Menachos Daf 95

All right, Duff Tadi hey, we're up to Thursday's Duff. And yesterday we started the new parakin we're talking about the shape of the lechem hapenim. Where Yochana had said it's like a sfinah raketa that it comes to a V shape at the bottom. Rav Chanina says it's more like a boxy U shape, it's a flat bottom. And now we're up to three lines before the bottom of the amid. Kiman ozla holda Amar Rav Yehuda, who's this member of Rav Yehuda going like alechem amid al asnifin, that the lechem are mimed at the snifin that we said. These are the supporting zachim that would hold up the individual lechem. Alechem amid as asnifin, the snifin amidin as alechem. So who's that going like? That the lechem are supporting the snifin, those pieces that are holding up each one of the lechem, and the snifin themselves are holding the lechem. So is that going like Rav Chanina or Rav Yochana? So like the Gemara, that idea that each one is holding up the other one is kiman Amar kiman sfinah raketa. It's really going like shitas Rav Yochana because the lechem will support the snifin from on top while the snifin themselves supports the lechem from underneath. And our scroll in there Gemara has a nice pretty picture. Moving over to amid aleph, may savei, let's ask now on Rav Yochana, kiman kaveres hayah lo betanor. We know that there was a mold inside the actual oven. The deima, what? Kiman tavla murbaas. It's like a square tablet. So there you have a braisa that says befaresh like Rav Chanina that it was squared off at the bottom and not like Rav Yochana that it was pointy at the bottom. So like the Gemara, aimi you could say the following, upiya deima kiman tavla murbaas. Only the top of that mold was squared off, but the bottom of the mold might have come to a V shape like Rav Yochana. And now we bring a befaresh a braisa like Rav Yochana. Tanya kiman Amar kiman sfinah raketa. The tanya could the braisa says arba snifin shel zahav hayu sham. Mefutzalin merashan kiman takrunan hayu. That onto these things that stuck out of the snifin, there were these things that stuck out like reeds that would support some kind of shelving. Shishim chin bahen es alechem. And here's the big line, shihu deima kiman sfinah raketa. So here you have a befaresh a braisa that sounds exactly like Rav Yochana. And that's the end of the sugya. So it seems like we should really be paskening like Rav Yochana. However, it's not the case. The Rambam in Hilchos Tamidin u Musafin says befaresh we paskin like Rav Chanina that it was boxed off at the bottom and very flat. And the question that the United Keilim grapple with is our Gemara seems to want to paskin like R' Yochanan. Why does the Rama pasken like R' Chanina? Because the Mishna suggests because R' Chanina was older and more seniority. But it is kind of a head scratcher why the Rama paskens that way. He boilahu lechem upon him nitzal b'masois einu nitzal b'masois. Klal Yisrael kept moving around. And when they moved around, the lechem that were on the shulchan l'cheira, one could argue that they should have a psul yetzei when the masois took place. When Klal Yisrael moved, they changed their location. So it's as if they left that initial makom kodesh if you will. So the shaila is is there going to be a psul yetzei? So R' Yochanan and R' Shimon ben Levi chadam amar nitzal v'chadam amar einu nitzal. D'manda amar nitzal, if you say that the lechem upon him became pasul, it's because d'chasiv k'she yachanu kein yisa'u. So we make a drasha d'ma chani yotzei nitzal b'yetzei. Just like by the lechem upon him, it becomes pasul when you take it out of the chatzer of the Beis Hamikdash, af b'nisiasai nitzal b'yetzei cuz it's no longer in that chatzer. But manda amar einu nitzal, because a different makor, d'chasiv v'lechem hatamid al av yihyeh. That you always have to have the lechem on the shulchan even when they're traveling with it. So even during the masois, those lechem will stay kasher. All right, but each one has to deal with the other one's psukim. Yidach nami, haksiv k'she yachanu kein yisa'u, which the Gemara says that's l'eidach gisa. That's just to say that the lechem don't become pasul because ma b'chani yotzei he lo yotzei mimkomo, just like if it didn't leave the chatzer, lo nimtzal, it does not become pasul. Af b'nisiasai he lo yotzei mimkomo, if it didn't leave its place which is the shulchan, lo nimtzal. Okay, but v'eidach nami, if you hold that the lechem did become pasul, haksiv v'lechem hatamid al av yihyeh. So if the pasuk is mashma that the lechem stayed on the shulchan