(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, 90


QUESTIONS: The Gemara quotes the Mishnah in Shekalim (4:2) that says that the leftover Nesachim are used for Kayitz ha'Mizbe'ach (that is, they are used to buy Korbanos that are offered on the Mizbe'ach when the Mizbe'ach is not in use). What comprises "leftover Nesachim"? Rebbi Chiya bar Yosef says that this refers to "Birutzei Midos." RASHI in Kesuvos (106b, DH Birutzei Midos) explains that when a person who sells flour would measure out the flour for the Menachos, he would top off the container with extra flour instead of giving a leveled measure. The owner of the Korban Minchah would then level the measure, effectively making the flour which was wiped off into leftover flour of Nesachim. This flour would then be used for Kayitz ha'Mizbe'ach.

The Gemara later (90b) quotes a Beraisa which supports Rebbi Chiya bar Yosef's opinion. The Beraisa asks what is done with the Birutzei Midos. The Beraisa says that if another Korban needs Nesachim, the Birutzei Midos should be brought with that Korban. If there is no other Korban that needs Nesachim, then the Birutzei Midos become Pasul through Linah (being left overnight), and they may be used for Kayitz ha'Mizbe'ach.

The Beraisa is difficult to understand. The third statement, regarding using the Birutzei Midos for Kayitz ha'Mizbe'ach, comes immediately after the statement that if the leftover Nesachim are not used for another Korban, then they become Pasul through Linah. If they are left overnight to become Pasul, then how can they be used for Kayitz ha'Mizbe'ach? What does the Beraisa mean when it says that the leftover Nesachim may be used for Kayitz ha'Mizbe'ach, if it has already become Pasul through Linah?


(a) RASHI (DH v'Im Lanu) explains that when the Beraisa says that the leftover Nesachim become Pasul by being left overnight, it is referring to a situation in which there was no other Korban with which to bring the Nesachim. The MISHNEH L'MELECH (Hilchos Ma'aseh ha'Korbanos 2:8) infers from Rashi's words that even when there is no other Korban with which to bring the leftover Nesachim, the leftovers still become Pasul through Linah. Rashi understands the Beraisa to be saying that when the Nesachim were not left overnight *and* there are no other Korbanos with which to bring them, they are used to buy animals for Kayitz ha'Mizbe'ach.

The Mishneh l'Melech has difficulty with Rashi's explanation. According to the way Rashi reads the Beraisa, the sequence of statements in the Beraisa is not in the correct order. The Beraisa should say that when there is another Korban, the Nesachim are brought with that Korban. When there is no other Korban, the Beraisa should be exchanged for animals for Kayitz ha'Mizbe'ach. If none of these things are done, then the Nesachim become Pasul through Linah. Why does the Beraisa give Linah as the second possibility instead of the third (and final) possibility?

(b) The MISHNEH L'MELECH (Hilchos Ma'aseh ha'Korbanos 2:10) infers from the words of the KESEF MISHNEH that he holds that the only time that Birutzei Midos become Pasul through Linah is when they were made Kadosh with another Korban, but they ended up not being offered that day. If no Korban was available for them that day, they do *not* become Pasul through Linah, since they never became Kadosh with Kedushas ha'Guf. According to this explanation, the flow of the Beraisa is clear. The Beraisa says that the leftover Nesachim should be brought with another Korban. If they are dedicated with that other Korban but are not brought that day, they become Pasul through Linah. If no Korban at all is found for the leftover Nesachim to accompany, then they are used for Kayitz ha'Mizbe'ach. (Y. Montrose)


OPINIONS: The Mishnah states that all Korbanos, including both public offerings and private offerings, require Nesachim, except for animals that are brought as Bechor, Ma'aser, Korban Pesach, Korban Chatas, and Korban Asham (excluding the Chatas and Asham of a Metzora). The Gemara lists the various verses from which we derive these Halachos.

The Mishnah does not mention whether Nesachim were brought with the Korbanos (the Olos and Shelamim) that were offered by the Nesi'im (as described in Bamidbar 7:10-88). This is presumably because it is not relevant in practice, but only as a historical note. It seems, though, that according to the rule of the Mishnah, the Nesi'im were required to bring Nesachim with their Korbanos. There are various opinions regarding whether or not they indeed brought Nesachim.

