Mishneh Torah — Sacrificial Procedure הלכות מעשה הקרבנות, Chapter 17

הַנּוֹדֵר מִנְחָה מַאֲפֵה תַּנּוּר לֹא יָבִיא מאֲפֵה כֻּפָּח וְלֹא מַאֲפֵה רְעָפִים וְלֹא מַאֲפֵה יוֹרוֹת הָעַרְבִיִּים:

When a person vows to bring a meal-offering baked in an oven, he should not bring one baked in a kopach, 5:9)]. one baked on rafters,).or one baked in Arab pits.). These are not acceptable, because the person took a vow that he would bring a meal offering cooked in an oven and these devices do not fit that description.

הָאוֹמֵר הֲרֵי עָלַי בְּמַחֲבַת וְהֵבִיא בְּמַרְחֶשֶׁת. בְּמַרְחֶשֶׁת וְהֵבִיא בְּמַחֲבַת. מַה שֶּׁהֵבִיא הֵבִיא וִידֵי חוֹבָתוֹ לֹא יָצָא. וְאִם אָמַר זוֹ לְהָבִיא בְּמַרְחֶשֶׁת וֶהֱבִיאָהּ בְּמַחֲבַת. אוֹ בְּמַחֲבַת וֶהֱבִיאָהּ בְּמַרְחֶשֶׁת. הֲרֵי זוֹ פְּסוּלָה. וְכֵן כָּל כַּיּוֹצֵא בָּזֶה. וְכֵן הָאוֹמֵר הֲרֵי עָלַי שְׁנֵי עֶשְׂרוֹנוֹת לַהֲבִיאָן בִּכְלִי אֶחָד וֶהֱבִיאָן בִּשְׁנֵי כֵּלִים. בִּשְׁנֵי כֵּלִים וֶהֱבִיאָן בִּכְלִי אֶחָד. מַה שֶּׁהֵבִיא הֵבִיא וִידֵי חוֹבָתוֹ לֹא יָצָא. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים כג כד) "כַּאֲשֶׁר נָדַרְתָּ לַה'":

When one says: "I promise to bring a meal offering [baked] on a flat frying-pan," and he brings one [baked] in a deep frying-pan or he promised to bring one [baked] in a deep frying-pan and brought one [baked] on a flat frying-pan, [the sacrifice] he brought is acceptable, but he did not fulfill his obligation.If he said: "I will bring these [baked] in a deep frying-pan and brings them [baked] on a flat frying-pan or promised to bring it [baked] on a flat frying-pan and brought it [baked] in a deep frying-pan," [the sacrifice] is unacceptable. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.Similarly, if a person says: "I promise to bring two esronim in one vessel and he brings them in two vessels" or "...in two vessels" and he brings them in one vessel, [the sacrifice] he brought is acceptable, but he did not fulfill his obligation. [The rationaleis that Deuteronomy 23:24] states: "As you vowed to G‑d."

אָמַר אֵלּוּ לְהָבִיא בִּכְלִי אֶחָד וְהֵבִיא בִּשְׁנֵי כֵּלִים אוֹ לְהָבִיא בִּשְׁנֵי כֵּלִים וְהֵבִיא בִּכְלִי אֶחָד הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ פְּסוּלִין. לֹא קְבָעָן בִּשְׁעַת הַנֵּדֶר אֶלָּא אָמַר הֲרֵי עָלַי שְׁנֵי עֶשְׂרוֹנוֹת וּבִשְׁעַת הַפְרָשָׁה קְבָעָן וְהִפְרִישָׁן בִּשְׁנֵי כֵּלִים וְחָזַר וֶהֱבִיאָן בִּכְלִי אֶחָד הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ כְּשֵׁרִים שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים כג כד) "כַּאֲשֶׁר נָדַרְתָּ" וְלֹא כַּאֲשֶׁר הִפְרַשְׁתָּ. אָמַר הֲרֵי עָלַי שְׁנֵי עֶשְׂרוֹנוֹת לְהָבִיא בִּכְלִי אֶחָד וֶהֱבִיאָן בִּשְׁנֵי כֵּלִים. אָמְרוּ לוֹ בִּכְלִי אֶחָד נָדַרְתָּ. הִקְרִיבָם בִּשְׁנֵי כֵּלִים הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ פְּסוּלִין. הִקְרִיבָם בִּכְלִי אֶחָד הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ כְּשֵׁרִים:

If he said: "I will bring these cakes in one vessel" and he brought them in two or [promised] to bring them in two and brought them in one, they are unacceptable.If he did not specify what he would bring when he took the vow, but [merely] said: "I promise to bring two esronim and when he designated [the meal for the offering], he set [the flour] aside in two vessels and afterwards, brought it in one vessel, it is acceptable. For the verse states "as you vowed" and not "as you set aside."When he said: "I promise to bring two esronim in one vessel," but he brought them in two, if despite being told that he vowed to bring them in one vessel, he offered them in two, they are not acceptable. If he brought them in one vessel, they are acceptable.

