meta: {"file": "/data/tomer/Sefaria-Export/txt_done/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Menachot/English/Sefaria Community Translation.txt"}
text: Mishnah Menachot
  משנה מנחות
  Sefaria Community Translation
  
  
  Mishnah Menachot
  
  
  
  
  
  All grain offerings from which handfuls were taken not for their own sake are valid, but they do not fulfill the obligation of their owners. [This is true] except for the grain offering of a sinner or the grain offering brought out of jealousy [by the suspected adulteress]. The grain offerings of a sinner and of jealousy from which handfuls were collected not for their own sake, or that were put into a vessel, or that were brought [to the altar], or were burned not for their own sake, or one [action was done] for their own sake and the other not or their own sake, or one [action was done] not for their own sake and one [was done] for their own sake, they are invalid. What [is meant by]  ["an action done] for their own sake and [one done] not for their own sake?" For the sake of the grain offering of the sinner and for the sake of the voluntary grain offering. [And what is meant by "an action done] not for their own sake and [one done] for their own sake"? With the intent of a voluntary grain offering  and with the intent of a grain offering of a sinner.
  The grain offering of a sinner and the grain offerings from which handfuls were taken by a non-priest, by a person in mourning [for a kinsman who has not yet been buried], by a <i>tevul yom</i> [a person who has immersed himself that day to purify himself, but who must wait for night-fall to be fully pure], by a person who lacks [priestly] garments, by a <i>mechusar kippurim</i> [a person who is required to bring an atonement offering before partaking in an offering], by a person with unwashed hands and feet, by an uncircumcised man, by an impure person, by a person who is sitting, or one who is standing on vessels, an animal, or his friend's legs - these [offerings] are invalid. If he took the handful with his left [hand], it [the offering] is invalid. Ben Betera says: he should return it and take the handful again with his right. If he took the handful, and a stone or a chunk of salt or a remnant of frankincense came with it in his hand, it is invalid, because they said: one who takes too much or too little [as] the handful, it is invalid. What is too much? If he took a heaping handful. And too little? If he took the handful with his fingertips. How should he do it? Extend his fingers on his palm [and bring the flour with his three middle fingers into his palm]. 
  If he used too much oil or too little  oil or too little  frankincense, it is invalid. One who takes a handful from the grain offering [intending] to eat the remainder [of the offering] outside [the Temple] or an olive’s bulk outside; Or to burn the handful or an olive’s bulk of the fistful outside; or  to burn its frankincense outside, it is invalid, but it does not entail <i>karet</i> [divinely imposed punishment consisting of death at an early age without progeny]. [One who takes a handful from the grain offering intending] to eat the remainder the next day or an olive’s bulk the next day; or  to burn the fistful the next day or an olive’s bulk of the handful  the next day; or to burn its frankincense the next day,  It is <i>piggul</i> [a sacrifice that becomes unfit due to the intention of the officiating priest to consume it outside of its permitted time], and they would be liable for <i>karet</i> [divinely imposed punishment consisting of death at an early age without progeny].   This is the general rule: anyone who takes the fistful, or puts it into a vessel, or carries it to the altar, or burns it, [intending] to eat [the amount] which is normally eaten, or to burn [the amount] which is normally burned: outside its prescribed place [the Temple courtyard], [the minhah] is invalid, but it does not result in <i>karet</i>; after its designated time, it is <i>piggul</i> [a sacrifice unfit due to the intention to consume it outside of its permitted time] and it results in <i>karet</i>, provided that the [portion which] permits is offered as required. How is the [portion which] permits offered as required"?  If one took the handful in silence [i.e., without express intention], and put it in a vessel and carried it, and burned it, [intending to eat it] after its designated time;  Or if one took the handful [intending to eat the grain-offering] after its designated time, and put it in a vessel, and carried it and burned it in silence, or if one took the handful and put it in a vessel, carried it out, and burned it [intending to eat the grain-offering] after its designated time. This is offering the [portion which] permits as is required.  
  How is the [portion which] permits not offered as is required?  If one took the handful [intending to eat it] outside the designated place, [and] put it in a vessel, carried it to the altar, and burned it [with the intention of eating it] after its designated time;  Or if one took the handful [intending to eat it] after its designated time, [and] put it in a vessel, carried it to the altar, and burned it [intending to eat it] outside its designated place, or if one took the fistful, put it in vessel, carried it to the altar, and burned it [intending to eat it] outside its designated time. If one took the handful of a sinner’s grain offering or the grain offering of jealousy not for their own sake, and put it in a vessel, carried it to the altar, and burned it [intending to eat them] after their designated time;  Or if one took the handful [from them, intending to eat] after their designated time, [and] put it in a vessel, carried it to the altar, and burned it not for their own sake, or if one took out the fistful, put it in vessel, carried it to the altar, and burned for the sake of something else - this is the [portion which] permits not offered as is required. [If one intended] to eat an olive’s bulk outside its designated place [and] an olive’s bulk on the next day, [or] an olive’s bulk on the next day [and] an olive’s bulk outside its designated place;  Half an olive’s bulk outside its designated place [and] half an olive’s bulk on the next day;  Half an olive’s bulk on the next day [and] half an olive’s bulk outside its designated place,  [The sacrifice] is unfit, and does not entail <i>karet</i>. Rabbi Judah said: this is the general rule: where the [improper] intention of time precedes the [improper] intention of place, [the sacrifice] is <i>piggul</i>, and they would be liable for <i>karet</i>; but if the [improper] intention of place precedes the [improper] intention of time, it is invalid and does not entail <i>karet</i>. But the Sages say: in both cases [the sacrifice] is invalid and does not entail <i>karet</i>.  [If one intends] to eat half an olive’s bulk [after its intended time or outside its intended place] [and] to burn half an olive’s bulk [similarly] - it is valid, for eating and burning do not combine [to equal an olive's bulk]. 
  
  
  
  If he took the handful [intending] to eat the remainder or to burn the handful the next day, Rabbi Yose concedes that the offering is <i>piggul</i> and he is obligated for extirpation.   [If he intended] to burn its frankincense the next day:  Rabbi Yose says: it is invalid but he is not liable for extirpation. But the sages say: it is rejected due to piggul and he is liable for extirpation.  They said to him: how does this differ from an animal-offering?   He said to them: with the animal-offering the blood, the flesh and the sacrificial portions are all one; but the frankincense is not part of the grain offering. 
  If he slaughtered the two lambs [intending] to eat one of the [two] loaves the next day, or if he burned the two dishes [of the frankincense intending] to eat one of the [two] rows of the showbread the next day: Rabbi Yose says: that loaf or that row about which he expressed the intention is rejected due to piggul and he is liable for extirpation for it, while the other is invalid but he is not liable for extirpation for it.  But the sages say, both are rejected due to piggul and he is liable for extirpation for both of them. If one of the [two] loaves or one of the [two] rows [of the shewbread] became unclean:  Rabbi Judah says: both must be taken out to the place of burning, for the offering of the congregation may not be divided.    But the sages say, the unclean [is treated] as unclean, but the clean may be eaten. 
  The thanksgiving offering can render the bread rejected due to piggul but the bread does not render the thanksgiving offering rejected due to piggul.  How so? If he slaughtered the thanksgiving offering intending to eat part of it on the next day, both it and the bread are rejected due to piggul; if he intended to eat part of the bread the next day, the bread is rejected due to piggul but the thanksgiving offering is not rejected due to piggul. 2)	The lambs can render the bread rejected due to piggul but the bread cannot render the lambs rejected due to piggul.  a)	How so? If he slaughtered the lambs intending to eat part of them the next day, both they and the bread are rejected due to piggul; if he intended to eat part of the bread the next day, the bread is rejected due to piggul but the lambs are not. 
  The animal-offering can render the libations rejected due to piggul after they have been sanctified in the vessel, the words of Rabbi Meir.  But the libations cannot render the animal-offering rejected due to piggul.  One who slaughters an animal-offering intending to eat part of it on the next day, both it and the libations are rejected due to piggul; if he intended to offer the libations the next day, the libations are rejected due to piggul but the animal-offering is not. 
  If he had an intention which causes something to be rejected because of piggul [with regard to the remainder of the grain-offering] during the [burning of the] handful and not during the [burning of the] frankincense, or during the [burning of the] frankincense and not during the [burning of the] incense: Rabbi Meir says: it is rejected due to piggul and he is liable for extirpation for it;  But the sages say: there is no extirpation unless he had an intention which causes something to be rejected due to piggul during the service of the whole of the thing that causes it to be permitted.   The sages agree with Rabbi Meir with regard to a sinner’s grain offering or a grain offering of jealousy, that if he had an intention which renders something rejected due to piggul during the [burning of the] handful, [the remainder] is rejected due to piggul and he is liable for extirpation for it, since the handful is the entire thing that causes it to be permitted.  If he slaughtered one of the lambs intending to eat the two loaves the next day, or if he burned one of the dishes of frankincense intending to eat the two rows [of the shewbread] on the next day:  Rabbi Meir says: it is rejected due to piggul and he is liable for extirpation for it;  But the sages say: it is not rejected due to piggul, unless he had an intention that renders something rejected due to piggul during the service of the whole of the thing that causes it to be permitted.  If he slaughtered one of the lambs intending to eat part of it the next day, that [lamb] is rejected due to piggul but the other [lamb] is valid. If he intended to eat the other [lamb] the next day, both are valid. 
  
