MENACHOS 99 (14 Sivan ) - Dedicated by Doug Rabin in memory of his mother, Leah Miriam bat Yisroel (Lucy) Rabin, in honor of her Yahrzeit.

1) TOSFOS DH Trei Dari Havu (cont.)

úåñôåú ã"ä úøé ãøé äåå (äîùê)

àô''ä ëéåï [ö"ì ãîàé - éòá"ö] ãèôé ìéä èôç ìà äåé ìà çùéá

(a) Answer: Even so, since the excess [of the space they occupy above 10 Amos] is less than a Tefach, it was not mentioned.

åäà ãúðéà áô' àîø ìäï äîîåðä (éåîà ãó ìâ:) ùåìçï áöôåï îùåê îï äëåúì ùúé àîåú åîçöä åîðåøä áãøåí îùåëä îï äëåúì ùúé àîåú åîçöä

(b) Implied question: A Beraisa in Yoma (33b) teaches that the Shulchan is in the north two and a half Amos from the wall [of the Heichal], and the Menorah is in the south two and a half Amos from the wall...

åîæáç îîåöò åòåîã áàîöò åîùåê ÷éîòà ëìôé çåõ îùåí ãëúéá åàú äîðåøä ðëç äùåìçï ãáòéðï ãçæå àäããé

1. ... And the Mizbe'ach is in the middle and extends a little towards the outside, for it says "v'Es ha'Menorah Nochach ha'Shulchan" - we require that they see each other!

éù ìééùáå àôé' ëî''ã öôåï åãøåí îåðçéï åàùåìçï ãîùä ÷àé àáì ùåìçðåú ãùìîä ñîåëåú ìëåúì

(c) Answer: We can resolve this even according to the opinion that they are placed north to south. It refers to Moshe's Shulchan, but Shlomo's Shulchanos were near the wall.

åäà ãúðéà áôø÷ äåöéàå ìå (ùí ãó ðà:) áéï äîæáç ìîðåøä äéä îäìê ãáøé øáé éäåãä øáé îàéø àåîø áéï ùåìçï ìîæáç

(d) Citation (Yoma 51b - Beraisa - R. Yehudah): [The Kohen Gadol] walked between the Mizbe'ach and the Menorah. R. Meir says, he walked between the Shulchan and the Mizbe'ach.

àò''â ãøáé îàéø ñáéøà ìéä öôåï åãøåí îåðçéí ëãîñé÷ äúí

(e) Implied question: R. Meir holds that they were north to south, like it concludes there! (If so, there was no room to walk in between.)

ðéçà ãéëåì ìäìê áéï ùåìçï ìîæáç ãùåìçðåú ùìîä ÷ééîé áúøé ãøé åùåìçï ãîùä áéï ùúé äùåøåú ùúé àîåú åîçöä îîðå ìùåøä äçéöåðä åùúé àîåú åîçöä îîðå ìùåøä äôðéîéú

(f) Answer: This is fine. He can walk between the Shulchan and the Mizbe'ach, for Shlomo's Shulchanos were in two rows, and Moshe's Shulchan was between the two rows. There were two and a half Amos from it to the outer row, and two and a half Amos from it to the inner row,

åîùåê îëåúì öôåðé ùúé àîåú åîçöä åäîæáç äéä áéï ùåìçï ãîùä ìîðåøä ãîùä àìà ùîùåê ÷éîòà ëìôé çåõ

1. It was distanced from the north two and a half Amos, and the Mizbe'ach was between Moshe's Shulchan and Moshe's Menorah, just [the Mizbe'ach] extends a little towards the outside;

åîæáç äæäá äéä àîä òì àîä ðîöà î÷åí ôðåé äøáä ùäéä éëåì ìäìê áéï äîæáç ìùåìçðåú

2. The gold Mizbe'ach was an Amah by and Amah. It turns out that there was much empty space in between that he could walk in between the Mizbe'ach and the Shulchanos.

