## Menachot Daf 83b

###### Menachot 83b:1
[Menachot 83b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/83b:1)

מַאי עָבֵיד לֵיהּ? מִבְּעֵי לֵיהּ לְכִדְרַב נַחְמָן, דְּאָמַר רַב נַחְמָן אָמַר רַבָּה בַּר אֲבוּהּ: מִנַּיִן לְמוֹתַר הַפֶּסַח שֶׁקָּרֵב שְׁלָמִים? שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וְזָבַחְתָּ פֶּסַח לַה׳ אֱלֹהֶיךָ צֹאן וּבָקָר״, וַהֲלֹא אֵין פֶּסַח בָּא אֶלָּא מִן הַכְּבָשִׂים וּמִן הָעִזִּים! אֶלָּא מוֹתַר הַפֶּסַח יְהֵא לְדָבָר הַבָּא מִן הַצֹּאן וּמִן הַבָּקָר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**what does he make of it,** i.e., what does he derive from it? **He requires it for that** which was stated **by Rav Naḥman, as Rav Naḥman says** that **Rabba bar Avuh says: From where** is it derived **that a leftover Paschal offering,** an animal consecrated but not ultimately sacrificed on Passover eve, **is sacrificed as a peace offering** afterward? It is derived from **that** which **is stated: “And you shall sacrifice the Passover offering unto the Lord, your God, of the flock and the herd.”** The verse is difficult: **But isn’t a Paschal offering brought only from the sheep and from the goats? Rather,** it is derived from here **that a leftover Paschal offering should be** sacrificed **as** an offering **brought** both **from the flock and from the herd,** i.e., a peace offering.


###### Menachot 83b:2
[Menachot 83b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/83b:2)

וְהָא מֵהָכָא נָפְקָא? מִדַּאֲבוּהּ דִּשְׁמוּאֵל נָפְקָא, דִּכְתִיב: ״אִם מִן הַצֹּאן קׇרְבָּנוֹ לְזֶבַח שְׁלָמִים״, וְאָמַר אֲבוּהּ דִּשְׁמוּאֵל: דָּבָר הַבָּא מִן הַצֹּאן יְהֵא לְזֶבַח שְׁלָמִים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But is it derived from here** that a leftover Paschal offering is sacrificed as a peace offering? **It is derived from** the verse **that Shmuel’s father** cites: **As it is written:** “And **if his offering for a sacrifice of peace offerings** to the Lord **is of the flock”** (Leviticus 3:6); **and Shmuel’s father said:** This teaches that an offering **that is brought** only **from the flock,** i.e., the Paschal offering, **will be a sacrifice of peace offerings.**


###### Menachot 83b:3
[Menachot 83b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/83b:3)

וְאַכַּתִּי מֵהָכָא נָפְקָא? מֵהָתָם נָפְקָא! וְהָתַנְיָא: ״כֶּבֶשׂ״ – לְרַבּוֹת אֶת הַפֶּסַח לְאַלְיָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**But still** it must be asked: **Is it derived from here? It is derived from there,** from the verse cited in the following *baraita*. **And isn’t it taught** in a *baraita*: Even though the verse already states that peace offerings come from the flock, as it is written: “And if his offering for a sacrifice of peace offerings to the Lord be of the flock, male or female, he shall sacrifice it without blemish” (Leviticus 3:6), the verse goes on to specify: “If he bring a lamb for his offering…and if his offering be a goat” (Leviticus 3:7–12). The word **“lamb”** is written **to include the Paschal offering in** the requirement that the **fat tail** be sacrificed on the altar, which is written subsequently with regard to a peace offering (Leviticus 3:9), since this *halakha* is not mentioned in the verses concerning the Paschal offering.


###### Menachot 83b:4
[Menachot 83b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/83b:4)

כְּשֶׁהוּא אוֹמֵר: ״אִם כֶּבֶשׂ״ – לְהָבִיא פֶּסַח שֶׁעָבְרָה שְׁנָתוֹ, וּשְׁלָמִים הַבָּאִים מֵחֲמַת פֶּסַח, לְכׇל מִצְוַת שְׁלָמִים: שֶׁיִּטְעֲנוּ סְמִיכָה, וּנְסָכִים, וּתְנוּפַת חָזֶה וָשׁוֹק.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* continues: **When** the verse **states: “If** he brings **a lamb,”** it is **to include in all the mitzvot of peace offerings a Paschal offering whose** first **year has passed** and is therefore too old to be sacrificed as a Paschal offering, **and peace offerings brought due to a Paschal offering.** Specifically, this indicates **that they require placing hands** on the head of the offering, **libations, and the waving of** the **breast and thigh.**


