Menachos 95 - THE SHAPE OF
1) THE SHAPE OF "LECHEM HA'PANIM"
(a) Question (against R. Yochanan - Beraisa #1): There was a mold (Tosfos - perforated) like a basket in the oven, it was like a square plate.
(b) Answer: The top was square (the dough was inserted from above, but it rested on the bottom, which was shaped like a ship.)
(c) Support (for R. Yochanan - Beraisa #2): There were four golden Snifin Mefutzalim (Rashi - with many branches; Tosfos - with holes, in which are inserted poles) to support the bread, which was shaped like a ship. (This is not a refutation of R. Chanina, for R. Yosi (96B) says that the rim around the Shulchan sufficed to support the bread, surely he holds like R. Chanina! Further, Beraisa #1 and our Mishnah are probably like R. Chanina - the answers given for R. Yochanan were weak, now that we can say that R. Yochanan holds like Beraisa #2, we do not rely on those answers.)
2) "LECHEM HA'PANIM" IN THE "MIDBAR"
(a) Question: Would Lechem ha'Panim become Pasul when the Machanos traveled?
(b) Answer #1: R. Yochanan and R. Yehoshua ben Levi argue about this, one says yes, the other says no.
1. The first opinion learns from "Ka'asher Yachanu Ken Yisa'u" - just like at the time of Chaniyah (when Yisrael were encamped), Lechem ha'Panim is Nifsal through Yotzei (leaving Chatzer ha'Mishkan), also when they traveled;
2. The latter opinion learns from "V'Lechem ha'Tamid Alav Yihyeh" (it always keeps its Kedushah,)
(c) Question: How does the latter opinion expound "Ka'asher Yachanu Ken Yisa'u"?
(d) Answer: He expounds just the contrary! Just like when Yisrael were encamped, Lechem ha'Panim was not Nifsal as long as it remained in its place, also when they traveled (as long as it remained in its place, i.e. on the Shulchan.)
(e) Objection: How will the first opinion expound "V'Lechem ha'Tamid Alav Yihyeh"?
(f) Answer #2 (Rav Dimi): All agree that if the bread remained on the Shulchan, it is not Nifsal;
1. They argue about when it was removed - the first opinion learns from "Ka'asher Yachanu..." - just like at the time of Chaniyah, Lechem ha'Panim is Nifsal through Yotzei, also when they traveled;
2. The latter opinion learns from "V'Nosa Ohel Mo'ed" - even when it is travelling, it is called Ohel Mo'ed.
(g) Question: How does the latter opinion expound "Ka'asher Yachanu..."?
(h) Answer: Just like at the time of Chaniyah, Lechem ha'Panim is Kosher as long as it is not Yotzei, also when they traveled.
(i) Question: How does the first opinion expound "V'Nosa Ohel Mo'ed"?
(j) Answer: It teaches about the order of travelling (the Mishkan is after Degel Reuven and before Degel Efrayim.)
1. The latter opinion learns this from "Machaneh ha'Leviyim b'Soch ha'Machanos".
(k) Question (Beraisa #1): When the Machanos traveled, Kodshim became Pesulim, Zavim were expelled from the boundaries of Shevet Levi, and Metzora'im were expelled from Machane Yisrael.
1. Suggestion: Even Lechem ha'Panim becomes Pasul!
(l) Answer: No, Kodshim other than Lechem ha'Panim are Nifsalim.
(m) Question: Either way you say, this is difficult!
1. If it is called Ohel Mo'ed even when travelling, also Kodshim should not be Nifsalim;
2. If it is not called Ohel Mo'ed when travelling, also Lechem ha'Panim should be Nifsal!
(n) Answer #3 (Ravin): R. Yochanan and R. Yehoshua ben Levi do not argue - one teaches that Lechem ha'Panim is Kosher as long as it remains on the Shulchan, the other teaches that it is Nifsal (at the time of travelling) if it is removed.
(o) Inference (Abaye): We learn from this that the Machanos would sometimes travel at night;
1. Version #1 (Rashi): If they would never travel at night (i.e. they would only begin travelling at the beginning of the morning), the Kodshim would be Pasul on account of Linah (even if it was not Yotzei!)
2. Version #2 (Tosfos): (One opinion taught that Lechem ha'Panim that was removed from the Shulchan is Nifsal at the time of travelling. Surely, they never traveled on Shabbos, on account of Hotza'ah and Mechamer.) If they would never travel at night (in particular, Motzei Shabbos), the earliest time to travel (after removing Lechem ha'Panim on Shabbos) would be the following morning, the Lechem would be Pasul on account of Linah!
(p) Objection: This is obvious - it says "Laleches Yomam va'Laylah!
(q) Answer: One might have thought, this is only if they started travelling during the day, but they do not start at night - Abaye teaches, this is not so
(r) Contradiction (to Beraisa #1) (Beraisa #2): When the Paroches was rolled up, Zavim and Metzora'im are permitted (in Machaneh Levi).
