ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf MENACHOS 53
(a) The Torah explicitly writes - that the Minchas Ma'afeh-Tanur and the Minchah al ha'Machavas may not be baked as Chametz.
(b) And we then learn from the Pasuk ...
1. ..."Zos Toras ha'Minchah ... Matzos Te'achel" - that this prohibition extends to all Menachos (though in the form of an Asei).
2. ... "Lo Se'afeh Chametz" - that it is even Me'akev.
(c) Rebbi Meir and Rebbi Yehudah argue in a Mishnah in Pesachim over the definition of Chametz and 'Si'ur'. 'Si'ur', according to ...
1. ... Rebbi Meir is 'Hichsifu Panav' (where the surface of the dough has turned pale), and 'Chametz' - where 'grasshoppers antenna' appear in the dough.
2. ... Rebbi Yehudah, is where 'grasshoppers antenna' appear in the dough, and 'Chametz' - where those antenna criss-cross.
(d) Rav Chisda queries the Limud from "Lo Se'afeh Chametz" - because, he suggests - we need it to teach us that the Menachos may not be real Chametz, only Si'ur (and not 'Le'akev').
(a) Rav Chisda cannot be referring to the Si'ur of ...
1. ... Rebbi Meir according to Rebbi Yehudah - because Rebbi Yehudah considers that proper Matzah (automatically negating the question).
2. ... Rebbi Yehudah according to Rebbi Meir - because Rebbi Meir considers that proper Chametz (automatically negating the D'rashah).
3. ... Rebbi Meir according to Rebbi Meir - because from the fact that one receives Malkos for eating it on Pesach, he must consider it Chametz [see Tosfos D.H. 'Ela de'Rebbi Meir']).
(b) So he must be referring to the Si'ur of Rebbi Yehudah according to Rebbi Yehudah, which is Chametz Nukshah (but not real Chametz).
(c) Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak also queries the Limud from "Lo Se'afeh Chametz". He suggests that we need it to teach us - "Lo Se'afeh Chametz" 'Ela Chalut' - which means 'scalded in boiling water'.
(d) Initially, we answer - that regarding those Menachos that the Torah wants 'Chalut', it has already written "Revuchah", whereas the Menachos by which it did not, it obviously does not want to be Chalut.
(a) Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak nevertheless suggests that we learn from "Lo'Se'afeh Chametz" (even with regard to those Menachos where the Torah does not write "Revuchah") - that even though preparing them as Chalut is not obligatory, it is voluntary.
(b) Ravina finally suggests we learn from "Lo'Se'afeh Chametz" - that a La'av pertains to baking any Minchah as Chametz (and not just an Asei, as we learned until now).
(c) We learn from the Pasuk (in connection with the Minchah al ha'Machavas) "Matzah Sih'yeh" - that baking the Menachos Chametz is Me'akev.
(a) Rebbi P'reida suggested to Rebbi Ami that we learn with regard to the Menachos, from the Pasuk in Bo (in connection with the Matzos) "u'Shemartem es ha'Matzos" - the Din in the Mishnah later in the Perek that all Menachos must be kneaded with warm water and guarded against becoming Chamutz (by working the dough without break).
(b) When Rebbi Ami replied 'be'Gufah K'siv, "Matzah Sih'yeh", he meant - that we do not need to learn this from a Pasuk by Matztah, because the Pasuk "Matzah Sih'yeh" (written in connection with Menachos themselves) implies - that one should make the Minchah Kasher, whilst at the same time guarding it against become Chametz.
(c) He reconciles this with the D'rashah that we just made from the same words - by explaining that we would have known that had the Torah written "Matzah Hi". The fact that the Torah writes "Sih'yeh" leaves room for a second D'rashah.
(a) The Rabbanan informed Rebbi P'reida that Rebbi Ezra, the grandson of Rebbi Avtulas was waiting outside. The latter, they told him, was the tenth generation after Rebbi Elazar ben Azaryah, who was in turn, the tenth generation after Ezra ha'Sofer.
(b) Rebbi P'reida responded - that if he was a Talmid-Chacham that was fine, and certainly if he had Yichus too, but if all he had was Yichus, let a fire consume him.
(c) When the Rabbanan assured him that Rebbi Ezra was indeed a Talmid-Chacham too, he was invited in and Rebbi P'reida saw how upset he was about the questions he had asked concerning him, he appeased him - by opening the conversation with words of Agadah, which lighten the atmosphere and make a person happy.
(d) Based on the Pasuk "Amrah la'Hashem Adoni Atah, Tovasi bal Alecha" ...
1. ... K'lal Yisrael asked of Hash-m - to reward them for spreading His Name in the world.
2. ... Hash-m replied - that He owed them nothing ...
3. ... adding "li'Kedoshim Asher ba'Aretz Heimah, va'Adirei Kol Cheftzi Bam", meaning - that He had indeed rewarded the Avos for being the first to do so, and that He desired them (referring to them as the mighty ones).
(a) The word that gave Rebbi Ezra his cue to begin Darshening was - "Adirei".
(b) He then Darshened, based on the Pesukim ...
1. ... "Adir ba'Marom Hash-m", "va'Adirei Kol Cheftzi Bam", "Tzalalu ka'Oferes be'Mayim Adirim" and "mi'Kolos Mayim Rabim Adirim" - 'Let the Mighty One come (Hash-m), and avenge the mighty Ones (Yisrael), from the hand of the mighty ones (the Egyptians), in the mighty (waters of the Yam-Suf).