  
  
  If he took the handful from the grain offering intending to eat [outside its proper place or after its proper time] a part that it is not usual to eat or to burn [outside its proper place or after its proper time] a part that it is not usual to burn, [the offering] is valid. Rabbi Eliezer invalidates [it].  [If he intended] to eat less than an olive's bulk of a part that it is usual to eat, or to burn less than an olive's bulk of a part that it is usual to burn, [the offering] is valid.  [If he intended] to eat a half an olive's bulk and to burn a half an olive’s bulk, [the offering] is valid, for eating and burning are not reckoned together. 
  If he did not pour in [the oil], or if he did not mix it, or if he did not break up [the grain offering] into pieces, or if he did not salt it, or wave it, or if he did not bring it near [the altar], or if he broke it up into large pieces, or if he did not anoint [with oil those types requiring anointing], it is valid. If the handful of one grain offering was mixed with the handful of another, or with a priest’s grain offering, or with the grain offering of the anointed [high] priest, or with the grain offering [offered with] the libations, it is valid.   Rabbi Judah says: if [it was mixed] with the grain offering of the anointed [high] priest or with the grain offering [offered with] libations, it is invalid, for since the consistency of the one is thick and the consistency of the other is thin, each absorbs from the other.   
  Two grain offerings from which the handfuls had not yet been taken out were mixed together: If it is still possible to take the handful from each separately, they are valid;  If not, they are invalid.  If the handful [of a grain offering] was mixed with a grain offering from which the fistful had not yet been taken, he must not burn it.  If he did burn it, then the grain offering from which the handful had been taken fulfills the owner's obligation while the other from which the handful had not been taken does not fulfill the owner's obligation.  If the handful was mixed with the remainder of the grain offering or with the remainder of another grain offering, it must not be burned;  If he did burn it does fulfill the owner's obligation. If the handful had become unclean and yet he offered it, the forehead plate [worn by the High Priest] renders it acceptable,   But if it went out [of the Temple Court] and  afterwards he offered it, the forehead plate does not render it acceptable. For the forehead plate renders acceptable only an offering which was unclean but not that which was taken out. 
  If the remainder of the grain offering became unclean or was burnt or lost:  According to the rule of Rabbi Eliezer it is valid; according to the rule of Rabbi Joshua it is invalid. If [he did] not [put the handful] into a ministering vessel it is invalid; Rabbi Shimon declares it valid.  If he burnt the handful twice [i.e., in two batches], it is valid. 
  Regarding the handful: the [absence of the] smallest part invalidates the whole. Regarding the tenth [of flour for the grain offering] the [absence of the] smallest part invalidates the whole.  Regarding the wine [libation which accompanies the grain offering] the [absence of the] smallest part invalidates the whole.  Regarding the oil [which is mixed in with the grain offering] the [absence of the] smallest part invalidates the whole.  Regarding the flour and the oil, the [absence of] one invalidates the other.  Regarding the handful and the frankincense, the [absence of] one invalidates the other. 
  Regarding the two goats of Yom Hakippurim, the [absence of] one invalidates the other.  Regarding the two lambs of  Shavuot, the [absence of] one invalidates the other.  Regarding the two loaves [that accompany the lambs], the [absence of] one invalidates the other.  Regarding the two rows [of the showbread], the [absence of] one invalidates the other. Regarding the two dishes [of frankincense], the [absence of] one invalidates the other. Regarding the rows and the dishes, the [absence of] one invalidates the other. Regarding the two kinds [of cakes] used in the offering of the nazirite,  the three kinds used for the red cow,  the four kinds [of cakes] used in the thanksgiving offering,  the four kinds [of species] used for the lulav, and the four kinds used for the [purification of the] leper,  the [absence of] one invalidates the others.  Regarding the seven sprinklings [of the blood] of the red cow, the [absence of] one invalidates the others.  Regarding the seven sprinklings between the poles of the ark, and of those toward the curtain and upon the golden altar, the [absence of] one invalidates the others. 
  Regarding the seven branches of the menorah, the [absence of] one invalidates the others.  Regarding the seven lamps on it, the [absence of] one invalidates the others.  Regarding the two portions of Scripture in the <i>mezuzah</i>, the [absence of] one invalidates the other; and even one letter invalidates the whole.  Regarding the four portions of Scripture in tefillin, the [absence of] one invalidates the others; even one letter invalidates the whole.  Regarding the four fringes, the [absence of] one invalidates the others, since the four together are one commandment.   Rabbi Ishmael says: the four are four separate commandments. 
  
  
  
