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 24
1) DISCONNECTED PARTS OF A "MINCHAH"
(a) Question (Benei R. Chiya): If an Isaron (i.e. a Minchah)
is in a Kli in two parts (they do not touch each other)
and a Tevul Yom touched one of them, what is the law (is
the other Pasul)?
2) "SAVA LAH TUM'AH"
1. A Mishnah teaches that a Kli joins Kodesh that is
inside - perhaps this is only when it is connected,
not when it is in two parts;
(b) Answer (R. Chiya): The Mishnah does not say that a Kli
*connects* (connoting that the Kodesh is connected, and
the Kli causes it all to be considered like one), rather,
a Kli *joins* (even if the Kadosh is disconnected!)
2. Or, perhaps the law applies in any case.
(c) Question (Benei R. Chiya): If part of another Minchah was
placed between the two pieces (and a Tevul Yom touched
the middle piece), what is the law (are the others
(d) Answer (R. Chiya): A Kli joins its (Kodesh) contents only
if they need to be in the same Kli (e.g. parts of one
Minchah - this middle piece need not be with the others.)
(e) Question (Benei R. Chiya): If a Tevul Yom put his finger
in between the two (disconnected) parts of the Minchah in
the Kli, what is the law (do we consider it as if the
Minchah is connected there, and he was Posel it?)
(f) Answer (R. Chiya): The only Kli that receives (and causes
its contents to receive) Tum'ah from its airspace
(without physical contact) is earthenware.
(g) Question (R. Chiya): May one take Kemitzah (on behalf of
the entire Minchah) from one of the parts?
1. If Tziruf (all Kodesh in a Kli is considered one) is
mid'Oraisa, it always applies, whether this is a
stringency or leniency;
(h) Answer #1 (Benei R. Chiya): We can learn from the
2. If Tziruf is mid'Rabanan, this is only a stringency.
1. (Mishnah): If two Menachos became mixed together
before Kemitzah - if one can take a Kometz from each
of them by itself they are Kesherim, if not, they
(i) Rejection (Rava): Perhaps each Minchah is connected, they
are (not truly mixed, rather,) intermeshed like prongs of
2. Inference: (In the first case) it helps to take a
Kemitzah from each Minchah, even though part of it
is disconnected (mixed with the other Minchah!)
1. Question: What was the conclusion?
(j) Answer #2 (Rava - Beraisa): "V'Herim *Mimenu*" - from a
connected Minchah, Kemitzah may not be taken from a
Minchah in two Kelim.
1. (Assumption: Even though the Minchah is
disconnected, the reason Kemitzah may not be taken
is because the Minchah is in two Kelim.)
(k) Rejection (Abaye): Perhaps the Kelim are joined, one is a
cavity hollowed out in the other, and the Minchah is
connected above (the brim of the Kelim;)
2. Inference: Kemitzah may be taken from a disconnected
Minchah in one Kli!
1. Even though it is connected above, the walls of the
Kli separate them below (therefore, Kemitzah may not
(l) Question: What is the corresponding case of a Minchah in
one Kli (which may be Nikmetzes?)
(m) Answer: If it was in a feeding trough for chickens (with
compartments for water and bran separated by a low
divider), and the Minchah is connected above the divider
within the vessel, Kemitzah may be done.
(n) Here, the Minchah is connected - we cannot resolve our
question about a disconnected Minchah.
(o) Question (R. Yirmeyah): Can water join (for Tum'ah) to
something joined through a vessel? (If two disconnected
parts of a Minchah were in a Kli, and water connected one
of them to Kodshim outside the Kli, and a Tevul Yom
touched the part outside the water, we know that the
other part (in the Kli) is Nifsal - does it Posel the
Kodshim outside the Kli?)
1. Perhaps Tziruf Kli only takes effect regarding what
is in the Kli, but not regarding what is outside;
(p) Question: If you will say that it is connected, can a Kli
Metzaref something joined through water? (If the Tevul
Yom touched the Kodshim outside the Kli, we know that the
part (in the Kli) touching the water is Nifsal - is the
other part Nifsal also?)
