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


brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf of Har Nof
Rosh Kollel: Rav Mordecai Kornfeld

Ask A Question about the Daf

Previous daf

Menachos, 89


QUESTION: The Mishnah (88a) states that a measuring vessel that contained a Chatzi Log was used in the Beis ha'Mikdash for measuring and pouring the oil for each candle of the Menorah. Each one of the seven candles contained a Chatzi Log of oil. TOSFOS (DH Chatzi Log) questions this requirement. Why is it necessary to have a special Kli Shares for the purpose of measuring and pouring the oil into the Menorah? The Menorah itself is a Kli Shares, and thus it should suffice to bring the oil in an ordinary (non-sanctified) vessel, pour it into the candles of the Menorah, and let the Menorah be Mekadesh the oil!


(a) The TZON KODSHIM explains that the amount of oil required for each flame of the Menorah was based on the largest amount necessary to provide fuel for the flame throughout the longest nights of the year. In the summertime, on a short night, there would be more oil than necessary. The Halachah is that a Kli Shares, such as the Menorah, is Mekadesh only the contents that are fit to be used. Since each candle of the Menorah is not supposed to contain more oil than the amount needed to last through night, the Menorah itself cannot be Mekadesh more than this amount each day. However, a Kli Shares which is dedicated for the purpose of holding oil for the Menorah in general can be Mekadesh as much as necessary.

The MINCHAS TEHORAH has difficulty with this explanation. The Halachah that a Kli Shares cannot be Mekadesh more than the amount that it needs applies only when the extra amount is not necessary at all, even mid'Rabanan. If, however, the Rabanan say that the required amount is always a Chatzi Log, then this amount becomes the appropriate amount for the Menorah to be Mekadesh!

(b) The KEREN ORAH (88b) answers that everything which is used for an Avodah in the Heichal must have Kedushah before it enters the Heichal, especially the oil used for the Menorah. The EIZEHU MEKOMAN explains that the Keren Orah's intention is that it must be Kadosh with Kedushas ha'Guf before it enters the Heichal.

(c) The YA'AVETZ challenges Tosfos' question. It is obvious that the oil must be placed into a Kli Shares before being poured into the Menorah, since it is forbidden to bring items that are Chulin into the Azarah, as Tosfos himself states earlier (80b, DH v'Chi)!

The YASHAR V'TOV rejects the contention of the Ya'avetz. Tosfos himself states earlier (80b, DH v'Chi) that as long as the items brought into the Azarah are Kadosh with Kedushas Bedek ha'Bayis (Hekdesh), there is no prohibition against bringing them into the Azarah. Accordingly, Tosfos' question in our Gemara remains (assuming that the oil was already made Hekdesh before it was brought to the Menorah).

The CHAZON ISH (Menachos 30:7) explains Tosfos' question in an entirely different manner. The Mitzvah of the Menorah is that there should be a flame burning, not that one has to make an "oil offering." This means that the requirement to give the item Kedushas ha'Guf by placing it into a Kli Shares does not apply to the oil used for the Menorah, as it applies to all other items that are used as Korbanos. (The Eizehu Mekoman reinforces this question based on the opinion of the RAMBAM (Hilchos Bi'as ha'Mikdash 9:7) that the lighting of the Menorah is not an Avodah, and it is valid even when performed by a non-Kohen. This shows that the oil used for the Menorah certainly is not considered a Korban of an oil offering.) Accordingly, it should suffice to dedicate the oil verbally, without placing it in a Kli Shares, in order for it to attain Kedushas ha'Guf. Why, then, is a Kli Shares necessary for the oil? This is the question of Tosfos, according to the understanding of the Chazon Ish. (Y. Montrose)


OPINIONS: The Mishnah states that one may mix the Nesachim of Parim (cows) with the Nesachim of Eilim (rams), and the Nesachim of different Kevasim (sheep) with each other. One may not mix the Nesachim of Kevasim with those of Parim and Eilim. If the Nesachim of each animal was stirred and then became mixed with the Nesachim of another animal, the Nesachim are valid. If they became mixed before being stirred, they are Pasul.

