Menachos 61 - NBTD
Summary
- The shiur learns from about twelve lines from the bottom of דף ס״א עמוד ב׳, beginning with “אוי אינו,” and works through דרשות on the words והבאת, אלה, מאלה, והקריבה, והגישה, and והרים to define which מנחות require הגשה and which require תנופה. The presentation follows רבי שמעון’s approach to expanding or excluding categories, then moves into the משנה’s list of items that require תנופה without הגשה and clarifies where תנופה is performed, the order between תנופה and הגשה, and which קרבנות have neither. The shiur then develops the ברייתא about the מצורע’s לוג שמן and אשם being waved together yet still fulfilling the מצוה if waved separately, and closes with the דרשות that bיכורים require תנופה and with the sugya that distinguishes between a woman’s קרבן requiring תנופה and who is permitted to perform the actual תנופה.
- Good morning is said, and the shiur is stated to be לזכר נשמת סימי בת מרדכי. The learning is positioned at about twelve lines from the bottom of דף ס״א עמוד ב׳, and yesterday’s דרשה on והבאת is recalled with the framing that רבי שמעון ties והבאת to עומר while רבי יהודה ties it to סוטה.
- A possibility is raised that והבאת teaches that a יחיד who voluntarily brings a מנחה could bring it מן השעורים, even though a typical נדבה is from wheat. A קל וחומר is proposed from ציבור, since ציבור brings a חובה מנחה from wheat (שתי הלחם) and a חובה מנחה from barley (עומר), so a יחיד should be able to bring a נדבה from either wheat or barley. A limiting word אלה is used to reject that extension so that only the barley cases already in the topic remain, and the shiur returns to using והבאת for its earlier function of teaching הגשה for עומר or סוטה.
- Another possibility is raised that אלה teaches that one who says “הרי עלי מנחה” must bring all five forms of מנחת נדבה: מנחת סולת, מחבת, מרחשת, חלות, and רקיקין. The word מאלה is used to limit the obligation so that “רוצה אחת מביא, רוצה חמש מביא,” meaning the person may bring one of the five or all five.
- רבי שמעון expounds “את המנחה” to include שאר מנחות for הגשה beyond the five voluntary types. The shiur identifies these as מנחת חוטא, a woman’s מנחה, and a גוי’s מנחה, and states that these require bringing the מנחה to touch the corner of the מזבח. A further possibility to include שתי הלחם and לחם הפנים is rejected from מאלה, and the reason given is that other menachos have אשים through קמיצה while שתי הלחם and לחם הפנים have no portion that goes to the fire.
- The sugya challenges the “אשים” criterion by noting that מנחת נסכים is entirely burned and would seemingly require הגשה. The word והקריבה is used to exclude מנחת נסכים from הגשה, and the shiur explains that although והקריבה was already used for סוטה, the extra ה׳ in והקריבה (instead of והקריב) creates an additional derasha to exclude נסכים while still including סוטה. The preference to include שאר מנחות and exclude מנחת נסכים is explained by logic: שאר מנחות “באות בגלל עצמן,” while מנחת נסכים generally comes as an accompaniment to עולה and שלמים and is “אינה באה בגלל עצמה.”
- The sugya notes that מנחת כהנים and מנחת כהן משיח also come “בגלל עצמן,” which could suggest they require הגשה, but according to רבי שמעון these do not require הגשה. The word והגישה is used with an extra ה׳ (from והגיש/והגישה) to exclude, and the shiur explains that the base requirement of הגשה is still learned while the extra letter enables the exclusion. The sugya is summarized as three criteria for requiring הגשה according to רבי שמעון: the מנחה has a portion burned (יש מהם לאשים), it comes on its own (ובאות בגלל עצמן), and it leaves שיריים for כהנים (ויש מהם לכהנים). The exclusions are then aligned to which criterion they lack: שתי הלחם and לחם הפנים lack אשים, מנחת נסכים is not brought because of itself, and מנחת כהנים and מנחת כהן משיח lack portions for כהנים because they are entirely burned.
- A new sugya begins with “והרים הכהן מן המנחה,” where a thought is raised that the כהן might remove the portion with a כלי, like a scoop. The phrase “והרים ממנה בקומצו” teaches that the removal is done with the hand through קמיצה, and a comparison is made that just as the earlier “רמה” is with the hand, so too here it is with the hand.
