Menachos Daf 69

All right, daf samech tes, shabbos is daf. Today is a series of interesting shailos. So, let's start with the second line on samech tes amud aleph. Boy Rummy bar Chama, shtei halechem. The shtei halechem that are brought on shavuos that are matir the bikurim in the Beis Hamikdash, shaila is at what point in the growth of the fruit do they work? Hanotza, sharian, or ichanota, sharian? Now, hanotza and ichanota are certainly early stages in their growth. It's not exactly clear what they are. We just know the ichanota is a little later after the hanotza, as Rashi tells us. But the Gemara, "My hanotza, my ichanota, what are we talking about?" Eelaim a hanotza de peira ve ichanota de peira. If we're talking about the stage of growth of the respective fruit that are growing, well, that doesn't work. Hashta hashrosha sharian. If the Torah is matir the grain that the carbon omer is matir, that works on anything that's already just taken root. So, hanotza ve ichanota meboy, which is certainly later than taking root, because now we're talking about the fruit itself growing. Hello, the shaila of hanotza and ichanota must be talking about something else. Ella hanotza de ola, ve ichanota de ola. The shaila that Rummy bar Chama is posing is what about the leaves when they grow from these fruit plants? Me have a key ashrosha, ilai. Do we equate the fruits' leaves to the hashrosha of the grain, and therefore the shtei halechem would work to be matir it to be brought in the Beis Hamikdash? Al lo ya, maybe it's not comparable, and you need to wait to a later point of ichanota before the shtei halechem can actually work. And and just to speak out what you may be thinking, like why don't we just say it goes like hashrosha, just like by the grain? And the answer is because there's a new hashrosha every year for grain. But a fruit tree only has the hashrosha once, and then and then it kind of recreates the peiros every year. So, you can't look at hashrosha as a one-off thing. That's the whole difference between making a borei pri ha'eitz or a borei pri ha'adama. It's about the fact that the tree doesn't regenerate, but the fruit regenerates. Anyway, this hanotza/ichanota shailu is blived with a teiku. Next shaila. Boy Rova bar Rav Chanan, chittin shizarin bakarka. Let's say you got the wheat that's planted in the ground. Omer matirin, oi ain omer matirin. Is the carbon omer going to be matir them now? What in the world is that supposed to mean? Heichi dami. Ee de ashresh, if it was already taken root before they brought the carbon omer, so it's tanina, that's a m'foresh mishnah. Ee de lo ashresh, if they haven't yet taken root, it's also tanina. This is going to be tomorrow's mishnah. D'itsnan, im hishreeshu k'idem l'omer, omer matirin. Ve im lo, asur nachi yavei im rabba. If they haven't taken root yet, you got to wait a whole 'nother year. To which the Gemara says, "Lo tzricha, de chatzidinuhu v'zarinuhu k'idem l'omer." The shaila is about a case of when you plant the kernels before the carbon omer. V'al so omer v'chalaf alav. And then the omer came and went before they took any root. V'komi boylin, what's the shaila? Mahu l'nakutei u'meichu minayu? Can I take the kernels out of the ground which have not yet taken root, and can I eat them? Because if they took root after the carbon omer, but before he took them out of the ground, then even if the omer would be matir these kernels, they still might become assur because they become assur because of the new growth that occurred after they took root. But our shaila here is, can I take these kernels out before they took root and eat them? What's the shaila? K'man de shadi bakada damya? When I put these kernels in the ground, is it like they're in a container? Bisharinu omer. And therefore, if you have a kaili full of these wheat kernels, the carbon omer will allow you to eat them. Oi dilma botel hu l'gabei ara? Or maybe now putting them in the ground, even though they haven't taken root, but somehow they become botel l'gabei ara, and therefore the omer is not going to matir them. This Gemara is reminiscent of the machlokes Rashash and Minchas Chinuch about zeria. And the Rashash even brings this Gemara as an example of his point. The machlokes I'm referring to is the Minchas Chinuch has a chiddush that if I put a seed in the ground, am chayev for zeria for planting on shabbos. Now, is there a hashrosha? No, but it's omed to become hushresh. It will take root. Now, let's say a wind comes and uproots that seed. So, the Minchas Chinuch says, "I was still chayev chatis for chillul shabbos, because you did the maaseh of zeria." The Rashash says, "What are you talking about? It didn't take root. You never did a maaseh of zeria." The Rashash says, "It's going to be similar to taking some dough, putting it into an oven where it can cook, but then you take the dough out of the oven before it cooks. Of course, you're not chayev for the bishul or for