(s) Answer (Rav Ashi): Beraisa #2 is like R. Eliezer, Beraisa #1 is like Chachamim (who argue with him):
1. (Beraisa - R. Eliezer) Suggestion: Perhaps if a Zav or Metzora entered the Azarah when Korban Pesach is being brought b'Tum'ah (because most of Yisrael, the Kohanim or Klei Shares are Teme'im), he is liable!
2. Rejection: "Vi'Shalchu Min ha'Machaneh Kol Tzaru'a v'Chol Zav v'Chol Tamei la'Nefesh" - a Zav or Metzora is forbidden (with Kares) to enter the Azarah only when a Tamei Mes is forbidden.
3) WHERE THE "SHTEI HA'LECHEM" AND "LECHEM HA'PANIM" ARE MADE
(a) (Mishnah): The places Kosher to make Lechem ha'Panim and Shtei ha'Lechem are the same:
1. The kneading and Arichah (arranging the dough into loaves) are done outside (the Azarah), they are baked inside; they are not Docheh Shabbos;
2. R. Yehudah says, all of these are done inside;
3. R. Shimon says, accustom yourself to say that Shtei ha'Lechem and Lechem ha'Panim are Kesherim in the Azarah or (even outside the Azarah,) in Beis Pagi (inside Yerushalayim.)
(b) Version #1 (Gemara) Question: It says that the kneading and Arichah are done outside - this implies that the dry measures were not Mekudashos (for otherwise, they would Mekadesh the Soles, it would be disgraceful to take it out of the Azarah - Tosfos; Rashi - it would become Pasul if it left);
1. Then it says that they are baked inside - this implies that the dry measures were Mekudashos!
2. Rabah: This question was asked by a great Chacham, Rav Sheshes.
(c) Objection: This is not difficult - perhaps the Isaron was not Mekudash, but the oven was!
(d) Version #2 - Question: It says that they are baked inside - this implies that the oven was Mekudash;
1. It also says that they are not Docheh Shabbos - if so, they must be baked on Erev Shabbos, they should be Nifsalim through Linah!
2. Rabah: This question was asked by a great Chacham, Rav Sheshes.
(e) Question (Rav Ashi): This is not difficult - perhaps 'inside' does not mean 'in the Azarah', rather, in a place of zealous people (i.e. Kohanim - they will bake it quickly (Rashi; R. Gershom - oversee the baking) and not allow it to become Chametz. Nimukei ha'Griv - regarding Shtei ha'Lechem, which must be Chametz, they will be zealous to prepare it properly.)
(f) Rejection: This is wrong!
1. If we require Kohanim for baking, we should also require them for kneading and Arichah (but the Mishnah permits this outside, i.e. Zarim may do this);
2. If we do not require Kohanim for kneading or Arichah, we should not require them for baking!
3. (Tosfos - perforce, we must say that different Tana'im taught these clauses of the Mishnah.) (end of Version #2)
(g) (Mishnah - R. Yehudah): All of these are done inside.
(h) (R. Avahu bar Kahana): R. Yehudah and R. Shimon both expound the same verse - "V'Hu Derech Chol Af Ki ha'Yom Yikdash ba'Keli":
1. R. Yehudah says, David found Kohanim (in Nov) baking Lechem ha'Panim on Erev Shabbos, and corrected them:
i. Do you bake on a Chol day, even though it will become Mekudash in a Kli (the oven)?! It will become Nifsal through Linah!
2. R. Shimon says, he found them baking it on Shabbos, and corrected them:
i. You should bake on a Chol day (Erev Shabbos) - do you think that the oven would Mekadesh it, and it would be Nifsal through Linah?! The oven is not Mekadesh, only the Shulchan!
(i) Rejection: We cannot say that he found them baking - it says "Va'Yiten Lo ha'Kohen Kodesh Ki Lo Hayah Sham Lechem Ki Im Lechem ha'Panim ha'Musarim mi'Lifnei Hash-m"! (Lechem ha'Panim was removed from the Shulchan, at that very time the new Lechem (which was already baked) was put in its place.)
(j) Question: How do we explain "V'Hu Derech Chol.."?
(k) Answer: They had told David that the only bread they have is the Lechem ha'Panim which was removed from the Shulchan;
1. He responded, (in my condition) not only that is permitted to me, Me'ilah no longer applies to it (since it is permitted to Kohanim), it is like Chulin - rather, you can even give me the new bread, which becomes Mekudash today (and Me'ilah applies to it), for I am dangerously sick (he had not eaten for four days.)
2. The argument of R. Yehudah and R. Shimon is based on what they received from their Rebbi'im.
i. Support (Mishnah - R. Shimon): Accustom yourself to say that Shtei ha'Lechem and Lechem ha'Panim are Kesherim in the Azarah or in Beis Pagi. (Their argument is not based on verses, each merely says the law that he himself received.)