2. ... "Vayishlach be'Yad Nasan ha'Navi Va'yikra Sh'mo Yedidyah", "Mah li'Yedidi be'Veisi", "Mah Yedidus Mishkenosecha", "Ashirah Na li'Yedidi", "le'Binyamin Amar, Yedid Hash-m" and "Nasati es Yedidus Nafshi be'Chaf Oyvehah" - May the beloved one (Shlomoh) the 'son' of the beloved one (Avraham) come and build the beloved (house - the Beis Hamikdash), for the Beloved One (Hash-m), in the portion of the beloved one (Binyamin), to atone for the beloved ones (Yisrael).
(a) Rebbi Ezra also Darshened, based on the Pesukim ...
1. ... "Va'teireh Oso ki Tov Hu", "Ki Lekach Tov Nasati Lachem", "Tov Hash-m la'Kol" and "Heitivah Hash-m la'Tovim" - that the good one (Moshe) will come and receive the good thing (Torah) from the Good One (Hash-m) on behalf of the good ones (Yisrael).
2. ... "ki Zeh Moshe ha'Ish", "ve'Zos ha'Torah", "Zeh Keili Ve'anveihu" and "Am Zu Kanisa" - that this one will come and receive the Torah (which is called 'Zos') from Hash-m (who is called 'Zeh') on behalf of Yisrael (who are referred to as "Am Zu").
(b) When, after the Churban Beis Hamikdash, Hash-m found Avraham in the Beis-Hamikdash and asked him "Mah li'Yedidi be'Veisi", he replied - that he came to enquire about his children (K'lal Yisrael).
(c) And when Hash-m told him ...
1. ... that his children had sinned and been exiled, he asked - whether they had not sinned be'Shogeg.
2. ... that they sinned on purpose, he asked whether it was not the minority who had sinned.
3. ... that most of them were guilty, he asked why Hash-m had not saved them on account of the B'ris Milah.
4. ... that they had nullified the B'ris Milah, he asked - why Hash-m had not waited a little longer, to give them a chance to do Teshuvah.
(a) And when Hash-m explained to him that the more his children sinned, the happier they became - he placed his hands on his head cried out and wept, and asked whether that meant that all was lost.
(b) In reply to Avraham's query, Hash-m said "Zayis Ra'anan Yafeh P'ri To'ar, Kara Hash-m Shimcha". He compared Yisrael to an olive-tree - which only bears fruit after a long time, and when it does, it bears a lot. Alternatively - the fruit of an olive-tree, unlike that of other trees, does not ripen bit by bit, only all in one go.
(a) Rebbi Chanina bar Papa interpreted the Pasuk "le'Kol Hamulah Gedolah Hitzis Eish Alehah, ve'Ra'u Dalyosav" with reference to the Churban Beis-Hamikdash. He explains ...
1. ... "ve'Ra'u Dalyosav" to mean - that their glory was destroyed.
2. ... "le'Kol Hamulah Gedolah Hitzis Eish Alehah" - because of the voice of their words, He set fire to the Beis Hamikdash'.
(b) This in turn, is based on his own interpretation of the Pasuk in Sh'lach-Lecha "Ki Chazak Hu Mimenu", by which the Meraglim meant - that Hash-m Himself (Kevayachol) is unable to remove his vessels (i.e. to take the Cana'anim) out of Cana'an.
(c) Rav Acha bar Chin'na objected to this explanation, based on Rebbi Chanina bar Pana's interpretation of the word "Hamulah" - which ought rather to have read "Milah" (or "Mulah).
(a) Rav Acha bar Chin'na therefore, interpreted it - with reference to Avraham, informing him that his Tefilos had borne fruit.
(b) Hash-m told Avraham that his Tefilos in the Beis Hamikdash had achieved that each of the four Galuyos would operate independently, rather than strike them with the ferocity of all four combined, as He had originally intented. Alternatively, Hash-m might have told him - that instead of each Galus extending as long as all four, He had divided the initial time period into four, with each of the four Malchuyos receiving its independent time slot.
(c) Rebbi Yehoshua ben Levi explains the analogy of Yisrael to an olive-tree by way of the leaves - in that Yisrael will exist forever, just like the leaves of an olive-tree remain on the tree the whole year.
(d) Whereas Rebbi Yochanan explains it by way of the oil - inasmuch as they only do Teshuvah through suffering, just like the olives only produce oil when they are beaten.
(a) Rav Chisda explains 'Chaseirah' and 'Yeseirah' in our Mishnah, when the yeast is thick or thin (as we explained there). The problem with this is - that seeing as at the time of measuring there is an Isaron, what difference does it make what the mixture would have been like if the dough would have been flour?
(b) Rabah and Rav Yosef answer - that we do indeed measure the Isaron as if it was flour, and not dough.
(c) It would be possible to obtain the necessary yeast according to both Rebbi Meir and Rebbi Yehudah, without any problem - by taking some of the flour after it had been measured, and turning it into yeast by placing it either in a hot location or together with another yeast, before returning it to the remainder of the flour and kneading them together.
(d) The reason that they do not do so is - because decreed that whoever sees them returning the yeast without measuring it, will think that one is permitted to add an external yeast, over and above the Isaron.