even when they were traveling, it shouldn't become pasul. So now beyond just reconciling the psukim to try to understand what the shaila might be, the Divrei Hakodesh suggests that the lechem might be an actual chelek of the shulchan because the shulchan is only really a shulchan because of the fact that it holds those lechem. So even if the lechem might have a psul yetzei, maybe they still put the lechem on the shulchan because it's a din in the shulchan. V'al kaponim, this last pasuk v'lechem hatamid al av yihyeh does seem to be a strong enough of a raya that the lechem upon him did not become pasul during the masois. So we need a different beer in the Shilin Machlokes. Eleke also of Dimi Amar, then the Suda when the Luchamin were actually on the Shulchan while they were traveling to Kuli Amali Pligi, both Rebbe Yochanan and Rebbe Shimon Levi would agree that it's not going to be puzzled. Eleke Pligi, where is our Machlokes? That's from the Suluk. That's if they took the Lucham off the table before the Messiahs and then it was carried independently with all the Kaylim. So, one of these Amoraims going to hold the Luchamin became puzzled and one will hold it's not. And Manda Amar Nifsul became puzzled, why would it become puzzled? D'ksiv K'sher Yachanu K'niyu So, that Machane Yisroel Nifsul would I say Afina Siasei. Nifsul B'Yotzei. But Manda Amar Niyu Nifsul, it's because D'ksiv V'nasa Ohel Moed, which we Darshan Af Al Pi Chen Nasa, even when the Mishkan was doing its Messiahs, Ohel Moed who had had a Din of the Ohel Moed and therefore there wouldn't be Absol Yotzei. So, therefore even if the Lechem HaPanim was taken off of the Shulchan before the Messiahs, it wasn't considered like it left the Chatzer HaMishkan. Therefore there won't be any Absol Yotzei. Now, V'idach Nami has the other Manda Amar who holds that the Luchamin did not become puzzled. What's he going to do? Hak Siv K'sher Yachanu K'niyu So, which sounds like it should become puzzled. To which the Gemara flips it around says like V'idach Kisa. He'll use it the other way to say that the Luchamin that was taken off the Shulchan is not puzzled because Machane Yisroel just like when they were encamped, K'lo Mapiklei Nifsul, as long as you didn't take it out of the Chatzer it doesn't become puzzled. So, Afina Siasei, K'lo Mapiklei Lo Nifsul. And V'idach Nami who holds that they did become puzzled, Hak Siv V'nasa Ohel Moed, which sounds like the Mishkan maintained its Machsiv of Kedusha even when it was traveling. So, even if the Luchamin came off the table it wasn't considered like it left the Chatzer HaMishkan. So, how do you deal with that? Zoch the Gemara goes Hahu L'Digolim U'dosa. That Possuk is talking specifically about the formation of Klal Yisroel that they had to maintain that formation when they traveled. V'idach, and if you learn that the Mishkan did maintain its Halachic status to not make Absol Yotzei when it was traveling, how does he know about the Digolim? The Gemara Me Machaneh Leviim B'secha, Machaneh Yisroel Nafka. He had a different Makor. But we're coming out according to Rebbe Dimi that the Machlokes Rebbe Yochanan and Rebbe Yehoshua is talking about the Lechem HaPanim that were taken off before the Messiahs left. There's a Machlokes whether or not the Luchamin will become puzzled. Correct, the Gemara Meisvei the Braisa says B'shas Siluk Messiahs, when they took down the Paroches, those curtains in preparation of their Masois, the Brisa says Kochem Nifsul Biyasei because you took down the curtains. The Zoven Umetzora'in Mishtalchin Chutz Hamachitzos. Despite the fact that there is Absoliyasei because you're taking down the curtains and it looks like there's no definition of this Makom Kodesh. Still you got to kick out the Zoven and the Metzora'in, these Tamei'dika people outside of the Machitzos. As Rashi says, even though there were no Koloim, but Af Al Pi Kein Hamachaneh Kodesh and therefore the Zoven and the Metzora'in were Mishtalchin. And if you want to go to their respective areas, and the Metzora'in had to leave the whole Machaneh Yisrael. But practical Amora Mile of a field Lechem Aponim. L'cheira, that should also include the Lechem Aponim. So you see the Lechem Aponim should have Absoliyasei in the same way that the Zoven and the Metzora'in had to leave. And for the Amora light, Bar Me Lechem Aponim. The Brisa is not coming to include the Lechem Aponim had an issue. So Amon of Shach, take a side here. Eil Oil Mayed is Daf Kahu. That means even during the Masois it retained the status of an Oil Mayed. So