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


prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem

Previous daf

Menachos 92

MENACHOS 92 (12 Teves 5764) - dedicated by Gitle Bekelnitzky and daughters to honor the first Yahrzeit of Joel Bikelnitzky, Reb Yoel Yitzchak ben Shraga Feivish, affectionately known as "Feter Yoel" to everyone in Crown Heights. Beloved uncle of Layah Bergman (Chicago IL), Zahava Mandel (Cedarhurst NY), and Sima Weinstock (Kew Gardens Hills, NY)



(a) Our Mishnah, discussing the Din of Semichah. lists only two Korban Tzibur that require Semichah. According to the Tana Kama, one of these is the Sa'ir ha'Mishtale'ach - Rebbi Shimon maintains it is the Sa'ir Avodas-Kochavim.

(b) They do not argue over the second one - the Par ha'Ba al Kol ha'Mitzvos (alias the Par He'elam Davar shel Tzibur).

(c) All Korbenos Yachid, on the other hand, require Semichah, except for three - Bechor, Ma'aser and Pesach.

(d) An heir is obligated to perform Semichah on his father's Korban. The Mishnah also incorporates him in the Din of ...

1. ... Nesachim, and in that of ...
2. ... declaring a Temurah on his father's Korban.
(a) The Beraisa too, echoes the Machlokes Tana'im cited in our Mishnah. The Tana who argues with Rebbi Shimon is - Rebbi Yehudah.

(b) The problem with the Beraisa, which after stating that Rebbi Yehudah discards Se'irei Avodas-Kochavim from the list of the Korbenos Tzibur that require Semichah, continues 've'es Mi Avi Tachteihem', is - why is it necessary to replace the Se'irei Avodas-Kochavim? What would be so terrible if the Par ha'Ba al Kol ha'Mitzvos was the only case?

(c) Ravina replies - by citing the tradition that there are two cases of Korban Tzibur that require Semichah (and not just one).

(a) Rebbi Shimon objects to Rebbi Yehudah's insertion of the Sa'ir ha'Mishtale'ach among the Korbanos Tzibur that require Semichah - on the grounds that Semichah can only be performed by the owner of the Korban. The owner of the Sa'ir ha'Mishtalei'ach was Yisrael, for whom it atoned, whereas the Kohen Gadol was the one to perform Semichah on it.

(b) Rebbi Yehudah however - holds that Aharon and his sons were indeed included in the Kaparah, as we shall see.

(c) Does Rebbi Shimon argue with the fact that the Sa'ir ha'Mishtalei'ach requires Semichah?

(a) Rebbi Yirmiyah comments that Rebbi Yehudah and Rebbi Shimon follow their reasoning in a Beraisa. The Tana there, discusses the Pasuk (in connection with the Kaparah of Yom Kipur). According to him ...
1. ... "Ve'chiper es Mikdash ha'Kodesh" - applies to the Kodesh Kodshim.
2. ... "ve'es Ohel Mo'ed" - to the Heichal.
3. ... "ve'es ha'Mizbe'ach" - to the Kaparah of the Mizbe'ach.
4. ... "Yechaper" - applies to the Azaros.
(b) All this refers to Tum'as Mikdash ve'Kodashav, where there was a Yedi'ah at the beginning but not at the end. The Kaparah to which the Pasuk is referring is - that of the Par ve'Sa'ir shel Yom ha'Kipurim, whose blood the Kohen Gadol sprinkled in the Kodesh Kodshim, in the Heichal and on the Mizbe'ach ha'Penimi.

(c) The blood of ...

1. ... the Par - atoned for the Kohen Gadol and the Kohanim
2. ... the Sa'ir - atoned for Yisrael.
(a) "ve'al Kohanim" refers to the Kaparah of the Kohanim, and when the Pasuk adds ...
1. ... "ve'al Kol Am ha'Kahal" - it is referring to Yisrael ...
2. ... whilst "Yechaper", refers to the Levi'im.
(b) The Tana is now referring to - the Kaparah of the Sa'ir ha'Mishtale'ach.

(c) This is the opinion of Rebbi Yehudah. According to Rebbi Shimon - just as ...

1. ... the blood of the Sa'ir ha'Na'aseh bi'Fenim atones on Tum'as Mikdash ve'Kodashav for Yisrael, so does the blood of the Kohen Gadol's Par atone on Tum'as Mikdash ve'Kodashav for the Kohanim, and just as ...
2. ... the Viduy of the Sa'ir ha'Mishtalei'ach atones on all other sins for Yisrael, so does the Viduy of the Par atone on all other sins for the Kohanim.
(d) Rebbi Shimon does not argue with the Hekesh comparing the Kohanim to the Yisrael - only according to him, it pertains to the fact that both receive atonement. Each one however, does so independently, one via the two Se'irim, the other, via the Par.
(a) Rebbi Yehudah in a Beraisa, extrapolates from the Pasuk (in connection with the Par ha'Ba al Kol ha'Mitzvos "Ve'samchu Ziknei ha'Eidah es Yedeihem al Rosh ha'Par" - that the Se'irei Avodas-Kochavim do not require Semichah.

(b) Rebbi Shimon, who requires Semichah by the Sa'ir Avodas-Kochavim, extrapolates - that they do not require Semichah at the hand of the Zekeinim (like the Par ha'Ba al Kol ha'Mitzvos), only at the hand of the Kohen Gadol.