(a) RASHI in Shir ha'Shirim (5:1) explains that the verse there refers to the Korbanos that the Nesi'im brought at the time of the dedication of the Mishkan. Rashi there adds that when the verse in Shir ha'Shirim says, "I drank my wine," it is referring to the Nesachim. The PARDES YOSEF (Bamidbar 15:2) says that it is clear that Rashi holds that the Nesi'im brought Nesachim with their Korbanos.

(b) The SEFORNO (Bamidbar 15:3) states that, historically, there were three stages of bringing Nesachim. The first stage was when the Torah was given, at which time no Nesachim were supposed to be brought. After the sin of the Egel ha'Zahav, Hashem required that Nesachim be brought with Korbenos Tzibur, public offerings, as a partial atonement for the sin. After the sin of the Meraglim, Hashem required further that Nesachim be brought with Korbenos Yachid, private offerings, as well.

Although the Seforno does not address whether or not the Nesi'im brought Nesachim, we can infer that since the Korbanos of the Nesi'im were private Korbanos that were brought before the sin of the Meraglim, the Seforno would hold that they did not bring Nesachim.

However, according to the approach of the NETZIV in HA'EMEK DAVAR (Bamidbar 7:15), it is possible that the Seforno agrees that the Nesi'im did bring Nesachim. The Netziv explains that although the Korbanos of the Nesi'im were brought by individuals, they had the status of Korbenos Tzibur. To prove his point, he says that had they had the status of Korbenos Yachid, they would not have been able to be brought on Shabbos. We know, however, that they were brought on Shabbos, since they were brought for twelve consecutive days.

We find also that the Seforno earlier (Bamidbar 7:2) says that the reason why the Nesi'im brought these Korbanos was because each Nasi felt that "some members of his Shevet were suspected of sinning." Since the Nesi'im were the leaders of the Shevatim, they decided to bring Korbanos to atone for their Shevatim. This implies that their Korbanos were considered to be Korbenos Tzibur, and thus warranted having Nesachim brought with them.

However, the Midrash Rabah (Bamidbar 14:2) seems to dispute this. The Nasi who brought the Korban on the seventh day was Elishama ben Amihud, the leader of Efrayim. The Midrash says that Hashem declared, "Yosef, you kept the Shabbos before the Torah was given! Therefore, by your life, I shall reward your grandchild, allowing him to bring his Korban on Shabbos, which others may not do! " If the Korbanos of all of the Nesi'im had the status of Korbenos Tzibur, then any Nasi's Korbanos could have been brought on Shabbos! Since the Midrash says that the Korbanos of Yosef's descendant differed from all other private Korbanos, it seems that the Midrash maintains that the Korbanos of the Nesi'im were private Korbenos Yachid. The allowance to bring the Korbanos on Shabbos was a Hora'as Sha'ah. The ARUCH LA'NER (Yevamos 6a) also says that it was a Hora'as Sha'ah that allowed Elishama ben Amihud to bring his Korbanos on Shabbos.

According to the Midrash, which maintains that the Korbanos of the Nesi'im were Korbenos Yachid, it seems that Nesachim were *not* brought with the Korbanos. (However, it could be that just as there was a Hora'as Sha'ah permitting the Korbanos to be brought on Shabbos, there was also a Hora'as Sha'ah commanding the Nesi'im to bring Nesachim.)

(c) The RAMBAN (Bamidbar 15:2) explains that the Nesi'im did *not* bring Nesachim, because in the Midbar the Nesachim were brought only with a Korban Tamid (possibly including other Korbenos Tzibur).

The NETZIV in HA'EMEK DAVAR (Bamidbar 7:15) has difficulty with the Ramban's explanation. How can the Ramban say that Nesachim were not brought with the Korbanos of the Nesi'im? When the verse summarizes the number of the animal offerings brought by the Nesi'im, the verse states, "u'Minchasam" -- "and their Menachos" (Bamidbar 7:87). We know that the term "Menachos" includes Nesachim. This clearly implies that the Nesi'im brought Nesachim!

The Netziv, however, concludes that this assumption is not necessarily true. When the Torah says that they brought the Menachos together with the Korbanos, it may mean that they brought flour and oil offerings, without wine (Nesachim). (Y. Montrose)

Next daf


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