Menachos 39
Summary
- The shiur learns מנחות דף ל״ט beginning from מנחות ל״ח עמוד ב׳ near אמר רבא שמע מינה, and it frames the daf around two themes: the halachic structure of ציצית tying and the halachic status of garment and string materials, including *sha’atnez* and which fabrics are חייב בציצית מדאורייתא versus מדרבנן. The sugya derives requirements such as knots per *chulyah*, the דאורייתא status of the קשר עליון, minimum remaining string length after tearing as כדי לענבן, and how the חוט של כרך counts in the מנין. The daf then moves to disputes about whether non-wool/linen garments are obligated מן התורה, presenting positions of Rav Nachman, Rava, תנא דבי רבי ישמעאל, and later pesak presentations including the Rambam, Raavad, Shulchan Aruch, and Rema, with practical נפקא מינות cited from the משנה ברורה and later authorities.
- The shiur states that today’s דף is מנחות דף ל״ט and that the group is holding on מנחות ל״ח עמוד ב׳ three lines from the end at אמר רבא שמע מינה on the first wide line. The shiur is sponsored anonymously לזכות הגמר חתימה טובה for the מתפללים of BKW and for all of כלל ישראל, and also by Henry Orlinsky לזכר נשמת יחיאל מיכל בן חיים שניאור זלמן הלוי זכרונו לברכה for Milton Kramer הנשמה שתהיה עלייה.
- A Rava derives that one must tie a knot on each *chulyah*, because if cut strings would undo the upper knot and thereby unravel the entire *g’dil*, the ציצית could not remain כשר unless there are intervening knots. The Gemara rejects this as definitive proof by suggesting the case may be where additional knots were tied incidentally. A Rava also derives that the קשר עליון is דאורייתא based on the need for the Torah’s heter of *sha’atnez* in ציצית, since a mere insertion without tying is not a דאורייתא *chibur*.
- A teaching in the name of Rav Ada citing Rav rules that if the thread snaps at its root where attached to the garment, the ציצית is פסול, and Rava challenges this from a ברייתא that initial שיעורים apply at creation but later remnants are acceptable. The Gemara interprets שיורי גרדומי כל שהוא as one concept and explains that validity requires enough remaining to tie, defined as כדי לענבן. The shiur then brings the rule that חוט של כרך עולה מן המניין, with attribution corrected to Shmuel and supported by a report from Rabbi Yoshiyah דמן אושא.
- The sugya states that תכלת שכרך רובה כשרה, and another version adds that even a single *chulyah* suffices, while describing the aesthetic ideal as שליש גדיל שני שלישי ענף. The שיעור of a *chulyah* is defined by רבי as three windings, and a baraita sets a range of not fewer than seven and not more than thirteen, with the shiur presenting the dispute whether this counts *chulyos* or windings per *chulyah*. The text explains that the number seven corresponds to שבעה רקיעים and thirteen corresponds to שבעה רקיעים plus six intervening spaces, and Tosafos connects the symbolism to תכלת resembling the sea and the sea resembling the sky.
- The Gemara teaches that one begins and ends the wrappings with white, grounding the start in הכנף מן הכנף and explaining the end as מעלין בקדושה ולא מורידין, with Rashi attributing white’s higher standing to the תורה’s precedence of הכנף before תכלת. A story then contrasts Rav’s critique of a garment whose ציצית is entirely *g’dil* with no *anf* against רבה בר בר חנה’s approval, and the dispute hinges on whether the Torah allows either *g’dil* or *ptil* versus requiring *ptil* alongside *g’dil*, with Rav reading גדילים as indicating the number of strings and פתיל as requiring loose ends.
- Shmuel in the name of Levi rules that wool strings exempt a linen garment, and the Gemara asks whether linen strings can exempt a wool garment. The sugya weighs whether wool works on linen because תכלת already necessitates wool, or whether the סמיכות of *sha’atnez* to גדילים תעשה לך makes the exemption symmetric, and it brings a proof from a statement of Rachva citing Rav Yehuda that both directions work. This conflicts with Rav Nachman’s claim that silk garments are exempt from ציצית, and Rava challenges him from a ברייתא listing שיראין והכלבך והסיריקון as חייבין בציצית, which Rav Nachman limits to a דרבנן obligation.
- The Gemara then questions how כלאים could be permitted if the obligation is only דרבנן, and it resolves that the phrase “צמר ופשתים פוטרין בהן” means either wool or linen, not both together. The sugya supports that non-wool/linen garments are only מדרבנן by stating that they are exempted by strings of their own kind but not by other kinds, and it then presents Rava’s reconciliation of הכנף with צמר ופשתים: wool and linen exempt both in-kind and out-of-kind, while other materials exempt only their own kind and not others. Rav Nachman grounds his דאורייתא limitation in תנא דבי רבי ישמעאל, deriving from the Torah’s specification of בגד as צמר ופשתים in נגעים that “בגד” elsewhere means only those materials, while Abaye cites another תנא דבי רבי ישמעאל that uses “או בגד” to include many additional materials.
- The shiur presents the major pesak dispute by attributing to the Rambam in הלכות ציצית פרק ג׳ הלכה א׳–ב׳ that only צמר ופשתים are חייב מדאורייתא, and to the Raavad that other garments are also חייב מדאורייתא. The shiur attributes to Tosafos quoting Rabbeinu Tam and Rashi, and to the Rosh, that the halacha follows Rava as the later authority, while the בית יוסף is presented as ruling like the Rif and Rambam and therefore codifying in Shulchan Aruch סימן ט׳ סעיף א׳ that only צמר ופשתים are דאורייתא, and the Rema as ruling that all fabrics are דאורייתא and stating והכי הלכתא.
- The shiur states three נפקא מינות from the משנה ברורה: a Sephardi seeking certainty of a דאורייתא mitzvah should prefer a wool garment, ספק obligations differ as ספק דאורייתא לחומרא versus ספק דרבנן לקולא depending on fabric and ruling, and a case of snapped ציצית in public implicates כבוד הבריות only for a דרבנן prohibition and not for an איסור דאורייתא. The shiur cites additional considerations from the Pri Megadim and attributes to Rav Sternbuch in תשובות והנהגות a recommendation to be stringent to wear wool to satisfy more views, including a view of the Maharam that wool strings without תכלת may only exempt a wool garment. The shiur reports that a suggested drawback of wool in summer as lacking הנאת לבישה is rejected by Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach and Rav Moshe Feinstein, and it ends by stating the plan to continue at the top of דף מ׳ עמוד א׳ the next day.
Previous Page
Next Page
Daf Images are property of Vagshal and may not be reproduced.
Suggestions