  The [absence of the] blue [in the fringes] does not invalidate the white, neither does the [absence of the] white invalidate the blue. The [absence of the] hand-tefillin does not invalidate the head-tefillin, neither does the [absence of the] head-tefillin invalidate the hand-tefillin.  The [absence of the] fine flour and the oil does not invalidate the wine, neither does the [absence of the] wine invalidate them.  The [absence of one of the] sprinklings [of the blood] on the outer altar does not invalidate the rest. 
  The [absence of the] bulls or the rams or the sheep do not invalidate one another. R. Simon says: if they had [enough funds to buy] many bulls but they did not have [enough to buy the] libations [which accompany them], let them bring one bull with its libation; let them not offer them all without libations.
  [The absence of] the bull or the rams or the lambs or the sheep do not invalidate the bread-offering, nor does [the absence of] the bread-offering invalidate [them]. [The absence of ] the bread-offering can invalidate the lambs, but [the absence of ] the lambs cannot invalidate the bread-offering - [these are] the words of Rabbi Akiva; Rabbi Shimon ben Nanos said: Not so, rather [the absence of} the lambs can invalidate the bread-offering, but the [absence of] the bread-offering cannot invalidate the lambs; because we find that when Israel was in the wilderness forty years, they offered lambs without the bread-offering, so now too they may offer the lambs without the bread-offering. R. Simon said: The law is [according to] the words of Ben Nanos, but the grounds are not [according to] his words, [because] all the [offerings] stated in Numbers were offered in wilderness, but all the [offerings] stated in Leviticus were not offered in the wilderness. When they came to the land, they offered both [sets of offerings]. And why do I say [nevertheless] they offer the lambs without the bread-offering? Because the lambs render themselves permissible without the bread-offering [via the burning of their innards on the altar], but the bread-offering without the lambs - there is nothing [offered] that would permit it.
  [The absence of ] the<i>temidim</i> [daily offerings of lambs, one after dawn and before sunset] near does not invalidate the <i>musafim</i> [additional offerings offered on Shabbat, Rosh Chodesh, and holidays], neither does [the absence of] the <i>musafim</i> invalidate the <i>temidim</i>, neither does the absence of [one of the] <i>musafim</i> invalidate the other <i>musafim</i>. Even if they did not offer the lamb in the morning, they must offer it towards evening. Rabbi Shimon said: When is this so? Only when they had acted under duress or in error, but if they acted deliberately and did not offer the lamb in the morning they may not offer it towards evening.  If they did not burn the incense in the morning, they burn it towards evening.   Rabbi Shimon said: all of it was burned towards evening [in such a case] - for the golden altar is dedicated only by the incense of spices, and the altar for the whole burnt offering [is dedicated only] by the daily offering of the morning, and the table [is dedicated only] by the showbread on Shabbat, and the menorah [is dedicated] only by [the kindling of] seven lamps towards evening.
  The high priest’s griddle-cakes cannot be brought in [two separate] halves. Rather, he must bring a whole tenth and then divide it, offering a half in the morning and a half towards evening.  If a [high] priest offered half in the morning and then died and they appointed another priest in his place, [the successor] may not bring a half-tenth from his house, neither [may he use] the remaining half-tenth of the first [high priest]. Rather, he must bring a whole tenth and divide it, and offer one half and leaving the other half goes to waste.  It turns out that two halves are offered and two halves go to waste.  If they did not appoint another priest in his place, from whose [expense] was it offered?   Rabbi Shimon says: from the community; Rabbi Yehudah says: from his heirs, and [both agreee that] a whole [tenth] was offered.  
  
  
  
  All grain offerings must be offered unleavened, with the exception of the leavened cakes of the thanksgiving offering and the two loaves [of Shavuot] which are offered leavened.   Rabbi Meir says: he takes the leaven from [the grain offerings] themselves and with this they are leavened.     Rabbi Judah says: that is not the best way, rather [first of all] he brings leaven and puts into the measuring vessel and then he fills the measuring vessel up [with flour].  But they said to him: even so [it is not satisfactory], for it would be sometimes too little and sometimes too much.   
  All grain offerings must be kneaded with lukewarm water. He must guard them lest they become leavened.  If  the remainder became leavened he has transgressed a negative commandment, for it is written, “No grain offering which you shall bring to the Lord shall be made leavened” (Leviticus 2:11). One is liable for the kneading, and for rolling and for baking [if he performed these after it became leavened]. 
  Some [grain offerings] require oil and frankincense, some require oil but not frankincense, some frankincense but not oil, and some neither oil nor frankincense.  These require oil and frankincense: the grain offering of fine flour, that prepared on a griddle, that prepared in a pan, the cakes and the wafers, the grain offering of the priests, the grain offering of the anointed high priest, the grain offering of a non-Jew, the grain offering of women, and the grain offering of the <i>omer</i> [The special barley offering, offered the day after Pesach, which permits grain harvested in the last year to be eaten]. The grain offering offered with the libations requires oil but not frankincense.  The showbread requires frankincense but not oil.  The two loaves, the sinner's grain offering and the grain offering of jealousy require neither oil nor frankincense. 
  And [regarding this last category,] one is liable for the oil on its own and for the frankincense on its own.   If he put in oil, he has invalidated it, but if frankincense, he can remove it.  If he put oil on the remainder, he has not transgressed a negative commandment.  If he put a vessel [containing oil] on a vessel [containing the grain offering], he has not rendered it invalid. 
  Some [grain offerings] require bringing near but not waving, some require waving but not bringing near, some require bringing near and also waving, and some require neither bringing near nor waving.  These require bringing near but not waving: the grain offering of fine flour, that prepared on a griddle, that prepared in a pan, the cakes and the wafers, the grain offering of the priests, the grain offering of the anointed high priest, the grain offering of a non-Jew, the grain offering of women, the sinner's grain offering. Rabbi Shimon says: the grain offering of the priests and the grain offering of the anointed high priest do not require bringing near, since no handful is taken out of them. And in any case where no handful is taken out, bringing near is not necessary. 
  These require waving but not bringing near:  The <i>log</i> [specific unit of volume] of oil of the leper and his guilt-offering,  the first fruits, according to Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov,  the innards of an individual’s <i>shelamim</i> [An offering whose various parts are consumed by its owners, the Kohanim and the fire on the altar] and its breast and thigh, whether they are the offerings of men or of women, by Israelites but not by others; the two loaves and the two lambs of Shavuot.  How does he perform [the waving]? He places the two loaves upon the two lambs and puts his two hands beneath them and waves them forward and backward and upward and downward, for it is written, “which is waved and which is lifted up” (Exodus 29:27).   The waving was performed on the east side [of the altar] and the bringing near on the west side.  The ceremony of waving comes before that of bringing near. The grain offering of the <i>omer</i> and the grain offering of jealousy require bringing near and waving.  The showbread and the grain offering brought with the libations require neither bringing near nor waving.
  Rabbi Shimon says: there are three kinds [of sacrifices] which require three commandments; two [of the three] apply to each kind, but none of them require a third.  And these are they: the <i>shelamim</i> of the individual, the <i>zivchei shalmei tzibur</i> [<i>shelamim</i> offering brought by/on behalf of all Israel – specifically, the two sheep brought along with the leavened grain-offering on Shavu’ot] and the guilt-offering of the leper.  The <i>shelamim</i> of the individual requires the laying on of hands for the living animal and waving after it is slaughtered, but it does not require waving while alive.  The <i>zivchei shalmei tzibur</i> require waving while alive and also after they are slaughtered, but they do not require the laying on of hands.  The guilt-offering of the leper requires the laying on of hands and also waving while alive, but it does not require waving after it is slaughtered. 
  One who says, “I take upon myself [to offer a grain offering prepared]  on a griddle,” he must not bring [one prepared] in a pan;  If [he says, I take upon myself to offer a grain offering prepared] in a pan,” he must not bring [one prepared] on a griddle.  What is the difference between a griddle and a pan?  The pan has a lid to it, but the griddle has no lid - [these are] the words of Rabbi Yose Haglili; Rabbi Hanina ben Gamaliel says: a pan is deep and what is prepared is spongy; a griddle is flat and what is prepared on it is hard. 
  [If one said,] “I take upon myself [to offer a grain offering baked] in an oven,” he must not bring what is baked in a stove or on tiles or in the cauldrons of the Arabs; Rabbi Judah says: he may bring what is baked in a stove.  [If he said,] “I take upon myself [to offer] a baked grain offering,” he may not bring half in loaves and half in wafers. Rabbi Shimon permits it for it is one [kind of] offering. 
  
