Sefer HaMitzvot (positive commandment 65) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 140) include this as one of the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
See Hilchot Shegagot, Chapter 9, for a description of the transgressions for which these sacrifices are brought.
See Hilchot Shegagot, Chapter 8, for a description of the situations which warrant bringing these sacrifices.
See Chapter 5, Halachah 2, with regard to slaughter, and Halachah 6 of that chapter with regard to sprinkling the blood on the altar.
As stated in Chapter 5, Halachah 18.
The fats, the lobe of liver, and the kidneys described in Leviticus 7:3-4.
For every element of a sacrifice offered on the altar must be salted (Hilchot Issurei Mizbeiach 5:11).
For Leviticus 7:7 establishes an equation between the guilt-offering and the sin-offering. See also Chapter 10, Halachah 3.
A skin affliction similar to, but not identical with leprosy, that afflicts people, their clothes, and their homes because of spiritual inadequacies, in particular, speaking lashon hara, uncomplimentary gossip (the conclusion of Hilchot Tum’at Tzara’at).
Hilchot Mechusrei Kapparah 4:2.
This sacrifice is given as an example of one of the Thirteen Principles of Biblical Exegesis taught by Rabbi Yishmael (Sifra 1:4). It describes an entity (the guilt offering brought by a person afflicted by Tzara‘at) that was once included in a general category (all guilt offerings), but was singled out with regard to a new stipulation (that its blood be received in a different manner). Hence the laws that apply to that general category apply to it only because there is an explicit verse (Leviticus 14:13) that returns it to the general category.
Sefer HaMitzvot (positive commandment 66) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 141) include this as one of the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
The two lambs offered on Shavuot (Leviticus 23:19).
The Radbaz emphasizes that there is a difference between peace-offerings and other sacrifices. Most of the peace-offerings are brought voluntarily, while most of the other offerings are brought due to an obligation.
Chapter 1, Halachah 17; Chapter 5, Halachah 3.
Brought when making the festive pilgrimages (Hilchot Chagigah 1:1).
Additional peace-offerings brought at the time of the festive pilgrimages (ibid.).
The term "vow" refers to a promise to bring a sacrifice. The term "pledge" refers to a promise to bring a particular animal as a sacrifice (Hilchot Nedarim 1:2).
See Hilchot Nizirut 8:1.
Ultimately, they will be given to the priests, as stated in Halachah 12.
As explained in the following halachah.
Our translation is based on Rashi, Menachot 61a. In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Menachot 5:6), the Rambam writes: “With regard to the guilt-offering brought by a person afflicted with tzara’at…, it is written (Leviticus 14:12): ‘And tenufah should be performed with them before God.’ A tradition has been received interpreting ‘before God’ as meaning ‘in the east.”‘
Rashi (loc. cit.) interprets this to mean that even the area to the east of the altar is considered as “before God,” but the area to the west certainly warrants that description. The Rambam does not accept this understanding. His interpretation is question by the Kessef Mishneh and others, for the Holy of Holies was to the west of the altar. Seemingly, the closer one comes to it, the more one is “before God.”
The bracketed addition is based on the Rambam’s Commentary to the Mishnah (Menachot 5:5). This is also the perspective of Rashi (Menachot 62a) based on our Sages’ statements that this action is intended to prevent destructive winds.
This is intended to prevent harmful dews (ibid.).
See Halachot 17-22 for a description of the breads which would accompany the thanksgiving offering.
In the previous halachah.
In this way, the bread will not be spoiled through excessive contact with the meat (Radbaz). In his gloss (based on Menachot 61b), he cites exegetical reasons why the other items are placed in the order mentioned.
More particularly, as mentioned in Hilchot Beit HaBechirah 5:8, there was a chamber in the southeast portion of the Women’s Courtyard set aside for this purpose.
As commanded by Numbers 6:19. The Radbaz explains that it would appear that the foreleg would be placed above the other portions of the sacrifice, but below the bread.
See Halachah 23.
In the previous two halachot.
An animal's foreleg is comprised of three bones. According to the Rambam, the lower two are given to the priest. See Commentary to the Mishnah (Chulin 10:4). Others maintain that the upper two should be given to the priest.
See Chapter 10, Halachah 4.
And any both male and female - with whom he desires to share the meat.
