Midrash sur Le Lévitique 2:10

1) "And what is left (from the meal-offering shall be for Aaron, etc."): even if it were not salted, even if it were not presented (at the southwest corner of the altar) — except if nothing were smoked of its frankincense. "from the meal-offering" — except if it (the meal-offering) were diminished (between kemitzah and smoking), except if nothing were smoked of its frankincense. "for Aaron and for his sons": for Aaron first, and then for his sons; for Aaron without apportionment (with the other Cohanim), and for his sons with apportionment. Just as Aaron, the high-priest, eats without apportionment, so, his sons, the high-priests, eat without apportionment.

2) "for Aaron and for his sons, holy of holies" — to permit the (remainders of the) meal-offerings of Israelite men. Now why should I (think to) exclude them (Israelite men, that I need a verse to include them)? It is written (Bamidbar 15:13): "All the native-born (men) shall do thus with these, to offer a fire-offering, a sweet savor to the L–rd." (Is the intent of the verse that) if he wishes to bring (libations [independent of the offering]) he may do so? Or (is its intent) that (the remainder of the) meal-offerings of (native-born) Israelite men be offered upon the fire (and not be eaten by the Cohanim, [the verse to be rendered: "All the native-born (men) shall do thus (as they do with the libation meal-offering) with these (gift meal-offerings), to offer (the remainder as) a fire-offering, etc."])? And how would I understand "And what is left from the meal-offering shall be for Aaron and for his sons"? As referring to (the meal-offerings) of proselytes, women, and bondsmen (and not to those of native-born Israelite men); it is, therefore, written: "for Aaron and for his sons, holy of holies" — to permit the (remainders of) meal-offerings of Israelite men (to be eaten by Cohanim).

8) See Gift Offerings, Chapter 11:1

[(Lev. 8:2:) TAKE AARON AND HIS SONS.] This text is related (to Prov. 20:7): THE ONE WHO WALKS IN HIS INTEGRITY IS RIGHTEOUS; BLESSED ARE HIS CHILDREN AFTER HIM. This refers to Aaron and his children.⁴²Tanh., Lev. 2:10. If this interpretation is so,⁴³Reading KN for MN, as suggested in Midrash Tanhuma (Jerusalem: Eshkol, n.d.), p. 500, n. 3. The Buber text is more awkward, but means essentially the same: “If < this interpretation results > from this saying.” Moses also was righteous, but his children were not like him. And Eli also was righteous, but his children were not like him. And Samuel [was] righteous, but his children were not like him. (I Sam. 8:3:) BUT HIS SONS DID NOT WALK IN HIS WAYS. Why do you say < of Aaron > (in Prov. 20:7): THE ONE WHO WALKS IN HIS INTEGRITY IS RIGHTEOUS; < BLESSED ARE HIS CHILDREN AFTER HIM >? Because during his lifetime he saw his sons after him serving in the High Priesthood. Therefore (in Lev. 8:2:) TAKE AARON AND HIS SONS ALONG WITH HIM.