the afiya. There should be no difference between that and zeria." And the Rashash uses the expression from our Gemara of k'man de shadi bakada damya. Coles money that's in the ground, but it hasn't yet taken root, you didn't yet do a maaseh of zeria. So, whether or not this Gemara is going to actually bring a raya one way or another, not so clear, but it certainly is reminiscent of that machlokes. Next shaila. Yaish l'hen aina oi ain l'hen aina. These planted kernels that have not taken root, are they considered like karka? Nafkamina being whether or not you say ain aina l'karkais. If it's not karka, then you would have a halacha of aina. If you overcharge, then the mekach would be botel. But if it's part of the karka, ain aina l'karkais, the mekach won't be botel. You may remember from our Bava Metzia days, there's a three-way machlokes Rishonim how to understand ain aina l'karkais. According to Rashi, it's a very limited understanding. It's only if it's the exact amount of the shtus, then we say ain aina. According to Tosafos, it's whether or not it's 100% of its value or if it's more. According to the Rambam, it's very broad. No matter what, you never apply the rules of aina by karka. And let's not forget the Ramban in Chumash that says that even if you say ain aina l'karkais, it's still assur. It's just that Chazal's ain aina l'karkais means by giving back that extra money. It's the application of what to do financially, but certainly off the issur ha'Torah is always going to be there if you overcharge. Anyway, the question is, these kernels that have not taken root, do we say aina or not? So, heichi dami. Eelaim a d'omer lei, "Shish d'ai bashisha." I put six into the ground and I'm selling you that amount of grain. V'al so sahadi now aidim came v'amri d'lo shadi bei ela chamisha. You only put five in the ground. If that was the case we're talking about, then that can't be because the omer omer of a kol d'varim sheb'mida u'mishkal u'vishevei minyan, afilu pachus m'dei ain ozcher. You'll have to give it back. And here where you actually spoke out the number, about it's going to be a mekach ta'us, and you got to give it back. Ella d'omer lei "Shish d'ai lo k'dei boyla." The mocher said to the lakeach, "I threw in as much as it needs." V'al so sahadi amri d'lo shadi bei k'dei boyla. The aidim come and say, "No, you didn't put as much as you need." But you never said the exact amount, so therefore it would be shiyach to hilchos aina. And therefore the question is, yaish l'hen aina? Because the k'man de shadi bakada damya, it's like it's in a container, and therefore it's like metaltelin, and we don't say ain aina l'karkais. Oi dilma botel hu l'gabei ara? It's botel to the ground because you put them in the ground, and therefore it'll have the halacha of ain aina l'karkais, same kind of shaila. And similarly, nishboin alain oi ain nishboin alain. What about a shvu'a l'gabei these things? K'dei shadi bakada damya um k'metaltelin dami? Is it like it's metaltelin, and therefore v'nishboin alain? Oi dilma botel hu l'gabei ara um k'karkoi dami? And therefore v'ain nishboin alain. How do we view these seeds? Which the Gemara ends up on all these shailos, teiku. Next shaila of Rummy bar Chama. Boy Rummy bar Chama, chittin shib'glalei bakar. The wheat kernels that are in the glalei bakar, which is the waste that comes out of your cattle. can see these undigested kernels. Or usha'irin shib'glalei beheima. You got the barley kernels. Mahu, what's going to be their halacha? The preik the Gemara, "L'mai?" What are you asking about? Eelaim a l'tum'ei tumas ochlin. The shaila is l'gabei hilchos tumas ochlin, because something has to be ro'i l'achila to have the tumas ochlin. So, these, despite the fact that they're very gross, might be still shiyach to this tumas ochlin. And the Gemara says, "Tanina, we already know this halacha from a braisa because chittin shib'glalei bakar, usha'irin shib'glalei beheima, chishuv l'an l'achila, if you intend to eat them, ain m'tamei tumas ochlin." Your intention to eat it is not enough to make it into food, and therefore they're not going to become tamei. However, but liktan l'achila. But let's say you actually went and did a maaseh that you took them in order to eat them, then m'tamei tumas ochlin. So, the braisa told us all the rules about these kinds of chittin u'glalei beheima l'gabei hilchos tumas, that can't be Rummy bar Chama's shaila. Ella, what's the shaila? L'minachais. Can I use these things as part of my carbon mincha? So, chittin d'lo yavei. How do you can't? Because of the posuk we've mentioned in the past, "Hakriveu na et pischa, et yitzchaka, oi ayisa panacha." You can't bring a carbon from something that would be considered such a bizayon. So, zok the Gemara, "Lo tzricha, what's the shaila about? D'nakteinu v'zarinuhu. You took these chittin that were in the glalei beheima and you replanted them. V'kaboi l'asuyei minachais minayu. And now I