Menachos 87 - NBTD
00:00 - Good Morning
00:11 - 86B
05:01 - 87A
23:28 - 87B
33:14 - Have a Wonderful Day!
Quiz - Kahoot.MDYdaf.com
Summary
- The text presents a running explanation of Mishnah and Gemara passages about the standards for wine libations and Temple measurements. It says that wine for the Mikdash may come from many lands, but the preferred wine comes from specific places, and it must avoid qualities such as fertilized or irrigated vineyards, interplanted vines, excessive sweetness, smoking, cooking, age beyond the preferred time, mold, and sediment. It also explains the Temple’s measuring vessels for dry offerings, the halachic discussions about whether one or two *issaron* measures exist, how the *havitin* of the Kohen Gadol are measured and divided, and whether the *Shulchan* can confer sanctity on the frankincense placed with the showbread.
- The Mishnah says wine libations may be brought from *Kirayim and Atulin*, from *Beis Rima and Beis Levan Behar*, and from *Kfar Sigana in the valley*. All lands are kosher, but the text says it is better to bring wine from those places. It says not to bring wine from a fertilized vineyard, from a vineyard that depends on irrigation, or from vines with other crops planted between them, although if such wine was brought it remains kosher.
- The text says not to bring *liston* wine, which it explains as overly sun-ripened sweet grapes, although if brought it is kosher. It says not to bring old wine according to Rabbi, while the Chachamim permit it. It also says not to bring sweet, smoked, or cooked wine, and if any of those are brought they are invalid.
- The wine must come from vines on the ground rather than hanging vines, and from cultivated vineyards worked twice a year. It should be stored in small barrels, not filled to the top, so that it has aroma. Wine should not be taken from the top because of mold or from the bottom because of sediment, but from the middle of the barrel. The gabbai checks the wine with a reed and strikes it when foam or sediment appears, because speech harms wine. Rabbi Yosei bar Rabbi Yehuda says any wine with mold on top is invalid, and the text derives this from the need for offerings to be complete.
- The Gemara challenges the apparent contradiction between *liston* wine being kosher after the fact and sweet wine being invalid after the fact. Ravina resolves this by saying the two descriptions are identical and both are invalid, while Rav Ashi distinguishes between sweetness caused by the sun, which is not repulsive, and sweetness inherent to the grape variety, which is repulsive.
- Rabbi holds that old wine may not be brought. Chizkiya explains that Rabbi learns this from the comparison of sheep and wine in the verse, just as a lamb must be in its first year. The text then raises and answers objections, and Rava explains that Rabbi’s real reason is the verse, “Al tira yayin ki yis’adam,” because wine is most red and desirable in its first year. The text adds that this is why red wine is used on the Seder night.
- The text says the vineyards should be worked twice yearly, and Rav Yosef is described as cultivating his orchard more intensely so that his wine could be diluted with more water than usual. It says wine was normally diluted with three parts water to one part wine, but his wine allowed twice that amount.
- The wine was not gathered in large barrels but in medium jars, and the jars were not placed two together so that a spoiled jar would not affect the other through aroma. The gabbai would signal with a reed rather than speaking, and the Gemara explains that speech is good for spices but harmful for wine.
- Rabbi Yosei bar Rabbi Yehuda says that if a barrel has even a little mold on top, the entire barrel is invalid. The text asks whether consecrating such wine would incur lashes like consecrating an animal with a blemish. It leaves the question unresolved.
- The baraita says rams are brought from Moav, sheep from Chevron, calves from Sharon, and young birds from Har HaMelech. Rabbi Yehuda says sheep for the Tamid should be as tall as they are wide. Rava bar Sheila explains this with a drash from the verse “Yir’eh miknekha bayom hahu kar nachvach,” and the text describes these sheep as unusually large.
- The passage then turns to verses about Jerusalem’s guards. It says the guards do not remain silent and speak verses of consolation and rebuilding, such as “Atah takum t’rachem Tzion” and “Boneh Yerushalayim Hashem.” Before the destruction, they said “Ki bachar Hashem b’Tzion.”
- The Mishnah says there were two dry measuring vessels in the Mikdash, an *issaron* and a *half-issaron*. Rabbi Meir says there were three: two types of *issaron* and a *half-issaron*. The text explains that the regular *issaron* was used for all menachot, including repeated use for the three *issaronim* of a bull and the two *issaronim* of a ram. The *half-issaron* was used for the *chavitin* of the Kohen Gadol, half in the morning and half in the afternoon.
- Rabbi Meir derives the existence of two *issaron* vessels from the doubled wording in the verse, one being *gudosh* and one *machuk*. The *gudosh* vessel was used for regular menachot, and the *machuk* vessel for the Kohen Gadol’s *chavitin*. The Chachamim say there was only one *issaron* vessel, and they derive the *half-issaron* from the extra ו, while Rabbi Meir does not use the ו for that derivation. The Chachamim learn from the dotted letter in the verse that there is no separate vessel for three *issaronim* of a bull or two of a ram.
- The text says the *half-issaron* was used for the Kohen Gadol’s *chavitin*. It asks whether the *half-issaron* itself was *gudosh* or *machuk*. The answer given is that since Rabbi Meir’s regular *issaron* is *machuk*, the *half-issaron* is also *machuk*, and the same applies according to the Chachamim.
- The Gemara asks how the *chavitin* are divided into loaves. It says they are divided by hand and not with a vessel, because using a scale-like tool would be inappropriate in the Mikdash, since weighing bread appears in a verse of curse. The text then asks whether the *Shulchan* can sanctify the frankincense in its area. It concludes that the *Shulchan* does not sanctify it enough to permit it on the altar, but it does sanctify it enough that if a *tevul yom* touches it, it becomes invalid.
- The text explains that the *Lechem HaPanim* on the *Shulchan* is folded in such a way that the table sanctifies a height of twelve or fifteen tefachim above it, depending on the opinion about the bread’s folded height. It then asks whether this sanctification should extend to the frankincense placed with the bread. The conclusion is that the *Shulchan* cannot sanctify the frankincense for altar use, but it can render it susceptible to invalidation.
Previous Page
Next Page
Daf Images are property of Vagshal and may not be reproduced.
Suggestions