Menachot 58

Both leaven and honey are forbidden components of a mincha. As Leviticus 2:11 tells it, “No grain offering that you offer to God shall be made with leaven, for no leaven or honey may be turned into smoke as an offering by fire to God.”

Today’s daf asks: What kind of punishment is in order if you mix both leaven and honey into your meal offering? Rava suggests the following:

With regard to one who offers up a mixture made of leaven and of honey on the altar, Rava says: He is flogged one set due to the prohibition against sacrificing leaven, and he is flogged a second set due to the prohibition against sacrificing honey, and he is flogged a third set due to the prohibition against sacrificing mixtures of leaven, and he is flogged a fourth set due to the prohibition against sacrificing mixtures of honey.

Rava argues that there are no less than four distinct violations here! Two violations for sacrificing a forbidden ingredient, and two for incorporating it into a sacrifice. All four, he asserts, are punished with a set of lashes. But Abaye disagrees:

One is not flogged for a general prohibition.

Let’s unpack this a bit. As we’ve seen in numerous other places scattered throughout the Talmud, violations of general commandments can garner consequences, but not lashes. And according to Abaye, Leviticus 2:11 is a general commandment. What does he mean by this? The answer is technical. There are a number of difficult kinds of general prohibitions, but a common format is a negative commandment with multiple components. Leviticus 2:11 prohibits burning and incorporating honey and incorporating leaven, so Abaye sees this as a general commandment. And since it’s a general commandment, violations are not punished with lashes.

There are those who say that Abaye concedes that in any event the offender is flogged with one set of lashes for sacrificing leaven.

Although Abaye argues that Leviticus 2:11 is a general commandment, and therefore no flogging is prescribed for one who violates it, some report that he concedes to his colleague that there may be a case for doling out one set of lashes — but not four. Others, however, say he holds a hard line against lashes.

So how do later halakhic authorities rule? In nearly all talmudic debates between Abaye and Rava, Rava wins. And yet, in this case, later legal deciders do not hand him a clear victory. In one section of the Mishneh Torah, (Things Forbidden on the Altar 5:1) Maimonides holds that lashes can be applied for either a honey or leaven violation, but adding both to a mincha doesn’t incur a second set of lashes. Elsewhere (The Sanhedrin and the Penalties within Their Jurisdiction 18:2), however, he says that a general prohibition doesn’t allow for lashes as punishment at all. And to add to the confusion, Rashi and the Tosafot embrace a second set of lashes for a violation of the second part of the commandment. While this doesn’t resolve the dispute, there appears to be little appetite for Rava’s stance, and no later halakhic authority seems to endorse all four sets of lashes.

Read all of Menachot 58 on Sefaria.

This piece originally appeared in a My Jewish Learning Daf Yomi email newsletter sent on March 10, 2026. If you are interested in receiving the newsletter, sign up here.