  
  
  These grain offerings have a handful taken from them and the remainder goes to the priests: the grain offering of fine flour, that prepared on a griddle, that prepared in a pan, the cakes and the wafers, the grain offering of a non-Jew, the grain offering of women, and the grain offering of the <i>omer</i> [The special barley offering, offered the day after Pesach, which permits grain harvested in the last year to be eaten].a fine grain offering, the frying pan grain offering, the deep-fried grain offering, loaves, wafers, the grain offering of non-Jews, the grain offering of women, the grain offering of the <i>omer</i>, the sinner's grain offering, and the grain offering of jealousy.  Rabbi Shimon says, the sinner's grain offering of a priest has its handful removed and is burned separately from the remainder. 
  The grain offering of the priests and the grain offering of the anointed high priest, and the grain offering offered with the libations are [wholly] for the altar and the priests have no share in them. With these the altar has greater power than the priests.  The two loaves and the showbread are eaten by the priests and the altar has no share in them; with these the priests have greater power than the altar. 
  All grain offerings that are prepared in a vessel require three applications of oil: pouring, mixing and putting oil in the vessel before they are made.    The [baked] loaves were mixed [with oil after breaking into pieces], the words of Rabbi [Judah Hanasi].  But the sages say: [while they were  still] fine flour [were they mixed with oil].  The loaves require mixing and the wafers anointing.  How did he anoint them? Like [the Greek letter] <i>chi</i>    And the rest of the oil was eaten by the priests. 
  All grain offerings prepared in a vessel must be broken into pieces. The grain offering of an Israelite was folded into two and the two were folded into four, and he separated [it at each bend].  The grain offering of priests was folded into two and the two were folded into four, but he does not separate. The grain offering of the anointed high priest was not folded.   Rabbi Shimon says: neither the grain offering of the priests nor the grain offering of the anointed high priest was broken in pieces, since the handful was not taken from them, and whenever the handful is not taken [from a grain offering] it is not to be broken in pieces.  And they were all an olive's bulk.
  All grain offerings must be rubbed three hundred times and beaten five hundred times.  The rubbing and the beating [is performed with the grains] of wheat.   Rabbi Yose says: also to the dough.   All grain offerings consist of ten cakes, except the showbread and the griddle-cakes of the high priest, which consist of twelve cakes , the words of Rabbi Judah.  Rabbi Meir says: they all consist of twelve cakes, except the loaves of the thanksgiving offering and of the Nazirite-offering, which consist of ten cakes. 
  The <i>omer</i> consisted of one tenth [of an eifah-measure of flour] taken from three <i>se'im</i> [particular  measure of volume]. The two loaves--two tenths taken from three <i>se'im</i>. And the showbread--twenty-four tenths taken from twenty-four <i>se'im</i>. 
  The <i>omer</i> was sifted in thirteen sieves, the two loaves [of Shavuot] in twelve and the showbread in eleven.  Rabbi Shimon said there was no fixed [number], rather flour that was sifted as much as necessary was brought as it says (Leviticus 24) "You shall take flour and bake it" - until it has been sifted as much as needed. 
  
  
  
  The thanksgiving offering was brought from five <i>se'im</i> [specific unit of volume] of flour of the Jerusalem measure, which is six <i>se'im</i> of the desert measure.  [This was equivalent to] two <i>eifot</i> [specific unit of volume, each] <i>eifah</i> is three <i>se'im</i> [and two <i>eifot</i> are also equal to] twenty <i>issaron</i>, ten of which for leavened bread and ten  for unleavened bread.  Ten for the leavened [meant that] each loaf [was made from] a whole <i>issaron</i> [of flour].  The ten for the unleavened bread - and in the unleavened bread [there were] three varieties: loaves, wafers and deep-fried dumplings - therefore there were three and a third <i>issaron</i> for each variety,  three loaves for every <i>issaron</i>.  In the Jerusalem measures it was thirty <i>kav</i> [particular unit of volume], fifteen for the leavened and fifteen for the unleavened.  Fifteen for the leavened [meant that] each loaf [was  made from] one and a half <i>kav</i>.  Fifteen for the unleavened bread - and in the unleavened bread [there were] three varieties: loaves, wafers and deep-fried dumpling - therefore there were five <i>kav</i> for each variety,  two loaves for every <i>kav</i>.
  [The grain-offering at] the dedication [of the Temple] consisted of [various kinds of] unleavened breads, like those [brought as part] of the thanksgiving-offering; [namely] loaves, wafers, and oily bread.   [The grain-offering of] the Nazirite consisted of two parts of the [various kinds of ] unleavened breads [brought as part] of the thanksgiving –offering; namely loaves and wafers. But not oily bread; thus there were ten <i>kav</i>by the Jerusalem measure, which is a little over six <i>esronot</i>.   From each one [of the unleavened breads brought with the Thanksgiving offering the priest] would take one tenth as an offering [for the officiating priest], as it states (Leviticus 7:14) "And he shall bring from it one out of each offering, as a separation for the Lord;"  [The word] "One" [tenth, indicates a whole loaf so] that one may not take a slice [or piece of bread as gift for the priest].  [The phrase] "From each one" [indicates] that all the offerings should be equal [in measure] and that one may not take [the officiating priest's share] out of one offering on behalf of another [that has less].  "to the officiating priest who sprinkles the blood of the peace-offering" [indicates that] the rest [of the offering] is eaten by the owner.  
  If one slaughtered the thanksgiving-offering inside [the Temple courtyard] while its bread was outside the wall, the bread is not sanctified. If he slaughtered [the thanksgiving-offering] before [the loaves] had formed a crust in the oven, or even if all [the loaves] except one had formed a crust, the bread is not sanctified. If he slaughtered  [the thanksgiving-offering] outside its [designate] time or outside its [designated] place, the bread is sanctified. If he slaughtered  [the thanksgiving-offering] and it was found to be <i>terefah</i> [an animal with a mortal condition such that it would die within one year], the bread is not sanctified. If he slaughtered [the thanksgiving-offering] and it was found to have a blemish [that disqualifies it as an offering], Rabbi Eliezer says [the bread is] sanctified; the Sages say [the bread is] not sanctified.  If he slaughtered [the animal] but not for its own sake - and likewise [regarding] the ram of the dedication ceremony or the two lambs of Shavuot slaughtered not for their sakes - the bread is not sanctified.
  Libations that were sanctified in a vessel, and their corresponding] sacrifice was found invalid, if there is another sacrifice they should be brought with it, but if not, they [are allowed to] become invalid by being left overnight.  The child of a thanksgiving-offering, or its substitute, and one who separates a thanksgiving-offering, loses it and then separates another in its place, these [secondary sacrifices] do not require bread, as it is stated: (Leviticus 7) "And he should bring with the thanksgiving sacrifice". - [only] the thanksgiving sacrifice requires bread; its child, its replacement, or its substitute do not require bread. 
  One who says "I accept upon myself [to bring] a thanksgiving sacrifice" must bring it and its bread from non-sacred money.  [If he says, "I accept upon myself to bring] a thanksgiving sacrifice with non-sacred money and the bread from <i>ma'aser</i> [<i>sheni</i>]" [the second tithe of produce, which must be taken to Jerusalem and consumed there], he must bring it and its bread from non-sacred money.  [If he says, "I accept upon myself to bring] a thanksgiving sacrifice from <i>ma'aser</i> [<i>sheni</i>] and the bread from non-sacred money", he may bring it.  [If he says, "I accept upon myself to bring] both the bread and the sacrifice from <i>ma'aser</i> [<i>sheni</i>], he may bring it.  But he may not bring [his offering] from the wheat of <i>ma'aser sheni</i>, rather from the money of <i>ma'aser sheni</i>. 
  From where [do we learn] that [if] one who says "I accept upon myself a thanksgiving sacrifice]", he must bring it from non-sacred money?  As it says (Deuteronomy 16:2) "You shall slaughter the Passover offering to the Lord, your God: sheep and cattle".  But Passover offerings are only brought from sheep or goats, so why does it say "sheep or cattle"? Rather, it is to connect everything that comes [as a sacrifice] from cattle or sheep to the Passover offering:  Just as the Passover offering which comes as an obligation, may come only from non-sacred money, so too anything which comes as an obligation may come only from non-sacred money.  Therefore one who says, "I accept upon myself [to bring] a thanksgiving sacrifice or a <i>shelamim</i> [an offering whose various parts are consumed by its owners, the Kohanim and the fire on the altar]", since they come as an obligation, they may come only from non-sacred money. Libations in all cases may come only from non-sacred money.  
  
