Menachos, Chapter 1, Mishnah 3. The Mishnah continues to discuss the various disqualifications that render a minchah invalid. The opening clause before us connects directly to the previous Mishnah, where we dealt with the required measures - not too much and not too little.
The measures of oil and frankincense:
The Mishnah states: "ribah shamnah, chisar shamnah, o chisar levonasah - pesulah" - if he added too much oil, reduced the oil, or reduced the frankincense, it is invalid. In other words, oil that is more or less than the required measure, and frankincense that is less than its measure, disqualify the minchah.
What are these measures? As we recall, the basic recipe for the flour minchah is one issaron of flour (about a gallon) and one log of olive oil (about half a liter).
Oil: less than a full log per issaron - invalid, as is derived in the Gemara's discussion. If he added more than a log - valid, provided that he did not reach two logs per issaron. In theory a person could donate a double portion, two issaronim of fine flour, in which case the measure would be two logs.
Frankincense: its measure is a kometz, a handful. Frankincense is the dried resin of the boswellia tree, and it looks like small pieces resembling yellow raisins in color and shape, and rock candy in their sheen. Each piece is called a "kort." After the fact, two korts suffice; less than two - invalid; and if he added more - valid, as long as there are not two handfuls here, as the Bartenura writes. It is worth noting that the Mishnah itself does not state this law explicitly.
Intentions that disqualify the minchah:
From here the Mishnah moves to a new topic. Those who have learned Maseches Zevachim will find familiar principles here; two lengthy Mishnayos are devoted to this subject. Let us first present the essentials, and afterward follow the language of the Mishnah.
In the first Mishnah we learned about the disqualification of "lo lishmah" - having in mind the wrong type of offering or the wrong person, which invalidates only the minchas chotei and the minchas kena'os. Here the Mishnah adds two further intentions, which disqualify any minchah: "chutz limkomo" - that it be eaten or burned in a place that is not fit, and "chutz lizmano" - that this be done at a time that is not fit. This refers specifically to the intention of the kohen performing the service; the intentions of the owner who brings the minchah have no effect whatsoever.
The four services that are indispensable in a minchah:
Kemitzah - removing the measure of a handful from the minchah.
Placing it in a vessel - placing the handful in a sanctified, designated service vessel.
Holachah - bringing the vessel, containing the handful and the frankincense, to the altar.
Haktarah - burning the handful and the frankincense upon the altar.
If during one of these four services the kohen has one of the two intentions - chutz limkomo or chutz lizmano - the minchah is disqualified. The intention alone disqualifies: it makes no difference whether he actually carried out his intention, whether he retracted it afterward, or whether he acted immediately. According to Rashi he must express his intention verbally, whereas according to the Rambam a thought in the heart is enough to disqualify.
Two forms of consumption:
From the verses we learned that there are two forms of eating here: the eating of a person and the eating of the altar. To picture this clearly, let us describe the order of the service from the beginning. The owner who brings the minchah takes an earthenware vessel, places the fine flour and the oil in it, mixes them together, and puts frankincense on top. He then hands the vessel with the minchah inside it to the kohen.
The kohen first brings the vessel to the southwest corner of the altar and presents it there - this is the 'hagashah', which is not counted among the services that are indispensable. Afterward he moves the frankincense to the side, scoops out a full handful of the fine flour and places it in a second service vessel that sanctifies it, adds the frankincense to it, carries the vessel to the altar, and burns the handful and the frankincense upon it. These are the four indispensable services. What remains in the first vessel is called 'shirayim' (remainders), and it is eaten by the kohanim.
The laws of eating the shirayim:
Who eats? Male kohanim only.
Where? In the Azarah (Temple courtyard) only.
When? On the day the minchah was offered and during the night that follows. Rabbinically until midnight, and by Torah law until dawn. If the minchah was offered on Monday, the shirayim may be eaten until nightfall, and from then until midnight by rabbinic law, and by Torah law until dawn of Tuesday. From that point on they become nosar because they were left overnight, and they are disqualified from being eaten.
These are the only options. A kohen who intends to eat the shirayim outside the Azarah - that is an intention of the wrong place; and one who intends to eat them after dawn of the following day - that is an intention of the wrong time.
So we find that there is here the eating of the kohen, which is of the shirayim, and the eating of the altar, which is of the handful and the frankincense burned upon it. Therefore four intentions disqualify: that he will eat the shirayim in a place that is not fit, outside the Azarah; that he will eat them at a time that is not fit, after dawn of the next day; that he will burn the handful or the frankincense in a place that is not fit, on an altar outside the Azarah; or that he will burn them at a time that is not fit - that is, from after nightfall of that night onward.
And this is the distinction: if the only disqualifying intention is that of the wrong time - this is piggul, and one who eats from the minchah is liable to kareis. But if an intention of the wrong place was joined to it as well - it is not piggul but merely disqualified: the minchah is invalidated and burned, it is not offered on the altar and is not eaten by the kohanim, but one who eats it transgresses only a general prohibition and is not liable to kareis. This is the essence of our Mishnah.
