Menachos 49 - NBTD
00:00 - Good Morning
00:13 - 49A
22:24 - 49B
31:32 - Have a Wonderful Day!
Quiz - Kahoot.MDYdaf.com
Summary
- Good morning רבותי! לעילוי נשמת אמי מרת איריס בת מרדכי. The shiur learns דף מ"ט עמוד א' and builds a running analysis around *akira b’ta’ut*—whether an unintended “uprooting” of a korban’s designation counts—through cases of כבשי עצרת on שבועות, *pigul* by kohanim, and מנחות where *ma’aseh mochi’ach* makes the mistaken intent ineffective, and then moves into the Mishnah that תמידים and מוספים do not *me’akvin* each other, including רבי שמעון’s limits for deliberate omission and his rule that the inaugurations of the מזבח הזהב, מזבח העולה, שולחן, and מנורה require their specific initial services, followed by a Gemara inquiry about precedence when the ציבור lacks enough animals, and a final sugya on the minimum of six טלאים מבוקרין in לשכת הטלאים, the four-day *bikur* requirement derived by בן בג בג from pesukim, and the clarification that “כדי לשבת ולשני ימים טובים” functions as a סימנא בעלמא.
- Rabba bar bar Chana teaches before Rav the case of כבשי עצרת ששחטן לשם אילים, where the kohen takes the correct sheep for שבועות but mentally designates them as אילים, even though the rams are an עולה and the sheep are שלמים. Rav’s view is that the korbanos count fully for the ציבור because the correct animals are slaughtered on the correct day for the שתי הלחם, even if the intent labels them as something else. Rav Chisda explains Rav as fitting a case where the sheep are in fact slaughtered as sheep and the mistaken element is reversed into a framework that leaves the action aligned with the animals’ true identity, while a different case is rejected because *akira b’ta’ut havi akira* makes an honest mistake a real uprooting.
- Rava states *akira b’ta’ut lo havi akira* and sets the sugya’s focus until the Mishnah as whether mistaken intent can truly uproot a korban’s status. The shiur frames the question as whether a person can be *oker* something on purpose or by accident, and it treats “מחשבה” largely as articulated designation rather than hidden *devarim shebalev*.
- Rava challenges from the דין of הכהנים שפיגלו במקדש where מזידין חייבים and שוגג פטור, yet the Tanna states פיגולם פיגול, implying that the disqualifying intent works even when mistaken. The Gemara’s initial reading treats the case as a kohen who thinks a חטאת is a שלמים and therefore forms *pigul* intent consistent with a שלמים timeframe, yielding a proof that *akira b’ta’ut havi akira*. Abaye answers that the kohen actually knows it is a חטאת and deliberately thinks as a שלמים but is still called שוגג because *kasavar mutar*, so the case does not prove *akira b’ta’ut*.
- Rabbi Zeira challenges from ר' שמעון that כל מנחות שנקמצו שלא לשמן כשרות ועלו לבעלים לשם חובה, and the Tosefta explains that מנחות differ from זבחים because *ma’aseh mochi’ach aleha* when the כלי and form reveal what is being done, such as מחבת versus מרחשת and חריבה versus בלולה. The sugya proposes that the case could be one of mistaken identification, where the only reason the wrong designation has no effect is that the act itself exposes the truth, suggesting that elsewhere *akira b’ta’ut* could work. Abaye rejects the inference and keeps the case as one where the kohen knows it is a מחבת and intentionally calls it מרחשת, and the resolution rests on Rav’s rule that מחשבה דלא מינכרא פטר רחמנא while מחשבה דמינכרא לא פטר רחמנא, so a blatant mismatch that everyone can see cannot effect an uprooting.
- The Mishnah states התמידים אינן מעכבין את המוספין ולא המוספין מעכבין את התמידים and also that the מוספים do not prevent each other, so the services remain valid even when performed without the other components. The Mishnah adds that if the morning תמיד is not offered, the afternoon one may still be offered, and רבי שמעון limits this permission to cases of אונסים או שוגגים, while in מזידים he rules that if they did not offer the morning lamb they do not offer the afternoon lamb. Rabbi Shimon also teaches that inaugurating the מזבח הזהב requires קטורת הסמים, inaugurating the מזבח העולה requires the תמיד של שחר, inaugurating the שולחן requires לחם הפנים בשבת, and inaugurating the מנורה requires בשבעה נרותיה.
- Rabbi Chiya bar Avin asks Rav Chisda which comes first when the ציבור lacks enough for both תמידים and מוספים, and the Gemara rejects the straightforward same-day framing because the תמיד of that day is both תדיר and מקודש. The Gemara reframes the question as תמידין דלמחר versus מוספין דהאידנא, where today’s מוסף carries שבת קדושה while tomorrow’s תמיד is תדיר, and it tests whether the Mishnah’s “אין מעכבין” implies equivalence in a one-animal shortage case. Abaye rejects the proof by reading the Mishnah as assuming both are available and treating the rule of “nothing precedes the תמיד של שחר,” derived from וערך עליה העולה and רבא’s reading העולה עולה ראשונה, as מצוה בעלמא describing ideal order rather than an absolute bar.
- The Gemara brings the דין that אין פוחתין משישה טלאים המבוקרין בלשכת הטלאים and initially frames it as preparation for שבת ולשני ימים טובים, with calculations raised about the number of animals needed across שבת and two days of ראש השנה and challenges that it should be seven or even eight because of timing for post-festival offerings. The sugya answers that the statement is understood after accounting for what has already been offered and focuses on the requirement that these are animals checked four days prior, a requirement that applies specifically to the תמיד and not to מוספים. The Gemara attributes the four-day *bikur* derivation to בן בג בג from תשמרו להקריב לי במועדו, linked by גזירה שוה to קרבן פסח’s והיה לכם למשמרת עד ארבעה עשר יום, establishing that the תמיד requires ביקור ארבעה ימים קודם שחיטה. The conclusion reads “כדי לשבת ושני ימים טובים” as a סימנא בעלמא rather than a literal calendar case, as indicated by the wording כדי לשבת, and it ends with the shiur’s closing wishes and the sponsorship notice: mdysponsor.com or sponsor at mdy.com.
Previous Page
Next Page
Daf Images are property of Vagshal and may not be reproduced.
Suggestions