want to bring a carbon mincha from that which grew. So, mai? Mishum mi'ususu hu? Is the reason why generally speaking, the chittin that I find b'glalei beheima is not considered food and therefore not m'kabel tuma, is that because of its mi'uskait? V'keivan d'zarinuhu, now that I've replanted it, ozda l'mi'usaihu. Its grossness now has gone away. Now, it looks like fresh crops. Which I would just add, I didn't see this or hear this from anybody, but the derech is to use fertilizer when you plant things in general. So, clearly, anything that grows from the ground is never going to have the mi'uskait that it shared before it was growing from the ground. But either way, it's clear to the Gemara that it's no longer mi'us. Oi dilma mishum k'chishusu hu? Maybe the reason why the chittin that are glalei beheima don't have a din for tumas ochlin is because now that it's gone through the animal's digestive system, it's kochush, it's weaker as a product. Hashta nami k'chushusu, and therefore this is considered like a weaker product even after it's regrown from the ground. Which the Gemara says, teiku. Next and final shaila from Rummy bar Chama. Boy Rummy bar Chama, pil an elephant shibolak fifa mitzris. You know those elephants, they eat anything. So, let's say it ate an entire kaili, some kind of basket. V'hikia derech beis array. And it went out the other end, and now I've got this digested basket, but it's still a kaili. So, mai? What's going to be the halacha? So, l'mai? What's the shaila about? Eelaim a l'm'batel tuma. So, if you want to say maybe going through the digestive tract of the elephant has now made it no longer m'kabel tuma, it's lost its shem kaili. Well, tanina, it's a m'foresh mishnah in the 25th perek of kailim, kol hakailim yordin l'dei tuma m'sun b'machshava, v'ain oilin m'tuma m'sun ela b'shinu'i maaseh. You need to have an actual physical change. And l'maaseh, this kfifa mitzris looks exactly the same way it did when it went in the elephant's mouth and out the back end. So, lo tzricha, d'pala chutzin v'avdi l'kfifa mitzris. So, the shaila of Rummy bar Chama must be something that's not m'foresh in the mishnah. Must be that the elephant ate all of the materials. The materials then came out the back of the elephant, and now you went ahead, and you said, "Hey, this looks like a great way to make a basket." So, you made a kaili out of those materials. So, me have a equal? Is this considered equal like a digestion? Na'havalei turning over tumas beis? K'chili glolim u'k'lei adama? Maybe it'll have a halachic status of clay glolim, which has the din of ain m'kabel tuma. D'omer Mar, it says pretty clearly in the 10th perek of kailim that clay avanim and clay glolim u'k'lei adama ain m'kabel tuma, lo m'divrei Torah v'lo m'divrei sofrim. Oi dilma lo have a equal? Maybe just because the materials that made this basket pass through the elephant, it's not considered like a halachic digestion, because it came out the same way it went in, and therefore it still will be m'kabel tuma. So, zok the Gemara, "Tifshu lei, meihol d'omer ulmi shum R'bi Shimon ben Yochai tzaddik, because maaseh u'bolus eivim sh'neitnaykus b'vei yarden." One time it happened to Rachmana l'tzlan, two babies were eaten by wolves, and then the wolves expelled their bodies. But clearly, they exited the wolves' bodies whole. U'bo maaseh lifnei chachamim b'tiyus habasar. That there's no longer a tumas meis on these dead infants, because now that it's gone through the digestive system of these wolves, that basar is no longer going to transmit tuma, because now it has a halachic status of being glalei beheima, and no longer sar adam. But zok the amora you can't bring a raya from that case because shani buser deroch human flesh which is very soft going through the digestive system of an animal is going to change its status and make it into a halachic status of glowlem. But the fibers that you're going to make baskets out of is tougher than human flesh and therefore it's not going to have a halachic status of glowlem. But the lipsha mesefa that same halacha about the za'avim they said the timu es hatzomais they made the bones tomay. So now we can bring a raya the other way that since the materials you make the basket are tough it does not beat glowlem in the same way that the bones didn't become tomay when they went through the za'avim. But the amora no because shani etzomais takushitvei. Bones are very hard. So the flesh is very soft the bones are very hard but the materials that make the baskets are just soft enough to have our shaila. Boy bizera nacha shaila chiten shira dubo avin. Let's say wheat kernels come down raining from the sky mahu what's going to be their halacha. Now what in the world are we talking about? So rashi has kind of a fantastical shot but at least it's grounded in a metzius. Some kind of an amazing weather incident that maybe took a tornado and schlepped a boat that was full of chiten into the sky