## Menachot Daf 7b

###### Menachot 7b:1
[Menachot 7b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/7b:1)

וְאִילּוּ מַגְבִּיהַּ אֶת הַשּׁוּלְחָן לָא קָתָנֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rav Sheshet notes: The entire process of the replacement of the shewbread is taught in the mishna, **and yet** the statement: A priest **raises the Table** above the ground so that the bowls of frankincense can be properly removed from them, **is not taught.** One can therefore conclude from the mishna that just as the bowls of frankincense are removed from a vessel that is resting upon the ground, i.e., the Table, so too, one may remove a handful of a meal offering from a vessel that is resting upon the ground.


###### Menachot 7b:2
[Menachot 7b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/7b:2)

לָאו אָמְרַתְּ הָתָם, סֵדֶר עֲבוֹדוֹת נָקֵט? הָכָא נָמֵי סֵדֶר עֲבוֹדוֹת נָקֵט.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this proof: **Didn’t you** already **say there,** with regard to the mishna that discusses improper intentions expressed during the service of a meal offering (12a), that the *tanna* **cited** only **the order of** sacrificial **rites? Here too,** the *tanna* **cited** only **the order of** sacrificial **rites.** Therefore, one cannot prove from here that there is no requirement to raise the Table.


###### Menachot 7b:3
[Menachot 7b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/7b:3)

מִי דָּמֵי? הָתָם לָא נָחֵית לְמִנְיָינָא דְּכֹהֲנִים, הָכָא נָחֵית לְמִנְיָינָא דְּכֹהֲנִים. אִם אִיתָא – לִיתְנֵי מַגְבִּיהַּ! אֶלָּא שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ: קוֹמְצִין מִכְּלִי שֶׁעַל גַּבֵּי קַרְקַע. שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **Are** these *mishnayot* **comparable? There,** on 12a, the *tanna* **did not delve into the number of priests** involved in the service of a meal offering. **Here,** on 99b, the *tanna* **does** in fact **delve into the number of priests** involved in the service of the shewbread. Therefore, **if it is so,** i.e., if the Table must be raised before the bowls of frankincense are removed, **let** the *tanna* **teach** that another priest **raises** the Table. **Rather, conclude from** the mishna that **one may remove a handful** of a meal offering **from a vessel that** is resting **upon** the **ground.** The Gemara affirms: **Conclude from** here that this is so.


###### Menachot 7b:4
[Menachot 7b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/7b:4)

אָמַר רָבָא: פְּשִׁיטָא לִי, קוֹמֵץ מִכְּלִי שֶׁעַל גַּבֵּי קַרְקַע – שֶׁכֵּן מָצִינוּ בְּסִילּוּק בָּזִיכִין. מְקַדְּשִׁין מִנְחָה בִּכְלִי שֶׁעַל גַּבֵּי קַרְקַע – שֶׁכֵּן מָצִינוּ בְּסִידּוּר בָּזִיכִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **Rava said:** It is **obvious to me** that a priest may **remove a handful from a vessel that** is resting **upon** the **ground, as we find** such an instance **in** the case of **the removal of** the **bowls** of frankincense from the Table of the shewbread, since the Table is resting upon the ground of the Sanctuary when they are removed. Similarly, **one can sanctify a meal offering in a vessel that** is resting **upon** the **ground, as we find** such an instance **in** the case of **the arrangement of** the **bowls** of frankincense upon the Table of the shewbread.


###### Menachot 7b:5
[Menachot 7b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/7b:5)

בָּעֵי רָבָא: קִידּוּשׁ קוֹמֶץ מַאי? מִמִּנְחָה יָלְפִינַן לַהּ, אוֹ מִדָּם יָלְפִינַן לַהּ? הֲדַר פַּשְׁטַהּ: מִדָּם יָלְפִינַן לַהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava raises a dilemma:** With regard to the **sanctification of a handful** by placing it in a vessel that is resting upon the ground, **what** is the *halakha*? Do **we derive** this *halakha* **from** the sanctification of **a meal offering,** in which case one can sanctify a handful in this manner, just as he can do so with a meal offering? **Or** do **we derive it from** the collection of the **blood** of an offering, in which case one cannot do so, just as the blood of an offering may not be collected in a vessel that is resting upon the ground? Rava **then resolves** the dilemma: **We derive it from** the collection of the **blood.**


