(Mishnah): Whatever is more Tadir (frequent) takes precedence (is done first);

Temidim come before Musafim.

We learn from "Milvad Olas ha'Boker Asher l'Olas ha'Tamid Ta'asu Es Eleh" (i.e. the Tamid is first, because it is more Tadir).

90b - Question: Which takes precedence, what is more Tadir, or what is more Kodesh?

Answer #1 (Mishnah): Temidim come before Musafim.

Even though Musafim are more Kodesh, Temidim come first, for they are more Tadir.

Rejection: Musafim are not more Kodesh. Temidim brought on Shabbos also receive the Kedushah of Shabbos!

Menachos 49a (R. Chiya bar Avin) Question: If the Tzibur does not have enough Temidim and Musafim, which has precedence?

Question: What is the case?

Suggestion: Both are for today.

Rejection: If so, obviously Temidim have precedence. They are Tadir (more frequent) and have as much Kedushah as the Musafim!

Answer #1: The Temidim are for tomorrow, and the Musafim are for today.

Temidim have precedence, for they are Tadir. Or perhaps Musafim have precedence, for they are more Kadosh (e.g. tomorrow is less Kadosh than today).

Answer (Rav Chisda - Mishnah): Temidim are not Me'akev Musafim, Musafim are not Me'akev Temidim, and Musafim are not Me'akev each other.

Suggestion: There are enough lambs for both of them. The Mishnah teaches that either may be offered first.

Rejection (Beraisa): "V'Arach Aleha ha'Olah" teaches that the morning Tamid goes (directly) on the wood (no Korban precedes it).

Also, Rava expounded "ha'Olah" - the (Tamid is) the first Olah. No Korban precedes it.

Conclusion: Rather, there are not enough lambs for both. (The Mishnah teaches that the lambs may be used for either.)

If both were for today, the Temidim would have precedence, for they are Tadir and Kadosh! Rather, the Temidim are for tomorrow, and the Musafim are for today. The Mishnah teaches that the lambs may be used for either.

Rejection (and defense of both Suggestions - Abaye): Really, they are for today, and there are enough lambs for both of them. The Mishnah permits offering either first. It is only l'Chatchilah that no Korban may precede the morning Tamid.

Pesachim 64b (Mishnah): He receives a full bucket and then returns an empty bucket.

Inference: He does not return the empty bucket before receiving the full one. This supports Reish Lakish:

(Reish Lakish): Ein Ma'avirim Al (we do not pass over) Mitzvos. (Returning an empty bucket is only preparation for Kabalah. It is not an actual Mitzvah.)

Rashi (49a DH Tadir): Musaf is only on a day with Kedushah, so both the Tamid and the Musaf (for that day) are Mekudash; the Tamid is also Tadir. Alternatively, Mekudash means that it is offered first; both of these attributes are only in the Tamid.

Tosfos (49a DH Tadir): Zevachim 91a supports the first Perush in Rashi. According to the latter Perush, why didn't we ask whether today's Musaf has precedence over the afternoon Tamid? This is because another source teaches that whenever we offered a morning Tamid, we must offer also the afternoon Tamid.

Tosfos (Yoma 34a DH ha'Olah): "Milvad" teaches that the Tamid comes first. It does not discuss when there are not enough lambs for both Korbanos, for Zevachim 89a discusses only which is offered first. "Ha'Olah" teaches about which is burned first on the Mizbe'ach.

Tosfos (34b DH Rebbi): If the Tzibur did not have enough Nesachim for the morning and afternoon Temidim, according to the opinion that the afternoon completes the morning Tamid, the morning is primary, so we offer the Nesachim in the morning. According to the opinion that the morning completes the Tamid of the previous afternoon, the afternoon is primary, so we offer the Nesachim in the afternoon.

Radvaz (4:13 (1087)): A prisoner was told that he may leave one day during the year to pray with a Minyan. A Chacham first said that he should choose Yom Kipur, and then retracted to say Purim, for Kri'as ha'Megilah publicizes the miracle. This is wrong. We do not pass over Mitzvos. He should do the first possible Mitzvah (pray today with a Minyan), without concern whether it is bigger or smaller than other Mitzvos. You do not know the reward for Mitzvos!

