## Menachot Daf 68b

###### Menachot 68b:1
[Menachot 68b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/68b:1)

מִשֶּׁחָרַב בֵּית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ, הִתְקִין רַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי שֶׁיְּהֵא יוֹם הֶנֶף כּוּלּוֹ אָסוּר. מַאי טַעְמָא? מְהֵרָה יִבָּנֶה בֵּית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ, וְיֹאמְרוּ: אֶשְׁתָּקַד מִי לֹא אָכַלְנוּ בְּהֵאִיר מִזְרָח? הַשְׁתָּא נָמֵי נֵיכוֹל!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara questions the claim that the purpose of waiting until the sacrifice of the *omer* is only in order to fulfill the mitzva in the most optimal fashion. The mishna teaches: **From** the time **that the Temple was destroyed, Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai instituted that** partaking from the new crop on **the day of waving** the *omer*, the sixteenth of Nisan, **is completely prohibited** and one may partake of the new crop only the next day. The Gemara analyzes this statement. **What is the reason** for this? It is that **soon the Temple will be rebuilt, and** people **will say: Last year [*eshtakad*],** when there was no Temple, **didn’t we eat** of the new crop **as soon as the eastern** horizon **was illuminated,** as the new crop was permitted immediately upon the advent of the morning of the sixteenth of Nisan? **Now, too, let us eat** the new grain at that time.


###### Menachot 68b:2
[Menachot 68b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/68b:2)

וְלָא יָדְעִי, דְּאֶשְׁתָּקַד לָא הֲוָה עוֹמֶר, הֵאִיר מִזְרָח מַתִּיר, וְהַשְׁתָּא דְּאִיכָּא עוֹמֶר – עוֹמֶר מַתִּיר. וְאִי סָלְקָא דַעְתָּךְ לְמִצְוָה, מִשּׁוּם מִצְוָה לֵיקוּם וְלִיגְזוֹר?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And they** would **not know that last year, when there was no Temple, the illuminating of the eastern** horizon **permitted** one to eat the new grain immediately, **but now that** the Temple has been rebuilt and **there is an *omer*** offering, it is **the *omer*** that **permits** the consumption of the new grain. When the Temple is standing, the new grain is not permitted until the *omer* offering has been sacrificed. The Gemara concludes its question: **And if it enters your mind** to say that one waits to partake of the new crop until the *omer* offering permits the new grain only in order **to** perform **the mitzva** in the optimal fashion, would **we arise and decree** that the entire sixteenth of Nisan is entirely prohibited only **due to** the performance of **a mitzva** in the optimal manner?


###### Menachot 68b:3
[Menachot 68b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/68b:3)

אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק: רַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי בְּשִׁיטַת רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אֲמָרָהּ, דְּאָמַר: מִן הַתּוֹרָה אָסוּר, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״עַד עֶצֶם הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה״ –

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai stated** his ordinance **in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, who says** that **it is prohibited by Torah law** to eat of the new grain until the seventeenth of Nisan, **as it is stated:** “And you shall eat neither bread nor parched grain, nor fresh stalks, **until this selfsame [*etzem*] day,** until you have brought the offering of your God” (Leviticus 23:14).


###### Menachot 68b:4
[Menachot 68b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/68b:4)

עַד עִיצּוּמוֹ שֶׁל יוֹם, וְקָסָבַר ״עַד״ וְעַד בַּכְּלָל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
This does not mean that it is permitted to eat the new grain on the morning of the sixteenth, when the eastern horizon is illuminated. Rather, it is prohibited **until the essence [*itzumo*] of the day. And** Rabbi Yehuda **holds** that when the verse says **“until,”** it means **until and including,** meaning that the grain is permitted only after the conclusion of the sixteenth. If so, by Torah law, eating the new grain is permitted only after the conclusion of the sixteenth, unless the *omer* offering was sacrificed, in which case it is permitted to eat the new grain immediately afterward.