אָמַר הֲרֵי עָלַי שְׁנֵי עֶשְׂרוֹנוֹת לְהָבִיא בִּשְׁנֵי כֵּלִים וְהֵבִיא בִּכְלִי אֶחָד. אָמְרוּ לוֹ בִּשְׁנֵי כֵּלִים נָדַרְתָּ. הִקְרִיבָן בִּשְׁנֵי כֵּלִים הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ כְּשֵׁרִים. הִקְרִיבָן בִּכְלִי אֶחָד הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ כִּשְׁתֵּי מְנָחוֹת שֶׁנִּתְעָרְבוּ:

When he said: "I promise to bring two esronim in two vessels," but he brought them in one, if after being told that he vowed to bring them in two vessel, he offered them in two, they are acceptable. If he brought them in one vessel, they are like two meal-offerings that became mixed together. 11:29, the law is that if one can take handfuls of each individually, they are acceptable. If not, they are not.

האוֹמֵר הֲרֵי עָלַי מִנְחָה. יָבִיא אַחַת מֵחֲמֵשֶׁת מִינֵי מְנָחוֹת הַבָּאוֹת בְּנֵדֶר וּנְדָבָה. אָמַר הֲרֵי עָלַי מְנָחוֹת יָבִיא שְׁנֵי (מִינֵי) מְנָחוֹת מֵחֲמִשְׁתָּן. אָמַר הֲרֵי עָלַי מִין מְנָחוֹת יָבִיא שְׁנֵי מְנָחוֹת מִמִּין אֶחָד. הֲרֵי עָלַי מִינֵי מְנָחוֹת יָבִיא שְׁתֵּי מְנָחוֹת מִשְּׁנֵי מִינִים. וְכֵן אִם אָמַר מִינֵי מִנְחָה יָבִיא שְׁנֵי מִינִין. קָבַע נִדְרוֹ בְּמִין מֵהֶן וּשְׁכָחוֹ מֵבִיא חֲמִשְּׁתָן:

If one says: "I promise to bring a meal-offering," he should bring one of the five types of meal-offerings that can be either vowed or pledged. If he says: "I promise to bring meal-offerings," he should bring two of the five types of meal-offerings. suggests that the word "types" is a printing error, because even if he brought two of the same type of meal-offering, he fulfilled his obligation. The Radbaz, however, initially explains that the Rambam's wording could be interpreted as being precise. Since the person said two meal-offerings, we can assume that he meant of two different types. Otherwise, he would have just vowed to bring one large meal-offering. Nevertheless, ultimately, the Radbaz rejects this interpretation and states that the Rambam's intent is "even of two types," i.e., he may bring two offerings either of one type or of two types. If he says: "I promise to bring a type of meal-offerings," he should bring two meal-offerings of one type. If he says: "I promise to bring types of meal-offerings," he should bring two meal-offerings [coming] from two types. Similarly if he says: "...types of a meal-offering," he should bring two types of meal-offerings. notes that this matter is debated by Menachot 105a and a ruling is not reached. Hence he questions how the Rambam can require him to bring a second offering: If it is not required, he will be bringing ordinary flour into the Temple Courtyard (which is forbidden). Hence he maintains that the person must make a stipulation when bringing this offering: "If I am obligated to bring it, this is to fulfill my vow. And if I am not obligated, it is a freewill offering." If he specified that he would bring one type [of meal-offering] and forgot [which type he specified], he should bring all five types.

