## Menachot Daf 81a

###### Menachot 81a:1
[Menachot 81a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/81a:1)

וְכִי מַפְרִישִׁין תְּחִלָּה לְמוֹתָרוֹת?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi explains why: **And does one separate** an animal **as a leftover *ab initio*?**


###### Menachot 81a:2
[Menachot 81a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/81a:2)

יָתֵיב רַבִּי יִצְחָק בַּר שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר מָרְתָא קַמֵּיהּ דְּרַב נַחְמָן, וְיָתֵיב וְקָאָמַר: וְלַיְיתֵי בְּהֵמָה וְלֶחֶם, וְלֵימָא: אִי הָךְ דְּקָיְימָא תְּמוּרָה הִיא – הָא תּוֹדָה וְהָא לַחְמָהּ, וְאִי הָךְ דְּקָיְימָא תּוֹדָה הִיא – הָא לַחְמָהּ וְהָא תִּהְוֵי תְּמוּרָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests another solution: **Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Shmuel bar Marta was sitting before Rav Naḥman, and he was sitting and saying: And let him bring** another **animal with loaves and let him say: If this** animal **that is extant is the substitute,** then let **this** be **the thanks offering and these its loaves. And if this** animal **that is extant is the thanks offering,** then let **these** be **its loaves and this will be a substitute,** as the substitute of a thanks offering is not sacrificed with loaves, and it may be consumed for the same duration as the thanks offering itself.


###### Menachot 81a:3
[Menachot 81a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/81a:3)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: עֲנִי מָרִי, אַרְבְּעִין בְּכַתְפֵּיהּ, וְכָשֵׁר?!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rav Naḥman **said to him: Answer me, my Master:** The *halakha* is that one who separates a substitute is liable to receive **forty** lashes **on his shoulders, and** yet you say it is **fit** to separate a substitute *ab initio*?


###### Menachot 81a:4
[Menachot 81a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/81a:4)

רַב עִילָּא חֲלַשׁ, עָל לְגַבֵּיהּ אַבָּיֵי וְרַבָּנַן, וְיָתְבִי וְקָא אָמְרִי: אִם אִיתַהּ לִדְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן דְּאָמַר: חוּץ לְחוֹמַת הָעֲזָרָה קָדוֹשׁ, לַיְיתֵי לֶחֶם וְלוֹתְבַהּ חוּץ לְחוֹמַת הָעֲזָרָה, וְלֵימָא: אִי הָךְ דְּקָיְימָא תּוֹדָה הִיא – הָא לַחְמָהּ, וְאִי לָא – לִיפּוֹק לְחוּלִּין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara relates that **Rav Ila took ill,** and **Abaye and the Sages went to** visit **him, and they were sitting and saying: If** one **accepts** the ruling **of Rabbi Yoḥanan, who said:** If the loaves of the thanks offering were within Jerusalem, i.e., the area of consumption of a thanks offering and its loaves, even if they were **outside the wall of the** Temple **courtyard** when the thanks offering was slaughtered they are **consecrated,** then **let** the owner **bring loaves and set them outside the wall of the** Temple **courtyard and let him say: If this** animal **that is extant is the thanks offering,** then let **these** be **its loaves, and if** it is **not, let them go out** and be consumed **as non-sacred** loaves.


###### Menachot 81a:5
[Menachot 81a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/81a:5)

מִשּׁוּם דְּאִיכָּא אַרְבַּע לְהָנִיף, הֵיכִי לֶיעְבֵּיד? לַנְפִינְהוּ אַבָּרַאי? ״לִפְנֵי ה׳״ כְּתִיב! גַּוַּואי? קָא מְעַיֵּיל חוּלִּין לָעֲזָרָה! הִלְכָּךְ, לָא אֶפְשָׁר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara responds: This too is not a valid remedy, **because there are four** loaves of the forty that one must **wave. How would he perform** the mitzva of waving them? **Shall he wave them outside** the Temple courtyard? He may not, since “waved for a wave offering **before the Lord”** (Leviticus 7:30) **is written** in the verse, and waving performed outside the Temple courtyard is not considered “before the Lord.” Shall he wave them **inside** the Temple courtyard? **He** will have **brought non-sacred food into the** Temple **courtyard. Therefore,** it is **not possible.**


