POINT BY POINT SUMMARY
Prepared by Rabbi P. Feldman
of Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
Ask A Question on the daf
Previous daf Menachos 31
1) WHERE THE "HALACHAH" FOLLOWS R. SHIMON SHEZURI
(a) Answer #5 (Rav Papa): He said this (the Halachah follows
R. Shimon Shezuri here and in all places) concerning the
Mishnah about a chest.
(b) Answer #6 (Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak): He said this
concerning the Mishnah about wine.
(c) (The Mishnah concerning a chest - Beis Shamai): (Wooden
vessels are equated to a sack, they are Mekabel Tum'ah
only if they are moved when empty and when full - this
excludes a vessel whose volume is at least 40 Sa'im.) We
measure the volume of the interior;
(d) Beis Hillel say, we measure the volume from the outside
(i.e. the walls are included);
(e) R. Yosi says, all agree that (Shitah Mekubetzes - not
only the walls, but even) the volume of the legs and rims
themselves is included;
1. The volume between the legs or within the rims is
(f) R. Shimon Shezuri says, if the legs are a Tefach tall
(they are important, they are not Batul to the chest),
what is between them is not included; if they are less
than a Tefach, what is between them is included.
(g) (The Mishnah concerning wine - R. Meir): Oil is a drink,
(therefore, by Rabbinic decree) whenever it is Tamei, it
is a Rishon l'Tum'ah (Tosfos - this entire Mishnah refers
to liquids that congealed);
(h) Chachamim say, even honey is a drink;
(i) R. Shimon Shezuri says, even wine is a drink.
(j) Question: Do the previous Tana'im say that wine is not a
(k) Correction: Rather, R. Shimon Shezuri says, wine is a
drink (but not oil or honey).
(l) (Beraisa - R. Shimon Shezuri) Version #1: Once, Tevel
became mixed with (a greater quantity of) Chulin; R.
Tarfon told me to buy in the market (Demai, from an Am
ha'Aretz), and to separate Ma'aser from it on the Tevel
in the mixture;
1. (Because Tevel is the minority, mid'Oraisa it is
Batul, the mixture is Chulin;) R. Tarfon holds that
the majority of Amei ha'Aretz take Ma'aser,
therefore mid'Oraisa, Demai is also exempt, he
tithes from what is exempt on what is exempt (the
obligation to take Ma'aser on both of these is only
(m) Question: Why didn't R. Tarfon tell him to buy from a
Nochri? (His produce is also exempt mid'Oraisa!)
(n) Answer: R. Tarfon holds that even if a Nochri buys land
in Eretz Yisrael, it retains its Kedushah, the produce
must be tithed mid'Oraisa, one may not separate from what
is liable to exempt produce that is exempt (mid'Oraisa).
(o) Version #2: R. Tarfon told him to buy produce from a
Nochri, and to separate from it on the Tevel in the
1. He holds that if a Nochri buys land in Eretz
Yisrael, it loses its Kedushah, the produce is
exempt from tithes (mid'Oraisa), he tithes from what
is exempt on what is exempt.
(p) Question: Why didn't R. Tarfon tell him to buy Demai?
(q) Answer: R. Tarfon does not hold that the majority of Amei
ha'Aretz take Ma'aser, rather, it is like an even doubt,
Ma'aser must be taken mid'Oraisa, one may not separate
from what is liable to exempt produce that is exempt.
(r) (Rav Yemar bar Shalmiya): (Ravin bar Chinena taught that
the Halachah follows R. Shimon Shezuri in all places -
does this include this Beraisa?
(s) Answer (Rav Papa): Yes.
(t) Question (Mar Zutra citing R. Chanina of Sura): Why was
Rav Yemar unsure - Ravin did not say, the Halachah always
follows R. Shimon Shezuri in the Mishnah - he said, in
2) A TEAR IN THE PARCHMENT
(a) (Rav Ze'ira): If a tear in the parchment goes through two
lines, it may be fixed; if it goes through three lines,
it may not be fixed;
3) THE SHAPE OF THE WRITING IN A "MEZUZAH"
(b) (Rabah Zuti): A tear through three lines may not be fixed
in an old parchment (Rashi - because it does not look
nice; Nimukei Yosef - because it is prone to tear
again), in a new parchment it may be fixed;
1. It does not depend just on old or new;
(c) A tear must be fixed with sinews, not with thread.
2. Version #1 (Rashi): Rather, if the parchment was
Afitzan (processed with gallnuts), it is dark, this
is like an old parchment; if it was not Afitzan,
this is like new.
3. Version #2 (Nimukei Yosef): Rather, if the parchment
was Afitzan, it is strong, like a new parchment; if
it was not Afitzan, this is like old.
(d) Question (Rav Yehudah bar Aba): What if the tear is
between columns or between lines?
(e) This question is not resolved.
(a) (R. Ze'iri): If two words were written on every line of a
Mezuzah, it is Kosher;
(b) Question: What if two words were written on a line, three
on the next, and one on the next?
(c) Answer (Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak): All the more so this
is Kosher, for (there is a precedent for this -) this is
like a Shirah (a part of the Torah in which parts of the
lines are left blank).
(d) Question (Beraisa): If text that should be written
normally was written like a Shirah, or vice-versa, this
(e) Answer: That refers to a Sefer Torah, but in a Mezuzah it
(f) (Rabah bar bar Chanah): If two words were written on a
line, three on the next, and one on the next, it is
1. If it was written like Kubah (1,2,3, it gets
progressively wider) or a tail (3,2,1) it is Pasul.
(g) (Rav Chisda): "Al ha'Aretz" (the last two words) must be
(the only words) on the last line.
1. Some say that it should be at the end of the line,
some say that it should be at the beginning of the
(h) (R. Chelbo): I saw Rav Huna roll his Mezuzah from "Echad"
(which is towards the end of the first line, i.e. from
the left) towards Shma (on the right); the Parshiyos were
*closed*. (In an *open* break between Parshiyos, there is
a large space extending to the end of the line).
2. The first opinion learns from "Chi'Gvo'ah Shamayim
Al ha'Aretz" - "Al ha'Aretz" should be at the end of
the line, in order that it will be right underneath
the previous two words "Ki'Mei ha'Shamayim";
3. The second opinion intends to maximize the distance
between "Al ha'Aretz" and "Ki'Mei ha'Shamayim" (the
blessing is that our days will be as great as this