###### Menachot 68b:5
[Menachot 68b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/68b:5)

וּמִי סָבַר לַהּ כְּוָותֵיהּ? וְהָא מִיפְלָג פְּלִיג עֲלֵיהּ! דִּתְנַן: מִשֶּׁחָרַב בֵּית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ, הִתְקִין רַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי שֶׁיְּהֵא יוֹם הֶנֶף כּוּלּוֹ אָסוּר. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה: וַהֲלֹא מִן הַתּוֹרָה הוּא אָסוּר, דִּכְתִיב ״עַד עֶצֶם הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה״!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And does** Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai **hold in accordance with** the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda? **But he disagrees with him, as we learned** in the mishna: **From** the time **that the Temple was destroyed, Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai instituted that** partaking from the new crop on **the day of waving** the *omer*, the sixteenth of Nisan, **is entirely prohibited. Rabbi Yehuda says: But isn’t it forbidden by Torah law, as it is written: “Until this selfsame day”?** This indicates that Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai disagrees with Rabbi Yehuda.


###### Menachot 68b:6
[Menachot 68b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/68b:6)

רַבִּי יְהוּדָה הוּא דְּקָא טָעֵי, הוּא סָבַר רַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי מִדְּרַבָּנַן קָאָמַר, וְלָא הִיא, מִדְּאוֹרָיְיתָא קָאָמַר. וְהָא ״הִתְקִין״ קָתָנֵי? מַאי ״הִתְקִין״? דָּרַשׁ וְהִתְקִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this. **It is Rabbi Yehuda who is mistaken. He thought** that **Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai is saying** that eating new grain on the sixteenth of Nisan is prohibited **by rabbinic law. And** that **is not so;** Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai **is** actually **saying** that it is prohibited **by Torah law.** The Gemara asks: **But it is taught** in the mishna that Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai **instituted,** which indicates that it is a rabbinic ordinance. The Gemara answers: **What** is the meaning of the term: **Instituted,** in this context? It means that **he interpreted** the verses in the Torah **and instituted** public notice for the multitudes to conduct themselves accordingly.


###### Menachot 68b:7
[Menachot 68b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/68b:7)

רַב פָּפָּא וְרַב הוּנָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אָכְלִי חָדָשׁ בְּאוּרְתָּא דְּשִׁיתְּסַר נַגְהֵי שִׁבְסַר, קָסָבְרִי: חָדָשׁ בְּחוּצָה לָאָרֶץ דְּרַבָּנַן, וְלִסְפֵיקָא לָא חָיְישִׁינַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **Rav Pappa and Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, ate** from **the new** crop **on** the **evening** of the conclusion **of the sixteenth** of Nisan, **leading into the seventeenth** of Nisan. **They held** that the prohibition against eating the **new** crop **outside Eretz** Yisrael applies **by rabbinic law. And** therefore **we are not concerned for** the **uncertainty** that perhaps the day we think is the sixteenth of Nisan is really the fifteenth, due to the court proclaiming the previous month of Adar a full thirty days long.


###### Menachot 68b:8
[Menachot 68b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/68b:8)

וְרַבָּנַן דְּבֵי רַב אָשֵׁי אָכְלִי בְּצַפְרָא דְּשִׁבְסַר, קָסָבְרִי: חָדָשׁ בְּחוּצָה לָאָרֶץ דְּאוֹרָיְיתָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** conversely, **the Sages of the study hall of Rav Ashi ate** from **the new** crop only **on the morning of the seventeenth. They held** that the prohibition against eating the **new** crop **outside Eretz** Yisrael applies **by Torah law.** Consequently, they did entertain the concern that the day they thought was the sixteenth might actually be the fifteenth of Nisan, which would mean that the new crop is permitted only the following morning.


###### Menachot 68b:9
[Menachot 68b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/68b:9)

וְרַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי מִדְּרַבָּנַן קָאָמַר, וְכִי תַּקֵּין לְיוֹם הֶנֶף – לִסְפֵיקָא לָא תַּקֵּין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
This is problematic, as if there is a concern that the sixteenth is really the fifteenth of Nisan, then the seventeenth would be the sixteenth of Nisan. Accordingly, how could they eat from the new crop on that morning? Didn’t Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Zakkai institute that the new crop is prohibited the entire day? The Gemara explains that those Sages of the study hall of Rav Ashi held: **And Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai is saying** that eating new grain on the sixteenth of Nisan nowadays is prohibited **by rabbinic law. And** the Sages **instituted** this prohibition only **for** the actual **day of waving** the *omer* offering, whereas it was **not instituted for** a day with regard to which the real date is **uncertain.**