and now it's raining kernels. Taisus doesn't like that because he doesn't think it should change anything. So he suggests we're talking about where it happened to al yedei nais yar dubo avin. It just magically started raining wheat. So now what the question is the halachic status of that wheat. And as we're going to see in the amora it's going to be a shaila about whether you can use it for the shtei alechem. This is relevant to all the chanukah torah about the beis yaakov's kasha because because the beis yaakov that asks why do we have eight days of chanukah it should only be seven days of chanukah there was no nais on the first day and they say rabbeinu chaim that you can't say that seven new days worth of oil were produced because that wouldn't be considered shemen zayis. So it has to be that in that same shtikla oil it had more achus and was able to burn more not more kamus because then it retained its halachic status of shemen zayis. But this taisus seems to imply that you would be shaya to use something that came al yedei nais for a mitzvah. It's not so pushit you could be machalik perhaps between having a halachic status of shemen zayis and the chlal whether or not you can use a chefza that was nivra al yedei nais for a tzorech mitzvah. Rabbeinu gross in his perpera daf discusses the legitimacy of that maisa from rabbeinu chaim who said he did say it who said he didn't say it. Al kol panim we have this shaila the chiten shira dubo avin it's raining wheat mahu. So the amora what's the shaila about? Eela menachis well amay lo. Why can't I use it? There's nothing wrong with this wheat. Ela leshei alechem must be it's a specific shaila about the shtei alechem my. Now what's the shaila about shtei alechem? Because me moshav seichem umar achmana it's got to come from your moshav seichem which means it can't come from outside of eretz yisrael. So is that lafukei dechutza la'aretz deloy avo de'avin shaper dumi maybe it's only a problem of chutz la'aretz but it's fine if it comes from the clouds. I dilma me moshav seichem dafka it's got to come from eretz yisrael but a feel de'avin now we're learning and therefore falling from the sky is not a kiyum of eretz yisrael. The amora umi eeka kiyavna is this even ever happened that you have to ask such a shaila? Which the amora says ain yeah. Bar aditaya one time happened that bar adi the arav nachisalei rum kisba chiti betilsa parsay. It rained down from the clouds a kisba which is a shira over an area of three parsayis tons of wheat. Next shaila boy rabbeinu shimon ben pazi shibola shevi ashlish chidem lo eemer. Let's say it reaches a shlish meaning a third of its full growth before the carbon imer was brought and then va'akra he uprooted it from the ground usha sal la'achra imer and then he replanted it after the carbon imer was brought va'asifa now grew some more. So now what's going to be the halacha? Can I eat it now or do I got to wait a whole 'nother year until the next year's carbon imer. So what's the tach of the shaila? Buser ikar as leinan visharya eemer. We go buser the original planting which is going to be mater al yedei the imer that already passed. I dilma buser taisafis as leinan ve'achiya ve'yara do I got to wait a whole 'nother year because of the new growth that happened after I replanted it. So tifshat lei me'al de'amar rabbeinu avo umar rabbeinu yochanan yalda shasivcha bazik. Now let's say you have a tree like a behelkus arla. Yalda is a reference to a young tree. So it's certainly going to be asur behana'a for the first three years and you grafted onto an older tree uba peiras and the young tree already has fruit on it. So afilu heisif uma sayim asur even if it increases 200 times it's still going to be asur because it because it maintains the original status from that original fruit. And similarly the amora rabbeinu shmuel bar nachmani umar rabbeinu anan botzal shishaslu bakarem. If an onion is planted in a karem that's a big no no because now it's going to be asur in alt kilayim. The nakara karem and then you uproot that problematic karem but the onion is continuing to grow. V'afilu heisif uma sayim even if it grows 200 times more of its original size still asur the onion is going to be asur alt kilayim karem. So you see that the enlarged growth maintains the original halachic status no matter how much new growth happens. So lechora we have a raya that you go buser the iker. In fact buser the amora he gufa come me bayla. We're actually asking about all these things. Mifsha shita lechula rabbonan de buser ikar as leinan is that really what's going on here? And therefore leshina lekula v'leshina lechumra. I dilma spuki mesafka lehu lechumra amrinan lekula amrinan. Maybe that's good for the shaila did they know it or they were doing it alt safek and therefore it should be an afkamina whether or not it should only be lekumra not lekula. Av dem is all teiku. And we'll pick it up with rabbeinu shaila for sunday's daf.