Alex, it is wonderful to hear from you again after quite some time. I was just thinking the other day, when looking through some old questions, that we have not been in contact for a while.

1. (a) Yes, I think you are correct that there is an inaccuracy here and a slight emendment probably needs to be made in the text of Rashi. In fact, it is clear from the words printed in Rashi that something is slightly out of order, because after the word "b'Shloshah" he writes "b'G" (Gimel, or 3) which is repetitous. If "b'Shloshah" refers to sickles, then it would be unecessary to write "b'G"; rather, Rashi should have written "Maglos" and one would have known that this means 3 Maglos.

(b) Therefore, I suggest the following emendment in Rashi. After the title word (Dibur ha'Maschil) "b'Shloshah" there should be a dot, and then it should read "Bnei Adam." This means that Rebbi Chanina is saying that on a weekday, three people reaped it. Rashi then continues with "b'G" which is a title word (DH), this is followed by a dot after "b'G" and Rashi continues "Maglos l'Farsem...." In other words, there are really two "Dibur ha'Maschil"s in Rashi, rather than merely one.

2. (a) Your second question is addresses by the Tiferes Yisrael (#6). The Tiferes Yisrael explains that the first order given by Rebbi Chanina would appear to be the logical one, because, first of all, one reaps with the sickle and only afterwards does one place the produce in the baskets, so Magal should come before Kupah (in the same way that in the Mishnah later (65a) he first asks whether this is a Magal and afterwards asks whether it is a Kupah).

(b) The Tiferes Yisrael explains that the reason for the difference between the order of Magal and Kupah on weekdays and Shabbos is that on Shabbos there is an additional reason to mention Magal first. On Shabbos, when there is only one reaper (according to Rebbi Chanina), it is important that this lone reaper should carry his Magal very conspicuously in order to publicise to everyone that he is on his way to reap the Omer, so that everyone should know that Ketziras ha'Omer overrides Shabbos. (This is similar to the Mishnah in Shabbos (130a) which teaches that if one forgot, before Shabbos, to bring the scalpel necessary for performing a Bris Milah on Shabbos, when one brings it on Shabbos itself through the public domain he deliberately does so openly in order to publicise that Bris Milah, when performed on the eighth day, overrides Shabbos.) In contrast, when one reaps the Omer on a weekday there is no need to display the sickle. This is because Rebbi Chanina agrees that three people reap the Omer on a weekday; since three people are doing it, this is considered a public event. Even though we are interested in publicising that one need not do the reaping exclusively on a Motza'i Shabbos night (in contrast to the claims of the Baitusin, whose opinion Chazal were interested in contradicting), the fact that three people are participating in the reaping suffices to achieve this publicity. Therefore, in the part of the Mishnah which discusses the practice on a weekday, the Kupah is mentioned before the Magal, because when one walks to the field in order to reap, he places the Magal in the Kupah, and only when he reaches the field does he start to use the Magal.

Kol Tuv,

Dovid Bloom

One of the Gedolim answered your second question simply by saying that Chazal were not Makpid about the order of the words. According to this, it is possible that in Mishnayot the order of the words is not always consistent.

Dovid Bloom

Here is a very different, and rather lengthy, answer to the first question on Rashi in the Mishnah. However, I think there will be a few interesting Chidushim here, b'Ezer Hashem.

1. The Chidush in this answer is that it is not in fact totally necessary to have 3 people doing the reaping, according to Rashi's understanding of the Shitah of the Chachamim. In the course of this answer I will attempt to provide a number of sources for this suggestion, but firstly I will explain how it helps us to understand the text of Rashi. My suggestion is that Rashi did not possess the text that we have in the Mishnah, that according to the Chachamim one must have 3 people doing the reaping. Instead, according to Chachamim, one must have 3 boxes and 3 scythes; 3 people are not mentioned, according to Rashi's text. What appears in Rashi in the Mishnah "bi'Shloshah," is not part of Rashi's own text but rather it should read "b'Shalosh," which is why Rashi proceeds to explain that 3 scythes are neccesary to publicize that one does Ketziras ha'Omer on Motza'i Yom Tov, unlike the Beitusin who believed that one does it only on Motza'ei Shabbos.

2. I will now try to show proofs for the contention that according to the Chachamim, it is not essential to have 3 people doing the reaping. The first proof is from our text of the Gemara (near the top of 64a). When the Gemara cites the Mishnah it states: "and the Chachamim say that both on Shabbos and on a weekday, one requires 3 boxes and 3 scythes."

