menachot 52b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/52b:9)

אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: הֲלָכָה כְּאַבָּא יוֹסֵי בֶּן דּוֹסְתַּאי. וּמִי אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן הָכִי? וְהָא אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: הֲלָכָה כִּסְתַם מִשְׁנָה, וּתְנַן: חֲמִשָּׁה קְמָצִין הֵן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
This discussion in the Gemara began with Rabbi Yoḥanan presenting the dispute between Abba Yosei ben Dostai and the Rabbis, and it concludes with his ruling concerning their dispute. **Rabbi Yoḥanan says:** The ***halakha*** is **in accordance with** the opinion of **Abba Yosei ben Dostai.** The Gemara asks: **And did Rabbi Yoḥanan** actually **say this? But doesn’t Rabbi Yoḥanan state** a principle that the ***halakha*** is **in accordance with** the ruling of **an unattributed mishna,** and **we learned** in the unattributed mishna cited earlier: **There are** only **five** *halakhot* pertaining to **a handful.** Since the mishna does not list the fact that a handful of frankincense is offered twice daily with the griddle-cake offering, how can Rabbi Yoḥanan accept that opinion?


###### Menachot 52b:10
[Menachot 52b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/52b:10)

אָמוֹרָאֵי נִינְהוּ, וְאַלִּיבָּא דְּרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **They are** different ***amora’im*, and** they disagree **with regard to** the opinion **of Rabbi Yoḥanan.** One said that Rabbi Yoḥanan rules in accordance with Abba Yosei ben Dostai, and one said that according to Rabbi Yoḥanan the *halakha* is always in accordance with an unattributed mishna.


###### Menachot 52b:11
[Menachot 52b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/52b:11)

**הֲדַרַן עֲלָךְ הַתְּכֵלֶת.**


###### Menachot 52b:12
[Menachot 52b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/52b:12)

מַתְנִי׳ **כׇּל הַמְּנָחוֹת** בָּאוֹת מַצָּה, חוּץ מֵחָמֵץ שֶׁבַּתּוֹדָה וּשְׁתֵּי הַלֶּחֶם שֶׁהֵן בָּאוֹת חָמֵץ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** **All the meal offerings come** to be offered as ***matza*,** with care taken to prevent leavening, **except for** ten loaves of **leavened bread** among the forty loaves **that** accompany **the thanks offering, and** the meal offering of **the two loaves** that are brought on the festival of *Shavuot*, **as they come** to be offered as **leavened bread.**


###### Menachot 52b:13
[Menachot 52b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/52b:13)

רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר: הַשְּׂאוֹר בּוֹדֶה לָהֶן מִתּוֹכָן, וּמְחַמְּצָן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Sages disagree as to the manner in which those meal offerings are leavened. **Rabbi Meir says:** With regard to **the leaven** added to the dough to facilitate leavening, **one separates [*bodeh*]** part of the flour **for** the meal offerings **from within** the flour of the meal offerings themselves, causes it to become leaven, **and leavens** the meal offerings with it.


###### Menachot 52b:14
[Menachot 52b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/52b:14)

רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: אַף הִיא אֵינָהּ מִן הַמּוּבְחָר, אֶלָּא מֵבִיא אֶת הַשְּׂאוֹר וְנוֹתְנוֹ לְתוֹךְ הַמִּדָּה, וּמְמַלֵּא אֶת הַמִּדָּה. אָמְרוּ לוֹ: אַף הִיא הָיְתָה חֲסֵרָה אוֹ יְתֵרָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Yehuda says: That is also not the optimal** manner in which to fulfill the mitzva, as aged leaven is a more effective leavening agent. **Rather, one brings the leaven** from another, aged, dough **and places it into the measuring** vessel, **and** then he adds flour until he **fills the measuring** vessel, to ensure the appropriate measure of a tenth of an ephah of flour. The Rabbis **said to** Rabbi Yehuda: **That too** is inappropriate, as in that manner the meal offering **will** either be **lacking** the requisite measure **or** be **greater** than the required measure, as the Gemara will explain.


###### Menachot 52b:15
[Menachot 52b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/52b:15)

**גְּמָ׳** בְּעָא מִינֵּיהּ רַבִּי פְּרִידָא מֵרַבִּי אַמֵּי: מִנַּיִן לְכׇל הַמְּנָחוֹת שֶׁהֵן בָּאוֹת מַצָּה? מְנָלַן? דִּכְתִיב בַּהּ – כְּתִיב בַּהּ, דְּלָא כְּתִיב בַּהּ – כְּתִיב בַּהּ

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** **Rabbi Perida raised a dilemma before Rabbi Ami: From where** is it derived with regard **to all the meal offerings that they come** to be offered as ***matza*?** Rabbi Ami was puzzled by this question, and replied: What do you mean when you say: **From where do we** derive this? Concerning every meal offering **with regard to which it is written** explicitly in the Torah that it comes as *matza*, **it is written with regard to it,** and therefore the dilemma does not arise. And concerning any meal offering where **it is not written** explicitly **with regard to it** that it must be *matza*, nevertheless **it is written with regard to it:**