2. Or, since we consider it to be connected, it is
connected in every respect.
1. Perhaps Tziruf Kli only takes effect when Tum'ah
touches inside the Kli, but not if it touches
(q) This question is not resolved.
2. Or, perhaps it applies in both cases?
(a) Question (Rava): If an Isaron was in two parts and one of
them became Tamei, and both parts were put in a Kli and a
Tevul Yom touched the Tamei part, what is the law?
1. Do we say Sava Lah Tum'ah (if Tum'ah touches
something that was already Tamei, this has no
effect, e.g. to Metamei other Kodesh through Tziruf
Kli), or not?
(b) Answer #1 (Abaye): We do not say this!
1. (Mishnah): If a garment was Tamei Medras (an Av
ha'Tum'ah) and was made into a curtain, it is no
longer Tamei Medras, but it is (a Rishon l'Tum'ah,)
like a Kli that touched a Medras.
3) AN UNNEEDED PART OF A "MINCHAH"
2. R. Yosi: It did not touch a Medras! However, if a
Zav touched it, it is Tamei Maga Zav (like a Kli
that touched a Zav, i.e. a Rishon.)
(c) Rejection (Rava): Perhaps this is only if the Zav touched
it before it was Tamei Medras;
3. Inference: Even if the Zav touched it after it was
Tamei Medras, it becomes Tamei Maga Zav - we do not
say Sava Lah Tum'ah!
1. Surely, if the second Tum'ah (Medras) is more severe
than the first, we do not say Sava Lah Tum'ah.
(d) Answer #2 (Mishnah): R. Yosi admits that if two garments
were folded on top of each other and a Zav sat on them,
the top garment are Tamei Medras, the bottom is Tamei
Medras and Tamei Maga Medras. (Right now, there is no
significance to (also) being Maga Medras - however, if it
will be was made into a curtain (or be torn less than the
Shi'ur for Tum'as Medras), R. Yosi admits that it will be
2. My question was when both are light Tum'os, perhaps
we say Sava Lah Tum'ah.
(e) Rejection: There, the Tum'os came at the same time -
Rava's question was when the Tum'os came one after the
(a) (Rava): If an Isaron was in two parts and one of them was
lost and more flour was separated to replace it and then
the lost part was found (either of these may be joined to
the intact part to comprise the Minchah), and all three
piles of flour are in one Kli:
1. If Tum'ah touches the (previously) lost pile, the
intact pile also becomes Tamei on account of Tziruf
Kli, the replacement pile is Tahor (since it was
never intended to be joined to the lost pile);
(b) (Abaye): In all cases, all of them become Tamei, for all
were designated on account of the original Minchah.
2. If Tum'ah touches the replacement pile, the intact
pile also becomes Tamei, the lost pile is Tahor;
3. If Tum'ah touches the intact pile, the other two
piles also become Tamei (since each was intended to
be joined to the intact pile);
(c) (Rava): The same applies to Kemitzah:
1. If Kemitzah was taken from the lost pile, its
Shirayim and the intact pile may be eaten, the
replacement pile is forbidden (it will not be part
of the Minchah, therefore the Kometz does not permit
(d) (Abaye): In all cases, the other two may not be eaten,
for all were designated on account of the original
2. If Kemitzah was taken from the replacement pile, its
Shirayim and the intact pile may be eaten, the lost
pile is forbidden;
3. If it was taken from the intact pile, (its Shirayim
may be eaten,) the other piles are forbidden (for we
do not know which of them is part of the Minchah);
(e) Question (Rav Papa): You hold that Shirayim of the intact
pile may be eaten? But the Kometz was separated for all
three piles, (a third of a Kometz from each, instead of
half (a Kometz) from each of the two piles comprising the
Minchah), a sixth is Chaser from each of them!
(f) Question (R. Yitzchak brei d'Rav Mesharshiya): How can
the Kometz be offered? A third of it is 'Chulin' (it was
for the pile that is not part of the Minchah!)
(g) Answer to both questions (Rav Ashi): The Kometz is taken
on behalf of what the Kohen intends for, he intends for