Menachot 90

The Temple had measuring cups for liquids and for dry goods. From a mishnah on today’s daf, we learn that the two sets have significant differences:

With regard to measuring vessels for liquids, their overflows are sacred. But with regard to measuring vessels for dry substances, their overflows are not sacred.

Rabbi Akiva says the measuring vessels for liquids are sacred, therefore their overflows are sacred, and since the measuring vessels for dry substances are not sacred, therefore their overflows are non-sacred.

Rabbi Yosei says the difference is not due to that factor. Rather, it is because the overflow of liquid was originally inside the vessel and then displaced, whereas the overflow of a dry substance was not displaced (from inside the vessel).

The mishnah states a simple rule: If a priest fills a measuring vessel with liquid that which spills over, that which runs down the outside of the vessel becomes sanctified and must be collected and used for sacred purposes. Not so for dry goods, however. When they spill over the edge of measuring cups, they are still considered ordinary. 

Then, to all appearances, the mishnah offers two explanations for this rule. Rabbi Akiva teaches that it has to do with whether the vessels consecrate the things they measure. Liquid measuring cups are sacred, imparting that sanctity to their contents — even the overflows. But measuring cups for dry goods are not sacred and, consequently, neither are their spilled contents. Rabbi Yosei, however, disagrees with this explanation. In his view, the difference has nothing to do with the status of the vessels, but rather the physics of pouring. Liquids that overflow, he reasons, come from within the vessel. If you pour liquid into a cup that is full, it displaces the liquid that was already there. Therefore, the overflow is comprised of liquid that was truly within the vessel — and therefore has been sanctified. Excess dry goods, however, do not enter the vessel; they simply fall off the top. Never having been within the vessel itself, they do not become sacred. 

Unsurprisingly, the Gemara probes the nature of this disagreement. The Gemara’s answer is a bit of a surprise, however, as it suggests an entirely new reading of the mishnah:

The first tanna holds that the measuring vessels for liquid items were anointed and thereby consecrated both on the inside and on the outside. The measuring vessels for dry items were anointed and consecrated only on the inside, but were not anointed on the outside. 

And Rabbi Akiva holds that the measuring vessels for liquid items were anointed on the inside and were not anointed on the outside, whereas the measuring vessels for dry items were not anointed at all.

And Rabbi Yosei holds that both types of measuring vessels were anointed only on the inside but were not anointed on the outside.

The Gemara doesn’t read the mishnah as presenting a rule followed by two explanations for it, but as three different opinions! And instead of seeing Rabbi Akiva and Rabbi Yosei as disagreeing about whether the ruling is dictated by the status of the various vessels or the physics of pouring, it suggests their disagreement is actually about which parts of the vessels have been anointed — the entire vessel, just the inside or none of the vessel. This doesn’t give us an answer to how things were done in the Temple of the past or how they should be done in any future Temple. Instead, it does the opposite, raising even more possibilities.

Read all of Menachot 90 on Sefaria.

This piece originally appeared in a My Jewish Learning Daf Yomi email newsletter sent on April 11, 2026. If you are interested in receiving the newsletter, sign up here.