###### Menachot 7b:6
[Menachot 7b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/7b:6)

וּמִי אָמַר רָבָא הָכִי? וְהָא אִתְּמַר: קוֹמֶץ שֶׁחִלְּקוֹ בִּשְׁנֵי כֵּלִים, רַב נַחְמָן אָמַר: אֵינוֹ קָדוֹשׁ, וְרָבָא אָמַר: קָדוֹשׁ. וְאִם אִיתָא, לֵילַף מִדָּם! הֲדַר בֵּיהּ רָבָא מֵהַהִיא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And did Rava** really **say this,** that the *halakha* with regard to the sanctification of a handful is derived from the collection of the blood? **But it was stated:** With regard to a full measure of **a handful that** a priest **divided** and placed **in two vessels, Rav Naḥman says** that **it is not sanctified, and Rava says** that it is **sanctified. And if it is so** that the *halakha* of the handful is derived from the collection of the blood, then **let** Rava **derive from blood** that the handful is not sanctified in this manner, just as the blood is not sanctified when divided into two. The Gemara responds: **Rava retracted that** statement and ruled that a handful is not sanctified when divided and placed into two vessels.


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

וָדָם מְנָלַן דְּלָא קָדוֹשׁ לַחֲצָאִין? דְּתָנֵי רַב תַּחְלִיפָא בֶּן שָׁאוּל: קִידֵּשׁ פָּחוֹת מִכְּדֵי הַזָּאָה בִּכְלִי זֶה, וּפָחוֹת מִכְּדֵי הַזָּאָה בִּכְלִי זֶה – לֹא קִידֵּשׁ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara further discusses the *halakha* with regard to the collection of the blood. **And** with regard to **blood, from where do we** derive **that it is not sanctified in halves,** i.e., when collected in two vessels? It is derived from **that** which **Rav Taḥlifa ben Shaul teaches** with regard to the water of purification: If the priest **sanctified** the water in two vessels in such a manner that he sanctified **less than the amount of sprinkling in this vessel,** i.e., there was not enough water into which he could dip a bundle of hyssop and sprinkle the water with it, **and** he sanctified **less than the amount of sprinkling in that vessel,** then **he has not sanctified** the water. Even if he subsequently combines the contents of both vessels into a single vessel, the water is not sanctified.


###### Menachot 7b:8
[Menachot 7b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/7b:8)

וְאִיבַּעְיָא לְהוּ: בְּדָם מַאי? הִלְכְתָא הִיא, וּמֵהִלְכְתָא לָא יָלְפִינַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara continues: **And a dilemma was raised before** the Sages: **With regard to** the collection of **blood** of a sin offering for the purpose of sprinkling it upon the altar, **what** is the *halakha*? **Is** the ruling with regard to the water of purification **a *halakha*** transmitted to Moses from Sinai, in which case the *halakha* with regard to blood may not be derived from it, as **we do not derive** other cases **from a *halakha*** transmitted to Moses from Sinai?


###### Menachot 7b:9
[Menachot 7b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/7b:9)

אוֹ דִלְמָא הָתָם מַאי טַעְמָא – דִּכְתִיב ״וְטָבַל בַּמַּיִם״, הָכָא נָמֵי הָכְתִיב ״וְטָבַל בַּדָּם״?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara explains the other side of the dilemma: **Or perhaps, there,** in the case of the water of purification, **what is the reason** that it is not sanctified? It is possible that the reason is **that it is written** in a verse that is referring to the water initially placed in the vessel: **“And dip it in the water”** (Numbers 19:18). If this verse is the source of the *halakha* that the hyssop may be dipped in the water of purification only when there was initially enough water in the vessel for sprinkling, then **here too,** in the case of the blood of a sin offering, **isn’t it written: “And** the priest **shall dip** his finger **in the blood”** (Leviticus 4:6)?