###### Menachot 68b:10
[Menachot 68b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/68b:10)

אָמַר רָבִינָא: אָמְרָה לִי אֵם – אֲבוּךְ לָא הֲוָה אָכֵיל חָדָשׁ אֶלָּא בְּאוּרְתָּא דְּשִׁבְסַר נַגְהֵי תְּמָנֵיסַר, דְּסָבַר לַהּ כְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה, וְחָיֵישׁ לִסְפֵיקָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Ravina said: My mother told me: Your father would eat from** the **new** crop **only on the evening** at the conclusion **of the seventeenth** of Nisan, **leading into the eighteenth.** The reason for this was that **he held in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yehuda** that nowadays it is prohibited to eat of the new crop on the sixteenth of Nisan by Torah law, **and** he was therefore **concerned for** the **uncertainty** that perhaps the sixteenth of Nisan was really the fifteenth, and consequently the seventeenth was really the sixteenth. Therefore he waited until the eve of the eighteenth, when he could be sure that there was no prohibition by Torah law against eating from the new crop.


###### Menachot 68b:11
[Menachot 68b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/68b:11)

**מַתְנִי׳** הָעוֹמֶר הָיָה מַתִּיר בַּמְּדִינָה, וּשְׁתֵּי הַלֶּחֶם בְּמִקְדָּשׁ. אֵין מְבִיאִין מְנָחוֹת, וּבִיכּוּרִים, וּמִנְחַת בְּהֵמָה קוֹדֶם לָעוֹמֶר, אִם הֵבִיא – פָּסוּל. קוֹדֶם לִשְׁתֵּי הַלֶּחֶם לֹא יָבִיא, אִם הֵבִיא – כָּשֵׁר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** Sacrifice of **the *omer*** offering **would permit** consumption of the new crop **in** the rest of **the country** outside the Temple, **and the two loaves** offering would permit the sacrifice of the new crop **in the Temple. One may not bring meal offerings, or first fruits, or the meal offering** brought with libations accompanying **animal** offerings, from the new crop **prior to** the sacrifice of **the *omer*, and if he brought** them from the new crop they are **unfit.** After the *omer* but **prior to the two loaves one may not bring** these offerings from the new crop, but **if he brought** them from the new crop, they are **fit.**


###### Menachot 68b:12
[Menachot 68b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/68b:12)

**גְּמָ׳** יָתֵיב רַבִּי טַרְפוֹן וְקָא קַשְׁיָא לֵיהּ: מָה בֵּין קוֹדֶם לָעוֹמֶר לְקוֹדֶם שְׁתֵּי הַלֶּחֶם?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** The mishna teaches that meal offerings brought from the new crop prior to the sacrifice of the *omer* offering are unfit, whereas those brought after the *omer* but prior to the two loaves are fit. **Rabbi Tarfon sat and posed** the following **difficulty: What is** the difference **between** meal offerings brought **before the *omer*** and those brought **before the two loaves?**


###### Menachot 68b:13
[Menachot 68b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/68b:13)

אָמַר לְפָנָיו יְהוּדָה בַּר נְחֶמְיָה: לֹא, אִם אָמַרְתָּ קוֹדֶם לָעוֹמֶר, שֶׁכֵּן לֹא הוּתַּר מִכְּלָלוֹ אֵצֶל הֶדְיוֹט, תֹּאמַר קוֹדֶם לִשְׁתֵּי הַלֶּחֶם, שֶׁהוּתַּר מִכְּלָלוֹ אֵצֶל הֶדְיוֹט?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rabbi **Yehuda bar Neḥemya said before** Rabbi Tarfon: **No,** one cannot compare the two situations. **If you said** that this is the *halakha* with regard to **before** the ***omer*** sacrifice, this is because at that stage there are **no** circumstances in which the new crop’s **general prohibition was permitted,** even **with regard to an ordinary** person; **shall you** also **say** that this is the *halakha* with regard to **before** the sacrifice of **the two loaves, when** the new crop’s **general prohibition was permitted with regard to an ordinary** person? The new crop ingredient in the meal offering is at least permitted in consumption after the *omer* is brought. Therefore, the meal offerings that were brought after the *omer* but before the two loaves are fit.


