Comentario sobre Levítico 9:17

וימלא כפו AND HE FILLED HIS HAND [THEREWITH] — this is what is elsewhere termed קמיצה (i. e. this is elsewhere expressed by the phrase … וקמץ מלא קמצו “he shall take a fistful”) (Sifra, Shemini, Mechilta d'Miluim 2 10; cf. Menachot 9b).

BESIDES THE BURNT-OFFERING OF THE MORNING. Scripture had to mention this here, in order to teach us that the burnt-offering of the people [which was a special offering for that day] did not exempt [them from bringing] the Daily burnt-offering, nor did it precede it [as nothing may ever be offered before the Daily burnt-offering of the morning]. But Scripture did not have to mention this about the seven days of consecration [namely that the offerings of those days were to be offered besides the burnt-offering of the morning], because those were offerings of individuals [i.e., Aaron and his sons] to consecrate them as priests, and it is self-understood that such offerings did not exempt [them from bringing] the Daily burnt-offering, nor did they precede it.
In the Torath Kohanim the Rabbis have taught:³²Torath Kohanim, beginning of Shemini 12. The meaning of this quote will be explained by Ramban further on in the text. “And the meal-offering was presented; and he filled his hand therefrom and burnt it on the altar, besides the burnt-offering of the morning. What does this come to teach us? Shall we say it teaches us that if he could not obtain the meal-offering [which was offered with every burnt-offering] that he should nevertheless bring the animal [as a burnt-offering]? [That could not be the case], for it has already been stated, And the burnt-offering was presented, and he offered it according to the ordinances.³³Verse 16. If so, why does it say, and he burnt it [i.e., the meal-offering] upon the altar, besides the burnt-offering of the morning? It is to teach us that there were two meal-offerings there, one for the [Daily] burnt-offering and one [brought] by itself” [for the burnt-offering of the people, which was a special offering of that eighth day].
The meaning of this text [of the Torath Kohanim] is as follows: Had Scripture stated, “And the burnt-offering was presented, and he offered it according to the ordinance, besides the burnt-offering of the morning,” the sense thereof would have been to teach that the Daily burnt-offering precedes [the other offerings], as He says in the section of the Additional Offerings, it shall be offered beside the continual burnt-offering, and the drink-offering thereof;³⁴Numbers 28:15. beside the continual burnt-offering.³⁵Ibid., Verse 31. But since He mentioned the meal-offering — stating, And the meal-offering was presented; and he filled his hand therefrom, and burnt it on the altar, besides the burnt-offering of the morning — it appears that [the phrase, besides the burnt-offering of the morning] is said with reference to the meal-offering. Therefore the Rabbis commented that if it comes to say that he offered this meal-offering alone, but did not offer the drink-offering of the Daily burnt-offering nor that of the people’s burnt-offering [of the eighth day], because he only found [ingredients] for this freewill meal-offering — [that could not be the case]. For [in the preceding verse] it has already been stated, And the burnt-offering was presented, and he offered it according to the ordinance,³⁶Verse 16. This shows that the drink-offering was brought together with the people’s burnt-offering of the eighth day, for otherwise it would not have been according to the ordinance. The question then re-appears: why is the phrase besides the burnt-offering of the morning mentioned in connection with the meal-offering? which means that it was offered according to its ordinance, with the drink-offering. [Thus we cannot derive from here a principle that the lack of the drink-offering does not prevent the bringing of the offering itself, if the meal-offering and the wine for the drink-offering are not obtainable.] If so, why does it say, And the meal-offering was presented etc. and he burnt it on the altar, besides the burnt-offering of the morning? It is to teach that he offered this meal-offering [of the people’s burnt-offering brought on the eighth day] “besides the burnt-offering of the morning and its meal-offering,” for this meal-offering was not the drink-offering [which is an obligatory part of the Daily burnt-offering], but was the freewill meal-offering of Israel [namely part of the burnt-offering of the people which they brought on that day].³⁷For one might have thought that since the burnt-offering of the people brought especially on this eighth day was also a public one, it should be exempted from the duty of bringing a meal-offering, as the meal-offering of the Daily Whole-offering had already been brought; hence Scripture stated that this meal-offering which came with the people’s burnt-offering, was offered “besides the burnt-offering of the morning and its meal-offering.” It should be pointed out that Ramban refers to this meal-offering as minchath-nedavah (“freewill — meal-offering”) not because of its voluntary nature, namely that it be optional for Israel to bring it or not. The name minchath-nedavah is only to distinguish it from the meal-offering which constantly accompanied the Daily Whole-offering of the people, while this one represented the willing spirit of the people on this day. See further my Hebrew commentary p. 45.

מלבד עולת הבקר, apart from the gift offering which accompanied the morning burnt offering.