Menachos 105
Summary
- Today’s *shiur* in Menachos begins on daf 104b and moves into daf 105, explaining the Mishnah’s dispute between the *Tanna Kamma* and Rabbi Yehudah about what a person brings when he vows “*harei alai minchah*” without specifying which *minchah*. The *Tanna Kamma* holds he may bring any of the five *menachos*, while Rabbi Yehudah requires *minchas soless* because it is *meyuchedes sheba’menachos*, and the Gemara clarifies that this means it lacks a *shem levai* rather than being “first.” The *Rambam* rules like the *stam Mishnah* that any of the five suffice, while Rashi in Chumash follows Rabbi Yehudah because it is *karov l’pshat*, as explained by R’ Eliyahu Mizrachi and brought by the *Shafsei Chachamim* and the *Mishneh Lamelech*. The Gemara then analyzes formulations like “*minchah*,” “*min ha’minchah*,” “*menachos*,” and “*mini minchah*,” leaving Rav Pappa’s question unresolved due to the possibility that a *beraisa* reflects Rabbi Shimon’s view, and it proceeds to a case of someone who specified a *minchah* but forgot which, showing that the Mishnah is not like Rabbi Shimon unless one uses *tenai* and related technical mechanisms, including details of *kemitzah* and *mosar shemen*.
- Today’s *shiur* is in Maseches Menachos on daf 105, beginning from daf 104b three lines from the bottom where the Gemara quotes the Mishnah at the two dots, and it continues through the ensuing Gemara on daf 105 and beyond.
- The Mishnah states that according to the *Tanna Kamma*, one who says *harei alai minchah* without specifying may bring whichever of the five *menachos* he wants, including *minchas soless*, the two *ma’afeh tanur* forms of *chalos* and *rekikin*, and the *machavas* or *marcheshes*. Rabbi Yehudah says he must bring *minchas soless* because it is *meyuchedes sheba’menachos*.
- The narrative states a *klal* that when there is a dispute between a *stam Mishnah* and Rabbi Yehudah, *halachah k’stam Mishnah*, since Rebbi arranged the Mishnayos with a *stam* to indicate the ruling follows the *Tanna Kamma*. The *Rambam* in Perak 17 of Hilchos Ma’aseh Korbanos Halachah 5 rules like the *Tanna Kamma* that one who says “*minchah*” may choose any of the five *menachos*.
- Rashi on Vayikra 2:1, *V’nefesh ki sakriv korban minchah la’Hashem, soless yihyeh korbano*, says that one who says *harei alai minchah* *stam* brings *minchas soless*, aligning with Rabbi Yehudah. R’ Eliyahu Mizrachi explains that Rashi in Chumash selects the halachic view closest to *pshat*, and here Rabbi Yehudah is *karov l’pshat* because the pesukim describe other *menachos* with identifying conditions such as *v’chi sakriv korban minchah ma’afeh tanur*, *v’im minchah al hamachavas korbanecha*, and *v’im minchas marcheshes korbanecha*, while the *soless* case is framed as the general *korban minchah la’Hashem* followed by *soless yihyeh korbano*.
- The Gemara concludes that *meyuchedes sheba’menachos* means *d’leis lei shem levai*, since the other *menachos* carry descriptive names like *minchah ma’afeh tanur*, *minchah al machavas*, and *minchas marcheshes*, while the *soless* offering is not labeled as *minchas soless* in that way. The Gemara addresses the *beraisa* that says *ho’il u’fasach bo ha’kasuv techilah* by explaining it as an identifying *siman* for which *minchah* Rabbi Yehudah refers to, not the underlying reason, and it calls this *simana b’alma* as Rashi explains for purposes of *girsa* and memory.
- The narrative notes that it is appropriate for the *beraisa* to give Rabbi Yehudah a *siman*, since Rabbi Yehudah gives a *siman* in the Mishnah on daf 96 and the well-known *siman* in the *seder shel Pesach*, *d’tzach adash b’achav*. Rav Yaakov Yitzchak Halevi Ruderman zt”l is quoted explaining that Rabbi Yehudah is called *rosh ham’dabrim b’chol makom* because of his concise style and his use of *simanim*, in line with the Gemara in Pesachim 3b that one should teach *b’derech ketzarah*, along with the *miltasa d’bdichusa* that MC in Yiddish means *mach kurtz*.