###### Menachot 68b:14
[Menachot 68b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/68b:14)

שָׁתַק רַבִּי טַרְפוֹן, צָהֲבוּ פָּנָיו שֶׁל רַבִּי יְהוּדָה בֶּן נְחֶמְיָה, אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא: יְהוּדָה, צָהֲבוּ פָּנֶיךָ שֶׁהֵשַׁבְתָּ אֶת זָקֵן? תְּמֵהַנִי אִם תַּאֲרִיךְ יָמִים. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה בְּרַבִּי אִלְעַאי: אוֹתוֹ הַפֶּרֶק פְּרֹס הַפֶּסַח הָיָה, כְּשֶׁעָלִיתִי לָעֲצֶרֶת שָׁאַלְתִּי אַחֲרָיו: יְהוּדָה בֶּן נְחֶמְיָה הֵיכָן הוּא? וְאָמְרוּ לִי: נִפְטַר וְהָלַךְ לוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Tarfon was silent,** and **Rabbi Yehuda ben Neḥemya’s face brightened. Rabbi Akiva said to him: Yehuda, has your face brightened because you answered the elder? I will be astonished if the days of your life will be lengthy. Rabbi Yehuda, son of Rabbi Ilai, said: That period** in which that interaction occurred **was half** a month **before Passover. When I ascended** again to the study hall **for** the festival of ***Shavuot*, I asked about him: Where is** Rabbi **Yehuda ben Neḥemya? And they said to me: He passed away and left** this world.


###### Menachot 68b:15
[Menachot 68b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/68b:15)

אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק: לְדִבְרֵי יְהוּדָה בֶּן נְחֶמְיָה, נְסָכִים בִּיכּוּרִים שֶׁהִקְרִיבָם קוֹדֶם לָעוֹמֶר – כְּשֵׁירִין. פְּשִׁיטָא!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak says: According to the statement of** Rabbi **Yehuda ben Neḥemya, libations** from **first fruits that one brought before the *omer*** offering is sacrificed should be **valid.** The reason is that the prohibition of the new crop does not apply to fruits at all, and therefore they are never prohibited to ordinary people. When the mishna states that first fruits are prohibited it is referring to first fruits of grain, not the fruit of a tree. The Gemara asks: Isn’t it **obvious** that libations from first fruits brought before the *omer* offering are valid? Why would one think that they should not be valid?


###### Menachot 68b:16
[Menachot 68b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/68b:16)

מַהוּ דְּתֵימָא: הָתָם הוּא דְּהוּתַּר מִכְּלָלוֹ אֵצֶל הֶדְיוֹט, אֲבָל הָכָא דְּלֹא הוּתַּר מִכְּלָלוֹ – לָא. קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן: כׇּל שֶׁכֵּן הָכָא, דְּלָא אִיתְּסַר כְּלָל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers that Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak’s statement is necessary, **lest you say: It is** only **there,** in the case of the meal offering of grain brought after the *omer* sacrifice, that it is valid, **as** the new crop’s **general prohibition was permitted with regard to an ordinary** person. **But here,** since with regard to these fruits there are **no** circumstances in which **its general prohibition was permitted,** one might say that the libation should **not** be valid. Therefore, Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak **teaches us** that the opposite is the case: **All the more so here** it is a valid offering, **where** the fruit **was not prohibited at all.**


###### Menachot 68b:17
[Menachot 68b:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/68b:17)

(סֵדֶר הֲנָצָא גְּלֵי פִּיל סִימָן.) בָּעֵי רָמֵי בַּר חָמָא: שְׁתֵּי הַלֶּחֶם מַהוּ שֶׁיַּתִּירוּ שֶׁלֹּא כְּסִדְרָן?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The Gemara presents **a mnemonic** for the ensuing discussions in the Gemara: **Order, sprouting, dung of, elephant.** The mishna teaches that a meal offering using the new crop may not be brought prior to the *omer* sacrifice or the two loaves. **Rami bar Ḥama raises a dilemma:** With regard to **the two loaves** offering on *Shavuot*, **what is** the *halakha* **as** to whether **they permit** the new grain to be used in the Temple, if this sacrifice was performed **out of their order?** The sacrifice of the *omer* permits ordinary people to eat from the new grain, whereas the sacrifice of the two loaves permits the new grain to be used in the Temple. What is the *halakha* if a new crop sprouted after the *omer* offering was brought but before the two loaves were brought?


