Ramban on Leviticus 2:11

כָּל הַמִּנְחָה אֲשֶׁר תַּקְרִיבוּ לַה' לֹא תֵעָשֶׂה חָמֵץ אָסַר לְהָבִיא הַמִּנְחָה חָמֵץ, וְאַחַר כָּךְ אָמַר "לֹא תַקְטִירוּ מִמֶּנּוּ", לֶאֱסֹר שֶׁלֹּא יַחְמִיץ הַקֹּמֶץ וְיַקְטִירֶנּוּ וְיִכָּנֵס בִּכְלַל "לֹא תַקְטִירוּ מִמֶּנּוּ אִשֶּׁה". כָּל הַקְטָרָה לְשׁוֹן קְטֹרֶת הַסַּמִּים, שֶׁהַפַּטָּמִין אוֹמְרִים יָפֶה הָיָה הַדְּבַשׁ לַקְּטֹרֶת אֶלָּא שֶׁאֲסָרַתּוּ הַתּוֹרָה (תורת כהנים פרשה יב ד). וְאָמַר "מִמֶּנּוּ" לֶאֱסֹר מִקְצָתוֹ, כְּלוֹמַר חֲצִי קֹמֶץ, וְכֵן עַל עֵרוּבוֹ לוֹקֶה מֵרִבּוּי הַכָּתוּב שֶׁאָמַר "כִּי כָל שְׂאֹר וְכָל דְּבַשׁ" כְּמוֹ שֶׁמְּפֹרָשׁ בִּמְנָחוֹת (נח) וּבִפְסָחִים (מג). וְטַעַם הַכָּתוּב שֶׁיַּזְכִּיר "מִנְחָה הִיא" (פסוק ו טו) וְיִכְתֹּב "הוּא", וְכֵן בְּכָל מָקוֹם מִפָּרָשַׁת "הִנֵּה אָנֹכִי שֹׁלֵחַ מַלְאָךְ" (שמות כג כ), וְכֵן "הָאִשָּׁה הַהִוא" (במדבר ה לא דברים יז ה) בַּעֲבוּר שֶׁהַנְּקֵבָה בִּכְלַל הַזָּכָר בְּכֹחַ. וְטַעַם הַשְּׂאוֹר וְהַדְּבַשׁ יִתָּכֵן שֶׁהוּא כְּדִבְרֵי הָרַב בְּמוֹרֶה הַנְּבֻכִים (ג מו), אָמַר שֶׁמָּצָא בְּסִפְרֵיהֶם שֶׁהַמִּנְהָג הָיָה לְעוֹבְדֵי ע"ז לְהַקְרִיב כָּל מִנְחָתָם חָמֵץ וּלְעָרֵב הַדְּבַשׁ בְּכָל קָרְבְּנֵיהֶם, וְלָכֵן אֲסָרָם לַגָּבוֹהַּ. וְכָזֶה אָמְרוּ רַבּוֹתֵינוּ (ספרי שופטים קמו) בַּמַּצֵּבָה, שֶׁהָיְתָה נִבְחֶרֶת בִּימֵי הָאָבוֹת וְאַחַר כָּךְ שְׂנֵאָהּ הַשֵּׁם מִפְּנֵי שֶׁעֲשָׂאוּהָ חוֹק לַע"ז, כְּמוֹ שֶׁאָמַר "אֲשֶׁר שָׂנֵא ה' אֱלֹהֶיךָ" (דברים טז כב). וּבְטַעַם הַמֶּלַח אָמַר גַּם כֵּן בַּעֲבוּר שֶׁהֵם יִמְאֲסוּ אוֹתוֹ וְלֹא יַקְרִיבוּהוּ כְּלָל. וְיִתָּכֵן מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאֵינוֹ דֶּרֶךְ כָּבוֹד לִהְיוֹת לֶחֶם הַשֵּׁם תָּפֵל מִבְּלִי מֶלַח, כְּטַעַם "הַקְרִיבֵהוּ נָא לְפֶחָתֶךָ" (מלאכי א ח), וּלְפִיכָךְ מִעֲטוּ הָעֵצִים וְהַדָּם שֶׁאֵין טְעוּנִים מֶלַח (מנחות כ), אוֹ שֶׁיֵּשׁ בְּכָל אֵלֶּה סוֹד נֶעֱלָם מִמֶּנּוּ. וְאָמַר הַכָּתוּב בִּשְׂאוֹר וּדְבַשׁ לְשׁוֹן רַבִּים, כִּי עִם אַהֲרֹן וּבָנָיו יְדַבֵּר, וְחָזַר וְאָמַר "וְכָל קָרְבַּן מִנְחָתְךָ בַּמֶּלַח תִּמְלָח", כִּי יַחְזֹר אֶל מֵבִיא הַמִּנְחָה שֶׁאָמַר בּוֹ בִּתְחִלַּת הַפָּרָשָׁה (ויקרא ב':ז') "וְאִם מִנְחַת מַרְחֶשֶׁת קָרְבָּנֶךָ". וְהַטַּעַם כִּי הַמְּלִיחָה כְּשֵׁרָה בְּזָר, כְּמוֹ יְצִיקָה וּבְלִילָה. וְטַעַם "עַל כָּל קָרְבָּנְךָ" עַל כָּל קָרְבְּנוֹתֶיךָ, שֶׁכָּל הַקָּרְבָּנוֹת טְעוּנִין מֶלַח כְּמוֹ הַמִּנְחָה: NO MEAL-OFFERING, WHICH YE SHALL BRING UNTO THE ETERNAL, SHALL BE MADE WITH LEAVEN. Here He prohibited the bringing of a meal-offering in leaven form. After that He said, Ye shall not ‘thaktiru’ (cause to ascend in fumes) either any leaven or honey, in order to prohibit the leavening of the handful and burning it upon the altar, this being included in the expression ye shall not cause to ascend in fumes … All terms of haktarah are expressions of burning aromatics, for druggists say¹⁹⁹Torath Kohanim, Vayikra 12:4. that honey would have been appropriate for the incense,²⁰⁰This explains why the Torah uses here the term thaktiru. For since honey is mentioned in the verse, and honey would have improved the scent of the incense, Scripture uses a term which is applicable to the burning of aromatics. but the Torah prohibited it.²⁰¹In the words of the Talmud Yerushalmi (Yoma IV, 5): “Bar Kappara taught: Druggists in Jerusalem used to say: had the smallest amount of honey been put into the incense no one could have stood its scent.” Scripture states any of it in order to prohibit [leaven or honey] even as a part of it, that is to say, even in one half of the handful. Similarly, one is liable to the punishment of stripes for mixing [leaven or honey with the handful in such a way that it is not recognized], because Scripture included it in saying, for ye shall not cause to ascend in fumes ‘any’ leaven or ‘any’ honey, as is explained in Tractate Menachoth²⁰²Menachoth 58a. and in Tractate Pesachim.²⁰³Pesachim 43b.