The Rashash there corrects our text and writes that it should read "bi'Shloshah" ("3 people") before "3 boxes." In addition, it should be noted that the text of Rabeinu Gershom (in the margin of the Gemara) is that according to the Chachamim, 3 people are required. This is consistent with the Rashash but is not consistent with our text, and my claim is that our text is a genuine one with support from two other sources in the Rishonim, which suggests that it is not necessary to accept the emendation of the Rashash.

3. See Tosfos in Zevachim (92b, end of DH Iy) who cites our Mishnah as: "and the Chachamim say, 'Both on Shabbos and on a weekday it was done with 3 boxes and 3 scythes.'"

Again, in the words of the Chachamim there is no mention of 3 people. This is consistent with our text (on 64a) and not consistent with our text in the Mishnah (on 63b). And, once again, the Mesores ha'Shas on the side of the Gemara points out that the text of Tosfos is not the same as our text in the Mishnah. However, the Mesores ha'Shas does not mention that our text on 64a is not the same as our text in the Mishnah on 63b, and the text on 64a is the same as Tosfos' text which offers additional support for the authenticity of our text on 64a.

4. Finally, I will point out that the Rashba in Megilah (20b, DH Kol ha'Lailah) also has the same text as ours on 64a. He writes: "Both on Shabbos and on a weekday it was done with 3 boxes and 3 scythes." Again, the editor of the Mosad ha'Rav Kook edition, note 344, writes that one must add the word "bi'Shloshah." However, we can rejoinder that according to our text on 64a, there is no need to make any emendations, because the Rashba's text is merely the same as that of Tosfos in Zevachim (92b).

5. I hope that I have now proved that there is a genuine text on 64a which does not read "bi'Shloshah." If so, we have support for what was suggested above in (1) that the word "bi'Shloshah" in the text of Rashi in the Mishnah on 63b is not authentic. The fact that Rashi writes "bi'Shloshah" and immediately proceeds to explain "b'Shalosh" suggests that his text in the Mishnah on 63b is the same as our text in the Gemara on 64a, and the same as the text of Tosfos in Zevachim (92b) and the Rashba in Megilah (20b) in our Mishnah.

6. It requires further research to explain the reasoning behind this text. The Rambam (in Perush ha'Mishnayos) writes that the reason why 3 people are required is so that the reaping should be completed quickly, which is not the same reason given by Rashi (64a) according to Rebbi Chanina Segan ha'Kohanim, that it is to publicize the Chachamim's opinion. Possibly this is the reasoning of Rashi as well, according to the Rabanan. This requires further clarification. However, what we have suggested here is that the reason for Rashi's comment in our Mishnah is that he is consistent with the text that does not read "3 people" in the Mishnah according to the Chachamim, because the Chachamim maintain that 3 people are not essential.

Kol Tuv,

Dovid Bloom

Here is an additional explanation to what we were Mechadesh in the previous answer, that it is not essential to have 3 people to do the reaping. A question may be asked on this approach from what the Rambam writes in his commentary to the Mishnah (beginning of this chapter), that the Torah commands that 3 people should reap the Omer. If this a Mitzvah d'Oraisa, then how can one claim that it is not essential?

The answer is that "Hidur Mitzvah d'Oraisa." Reaping done by 3 people makes the Mitzvah of reaping the Omer more beautiful. There is a Torah Mitzvah to beautify the Mitzvah, but nevertheless it is not Me'akev.

There is, in fact, another source from this Sugya for the principle that "Hidur Mitzvah d'Oraisa." The Gemara (64a) says that if the Kohen has two Chata'os, one of them fat and the other thin, and he had slaughtered the thin one on Shabbos, he is told to slaughter the fat one on Shabbos as well and offer it. This is because it is a Mitzvah d'Oraisa to bring the Korban from the choicest animal, even though doing so will involve additional Melachah on Shabbos, and even though the Korban would be entirely valid if brought from a thinner animal. This proof is given by the Sha'agas Aryeh (#50).

In a similar way, it is a Torah Mitzvah to have 3 people reap the Omer on Shabbos even though it is valid if only one person does it.

Dovid Bloom

One does in fact have 3 when it falls out on a weekday too. The Rambam in his commentary to the Mishnah (that I cited above) and the Rambam Hilchot Temidim u'Musafim 7:11 makes no distinction between Shabbat and weekday concerning the number of people reaping the omer:- in both cases he writes that it is 3.

Kol Tuv

Dovid Bloom