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 19
MENACHOS 19 - anonymously dedicated by an Ohev Torah and Marbitz Torah in
Baltimore, Maryland, formerly of Ramat Beit Shemesh, Israel.
1) THE SOURCE OF THE ARGUMENT
(a) Question: What is Chachamim's reason?
2) WHAT TEACHES THAT SOMETHING IS "ME'AKEV"?
(b) Answer: "V'Yotzak Aleha Shemen...Ve'Hevi'ah El Benei
Aharon ha'Kohanim v'Komatz" - only after Kemitzah,
Kohanim must do the Avodah, but Yetzikah and Belilah of a
Zar are Kesherim.
(c) (Implied question): Why does R. Shimon argue?
(d) Answer #1: He says that "Benei Aharon ha'Kohanim" is
expounded to refer to what precedes it (Yetzikah) and
after it (Kemitzah).
(e) Objection: Elsewhere, R. Shimon does not expound what
comes before and after!
1. (Beraisa): "V'Lakach...b'Etzba'o" - This teaches
that Kabalah must be with the right hand.
(f) Answer #2: R. Shimon says that the 'Vov'
("V'Yotzak...*Ve*'Hevi'ah El Benei Aharon") connects the
latter Parshah (Kemitzah) to the former (Yetzikah), i.e.
also Yetzikah requires Kehunah.
2. "B'Etzba'o v'Nasan" - This teaches that Zerikah must
be with the right hand.
3. R. Shimon: It does not say 'Yad' regarding Kabalah,
therefore, if it was done with the left hand it is
4. (Abaye): They argue whether "B'Etzba'o" is expounded
to refer to what comes earlier (Kabalah) and/or
later (Zerikah) in the verse.
(g) Question (Beraisa): "V'Shochat...V'Hikrivu Benei Aharon
ha'Kohanim" - from Kabalah and onwards, Kohanim must do
1. This teaches that a Zar may slaughter.
(h) Answer: There it says "V'Samach...v'Shochat"- just like
Semichah of a Zar is Kosher, also slaughter.
2. If R. Shimon expounds a 'Vov' to connect Parshiyos,
he should also expound "V'Shochat...*V*'Hikrivu
Benei Aharon" to disqualify slaughter of a Zar!
(i) Question: If so, we should say, just like Semichah must
be by the owner, also slaughter!
(j) Answer #1: A Kal va'Chomer teaches that the owner need
1. Zerikah is the primary Mechaper, it need not be by
the owner, all the more so slaughter, which is not
the main atonement!
(k) Objection: Perhaps we cannot learn from Zerikah, for
(usually) it cannot be done by the owner, for it requires
Kehunah, but slaughter could be done by the owner!
(l) Answer #2: "V'Shochat Es Par ha'Chatas *Asher Lo*" - the
Par of Yom Kipur must belong to the slaughterer (the
Kohen Gadol), but normally, the owner need not slaughter
(a) (Rav): Wherever the Torah says 'Torah' and 'Chukah', it
1. We are thinking that this is only when it says both
of them, e.g. "Zos Chukas ha'Torah..."
(b) Question #1: Regarding Nazir, it says only Torah, yet Rav
taught that it is Me'akev that a Nazir do Tenufah!
(c) Answer: There it says "Ken Ya'aseh", it is as if it says
(d) Question #2: Regarding Todah, it says only Torah;
1. (Mishnah): A Todah is brought with four kinds of
bread, they are Me'akev each other.
(e) Answer: Todah is Hukash to Nazir;
1. "Al Zevach Todas Shelamav" - this includes Shalmei
(f) Question #3: Regarding Metzora, it says only Torah;
1. (Mishnah): The four species used for Taharas Metzora
(cedar, hyssop, scarlet thread and birds) are
Me'akev each other.
(g) Question #4: Regarding Yom Kipur, it says only Chukah;
2. Answer: There it says "Zos Tihyeh Toras ha'Metzora",
it is as if it says Chukah.
1. (Mishnah): The two goats of Yom Kipur are Me'akev
(h) Retraction: Rather, Rav meant wherever the Torah says
'Torah' *or* Chukah', it is Me'akev.
