Menachos 86
Summary
- A Mishnah in Menachos פ״ו opens by ranking the best olive oil for the בית המקדש as coming from תקוע, with אבא שאול naming רגב בעבר הירדן as second, while allowing oil from all lands בדיעבד and setting further lכתחילה restrictions based on how and where the olives grow and how they are processed. The Gemara ties תקוע’s oil to תקוע’s חכמה through רבי יוחנן, brings a tradition about אשר’s blessing of abundant oil through an episode in גוש חלב, and uses that story to frame themes of hidden wealth and public perception through the פסוק יש מתעשר ואין כל מתרושש והון רב. The sugya then defines אנפיקנון as oil from olives שלא הביאו שליש and connects it to שמן המור in אסתר, debates contradictory rulings about its validity, and closes with a detailed Mishnah and Beraisa describing three harvests and three pressings that yield nine grades of oil, distinguishing oil fit for the מנורה from oil fit for מנחות. The section also explains why the מנורה’s oil must be זך כתית while מנחות do not, attributes this to התורה חסה על ממונם של ישראל, and presents דרשות that the מנורה serves as עדות שהשכינה שורה בישראל, centered on the נר מערבי.
- A Mishnah states תקוע אלפא לשמן as the highest-quality oil source in ארץ ישראל, and אבא שאול says רגב is שניה לה even though it lies בעבר הירדן. A Mishnah states that all lands are כשרות for oil, but לכתחילה oil is brought from תקוע and from רגב for use in the בית המקדש. A Mishnah rules that oil is not brought from olives grown in a fertilized field, an irrigated field, or among other planted crops, and it validates such oil בדיעבד. A Mishnah rules that oil is not brought as אנפיקנין and validates it בדיעבד, while oil from olives soaked in water, pickled, or cooked is פסול even בדיעבד.
- A Gemara cites וישלח יואב תקועה ויקח משם אשה חכמה and asks why יואב went specifically to תקוע. רבי יוחנן says that because the people of תקוע are accustomed to olive oil, חכמה is common among them. A Gemara presents this as the explanation for why an אשה חכמה is found in תקוע.
- A Baraisa expounds וטובל בשמן רגלו as referring to the portion of אשר that produces oil like water. A narrative reports that אנשי לודקיא needed oil and hired a broker to purchase שמן במאה ריבוא, and he is directed from ירושלים to צור and then to גוש חלב in אשר’s territory. A narrative describes finding a farmer working under his olive trees who appears poor, yet his maid brings him hot water and then a gold vessel full of oil in which he immerses his hands and feet, fulfilling וטובל בשמן רגלו. A narrative states that after eating and drinking, the farmer measures out a hundred myriads of oil, offers more, and then supplies an additional שמונה עשר ריבוא on credit while escorting the buyer to collect payment.
- A narrative states that the city praises the broker upon his return, and he redirects the praise to the farmer, explaining that he is only a debtor and the farmer is the true wealthy man. A narrative frames the episode as a fulfillment of יש מתעשר ואין כל מתרושש והון רב, portraying the broker as appearing wealthy without assets and the farmer as appearing poor while possessing great wealth.
- A presentation explains that ולאשר אמר: ברוך מבנים אשר יהי רצוי אחיו וטובל בשמן רגלו contains three blessings: children, acceptance among brothers, and abundant oil. Reb שלמה קלוגר in אמרי שפר reads יהי רצוי אחיו as a blessing that despite wealth and success, אשר remains accepted by his brothers rather than suffering the dynamic implied by ורצוי לרוב אחיו about מרדכי. An אבן עזרא explains ורצוי לרוב אחיו as a consequence of inevitable jealousy, stating that a person cannot appease everyone because of קנאת האחים.
- A presentation cites a נודע ביהודה responsum (יורה דעה תנינא סימן י) about hunting, where he refuses to treat it as a normal Jewish practice and writes that he answers only out of affection for a benefactor known for good מידות. A presentation quotes his concern that jealousy breeds hatred and that one must avoid giving enemies an opening for slander, describing שנאה מחמת קנאה as inevitable for prominent wealthy people.
- A citation from רש״י on ברוך מבנים אשר states that the ספרי says no tribe is blessed with children like אשר and that רש״י says ואיני יודע כיצד. A citation from רש״י on יהי רצוי אחיו gives another explanation that אשר’s daughters are beautiful and are married to כהנים גדולים and kings anointed with olive oil. A משך חכמה cites תנא דבי אליהו to interpret וכימיך דבאך as a blessing about בנות אשר that the elderly are like virgins and that virgins have no blood, describing זקינה כבתולה and connecting it to the פסוק ברזל ונחשת מנעלך וכימיך דבאך.
- A משך חכמה proposes that כהנים גדולים marry from בנות אשר to avoid טומאה complications tied to נידה and ספקות, arguing that the blessing implies the absence of דם נידה. A משך חכמה connects ברוך מבנים אשר to כתובות י׳ that links abundant blood to abundant children, explaining that a special blessing is needed to ensure children alongside the condition described as lacking blood. A citation from מגדים חדשים adds that if a כהן whose wife is a נידה should not duchan because נידה is מטמא באוהל מדרבנן, then all the more so concerns about טומאה could motivate a כהן גדול to prefer a wife from בנות אשר.