###### Menachot 81a:6
[Menachot 81a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/81a:6)

מַתְקֵיף לַהּ רַב שִׁישָׁא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב אִידִי: אִם אִיתַהּ לִדְחִזְקִיָּה, דְּאָמַר קָדְשׁוּ אַרְבָּעִים מִתּוֹךְ שְׁמוֹנִים – לַיְיתֵי בְּהֵמָה, וְלַיְיתֵי שְׁמוֹנִים בַּהֲדַהּ, וְלֵימָא: אִי הָךְ דְּקָיְימָא תּוֹדָה הִיא – הָא נָמֵי תֶּיהְוֵי תּוֹדָה, וְהָא שְׁמוֹנִים דְּתַרְוַיְיהוּ; אִי הָךְ דְּקָיְימָא תְּמוּרָה הִיא – הָא תּוֹדָה וְהָא לַחְמָהּ, וְלִיקְדְּשׁוּ לְהוּ אַרְבָּעִים מִתּוֹךְ שְׁמוֹנִים!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Sheisha, son of Rav Idi, objects to this: If** one **accepts** the ruling **of Ḥizkiyya, who said** with regard to a thanks offering that one slaughtered accompanied by eighty loaves rather than the required forty: **Forty of the eighty** loaves **are consecrated,** then let the owner **bring an animal and let him bring eighty loaves with it and say: If this** animal **that is extant is the thanks offering,** then **this** additional animal **should also be a thanks offering and these eighty** loaves should be **for both of them.** And **if this** animal **that is extant is the substitute,** then let **this** additional animal be **a thanks offering and these** shall be **its loaves, and let forty of the eighty be consecrated for it.**


###### Menachot 81a:7
[Menachot 81a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/81a:7)

מִשּׁוּם דְּקָא מְמַעֵט בַּאֲכִילָה דְּאַרְבָּעִים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this: This is not a valid remedy, **because it reduces** the **consumption of the forty** additional loaves, as the priests may not be able to consume the four loaves given from the additional forty, and the owner cannot consume them because they may be the portion of the priest.


###### Menachot 81a:8
[Menachot 81a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/81a:8)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב אָשֵׁי לְרַב כָּהֲנָא: אִם אִיתָא לִדְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן, דְּאָמַר: הִפְרִישׁ חַטָּאת מְעוּבֶּרֶת וְיָלְדָה – רָצָה בָּהּ מִתְכַּפֵּר, רָצָה בִּוְולָדָהּ מִתְכַּפֵּר, לַיְיתֵי בְּהֵמָה מְעוּבֶּרֶת וְיַמְתִּין לָהּ עַד שֶׁתֵּלֵד, וְלַיְיתֵי שְׁמוֹנִים בַּהֲדַהּ, וְלֵימָא: אִי הָךְ דְּקָיְימָא תְּמוּרָה הִיא – הָא וּוְלָדָהּ תּוֹדָה הִיא, וְהָא שְׁמוֹנִים דְּתַרְוַויְיהוּ; וְאִי הָךְ דְּקָיְימָא תּוֹדָה הִיא – הָא נָמֵי תּוֹדָה הִיא, וְהָא שְׁמוֹנִים דְּתַרְוַויְיהוּ הוּא, וְהַאי לֶיהֱוֵי מוֹתָר דְּתוֹדָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Ashi said to Rav Kahana: If** one **accepts** the ruling **of Rabbi Yoḥanan, who said:** If **one separated a pregnant** animal as **a sin offering and it gave birth,** if **he wants he can achieve atonement with it,** and if **he wants he can achieve atonement with its offspring;** then **let** the owner **bring a pregnant animal and wait until it gives birth, and let him bring eighty** loaves **with it and say: If this** animal **that is extant is the substitute,** then **this** and its offspring **are thanks offerings, and these eighty** loaves should be **for both of them. And if this** animal **that is extant is the thanks offering,** then **this** mother should also be **a thanks offering, and these eighty** loaves should be **for both of them, and let this** offspring **be the leftover of the thanks offering.**


