(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 102

MENACHOS 101-102 - Two weeks of study material have been dedicated by Mrs. Estanne Abraham Fawer to honor the fourth Yahrzeit of her father, Reb Mordechai ben Eliezer Zvi (Weiner), who passed away 18 Teves 5760. May the merit of supporting and advancing Talmud study during the week of his Yahrzeit serve as an Iluy for his Neshamah.


(a) Why, assuming that our Mishnah 'Pigeil, bein be'Kodshei Kodshim ... Eino Metamei Tum'as Ochlin', speaks about Pigeil bi'Zerikah, is this a Kashya on Rebbi Oshaya.
What ought the Mishnah to have said, according to him?

(b) How do we establish the Mishnah, to reconcile it with Rebbi Oshaya?

(c) What problem do we then have with the continuation of the Mishnah 'Pigeil be'Minchcah, Metamei Tum'as Ochlin'? What should the Tana rather have said?

(d) And we answer that the Tana deliberately switches to Minchah to teach us a Chidush.
Which Chidush?

(a) When Rav Ashi said over this whole piece to Rav Nachman, the latter refuted it.
How did he establish the case in our Mishnah ...
  1. ... 'Lan Lifnei Zerikah' (which we established 'Kodem she'Yera'eh li'Zerikah')?
  2. ... 'Pigeil bein be'Kodshei Kodshim ... ' (which we established by Pigeil Lifnei Shechitah)?
(b) Yet in both cases, he justifies the Tana in its ruling 'Eino Metamei Tum'as Ochlin', even according to Rebbi Oshaya.
Why is that?

(c) Why should there be a difference between Pidyon and Zerikah in this regard?

(a) Rebbi Yehoshua in the Mishnah in Me'ilah, confines Me'ilah (with regard to Kodshim that became Pasul) to something which the Kohanim were at no stage, permitted to eat.
Why is something that the Kohanim are permitted to eat, not subject to Me'ilah?

(b) The latter category comprises three cases. Two of them are 'she'Lanah' and 'she'Nitme'ah'.
What is the third?

(c) The former comprises three cases, too.
If two of them are 'she'Nishchatah Chutz li'Zemanah ve'Chutz li'Mekomah', what is the third?

(d) How do we query Rav Nachman's explanation from 'Lanah' in the Reisha?

(a) In attempting to answer the Kashya, how do we establish the case of 'Lanah' vis a vis 'Nitme'ah' and 'Yatz'ah'?

(b) What would then be the Din in a case of 'Lanah Mamash' (before the Zerikah)?

(c) What problem does this create with the Lashon 'Kol she'Haysah Lah Sha'as Heter la'Kohanim'? What ought the Tana to have said?

(d) So how did Rav Ashi really answer Rav Nachman? How did he distinguish between Me'ilah and Tum'as Ochlin (with regard to 'Kol ha'Omed Lizarek')?

(a) We query this answer too, from a Beraisa, which discusses someone who brings an Asham Taluy, and who discovers in the process, that he did not sin.
What does one bring an Asham Taluy for?

(b) Rebbi Meir permits him to let the animal loose among his animals, because it is Chulin.
What do the Chachamim say? Why is that?

(c) Rebbi Eliezer even permits him to bring it.
Why is that?

(d) What does the Beraisa say in a case where he only discovered his innocence after the Shechitah?

Answers to questions



(a) If the blood has already been sprinkled when the owner discovers that he did not sin, the Tana Kama holds that the Basar may be eaten. Rebbi Yossi rules even more leniently.
What does he say?

(b) What do we try to prove from Rava, who equates Rebbi Yossi with Rebbi Shimon?

(c) We reject Rava's interpretation of Rebbi Yossi however, by citing Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Chanina.
What reason does he ascribe to Rebbi Yossi?

(a) Based on Rava's interpretation of Rebbi Yossi, what did Rav Ashi comment to Rav Kahana about 'Kol ha'Omed Lisaref'?

(b) What Kashya did he then ask on Rava from Nosar and Parah?

(c) What was Rava's reply?
To what did he ascribe Tum'as Ochlin?

(a) Why was Ravina surprised at Rava's reply, notwithstanding the fact that Chibas Kodesh can cause Hekdesh that would not otherwise be subject to Tum'ah, to become Pasul?

(b) In any event, he thought that, with Rava's explanation, one could resolve the She'eilah of Resh Lakish, who asked whether one counts Rishon ve'Sheini in the case of T'zrid shel Menachos.
What is a 'Tz'rid shel Menachos'?

(c) What was Rav Ashi's reply? Why does Rav Kahana's statement have nothing to do with Resh Lakish's She'eilah?

(d) What will be the ramifications of saying that we do count Rishon ve'Sheini mi'de'Rabbanan, if the Nosar, the Parah or the Tz'rid shel Menachos then touched Kodshim?

(a) What does our Mishnah say about someone who undertakes to bring ...
  1. ... *a Minchah* al ha'Machavas' and then brings a Minchas Marcheshes, or vice-versa?
  2. ... '*this Minchah* (with reference to flour lying in front of him) as a Minchah al ha'Machavas' and then brings a Minchas Marcheshes, or vice-versa?
(b) The same distinction will apply where someone undertakes to bring 'two Esronim in one K'li' (as one Minchah) and he brings them in two Keilim (as two), or vice-versa, or 'these two Esronim in one K'li' and he brings them in two Keilim, or vice-versa.
Why, in the latter set of cases, is the Minchah Pasul if he brings the Minchah in two Keilim instead of one?

(c) And what does the Tana say in a case where someone undertook to bring two Esronim in one K'li, and brought them in two Keilim. Then, ignoring people who reminded him that he had said 'one K'li', he went ahead and finished bringing them in two Keilim?

(d) Considering that he did not say "Eilu', why is this case different than the previous case, where the Korban is Kasher, because he did not say 'Eilu'?

(a) And what does the Mishnah say about the equivalent case to the previous one, where he erred and brought the Minchah in one Keili instead of two, in spite of the people who reminded that he had said 'two'?

(b) What are the ramifications of this ruling?

(c) Why do we not say the same with regard to the earlier case 'Eilu Lehavi bi'Shenei Keilim Ve'heivi bi'K'li Echad, Pasul'?

(a) Having taught the Din in ...
  1. ... the Reisha (with regard to a Minchah al ha'Machavas and a Minchas Marcheshes), why did the Tana find it necessary to repeat it in the Seifa (with regard to two Esronos in one K'li and in two)?
  2. ... the Seifa, why did the Tana find it necessary to repeat it in the Reisha?
(b) Our Mishnah, in the Reisha de'Reisha and the Reisha de'Seifa rules 'Mah she'Heivi Heivi, vi'Yedei Nidro Lo Yatza'. Rebbi Shimon in a Beraisa, disagrees.
What does he say?
(a) We ask on our Mishnah from a Beraisa (in connection with the Korban Minchah). What does the Tana there mean when he writes 'Lo Kidshum K'lei Shareis'?

(b) Why does this pose a Kashya on our Mishnah?

(c) What do we answer?

(a) What does Abaye learn from the Pasuk in Ki Seitzei "Ka'asher Nadarta" with regard to fixing the K'li?

(b) How does this enable him to qualify our Mishnah?

(c) What does Rebbi Acha bar Chanina ... Amar Rebbi Yochanan say about this?

Answers to questions

Next daf


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