אֵין הַיָּחִיד מֵבִיא מִנְחָה בִּכְלִי אֶחָד יוֹתֵר מִשִּׁשִּׁים עִשָּׂרוֹן. וְאִם נָדַר יוֹתֵר מִשִּׁשִּׁים מֵבִיא שִׁשִּׁים בִּכְלִי אֶחָד וְהַשְּׁאָר בִּכְלִי שֵׁנִי. שֶׁאֵין יְכוֹלִין לְהִבָּלֵל כְּאֶחָד אֶלָּא שִׁשִּׁים אֲבָל יֶתֶר עַל שִׁשִּׁים אֵין נִבְלָלִין. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין הַבְּלִילָה מְעַכֶּבֶת כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ אָמְרוּ חֲכָמִים כָּל הָרָאוּי לְבִילָה אֵין הַבִּילָה מְעַכֶּבֶת בּוֹ וְכָל שֶׁאֵינוֹ רָאוּי לְבִילָה הַבִּילָה מְעַכֶּבֶת בּוֹ:

A private individual should not bring more than sixty esronim [of flour] in one vessel as a meal offering. If he vowed more than sixty, he should bring sixty in one vessel and the remainder in a second vessel.[The rationale is that] no more than sixty [esronim of flour] can be mixed together [with oil as one]. to every isaron (Chapter 12, Halachah 7), nevertheless, if there is a very large quantity of flour, it will be difficult to get a proper mixture. It is not an absolute requirement for [the flour and the oil] to be mixed together as we explained. Nevertheless, our Sages said: 18b; 103b. "Whenever a [meal-offering] is fit to be mixed [with oil], it is not an absolute requirement for it to be mixed. Whenever it is not fit to be mixed [with oil], mixing it is an absolute requirement." 82a.

אָמַר הֲרֵי עָלַי מֵאָה וְעֶשְׂרִים וְאֶחָד עִשָּׂרוֹן מֵבִיא מֵאָה וְעֶשְׂרִים בִּשְׁנֵי כֵּלִים שִׁשִּׁים בְּכָל כְּלִי וּמֵבִיא עִשָּׂרוֹן אֶחָד בַּכְּלִי הַשְּׁלִישִׁי. אָמַר הֲרֵי עָלַי עִשָּׂרוֹן יָבִיא עִשָּׂרוֹן אֶחָד. הֲרֵי עָלַי עֶשְׂרוֹנוֹת יָבִיא שְׁנַיִם. פֵּרֵשׁ נִדְרוֹ וְשָׁכַח כַּמָּה עִשָּׂרוֹן פֵּרֵשׁ יָבִיא שִׁשִּׁים עִשָּׂרוֹן בִּכְלִי אֶחָד. שָׁכַח כַּמָּה עִשָּׂרוֹן פֵּרֵשׁ וּבְאֵי זֶה מִין קְבָעוֹ. הֲרֵי זֶה מֵבִיא שִׁשִּׁים עִשָּׂרוֹן מִכָּל מִין וָמִין מֵחֲמִשְׁתָּן:

If one says: "I promise to bring 121 esronim [as a meal offering]." He should bring 120 [esronim] in two vessels - 60 in each vessel - and one isaron in a third vessel.If he said: "I promise to bring an isaron," he should bring one isaron. "I promise to bring isaronim," he should bring two. If he specified [the number of esronim] he vowed and then forgot how many he specified, he should bring 60 esronim in one vessel. and if he had promised a lesser amount, bringing more will not disqualify his offering (Radbaz). If he forgot how many esronim he specified and which type [of meal-offering] he specified, he should bring 60 esronim of each of the five types [of meal-offerings].

קָבַע נִדְרוֹ וְשָׁכַח כַּמָּה עֶשְׂרוֹנוֹת נָדַר וּבְכַמָּה כֵּלִים נָדַר הֲרֵי זֶה מֵבִיא מֵאֶחָד וְעַד שִׁשִּׁים בְּשִׁשִּׁים כֵּלִים. כֵּיצַד. מֵבִיא עִשָּׂרוֹן אֶחָד בִּכְלִי רִאשׁוֹן וּשְׁנֵי עֶשְׂרוֹנִים בִּכְלִי שֵׁנִי וּשְׁלֹשָׁה עֶשְׂרוֹנִים בַּשְּׁלִישִׁי עַד שֶׁיִּהְיוּ עַד שִׁשִּׁים עִשָּׂרוֹן בַּכְּלִי הָאַחֲרוֹן. וְאִם שָׁכַח אַף בְּאֵי זֶה מִין קָבַע מֵבִיא עַל סֵדֶר זֶה שִׁשִּׁים כֵּלִים מִכָּל מִין וְנִמְצָא מֵבִיא מִכָּל מִין אֶלֶף וּשְׁמוֹנֶה מֵאוֹת וּשְׁלֹשִׁים עִשָּׂרוֹן:

If he specified his vow and forgot both how many esronim he vowed and the number of vessels in which he vowed to bring them, he should bring [the full range of] one to sixty esronim in sixty different vessels. in two vessels and he brought them in one, the offering is unacceptable. By bringing the full range of vessels from one to sixty, the person will certainly have included the entire number he vowed to bring. Any extra are considered as voluntary offerings.The Radbaz notes that there is a difference of opinion concerning this matter in Menachot 13:2 and the opinion the Rambam quotes here is that of Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi. The Sages, however, differ and maintain that it is sufficient to bring one meal offering of 60 esronim. The Radbaz questions why the Rambam chooses to follow Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi's view, for it is a minority opinion. Moreover, he notes that in the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah, he explicitly states that the halachah does not follow this view. The Radbaz explains that since the Talmud (Menachot 106a) tries to justify other teachings according to Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi's view, we can assume that it is accepted as halachah.What is implied? He should bring one isaron in the first vessel, two esronim in the second vessel, three in the third, until he brings 60 esronim in the last vessel. If he also forgot what type [of meal-offering] he designated, he should also brings [60 offerings] according to this pattern in 60 vessels of each type. Thus he will be bringing 1830 esronim from each type.

הָאוֹמֵר הֲרֵי עָלַי מִנְחַת שְׂעוֹרִים אוֹ מִנְחַת חֲצִי עִשָּׂרוֹן אוֹ מִנְחַת בְּלֹא שֶׁמֶן וּלְבוֹנָה הֲרֵי זֶה פָּטוּר. שֶׁלֹּא הִתְנַדֵּב דָּבָר שֶׁכָּמוֹהוּ מַקְרִיבִין. אָמַר הֲרֵי עָלַי מִנְחָה מִן הַשְּׂעוֹרִים אוֹ מִן הָעֲדָשִׁים אוֹ מִנְחָה בְּלֹא שֶׁמֶן וּלְבוֹנָה אוֹ מִנְחָה חֲצִי עִשָּׂרוֹן. שׁוֹאֲלִין אוֹתוֹ אִם אָמַר לֹא נָדַרְתִּי אֶלָּא עַל דַּעַת שֶׁמֻּתָּר לְהַקְרִיב כָּזֶה וְאִלּוּ יָדַעְתִּי שֶׁאֵין מַקְרִיבִין אֶלָּא עִשָּׂרוֹן שָׁלֵם סלֶת בְּשֶׁמֶן וּלְבוֹנָה לֹא הָיִיתִי נוֹדֵר הֲרֵי זֶה פָּטוּר. וְאִם אָמַר אִלּוּ הָיִיתִי יוֹדֵעַ הָיִיתִי נוֹדֵר כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁמַּקְרִיבִין הֲרֵי זֶה חַיָּב לְהַקְרִיב כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁמַּקְרִיבִין:

When a person says: "I promise to bring a meal-offering of barley," and the omer offering. Those are obligatory offerings and cannot be vowed by a person."...a meal-offering of a half an isaron," (Chapter 12, Halachah 5). or "...a meal-offering without oil or frankincense," he is exempt, because he did not vow an entity that is sacrificed.If he said: "I promise to bring a meal-offering ("meal-offering of"), as in the first clause he is not obligated at all, for the grammatical structure of the term is that of an adjective and the emphasis is on the words that follow. If, however, he used the term minchah ("meal-offering"), we assume that the fundamental intent of his vow was to bring a meal-offering. Since the specifics he mentioned were unacceptable, we ask him to clarify his intent. The Ra'avad does not accept this distinction, but the Radbaz and the Kessef Mishneh explain the Rambam's position. of barley," "...of lentils,"103a debates whether a person could possibly err and think that a meal-offering from lentils is acceptable, from the resolution of that passage, it appears that such an error is plausible. "...a meal-offering without oil or frankincense," or "...a meal-offering of a half an isaron," we ask him [what his intent was]. If he says: "I only took the vow because I thought it was permissible to offer such [sacrifices]. Had I known that one could only offer a complete isaron of fine [wheat] flour together with oil and frankincense, I would not have taken a vow," he is exempt. If, [however,] he said: "Had I known [that such offerings were unacceptable], I would have taken a vow to bring [an offering] like those that are offered," he is obligated to bring an offering like those that are offered.