I feel the Kochem Nami then there shouldn't even be Absol in those Kochem. They're still within the Oil Mayed, there should be no Absoliyasei for these Kochem. And the Oil Mayed loved Daf Kahu. So then I feel Lechem Nami. So which one is it? So Ela, let's find a new Mahalach to explain the Machlokes of Rechan and Ruban Levi. Ela Ki Asur of an Amar, Mar Amar B'Masuder, Mar Amar M'Sulak. But they play key, we're talking about two different cases. Were the Lechamin on the Shulchan when they were traveling or was it off the Shulchan? But in the Chanami, if the Lechamin stayed on the Shulchan, it's not going to be puzzle. But if it was off the Shulchan, everybody's going to be Maskin that it would become puzzle. Now based on this Halacha that we're taking from the Brisa, that taking down the Koloim of the Mishkan in order to travel, we would still have Absoliyasei for Kochem. Amar Abayash Nami No Yaseel B'Masois B'Layla. Must be that they did it at night time. They broke down the whole Machaneh by night. Because Yisrael K'Darcho Inseel K'Masois B'Layla. If you tell me they didn't do it by night, same as Medali. When would they take down the Koloim of the Chotzer of the Mishkan? With Tzafra in the morning? So my area I'm sure you see. Don't talk to me about Absoliyasei at all. Take a plea if Salay B'Layla. If you tell me they wait till morning to do the taking down the Koloim, well then you've already puzzled the Kochem Absolayna. So from the fact that we're talking about Absoliyasei, it must be that they were able to do this breakdown at night and they traveled by night. Well practical Amora P'Shita Absoliyasei traveled by night. La Lecha So by it doesn't have to figure this out from a brice. It's a possuk. That they maybe started traveling by day they can continue by night. That's all the possuk might mean. They're not going to start a new trip at night time. From this brice you see that they actually would do that by night and even start traveling at night. The brice says Once these curtains that were around the hotzer were rolled up okay then they were able to come back in because it's no longer in the of the mishkan. You got no curtains. But the is asking the brice earlier said it's not true. It did maintain it's so you have a steer in the brice. The brice that's matter to go to is going like the brice which just says it's going like and you could the brice says turning over the brice says the I might have thought to say that when the pushed their way in what are they pushing their way in with the the is that if of all of the carbon is brought in a massive of which means that these people can go into the into the it's kind of amazing. Now the question is if you're already having these people go in to take care of the can the say hey we can come too now. So you might have thought they should still get which would typically be the for someone who's to go into the Tom and Mary. The is called the of the of the of the so we are the of the of the of the of the but it's the of the and the of the but what do you say in this brice according to the sending out of the of the is totally on now during people who were were sent out of the because of the there was no so those were who could go into there was no halacha of shiluach, of them out during the time of the Masais. So it makes sense that according to shitas Rebbi Eliezer, the zavim and the metzora'im also weren't sent out because we parallel them to the tumai meis. So here you have your muker to be matir the zavim and the metzora'im to go into machaneh Leviya like shitas Rebbi Eliezer based on this braisa. But in the chanamie, the other braisa that says they can't go in is going like shitas Rabbanan and they argue with Rebbi Eliezer that the tumas zavim and metzora'im is not totally on tumas meis. Zakt the Mishna, achas shtei lechem and the achas lechem uponim, where did you make them? Lishin u'varichin bachutz. You can knead them and form them outside of the chatzer because right now this dough is not yet kodesh. Even though you measured all the flour in the Beis Hamikdash with that measuring keili for the issaron, but this tana holds that that's not a kli sharesh to be makdish its contents. And therefore there's no psul yetzeh by doing it outside the Beis Hamikdash so you could do the kneading and the shaping outside. This is all as opposed to the liquid measurement that were kodesh. But the shtei lechem and lechem uponim had no liquids in them. But v'afiasan bifnim, the baking has to be done inside the chatzer because that point the tanur itself is