Chesed Club World Wide Center & Discussion Groups
Kitzurdaf

Back

03-17-2011
Title:
Menachos 7 - RETURNING THE

Message:
1) RETURNING THE "KEMITZAH" TO THE VESSEL

(a) Question: If so, even before the Kometz was put in another Kli it cannot be fixed, for when it is returned to the first Kli, that is Mekadesh it, this completes the Avodah!
(b) Answer #1 (R. Yochanan): (These Tana'im allow returning it -) this teaches that a Kli Shares is Mekadesh what is put inside it only if the person intended for this.
(c) Question: But R. Yochanan holds that a Kli Shares is not Mekadesh what is put inside, even if the person intended for this!
1. Question (Reish Lakish): Do Klei Shares Mekadesh Pesulim to be offered on the Mizbe'ach l'Chatchilah?
2. Answer (R. Yochanan): They are not Mekadesh Pesulim.
(d) Answer: R. Yochanan answered that Klei Shares do not Mekadesh Pesulim to be offered l'Chatchilah, they do Mekadesh them to become (irrevocably) Pesulim.
(e) Answer #2 (Rav Amram): The Kometz must be returned to an overflowing Kli (it rests on the Minchah, it does not reenter the interior of the Kli, therefore the Kli is not Mekadesh it), and repeats Kemitzah.
(f) Question: Kemitzah must be taken from the interior of the Kli (even the first Kemitzah would not be from an overflowing Kli!)
(g) Answer: The Kli was full but not overflowing.
(h) Question: Removal of the Kometz left a pit - when the Kometz is returned, it reenters the pit, in the interior of the Kli!
(i) Answer: The Kometz is not returned to the pit, rather, to the side; the Kli is shaken, and the Kometz reenters the pit by itself, as if a monkey put it in (therefore, the Kli is not Mekadesh it.)
(j) Question (R. Yirmeyah): Why didn't Rav Amram say that it was returned to a Kli on the ground?
(k) Answer (R. Yirmeyah): This shows that Kemitzah from a Kli on the ground is valid.
2) "KEMITZAH" FROM A "KLI" ON THE GROUND
(a) R. Zeira: Rav Nachman already asked about this:
1. Avimi was learning Menachos by Rav Chisda...
2. Interjection: How can that be, Rav Chisda was a Talmid of Avimi! (The following episode proves this.)
i. Rav Chisda: Avimi struck (or embarrassed) me greatly for forgetting the resolution of the auction of Beis Din;
ii. (The Mishnah says, Beis Din announces orphans' property for 30 days before selling it; the Beraisa says, for 60 days!)
iii. Resolution: If Beis Din announces the property for sale every weekday, they wait 30 days (before selling it); if they announce it only on Mondays and Thursdays, they wait 60 days.
3. Answer: Avimi had forgotten Maseches Menachos, he went to Rav Chisda, who helped him recover it.
4. Question: He could have told his Talmid to come to him!
5. Answer: Avimi went, so the exertion (and embarrassment of going to his Talmid) would be a merit to succeed.
6. On the way, Rav Nachman saw him and asked 'How is Kemitzah done?'
7. Avimi: From this Kli that is in front of us.
8. Rav Nachman: May Kemitzah be done from a Kli on the ground?!
9. Avimi: No, the Kohen lifts it up.
10. Rav Nachman: How do we Mekadesh the Minchah (Rashi - the Kometz)?
11. Avimi: We put it in this Kli that is in front of us.
12. Rav Nachman: May it be put in a Kli on the ground?!
13. Avimi: No, the Kohen lifts it up.
14. Rav Nachman: If so, three Kohanim are needed for Kemitzah - one to lift the Kli holding the Minchah, one to do Kemitzah, and one to Mekadesh the Minchah (R. Gershom; based on our text; Rashi - to lift the Kli the Kometz will be put into).
15. Avimi: That is not difficult - the Tamid requires 13 Kohanim!
(b) Question (Mishnah): The general rule is, if any of the following Avodos was done with intent to eat something normally eaten...
1. Kemitzah, putting the Kometz in a Kli, Holachah, and Haktarah.
2. The Mishnah does not mention lifting the Kli!
(c) Answer: The Mishnah lists the Avodos (in which Pigul
applies), not all the Kohanim involved in the Avodos.
(d) Question: May Kemitzah be done from a Kli on the ground?
(e) Answer (Rav Sheshes): We learn (that it may) from what is done inside (the Heichal):
1. (Mishnah): Four Kohanim enter, two are holding Lechem ha'Panim (each holds a stack of six loaves), each of the other two holds a spoon of Levonah;
2. Four Kohanim enter before them, two of them remove (last week's) Lechem ha'Panim from the Shulchan, the other two remove the two spoons of Levonah.
7b---------------------------------------7b