###### Menachot 81a:9
[Menachot 81a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/81a:9)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: מַאן לֵימָא לַן דְּאָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אִם שִׁיְּירוֹ מְשׁוּיָּיר? דִּלְמָא אִם שִׁיְּירוֹ אֵינוֹ מְשׁוּיָּיר, וְהַיְינוּ טַעְמָא דְּרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן, דְּאָמַר: אָדָם מִתְכַּפֵּר בִּשְׁבַח הֶקְדֵּשׁ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rav Kahana **said to him: Who shall say to us that** the reasoning of **Rabbi Yoḥanan** is that he **said** that the offspring is considered the property of the one who dedicated the pregnant mother, such that **if he reserved it** for a specific consecration it is considered **reserved** for that consecration? **Perhaps** Rabbi Yoḥanan holds that **if he reserved it, it is not** considered **reserved, and this is the reason that Rabbi Yoḥanan** holds that one can achieve atonement with the offspring of a pregnant animal separated as a sin offering, **as he said: A person achieves atonement with the enhancement of consecrated** property, such as the offspring of an animal that was consecrated when pregnant.


###### Menachot 81a:10
[Menachot 81a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/81a:10)

רָבִינָא אִיקְּלַע לְדַמְהַורְיָא, אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב דִּימִי בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב הוּנָא מִדַּמְהַורְיָא לְרָבִינָא: וְלַיְיתֵי בְּהֵמָה, וְלֵימָא ״הֲרֵי עָלַי״, וְלַיְיתֵי בְּהֵמָה אַחֲרִיתִי, וְלַיְיתֵי שְׁמוֹנִים בַּהֲדַהּ, וְלֵימָא: אִי הָךְ דְּקָיְימָא תְּמוּרָה הִיא – הָנֵי תַּרְתֵּי תּוֹדוֹת, וְהָא שְׁמוֹנִים דְּתַרְוַיְיהוּ; וְאִי הָךְ דְּקָיְימָא תּוֹדָה הִיא – וְהָא דְּאָמְרִי ״עֲלַי״ נָמֵי לֶיהֱוֵי תּוֹדָה, וְהָא שְׁמוֹנִים דְּתַרְוַיְיהוּ, וְאִידַּךְ תִּהְוֵי לְאַחְרָיוּת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Ravina happened** to come **to Dimhorya. Rav Dimi, son of Rav Huna from Dimhorya, said to Ravina: And let** the owner **bring an animal and say: It is** incumbent **upon me** to bring an animal for a thanks offering, and let him separate this animal in fulfillment of his vow, **and** then **let him bring another animal, and let him bring eighty** loaves **with it and say: If this** animal **that is extant is the substitute,** then **these two** additional animals are **thanks offerings and these eighty** loaves should be **for both of them. And if this** animal **that is extant is the thanks offering,** then **this one** for **which I said:** It is incumbent **upon me, should also be a thanks offering, and these eighty** loaves are **for both of them, and let the other** animal **be for a guarantee,** to be sacrificed if my thanks offering gets lost, and it does not require loaves.


###### Menachot 81a:11
[Menachot 81a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/81a:11)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: הַתּוֹרָה אָמְרָה ״טוֹב אֲשֶׁר לֹא תִדֹּר מִשֶּׁתִּדּוֹר וְלֹא תְשַׁלֵּם״, וְאַתְּ אָמְרַתְּ: לֵיקוּם וְלִינְדּוֹר בַּתְּחִילָּה?!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Ravina **said to him: The Torah said: “Better is it that you should not vow, than that you should vow and not pay”** (Ecclesiastes 5:4), **and you say: Let him rise up and vow *ab initio*?** Taking a vow to bring an offering is not encouraged. As all possible remedies have been rejected, the statement of Rabbi Ḥiyya, that there is no remedy in a case where a thanks offering and its substitute were intermingled and one of them died, stands.


###### Menachot 81a:12
[Menachot 81a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/81a:12)

**מַתְנִי׳** הָאוֹמֵר ״הֲרֵי עָלַי תּוֹדָה״ – יָבִיא הִיא וְלַחְמָהּ מִן הַחוּלִּין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** **One who says: It** is incumbent **upon me** to bring **a thanks offering, must bring it and its loaves from non-sacred** money in his possession and not second-tithe money. Since he said: It is incumbent upon me, bringing the offering is an obligation, and one may not fulfill an obligation with second-tithe money.