###### Menachot 83b:5
[Menachot 83b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/83b:5)

כְּשֶׁהוּא אוֹמֵר ״וְאִם עֵז״ – הִפְסִיק הָעִנְיָן, לִימֵּד עַל הָעֵז שֶׁאֵינָהּ טְעוּנָה אַלְיָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And when** the verse **states:** “And **if** his offering is a **goat,” it interrupted the** previous **matter** and **taught that the** sacrifice of **a goat does not require** that the **fat tail** be burned on the altar. In any event, the verse indicates that a Paschal offering that was disqualified as such because it has reached its second year, i.e., the leftover of a Paschal offering, is sacrificed as a peace offering. It may therefore be asked: Why are there three verses to indicate this one *halakha*?


###### Menachot 83b:6
[Menachot 83b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/83b:6)

תְּלָתָא קְרָאֵי כְּתִיב: חַד לְעִבְּרָה זְמַנּוֹ וְעִבְּרָה שְׁנָתוֹ, וְחַד לְעִבְּרָה זְמַנּוֹ וְלֹא עִבְּרָה שְׁנָתוֹ, וְחַד לְלֹא עִבְּרָה זְמַנּוֹ וְלֹא עִבְּרָה שְׁנָתוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather,** none of these derivations are superfluous, as **three verses are written** that teach the *halakha* that a Paschal offering that is sacrificed not on Passover eve is sacrificed as a peace offering. **One** verse teaches this *halakha* in a case where **its time** of sacrifice, Passover eve, **has passed, and its** first **year has** also **passed,** disqualifying it for sacrifice as a Paschal offering. **And one** verse teaches the *halakha* in a case where **its time** of sacrifice **has passed, but not its** first **year. And** the third **one** teaches a case where **neither its time** of sacrifice **nor its** first **year has passed,** but it was sacrificed before Passover eve.


###### Menachot 83b:7
[Menachot 83b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/83b:7)

וּצְרִיכִי, דְּאִי אַשְׁמְעִינַן עִבְּרָה זְמַנּוֹ וְעִבְּרָה שְׁנָתוֹ, מִשּׁוּם דְּאִידְּחִי לֵיהּ לִגְמָרֵי, אֲבָל עִבְּרָה זְמַנּוֹ וְלֹא עִבְּרָה שְׁנָתוֹ, דַּחֲזֵי לְפֶסַח שֵׁנִי, אֵימָא לָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** all these verses **are necessary. As had the Merciful One written** only the case **where** both **its** first **year and its time** of sacrifice **have passed,** one could say that only such a Paschal offering should be sacrificed as a peace offering, **as it was completely rejected from** its status as **a Paschal offering; but** in a case where **its time** of sacrifice **has passed but its** first **year** has **not** passed, in **which** case it is still **fit to** be sacrificed as a Paschal offering on the **second *Pesaḥ*, I would say** that it is **not** sacrificed as a peace offering.


###### Menachot 83b:8
[Menachot 83b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/83b:8)

וְאִי אַשְׁמְעִינַן עִבְּרָה זְמַנּוֹ וְלֹא עִבְּרָה שְׁנָתוֹ, דְּאִידְּחִי לֵיהּ מִפֶּסַח רִאשׁוֹן, אֲבָל לֹא עִבְּרָה זְמַנּוֹ וְלֹא עִבְּרָה שְׁנָתוֹ, דַּאֲפִילּוּ לְפֶסַח רִאשׁוֹן נָמֵי חֲזֵי, אֵימָא לָא, צְרִיכָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if** the Torah **had taught us** only that a leftover Paschal offering **whose time has passed but whose year has not passed** is sacrificed as a peace offering, one might think that this is **because** the Paschal offering **was rejected from the first *Pesaḥ*; but** in a case **where neither its time** of sacrifice **nor its** first **year have passed,** in **which** case it is still **fit to** be sacrificed as **a Paschal offering** on Passover eve, **I would say** that it is **not** sacrificed as a peace offering. Therefore, all three verses **are necessary.**


