Alternatively, [the sprinklings] without [in the Hekal] are directly inferred from [those ] within [the Holy of Holies]. (1) On the view that it does not (2) constitute a Hekkesh, it is well: hence it is written, Ye shall bring out of your dwellings [two] wave-loaves [of two tenth parts of an ephah etc]: (3) Now, ‘ye shall bring’ need not be said; (4) what then does ‘ye shall bring’ teach? Whatever you bring on another occasion (5) must be like this: as here a tenth [of an ephah] is used for hallah, so there (6) too a tenth is required for hallah. If so, as here two tenths are required, so there too two tenths are required? Therefore Scripture states, they shall be [of fine flour]. (7) We have thus learnt ten [tenths] for leavened [loaves]. Whence do we know ten [tenths] for unleavened loaves? Because it says, With cakes of leavened bread [he shall present his offering with the sacrifice of his peaceoffering for thanksgiving] (8) [which intimates,] Bring an equal quantity of unleavened as of leavened. (9) But on the view that it constitutes a Hekkesh, what can be said? (10) — ‘Ye shall bring’ is superfluous. (11) THE PASSOVER-OFFERING IS EATEN ONLY [etc]. Which Tanna [rules thus]? — Said R. Joseph, It is R. Eleazar b. ‘Azariah. For it was taught, R. Eleazar b. ‘Azariah said, [And they shall eat the flesh] in the night (12) is stated here, whilst elsewhere it is stated, For I will go through the land of Egypt in that night: (13) just as there it means by midnight, so here too it means by midnight. Said R. Akiba to him: Yet surely it is already stated, [and ye shall eat it] in haste, (14) [implying] until the time of haste? (15) If so, what is taught by ‘in that night’? You might think that it is like all [other] sacrifices, which are eaten by day: therefore it is stated ‘in [that] night’: it is eaten by night, but it may not be eaten by day. Said Abaye to him [R. Joseph]: How do you know that [the author of our Mishnah is] R. Eleazar b. ‘Azariah, while [the law is] Biblical. Perhaps the law is Rabbinical only, [the reason being] to prevent transgression? (16) — If so, why state, ONLY UNTIL MIDNIGHT? (17) But it means, It is as the other laws; (18) as those are Biblical, so is this Biblical. (19)

---

(1). ↑ And not via the animals at all.
(2). ↑ Emended text (Bah, Sh. M.).
(3). ↑ Lev. XXIII, 17.
(4). ↑ The text could read: And ye shall present a new offering unto the Lord (v. 16) out of your dwellings, etc.
(5). ↑ Lit., ‘from another place’.
(6). ↑ Lit., ‘as there... so here.’ The hallah (unleavened loaf) brought on another occasion (v. n. 4) is referred to as ‘here’, as that is the actual subject being discussed.
(7). ↑ Ibid. For the interpretation of this v. Men. 78a top.
(8). ↑ Lev. VII, 13.
(9). ↑ The preceding verses read: Then he shall offer... unleavened cakes mingled with oil, and unleavened wafers spread with oil, and cakes mingled with oil. When this is followed by ‘ With cakes of leavened bread’, etc., it yields a Hekkesh, whence we learn that the weight of the former must be the same as that of the latter.
(10). ↑ The wave-loaves brought on Pentecost were made of a tenth of an ephah of flour, and they were leavened. Now, the thanks-offering was accompanied by four kinds of loaves; v. Lev. VII, 12-14. These included a set of leavened loaves (the other three kinds were unleavened), but neither the actual number of each kind nor their weight is stated. By means of a gezerah shawah the Talmud deduces that there were the loaves of each kind, and from the superfluous ‘ye shall bring’ it infers that the leavened loaves were each to be made of a tenth of an ephah (these are those brought ‘on another occasion’), just like the two wave-loaves, so that ten tenths were required for all. Thus the number is not deduced by a Hekkesh but by a gezerah shawah, which is regarded as being explicitly stated in the subject itself, while the weight is learned by a Hekkesh (the superfluous ‘ye shall bring’). Then the Talmud infers by another Hekkesh that the weight of the unleavened loaves is the same (v. preceding note). The difficulty then is the same as the preceding on the number of sprinklings (v. p. 287, n. 3).
(11). ↑ Hence the fact that the loaves of the thanksoffering require a tenth of an ephah each is not regarded as an inference by a Hekkesh, but as though it were explicitly stated.
(12). ↑ Ex. XII, 8.
(13). ↑ Ibid. 12.
(14). ↑ Ibid, 11.
(15). ↑ I.e., when they had to make haste to leave Egypt, which was in the morning.
(16). ↑ Possibly this Tanna holds that by Scriptural law it may be eaten until morning, yet he gives the limit of midnight so as to make sure that one will not transgress by eating it in the morning.
(17). ↑ He should state, And it is eaten until midnight.
(18). ↑ Lit., ‘as there’. Sc. that it may only be eaten roast and by registered persons.
(19). ↑ Hence its author must be R. Eleazar b. ‘Azariah.