נָדַר עִשָּׂרוֹן וּמֶחֱצָה וְאָמַר אִלּוּ הָיִיתִי יוֹדֵעַ הָיִיתִי נוֹדֵר כְּדֶרֶךְ הַמִּתְנַדְּבִין הֲרֵי זֶה מֵבִיא שְׁנַיִם. אָמַר הֲרֵי עָלַי קֶמַח אוֹ הֲרֵי עָלַי חֲצִי עִשָּׂרוֹן וְלֹא הִזְכִּיר שֵׁם מִנְחָה הֲרֵי זֶה פָּטוּר כְּמִי שֶׁלֹּא נָדַר מֵעוֹלָם. וְכֵן הָאוֹמֵר הֲרֵי עָלַי תּוֹדָה בְּלֹא לֶחֶם וְזֶבַח בְּלֹא נְסָכִים הֲרֵי זֶה פָּטוּר. וְאִם אָמַר אִלּוּ הָיִיתִי יוֹדֵעַ שֶׁאֵין מַקְרִיבִין כָּךְ הָיִיתִי נוֹדֵר כְּדֶרֶךְ הַנּוֹדְרִין הֲרֵי זֶה חַיָּב לְהַקְרִיב כְּדֶרֶךְ הַמַּקְרִיבִין:

If he vowed to bring an isaron and a half maintain that this law applies only when the person said: "a meal-offering (minchah) of an isaron and a half." and he said: "Had I known [that such offerings were unacceptable], I would have taken a vow to bring [an offering] like those that are offered," he must bring two [esronim].. If he said: "I promise to bring coarse flour", "fine flour," and not kemach, "coarse flour." This he is vowing to bring an entity that is never offered. or "I promise to bring a half an isaron" without mentioning the term "meal-offering," he is exempt. It as if he never took a vow at all.Similarly, if one said: "I promise to bring a thanksgiving-offering without bread,"or "...a sacrifice without its accompanying offerings," he is exempt. If he said:). "Were I to have known that such offerings are not sacrificed, I would have taken a vow to bring [an offering] like those that are offered," he is obligated to bring [an offering] like those that are offered.

הָאוֹמֵר הֲרֵי עָלַי לַחְמֵי תּוֹדָה יָבִיא תּוֹדָה וְלַחְמָהּ. שֶׁהַדָּבָר יָדוּעַ שֶׁאֵין מַקְרִיבִין לֶחֶם בְּלֹא תּוֹדָה וְסוֹף הַקָּרְבָּן הִזְכִּיר. אָמַר הֲרֵי עָלַי לֶחֶם לִפְטֹר תּוֹדָתוֹ שֶׁל פְּלוֹנִי יָבִיא לֶחֶם תּוֹדָה עִם תּוֹדַת חֲבֵרוֹ:

When a person says: "I promise to bring the bread of a thanksgiving-offering," He must bring a thanksgiving offering and its bread. [The rationale is that] it is known that the bread is never offered without the thanksgiving-offering and he mentioned merely the conclusion of the sacrifice. If he said: 'I promise to bring the bread to fulfill the obligation for so-and-so's thanksgiving offering," he should bring the bread for a thanksgiving offering together with the offering of his friend.

מִתְנַדֵּב אוֹ נוֹדֵר אָדָם יַיִן בִּפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ. וְאֵין מִתְנַדְּבִין לוֹג יַיִן וְלֹא שְׁנֵי לוֹגִין. שֶׁאֵין בִּנְסָכִים לֹא לוֹג וְלֹא שְׁנַיִם. וְאֵין מִתְנַדְּבִין חֲמִשָּׁה שֶׁאֵין חֲמֵשֶׁת לוֹגִין רְאוּיִין לֹא לְנִסְכֵּי בְּהֵמָה אַחַת וְלֹא לְנִסְכֵּי שְׁתֵּי בְּהֵמוֹת. אֲבָל מִתְנַדְּבִין שְׁלֹשָׁה וְאַרְבָּעָה וְשִׁשָּׁה וּמִשִּׁשָּׁה וָמַעְלָה מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵן רְאוּיִין לְנִסְכֵּי בְּהֵמוֹת:

A person may vow or pledge to bring wine independently. One should not vow to bring a log of wine or two lugim, for there are no libations that are [only] a log or two lugim., depending on the animal offered. Nor should one vow five lugim, for five lugim are not fit for the libations of one animal or for those of two animals. One may, however, vow three, four, six, or more lugim, 12:4)]. because they are fit for the wine libations for sacrificial animals.

