Exodus 29:2 Midrash: Sifra, Midrash Tanchuma Buber, Midrash Tanchuma & Sifrei Bamidbar

וְלֶ֣חֶם מַצּ֗וֹת וְחַלֹּ֤ת מַצֹּת֙ בְּלוּלֹ֣ת בַּשֶּׁ֔מֶן וּרְקִיקֵ֥י מַצּ֖וֹת מְשֻׁחִ֣ים בַּשָּׁ֑מֶן סֹ֥לֶת חִטִּ֖ים תַּעֲשֶׂ֥ה אֹתָֽם׃

and unleavened bread, and cakes unleavened mingled with oil, and wafers unleavened spread with oil; of fine wheaten flour shalt thou make them.

Sifra

"soleth" (fine flour): Just as soleth elsewhere (Shemoth 29:2) is of wheat, so, here.
Ask a RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Sifra

5) "a tenth of an ephah": one-tenth of three sa'in, which is seven revi'in and an addition. "soleth": Just as soleth stated there (Exodus 29:2) is of wheat, so soleth stated here is of wheat. "for a sin-offering": Its monies must be designated as being for a sin-offering. "he may not place oil upon it": But he may place (oil) upon what remains (of the minchah offering). "he shall not put frankincense upon it": I might think that if he did place frankincense upon it, it becomes unfit; it is, therefore, written: "for it is a sin-offering" (and just as a beast sin-offering is not invalidated by frankincense, this bird sin-offering is, likewise, not invalidated by frankincense. Or, (I might think): "it is a sin-offering" — Even if he placed oil upon it, it is kasher; it is, therefore, (to negate this) written: "it" (with frankincense, is a sin-offering — but not with oil). And why do you see fit to permit it with frankincense and to invalidate it with oil? After Scripture includes, it excludes. Why do I permit it with frankincense? Because it can be picked off — and I invalidate it with oil, because it cannot be picked off.
Ask a RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Sifra

5) "meal" (soleth): Just as the soleth mentioned elsewhere (Shemoth 29:2) is wheat, so the soleth mentioned here is wheat. "a meal-offering": like all meal-offerings, requiring a fistful. "perpetual": even in a state of tumah, even on the Sabbath.
Ask a RabbiBookmarkShareCopy