  
  
  All public and private offerings can be brought from the Land [of Israel] or outside the Land, from the new or the old [grain] except for the <i>omer</i> and the two breads [of Shavuot] which can only be brought from the new [grain] and from the Land of [Israel].  And all of them should only be brought from the best.  What is the best? Michmas and Mizoniacha are the best [areas] for fine flour.  Second best for fine flour are Chafaraim in the valley.  The [grain of the] whole land was valid, but they used to bring it only from these places.
  One may not bring [grain for grain offerings] from a fertilized field nor from an irrigated field nor from a field [also planted with] trees. But if one did bring it [from these] it was valid.  How does one do it [i.e., work the field to produce grain for grain offerings]? He plows it in the first year and in the second year he sows it seventy days before Pesach, and it would produce [grain fit to make from it] fine flour.  How would he test it? The temple-treasurer would put his hand into it; if [flour] powder came up in [his hand], it was invalid until he sifted it [to remove the fine powder].  If it had become full of maggots, it is invalid. 
  Tekoa is best for its oil.  Abba Shaul says: Second to it is Regev, on the other side of the Jordan.  The [oil of the] whole land was valid, but they used to bring it only from these places.  One may not bring it from a fertilized field nor from an irrigated field nor from [from olive-trees planted in a field] with seeds sown in between them, but if one did bring it [from these] it was valid.  One may not bring <i>anpikanon</i> [oil from immature olives, used for medicinal and cosmetic purposes], and if one did bring it, it is invalid.    One may not bring it from olive-berries which had been soaked in water or preserved or stewed; and if one did bring it, it is invalid.
  There are three [crops of] olives and each gives three kinds of oil.   The first crop of olives he picks the olives from the top of the tree; and he pounds them and puts them into the basket; Rabbi Judah says: around the [sides of  the] basket.  This is the first.  He then presses them with the beam;  Rabbi Judah says: with stones.  This is the second.  He goes back and grinds them and presses them again. This is the third .  The first [oil] is fit for the <i>menorah</i> [Temple candelabrum] and the others for grain offerings.  The second olive crop is when he picks them at roof-level and he pounds them and puts them into the basket; Rabbi Judah says: around the [sides of the] basket.    This is the first.  He then presses them with the beam;  Rabbi Judah says: with stones. This is the second.  He goes back and grinds them and presses them again. This is the third . The first [oil] is fit for the <i>menorah</i> and the others for grain offerings.  The third olive crop is when he packs the last olives of the tree inside the storehouse [of the oil pressing facility] until they become overripe; he takes them up and dries them on the roof and he pounds them and puts them into the basket; Rabbi Judah says: around the basket. This is the first. He then presses them with the beam;  Rabbi Judah says: with stones. This is the second.  He goes back and grinds them and presses them again. This is the third .  The first [oil] is fit for the <i>menorah</i> and the others for grain offerings.
  The first of the first, there is none better than it.  The second of the first and the first of the second are equal.  The third of the first, the second of the second and the first oil of the third are equal.  The third of the second  and the second of the third are equal.  The third of the third, there is none worse than it.  It would have been logical that grain offerings should also require the purest olive oil: for if the <i>menorah</i>, whose [oil] is not for eating, requires pure olive oil, then should not grain offerings, whose oil is for eating,  also require pure olive oil?  But Scripture says, “Pure olive oil of beaten olives for lighting” (Exodus 27:20), and not pure olive oil of beaten olives for grain offerings.
  From where did they bring the wine [for the libations]?   Keruhim and Attulim are best for wine.  Second to them are Bet Rimmah and Bet Lavan on the mountain and Kefar Signa in the valley.  [Wine of the] whole land was valid but they used to bring it only from these places.  One may not bring it from a fertilized field nor from an irrigated field nor from [vines planted in a field] sown with seeds; but if one did bring it [from these] it was valid.  One may not bring wine from sun-sweetened grapes, but if one did bring it, it was valid.  One may not bring old wine, the words of Rabbi.  But the sages validate it.  One may not bring sweet wine or smoked wine or boiled wine, and if one did bring it, it was invalid.  One may not bring wine from grapes [raised and] hung [on reeds], but only from the vines growing close to the ground and from cultivated vineyards. 
  They would not put [the wine] in large casks but in small barrels. And one did not fill the barrels to the brim, so that its scent might waft.  One may not take the wine at the edge of the barrel because of the scum, nor that at the bottom because of the lees.  Rather, one should take it only from the  middle third of the barrel.   How did he test it?  The temple-treasurer used to sit with a [measuring] reed in his hand; when it shot out [during pouring] lees, he would knock with his reed [as a sign to stop pouring]. Rabbi Yose bar Judah says: wine on which there is a scum is invalid, as it is said, “They shall be for you without blemish, and their grain offering,” and "They shall be for you without blemish, and their libations” (Numbers 28:19-20, 31). 
  
  
  
  There were two measures in the Temple: the <i>issaron</i> [a specific measure of volume] and the half-<i>issaron</i>.  Rabbi Meir says: the <i>issaron</i>, [another] <i>issaron</i>, and a half-<i>issaron</i>.  For what purpose did the <i>issaron</i> measure serve?  Using it he would measure all the grain offerings.  He would not measure with a three-<i>issaron</i> measure for a bull or with a two-<i>issaron</i> measure for a ram, rather, rather they would measure by <i>esronot</i>.  For what purpose did the half-<i>issaron</i> measure serve?  Using it he would measure the griddlecakes of the high priest, half in the morning and the half towards evening. 
  There were seven measuring vessels for liquids in the Temple: the <i>hin</i> [a specific measure of liquid volume], the half-<i>hin</i>, the third-<i>hin</i>, the quarter-<i>hin</i>, the <i>log</i> [a specific measure of liquid volume], the half-<i>log</i>, and the quarter-<i>log</i>. Rabbi Eliezer bar Zadok says: there were markings in the <i>hin</i> measure: thus far for a bull, thus far for a ram, and thus far for a lamb. Rabbi Shimon says: there was no <i>hin</i> measure at all, for what purpose could the <i>hin</i> serve?  Rather there was an additional measure of one and a half <i>log</i> by which he would measure [the oil] for the grain offering of the high priest, a <i>log</i> and a half in the morning and a <i>log</i> and a half towards evening.
  For what purpose did the quarter-<i>log</i> serve?  A quarter-<i>log</i> of water for the one with skin disease and a quarter-<i>log</i> of oil for the Nazirite. For what purpose did the half-<i>log</i> serve?  A half-<i>log</i> of water for the <i>sotah</i> [suspected adultress subjected to a trial by ordeal through drinking the bitter waters]and a half-<i>log</i>  of oil for the thanksgiving offering.  With the <i>log</i> one measured [the oil] for all the grain offerings.  Even a grain offering of sixty <i>issaron</i> required sixty <i>log</i> [of oil].   Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov says: even a grain offering of sixty tenths required only one <i>log</i> [of oil], for it is written, “For a grain offering, and a <i>log</i> of oil” (Leviticus 14:21).    Six [<i>log</i>] for a bull, four for a ram, and three for a lamb, three a half for the candlestick, a half-<i>log</i> for each lamp.
  One may mix the libations of bulls with the libations of rams, or the libations of lambs with the libations of other lambs, or those of an individual offering with those of a communal offering, or those of [an offering from] today with those of [an offering from] yesterday; but one may not mix the libations of lambs with the libations of bulls or of rams.   And if they mixed these on their own, and they mixed these on their own, and then they were mixed, they are valid. But if before each was mixed [by itself they were mixed together], they are invalid. The lamb that was offered with the <i>omer</i> [the special barley offering, offered the day after Pesach, which permits grain harvested in the last year to be eaten], even if its grain offering was doubled, its libations were not doubled.  
  All the measures in the Temple were heaped except [that used for] the high priest's [grain offering] which included in itself the heaped amount. The overflow of the liquid-measures was holy, but the overflow of the dry-measures was not holy.  Rabbi Akiva says: the liquid-measuring vessels were holy, therefore their overflow was holy too; the dry-measuring vessels were not holy, therefore their overflow was not holy.  Rabbi Yose says: it is not because of this, but because liquids are stirred up and the dry measures are not. 
  All the offerings of the community and of the individual require libations except the first-born animal, the tithe of cattle, the <i>pesach</i>, the sin offering and the guilt offering;  But the sin offering and the guilt offering of the <i>metzora</i> [One rendered severely impure from an unsightly skin disease. Upon recovery and purification, he must bring offerings.] do require libations. 
  All of the offerings of community do not require the laying on of hands except the bull that is offered for [the transgression] of any of the commandments, and the scapegoat. Rabbi Shimon says: also the goats offered for [the transgression] of idol worship. All the offerings of an individual require the laying on of hands except the first-born, the cattle tithe, and the <i>pesach</i>.  And an heir may lay his hands [on them], and he may bring the libations, and [if he wrongfully] substitutes [another animal for it, it is holy].  
  All perform the laying on of hands except for a deaf-mute, a <i>shoteh</i>, a minor, a blind person, a non-Jew, a slave, an agent, and a woman.  The laying on of hands - the last part of the commandment [of bringing the offering] - is on the head, and [is performed] with both hands, the place they would slaughter is where the hands are laid [upon the animal], and immediately after laying hands upon it they would slaughter it.  
  There is a stringency regarding laying on of hands is that is greater than regarding waving [parts of an offering] and [a stringency] regarding waving that is greater than regarding laying on of hands.  For an individual may wave on behalf of all the others, but an individual may not lay on hands on behalf of all the others.  And there is a stringency regarding waving, for waving takes place for offerings of the individual and for offerings of the community, for living animals and for slaughtered animals, and for things that have a living soul and for things that do not have a living soul [i.e., grain offerings]; but it is not so with laying on of the hands. 
  