The reason why Scripture mentions here minchah hi²⁰⁴Verse 6. — Actually the word is written hu [hei-vav-alef, which is the masculine third person pronoun], but it is read hi [hei-yod-alef, which is the equivalent feminine pronoun]. Ramban intends to explain why it is written in the masculine when the word minchah is in the feminine, and hence Scripture should have written minchah hi. [in the feminine] while it is written hu [in the masculine], and similarly in all places,²⁰⁵Further, Verse 15, etc. [will be understood]²⁰⁶So expressly stated in Abusaula’s commentary on the mystic passages in Ramban. — See Vol. I, Preface p. xii, Note 21. from the section, Behold, I send a messenger before thee.²⁰⁷Exodus 23:20. — Reference is to Verse 21 there, for My Name is in him (Abusaula). The implication is that here too one gender is included in the other, namely, the feminine hi in the masculine hu, as explained in the text. So also ‘ha’ishah hahi’ (that woman)²⁰⁸Deuteronomy 17:5. [is written hahu in the masculine, while it is read hahi in the feminine], because the feminine is potentially included in the masculine.
It is possible that the reason why we are forbidden to bring leaven and honey [upon the altar] is as the Rabbi [Moshe ben Maimon] states in the Moreh Nebuchim,²⁰⁹Guide of the Perplexed, III, 46. where he says that he found it written in their books that the custom among the idolaters was to offer all their meal-offerings only in leavened form, and to season all their sacrifices with honey; therefore He forbade bringing them on His altar. Our Rabbis have similarly said with reference to monuments [of one stone raised in order to sacrifice on it], that this was a favored mode of worship in the days of the patriarchs,²¹⁰See Genesis 28:18. and afterwards G-d hated it²¹¹Deuteronomy 16:22. because [the Canaanites] had made it an ordinance of an idolatrous character, as He said, which the Eternal thy G-d hatheth.²¹¹Deuteronomy 16:22.
Concerning the reason why we were commanded to offer salt with every offering,²¹²Verse 13. [Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon] also said²⁰⁹Guide of the Perplexed, III, 46. that it is because the idolaters rejected it and did not offer it at all to their idols; [therefore He commanded us to have salt in every offering]. It is possible that [we are commanded to offer salt because] it is not respectful that the food which is offered up to G-d should have no flavoring, being without salt,²¹³Job 6:6: Can that which hath no savor be eaten without salt? similar to that which is written, Present it now unto thy governor; will he be pleased with thee?²¹⁴Malachi 1:8. — “The Torah thus teaches us a rule of conduct — that Royal Majesty of heaven is similar to that on earth” (Bachya, in my edition Vol. II, p. 406). That is why the Sages excluded wood and blood²¹⁵Menachoth 21a. from the requirement of being offered with salt [since they are not edible]. Or it may be that there is in all these matters some secret hidden from us.
In the case of leaven and honey Scripture speaks in the plural [for ‘ye’ shall not cause to ascend in fumes, either any leaven or honey] because it speaks to Aaron and his sons. After that it says, And every meal-offering of ‘thine’ shalt ‘thou’ season with salt,²¹²Verse 13. because it refers to him who brings the meal-offering, concerning whom it said at the beginning of the section, And if thy offering be a meal-offering of the stewing-pan;²¹⁶Verse 7. and the reason [why it refers to salting by the person who brings the offering, is because] it is valid if done by a non-priest,²¹⁷In view of the fact that the salting was done on top of the altar, which no non-priest was allowed to approach, Ramban must mean that if it happened that the non-priest salted it before the offering was taken up to the altar, it need not be salted again. See my Hebrew commentary p. 18. just as pouring the oil and mingling it with the flour are [as explained above in Verse 2]. Upon all thine ‘offering’ thou shalt offer salt²¹⁸Verse 13. The word korbancha (thine offering) is in the singular. Since this might be interpreted to refer only to the meal-offering mentioned in this verse, Ramban proceeds to explain that it means here “offerings” in the plural, for all offerings etc. means “upon all thine offerings” [in the plural], for all offerings have to be offered with salt, just as the meal-offering.