REVIEW QUESTIONS ON GEMARA AND RASHI
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Menachos 27
MENACHOS 26-27 - these Dafim have been dedicated anonymously l'Iluy Nishmas
Tzirel Nechamah bas Tuvya Yehudah by her family.
(a) What does our Mishnah say about ...
(b) What do we learn from the Pasuk in Vayikra ...
- ... the Kometz, the Isaron (of a Minchah), the Yayin and the Levonah?
What do they all have in common?
- ... the So'les and the Shemen, and the Kometz and the Levonah?
(c) And what do we learn from the Pesukim ...
- ... where the Torah repeats "M'lo Kumtzo"?
- ... "mi'Soltah" (which contains an extra 'Hey')?
- ... "Kachah" (written in connection with the wine and with the Minchas Nesachim)?
- ... "u'mi'Shamnah" (in connection with the Minchas Nedavah)?
- ... there "mi'Soltah u'mi'Shamnah" and "mi'Girsah u'mi'Shamnah"? What does "mi'Girsah" mean?
- ... "al Kol Levonasah" (Vayikra) and "ve'es Kol ha'Levonah Asher al ha'Minchah" (Tzav)?
(a) And what does our Mishnah say about ...
(b) What constitutes ...
- ... the two goats of Yom Kipur, the two Kivsei Atzeres, the two Chalos (the Sh'tei ha'Lechem), two rows of the Lechem ha'Panim and the two Bazichin containing Levonah?
- ... the rows of Lechem ha'Panim and the Bazichin, the two species of the Nazir, the three species of the Parah and the four species of the Todah, of the Lulav and of the Metzora?
(c) Finally, what does the Tana say about the seven Hazayos between the
poles (of the Aron), the seven Hazayos towards the Paroches and the Hazayos
of the Mizbe'ach ha'Zahav?
- .. the two species of the Nazir?
- ... the three species of the Parah?
- ... the four species of the Metzora?
- ... the four species of the Todah?
(d) To what does this last ruling pertain?
(a) What do we learn from the fact that the Torah writes ...
(b) We know that each of the two Sedarim is crucial, as is each of the two
Bazichin, from the fact that the Torah writes in Emor "me'Ishei Hashem
- ... in Acharei-Mos "Ve'haysah Zos Lachem *le'Chukas* Olam"?
- ... in Emor (in connection with the Kivsei Atzeres) "Kodesh *Yih'yu* la'Hashem"?
- ... "So'les Tih'yenah" (ibid.)?
From where do we know that they are also Me'akev each other?
(c) We also know that the two species of the Nazir is crucial from "Kein
Ya'aseh" (in Naso), and the three of the Parah, from "Chukah" (in Chukas).
What do we learn from the Pasuk (with regard to the former) "al Zevach Todas
(d) And what do we learn from the Pasuk ...
- ... "Zos *Tih'yeh* Toras ha'Metzora"?
- ... in Emor "u'Lekachtem Lachem"?
(a) What does Rav Chanan bar Rava mean when he says that as long as one has
the four species of the Lulav, they are not Me'akev each other?
(b) What does the Beraisa say about the four species of the Lulav? How does
the Tana subdivide them into two groups?
(c) What does that have to do with the Pasuk in Amos "ha'Boneh ba'Shamayim
Ma'alosav, va'Agudaso al Eretz Yesadah"?
(d) How do we reconcile the Beraisa's initial ruling with what Rav Chanan
bar Rava, who just said that the four species of the Lulav do not need to be
(a) Which Tana holds that the four species of the Lulav require binding?
(b) How does he learn this from "Agudas Eizov"?
(c) The Rabbanan do not learn this 'Gezeirah-Shavah'.
What problem do we
have with the Beraisa 'Lulav Mitzvah le'Agdo, ve'Im Lo Agdo, Kasher'?
(d) We nevertheless establish the Beraisa like the Chachamim.
Mitzvah is the Tana referring to?
(a) From where do we learn that the seven Haza'os, as well as the various
sets of Haza'os of the Par Kohen Gadol on Yom Kipur are Me'akev each other?
Answers to questions
(b) What problem do we have with the Pasuk "Ve'asah le'Par (He'elam Davar
shel Tzibur) Ka'asher Asah le'Par ha'Chatas (shel Kohen Mashi'ach)"?
(c) Why indeed, does the Torah then write it?
(d) What do we learn from ...