###### Menachot 7b:10
[Menachot 7b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/7b:10)

וְאִיתְּמַר, אָמַר רַבִּי זְרִיקָא אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: אַף בְּדָם לֹא קִידֵּשׁ. אָמַר רָבָא: תַּנְיָא נָמֵי הָכִי, בִּפְנֵי כֹּהֵן מַנִּיחַ, ״וְטָבַל״ וְלֹא מְסַפֵּיג.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara continues: **And it was stated** with regard to this dilemma: **Rabbi Zerika says** that **Rabbi Elazar says: Even in** the case of the **blood, one has not sanctified** it if he collected less than a full measure of blood in a single vessel. **Rava said** that **this is also taught in** a *baraita* **with regard to** the bull of **the anointed priest.** The verse states: “And the priest shall dip his finger in the blood, and sprinkle of the blood” (Leviticus 4:6). From the term **“And** the priest **shall dip”** it is derived that there must be enough blood inside the vessel in which to dip his finger, **and** there should **not** be so little blood that he must resort to **wiping** his finger along the walls of the vessel.


###### Menachot 7b:11
[Menachot 7b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/7b:11)

״בַּדָּם״ – שֶׁיְּהֵא בַּדָּם שִׁיעוּר טְבִילָה מֵעִיקָּרוֹ, ״מִן הַדָּם״ – מִן הַדָּם שֶׁבָּעִנְיָן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* continues: Additionally, from the term **“in the blood”** it is derived **that there should initially be in** the vessel containing **the blood a measure** fit for **dipping** his finger. Furthermore, it is derived from the term **“of the blood”** that he must sprinkle **from the blood of the matter,** as will be explained.


###### Menachot 7b:12
[Menachot 7b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/7b:12)

וְאִיצְטְרִיךְ לְמִכְתַּב ״וְטָבַל״, וְאִיצְטְרִיךְ לְמִכְתַּב ״בַּדָּם״, דְּאִי כְּתַב רַחֲמָנָא ״וְטָבַל״ הֲוָה אָמֵינָא: אַף עַל גַּב דְּלֹא קִיבֵּל שִׁיעוּר טְבִילוֹת, דְּהַיְינוּ הַזָּאָה שֶׁבַע פְּעָמִים מֵעִיקָּרוֹ, כְּתַב רַחֲמָנָא ״בַּדָּם״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And it was necessary** for the Merciful One **to write: “And** the priest **shall dip,” and it was necessary** for the Merciful One **to write: “In the blood,”** despite the fact that both terms are referring to the amount of blood that must be in the vessel. **Because if the Merciful One had written** only: **“And** the priest **shall dip,” I would say** that it is enough if the vessel contains enough blood for even one sprinkling, **even though** the priest **did not initially collect a measure** fit for all of the **sprinklings, that is,** enough with which to **sprinkle seven times.** Therefore, **the Merciful One writes: “In the blood.”**


###### Menachot 7b:13
[Menachot 7b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/7b:13)

וְאִי כְּתַב רַחֲמָנָא ״בַּדָּם״, הֲוָה אָמֵינָא אֲפִילּוּ מְסַפֵּיג, כְּתַב רַחֲמָנָא ״וְטָבַל״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if the Merciful One had written** only: **“In the blood,” I would say** that if there was initially a full measure collected in the vessel then the sprinkling is valid **even** if now the priest must resort to **wiping** his finger. Therefore, **the Merciful One writes: “And** the priest **shall dip,”** indicating that the priest must be able to dip his finger into the blood and not have to wipe it on the walls of the vessel.