(c) We query this however, from another Beraisa, where Rebbi Yehudah makes a similar inference from the Pasuk (in connection with the Sa'ir ha'Mishtalei'ach) "Ve'samach Aharon ... al Rosh ha'Sa'ir ha'Chai". Rebbi Shimon extrapolates from this Pasuk - that the Se'irei Avodas-Kochavim do not require Semichah at the hand of the Kohen Gadol (like the Sa'ir ha'Mishtalei'ach), only at the hand of the Zekeinim.

(a) The problem we are now faced with is - a discrepancy between the first Beraisa, where Rebbi Shimon requires Semichah on the Se'irei Avodas-Kochavim at the hand of the Kohen Gadol, and the second, where he requires it at the hand of the Zekeinim.

(b) Rav Sheishes queries Rebbi Shimon in the first Beraisa. The problem with saying that the Kohen Gadol should perform Semichah on the head of the Se'irei Avodas-Kochavim is - that Semichah must be performed by the owner of the Korban (who in this case, are the Zekeinim, and not the Kohen Gadol).

(c) We solve both problems - by amending the first Beraisa to read like the second one.

(d) And Rebbi Shimon said to Rebbi Yehudah - that the Se'irei Avodas-Kochavim do require Semichah, and what Rebbi Yehudah heard was not that thy don't, but that they do not require Semichah at the hand of the Kohen Gadol, and that the source if the word "ha'Chai".




(a) Despite Ravina's tradition (that there are specifically two cases of Korban Tzibur that require Semichah), Rebbi Yehudah precludes Se'eirei Avodas-Kochavim from a Pasuk - either to stress the fact or because that is how his Rebbes taught him. Either way, the Pasuk ("Par" and "min ha'Chai") is merely an 'Asmachta' (a support for the Halachah that we already know).

(b) Rebbi Yehudah, in a Beraisa, learns Se'ir Nachshon (by the Chanukas ha'Mizbe'ach, in Parshas Naso) from the Pasuk (in connection with the Sa'ir Nasi) "Ve'samach Yado al Rosh ha'Sa'ir". He needs a Pasuk for this, in spite of the principle that all Korbenos Yachid require Semichah - because without it, we would not learn Sha'ah from Doros (a once only occasions from a regular occurrence).

(c) Rebbi Shimon - learns Se'irei Avodas-Kochavim from there (and not Se'ir Nachshon).

(d) The principle he states (to support both his insertion of Se'irei Avodas-Kochavim and the exclusion of Sa'ir Nachshon) is - that all Chata'os whose blood is taken inside the Heichal, require Semichah.

(a) In spite of having learned Sa'ir Avodas-Kochavim from a Pasuk, Rebbi Shimon states the principle - as a Si'man (to reinforce the Pasuk, and not because he really needs to).

(b) Now that he does state the principle, he includes the Sa'ir Avodas-Kochavim, and not the Sa'ir ha'Na'aseh bi'Fenim (on Yom Kipur) - because like the Sa'ir Nasi (from which he learns it), the former atones for a sin that is known both at the beginning and at the end (whereas the Sa'ir ha'Na'aseh bi'Fenim atones for Tum'as Mikdash ve'Kodashav that was initially known, but subsequently forgotten.

(c) According to Rebbi Shimon, we need both Ravina's principle and the Pasuk ("Ve'samach Yado al Rosh ha'Sa'ir"). Had we had ...

1. ... the Halachah and not the Pasuk - we would not have known whether to include the Se'irei Avodas-Kochavim or the Sa'ir ha'Na'aseh bi'Fenim (as we just explained.
2. ... the Pasuk and not the Halachah - we would have included the Zivchei Shalmei Tzibur (on Shavu'os) from a 'Kal va'Chomer' from Shalmei Yachid ...
(d) ... because if Shalmei Yachid, which do not require Tenufah alive, require Semichah, Zivchei Shalmei Tzibur, which do, should certainly require Semichah.
(a) The Torah writes "Korbano" - three times in Vayikra (and three times in Tzav [in connection with the Korban Shelamim]).

(b) Besides Bechor, the other two Korbanos that we initially preclude from Semichah, from "Korbano" are - Ma'aser and Pesach.

(c) If not for "Korbano", we would have included ('Kal va'Chomer from Shelamim) ...

1. ... Bechor - because, unlike Shelamim, it is Kadosh from birth.
2. ... Ma'aser Beheimah - because, unlike Shelamim, it sanctifies the animal before it and the animal after it (in a case where one inadvertently called them Ma'aser).
3. ... Pesach - which, unlike Shelamim, is obligatory.
(a) The Pircha on the 'Kal va'Chomer' (of Bechor, Ma'aser and Pesach over Shelamim) is - that besides Nesachim (which pertain to it but not to them), Shelamim also require the waving of Chazeh va'Shok.

(b) We therefore explain the above Limud from "Korbano" as - a mere Asmachta.

(c) And from these "Korbano" we disqualify - a person from making Semichah on the Korban of a Nochri, as well as of a friend (since in neither case is he the owner [see Tosfos DH 'Korbano').

(d) Whereas from the third "Korbano" - we learn that all partners in a Korban, are obligated to perform Semichah.

Next daf


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