Menachos Daf 51 מנחוס דַף 51

A Baraisa darshens: "בשמן" – with oil (which is superfluous, since the passuk says it is fried on a מחבת, and would require a לוג of oil like any מנחת מחבת), להוסיף לה שמן – the extra word comes to add oil onto it beyond the standard amount, but does not indicate how much. Rebbe Yishmael the son of Rebbe Yochanan ben Berokah says that the passuk, "סלת מנחה תמיד" – fine flour as a minchah continually, compares it to the minchah brought with the korban tamid: just as the מנחת תמידין requires three לוגין of oil, so too the חביתי כהן גדול require three לוגין of oil. Rebbe Shimon says: ריבה כאן שמן – [the Torah] increased the oil required here for חביתין (based on the superfluous "בשמן"), וריבה במנחת כבשים שמן – and [the Torah] increased the oil required for the minchah of the lambs (i.e., the תמיד) beyond the standard לוג of oil for an עשרון of flour. Just as the תמיד requires three לוגין of oil for an עשרון of flour, so too חביתין require three לוגין of oil for their עשרון. We do not derive from a minchah of פרים and אילים to require two לוגין of oil per עשרון, because חביתין are more similar to מנחת תמיד, which is likewise one עשרון of flour, as opposed to the מנחה of פרים and אילים, which are multiple עשרונות.

The next Mishnah states that if no Kohen Gadol was appointed in place of a Kohen Gadol who died, משל מי היתה קריבה – from [whose funds] were the חביתין brought? Rebbe Shimon says it was brought משל ציבור – from the funds of the community, and Rebbe Yehudah says משל יורשין – from the [Kohen Gadol’s] heirs. These חביתין were brought whole (i.e., the entire עשרון was offered). Rebbe Yehudah derives his opinion from the passuk: והכהן המשיח תחתיו מבניו יעשה אותה – and if the anointed Kohen [dies], in his place, from [one of] his sons, he shall make it. They do not bring it in halves, like the Kohen Gadol did, because the passuk says "אותה" – it, implying they bring כולה ולא חציה – all of it, not half of it. Rebbe Shimon darshens חק עולם – an eternal law to teach משל עולם – it is funded from the community (when there is no Kohen Gadol).

The Gemara asks that Rebbe Shimon’s derashah in the Baraisa, which implies that the חביתין were funded (when there is no Kohen Gadol) from the community מדאורייתא, is contradicted by a Mishnah, in which Rebbe Shimon lists seven תקנות, including: ותנאי בי"ד הוא – it is a stipulation of Beis Din that כ"ג שמת ולא מינו כהן אחר תחתיו – if a Kohen Gadol dies, and they did not appoint another Kohen in his place, שתהא מנחתו קריבה משל ציבור – that his minchah (of חביתין) should be brought by communal funds. This proves that it is a Rabbinical enactment!? Rebbe Avahu answers that there were two תקנות: מדאורייתא, they were funded from the ציבור, but during the second Beis Hamikdash (when many unworthy Kohanim Gedolim purchased the position, and did not survive a full year), Beis Din saw it was draining on the funds of the לשכה, they enacted that the יורשים should fund the חביתין. Later, when they saw the יורשים were negligent in paying for it, they restored the Biblical law for the ציבור to fund the חביתין (and this is the "תקנה" to which Rebbe Shimon referred).