###### Menachot 7b:14
[Menachot 7b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/7b:14)

״מִן הַדָּם״ שֶׁבָּעִנְיָן, לְמַעוֹטֵי מַאי? אָמַר רָבָא: לְמַעוֹטֵי שִׁירַיִם שֶׁבָּאֶצְבַּע, מְסַיַּיע לֵיהּ לְרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר, דְּאָמַר: שִׁירַיִם שֶׁבָּאֶצְבַּע פְּסוּלִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara returns to the last statement of the *baraita*, that the priest must sprinkle **from the blood of the matter.** This statement serves **to exclude what? Rava said:** It serves **to exclude** the **remainder** of blood **on** his **finger** from the previous sprinkling, i.e., the priest must dip his finger into the blood before each sprinkling; he may not sprinkle with the blood that remains on his finger from the previous sprinkling. The Gemara notes: This **supports** the opinion **of Rabbi Elazar, who says** that the **remainder** of blood **that** remained **on** the priest’s **finger is unfit** for sprinkling.


###### Menachot 7b:15
[Menachot 7b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/7b:15)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רָבִין בַּר רַב אַדָּא לְרָבָא: אָמְרִי תַּלְמִידָךְ אָמַר רַב עַמְרָם, תַּנְיָא: הָיָה מַזֶּה וְנִתְּזָה הַזָּאָה מִיָּדוֹ, אִם עַד שֶׁלֹּא הִזָּה – טָעוּן כִּיבּוּס, מִשֶּׁהִזָּה – אֵין טָעוּן כִּיבּוּס.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Ravin bar Rav Adda said to Rava: Your students say** that **Rav Amram says** that **it is taught** in a *baraita*: In a case where a priest **was sprinkling** from the blood of a sin offering **and** the blood of the **sprinkling sprayed from his hand** onto a garment, the *halakha* is as follows: **If** the blood sprayed onto the garment **before he sprinkled,** the garment **requires laundering,** as is the *halakha* when the blood of a sin offering that is fit for sprinkling fell on a garment. But if the blood sprayed onto the garment **after he** had already **sprinkled,** it **does not require laundering.**


###### Menachot 7b:16
[Menachot 7b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/7b:16)

מַאי לָאו עַד שֶׁלֹּא גָּמַר הַזָּאָתוֹ, וּמִשֶּׁגָּמַר הַזָּאָתוֹ? שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ דְּשִׁירַיִם שֶׁבָּאֶצְבַּע כְּשֵׁרִים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Ravin bar Rav Adda asks: **What, is it not** correct to say that this means if the blood sprayed onto the garment **before he completed** all of **his sprinkling,** then the garment requires laundering, **and** if the blood sprayed onto the garment **after he completed his sprinkling,** then the garment does not require laundering? If so, one can **conclude from** the *baraita* **that** the **remainder** of blood **that** remained **on** his **finger** between each sprinkling is **fit** for sprinkling, as otherwise, it would not result in a requirement to launder a garment upon which it sprayed.


###### Menachot 7b:17
[Menachot 7b:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/7b:17)

לֹא, עַד שֶׁלֹּא יָצְתָה מִיָּדוֹ הַזָּאָה – טָעוּן כִּיבּוּס, וּמִשֶּׁיָּצְאָה הַזָּאָה מִיָּדוֹ וְנִתְּזָה מִמַּה שֶּׁנִּשְׁאַר – אֵין טָעוּן כִּיבּוּס.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this suggestion: **No,** the *baraita* is saying that if the blood sprayed from his hand onto the garment **before** any particular **sprinkling left his hand,** the garment **requires laundering. But** if the blood was sprayed **after a sprinkling left his hand,** in which case the blood **sprayed from that which remained** on his finger following that sprinkling, then the garment **does not require laundering,** as the blood left on his finger was already rendered unfit for sprinkling.


###### Menachot 7b:18
[Menachot 7b:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/7b:18)

אֵיתִיבֵיהּ אַבָּיֵי: גָּמַר מִלְּהַזּוֹת – מְקַנֵּחַ יָדוֹ בְּגוּפָהּ שֶׁל פָּרָה. גָּמַר – אִין, לֹא גָּמַר – לָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Abaye raised an objection to** Rava from a mishna discussing the red heifer (*Para* 3:9): When the priest has **completed sprinkling** the blood of the red heifer toward the entrance to the Sanctuary, **he wipes his hand** from the blood **on the body of the heifer.** Abaye explains his objection: The mishna states that when the priest **completed** all the sprinklings, then **yes,** he wipes his hand. It may be inferred that if he **did not complete** the sprinklings, he does **not** wipe his hand, even though blood remains on his finger from each preceding sprinkling. This proves that the blood that remains on his finger is fit for sprinkling.