Rebuttal (Chacham Tzvi 106): The Gemara asked whether Tadir or Mekudash comes first. According to the Radvaz, even if Tadir is first, Ein Ma'avirim Al ha'Mitzvos! Rather, we must say that Ein Ma'avirim applies only when both Mitzvos are equal. The Gemara brought different proofs in Zevachim and in Menachos. In Zevachim we discuss when both are in front of us, so Ein Ma'avirim does not apply. In Menachos Ein Ma'avirim applies, and therefore Mekudash is no better than Tadir.

Defense #1 (Be'er Heitev 90:9/11): Leket ha'Kemach (p.11) says that a Tzibur never dies, so it was a question which comes first. An individual could die, so he does not postpone a Mitzvah.

Defense #2 (Ketzos ha'Choshen Sof 104:2): According to one explanation of Rashi and Tosfos (in Menachos), Mekudash is the one that comes first! The Gemara asked if the attribute of coming first overrides a greater Mitzvah (in that case, Tadir) that comes later. It concluded that they are the same. Likewise, they are the same in the Radvaz' case, so Ein Ma'avirim applies.

Birkei Yosef (90:3): The Bartenura (Zevachim 10:6) said that it seems that Tadir has precedence. Acharonim protested, for the Gemara never resolved this! Some say that we follow the majority of attempted proofs in Zevachim, which assumed that Tadir has precedence. The Sugya in Menachos refutes this. It said that if both are for today, Temidim have precedence, for they are Tadir and Mekudash. I.e. Kedushah of the day also applies to the Temidim. This rejects all the proofs in Zevachim! Rather, in Menachos (R. Chiya bar Avin asked about when we do not have enough lambs for Temidim or Musafim;) we asked 'what is the case?' The one who asked (we will call him Ploni) held that Tadir is first, and Ein Ma'avirim applies only when both Mitzvos are equal. Ploni assumed that R. Chiya (bar Avin) agrees, since he did not simply ask whether Tadir or Mekudash has precedence. Also, R. Chiya did not ask about Tadir for tomorrow and less Tadir for today. Ploni was bothered 'what is the case?', for he held like the rejection in Zevachim that Kedushah of the day also applies to the Tamid. He could not say that R. Chiya asked about Temidim for today and Musafim of tomorrow, for surely Tadir has precedence, and also Ein Ma'avirim applies. He was reluctant to say that R. Chiya asked about Musafim for today and Temidim of tomorrow, for Tadir has precedence, and Ein Ma'avirim does not apply (since the latter Mitzvah has precedence). The answer was that even though Tadir by itself has precedence over Mekudash, when Ein Ma'avirim favors Mekudash, perhaps it has precedence. Perhaps this is the Bartenura's source that (when Ein Ma'avirim does not apply) Tadir has precedence.

Yad Eliyahu (42): If one prays Shacharis in a small Minyan (for the big Minyan prays too late), it is proper to go to the big Minyan for Musaf. Even though the Radvaz says that we do not delay a Mitzvah, we are not concerned if the Mitzvah will be done that day or the next. (Note: according to this, in the Radvaz' case, if the next day has Kri'as ha'Torah, he should go to the Beis ha'Keneses the next day.) The Beis Yosef (Siman 271) says that if one does not have enough wine for Kidush and Havdalah, he should make Kidush (on Shabbos night) on bread, even though this is b'Di'eved, and save the wine for Havdalah (which cannot be said on bread, even though Kidush is mid'Oraisa and Havdalah is mid'Rabanan). I derive from here that if Shabbos is after Yom Tov Sheni, and (after leaving wine for Havdalah) he does not have enough wine for Kidush for both days, he should leave the wine for Shabbos, which has precedence over Yom Tov Sheni, which is mid'Rabanan. One could ask even about Yom Tov Rishon. Even though it is mid'Oraisa, it is not as severe as Shabbos. It seems that one may do as he wants. A proof is from the Rambam (Hilchos Temidim 8:20), who says that if there are only two sheep, they may offer them today for Musaf or tomorrow for the Tamid. Tosfos (34b) says that if there are not enough Nesachim for the afternoon and morning, we use them for the one that is primary. This is unlike Tamid and Musaf, in which each is primary in its time. Therefore, one may do as he wants. The Yerushalmi says that one should not weigh Mitzvos (and say that one is more important than another). That is a different matter. It discusses different kinds of Mitzvos, and teaches that one should not prefer one type over another. Here we discuss Mitzvos of the same type, but one has precedence over the other.