  
  
  Rabbi Ishmael says: On Shabbat the <i>omer</i> [The special barley offering, offered the day after Pesach, which permits grain harvested in the last year to be eaten] would come from three <i>se'im</i> [a specific measure of volume] and on a weekday from five; the Sages say: whether on Shabbat or on a weekday it would come from three <i>se'im</i>. Rabbi Hanina Segan HaKohanim says: on Shabbat it was reaped by one person with one sickle into one basket, and on a weekday it was reaped by three people into three baskets and with three sickles; the Sages say: whether on Shabbat or on a weekday it was reaped by three people into three baskets and with three sickles.   
  The [best fulfillment of the] commandment of the <i>omer</i> is [that it] come from a nearby land.  If [the areas] close to Jerusalem were not yet ripe they could bring them from any place.  It once happened that it came from Gaggot Tzrifin and the two loaves came from the valley of Ein Socher. 
  How would they do [the reaping of the <i>omer</i>]? The agents of the court would go out on the eve of the holiday and they would make them into bundles while they were still attached to the ground so that they would be easy to cut.  And all cities that were near there would come so that it would be cut with a great fanfare.  Once it got dark, [the reaper] would say to them, "Has the sun set?" and they would answer "Yes!".  Has the sun set? and they would answer "Yes!"  "With this a sickle?" and they would answer "Yes!", "With this a sickle?" and they would answer "Yes!"  "Into this a basket?", and they would answer "Yes!", "Into this a basket?" and they would answer "Yes!"  On Shabbat, he would say to them, "Is it Shabbat?" and they would answer "Yes!",  "Is it Shabbat?" and they would answer "Yes!"  "Shall I reap?" and they would answer "Reap!" "Shall I reap?" and they would answer "Reap!"  Three times for each question and they would answer, "Yes! Yes! Yes!"  Why so much? To prove wrong the <i>Baitusim</i> [a sect akin to the Sadducees, who rejected the Oral Torah] who would say that the <i>omer</i> was only reaped on [the day] after [the first day of the Pesach] holiday. 
  They would reap it and place it in baskets.  It would be brought into the Temple courtyard and they would singe it over the fire to fulfill the commandment [that it be brought from] parched grain, [[these are] the words of Rabbi Meir; the Sages say  they would beat it with reeds and stems [to remove the husks] so that [the grains] would not be crushed; they [would then] put it into a tube which was perforated so that the fire could reach all of it.  They would spread it out in the courtyard and the wind would blow through it [removing the chaff], it would then be placed in a the mill and an <i>issaron</i> [specific measure of volume] of flour would be taken from it which was then sifted through thirteen sieves; the rest of the flour would be redeemed and [could then] be eaten by anyone, it was obligated regarding <i>challah</i>, but exempt from tithing. Rabbi Akiva said it was obligated regarding <i>challah</i> [a portion of a batch of bread dough given to a <i>Kohen</i> which becomes holy upon separation, and can only be consumed by <i>Kohanim</i> or their household] and tithing.  [The priest engaged in offering the <i>omer</i> came to the <i>issaron</i> and place its oil and frankincense [in the vessel], he poured [the rest of the oil] and mixed [the flour with the oil], waved [the offering] and brought it close [to the corner of the alter], took a handful and burned it, and the remainder could be eaten by the priests.  
  Once the <i>omer</i> was offered, they used to go out and find the market of Jerusalem already full of flour and parched grain [of the new produce], [though this was] against the will of the Sages, [these are] the words of Rabbi Meir; Rabbi Judah says: they were acting [in accordance with] the will of the Sages. Once the <i>omer</i> was offered, the new grain was permitted immediately, but for those that lived far off it was permitted only after midday.  After the Temple was destroyed Rabbi Yohanan ben Zakkai decreed that it should be forbidden throughout the day of the waving. Rabbi Judah said: Is it not forbidden [in such a case] by the Torah, for it is said, “Until this very day?” (Leviticus 23:14)   So why was it permitted for those that lived far away from midday [when the Temple stood]? Because they know that the court would not be lazy regarding it.  
  The <i>omer</i> permitted [new grain] in the rest of the country and the two loaves [offered on Shavuot, permitted new grain] in the Temple.  Grain offerings and first fruits [from the new produce] could not be brought before the <i>omer</i>, and if they were, they were invalid.  They should not be brought before the two loaves, but if they were they are still valid. 
  Wheat, barley, spelt, oats and rye are obligated regarding <i>challah</i>.  And they combine [to make up the minimum obligated amount]. They are forbidden [to be eaten] as new grain before Pesach, and to be reaped before the <i>omer</i> [is brought].  If they had taken root before the <i>omer</i> [is brought, bringing] the <i>omer</i> permits them, and if not, they are forbidden until the next <i>omer</i> [is brought]. 
  They may reap in irrigated fields in the valley [before the <i>omer</i> is brought], but they may not stack it.  The people of Jericho used to reap [before the <i>omer</i> was brought in accordance] with the will of the Sages, and used to stack it against the will of the Sages, but the Sages did not protest. One may reap hay to feed livestock; Rabbi Judah said: When is this so? If one had begun to reap it before it had brought forth a third [of its growth]. Rabbi Shimon says: one may even reap it and feed [his livestock with it] even after it has brought forth a third [of its growth]. 
  One may harvest for the sake of the saplings [i.e., to promote their growth], for the sake of a house of morning, and  for the sake of a house of study, [but in such cases], one should not bind them but rather leave them in loose bunches.  The [best fulfillment of the] commandment of the <i>omer</i> is that is come from standing grain; if he did not find any, he may bring from bundled grain.  [The best fulfillment of] its commandment is that it come green; if he did not find any, he may bring it dry.  [The best fulfillment of] its commandment is that it be reaped at night; if it was reaped during the day, it is still valid; and its [reaping] overrides Shabbat [prohibitions]. 
  