being makdish the lechem and then there would be a psul yetzeh. V'einan dechin es hashabbos. So even though you need to have those lechem on there for Shabbos, but you can't bake the shtei lechem and lechem uponim on Shabbos. And the reason is very simple because you could do it beforehand, so there's no heter to do it on Shabbos. Rebbi Yehuda omer, kol ma'asein bifnim. Everything, all of the preparation of these lechem were done inside the chatzer. But a third shita is Rebbi Shimon omer, le'eilam havei rugal le'imar, shtei lechem and lechem uponim she'eiris ba'azarah u'she'eiris ba'veis pagim, which means according to Rebbi Shimon you could do it throughout Yerushalayim. And in the chanamie, the keili that's measuring the issaron and the tanur itself going to be makdish the lechem. So therefore according to Rebbi Shimon, you can make the dough and you can even bake it outside of the Beis Hamikdash. Zakt the Gemara, hagufa kasha. How do you read this Mishna? Amris, you're saying lishin u'varichin bachutz. Alma, if you're telling me you could do it outside the Beis Hamikdash, alma meidas yavish nisgacha. By this dice, the measuring of the flour didn't make it kodesh. But then the Mishna says v'afiasan bifnim, you got to bake it inside the Beis Hamikdash. So alma meidas yavish nisgacha. Meidas yavish meaning the oven is kodesh. So which one is it? Do the keilim, are they makdish the solids meaning the dough or the flour or not? Zakt the Gemara amarava hooksha adam kasha shuhu kasha kebarzel. This question is mamish starke kasha from somebody who is stark like barzel which Ta'anis says is a compliment. Like the Gemara in Ta'anis says the kol talmidei chachamim she'eino kasha kebarzel eino talmid chacham. Umano and who is the makshe? It is Rav Sheishes. Look the Gemara my kasha. What is the big deal with this kasha? Dilma yisaron lemiqdash but tanur is miqdash. The measuring keilim that measures the flour in a chinami that's not going to imbue kedusha. But the tanur would. So that can't be the kasha he asked. Only ikasha hakasha. This must have been Rav Sheishes's kasha. Va'af yosan bifnim. The baking is done inside. So alma tanur mikdash. By istois the tanur is a klisharis that gives it kedusha. Ve'ein doiches es hashabbos. And the mishna says you're not doiche shabbos with it meaning the lechem uponim were baked before shabbos. But if the tanur is makdish the lechem uponim on Friday it's psulina. Now when you come to shabbos you're going to have psulina. It's the next day. So the two rules are being soise to each other. Because as we said it seems like the tanur is being mikdish the lechem. But now if you're telling me there's a psulina and we obviously can't have a psulina must be they're not yet kodesh. Amarava again hooksha adam kasha shuhu kasha kebarzel and umano and who's that that's Rav Sheishes. So amarav Ashi I'll tell you what the answer is. U my kusha. Dilma may bifnim. When we say bifnim we're saying the makom's reason. We're not talking about in the chatzer of the mikdash. We're just talking about in a location where the kohanim reside. Because the reference the fact that the kohanim are coming zaris to make sure that the lechem uponim are not nis'chameitz. And that's all we meant that they're going to take care of it. A lot of the achronim want to know that makes good sense for the lechem uponim which are matzah and therefore you got to make sure it's not nis'chameitz. But the shtei halechem were made as chameitz. So what kind of zaris do we need for that? The Chasam Sofer writes that there's a zaris in making sure it does become chameitz. All right. So that was Rashi's teretz. But look the Gemara we don't like that teretz. Veha deRashi's barusi. It's wrong. And barusi might be an expression of it's outside like it's unacceptable. Because mana nafshach. E afiya beinans reason. If you need to have kohanim do the afiya so then lisha varicha nami beinans reason. All of those preparatory stages would also require the same zaris. The lisha varicha lebeinans reason so then afiya nami lebeinans reason. So why would we make a chelek between the zaris in different parts of this process? Ela deRashi barusi. And that's it. The Gamara doesn't answer the kasha. So, how do we deal with the steer and prices? So, you can look down at the bottom that six-word Tosefos where Tosefos says, "That's what you got to say. There's two different tanayim." Cuz otherwise, we're going to be left with an unanswerable steer. And the mishna had said "kol ma'asein bifnim v'chulo" that everything is done in the chatzer. And