###### Menachot 68b:18
[Menachot 68b:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/68b:18)

הֵיכִי דָּמֵי? כְּגוֹן דְּזַרְעִינְהוּ בֵּין הָעוֹמֶר לִשְׁתֵּי הַלֶּחֶם, וַחֲלֵיף עֲלַיְיהוּ שְׁתֵּי הַלֶּחֶם וְעוֹמֶר. מַאי? כְּסִדְרָן שַׁרְיָין, שֶׁלֹּא כְּסִדְרָן לָא שַׁרְיָין? אוֹ דִלְמָא שֶׁלֹּא כְּסִדְרָן נָמֵי שַׁרְיָין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **What are the circumstances** of this case? The Gemara explains: This is referring to a case **where they planted** the grain **in between** the time of the sacrifice of **the *omer* and the** time of **the two loaves** offering. **And** therefore the sacrifice of **two loaves passed by** first, **and** then the time of the ***omer*** offering of the following year. **What** is the *halakha* in such a case? The Gemara explains the two possibilities: Does the sacrifice of the *omer* and two loaves **permit** the new grain to be used for meal offerings if sacrificed only in **their** proper **order,** whereas if sacrificed **out of their order** the sacrifice **does not** permit the new crop? **Or perhaps** they **permit** the new grain to be used for meal offerings **even** when sacrificed **out of their order.**


###### Menachot 68b:19
[Menachot 68b:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/68b:19)

אָמַר רַבָּה: תָּא שְׁמַע, ״וְאִם תַּקְרִיב מִנְחַת בִּכּוּרִים״ – בְּמִנְחַת הָעוֹמֶר הַכָּתוּב מְדַבֵּר. מֵהֵיכָן בָּאָה? מִן הַשְּׂעוֹרִין. אַתָּה אוֹמֵר מִן הַשְּׂעוֹרִין, אוֹ אֵינוֹ אֶלָּא מִן הַחִיטִּין?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabba said: Come** and **hear** proof from a *baraita*: **“And if you bring a meal offering of first fruits** to the Lord, you shall bring for the meal offering of your first fruits grain in the ear parched with fire, even groats of the fresh ear” (Leviticus 2:14). **The verse is speaking of the *omer* meal offering. From where,** i.e., of which grain, **is it brought?** It is brought **from barley.** The *baraita* asks: **Do you say** that it is brought **from barley, or** perhaps **it is only from wheat?**


###### Menachot 68b:20
[Menachot 68b:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/68b:20)

רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: נֶאֱמַר ״אָבִיב״ בְּמִצְרַיִם, וְנֶאֱמַר ״אָבִיב״ לְדוֹרוֹת. מָה ״אָבִיב״ הָאָמוּר בְּמִצְרַיִם – שְׂעוֹרִין, אַף ״אָבִיב״ הָאָמוּר לְדוֹרוֹת – שְׂעוֹרִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Eliezer says** that it **is stated “in the ear” with regard to** the plague of hail in **Egypt:** “And the flax and the barley were smitten; for the barley was in the ear, and the flax was in bloom” (Exodus 9:31), **and it is stated “in the ear”** with regard to the mitzva of the new crop, which is **for** all **generations. Just as** the term **“in the ear” that is stated with regard to** plague of hail in **Egypt** is referring to **barley,** as is clear from the next verse: “But the wheat and the spelt were not smitten, for they ripen late” (Exodus 9:32), **so too** the term **“in the ear” that is stated** with regard to the new crop **for** all **generations** is referring to **barley.**


###### Menachot 68b:21
[Menachot 68b:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/68b:21)

וְרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר: מָצִינוּ יָחִיד שֶׁמֵּבִיא חוֹבָתוֹ מִן הַחִיטִּין, וְחוֹבָתוֹ מִן הַשְּׂעוֹרִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* cites another proof that the *omer* offering is brought from barley. **And Rabbi Akiva says: We found an individual who brings his obligation** of a meal offering **from wheat,** which is brought by a poor person for a false oath of testimony, a false oath of utterance, or for entering the Temple while ritually impure, **and** one who brings **his obligation** of a meal offering **from barley,** in the case of a sinner’s meal offering or the meal offering of a *sota*.


