Menachos 75
Summary
- Today's *daf* is Menachos *daf* 75, and the *shiur* is *l’zechus refuah sheleimah* for שרה רבקה בת הינדה לאה שתשלח רפואה שלימה בתוך שאר חולי ישראל. The *Mishnah* and *Gemara* lay out the three *matanos shemen* in a *korban minchah* done in a *kli*, define when *belilah* happens and which forms do not require it, and establish that *pasisa* applies to *minachos* done in a *kli* with specific exclusions and a dispute about the extent of breaking. The *Gemara* then connects *pasisa* to the *brachah* on *chavitza*, debates when *hamotzi* applies to bread pieces smaller than a *k’zayis* and the role of *to’ar d’nahama*, and records that a *kohen* who offers a *minchah* in Jerusalem for the first time recites *shehechiyanu* before eating and then says *hamotzi*.
- Any *minchah* made in a *kli*, including *minchas machavas* and *minchas marcheshet*, requires three *matanos shemen*: *yetzikah*, *belilah*, and *matan shemen bakli kodem la’asiyasan*. The procedure places oil in the vessel first, then flour, then *mayim pushrim*, then additional oil for *belilah*, and then additional oil for *yetzikah*, and the *Rishonim* note that the *Mishnah* lists these in reverse order. Rav Pappa says the phrase “*kol hamenachos hane’asos bakli*” excludes *minchas ma’afeh tanur*, which does not have all three *matanos* even though it still has oil requirements.
- A *beraisa* derives *matan shemen bakli* for *marcheshet* from “סלת בשמן תעשה” and links *marcheshet* to *machavas* through the *gezeirah shavah* of “קרבנך,” yielding *matan shemen bakli* for *machavas* and *yetzikah* and *belilah* for *marcheshet* from the explicit verses by *machavas*. Tosafos challenges how the *gezeirah shavah* extends beyond these two *minachos* and how *yetzikah* is later derived from a broader *ribui*, and Tosafos answers that once the Torah reveals the oil procedure in some *minachos*, logic extends the method to other *minachos* such as *minchas soless* and *minchas ha’omer*.
- Rabi holds “חלות בוללן” and places *belilah* after baking by crushing the *chalos* and mixing them with oil, while the *Chachamim* hold “סולת” and require *belilah* while still *soless*. The *Chachamim* challenge Rabi from *lachmei todah*, which are called “חלות מצות בלולות בשמן” yet cannot be mixed as baked *chalos*, and Rav Shmuel bar Yitzchak explains that the oil amount for the *todah* breads is only a *revi’is* for the *belilos* and only a small fraction per *chalah*, making post-baking mixing impractical. A *Tosefta* records that Rabi ultimately concedes, and Tosafos cites a *girsa* that frames the *Chachamim’s* question as compelling and identifies it as the prompt for Rabi’s retraction.
- The verse “חלות מצות בלולות בשמן ורקיקי מצות משוחים בשמן” yields the rule that *chalos* require *belilah* and not *mashichah*, while *rekikin* require *mashichah* and not *belilah*. The *beraisa* rejects *kal vachomer* arguments that would impose both processes on both forms and treats the verse’s wording as exclusive. Rava says the exclusivity is reinforced because across multiple passages the Torah never describes *chalos* as *meshuachos* nor *rekikin* as *belulin*.
- The *Mishnah* defines *mashichah* as applying oil in the pattern of “כמין כי,” and Rav Kahana identifies it as the Greek letter *ki*, with differing descriptions among the *Rishonim* as to its shape, and the remaining oil is eaten by *kohanim*. A *beraisa* about a voluntary *minchah* brought half *chalos* and half *rekikin* divides the *log shemen* initially, applies oil by *belilah* to the *chalos*, smears the *rekik* over its whole surface, and returns leftover oil to the *chalos*, while Rabi Shimon Yehudah in the name of Rabi Shimon rules “כמין כי” and gives the leftover to the *kohanim*. Another *beraisa* about *rekikin* alone requires repeated smearing until the entire *log* is used, while the same attribution to Rabi Shimon limits it to “כמין כי” and allocates the rest to the *kohanim*.
- All *minachos* made in a *kli* require *pasisa*, and Rav Pappa says this excludes *shtei halechem* and *lechem hapanim* because they are baked in a *tanur* treated here as not a *kli shareis*. A *beraisa* derives *pasisa* for all *minachos* from “מנחה היא” and excludes *shtei halechem* and *lechem hapanim* from *pasisa* via “אותה.” The same verse’s “מנחה” includes all *minachos* in *yetzikah*, while the exclusions “עליה” and “היא” remove both forms of *ma’afeh tanur*—*chalos* and *rekikin*—from *yetzikah*, and the text notes that *shtei halechem* and *lechem hapanim* are not framed as excluded from *yetzikah* because they have no oil to pour. Rava explains that the need for two exclusions fits *ma’afeh tanur* because it has two categories, whereas excluding *minchas kohanim* would not require two *mi’utim*.
- A *Mishnah* sets *petisah* for *minchas Yisrael* as folding once to two and then to four and separating so it breaks, while *minchas kohanim* is folded similarly but without separating. The *Mishnah* states that *minchas kohen mashiach* is not folded, and a *beraisa* reads the verse “פתות אותה פתים” to require multiple pieces but not crumbs, applying the folding patterns accordingly and stating that *kohen mashiach* is folded only to two. The *Gemara* reconciles the *beraisa* with the *Mishnah* through Rava’s explanation that *minchas kohen mashiach* is not folded to four but is folded to two.
- Rabi Shimon rules that *minchas kohanim* and *minchas kohen mashiach* have no *petisah* because they have no *kemitzah*, and “כל שאין בה קמיצה אין בה פתיתה.” Rabi Shimon also holds that wherever *petisah* is done, the pieces are made into *k’zayis* sizes rather than stopping at four folds.
- Rav Yosef derives that *chavitza* with bread pieces of *k’zayis* receives *hamotzi*, while pieces smaller than *k’zayis* receive *mezonos*, and he links this to the requirement to break *minchah* to *k’zayis* pieces. A *beraisa* about a *kohen* offering *minachos* in Jerusalem states that he says “ברוך שהחיינו וקיימנו” and then, when eating, says *hamotzi*, and this is used as support that a *minchah* retains *hamotzi* status when broken to *k’zayis*. Abaye challenges Rav Yosef with a teaching that crushes the *minchah* further “עד שמחזירן לסלתן,” and the *Gemara* distinguishes cases and ultimately records Rav Sheshes that even crumbs without *k’zayis* can be *hamotzi*, while Rava conditions this on “דאיכא תואר דנהמא עלייהו.” The narrative notes a broader halachic debate about *brachos* on *matzah* outside Pesach and quotes views attributed to the כנסת הגדולה, the בית דוד, and the מחזיק ברכה, and it returns to Rashi’s explanation that the *shehechiyanu* is said by a *kohen* doing *avodah* for the first time alongside a comparison raised from the Rema about *shehechiyanu* for a first-time *shochet* on *kisui hadam*.
- The *shiur* ends with an intention to continue at the *Mishnah* on צ״ו עמוד א׳ tomorrow.
Previous Page
Next Page
Daf Images are property of Vagshal and may not be reproduced.
Suggestions