(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 7

MENACHOS 6-7 - these Dafim have been dedicated anonymously l'Iluy Nishmas Tzirel Nechamah bas Tuvya Yehudah by her family.


(a) According to Rav Amram, the Tana'im (and Rav in the second Lashon) might even hold 'K'lei Shareis Mekadshin Afilu mi'Da'as'.
What does he then mean when he establishes the case where the Kometz was returned to a K'li that was heaped over the brim?

(b) Why can we not accept this answer?

(c) On what grounds do we also object to the answer that the K'li was not heaped over the brim, but to the brim?

(d) So how do we finally establish Rav Amram?

(a) Rebbi Yirmiyah asked Rebbi Zeira why Rav Amram did not establish the case when whoever performed the Pasul Kemitzah, replaced it in a K'li on the floor.
How would that solve the problem?

(b) What did Rebbi Yirmiyah extrapolate from the fact that he did not answer like that?

(c) Rebbi Zeira replied that he had touched on the She'eilah that Avimi had already asked Rav Rav Chisda (which we will cite shortly).
What objection do we raise to the mere fact that he quoted Avimi as having asked Rav Chisda?

(a) From where do we know that Rav Chisda was Avimi's Talmid, and not vice-versa?
What did Rav Chisda reveal concerning his relationship with Avimi?

(b) The problematic Sugya (that Rav Chisda kept on forgetting) was that of 'Shum ha'Yesomim' in Erchin.
If one Tana gives the time of assessment as thirty days, what does the other Tana say?

(c) How did Avimi explain it?

(d) Seeing as Avimi was indeed Rav Chisda's Rebbe, how come that Avimi asked Rav Chisda how one takes Kemitzah?

(a) Then why did he not ask Rav Chisda to come to him?

(b) On the way, he met Rav Nachman.
What was Avimi's response when, in reply to his question how one takes Kemitzah, Rav Nachman pointed to a K'li lying on the ground?

(c) How did Rav Nachman's modify his ruling?

(a) Avimi asked that if that was so, then every Kemitzah would require three Kohanim, two to hold the K'li containing the Minchah and the K'li into which the Kohen would place the Kemitzah respectively, and one to perform the actual Kemitzah.
Why could one Kohen not hold the first two Keilim?

(b) What did Rav Nachman reply?

(c) The Mishnah later states 'Kol ha'Kometz, ve'Nosen bi'Cheli, ha'Molich ve'ha'Maktir Davar Le'echol ... '.
What did Rav Nachman reply, when Avimi asked him why the Tana omitted 'ha'Magbihah'?

(a) When they asked Rav Sheishes whether the Kohen may perform the Kemitzah from a K'li that is lying on the floor, he cited a Beraisa. The Tana there describes how every Shabbos, eight Kohanim would enter the Heichal.
What were they going to do?

(b) Why were eight Kohanim necessary?

(c) How did Rav Sheishes resolve the She'eilah from there?

(d) What is the connection between the Siluk Bazichin and the Kemitzah of the Minchah?

(e) How did Rav Sheishes counter the Kashya that maybe the Tana is speaking about Avodos and not Kohanim (like we explained with regard to the previous Beraisa)?

Answers to questions



(a) According to Rava, it is obvious that the Kohen may perform Kemitzah from a K'li which is lying on the floor, and likewise, he may sanctify the Minchah in such a K'li.
If he learns the first ruling from the Siluk Bazichin, like Rav Nachman, from where does he learn the second ruling?

(b) He is not at first certain however, about being Mekadesh the Kometz in such a K'li. On the one hand, maybe it is Kodesh just like the Kidush of the Minchah.
What would be his source to say that it is not?

(c) What is Rava's conclusion?

(d) The four main Avodos of the Minchah correspond to the four main Avodos of the Zevach.
If Kemitzah corresponds to Shechitah, and Kidush Kometz to the Kabalas ha'Dam, which Avodah of a Zevach corresponds to ...

  1. ... Holachas Kometz?
  2. ... Haktaras Kometz?
(a) Rav Nachman invalidates a Kometz which the Kohen halved and placed into two Keilim.
From where does he learn it?

(b) What does Rava say?

(c) Seeing as Rava just learned the Din of Kometz from the Dam of the Zevach, why does he disagree with Rav Nachman, who learns this Din from the Dam of the Zevach too (as we just explained?

(a) The original source of this ruling is where the Kohen was Mekadesh less than the Shiur Haza'ah of the Mei Parah in two Keilim.
Will it help to then pour the contents of one of the Keilim into the other, to make up the Shi'ur?

(b) From where do we know that Dam does not become Kadosh in halves?

(c) Why might we not learn Kabalas ha'Dam from it?

(d) If, on the other hand, we learn it from the Pasuk in Chukas "Ve'taval ba'Mayim", on what basis will the Din extend to Kabalas ha'Dam too?

(e) What did Rebbi Zerika Amar Rebbi Elazar conclude?

(a) Rava informs us that this Halachah is already mentioned in a Beraisa.
What does the Tana there learn from the Pasuk in Vayikra (in connection with the Par Kohen Mashi'ach) ...
  1. ... "Ve'taval"?
  2. ... "ba'Dam"?
(b) And what does the Tana mean when he also Darshens from the Pasuk there "min ha'Dam" 'min ha'Dam she'be'Inyan'? What does this preclude?

(c) This bears out a statement by Rebbi Elazar.
What did Rebbi Elazar say?

(a) Ravin bar Rav Ada cites ... Rav Amram, who asks on Rebbi Elazar from a Beraisa (in connection with the Kohen Gadol sprinkling the Dam of the Chata'os Chitzoniyos).
How does Rav Amram explain 'Hayah Mazeh, Ve'nitzah Haza'ah mi'Yado; Im ad she'Lo Hizah, Ta'un Kibus' to pose the Kashya?

(b) And how does he then explain the Seifa 'mi'she'Hizah, Eino Ta'un Kibus Begadim'?

(c) How did Rava therefore interpret 'ad she'Lo Hizah', and 'mi'she'Hizah', to reconcile Rebbi Elazar with the Beraisa?

(d) And what does Abaye infer from the Mishnah in Parah 'Gamar mi'Lehazos, Mekane'ach Yado be'Gufah shel Parah' that will pose a Kashya on Rebbi Elazar?

(a) How does Rava answer the Kashya (by changing the inference)?

(b) Where was ...

  1. ... the Parah burned?
  2. ... the blood of the Parah sprinkled towards the entrance of the Ohel Mo'ed?
(c) In whose presence was the body of the Parah Adumah burned?

(d) What problem does this present on our previous answer, obligating the Kohen to wipe his finger between each Haza'ah?

(a) How did Abaye (who asked the initial Kashya) answer this Kashya?

(b) How does this explain the fact that Ezra refers to the bowls as 'Kipurei Zahav'?

Answers to questions

Next daf


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