Study Menachot folio 8A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
And if it is so that R' Elazar holds that blood may not be sanctified in halves, let him derive the halakha of the High Priest’s griddle-cake offering from that of blood. And if you would say that in this case R' Elazar does not derive the halakha of the matter of a meal offering from that of anothe
The Talmud responds: R' Elazar does derive the halakha with regard to a meal offering from that of another meal offering; the shewbread is considered a meal offering. But he does not derive the halakha with regard to a meal offering from that of blood.
The Talmud asks: And does R' Elazar derive the halakha of one meal offering from that of another meal offering? But isn’t it taught in a baraita: If before the priest detached the arrangement of shewbread and the bowls of frankincense from upon the Table, the bread broke into pieces, the bread is un
The Talmud continues: And R' Elazar says: When the baraita refers to the detachment of the shewbread, it does not mean that the priest actually detached it. Rather, it means that once the time to detach it has arrived, even though he has not yet detached it and has not removed the bowls, it is con
The Talmud explains its question: And if R' Elazar derives the halakha of one meal offering from another, why does he say that frankincense contained in the bowls is burned in a case where the shewbread broke when the time to detach the bread had arrived? It should be like the case of a meal offerin