Pesachim 59b derives this law from the order in which the concepts are stated in the Torah. Similarly, the owner may not partake of his portion until that time (Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim 18:7).
See Hilchot Ma’achalot Assurot 15:21; Hilchot Bikkurim 1:15.
There is, however, no such doubt with regard to the elevated portion of the nazirite’s ram (Radbaz).
For Leviticus 7:14 uses the word terumah when describing this offering. Nevertheless, since we find exclusions with regard to penalties associated with terumah in other verses, it is possible that they do not apply with regard to these breads. Accordingly, Menachot 77b leaves the matter unresolved.
Hilchot Terumot 6:6.
As stated in Hilchot Terumot 13:1-2, in such an instance, one hundred times the amount of terumah is required before the mixture is permitted.
The Radbaz and the Kessef Mishneh note that if these breads become mixed with ordinary breads, seemingly, there is a question whether a Scriptural prohibition applies and one should rule stringently. They explain that as long as there is a majority of permitted substances, the Scriptural prohibition is considered as nullified and the prohibition is only Rabbinic in origin (see Hilchot Ma‘achalot Assurot 15:13). This also applies with regard to a mixture of terumah (Hilchot Terumot 14:7). Accordingly, in this instance, since it is possible that the laws of terumah are not applied to these breads, we do not impose the Rabbinic prohibition.
As will be stated (Chapter 12, Halachah 9), in contrast to the meal offerings brought by Israelites, meal offerings brought by the priests are consumed entirely by the altar’s pyre. Hence, the Rambam felt it necessary to clarify that these breads are not in that category.
If the two partners would perform tenufah each one holding part of the items, neither would be performing the rite as required. If one put his hand below the hand of the other one, there would be an interposition between that person’s hand and the sacrificial items. And it is also impossible for them to perform tenufah, one after the other, because the Torah speaks about tenufah, using the singular, and not tenufot, using the plural (Menachot 94a).
That rite must be performed by each of the partners individually (Chapter 3, Halachah 9).
The Radbaz suggests that if she is married, her husband should perform this rite on her behalf.
A woman suspected of adultery who is required to bring an offering as part of her process of atonement.
Hilchot Sotah 3:15; Hilchot Nizirut 8:4.
Menachot 61a derives this concept from Numbers 5:25 which speaks of teriufah being performed with a Sotah‘s offering and then of it being brought to the altar.
An isaron is defined as a measure equivalent to the volume of 43 and 1/5 eggs.
I.e., the space intended for the flour will be taken by the yeast.
And thus take up only a small amount of space.
And thus take up a lot of space.
In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Menachot 9:3), the Rambam writes that he has found no definition for the term murbechet, but that it appears to him that to imply that a large quantity of oil is used in the preparation of the cakes.
See the Rambam’s Commentary to the Mishnah (Challah 1:6; Menachot 9:3), where he describes how these fried cakes are made.
Those loaves which are leavened do not require oil [the Rambam’s Commentary to the Mishnah (Menachot 7:4)].
A half a log is 172 cc. according to Shiurei Torah and 300 cc. according to Chazon Ish.
The Radbaz maintains that the measure of half a log was communicated to Moses, but the breakdown of how this measure should be used was not. Hence, after the fact, the sacrifice is not disqualified if there was some deviation.
Although the person desires to bake only four loaves, he must also separate one loaf of each type for the priest. This separation must be done beforehand, as the Rambam proceeds to explain. Thus one tenth of each type of dough must be separated and prepared for the priest.
I.e., it would not be deferential to give the priest a piece of each of the four doughs as his sacrificial portion.
The nazirite is bringing two thirds of the unleavened bread brought in connection with a thanksgiving offering. Hence, he uses two thirds the amount of flour.
I.e., a similar amount of oil is used as is used for the corresponding loaves of the thanksgiving offering.
As stated in Numbers 6:19.
I.e., if any of the types of bread are lacking, the sacrifice is unacceptable and nothing should be brought at all.
In his gloss to the Mishnah (Menachot 3:7), Tosafot Yom Tov writes that these breads were baked in Beit Pagi, a small settlement, outside, but close to the Temple Mount.
Chapter 5, Halachah 17.
Chapter 5, Halachah 18.
See Hilchot Korban Pesach 1:14; Hilchot Bechorot 1:2; 6:4.