3. The Mishnah does not mention Kohanim that lift the Shulchan! (Lechem ha'Panim may be removed and placed on it when it is on the ground - likewise, Kemitzah may be done from a Kli on the ground.)
(f) Question: Just as we said above (the Mishnah lists the Avodos, it does not list all the Kohanim involved), we can answer here!
(g) Answer: That is wrong - that Mishnah did not count the Kohanim involved, our Mishnah does - if Kohanim must lift the Shulchan, it would count them!
(h) Conclusion: Kemitzah may be done from a Kli on the ground.
(i) (Rava): Surely, Kemitzah may be done from a Kli on the ground, just like removal of Levonah from the Shulchan;
1. Surely, the Minchah may be put in a Kli Shares (to Mekadesh it on the ground, just like placing of Levonah on the Shulchan);
(j) Question (Rava): May the Kometz be put in a Kli Shares on the ground?
1. Do we learn from a Minchah (that it may), or from blood (a Kohen must hold the Kli for Kabalah off the ground)?
(k) Answer (Rava): We learn from blood.
3) "KIDUSH L'CHATZA'IM"
(a) Question: Rava contradicts what he said elsewhere!
1. (Rav Nachman): If a Kometz was put into two Kelim (part in each), it is not Mekudash;
2. (Rava): It is Mekudash.
3. Rava should learn from blood (that it is not Mekudash, we will explain how we know this), like he did to settle the previous question!
(b) Answer: Rava retracted from this latter law, we learn from blood, it is not Mekudash.
(c) Question: (Rava was sure that) if blood was put into two Kelim, it is not Mekudash - what is the source of this?
(d) Answer: He learns from the following:
1. (Rav Tachlifa ben Sha'ul): If Kidush Mei Chatas (putting ashes of the Parah Adumah on water) was done l'Chetz'aim (it was done in two vessels, neither had the Shi'ur needed for Haza'ah), the water is not Kadosh (even if he puts it together and now has a Shi'ur,).
2. Question: What is the law regarding blood (if less than the amount needed for the Haza'os of Metzora or inner Chata'os was put in the Kli)?
i. If a tradition from Sinai teaches that Kidush Mei Chatas cannot be done l'Chetz'aim, we do not learn to other places;
ii. If we learn from "V'Toval *ba'Mayim* (there must be the proper Shi'ur of water to immerse the branches and sprinkle), we should learn similarly from "V'Toval...ba'Dam"!
3. Answer (R. Zerika citing R. Elazar): Even blood is not Mekudash l'Chatza'im.
4. Support (Rava - Beraisa): "V'Toval" - he immerses (his finger in blood), he does not soak up blood from the wall of the vessel;
5. "Ba'Dam" - there must be enough blood for Tevilah from the beginning.
6. "Min ha'Dam" - from the blood we are dealing with (this will be explained).
7. The Torah must teach both "V'Toval" and "Ba'Dam":
i. If it only said "V'Toval", one might have thought we do not require enough blood for all seven Tevilos from the beginning;
ii. If it only said "Ba'Dam", one might have thought that he may soak up blood.
4) BLOOD LEFT ON THE FINGER
(a) Question (Beraisa): '"Min ha'Dam" - from the blood we are dealing with' - what does this exclude?
(b) Answer (Rava): This excludes blood left on his finger after every Haza'ah;
1. This supports R. Elazar, who says that blood left on his finger is Pasul.
(c) Question (Ravin bar Rav Ada - Beraisa): If blood splashed onto a garment from a Kohen's hand before he was Mazeh, it must be washed (in the Mikdash);
1. If blood splashed from his hand after Haza'ah, it need not be washed.
2. Suggestion: The Beraisa distinguishes between before and after finishing all the Haza'os - this teaches that until then, blood left on his finger is Kosher for remaining Haza'os!
(d) Answer (Rava): No, it distinguishes between before a Haza'ah, and (blood left on his finger) after Haza'ah.
(e) Question (Abaye - Mishnah): After finishing Haza'ah (of blood of the Parah Adumah), the Kohen would wipe his hand on the Parah itself.
1. Inference: He would not wipe it until completing the Haza'os (but before this, blood left on his finger is Kosher for remaining Haza'os!)
(f) Answer (Rava): No - after completing the Haza'os, he would wipe his *hand*, after each Haza'ah, he would wipe his *finger*
(g) Question: We understand, after completing the Haza'os, he would wipe his hand on the Parah itself - "V'Saraf Es ha'Parah l'Einav" (Rashi - for he is by it when it is burned; Tosfos - the end of this verse requires burning all the blood with the Parah);
1. Between Haza'os, what would he wipe his finger on? (Rashi - he was on top of Har ha'Mishchah, the Parah was below, surely he did not descend between Haza'os! Tosfos - he could not wipe it on the Parah, lest hairs stick to his finger, this would disqualify future Haza'os.)
(h) Answer (Abaye): He would wipe his hand on the edge of the bucket (of blood) - the buckets are called "*Kefori* Zahav" (the root of this word also connotes cleaning).

Back