(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long asthis header and the footer at the end are included.)


prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem

Previous daf


MENACHOS 46 - Dedicated by Mr. and Mrs. D. Kornfeld in honor of the births of three first-born Turkel grandchildren: Ohr Esther, to Eitan and Ayeleth Turkel of Raanana; Yael Nechamah to Avi and Esti Turkel of Passaic; and a baby boy to Shoshi [Turkel] and Yossi Kaufman of Manchester. Mazel Tov to the proud parents and grandparents!


(a) The Beraisa learns from "al Machavas" that the Minchas Chavitin requires a K'li Shareis (as we just explained). The Tana learns from the 'Gezeirah-Shavah' "ba'Shemen" "ba'Shemen" (from Minchas Nesachim ["ve'Isaron So'les Balul ba'Shemen Kasis Reva ha'Hin"]) - that it requires three Lugin of oil (for the Isaron).
(b) Or perhaps, we suggest, one ought to learn it from a Minchas Nedavah. If we did - a Minchas Chavitin would require a mere Log of oil.
(c) We suggest that it is preferable to learn 'Tashat' from 'Tashat' from Minchas Nesachim, which falls under the category of Tamid - because it is brought together with the Korban Tamid each morning and afternoon.
(d) The Minchas Chavitin and the Minchas Nesachim override Shabbos and Tum'ah - because they are obligatory Korbanos with a fixed time, whereas the Minchas Yachid does not - because it is not.

(a) We counter that perhaps one ought to learn 'Yagel' from 'Yagel'. The 'Yud stands for 'Yachid' (whereas the Minchas Nesachim pertains to a Tzibur) - the 'Gimel' for - 'bi'Gelal Atzmah' (whereas the Minchas Nesachim comes together with a Korban) and the 'Lamed' - 'Levonah', which they do not require (whereas a Minchas Nesachim does).
(b) Rebbi Yochanan ben Berokah learns it from the Pasuk "So'les Minchas Tamid" - which compares the Minchas Chavitin to a Korban Tamid (as we learned earlier).

(a) Rebbi Shimon says 'Ribah Ka'an Shemen ve'Ribah be'Minchas Kevasim Shemen', by which he means - that it is preferable to learn Minchas Chavitin (where the Torah specifically comes to add oil) from the Minchas Kesavim which has a lot of oil, rather than from a Minchas Nedavah, where there is the minimum Shi'ur of one Log.
(b) If we learned the Minchas Chavitin from the Minchas Parim and the Minchas Eilim, as he suggests - it would require two Lugin of oil.
(c) He rejects this suggestion however, preferring to learn Minchas Chavitin from Minchas Kevasim - since they both consist of one Isaron, as opposed to an Ayil, which consists of two Isronos, and a Par, which constitutes three.

(a) The problem with the Tana's suggestion to learn Minchas Chavitin from Minchas Nedavah, rather than from Minchas Nesachim is - that we just quoted the word "ba'Shemen", which implies 'Lehosif' (to add to the minimum Shi'ur of oil [a Log]).
(b) According to Abaye, the author of ...
1. ... the Reisha '"ba'Shemen, Lehosif Lah Shemen" is - Rebbi Shimon.
2. ... the suggestion 'I K'lach le'Derech Zeh ' ... "ve'Ne'emar be'Minchas Nedavah Shemen" is - Rebbi Yishmael B'no shel Rebbi Yochanan ben Berokah (whose opinion we cite before having finished with that of Rebbi Shimon).
(c) Rav Huna b'rei de'Rav Yehoshua establishes the suggestion too, like Rebbi Yishmael B'no shel Rebbi Yochanan ben Berokah, and his dilemma is how to interpret the words "al Machavas", which might mean ...
1. ... that it (the Minchas Chavitin) has the Din of a Minchah al ha'Machavas, in which case "ba'Shemen implies 'Lehosif'.
2. ... simply that it must be baked in a pan and no more), in which case it may not require any oil at all (like a Minchas Chotei), and "ba'Shemen" comes to necessitate the minimum amount of oil.
(d) So Rebbi Yishmael tries to learn it from the 'Din' ('Chavshat' from 'Chavshat'). When that does not work (because of 'Yagel'), he learns it from "So'les Minchas Tamid (as we already explained).

(a) Rava establishes the author of the suggestion too, as Rebbi Shimon (see Rabeinu Gershom). True, Rebbi Shimon just said that "al Machavas" comes to increase oil. Nevertheless - he tries to learn it independently ('Ilu Lo Ne'emar ka'Amar').
(b) After refuting the Limud from the Din of 'Chavshat', and being forced to apply his original Limud from "ba'Shemen", Rebbi Shimon still needs to come on to the Limud of 'Minchah ha'Ba'ah Isaron' - so as not to have to learn from Minchas Parim ve'Eilim (as we already explained).