(i) Question: Regarding other Korbanos, it says "Zos
ha'*Torah* la'Olah la'Minchah...", yet Haktaras Eimurim
(of Zevachim) and Hagashah (of Menachos) are not Me'akev!
(j) Retraction: When it says Torah, it is not Me'akev unless
it also says Chukah; when it says Chukah, even without
Torah, it is Me'akev.
(k) Question: But Rav said wherever the Torah says 'Torah'
(l) Answer: He means, even if it says Torah, it is not
Me'akev unless it also says Chukah.
(m) Question: Regarding Menachos it says Chukah, yet Rav
taught that wherever the Torah repeats something
regarding a Minchah, it is Me'akev;
1. Inference: A matter that is not repeated is not
(n) Answer #1: It says Chukah regarding *eating* Menachos,
this does not teach Ikuv Hakravah.
(o) Objection: It says Chukah regarding eating Lechem
ha'Panim (yet we learn Ikuv from this)!
1. (Mishnah): The two Sedarim are Me'akev each other,
the two Bazichim are Me'akev each other.
(p) Answer #2: Menachos are different, for it says
"Mi'Garshah umi'Shamnah" - only Geresh (i.e. Soles flour)
and oil are Me'akev.
2. Conclusion: Even when it says Chukah regarding
eating, this teaches Ikuv Hakravah!
3) WHAT IS "ME'AKEV" THE "MENACHOS"
(a) (Rav): Wherever the Torah repeats something regarding a
Minchah, it is Me'akev.
(b) (Shmuel): Only Geresh and oil are Me'akev.
(c) Question: Does Shmuel really hold that when the Torah
repeats something, it is not Me'akev?!
(d) Answer: Surely, he agrees that when the Torah repeats
something, it is Me'akev - rather, he and Rav argue about
"Melo Kumtzo" and "B'Kumtzo":
1. (Beraisa): "Melo Kumtzo" and "B'Kumtzo" - these
teach that Kemitzah must be done with the hand, a
Kohen may not use a Kli that holds as much as his
(e) Question: Shmuel does learn Kodshei Doros from Kodshei
2. Rav says that this is Me'akev, for the Torah
repeated it - Va'Yakrev Es ha'Minchah va'Ymalei
3. Shmuel does not learn from this, for it applies to
the Milu'im, we do not learn Kodshei Doros from
1. (Mishnah): Klei Lach (Klei Shares that hold liquids)
are Mekadesh liquids, dry measures are Mekadesh dry
(f) Answer: There is different, since it is repeated 12
times, we learn Doros from Sha'ah.
2. Klei Lach are not Mekadesh dry, dry measures are not
3. (Shmuel): This only applies to (liquid) measures,
but buckets (even though they hold liquids, i.e.
blood) are Mekadesh dry;
i. We learn from the Menachos in the buckets
donated by the Nesi'im - "Shneihem Mele'im
(g) Question (Rav Kahana and Rav Asi): The Torah repeated
Hagashah, yet it is not Me'akev!
1. Question: Where is it repeated?
(h) Answer: There it is repeated to teach about where
Hagashah is done
2. Answer: "Zos Toras ha'Minchah Hakrev Osah...Lifne
1. (Beraisa) Suggestion: "Lifnei Hash-m" - perhaps
Hagashah is in the west!
2. Rejection: "El Penei ha'Mizbe'ach".
3. Suggestion: "El Penei ha'Mizbe'ach" - perhaps
Hagashah is in the south!
4. Rejection: "Lifnei Hash-m".
i. To fulfill both verses, it suffices to do
Hagashah at the edge of the southwest corner.
5. Suggestion (R. Eliezer): Perhaps Hagashah may be
done at the southern or western side of the
6. Rejection: If there are two verses and it is
possible to fulfill both of them, we do so, rather
than fulfilling one in a way that precludes
fulfilling the other;
i. If Hagashah would be done on the west side, we
would not fulfill "El Penei ha'Mizbe'ach";
7. (Rav Ashi): R. Eliezer holds that the entire
Mizbe'ach is in the north (so the south side faces
the Heichal, it is "Lifnei Hash-m".)
ii. By doing it on the south, we also fulfill