כֵּיצַד. נָדַר שִׁבְעָה הֲרֵי הֵן כְּנִסְכֵּי כֶּבֶשׂ וְאַיִל. נָדַר שְׁמוֹנָה הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ כְּנִסְכֵּי שְׁנֵי אֵילִים. תִּשְׁעָה כְּנִסְכֵּי שׁוֹר וְכֶבֶשׂ אוֹ כְּנִסְכֵּי שְׁלֹשָׁה כְּבָשִׂים. נָדַר עֲשָׂרָה הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ כְּנִסְכֵּי שׁוֹר וְאַיִל אוֹ שְׁנֵי כְּבָשִׂים וְאַיִל וְכֵן עַד לְעוֹלָם:

What is implied? If a person vows seven [lugim], they are considered as the libations for a sheep and for a ram. and those for a ram are four. We assume that the person desired to bring them both. If he vowed eight, they are the libations for two rams; nine are the libations for an ox. and a sheep or those of three sheep. If he vowed ten, they are the libations for an ox and a ram or two sheep and a ram. Similarly, all numbers [can be seen as such combinations].

נָדַר חֲמִשָּׁה לוֹגִין אוֹמְרִין לוֹ הַשְׁלֵם שִׁשָּׁה שֶׁהֲרֵי קְבָעָן לְקָרְבָּן. אֲבָל אִם נָדַר לוֹג אוֹ שְׁנַיִם פָּטוּר שֶׁהֲרֵי אֵינָן רְאוּיִין כְּלָל לֹא הֵן וְלֹא מִקְצָתָן. וְאֵין מִתְנַדְּבִין וְלֹא נוֹדְרִין פָּחוֹת מִלּוֹג שֶׁמֶן. שֶׁאֵין לְךָ מִנְחָה פְּחוּתָה מֵעִשָּׂרוֹן וְהִיא צְרִיכָה לוֹג אֶחָד שֶׁמֶן:

If he vowed to bring five lugim, we tell him: "Make it a complete six." [The rationale is that] he already established it as fit for a sacrifice. are brought, we assume that he did not want to make an empty statement. Hence, we ask him to increase the amount so that he will also be able to bring a valid offering. We do not reduce the amount, because there is an unresolved discussion in Menachot 104a if that is acceptable.If, by contrast, he vowed one log or two, he is exempt, for this amount or their components are not fit to be used as a libation., the Radbaz states that if one says: "a wine libation of one log," he should be asked to clarify his intent.Less than a log of oil should not be vowed or pledged, for there is no meal-offering smaller than an isaron and it requires a log of oil.

הָאוֹמֵר הֲרֵי עָלַי יַיִן לֹא יִפְחֹת מִשְּׁלֹשָׁה לוֹגִין. הֲרֵי עָלַי שֶׁמֶן לֹא יִפְחֹת מִלּוֹג. פֵּרֵשׁ נִדְרוֹ וְשָׁכַח כַּמָּה לוֹג נָדַר מִן הַיַּיִן אוֹ מִן הַשֶּׁמֶן יָבִיא אַרְבָּעִים וּמֵאָה לוֹג. שֶׁאֵין לְךָ יוֹם שֶׁמַּקְרִיבִין בּוֹ הַצִּבּוּר קָרְבָּנוֹת מְרֻבּוֹת יוֹתֵר מִיּוֹם טוֹב הָרִאשׁוֹן שֶׁל חַג שֶׁחָל לִהְיוֹת בְּשַׁבָּת וְהָיוּ הַנְּסָכִים בּוֹ מֵאָה וְאַרְבָּעִים לוֹג שֶׁמֶן וּכְמוֹתָם יַיִן כְּמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר בְּהִלְכוֹת תְּמִידִין וּמוּסָפִין:

When a person says: "I promise to bring wine," he should not bring less than three lugim. "I promise to bring oil," he should not bring less than a log. If he specified a given amount in his vow and forgot how many lugim of wine or oil he specified, he should bring 140 lugim. For there is no day on which there are more communal offerings sacrificed than on the first day of Sukkot that falls on the Sabbath. On that day, the accompanying offerings included 140 lugim of oil and an equal amount of wine as will be explained in Hilchot Temidim UMusafim.. We assume that a person would not vow or pledge a larger amount. The Radbaz clarifies that this ruling applies to a very wealthy person who can be assumed to have made a generous vow. A person of ordinary means, by contrast, should be required to pay the largest amount he could conceive of having pledged (see Hilchot Arachin 2:8-10).