- The משנה is framed as the category of items that require תנופה but not הגשה, contrasted with the earlier theme of menachos requiring הגשה without תנופה. The list includes לוג שמן של מצורע ואשמו, ביכורים according to רבי אלעזר בן יעקב, and אימורי שלמי יחיד with their חזה ושוק, applying to both men and women but “בישראל ולא באחרים.” The list also includes שתי הלחם ושני כבשי עצרת, and the procedure is described as placing the two breads on top of the two כבשים, putting two hands underneath, and performing מוליך ומביא, מעלה ומוריד, with the verse “אשר הונף ואשר הורם” cited. The shiur states that תנופה was “במזרח,” explains the orientation of east and west in the בית המקדש, and asserts that “במזרח” means even in the east, while הגשה is always in the west at the southwest corner.
- The משנה states “תנופות קודמות להגשות,” and the shiur applies this explicitly to עומר and סוטה, which both require הגשה and תנופה, and also reports that the Brisker Rav extends this precedence even across cases where one korban has only one of the two actions. The משנה states that לחם הפנים and מנחת נסכים require neither הגשה nor תנופה. רבי שמעון’s statement is presented that three items require three mitzvos such that each item has two of the three and none has all three: זבחי שלמי יחיד, זבחי שלמי ציבור, and אשם מצורע, with the three mitzvos identified as סמיכה חי, תנופה חי, and תנופה שחוט. The shiur assigns the combinations as follows: זבחי שלמי יחיד have סמיכה חיים and תנופה שחוטים but not תנופה חיים; זבחי שלמי ציבור have תנופה חיים ושחוטים but no סמיכה; and אשם מצורע has סמיכה ותנופה חי but no תנופה שחוט.
- A ברייתא from “והקריב אותו לאשם ואת לוג השמן והניף אותם תנופה” teaches that the אשם and the oil require תנופה together as one act. Another derasha teaches that if one waved each separately, “יצא,” and the shiur explains that this means he is יוצא the מצות תנופה even though the ideal form is together, and that lack of proper תנופה does not invalidate the קרבן. A further possibility that one must do three separate תנופות is rejected from “תנופה ולא תנופות,” learning from the extra word תנופה after והניף that only one waving is required.
- The brייתא’s “לפני ה׳” is linked to “במזרח,” and the shiur contrasts this with menachos where “לפני ה׳” is identified with the west. The shiur states “הני מילי מנחה דאיקרי חטאת,” and that a חטאת requires a יסוד, with רש״י used to say that pouring the leftover blood on the יסוד is a non‑מעכב חיוב; because the מנחה is called חטאת it is brought to the same corner. The fact that “קרן דרומית מזרחית לא היה לה יסוד” is used to explain why that corner is avoided for those cases, while the מצורע’s process can be in the east since it does not require the יסוד.
- The משנה’s attribution that bיכורים require תנופה is tied to רבי אלעזר בן יעקב via “ולקח הכהן הטנא מידך,” teaching that the basket is waved. The reason is given as a גזירה שוה “יד יד” from שלמים, comparing “מידך” with “ידיו תביאנה,” yielding that just as bיכורים involves a כהן, so too the analogous act involves a כהן, and just as there are בעלים, so too there are בעלים, leading to the procedure that the כהן places his hand under the hands of the owner and waves. תוספות is brought to say it is not literally under the owner’s hands because that would be חציצה, but rather under the כלי while the owner holds separately. The sugya asks why the משנה attributes this to רבי אלעזר בן יעקב if רבי יהודה also derives תנופה from “והנחתו,” and two answers are given: רבא says the verse רבי אלעזר בן יעקב uses appears first, and רב נחמן בר יצחק says he is “רב גוברא,” with רש״י cited that “משנתו קב ונקי” and the תשב״ץ explaining “קב” as 102 and connecting it to 102 places of פסיקה like רבי אלעזר בן יעקב.
- The משנה’s phrase “אחד האנשים ואחד הנשים… בישראל ולא באחרים” is explained by רב יהודה to mean that both men’s and women’s קרבנות require תנופה, but the actual תנופה is performed “בישראל ולא בידי נשים,” so women do not perform the waving. A ברייתא expounds “בני ישראל” to mean ישראל wave and גוים do not, and also that women do not wave, with an aside that the shiur connects this language to broader questions such as whether women can make ציצית, noting a מחלוקת ראשונים. רבי יוסי argues from the תורה’s differentiation in סמיכה between ישראל, גוים, and women, but the counter is that סמיכה is done by the owner whereas תנופה is in the hands of כהנים, so a woman’s קרבן can still have תנופה performed by the כהן. A further teaching limits “בני ישראל” and then includes גרים and עבדים משוחררים from “המקריב,” rejects the reading that this refers only to the כהן by using “ידיו תביאנה” to show בעלים are intended, and concludes with the shared procedure that the כהן and the owner participate as “כהן מניח ידו תחת ידי בעלים ומניף,” with the earlier תוספות qualification understood.
Previous Page
Next Page
Daf Images are property of Vagshal and may not be reproduced.
Suggestions