###### Menachot 83b:9
[Menachot 83b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/83b:9)

**הֲדַרַן עֲלָךְ הַתּוֹדָה הָיְתָה בָּאָה.**


###### Menachot 83b:10
[Menachot 83b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/83b:10)

מַתְנִי׳ **כׇּל קׇרְבְּנוֹת הַצִּיבּוּר** וְהַיָּחִיד בָּאִין מִן הָאָרֶץ וּמֵחוּצָה לָאָרֶץ, מִן הֶחָדָשׁ וּמִן הַיָּשָׁן, חוּץ מִן הָעוֹמֶר וּשְׁתֵּי הַלֶּחֶם, שֶׁאֵינָן בָּאִין אֶלָּא מִן הֶחָדָשׁ וּמִן הָאָרֶץ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** **All communal and individual** meal **offerings** may **come from** produce grown in **Eretz** Yisrael **and from outside Eretz** Yisrael, **from the new** crop, i.e., the current year’s crop, **and from the old** crop from previous years. This is the *halakha* of all meal offerings **except for the *omer*,** i.e., the measure of barley brought as a communal offering on the sixteenth of Nisan, **and the two loaves,** i.e., the communal offering brought on the festival of *Shavuot*, **as they come only from the new** crop **and from Eretz** Yisrael.


###### Menachot 83b:11
[Menachot 83b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/83b:11)

וְכוּלָּן אֵינָן בָּאִין אֶלָּא מִן הַמּוּבְחָר, וְאֵיזֶהוּ מוּבְחָר שֶׁלָּהֶם? (מִכְנֵיס וְזַטְחָא) [מִכְמָס וְזוֹנֵחָא] – אַלְפָּא לַסֹּלֶת, שְׁנִיָּיה לָהֶן – עֲפוֹרַיִים בַּבִּקְעָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And all** meal offerings **come only from the optimal-**quality grain. **And which** places have the **optimal** grain **for them?** Fields in **Makhnis and Zateḥa** are the **primary [*alfa*]** source **for fine flour. Secondary to them** is **Aforayim in the valley.**


###### Menachot 83b:12
[Menachot 83b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/83b:12)

כׇּל הָאֲרָצוֹת הָיוּ כְּשֵׁרוֹת, אֶלָּא מִכָּאן הָיוּ מְבִיאִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
A**ll the regions were valid** as the source of the grain**, but** it is **from here,** the primary and secondary places, that **they would bring** grain, because it was of optimal quality.


###### Menachot 83b:13
[Menachot 83b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/83b:13)

**גְּמָ׳** מַתְנִיתִין דְּלָא כִּי הַאי תַּנָּא, דְּתַנְיָא: עוֹמֶר הַבָּא מִן הַיָּשָׁן – כָּשֵׁר, שְׁתֵּי הַלֶּחֶם הַבָּאוֹת מִן הַיָּשָׁן – כְּשֵׁרוֹת, אֶלָּא שֶׁחִיסֵּר מִצְוָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** The mishna states that the *omer* meal offering and the two loaves are prepared only from the new crop. The wording of the mishna indicates that this is an essential requirement. The Gemara notes: **The mishna is not in accordance with** the opinion of **this** following ***tanna*, as it is taught** in a *baraita*: **An *omer*** meal offering **that comes from the old** crop is **valid.** Similarly, **the two loaves that come from the old** crop **are valid, but** by bringing them from the old crop one **lacks** the proper fulfillment of its **mitzva.**


###### Menachot 83b:14
[Menachot 83b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/83b:14)

עוֹמֶר – דִּכְתִיב ״תַּקְרִיב אֵת מִנְחַת בִּכּוּרֶיךָ״, וַאֲפִילּוּ מִן הָעֲלִיָּיה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara provides the biblical sources for the rulings of the *baraita*: The source for the ruling concerning the ***omer*** meal offering is **as it is written:** “And when you shall bring a meal offering of first fruits to the Lord, it is ripened grain, toasted over fire, even groats of the fresh ear, **you shall bring the meal offering of your first fruits”** (Leviticus 2:14). The superfluous repetition of the term “you shall bring” teaches that the *omer* is valid **even** if brought **from** an old crop that was stored away in **the attic.**


###### Menachot 83b:15
[Menachot 83b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/83b:15)

שְׁתֵּי הַלֶּחֶם – דִּכְתִיב: ״מִמּוֹשְׁבֹתֵיכֶם תָּבִיאּוּ״, וְלֹא מִן חוּצָה לָאָרֶץ. ״מִמּוֹשְׁבֹתֵיכֶם״ – וַאֲפִילּוּ מִן הָעֲלִיָּיה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The source for the ruling concerning the **two loaves** is **as it is written:** “And you shall offer a new meal offering to the Lord. **From your dwellings you shall bring** two wave-loaves” (Leviticus 23:16–17). The term “your dwellings” is a reference to Eretz Yisrael. Therefore, the verse indicates that the two loaves must be brought from grain grown there, **and not from outside of Eretz** Yisrael. Furthermore, the term **“from your dwellings”** teaches that the offering may come from any grain grown in Eretz Yisrael **and even from** an old crop that was stored away in **the attic.**


