Study Menachot folio 93A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
if the repeated term “his offering” is not needed to counter the a fortiori inferences, why do I need these 3 verses? The Talmud explains: One instance of “his offering” teaches that one places hands only on one’s own offering, but not on an offering of another person. Another instance of “his offe
§ The Mishnah states: If the owner of an offering died, then the heir is regarded as the offering’s owner. Therefore, he places his hands on the offering and brings the accompanying libations, and he can substitute a non-sacred animal for it. Although it is prohibited to perform an act of substituti
Rav Ḥananya taught a baraita in the presence of Rava: An heir does not place hands on an offering he inherited, and an heir cannot substitute a non-sacred animal for an offering he inherited. Rava asked: But didn’t we learn in the Mishnah: The heir places his hands on the offering, and brings the ac
Rav Ḥananya said to Rava: Should I reverse the current version of the baraita to have it be in accordance with the Mishnah? Rava said to him: No, as whose opinion is expressed in the Mishnah? It is the opinion of R' Yehuda, as it is taught in a baraita: An heir places hands, and an heir can effect
The Talmud clarifies: What is the reasoning of R' Yehuda? He expounds the term “his offering” as teaching that one places hands only on one’s own offering, but not on one’s father’s offering that one inherited. And furthermore, R' Yehuda derives the halakha concerning who can substitute a non-sacre