  
  
  The Two loaves were kneaded one at a time and baked one at a time. The Panim bread were kneaded one at a time and baked two at a time. They were made in a mold and when he took them out of the oven he would place them in a mold so they wouldn't spoil.
  Both the Two Loaves and the Panim bread, were kneaded and molded outside the temple but baked inside the temple and they do not override Shabbat. Rabbi Yehuda says the entire process took place inside the courtyard. Rabbi Shimon says, one should accustom himself to say, the Two Loaves and the Panim Bread are valid in the courtyard and in the house of Pagi [which was outside the temple].
  The high priest's cakes were kneaded formed and baked inside the temple courtyard and they override Shabbat. Their grinding and sifting do not override the Shabbat. Rabbi Akiva said a general rule: Anything which can be done before Shabbat does not override the Shabbat, and whatever cannot be done before the Shabbat does override the Shabbat.
  All flour offerings require a vessel while inside the courtyard but not while outside. How so? The Two Loaves, were seven fists long, four fists wide and their horns were four fingers tall. The Panim Bread was ten fists long, five fists wide and its horns were seven fingers. Rabbi Yehuda said, so one should not err, ZaDad Yehaz [the numeric value of the hebrew letters is 7,4,4 and 10,5,7]. Ben Zoma says "and you shall place on the table Panim bread always" that it must have faces.
  The table: its length was ten handbreadths and its width, five ; the showbread its length was ten handbreadths and its width five . He would place its long side across the breadth of the table, and he would fold up two and a half handbreadths on this side and two and half on this side so that its length filled the entire breadth of the table, the words of Rabbi Judah. Rabbi Meir says: the table: its length was twelve handbreadths and its width six ; the showbread its length was ten handbreadths and its width five . He would place its long sided across the breadth of the table, and he would fold up two handbreadths on this side and two on this side ; and there was a space of two handbreadths between [the two sets] so that the wind could blow between them. Abba Shaul says: there they used to put the two dishes of frankincense for the showbread. They said to him: Has it not already been said, “And you shall put pure frankincense upon [al] each row” (Leviticus 24:7)? He replied, But has it not also been said, “And next unto [al] him shall be the tribe of Manasseh” (Numbers 2:20)? 
  There were four golden attachments there split at the top and they would support two rods for one stack and two rods for the other. And there were 28 reeds like half a hollow reed fourteen for one stack and fourteen for the other. Neither the arrangement of the reeds or their removal override Shabbat rather he goes in on Friday and take them out and places them lengthwise across the table. All of the vessels in the temple were placed lengthwise with the length of the Sanctuary.
  There were two tables in the anti-chamber at the entrance to the Sanctuary, one was made of marble and the other of gold. The one of marble is where they would place the Panim-bread on its way into the sanctuary and on the gold one as it left, because we go up in sanctity and not down. And there was one gold one inside where the Panim bread would be left always. Four priests would enter. Two of them had the two stacks and the other two had two spoons. Four would walk before them, two to take the two stacks and two to take the two spoons. The ones bringing in bread would stand in the north side and face south and those taking out bread would stand in the south and face north. These would take out as those would place down a fistful removing against a fistful placing as it says (Exodus 25) "before me always". Rabbi Yossi says, even if these completely pulled it off before these put down the new stack is considered constantly. They would leave and place [the bread] on the golden table in the anti-chamber. Once they offered the spoons [of frankincense] the bread would be given out to the priests. If Yom Kippur fell on Shabbat, the bread would be given out that night. If Yom Kippur was on Friday, the goat of Yom Kippur is eaten that night. The Babylonians would eat it raw because they were not timid about eating raw meat.
  If he arranged the bread on Shabbat and the spoons after Shabbat, but he offered the spoons on the following Shabbat it is invalid, and it is not subject to piggul, being left past its time or touching it while impure. If he arranged the bread and the spoons on Shabbat but offered the spoons after the following Shabbat it is invalid, and it is not subject to piggul, being left past its time or touching it while impure. If he arranged the bread and the spoons after Shabbat but offered the spoons on the following Shabbat it is invalid. How should he do it? He should leave it to the following Shabbat because even if it is on the table for many days, there is nothing wrong.
  The Two Loaves were eaten on no less than the second day [from their baking] and no greater than the third day. How so, they were baked on the day before Yom Tov [Shavuot] and eaten on Yom Tov which is the second day. If Yom Tov fell after Shabbat, then they were eaten on the third day. The Panim bread were eaten no less than nine days [after their baking] and no greater than eleven. How so, they were baked on Friday and eaten the following Shabbat, which is nine days. If Yom Tov fell on Friday then they would be eaten on the tenth day. If the two days of the New Year fell before Shabbat then they were eaten on the eleventh day. And they do not override Shabbat or Yom Tov. Raban Shimon Ben Gamliel said in the name of Rabbi Shimmon son of the Deputy High-Priest, they do override Yom Tov but not the Fast Day [Yom Kippur].
  
  
  
  The grain offerings and libations that became impure before they became sanctified in a vessel, they can be redeemed.  Once they have become sanctified in a vessel, they can no longer be redeemed.  Birds, wood, frankincense and temple vessels cannot be redeemed because redemption was only stated regarding beasts [cattle, sheep and goats].  
  One who says I will bring  [a grain offering prepared] in a frying pan, but he brought [one prepared] in a deep-frying pan, or, one who said I will bring [a grain offering prepared] in a deep-frying pan, but he brought [one prepared] in a frying pan, what he brought, he brought, but he did not fulfill his obligation.  [If he committed] to bring this [grain offering prepared] in a frying pan but he brought [one prepared] in a deep-frying pan or to bring this [grain offering prepared] in a deep-frying pan but he brought [one prepared] in a frying pan, it is invalid.  If he said I will bring two <i>esronim</i> [specific dry volume measure] [of flour] in one vessel, but he brought it in two vessels or he said in two vessels but he brought in one, what he brought, he brought, but he did not fulfill his obligation.  [If he committed] to bring these [two <i>esronim</i>] in one vessel and he brought them in two, or these [two <i>esronim</i>] in two vessels and he brought them in one vessel, these are invalid.  If he said I will bring two <i>esronim</i> in one vessel and he brought them in two vessels, and they said [to him] "you vowed regarding one vessel", if he [subsequently]brought it in one vessel, it is valid; in two vessels it is invalid.  If he said I will bring two <i>esronim</i> in two vessels and he brought them in one vessel and they they said [to him] "you vowed regarding two vessels", if he [subsequently]brought it in two vessels, it is valid; in one vessel it is as if two grain offerings became mixed. 
  If he said, "I accept upon myself a grain offering from barley", he may bring it from wheat.  "From flour", he may bring it from fine flour.  "Without oil or frankincense", he may bring it with oil and frankincense.  "Only half an <i>issaron</i>", he may bring a full <i>issaron</i>.  "One and a half <i>esronim</i>", he must bring two.  Rabbi Shimon exempts him since he did vow [the offering]  in the way people [usually] vow.  
  One may vow a grain offering of up to 60 <i>issaron</i> and bring it in one vessel.  If he said, "I will bring one of 61 <i>issaron</i>", he may bring 60 in one vessel and one in another vessel: since the community brings 61 <i>issaron</i> on the first day of Sukkot that falls on Shabbat , it is enough that the individual should be less than then congregation by one.  Rabbi Shimon says: but some of these [Sukkot grain offerings] are for the bulls and others for the sheep and they cannot be mixed with one another! Rather, [the reason for the limitation is that] until 60, they can be mixed well.  They said to him: 60 can be mixed but 61 cannot?  He said to them: all of the measurements of the Sages are this way: In forty <i>se'ah</i> [a specific liquid volume measure] one immerses; in 40 <i>se'ah</i> minus a <i>kortov</i> [a minute volume measure] one may not immerse.  One may not vow one, two or five <i>log</i> [of wine for libations],  but one may vow three, four, six, or more than six. 
  One may vow wine [alone], but not oil [alone], [these are] the words of Rabbi Akiva; Rabbi Tarfon says: one may vow oil.  Rabbi Tarfon said: just as we see regarding wine that it comes both as an obligation and as a free-will vow, so too oil comes as an obligation and as a free-will vow.  Rabbi Akiva said to him, not so! If you say regarding wine, which is brought as an obligation on its own, can you say the same thing regarding oil which is not brought as an obligation on its own?  Two people may not vow one <i>issaron</i> but they may vow an <i>olah</i> [an offering burnt entirely upon the altar] or a <i>shelamim</i> [an offering whose various parts are consumed by its owners, the Kohanim and the fire on the altar], and regarding birds - even one bird.  
  
