QUESTION: The SHULCHAN ARUCH (OC 50:1) writes that the Chachamim enacted that one should recite the Parshah of the Korban Tamid, the Perek of Eizehu Mekoman, and the Beraisa of Rebbi Yishmael every day before the morning prayers. This enactment was made so that everyone would learn words of Torah, Mishnah, and Gemara every day. (The Shulchan Aruch explains that the Beraisa of Rebbi Yishmael constitutes Gemara.) The Shulchan Aruch does not explain why the Chachamim enacted that the specific Perek of Eizehu Mekoman be recited. What is special about this Perek?


(a) The TUR (OC 50) explains that this enactment is based on the verse, "uv'Chol Makom Muktar u'Mugash l'Shmi" -- "And in every place incense is offered to My name, and a pure Minchah offering" (Malachi 1:11). The Gemara in Menachos (110a) explains that this verse clearly does not mean literally that people were sacrificing Korbanos "in every place," since Korbanos may be offered only in the Beis ha'Mikdash. Rather, the verse refers to Talmidei Chachamim, and it means that whenever a person learns the laws of Korbanos, in any time and any place, it is considered as if he offers Korbanos to Hash-m. This is why the Perek of Eizehu Mekoman is said after the recitation of the daily Avodah of the Parshas ha'Tamid and the Seder ha'Yom. It is considered as though the Jewish people continue to bring Korbanos with their learning. (See also MISHNAH BERURAH OC 50:2.)

(b) The BEIS YOSEF (OC 50) writes in the name of the RE'AH that this Perek was chosen because it contains no arguments, and it was taught to Moshe Rabeinu in these words at Har Sinai. The KAF HA'CHAIM points out that the Beis Yosef does not mean that nothing in this Perek is subject to dispute; one Mishnah states that the Korban Pesach is eaten only until midnight, and we know that this is the subject of dispute between Rebbi Akiva and Rebbi Elazar ben Azaryah (Berachos 9a). The Beis Yosef means that there is no explicitly recorded argument in the entire Perek.

(c) The TAZ explains that there is an allusion in this Perek to the fact that the entire Torah she'Ba'al Peh was given to Moshe Rabeinu at Har Sinai. There are 344 words in the Perek, which, "Im ha'Kolel," equals the Gematriya of "Moshe." (A rule of Gematriya is "Im ha'Kolel": an additional 1 may be added to the combined numerical value of a word's letters. This extra 1 corresponds to the word as a whole.) (Y. MONTROSE)


OPINIONS: The Mishnah states that Kodshei Kodashim are slaughtered in the north of the Azarah. The Mishnah does not mention that one must slaughter the Korban with a Kli Shares, such as a knife. This is in contrast to the Mishnah's next statement, "and the accepting of the blood is done with a Kli Shares in the north."

Does the Mishnah intentionally omit that the Korban must be slaughtered with a Kli Shares to teach that no specific instrument is needed for the Shechitah of Kodshim?

(a) TOSFOS (DH Eizehu) quotes RABEINU EFRAIM who indeed infers from the Mishnah that a Kli Shares is not necessary for the slaughter of Shechitah. This is supported by the Gemara in Chulin (3a) which states that a person may slaughter an animal with a sharpened reed or stalk. If a Kli Shares would be required for Shechitah, then a reed or stalk certainly would not be allowed, since a Kli Shares cannot be made out of wood (or reeds or stalks).

(b) Tosfos, however, has difficulty with Rabeinu Efraim's view. The Gemara later (97b) derives from the verse, "va'Yikach Es ha'Ma'acheles li'Shechot" -- "and he took the knife to slaughter" (Bereishis 22:10), that one must use a Kli Shares for the Shechitah of a Korban Olah. The Gemara there learns that all Korbanos must be slaughtered with a Kli Shares from this teaching. Moreover, the Gemara in Sotah (14b) implies that the knife used for the Shechitah is Mekadesh the blood of the Korban, which is possible only if the knife is a Kli Shares. Tosfos therefore concludes that Kodshim must be slaughtered with a Kli Shares.

How does Tosfos refute the proof of Rabeinu Efraim from the Gemara in Chulin (3a)? Tosfos explains that the Gemara in Chulin follows the opinion of Rebbi Yosi b'Rebbi Yehudah, who maintains that one may make a Kli Shares from wood (as long as he makes the object into a Kli).

According to Tosfos, why does the Mishnah omit the requirement that the Shechitah of Kodshim must be done with a Kli Shares? Tosfos explains that there is no need for the Mishnah to teach that the Shechitah must be done with a Kli Shares. It is obvious that every part of the Avodah must be done with a Kli Shares. When the Mishnah says that the Kabalas ha'Dam is done with a Kli Shares in the north, it does not mean to teach that the Kabalas ha'Dam must be done with a Kli Shares, because, again, that is obvious. Rather, the Mishnah means that when the Kabalas ha'Dam is done, the Kli Shares which receives the blood must be in the north. The animal and flow of blood cannot be in the north while the Kli which receives it is in the south.

However, Tosfos mentions that the Tosefta in Menachos seems to support the opinion of Rabeinu Efraim. The Tosefta says that the Kemitzah of a Minchah is more stringent than the Shechitah of a Korban, since the Kemitzah of a Minchah requires a Kli, but the Shechitah of a Korban does not require a Kli. How can the Tosefta be reconciled with the Gemara that clearly requires that Shechitah be done with a Kli? Tosfos answers that the Tosefta does not mean that a Kli is not necessary for Shechitah, but rather that no standard type of Kli is necessary. Although there is a rule that substandard objects should not be used in the Beis ha'Mikdash (as derived Malachi 1:8), the Tosefta is teaching that this Halachah does not apply to the item used to perform the Shechitah. (Y. MONTROSE)