- The Mishnah rules that one who says *minchah* or *min ha’minchah* brings one *minchah*, while one who says *menachos* or *min ha’menachos* brings two. Rav Pappa asks about one who says *mini minchah*, and the Gemara entertains that it might mean two *menachos* because *mini* is plural and *minchah* can be a collective term, or it might mean one *minchah* chosen from the various types, expressed as *m’minei minchah chadah minchah alai*. The attempt to resolve it from the Mishnah fails because deductions from the *reisha* and *seifa* pull in opposite directions, and a *beraisa* about *min menachos alai* and later about *min menachos* versus *mini menachos* yields a possible inference that *mini minchah* is one, but the Gemara says the proof may depend on whether the *beraisa* follows Rabbi Shimon.
- Rabbi Shimon holds *machatzah chalos u’machatzah rekikin yavi*, while the *Rabbanan* forbid mixing and require all *chalos* or all *rekikin*. The Gemara explains that if the *beraisa* is Rabbi Shimon, then *mini minchah* could be understood as one *minchah* containing two *minim* through a mixture, while according to the *Rabbanan* that model does not exist, leaving Rav Pappa’s question without a final resolution as presented.
- The Mishnah states that if one says *pirashti* that he specified which *minchah* he vowed but does not remember what he specified, he brings all five, making a condition that whichever is required fulfills his vow and the others are a new *nedavah* to the Beis HaMikdash. Rav Yirmiyah says the Mishnah is *d’lo k’Rabbi Shimon*, since Rabbi Shimon’s permission for mixed *chalos* and *rekikin* would create many more possibilities, with the Gemara stating one would need at least fourteen and possibly sixteen depending on a dispute between Rabbi Yehudah and Rabbi Meir about whether *menachos* come in sets of ten or twelve.
- Rabbeinu Gershom lists the possible combinations from nine *chalos* and one *rakik* through one *chalah* and nine *rekikin* as nine distinct mixes, in addition to the possibility of all *rekikin*, and he frames this as *gor’e’a u’mosif* from one side to the other. The narrative notes that Rashi begins this calculation but does not present the full *cheshbon* in the same way.
- A *beraisa* about Rabbi Shimon describes a *safek metzora* on the 61st day bringing an *asham* and *log* and declaring *im metzora hu zeh ashmo v’zeh logo, v’im lav asham zeh yehei shalmei nedavah*, and the offering is handled with the *chumros* of both *asham* and *shelamim*, including *shechitah b’tzafon*, *matan behonos*, *semichah*, *nesachim*, *tenufas chazeh v’shok*, and limitations of eating to *zichrei kehunah* for *yom v’laylah*. The *shittah mekubetzes* is cited that lines beginning *v’af al gav* reflect notes of the *Rabbanan Savora’ei*, and the text distinguishes between cases like *asham* and *shelamim* where a *tenai* can cause *kadshim l’beis hap’sul* by limiting eating time and therefore is not done *l’chatchilah* except *l’takunei gavra*, versus *menachos* where the text says there is no such downside and the *tenai* can work *afilu l’chatchilah*.
- Rav Pappa challenges Abaye about how Rabbi Shimon’s approach functions if one brings *issaron echad mi’shnei issaronim* and *log echad mi’shnei login*, and the Gemara states it has a tradition that Rabbi Shimon holds *im heivi issaron echad mi’shnei issaronim v’log echad mi’shnei login yatza*. The Gemara asks how *kemitzah* is performed and answers that he stipulates conditions so that *kemitzah* from *chalos* applies appropriately and *kemitzah* from *rekikin* applies appropriately, and it invokes Rabbi Shimon’s rule that even if a kometz came from only one of the two, *yatza*, because the *ma’afeh tanur* is treated as one *korban*. The Gemara raises the issue of *mosar shemen* because in one case it returns to the *chalos* while in another it is eaten by the *kohanim*, and it resolves it by adopting the view of Rabbi Shimon ben Yehudah *mishum Rabbi Shimon* that even with *machatzah chalos u’machatzah rekikin* one smears *k’min ki* and *mosar hashemen ne’echal l’kohanim*, eliminating the conflict.
Previous Page
Next Page
Daf Images are property of Vagshal and may not be reproduced.
Suggestions