Before us is Mishnah 5, the final mishnah of chapter 12. At the end of the previous mishnah we learned that a person may donate wine and bring it as a sacrifice in its own right, a voluntary offering. From here the question arises: what is the law regarding oil?
Oil is essentially similar to wine: it too is a liquid, and it too comes as part of the meal offering that accompanies the libations. But there is a fundamental difference between them. Wine, when it is offered as part of the ordinary libations that accompany an olah or a shelamim, stands on its own - wine that is poured through the hole in the small basin at the base of the altar. Oil, by contrast, does not stand on its own: it is mixed into the fine flour, and the two are offered together as a meal offering.
Fine flour on its own - everyone knows that it can be donated, for that is simply a meal offering of fine flour. The question is whether one can donate oil on its own, and on this the Tannaim disagreed.
The view of Rabbi Akiva:
Rabbi Akiva holds that one does not donate oil. The basis for this is the principle we learned, that a voluntary offering comes as an imitation: the verse "kol ha'ezrach ya'aseh kachah" - every native shall do so in this manner - teaches that the donor must imitate what he would have done had he brought an ordinary meal offering with libations. Wine can be imitated and brought on its own, for that is the way it is normally offered; but oil on its own does not exist at all, and therefore there is nothing here to imitate, and it is never possible to bring oil on its own.
The view of Rabbi Tarfon:
Rabbi Tarfon disagrees, and in his view there is a derivation from the verse in Vayikra (chapter 2, verse 1): "venefesh ki takriv korban minchah" - and when a person brings a meal offering as a sacrifice. The word "korban" appears superfluous, and it comes to include the offering of a meal offering of oil brought on its own. In his opinion, then, the verse permits donating oil on its own.
Naturally, since Rabbi Akiva does not accept this derivation, one might have thought that the discussion ends here. But Rabbi Tarfon seeks to persuade Rabbi Akiva that even according to his own approach one can bring a meal offering of oil as a voluntary offering on its own, and this by another route - through the derivation of "mah matzinu," also known as a "binyan av."
"Mah matzinu" and the pircha:
"Mah matzinu" is one of the thirteen principles by which the Torah is expounded, and it is the weakest of them. It can be translated, with a touch of humor, as: "Hey, why not?" That is: wine is a liquid that comes with the meal offering of libations, and it can be brought on its own; oil is likewise a component of the meal offering of libations - why should it not also be brought on its own? Wine serves as the prototype, and oil should be no different from it: just as we find with wine, so it should be with oil.
Since this is a weak derivation, there is always the possibility of a pircha, that is, a refutation. For the entire force of "mah matzinu" lies in the claim that the two cases look similar and therefore should be equated; and the pircha responds: they are not truly similar, for some essential reason. And once an essential difference is found, the derivation collapses and the binyan av does not apply. This is precisely the flow of our mishnah: Rabbi Tarfon seeks to apply the "mah matzinu" of wine on its own to oil on its own, and Rabbi Akiva rejects this and argues that they are not comparable, since wine is offered on its own and oil is not.
The text of the Mishnah:
"Misnadvim yayin ve'ein misnadvim shemen, divrei Rabbi Akiva" - one may bring a voluntary offering of wine on its own, as we learned in the previous mishnah, but one may not bring olive oil on its own.
"Rabbi Tarfon omer: misnadvim shemen" - not only wine, whose law is derived from "kol ha'ezrach ya'aseh kachah," but oil as well, based on the inclusion implied by the word "korban" in the verse "venefesh ki takriv korban minchah."
"Amar Rabbi Tarfon: mah matzinu b'yayin sheba chovah uva nedavah, af shemen ba chovah uva nedavah" - just as with wine everyone agrees that it comes both as an obligation, as part of the libations of an olah and shelamim, and as a voluntary offering on its own, so too the oil, which comes as an obligation with the libations of every olah and shelamim, should also be able to come as a voluntary offering on its own.
"Amar lo Rabbi Akiva: imar b'yayin sheken hu karev chovaso bifnei atzmo, tomar b'shemen she'eino karev chovaso bifnei atzmo" - wine, when it comes as an obligation with the libations of an olah and shelamim, is offered by itself; oil, however, is never offered by itself, but is mixed into the fine flour. Because of this there is a refutation, and the derivation does not stand.
The practical halachah:
The halachah is ruled like Rabbi Tarfon, and we accept his derivation: a person may donate oil and bring it as a meal offering on its own. And how is this done? The donor brings his oil, and the kohen takes a kometz from it. According to Rashi and Tosafos this is literal: the kohen inserts his hand in the manner of kemitzah and takes a full three fingers of oil; the oil is salted, and afterward thrown onto the fire of the altar. It is not poured into the basin at the southwestern corner as wine is, because the voluntary offering must mirror what is done with a regular libation meal offering: kemitzah, salting, and placing on the fire itself.
The Tosafos Yom Tov asked the obvious question: how can one take a kometz from a liquid? He therefore suggested that in practice one throws onto the fire the measure of a kometz of oil. However, the language of Rashi and Tosafos implies that one actually does take a kometz with the fingers in the manner of a regular kemitzah, salts it, and throws it into the flames.
Partnership in offerings:
At the conclusion of the mishnah an entirely new point is introduced: a person may join together with his friend, and even with ten friends, and bring a voluntary offering along with them - but not a meal offering. The reason for this is the wording of the verse regarding meal offerings: "venefesh ki takriv korban minchah" - "venefesh" means a single individual, and from here we learn that a meal offering is brought by an individual alone, one meal offering per person. Regarding the other offerings this limiting word was not stated, and therefore two people may join together and bring an olah or shelamim in partnership, and even ten partners may bring among them a single olah or a single shelamim.
There is thus no possibility of two people joining together and bringing one meal offering in partnership, because of that verse. And so too with birds: one may donate even a single bird in partnership, one young dove. The novelty is that bird offerings generally come in a pair, but when one donates only a single bird, others may join in it, and even ten people may share one young dove, and this is binding - whereas with a meal offering there is no possibility of partnership.
Precision in the wording of the mishnah and the opinion of the Rambam:
From the precise wording of the mishnah - "ein shnayim misnadvim isaron echad" - it would seem that the problem is specifically with a single isaron, and there is room to infer that if the meal offering consists of two esronim it may be brought in partnership: this one pays for one isaron and that one pays for one isaron, and it is offered as a single meal offering between the two of them.
However, the Rambam rules simply as explained above: "venefesh ki takriv korban minchah" - one meal offering per person. Therefore, even if the meal offering consists of two esronim, two people cannot share it; rather, one meal offering per person, regardless of the number of esronim it contains.
In summary: in this mishnah Rabbi Akiva and Rabbi Tarfon disagree about a meal offering of oil brought as a voluntary offering on its own: Rabbi Akiva rejects it, since oil is never offered by itself and there is no parallel here to the libation meal offering; Rabbi Tarfon permits it based on the derivation from "korban minchah," and the halachah follows him. We examined the "mah matzinu" derivation and the refutation that rejects it, the manner in which the oil meal offering is brought through kemitzah, salting and throwing onto the fire, and the law of partnership: with an olah, a shelamim and even a bird one may donate in partnership, whereas with a meal offering - one meal offering per person.