The Mishnah discusses a case where one performs the ritual scooping (קמיצה, kemitzah) of a meal offering (מנחה, mincha) and discovers an extraneous item in their hand, such as a rock, a pebble, a grain of salt, or a piece of frankincense (לבונה, levonah). In such a scenario, the offering is invalid (פסול, pasul). The reason is that a mincha must be complete (שלם, shalem) to be valid (כשר, kasher). If an extraneous item is present, the offering is not whole; it is missing a portion of the pure flour and oil. Rashi explains that the offering is invalid because the spot occupied by the pebble or salt is lacking the required flour.
Rashi then raises a question: how can one perform the kemitzah if frankincense is part of the mincha? If the presence of levonah makes the offering invalid due to it being "lacking" (חסר, haser), how is levonah ever included? The answer is that the levonah is moved to the side before the kemitzah is performed. After the kemitzah, the levonah is then added. This ensures that the levonah is not mixed in during the initial scooping, thus avoiding the issue of a "lacking" offering.
The Gemara asks why the Mishnah needs to provide all these examples—salt, levonah, and a rock—when the general principle is simply that the offering must consist entirely of flour and oil. The Gemara explains that each example is necessary. If only a rock had been mentioned, one might assume it invalidates the offering because rocks are not placed on the Altar (מזבח, Mizbe'ach). However, salt and levonah are placed on the Altar. Therefore, one might mistakenly think their presence during kemitzah is acceptable.
Specifically, regarding salt, one might think it is acceptable because salt is added to the mincha after the kemitzah. However, salt is not an initial ingredient when the offering is prepared in the vessel (כלי, keli). Thus, its presence during kemitzah invalidates the offering. For levonah, one might think it is acceptable because it is an initial ingredient placed in the keli from the outset. Therefore, the Mishnah needs to teach that even with levonah, the offering is invalid if it is scooped along with the flour. Rashi clarifies that salt is added to the offering only after the scooped portion (קומץ, kometz) has already been placed on the Altar.
The Gemara then asks why all three examples are necessary. If the Mishnah had first mentioned levonah, which is an integral part of the mincha, one would automatically infer that a rock or salt would also invalidate the offering. The Gemara answers that the Mishnah began with the general case of salt, necessitating the inclusion of all three examples.
The Mishnah states that a kometz that is "lacking" (חסר, haser) or "excessive" (יתר, yater) is invalid. The Gemara questions why the Mishnah gives the reason of "lacking" or "excessive" when a simpler reason could be given: a barrier (חציצה, hatzitzah). The flour must directly touch the Kohen's fingers. If a rock is present, it creates a barrier between the flour and the Kohen's fingers, invalidating the offering. Furthermore, even if the rock is in the middle of the flour, not directly between the fingers and the flour, it could still create a barrier by separating the flour itself, making it seem like two distinct komatzim. This too would invalidate the offering.
The Gemara clarifies that the Mishnah's ruling of "lacking" or "excessive" applies specifically to a case where the extraneous item is on the side of the kometz, near the thumb (גודל, gudal) or pinky (זרת, zeret). In such a position, it does not create a barrier between the fingers and the flour, nor does it separate the flour itself. In this specific scenario, the invalidation is not due to hatzitzah but because the required measure (שיעור, shiur) of flour is lacking from that particular spot. Rashi explains that if the item is above the fingers or below the kometz, it does not create a barrier, but it still causes a deficiency in the required measure.
The Gemara then asks how the kemitzah is performed. Abaye explains that it is done by scooping with the hand. The Gemara then delves into the names of the fingers. The smallest finger is the zeret (pinky). The finger next to it is the kimitzah finger (ring finger), so called because the kemitzah begins there. The middle finger is the amah (middle finger), used for measuring in the construction of the Temple (מקדש, Mikdash) and its vessels. The pointer finger is the etzba, and the thumb is the gudal, used for sprinkling oil and blood on the thumb of a leper (מצורע, metzora).
Rava states that the kemitzah is performed by pinching with all the fingers. This implies that the kemitzah is primarily done with the kimitzah finger. The other fingers are used for "smoothing out" (להשוות, lehashvot) the kometz after it has been collected, leveling off any protruding portions with the thumb and pinky. Thus, all fingers are involved, but the actual scooping begins with the kimitzah finger. Rashi clarifies that "smoothing out" means pressing down any excess flour from above with the thumb and from below with the pinky so that it is not protruding.
Rav Zutra bar Tuvia in the name of Rav explains the precise method: one bends the three fingers (kimitzah, amah, and etzba) over the palm until their tips touch the palm. Then, one presses these fingers into the flour, and whatever flour is contained within this cupped hand is the kometz. This means it is not a scooping motion, but rather a pressing down into the flour, allowing it to fill the cupped hand. A Baraita supports this, stating that the kometz must be full (מילוא, milo), meaning the palm must be involved, not just the fingertips. One cups the three fingers over the palm and presses down.
The Gemara then discusses the minchot of the griddle (מחבת, machavat) and the pan (מרחשת, marcheshet), which are made from baked pieces. When performing kemitzah on these, the pieces might protrude unevenly. In such cases, the Kohen must use his thumb and pinky to precisely break off any excess, ensuring the kometz is neither lacking nor excessive. This is considered one of the most difficult tasks (עבודה, avodah) in the Temple, as it requires extreme precision to break off only the protruding parts without affecting the inner portion.
The Gemara compares this to other difficult avodot, such as the "pinching" (מליקה, melikah) of a bird offering, which requires one-handed precision, and the "scooping" (חפינה, chafina) of frankincense on Yom Kippur. The chafina involves transferring frankincense from a shovel into the Kohen's hands in the Holy of Holies (קודש הקודשים, Kodesh Hakodashim), which is challenging due to the need to ensure no frankincense falls to the floor.