then Rabi Shimon had said they could do it in the chatzer and even in Yerushalayim. "b'is pakki" "u'shneihen" both Rabi Yehuda and Rabi Shimon is "mikra echad darshu" that's where we're going to draw from the psukim of David ha'Melech to the Kohanim from Nov l'gabei the lechem ha'panim that when David ha'Melech was starving asked for bread and the Kohanim said they only had the lechem ha'panim bread. So, now David ha'Melech had said "hu derech chol v'afki hayom yikdash bakli" that the lechem ha'panim is not kodesh yet even though later on today it's going to be "niskadesh in a kli shareis". "Rabi Yehuda savar b'chol ashkechinu d'chol afulei" Rabi Yehuda told the David ha'Melech found the Kohanim making the lechem ha'panim on "chol" meaning on a weekday "erev Shabbos". So, "amar lo hu said to them "derech chol kafisulei" are you baking it in a way of not kodesh meaning on weekday? "afki hayom yikdash bakli" even though today it will become "niskadesh in the tanur". And therefore, "ifsulei b'leina" David ha'Melech now says according to the way Rabi Yehuda is understanding the pasuk that he's concerned that if you're baking it during "chol" meaning Friday, Shabbos morning it's going to have "ifsuleina". So, he was telling them you should be "decheh Shabbos" and you should bake it on Shabbos itself. So, how did Rabi Yehuda understand this pasuk that the tanur itself is "makdish" the lechem ha'panim? But Rabi Shimon he read the psukim differently. "savar b'Shabbos ashkechinu" David ha'Melech found the Kohanim of Nov on Shabbos. "d'chol afulei" And "amar lo hu he said to them "loi derech chol b'isul l'mevdei" shouldn't you do this on a weekday? "midei tanur makdish" are you so concerned that the oven is going to be "makdish" it and then you're going to have "ifsuleina"? It's not true. "shulchan hu d'makdish" according to Rabi Shimon the "kli shareis" that's actually going to be "makdish" this lechem ha'panim is not the oven at all. It's actually the "shulchan". And therefore, there won't be any "d'chiya" of Shabbos cuz there's no "ifsuleina" now. So, it's the same pasuk that both Rabi Yehuda and Rabi Shimon get their respective "shitahs" from. But "v'freich d'Gamara u'mi matza Samuch d'v'Shabbos afia ashkechinu" the whole "raya" is based on this idea that David ha'Melech found them baking the lechem "aiv o ch'siv" the pasuk says "v'yiten leha kohen kodesh ki lo haya sham lechem ki im lechem ha'panim hamusarim me'al ha'Shulchan" gave because there was nothing there except for the so according to this the old already been taken from the and the new were put on there. So he didn't come when they were baking the bread and therefore what did mean when he said that it's being done he didn't come when they were baking it this is what the told like there is no other available he like a only this then said I don't even need to tell you about these that were already taken off the that that will be the Derek since it's already no longer it's already it's going to be even this new to the which is going into this the you can still give me to eat moving over to why because because he's about to die from starvation so he's allowed to eat this or so we're not talking about the baking of the at all and now we need a new for I just parenthetically what would have been telling these that I'm starving to death and therefore it's for me to eat it wouldn't they know that everything is that he could eat these so send wants to suggest that it's only the that we say you but there is the in the that it's not one of the big three but there's still is a real issue about saving one's life with somebody else's money now can be understood as a from the so really one could have heard that a person can't be with an but because he learned that a his parents get there that a is above the rules of regular because he can appropriate people's stuff just by dint of his so maybe was saying his and being a allows him to be over this to take the that are even the fresh ones that are going to be that day interesting what's the makyris for R' Akiva and R' Shimon now that we're learning the psukim differently? >> It's big Amora pligy. It's going to be a shaila in the mesora whether or not the tanas mikadesh the lechem or not. R' Yehuda holds the taz, R' Shimon holds the taz. Dikna means also meduyak that way. lomar shte alechem alechem upon ksheires bazara uksheires abase pagi." So that kind of nusach of regel lomar sounds like it was coming from mesora not from a drasha and after shma mina and we'll pick it up with the mishna for Friday's daf.