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

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: גָּמַר – מְקַנֵּחַ יָדוֹ, לֹא גָּמַר – מְקַנֵּחַ אֶצְבָּעוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rava **said to** Abaye: The mishna means that when the priest **completed** all of the sprinklings, **he wipes his hand.** If he has **not** yet **completed** all of them, then he does not wipe his hand but he must **wipe his finger** to remove the blood after each sprinkling, as that blood is no longer fit for subsequent sprinklings.


###### Menachot 7b:20
[Menachot 7b:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/7b:20)

בִּשְׁלָמָא גָּמַר מְקַנֵּחַ יָדוֹ בְּגוּפָהּ שֶׁל פָּרָה, דִּכְתִיב: ״וְשָׂרַף אֶת הַפָּרָה לְעֵינָיו״, אֶלָּא לֹא גָּמַר מְקַנֵּחַ אֶצְבָּעוֹ, בְּמַאי מְקַנֵּחַ? דְּאִי אָמְרַתְּ בְּגוּפָהּ שֶׁל פָּרָה, אִיבְּעִי לֵיהּ לְמִיתְנֵי: מְקַנֵּחַ יָדוֹ וְאֶצְבָּעוֹ בְּגוּפָהּ שֶׁל פָּרָה! מִדְּלָא קָתָנֵי הָכִי, שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ דְּלָא בָּעֵי קִינּוּחַ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara raises a difficulty: **Granted,** after **he completed** all the sprinklings **he wipes his hand on the body of the heifer, as it is written: “And the heifer shall be burned in his sight;** her skin, and her flesh, and her blood” (Numbers 19:5), which indicates that the blood of the red heifer must be burned together with its flesh. **But** if when the priest had **not** yet **completed** the sprinklings **he wipes his finger,** then **with what** does he **wipe? Because if you say** that he wipes his finger **on the body of the heifer,** the mishna **should have taught:** He **wipes his hand and his finger on the body of the heifer.** Rather, **from** the fact **that** the mishna **does not teach this,** that he wipes his finger on the body of the heifer, one can **conclude from** this mishna **that** his finger **does not require wiping** between sprinklings.


###### Menachot 7b:21
[Menachot 7b:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/7b:21)

אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: בִּשְׂפַת מִזְרָק, כְּדִכְתִיב: ״כְּפוֹרֵי זָהָב וְגוֹ׳״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Abaye said:** He wipes his finger **on the edge of** the **bowl** containing the blood, **as it is written: “Atoning bowls [*keforei*] of gold”** (Ezra 1:10), which is referring to the bowls containing the blood. The root *kafar* can also mean to wipe.


###### Menachot 7b:22
[Menachot 7b:22](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/7b:22)

וּמִי אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר הָכִי? וְהָא אִיתְּמַר: חֲבִיתֵּי כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל – רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: אֵינָהּ קְדוֹשָׁה לַחֲצָאִין, רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אָמַר: מִתּוֹךְ שֶׁקְּרֵבָה לַחֲצָאִין, קְדוֹשָׁה לַחֲצָאִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The Gemara returns to the issue of the sanctification of blood collected in two vessels: **And did Rabbi Elazar** really **say this,** that blood is sanctified only when a full measure is initially collected in a single vessel? **But it was stated** with regard to the **High Priest’s griddle-cake** offering: **Rabbi Yoḥanan says** that **it is not sanctified in halves,** i.e., if half of a tenth of an ephah was placed in one vessel, and a second half in another vessel, neither is sanctified. **Rabbi Elazar says: Since it is sacrificed in halves,** as half of the meal offering is sacrificed in the morning and half in the afternoon, it may be **sanctified in halves.**