Abaye then raises several questions about alternative methods of performing kemitzah: What if one scoops with the fingertips only, without involving the palm? What if one scoops from the sides of the flour? What if one places the back of the hand into the flour and presses down? What if one places the palm facing up and fills it with flour from below? All these questions are left unresolved (תיקו, tiku), awaiting the prophet Elijah (אליהו הנביא, Eliyahu Hanavi).
Abaye also asks about the sanctification (קידוש, kiddush) of the kometz in the vessel. If one places the kometz on the side of the vessel instead of dropping it inside, is it sanctified? The Torah requires it to be "in the vessel." Does this mean resting on the base of the vessel, or merely within its walls? This too is left unresolved (tiku).
Another question arises: What if one turns the vessel upside down and places the kometz on the outside bottom of the vessel? Is this considered "in the vessel" if the bottom has an indentation, or must it be inside in the normal manner? This also remains unresolved (tiku).
The Mishnah states that if one adds too much oil (ריבת שמנה, ribat shamna), too little oil (חסר שמנה, chaser shamna), or too little levonah (חסר לבונה, chaser levonah), the offering is invalid. Rashi explains that the standard measure of oil for a mincha is one log. If one puts in less, it is invalid. The Gemara questions why the Mishnah gives the case of "too much oil" as doubling the measure (e.g., two logs instead of one). Why not give a case where even a single extra drop invalidates the offering, such as unconsecrated oil (שמן חולין, shemen chulin) or oil designated for a different offering?
The Gemara explains that Rabbi Elazar's teaching (which specifies doubling the oil) is based on a "no need to say" (לא מיבעיא, lo meba'ya) system. It is obvious that unconsecrated oil or oil from another offering, even a drop, would invalidate the mincha. The novel teaching is that even if one designates two logs of oil for this specific mincha, and each log is technically suitable, putting both in still invalidates the offering. One might have thought that since each log is individually suitable, their combined presence would be acceptable, but the Mishnah teaches otherwise.
Rava questions the Mishnah's phrasing, "too much of its oil" (ריבה שמנה, ribah shamnah). Why specify "its oil"? It should simply say "too much oil," which would include unconsecrated oil or oil from another offering. The phrasing "its oil" implies that the oil was specifically designated for this mincha. This teaches that even if two logs were designated for this mincha, their combined presence still invalidates it. Rashi confirms that "its oil" implies oil designated for that specific mincha.
Regarding "too little levonah," the Mishnah states it is invalid. The Gemara cites a Baraita that says even one granule (קורט, kort) of levonah is sufficient, implying that less than one granule is invalid. Another Baraita, however, in the name of Rabbi Shimon, states that any lacking measure is invalid. The Gemara resolves this by explaining that the first Baraita refers to levonah that accompanies a mincha, where one kort is the minimum. The second Baraita refers to a standalone levonah offering, which requires a specific measure (שיעור, shiur) from beginning to end.
Rabbi Yitzchak bar Yosef in the name of Rabbi Yochanan offers three opinions on the kemitzah of levonah: Rabbi Meir (our Tanna) holds that even a drop of levonah missing invalidates the mincha, meaning a complete measure is needed from the beginning of the process (when the kemitzah is performed) until the end (when the kometz and levonah are burned on the Altar, הקטרה, haktarah). Rabbi Yehuda holds that a full measure is needed at the beginning, but at the end, two kortim are sufficient. Rabbi Shimon holds that even one kort at the end is sufficient. They all derive their opinions from the same verse, interpreting the word "all" (כל, kol) and "and" (ואת, ve'et) differently to determine the minimum required amount.
Rabbi Yitzchak bar Yosef in the name of Rabbi Yochanan further clarifies that this dispute applies only to levonah that accompanies a mincha. However, if one donates a standalone levonah offering, everyone agrees that a full measure is required from beginning to end. The Gemara then questions why this distinction is necessary. It explains that one might have thought that since the levonah of the showbread (לחם הפנים, lechem hapanim) also accompanies it, it would be treated like levonah with a mincha. However, the bread is not considered the mincha of the bazichin (spoons of frankincense), so a complete measure is required for the bazichin from beginning to end.
Another opinion states that the dispute extends even to standalone levonah offerings. The Gemara then returns to the Mishnah's statement that "too little levonah" (חסר לבונה, chaser levonah) invalidates the offering. This implies that "excessive levonah" (יתר, yater) would be valid. However, a Baraita explicitly states that "excessive" is invalid. Rabbi Bar Chama resolves this by explaining that the Baraita refers to a case where one designated two full measures (שני קומצים, shnei komatzim) of levonah for the offering. A slight excess is acceptable, but doubling the measure is considered too much and invalidates the offering.
The Gemara then discusses the cutoff point for invalidation due to excess. If one initially designated two measures of levonah, but one measure was lost before the kemitzah, the offering is valid because at the time of kemitzah, the correct measure was present. However, if the excess was present at the time of kemitzah, it is invalid. Similarly, for the bazichin (spoons of frankincense) that accompany the showbread, if one designated four measures for two spoons (two measures per spoon), but two measures were lost before the spoons were removed from the table, it is valid. But if the excess was present when the spoons were removed, it is invalid. The removal of the bazichin from the table is the cutoff point, analogous to the kemitzah for the mincha.
The Gemara questions why this needs to be stated twice, as it is similar to the mincha case. It explains that one might have thought that since the kometz of levonah in the spoon is distinct and separate, it might be considered as if it was already removed from the moment of the Musaf prayer on Shabbat, even before physical removal. The Mishnah teaches that this is not the case; actual physical removal is required. Rashi clarifies that the removal of the bazichin from the table on Shabbat after Musaf is the equivalent of the kemitzah for the mincha.