###### Menachot 83b:16
[Menachot 83b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/83b:16)

הָא אַפֵּיקְתֵּיהּ? אָמַר קְרָא ״תָּבִיאּוּ״, וַאֲפִילּוּ מִן הָעֲלִיָּיה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks how two *halakhot* can be derived from the same term: **Didn’t you** already **expound that** term to teach that one can use grain only if it is grown in Eretz Yisrael? How can you also derive from it that the grain can be brought from an old crop? The Gemara explains: That is derived from the next term, as **the verse states:** “From your dwellings **you shall bring”** (Leviticus 23:17), which teaches that one may bring them from any grain grown in Eretz Yisrael **and even from** an old crop that was stored away in **the attic.**


###### Menachot 83b:17
[Menachot 83b:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/83b:17)

וְהַאי מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ, שֶׁכֹּל שֶׁאַתָּה מֵבִיא מִמָּקוֹם אַחֵר – הֲרֵי הוּא כָּזֶה! אִם כֵּן, לִיכְתּוֹב קְרָא ״תָּבִיא״, מַאי ״תָּבִיאּוּ״? שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ תַּרְתֵּי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara questions this answer: **But that** term **is necessary** to teach **that any** leavened bread offering **that you bring in another instance,** i.e., the loaves of the thanksgiving offering, **is to be like this** offering of the two loaves, i.e., the same requirements apply to it (see 77b). How, then, can you expound the term to also teach that grain from an old crop can be used for the two loaves? The Gemara explains: **If so,** that the term is written only to teach about the requirements for other leavened bread offerings, then **let the verse write: You shall bring [*tavi*],** using the singular form. For **what** reason then, does it write: **“You shall bring [*tavi’u*],”** using the plural form? It is written so that one can **learn from it two** different *halakhot*.


###### Menachot 83b:18
[Menachot 83b:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/83b:18)

וְהָכְתִיב ״רֵאשִׁית״? לְמִצְוָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara questions the ruling of the *baraita* that the *omer* and the two loaves are valid even if brought from an old crop: **But isn’t** the term **“first” written** with regard to both the *omer* and the two loaves? This indicates they must come from the new crop. The *omer* is referred to as “the first of your harvest” (Leviticus 23:10), and the two loaves are referred to as “an offering of the first” (Leviticus 2:12). The Gemara answers: The term indicates that only the new crop should be used, but that is only **for** the proper fulfillment of the **mitzva.** If an old crop was used, the offerings are still valid.


###### Menachot 83b:19
[Menachot 83b:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/83b:19)

הָכְתִיב ״חֲדָשָׁה״? הַאי מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ לְכִדְתַנְיָא: רַבִּי נָתָן וְרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אָמְרוּ: שְׁתֵּי הַלֶּחֶם הַבָּאוֹת מִן הַיָּשָׁן – כְּשֵׁרוֹת, וּמָה אֲנִי מְקַיֵּים ״חֲדָשָׁה״? שֶׁתְּהֵא חֲדָשָׁה לְכׇל הַמְּנָחוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: But **isn’t it written** with regard to the two loaves: **“A new** meal offering” (Leviticus 23:16), which indicates that only the new crop can be used? The fact that with regard to the two loaves the Torah repeats this requirement twice suggests that it is indispensable. The Gemara answers: The word “new” cannot teach that the use of the new crop is essential, as **it is necessary for that which is taught** in a *baraita*: **Rabbi Natan and Rabbi Akiva said** that even if **the two loaves are brought from the old** crop, they are **valid. How do I realize** the meaning of: **“A new** meal offering”? This teaches that the two loaves **are to be the first of all the** other **meal offerings.** No other meal offerings may be brought from the new crop until the meal offering of the two loaves has been brought.


###### Menachot 83b:20
[Menachot 83b:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/83b:20)

עַד כָּאן לָא פְּלִיגִי אֶלָּא בְּחָדָשׁ,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The Gemara defines the limits of the dispute between the mishna and *baraita*: **They disagree only with regard to** whether it is essential for the *omer* and the two loaves to be brought from **the new** crop.