In the language of the Mishnah:
The Mishnah opens: "HaKometz es haMinchah" - a kohen who removes a handful from a minchah of fine flour, and while doing so has one of the following intentions:
"Le'echol shiyareha bachutz" - that he will eat the shirayim in a place that is not fit, outside the Azarah.
"O k'zayis mishiyareha bachutz" - and even if his intention is not about all the shirayim but only about an olive's volume, since the measure of an act of eating in the Torah is an olive's volume.
"Lehaktir kumtzah bachutz" - that he will burn the handful designated for the altar in the Azarah on an altar outside the Azarah.
"O k'zayis mikumtzah bachutz" - and even if he intends to burn only a single olive's volume of the handful outside the Azarah.
"O lehaktir levonah bachutz" - and even if his intention concerns only the burning of the frankincense outside the Azarah.
In all of these, the intention alone, at the time of the kemitzah, disqualifies the minchah. And the same law applies - even though the Mishnah does not state it explicitly - if he had this intention at the time of placing it in the vessel, at the time of carrying it to the altar, or at the time of burning it: in all of these the minchah is disqualified, regardless of what actually happened afterward. The Mishnah adds: "V'ein bo kareis" - one who eats from this disqualified offering transgresses a prohibition, but is not liable to kareis, since there was no intention of the wrong time here.
In contrast, if he intended:
"le'echol shayareha lemachar" or "kezayis mishayareha lemachar" - that he will eat the leftovers, or an olive's worth of them, after dawn of the following day.
"lehaktir kumtzah lemachar" or "kezayis mikumtzah lemachar" - that he will burn the handful, or an olive's worth of it, at a time that is not fit. Interestingly, with regard to the burning this does not mean specifically the next morning, but any hour after nightfall of that same night.
"o lehaktir levonah lemachar" - that he will burn the frankincense after nightfall.
In all of these cases the offering is piggul, and not merely invalid: one who eats from such an offering is liable to kareis.
"Zeh haklal":
The Mishnah sums up: "kol hakometz es hakometz ve'es halevonah venosnam bichli umehalech umaktir" - one who performs any of the four services that are indispensable: taking the handful, placing it in the sacred vessel, carrying the vessel with the handful and the frankincense to the altar, and burning it upon the altar. And while performing the service he intends "le'echol davar shedarko le'echol" - the leftovers, "o lehaktir davar shedarko lehaktir" - the handful or the frankincense. Then: if his intention was about a place that is not fit, outside the Courtyard - "chutz limkomo, pasul ve'ein bo kareis"; and if his intention was about a time that is not fit, tomorrow rather than today - "chutz lizmano, piggul vechayav alav kareis". The literal meaning of 'piggul' is something repulsive, and its intent is that the offering is invalid.
This wording must be examined precisely: if the kohen intended to eat the handful or to burn the leftovers at a place or time that is not fit, his intention is of no consequence. It is a condition that he intend the eating of something that is normally eaten, or the burning of something that is normally burned; but one who intends to eat the item that is normally burned, or to burn the item that is normally eaten - such an intention does not invalidate.
"Uvilvad sheyikrav hamatir kemitzvaso":
The meaning of this condition is that the law of piggul, which carries liability for kareis, applies specifically when the improper intention was solely an intention of chutz lizmano. But if another improper intention was mixed in with it, such as chutz limkomo, the status reverts to being merely invalid and not piggul, and there is no liability for kareis for eating it.
'The matir' is the handful and the frankincense, for before the kohanim may eat the leftovers of the minchah, that which permits it must first be offered - the burning of the handful and the frankincense upon the altar. Therefore it is required that the matir be offered "kemitzvaso", in the manner in which it was supposed to be offered, meaning that apart from the intention of chutz lizmano no other disqualification occurred with it.
"Keitzad karav hamatir kemitzvaso?":
The Mishnah brings examples of a case in which the matir, the handful and the frankincense, was brought in the manner in which it was supposed to be brought - without any disqualification beyond the intention of chutz lizmano:
"kamatz bishtikah" - the taking of the handful was performed without any irregular occurrence (the literal meaning is "in silence", and most commentators explain that there was no improper intention at all), "venasan bichli vehilech vehiktir chutz lizmano" - and during one of the subsequent services he had an intention of chutz lizmano, such as that he would eat the leftovers at a time that is not fit. This is piggul.
"o shekamatz chutz lizmano" - he had an improper intention regarding time at the time of taking the handful, the first of the four services, "venasan bichli vehilech vehiktir bishtikah" - and the other three services were performed without any improper intention. This too is piggul, for there was one intention of chutz lizmano here, and that is enough.
"o shekamatz venasan bichli vehilech vehiktir chutz lizmano" - he had an intention of chutz lizmano during all four services, and no other disqualification occurred. "Zehu shekarav hamatir kemitzvaso" - the matir was offered in its proper manner, apart from the intention regarding time, and this is piggul.
In the next Mishnah we will see the other side: how the matir is not offered in its proper manner, when additional disqualifications become mixed in with the intention of chutz lizmano.