(e) From the second "la'Par" ("ve'Ka'asher Asah le'Par ha'Chatas") we
include the Haza'os of the Par shel Yom ha'Kipurim in the Din of Ikuv.
- ... the word "ha'Chatas"?
- ... the continuation of the Pasuk "Kein Ya'aseh"?
do we need a special Pasuk for this, seeing as we already know this from the
(a) The Beraisa invalidates the Haza'os of the Parah Adumah (on the Har
ha'Zeisim), those she'bi'Fenim and those of a Metzora (by the Sha'ar
Nikanor), if they are performed she'Lo li'Shemah.
Why is the former Pasul?
(b) What do the Haza'os 'she'bi'Fenim' incorporate?
(c) The Tana invalidates the Haza'os of the Parah Adumah that were not
'Mechuvanos', but validates all the others.
What does 'Mechuvanos' mean?
Why is the former Pasul?
(d) What problem do we have with this? What did we learn in another Beraisa
regarding 'she'Lo Mechuvanos' of the Parah Adumah?
(a) And we establish this as a Machlokes Tana'im, as we shall see shortly.
What does the Beraisa say about Mechusrei Kaparah or Tevulei-Yom or other
Temei'im, who entered the Azarah be'Tum'ah ...
(b) If the Pasuk in Acharei-Mos "Mei Nidah Lo Zorak Alav" teaches us that a
Tamei who did not Tovel is Chayav Kareis for entering the Azarah, what do we
learn from ...
- ... be'Shogeg?
- ... be'Meizid?
(c) What will be the Din if a Tahor Zarim enter ...
- ... "Od Tum'aso Bo"?
- ... "ve'Ish Asher Yitma ve'Lo Yischata"?
(d) Over which area do Rebbi Yehudah and the Rabbanan argue?
- ... 'Lifenim mi'Mechitzasan'? What does 'Lifenim mi'Mechitzasan' mean?
- ... 'el P'nei ha'Kapores' (in front of the lid of the Aron)?
(a) The Torah writes in Acharei-Mos "ve'al Yavo ve'Chol Eis el ha'Kodesh,
mi'Beis la'Paroches, el P'nei ha'Kapores ... ve'Lo Yamus".
On what grounds
do the Rabbanan disagree with Rebbi Yehudah, who explains that "mi'Beis
la'Paroches" is only subject to a La'av?
(b) How does Rebbi Yehudah counter their argument? What would we have
thought had the Torah omitted "mi'Beis la'Paroches"?
(c) The Rabbanan refute this theory, based on the Pasuk in Terumah
"Ve'hivdilah ha'Paroches Lachem Bein ha'Kodesh u'Vein Kodesh ha'Kodashim".
What do they extrapolate from there?
(d) And on what grounds does Rebbi Yehudah disagree with the Rabbanan?
What, in his opinion, ought the Torah to have then omitted?
(a) How do the Rabbanan counter that? If according to them "el-P'nei
ha'Kapores" comes to teach us 'Derech Meshupash', what might this mean?
(b) What is the root of the word 'Meshupash'?
(c) The source for this D'rashah is a Beraisa.
What does Rebbi Eliezer ben
Ya'akov learn there from the Pasuk in Acharei-Mos "el-P'nei ha'Kapores
(a) Rebbi Yehudah too, agrees with this D'rashah.
What does he now learn
from the word "el"?
(b) What do the Rabbanan say to that?
(c) How does this Machlokes reflect on the Pasuk in Chukas (in connection
with sprinkling the blood of the Parah) "Ve'hizah *el* Nochach P'nei Ohel
(d) What have we proved from here?
(a) The Torah requires the Kohen Gadol to sprinkle the blood of the Par and
the Sa'ir "al-P'nei ha'Kapores" (towards the lid of the Aron)? According to
the Mishnah in Yoma, how did they achieve this during the time of the second
Beis Hamikdash, when there was no Aron ha'Kodesh?
(b) On what grounds does Rav Yosef query this, according to Rebbi Yehudah?
(c) How does Rabah bar Ula answer this Kashya, based on the Pasuk there
"Ve'chiper es Mikdash ha'Kodesh"?
(a) Rava establishes both Beraisos ('she'Lo Mechuvanos, Pesulos' and 'she'Lo
Mechuvanos, Kesheiros' according to the Rabbanan).
Answers to questions
How will he then explain
the Beraisa which says 'Pesulos'?
(b) How will he then establish the Beraisa which rules 'Kesheiros'?