- A Gemara notes a contradiction between a Mishnah that validates אנפיקנון בדיעבד and a Baraisa that says ואם הביא פסול, and it explains the פסול as מפני שהוא שרף because unripe olives produce discharge rather than real oil. רב יוסף resolves that the dispute reflects different authorities, attributing one view to רב חייא and another to רבי שמעון ברבי. A Gemara says רב חייא זרקי ליה while רבי שמעון ברבי מטבל ביה, and it gives the mnemonic עשירים מקמצי to associate רבי שמעון ברבי with not discarding it.
- A Gemara interprets ששה חדשים בשמן המור with two views: רב הונא בר חייא identifies it as סטכתא, and רבי ירמיה בר אבא identifies it as שמן זית שלא הביא שליש. A Baraisa in the name of רבי יהודה defines אנפיקנון as שמן זית שלא הביא שליש and states that it is used because it removes hair and softens the skin, דמשיר את השיער ומעדן את הבשר.
- A Baraisa rules that oil from כבוש, שלוק, שרוי, שמרים, or ריח רע should not be brought and that if brought it is פסול. רבה asks whether הקדישן triggers מלקות as in הקדשת בעל מום, reasoning that a פסול item might be treated like בעל מום, or whether בעל מום applies only to בהמה. A Gemara leaves the question as תיקו.
- A presentation challenges the reading of עשירים מקמצי as simple stinginess by connecting רבי שמעון ברבי to רבי יהודה הנשיא’s statement that he was not נהנה מן העולם הזה אפילו כאצבע קטנה. A citation from תוספות in עבודה זרה י״א reconciles that statement with the report that רבי’s table never lacked delicacies by saying that the רבים who ate at his table benefited even if he personally did not. A citation from הגהות יעב״ץ reinterprets the phrase about אצבעות as referring to רבי’s ten fingers used to write the Mishnayos and his claim that he took nothing in return, linking אצבע קטנה to the act of writing rather than to asceticism. A presentation cites תורת חיים on סנהדרין ל״ו that משה, רבי, and רב אשי combine תורה וגדולה and that such גדולה is necessary for compiling foundational תורה, associating רבי with the capacity to produce the Mishnah and רב אשי with producing the Gemara.
- A Mishnah states that olives are harvested three times and each harvest yields three oils. A Mishnah describes the first harvest from the top of the tree and extracts oil by crushing and placing into a basket, then pressing again with a beam, and finally grinding, producing first, second, and third oils, with the first fit for the מנורה and the rest for מנחות. A Mishnah repeats the same three-stage extraction for the second harvest from olives at roof height, again making the first fit for the מנורה and the rest for מנחות.
- A Mishnah describes the third harvest as olives placed in a vat until they soften, then raised to the roof, pressed, placed into a basket, pressed again, and finally ground, again yielding three oils with the first fit for the מנורה and the rest for מנחות. A Mishnah concludes that the process yields nine grades of oil and ranks them, stating הראשון שבראשון אין למעלה הימנו and השלישי שבשלישי אין למטה הימנו, while equating intermediate combinations such as השני שבראשון with הראשון שבשני for purposes later clarified.
- A Gemara asks whether the correct wording is מגרגרו or מגלגלו and brings a Baraisa that uses מגלגלו. A Baraisa states that the oil for the מנורה must come directly from the olive and lays out the same three harvests and three extractions, describing grinding in a mill, placing into a basket, pressing with a beam, and grinding again, with the first oil reserved for the מנורה. רבי יהודה comments that it is not ground in a mill but crushed in a mortar, it is not pressed with a beam but with stones, and it is not placed on the bottom of the basket but around its sides.
- A Gemara asks how the Mishnah can say כותש like רבי יהודה while its plain description of the basket and beam aligns with the רבנן, and it answers that the anonymous tanna holds like רבי יהודה in one respect and disagrees in another. A Gemara concludes that the Mishnah reflects a composite position: crushing at the start like רבי יהודה while retaining the beam and the basket-bottom placement not like רבי יהודה.
- A Mishnah states that all מנחות would logically require שמן זית זך by קל וחומר from the מנורה, but a פסוק limits זך כתית to lighting, stating זך כתית למאור ואין זך כתית למנחות. A Gemara challenges the Mishnah’s claim that certain oils are שווין because only the first oils qualify for the מנורה, and רב נחמן בר יצחק explains that שווין means שווין למנחות. A Baraisa derives that זך means clean and that כתית implies crushed, and it concludes that the התורה limits the requirement for זך כתית for מנחות מפני החיסכון, with רבי אלעזר stating התורה חסה על ממונם של ישראל.
- A Gemara expounds צו את בני ישראל ויקחו אליך to mean אליך ולא לי, with רב שמואל בר נחמני stating that הקדוש ברוך הוא does not need the light. A Gemara points to the placement of שולחן בצפון and מנורה בדרום as evidence that the lighting is not for divine need. A Gemara explains ויעש לבית חלוני שקופים אטומים by teaching that the windows are wide inside and narrow outside to show that no outside light is required.
- A Gemara states that the מנורה is עדות לכל באי עולם שהשכינה שורה בישראל, and it argues that the במדבר years already show that Israel does not supply light for God. רבא defines the עדות as the נר מערבי, which receives oil like the others yet burns longer, and it is described as the lamp from which lighting begins and with which it ends, וממנה היה מדליק ובה היה מסיים.
Previous Page
Next Page
Daf Images are property of Vagshal and may not be reproduced.
Suggestions