  
  
  [One who says,] "I take upon myself an <i>issaron</i> [specific dry volume measure]" - he must bring one.  "<i>esronim</i>" - he must bring two.  "I specified, but I don't know what I specified" - he must bring 60 <i>issaron</i>.  If he said, "I take upon myself a grain offering" -  he may bring whichever type he wants.  Rabbi Yehuda says: he should bring a fine-flour grain offering, because it is the most special of the grain offerings.  
  "A grain offering" or "a type of grain offering" - he must bring one type.  "Grain offerings" or "a type of grain offerings" -  he must bring two types.  "I specified, but I don't know what I specified" - he must bring all five [types].  "I specified a grain offering of <i>esronim</i>, but I don't know what I specified" - he must bring a grain offering of 60 <i>issaron</i>.  Rabbi [Yehuda HaNasi] says he must bring grain offerings [of every size] from one <i>issaron</i> until 60 <i>issaron</i>. 
  "I take upon myself wood" - he may not bring less than two logs.  "Frankincense" - he may not bring less than a handful.  There are five [situation where the measure is] handfuls: one who says, "I take upon myself frankincense" - he may not bring less than a handful; if he vows a grain offering - he must bring with it a handful of frankincense; one who offers a handful outside the Temple is liable; the two bowls [placed on the table with the <i>Lechem Hapanim</i> [twelve, specially shaped unleavened loaves offered each Shabbat on the golden table in the Temple ]require two handfuls [in each].  
  "I take upon myself a gold [coin]"- he may not bring less than a <i>dinar</i> [specific coin] of gold. "Silver" - he may not bring less than a <i>dinar</i> of silver.  "Copper", he may not bring less than a <i>ma'ah</i> [specific coin] of copper.  "I specified but I don't know what I specified" - he must bring until he says "I definitely did not mean to bring this much".  
  “I take upon myself to bring wine” -  he may not bring less than three <i>login</i>.   “Oil,” he may not bring less than one <i>log</i>;   Rabbi says: three <i>login</i>.   “I specified but I don't what I specified,” he must bring the most that is brought on any one day.  
   “I take upon myself an <i>olah</i>” - he must bring a lamb.     Rabbi Elazar ben Azaryah say: either a turtle-dove or a young pigeon.  “I specified [an <i> olah </i> offering] of cattle, but I do not know what I specified,” he must bring a bull and a calf.  “[I specified an <i>;olah </i> offering] of the [domesticated] beasts, but I do not know what I specified,” he must bring a bull, a he-calf, a ram, a goat, a kid, and a lamb.   “I specified [an <i>olah</i>], but I do not know what I specified,” he must add to these a turtle-dove and a young pigeon. 
  “I take upon myself a thanksgiving offering or a <i>shelamim</i> offering” - he must bring a lamb. “I specified [one of these types of offerings] of cattle, but I do not know what I specified” - he must bring a bull and a cow, a he-calf and a she-calf.  “[I specified one of these types of offerings] of the [domesticated] beasts, but I do not know what I specified” - he must bring a bull and a cow, a he-calf and a she-calf, a ram and a ewe, a he-goat and a she-goat, a he-kid and a she-kid, a he-lamb and a she-lamb. 
  “I take upon myself an ox” - he must bring one with its libations to the value of a <i>maneh</i>.  “A calf” - he must bring one with its libations to the value of five <i>selaim</i>.  “A ram” - he must bring one with its libations to the value of two <i>selaim</i>.   “A lamb” - he must bring one with its libations to the value of one <i>sela</i>.  “An ox valued at one <i>maneh</i>” - he must bring one worth a <i>maneh</i> apart from its libations . “A calf valued at five <i>selaim</i>” - he must bring one worth five <i>selaim</i> apart from its libations. “A ram valued at two <i>selaim</i>” - he must bring one worth two <i>selaim</i> apart from its libations. “A lamb valued at one <i>sela</i>” - he must bring one worth one <i>sela</i> apart from its libations.  "An ox valued at a <i>maneh</i>”, and he brought two together worth a <i>maneh</i>, he has not fulfilled his obligation, even if one was worth a <i>maneh</i> less one <i>dinar</i> and the other also was worth a <i>maneh</i> less one <i>dinar</i>.  “A black one” and he brought a white one, or “a white one” and he brought a black one, or “a large one” and he brought a small one, he has not fulfilled his obligation.  "A small one” and he brought a large one - he has fulfilled his obligation;  Rabbi [Yehudah Hanasi] says: he has not fulfilled his obligation. 
  “This ox shall be an <i>olah</i>” and it becomes blemished - if he wants he may bring two with its [redemption] money.  “These two oxen are for an <i>olah</i>” and they become blemished - if he wants he may bring one ox with their [redemption] money.  Rabbi [Yehudah Hanasi] forbids it.  “This ram shall be an <i>olah</i>” and it becomes blemished - if he wants he may bring a lamb with its [redemption] money. “This lamb shall be an <i>olah</i>” and it becomes blemished - if he wants he may bring a ram with its [redemption] money; Rabbi [Yehudah Hanasi] forbids it. One who says, “One of my lambs shall be sanctified,” or “one of my oxen shall be sanctified,” and he had only two, the larger one is sanctified.  If he had three, the middle one is sanctified.  “I specified one but I do not know which I specified,” or [if he said,] “My father told me [that he had specified one] but I do not know which” - the largest one among them is sanctified. 
  “I take upon myself an <i>olah</i>” - he must offer it in the Temple.  And if he offered it in the Temple of Onias (A temple made by Onias in the Egyptian city of Heliopolis, contemporary with the Second Temple in Jerusalem), he has not fulfilled his obligation.  “I take upon myself to offer an <i>olah</i> but I will offer it in the Temple of Onias” - he must offer it in the Temple, yet if he offered it in the Temple of Onias he has fulfilled his obligation.  Rabbi Shimon says: this is not an <i>olah</i>.  “I will be a Nazirite” - he must shave in the Temple. And if he shaved in the Temple of Onias he has not fulfilled his obligation.  "[I will be a Nazirite on the condition] that I will shave in the Temple of Onias” - he must shave in the Temple, but if he shaved in the Temple of Onias he has fulfilled his obligation.   Rabbi Shimon says: this one is not a Nazirite.   The priests who served in the Temple of Onias may not serve in the Temple in Jerusalem; and needless to say [this is so of priests who served] something else [a euphemism for idolatry]; for it is said, “The priests of the shrines, however, did not ascend the altar of the Lord in Jerusalem. But they did eat unleavened bread along with their kinsmen” (II Kings 23:9).    Thus they are like those that had a blemish: they are entitled to share and eat [of the holy things] but they are not permitted to offer sacrifices.  
  It is said of the <i>olah</i> of cattle, “An offering made by fire of pleasing odor” (Leviticus 1:9);   and of the <i>olah</i> of birds, “An offering made by fire of pleasing odor (vs. 17); and of the  grain offering, “An offering made by fire of pleasing odor” (Leviticus 2:2): to teach you that it is the same whether one offers much or little, so long as one directs one’s heart to heaven.