(a) Rebbi Yehudah learns from ...
1. ... the Pasuk "ve'ha'Kohen ha'Mashi'ach Tachtav mi'Banav Ya'aseh Osah" - that in the event of the Kohen Gadol's death, the heirs are obligated to bring the Minchas Chavitin, until their father's successor is appointed.
2. ... "Osah" - that it is burned in one go, and not in halves.
(b) Whereas Rebbi Shimon learns from ...
1. ... "Chok Olam" - that the Tzibur must bring it.
2. ... "Kalil Toktar" - that it is entirely burned, and not eaten (or that it is burned in one go, and not in halves).
(c) When Rebbi Shimon rules that the Tzibur brings the Minchas Chavitin, he means - that it is purchased from the Terumas ha'Lishkah.

(a) The Pasuk there "Zeh Korban Aharon u'Vanav Asher Yakrivu la'Hashem" teaches us that both Aharon and his sons brought a Korban on the day they were inaugurated. The Tana learns from ...
1. ... "Asher Yakrivu la'Hashem" - that they were independent Korbanos (and not one that they brought between them).
2. ... "ve'ha'Kohen ha'Mashi'ach Tachtav mi'Banav ... " - that even Kohanim Hedyotos bring this Korban, and not just Kohanim Gedolim.
(b) We cannot extrapolate from what we just learned that a Kohen Hedyot must bring a Korban on the day that he is inaugurated (i.e. when he turns thirty) - because the Beraisa may well be confined to Aharon and his sons in the Midbar (and not to future generations at all) See Rashash.
(c) Even though we need the Pasuk "ve'ha'Kohen ha'Mashi'ach Tachtav mi'Banav ... " to teach us this latest ruling, Rebbi Yehudah nevertheless learns from it that the heirs are obligated to bring the Minchas Chavitin, in the event of their father's death - from the 'Mem' in "mi'Banav" (when the Torah could have written "Banav Ya'aseh (or Ya'asu) Osah".

(a) Rebbi Shimon Darshens "ve'ha'Kohen ha'Mashi'ach" in the way that we just explained, whereas from "Osah", he learns - that the Kohen Gadol's successor is obligated to bring an entire Isaron, and is not permitted to combine the remaining half of the deceased Kohen Gadol Korban with the half that he brings (as we learned earlier).
(b) Although we learned that from the 'Vav' in "u'Machtzisah ba'Erev", as we explained above - Rebbi Shimon does not hold of that D'rashah.
(c) Whereas Rebbi Yehudah learns from "Chok Olam" - that this Halachah applies to all generations (see also Tosfos DH 'Chok Olam').

(a) The Torah writes "Kalil Toktar" in the earlier Parshah, and "Lo Se'achel" in the later one, the Beraisa says - referring to that of the Kohen Gadol and the Kohen Hedyot, respectively.
(b) The author of this Beraisa is Rebbi Yehudah (who does not Darshen "Kalil Toktar" like Rebbi Shimon), who learns from the Pasuk (in the Parshah of Kohen Hedyot) "Kalil Tih'yeh Lo Se'achel" - a 'Gezeirah-Shavah', including both the Kohen Gadol and the Kohen Hedyot in both the La'av of "Lo Se'achel" and the Asei of "Kalil Toktar" (see Rashash).

(a) In the Mishnah in Shekalim, Rebbi Shimon lists seven Takanos Beis-Din. The first concerns a Nochri who sends a Korban to Yerushalayim from overseas, but without the Nesachim. Chazal instituted that ...
1. ... the Tzibur are obligated to provide them - and the same applies to ...
2. ... a Ger who died, leaving Korbanos that he did not manage to bring before he died, but without the Nesachim.
(b) The third Takanah concerns a Kohen Gadol who died without having brought the Minchas Chavitin, which the Chachamim obligated the Tzibur to do, if the new Kohen Gadol has not yet been appointed. Rebbi Avahu reconciles this with Rebbi Shimon, who ruled earlier that the Tzibur are obligated to bring the Minchas Chavitin mi'd'Oraysa - by turning it into two Takanos. mi'd'Oraysa, the Minchas Chavitin of a deceased Kohen Gadol must be supplied by the Tzibur. However, when the Chachamim saw that the Tzibur's funds were running dry, they insitituted that the heirs should bring it. Then when they saw that the heirs were being lax, they reverted to the Torah obligation and obligated the Tzibur to bring it.

(a) The Beraisa learns from the Pasuk ...
1. ... "Chatas" - that the Parah Adumah is subject to Me'ilah.
2. ... "Hi" - that its ashes are not ("Hi", 've'Lo be'Afrah').
(b) Rav Ashi reconciles this with the Mishnah in Shekalim, which lists 'Ein Mo'alin be'Afrah' among the Takanos Chachamim - by turning it into two Takanos. mi'd'Oraysa, the ashes of the Parah Adumah are not subject to Me'ilah. However, when the Chachamim saw that people were abusing the ashes (by using them to place on their wounds) they instituted that they should. But when, on account of that, people began to withdraw from Safek Haza'os, they reinstated the Torah law.

Next daf


For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,