The Gemara has difficulty with the simple understanding of the Mishnah's words. The verse says, "v'Hiktiru" -- "and they will burn" (Vayikra 3:5), which teaches that one may not mix up the fats of different animals. The Gemara understands that this applies to all Korbanos, and therefore it asks that Nesachim also should not be able to be mixed l'Chatchilah. Abaye answers that when the Mishnah discusses mixing up Nesachim of different animals, it is referring only to mixing the wine of the Nesachim, but not the flour and oil. The Mishnah is saying that when the flour and oil were already brought, one may mix the wine l'Chatchilah. If the flour and oil were not yet brought, and they became mixed up, one may also mix the wines. If they did not become mixed up, then one may not mix the wines.

What is the interpretation of the Mishnah according to Abaye?

(a) RASHI (Kesav Yad) throughout the Sugya explains that Abaye maintains that the verse of "v'Hiktiru" prohibits the mixing of the flour and oil of different Menachos. The Menachos are valid b'Di'eved when mixed only when they were stirred individually before they were combined. The Mishnah does not differentiate between the Nesachim of Kevasim, Eilim, or Parim. If the Menachos were offered already or were mixed together after being stirred individually, then one may mix the wines as well. If the Menachos have not been mixed, then it is forbidden to mix the wine. The only reason why the Mishnah states that the Nesachim of Kevasim that are mixed with the Nesachim of Parim and Eilim are Pasul is because the Menachos were combined *before* each one was stirred individually, and not because the Nesachim of different types of animals are incompatible. Consequently, the wine belonging to each Korban similarly may not be mixed with the wine of the other Korban, and one must bring different flour and oil to replace the Menachos that are Pasul, and one may not mix the wine together.

The requirement of "v'Hiktiru" applies to the burning of the flour and oil, but not to wine. Why, then, may one not mix the wine of the Nesachim of different animals? The Gemara explains that the wine may not be mixed together before the flour and oil have been mixed together, because onlookers might think that it is also permitted to mix the flour and oil as well. However, when the flour and oil have already been offered or mixed, there is no suspicion that people will learn from the mixing of the wine that one may also mix Menachos.

(b) RASHI gives a similar explanation, with one apparent difference (DH Me'arev Nami). Rashi explains that when the Mishnah states (in the second case) that one may not mix the Nesachim of Kevasim with those of Parim and Eilim, it is not referring to where the oil and flour were already mixed together. (According to Rashi Kesav Yad, the reason why it is Pasul in such a case is because the actual Menachos were mixed together and are therefore Pasul.)

The KESEF MISHNEH (Hilchos Temidin u'Musafin 10:15-20) is bothered by Rashi's explanation. If Rashi understands that the Mishnah is stating simply that when the Menachos were not mixed together, one may not mix the wine, then why does the Mishnah say altogether that one may not mix the Nesachim of different animals? One may not even mix the Nesachim of two of the same type of animal, since it is prohibited l'Chatchilah to mix wine from different Korbanos!

1. The Kesef Mishneh writes that the text of Rashi must be emended to read that the case of Nesachim from different animals is "*even* where the oil and flour were already mixed together." According to the Kesef Mishneh, Rashi understands that the Nesachim of Kevasim and Parim may not be mixed even after the Menachos themselves were mixed *after* being individually stirred. This is a unique stringency that applies to a mixture of different types of Korbanos.

2. The LECHEM MISHNEH leaves the text of Rashi unchanged. He explains that Rashi understands that only when the type of Korban is different do we say that one may not mix wine, because one might come to mix the flour and oil as well, transgressing the verse of "v'Hiktiru." However, this Gezeirah does not apply when the Korbanos are the same type.

(c) The BARTENURA explains the Mishnah in a straightforward way. The Mishnah is saying that one may mix the *Menachos* of similar types of animals as long as they have a equal ratio of oil to flour. Since Parim and Eilim both have a ratio of two Lugin to one Isaron of flour, they may be mixed. In contrast, Kevasim, which have a ratio of three Lugin to one Isaron, may not be mixed with the Nesachim of Parim and Eilim. Mixing Kevasim with either Eilim or Parim would alter the required constitution of the Menachos, and is therefore prohibited.

However, as the TOSFOS YOM TOV points out, this explanation does not seem to take into account the Gemara's conclusion that the Mishnah is discussing the mixing of the *wine* and not the Menachos. The Tosfos Yom Tov rebukes the Bartenura and comments that while it is acceptable to explain a Mishnah according to the most straightforward explanation, one may do so only when writing a commentary on Gemara (that is, when one is Rashi). When one is writing a commentary on the Mishnayos alone, he must explain the Mishnah according to the conclusion of the Gemara. (Y. Montrose)

Next daf


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