Sifra Nedavah Chapter 10

¹1) (Vayikra 2:1): "a meal-offering" — What obtains here (in our section) obtains with all (other) meal-offerings, and what obtains with all (other) meal-offerings obtains here. "soleth" (fine flour): Just as soleth elsewhere (Shemoth 29:2) is of wheat, so, here. (It could have been written) "soleth, his offering" (instead of) "soleth shall be (his offering"), the implication being that he may donate and offer only (a meal-offering) of wheat. (For without the limiting clause I would reason:) Does it not follow (that an individual may bring a meal-offering of barley)? viz.: The congregation brings a prescribed meal-offering of wheat (i.e., the libation meal-offering, the two loaves, and the show bread), and an individual brings a gift meal-offering of wheat. Just as the congregation, which brings a prescribed meal-offering of wheat, brings a prescribed meal-offering of barley (e.g., the meal-offering of the omer), so, the individual, who brings a gift-offering of wheat, may bring a gift-offering of barley. It is, therefore, written (to negate this): "soleth, his offering," "soleth shall it be" — he may donate and offer only (a meal-offering) of wheat. ²2) So that if one said: "I vow a meal-offering of barley," he brings one of wheat; "of kemach" (first flour), he brings one of soleth (fine flour); "without oil and frankincense," he brings oil and frankincense with it;" "a half-issaron," he brings a full issaron; "an issaron and a half," he brings two. R. Shimon (in the above instances) exempts him, his not having donated in the customary manner. ³3) "his offering" — the individual brings a gift meal-offering, but not partners. (For without the exclusion clause I would reason:) Does it not follow (that a gift meal-offering may be brought in partnership)? viz.: A beast burnt-offering is brought in vow or gift, and a meal-offering is brought in vow or gift. Just as the first may be brought by two, so, the second may be brought by two. ⁴4) — No, this may be true in the case of a beast burnt-offering, which comes as a communal gift-offering, but not in that of a meal-offering, which does not come as a communal gift-offering. — This is refuted by the instance of a bird burnt-offering, which does not come as a communal gift-offering, yet does come as a gift of two. ⁵5) — So that you should not wonder if a meal-offering, which does not come as a communal gift-offering, does come as a gift of two. It is, therefore, written (to negate this) "his offering" — the individual brings a gift meal-offering, but not partners. ⁶6) Just as two do not bring a gift meal-offering, so they do not bring wine or frankincense or wood. But they can donate a burnt-offering and peace-offerings, and, with (a) fowl (-offering), even one bird. ⁷7) "And he shall pour oil upon it" — upon all of it; "and he shall put frankincense upon it" — upon part of it. Why do you see fit to say this" (i.e., to make this distinction). — For there is no inclusion ("upon it") after inclusion (upon it") in the Torah except for limitation. ⁸8) Another rendering: "And he shall pour oil upon it" — upon all of it, because it (the oil) is mixed with it, and the fistful is taken with it. "and he shall put frankincense upon it" — upon part of it, because it (the frankincense) is not mixed with it, and the fistful is not taken with it. ⁹9) "and he shall put frankincense upon it" — upon part of it, I do not know how much. I, therefore, reason: It (the meal-offering) requires kemitzah (the taking of the fistful), and it requires frankincense. Just as kemitzah is a full fist (Ibid. 2), so the frankincense requires a full fist. R. Yehudah says: If the frankincense (on the meal-offering) was diminished (from a fistful after kemitzah), it is kasher. ¹⁰10) "And he shall pour oil upon it and he shall put frankincense upon it, and he shall bring it to the sons of Aaron, the Cohanim": The implication is that all men (i.e., even non-Cohanim) may do the pouring and the mixing.