Menachos 70
Summary
- A שיעור on מנחות ע״א begins at ס״ט ע״ב with בעי רבא and is sponsored לעילוי נשמת מרשא מרים שרה בת יעקב משה, her נשמה should have an עליה. A case is analyzed where grain that grew before the עומר is uprooted after the עומר, replanted, and then grows more, and the ספק is whether the דין follows the עיקר that was already permitted or the תוספת growth, with a suggestion that going בתר עיקר in ערלה and כלאים may be only לחומרא and not לקולא. The Gemara then shifts to parallel שאלות in מעשר, תרומה, and planting contexts such as דבר שאין זרעו כלה and עציץ שאינו נקוב, and it continues into a משנה listing the five grains and their shared halachic properties in חלה, חדש, and קצירה before the עומר, along with supporting גזירות שוות and rules of צירוף for multiple הלכות.
- A speaker opens with “Shalom to all” and states that today’s דף is מנחות ע״א, starting ס״ט ע״ב on the bottom line with the words בעי רבא. A sponsorship is given לעילוי נשמת מרשא מרים שרה בת יעקב משה, with the wish that her נשמה should have an עליה.
- A case is reviewed where grain grew before the עומר, was uprooted after the עומר, replanted, and then grew more, and the question is whether it is considered *chadash* requiring the next year’s עומר or whether the עומר already permitted it. A ספק is framed between following the עיקר that was already permitted and following the new growth, and even though two cases are cited where the דין goes בתר עיקר, namely ערלה and כלאים, it is suggested that those may be only לחומרא but not לקולא.
- A question is posed, attributed by some as בעי רבה and by others as בעי רבא, about לענין מעשר מאי in a case where the grain was removed, evaluated for tithing, the מעשר was separated and given away, and then the grain was replanted and grew more. A conditional is set that if one says לא אזלינן בתר עיקר and the תוספת contains an obligation, then the question becomes what happens to the עיקר that already had מעשר taken, whether it now requires מעשר again after replanting. Abaye challenges this as no different from ordinary wheat and barley that once planted and grown would require separating again, and the response distinguishes between דבר שזרעו כלה, where the seed decomposes, and דבר שאין זרעו כלה, such as replanting a whole wheat stalk with its root and existing kernel so that it continues rather than becoming something new.
- A proof is suggested from רבי יצחק אמר רבי יוחנן that ליטרא בצל שתיקנו and then planted is מתעשר לפי כולו, requiring tithing on the entire amount after regrowth even though it was already tithed before planting. The Gemara rejects this as לא ראיה because there it is the normal method of planting onions, while here replanting an entire wheat stalk is not the normal method, and the question remains unresolved.
- A question is raised by רבי חנינא בר מניומי to Abaye about עציץ שאינו נקוב and the possibility that it later becomes perforated, creating a case where growth begins not connected to the ground and later becomes connected. The Gemara answers that in the flowerpot case it is considered one זריעה that becomes connected and continues, whereas the earlier wheat case is treated as שתי זריעות because it was uprooted and replanted, so this does not resolve the earlier question.
- A new question of בעי רבא is presented about a שיבולת that already had מרוח בכרי making it טבל, was then planted, and then had its designation made while it was attached, asking whether קריאת שם works because it was already טבל or whether planting causes the טבל status to fall away. רב פפי challenges that validating such a designation would imply תרומה מחוברת לקרקע, but a משנה states לא מצינו תרומה מחוברת לקרקע. The response limits that teaching to לענין חיובי מיתה וחומש, explaining that if one detaches and eats it then it is detached and not subject to that framework, and if one bends and eats while attached then בטלה דעתו אצל כל אדם, leaving the underlying question without resolution.
- A comparison is raised from what is written on the פנקסו דאילפא about ביצי נבלת העוף הטהורה where eggs inside the bird are מטמא בגדים בבית הבליעה while eggs outside are not. The challenge argues that this implies an abnormal mode of eating can still create טומאה, conflicting with the prior explanation that eating attached תרומה would be dismissed as בטלה דעתו אצל כל אדם. The Gemara distinguishes that people do eat detached items in such ways while they do not eat מחובר in such ways, framing detached consumption as within normal human behavior compared to eating food still attached to the ground.
- A teaching is brought בשם שמואל via רב ימי בר כסנא that הזורע כלאים בעציץ שאינו נקוב is אסור as a rabbinic prohibition. Rava argues that the chiddush is meaningful if it implies מכת מרדות מדרבנן, while merely stating אסור is not novel because a משנה already shows עציץ שאינו נקוב has a rabbinic planting status through the rule תרם משאינו נקוב על הנקוב תרומה ויחזור ויתרום, distinguishing obligations דאורייתא and מדרבנן.
- A משנה lists החטים, השעורים, הכוסמין, שבולת שועל, and השיפון as grains that are חייבים בחלה, that are מצטרפין זה עם זה, that are אסורים בחדש before the עומר is brought, and that are forbidden to be cut before the עומר. A rule is stated that if they took root before the עומר then עומר מתירן, and if not then they remain אסורין until the next עומר.
- A ברייתא teaches that כוסמין are a type of wheat, while שבולת שועל and שיפון are a type of barley, tying this to earlier rules in מסכת חלה about which grains are מצטרף with which. The Gemara identifies כוסמין as ע״ב ענתא גולבא, שיפון as דשרא, and שבולת שועל as שיבולי תעלא, and it states that these five grains qualify while אורז ודוחן do not.
- Reish Lakish derives the five-grain rule for חלה from a גזירה שוה לחם לחם from מצה, connecting והיה באכלכם מלחם הארץ to לחם עוני. A further derivation is given from דבי רבי ישמעאל and דבי רבי אלעזר בן יעקב that only דברים הבאים לידי חימוץ qualify for the פסח obligation, excluding rice and millet because they do not become חמץ but instead come לידי סירחון, and this underpins the five-grain framework.
- A teaching states that הדגן והקמחים והבצקות מצטרפין זה עם זה, and different אמוראים assign the application to different areas: כהני to חדש with liability for מלקות on a combined כזית, רב יוסף to חמץ בפסח with כרת on a combined כזית, רב פפא to מעשר שני with מלקות for eating outside the wall, and רבא to טומאת אוכלין requiring a combined ביצה’s worth. Rava’s application is explained as requiring אוכל בעיניה and excluding non-food waste, and a ברייתא is cited that wheat joins whether peeled or unpeeled while barley joins only when peeled.
- A contradiction is raised from a teaching in דבי רבי ישמעאל on the verse על כל זרע זרוע אשר יזרע, which includes חיטה בקליפתה ושעורה בקליפתה ועדשים בקליפתן because that is how seeds are planted. The Gemara resolves that there is no difficulty by distinguishing moist from dry, stating that when moist the husk protects and joins, but when dry it does not protect and falls away and therefore does not join.
- Reish Lakish again uses the גזירה שוה לחם לחם from מצה to ground the איסור of חדש. רבי יוחנן derives the איסור of cutting before the עומר via a גזירה שוה ראשית ראשית from חלה. A clarification of what “קודם העומר” means is presented with two views, one defining it as before קצירת העומר and the other as before הבאת העומר, and the Gemara shifts the מחלוקת to the סיפא about the condition for השרשה, presenting one view that it must take root before הבאת העומר and the other that it must take root before קצירת העומר, and the speaker stops with the intention to continue the דין tomorrow.
Previous Page
Next Page
Daf Images are property of Vagshal and may not be reproduced.
Suggestions