###### Menachot 68b:22
[Menachot 68b:22](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/68b:22)

וְצִיבּוּר שֶׁמְּבִיאִין חוֹבָתָן מִן הַחִיטִּין, מְבִיאִין חוֹבָתָן מִן הַשְּׂעוֹרִין, וְאִם אַתָּה אוֹמֵר בָּא מִן הַחִיטִּין – לֹא מָצִינוּ צִיבּוּר שֶׁמֵּבִיא חוֹבָתוֹ מִן הַשְּׂעוֹרִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** we also found with regard to the **community that they bring their obligation** of a meal offering **from wheat,** in the case of the two loaves offering of *Shavuot*, and therefore, to keep the *halakha* of a community parallel to that of an individual there should be a case where the community **brings their obligation** of a meal offering **from barley. And if you say** that the *omer* offering **comes from wheat,** then **we** will **not** have **found** a case of **a community that brings its obligation** of a meal offering **from barley.** Consequently, it must be that the *omer* offering comes from barley.


###### Menachot 68b:23
[Menachot 68b:23](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/68b:23)

דָּבָר אַחֵר: אִם אַתָּה אוֹמֵר עוֹמֶר בָּא מִן הַחִיטִּין – אֵין שְׁתֵּי הַלֶּחֶם ״בִּיכּוּרִים״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rabbi Akiva suggests another proof: **Alternatively, if you say** that the ***omer*** offering **comes from wheat,** then **the two loaves** offering would **not** be from the **first fruits.** The verse states that the two loaves offering of *Shavuot* should come from the first fruits: “Also in the day of the first fruits, when you bring a new meal offering to the Lord in your feast of weeks” (Numbers 28:26). If the *omer* is from wheat, then the two loaves offering would not be the first offering of the first fruit, as the *omer* offering of Passover precedes it. Therefore, the *omer* offering must come from barley. This concludes the *baraita*.


###### Menachot 68b:24
[Menachot 68b:24](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/68b:24)

וְאִם אִיתָא דִּשְׁתֵּי הַלֶּחֶם שֶׁלֹּא כְּסִדְרָן שַׁרְיָין, מַשְׁכַּחַתְּ לַהּ דְּמַקְרֵיב עוֹמֶר מֵהָנָךְ דְּאַשְׁרוּשׁ קוֹדֶם לִשְׁתֵּי הַלֶּחֶם, וּבָתַר הָעוֹמֶר דְּאֶשְׁתָּקַד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rabba resolves Rami bar Ḥama’s dilemma from this last proof of Rabbi Akiva: **And if it is so, that the two loaves** sacrificed **not in their** proper **order** still **permit** the use of the new crop for meal offerings, **you** can in fact **find** a case where the two loaves are from the first fruits even though they are also brought from wheat, just like the *omer* offering. This is a case **where** the community **sacrifices** the current ***omer*** offering **from these** wheat grains **that took root prior** to the bringing of **the two loaves** offering **but after** the bringing of **the *omer*** offering **of last year.**


###### Menachot 68b:25
[Menachot 68b:25](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/68b:25)

וּשְׁתֵּי הַלֶּחֶם מֵהָנָךְ דְּאַשְׁרוּשׁ קוֹדֶם לָעוֹמֶר דְּהַשְׁתָּא, וּבָתַר שְׁתֵּי הַלֶּחֶם דְּאֶשְׁתָּקַד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And the** current **two loaves** offering is brought **from these** grains **that took root prior to the current *omer*** offering **and after the two loaves** offering **of last year.** In this scenario, the two loaves come from wheat of this year’s crop and yet they are still called the first fruits, despite the fact that the *omer* offering also came from wheat, as that wheat is considered the previous year’s crop. Since this case is not mentioned in the *baraita*, evidently if the two loaves are not in the proper order with regard to a certain crop they do not permit that crop to be used in offerings in the Temple. This resolves Rami bar Ḥama’s dilemma.


###### Menachot 68b:26
[Menachot 68b:26](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/68b:26)

מִי סָבְרַתְּ

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
In this manner Rabba has attempted to prove that the proper order of the *omer* offering followed by the two loaves is necessary to permit the new grain for use in meal offerings. The Gemara rejects the proof: **Do you hold**