(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 17


(a) What did Charifi de'Pumbedisa (Eifah and Avimi, b'nei Rachbah) mean when they said 'Hatarah Mefageles Haktarah'?

(b) How does this tie up with ...

  1. ... the principle 'Ein Mefaglin be'Chatzi Matir'?
  2. ... the ruling in the previous Mishnah 'Shachat Echad min ha'Kevasim Le'echol me'Chaveiro le'Machar, Sheneihem Kesheirim'?
(a) What does the Tana in the first Perek say about 'Kol ha'Kometz, Nosen bi'Cheli, Molich u'Maktir Le'echol Davar she'Darko Le'echol, u'Lehaktir Davar she'Darko Lehaktir', if the Kohen had in mind ...
  1. ... 'Chutz li'Mekomo'?
  2. ... 'Chutz li'Zemano'?
(b) How does Rava attempt to prove Charifi de'Pumbedisi right from there?

(c) How do we establish Maktir, to refute Rava's proof?

(a) Rav Menashya bar Gada disputes Charifi de'Pumbedisi's ruling.
On what grounds does he maintain, quoting Rav Chisda, 'Ein Haktarah Mefageles Haktarah', even according to Rebbi Meir, who holds 'Mefaglin be'Chatzi Matir'?

(b) What did Rav Menashya bar Gada reply, when Abaye asked him whether Rav Chisda said this in the name of Rav?

(c) How do we corroborate this?

(a) Rav Ya'akov bar Aba tries to prove Rav Chisda Amar Rav right, from our Mishnah 'Shachat Echad min ha'Kevasim Le'echol ... me'Chaveiro le'Machar, Sheneihem Kesheirim'.
What does he try to prove from there?

(b) How do we reject this proof? What other reason do we give for the Pigul being ineffective?

(c) All this will only go according to Rebbi Meir and the Rabbanan, but not according to Rebbi Yossi earlier in the Perek.
What does Rebbi Yossi say?

(a) Rebbi Chanina taught Rav Hamnuna 'Hiktir Kometz Lehaktir Levonah Le'echol Shirayim le'Machar, Pigul'.
What did Rav Hamnuna comment on that?

(b) We query this however, because it is unclear what it is coming to teach us.
Why can the Chidush not be that ...

  1. ... 'Haktarah Mefageles Haktarah'?
  2. ... 'Mefaglin be'Chatzi Matir'?
  3. ... both?
(c) How does Rav Ada bar Ahavah explain Rebbi Chanina's statement? What does he hold with regard to 'Haktarah Mefageles Haktarah' and 'Mefaglin be'Chatzi Matir'?
(a) What objection did Rav Yitzchak bar Aba raise when a Beraisa expert cited a Beraisa 'Hiktir Kometz Le'echol Shirayim le'Machar le'Divrei ha'Kol Pigul'?

(b) How did he therefore amend the Beraisa?

(c) Why did he prefer to amend it this way, rather than to leave the ruling as it was and simply change the author to Rebbi Meir?

***** Hadran Alach 'ha'Kometz es ha'Minchah *****

***** Perek ha'Kometz Rabah *****


(a) What does Rebbi Eliezer in our Mishnah rule in a case where the Kohen performed the Kemitzah with the intention of eating part of the Minchah that is not meant to be eaten, or of burning part of it that is not meant to be burnt?

(b) And what does he say in a case where the Kohen performed the Kemitzah with the intention of eating ...

  1. ... or burning the next day, less than a k'Zayis of a part that is meant to be eaten or burnt?
  2. ... half a k'Zayis and burning half a k'Zayis the next day?
(c) Having already taught this Halachah in the first Perek, why did the Tana see fit to repeat it?
(a) Rebbi Asi Amar Rebbi Yochanan cites the Pasuk in Tzav (in connection with Pigul) "ve'Im He'achol Ye'achel mi'Besar Zevach Shelamav ... "? For whose opinion is this Pasuk the source?

(b) Based on the fact that the Torah is clearly comparing Achilas Adam and Achilas Mizbe'ach, how does Rebbi Eliezer derive his opinion from there?

(c) How will the Rabbanan then explain the fact that the Torah uses a Lashon of Achilah with regard to Haktarah?

(d) From where will Rebbi Eliezer learn that (based on the Lashon "He'achol Ye'achel")?

Answers to questions



(a) What is the significance of Rebbi Zeira reminding Rebbi Asi that he himself in the name of Rebbi Yochanan, had said that Rebbi Eliezer in our Mishnah concedes that there is no Kareis.
How does that clash with what he just said?

(b) What did Rebbi Asi reply?

(c) According to those who say that there is no Kareis, what is Rebbi Eliezer's source?

(d) In the Beraisa that Rebbi Asi cites, the Tana Kama rules that if someone who Shechts a Korban with the intention of drinking its blood or burning its flesh the next day, the Korban is Kasher.
What does Rebbi Eliezer say?

(a) In a case where the Kohen Shechted the Korban, having in mind to leave its blood until the next day, Rebbi Yehudah says 'Pasul'.
Why must he be referring to the opinion of Rebbi Eliezer, and not the Rabbanan?

(b) According to Rebbi Elazar, this latter case is subject to the same Machlokes between Rebbi Eliezer and the Rabbanan as the Reisha.
What problem do we initially have with this explanation?

(c) So how does Rebbi Asi explain the Machlokes between Rebbi Yehudah and Rebbi Eliezer?

(a) We refute Rebbi Asi's explanation however, concluding that according to everyone, there is no Kareis in the Reisha.
What is then the basis of the Machlokes between Rebbi Eliezer and the Rabbanan in that regard?

(b) Over which point do the three Tana'im then argue?

(c) According to the Tana Kama, 'Lehani'ach' is unanimously Kasher; whereas Rebbi Yehudah maintains that 'Lehani'ach' is unanimously Pasul.
Why is that?

(d) What does Rebbi Elazar then hold?

12) How does Rebbi Yehudah in a Beraisa prove to the Rabbanan that a Machshavah to leave over all the blood for the next day is Pasul d'Oraysa?

Answers to questions

Next daf


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