åöøéê ìééùá äñåâéà ãù÷ìéí (ãó éà.) ãîééúé äúí áôø÷ ùìù òùøä ùåôøåú ôìåâúà ãøáé åø' àìòæø áø ùîòåï ãäëà åîúðééà äúí àéôëà

(g) Question: We must resolve the Sugya in Shekalim (11a). It brings there the argument of Rebbi and R. Elazar b'Ribi Shimon here, taught oppositely;

ìøáé àìòæø áø ùîòåï îæøç åîòøá åìøáé öôåï åãøåí åäãø ÷à àîø î''ã îæøç åîòøá ëåìï øàåééï ìùéøåú

1. R. Elazar b'Ribi Shimon holds that they were east to west, and Rebbi says that they rested north to south. And then it says that according to the opinion that they were east to west, all were proper for service!

åðøàä ãäééðå ëø' àìòæø áï ùîåò ãáñîåê ãàîø òì ëåìí äéå îñãøéí

(h) Answer: It seems that that is like R. Elazar ben Shamu'a below, who says that they arranged [Lechem ha'Panim] on all of them;

åîàï ãàîø öôåï åãøåí ðîöà ùåìçï áöôåï åîðåøä áãøåí ãå÷à òì ùì îùä îñãøï ôé' ëøáé éåñé áø éäåãä ãáñîåê ãòì ùì ùìîä àéï éëåì ìñãø ëéåï ùøàù äùåøä ñîåëä ìëåúì öôåðé áãåç÷

1. And the one who says that they rested north to south, it turns out that the Shulchan is in the north and the Menorah is in the south, they arranged [Lechem ha'Panim] only on Moshe's [Shulchan]. This is like R. Yosi b'Ribi Yehudah below, that he cannot arrange on Shlomo's [Shulchanos], since the end of the row is close to the north wall. (Yashar v'Tov - if bread were put on the last table, there would be no air between it and the wall, and it would get moldy.)

åäãø ÷úðé äùåìçï äéä ðúåï îçöé äáéú åìôðéí îùåê îï ä÷øï ùúé àîåú åîðåøä áãøåí åîæáç äæäá äéä ðúåï áúåê äáéú çåì÷ àú äáéú îçöé äáéú åìôðéí îùåê ÷éîòà ëìôé çåõ åëåìäå îùìéù äáéú åìôðéí

2. And then it teaches that the Shulchan was from half of the Bayis and inside (towards the Kodesh ha'Kodoshim), distanced from the Keren (this will be explained) two Amos, and the Menorah was in the south, and the gold Mizbe'ach was put in the Bayis and divides the Bayis from half the Bayis and inside, extending a little towards the outside. All of it is from a third of the Bayis and inside.

àé àôùø ìééùá àåúä áøééúà àìà ëî''ã îæøç åîòøá îåðçéí îùåê îï ä÷øï äééðå îï äëåúì ùúéí åîçöä äéä îùåê àìà ùãéìâ äñåôø åîçöä

(i) Observation: We can resolve that Beraisa only like the opinion that they were east to west. "Distanced from the Keren", i.e. from the wall two and a half Amos, just the scribe omitted "and a half."

åäà ã÷àîø áøéùà ãáøééúà îçöé äáéú åáñéôà îùìéù ëãùðéðï ìòéì

(j) Implied question: Why does the Reisha of the Beraisa say from half the Bayis, and the Seifa says from a third?

ãáøéùà ìà çùéá áéú ÷ãùé ä÷ãùéí áäãé äéëì åáñéôà ÷à çùéá áéú ÷ãùé ä÷ãùéí áäãé äéëì

(k) Answer: The Reisha does not count the Kodesh ha'Kodoshim with the Heichal, and the Seifa counts the Kodesh ha'Kodoshim with the Heichal.

2) TOSFOS DH Kamah Mashuch Min ha'Kosel Shtei Amos u'Mechetzah

úåñôåú ã"ä ëîä îùåê îï äëåúì ùúé àîåú åîçöä

(SUMMARY: Tosfos gives the source and a reason for this.)

ëãúðéà áéåîà ôø÷ àîø ìäï äîîåðä (ãó ìâ:)

(a) Source: A Beraisa in Yoma (33b) teaches like this.

åá÷åðèøñ ôéøù äèòí ùéäéå ùðé äëäðéí äðåùàéí ùðé äñãøéï éëåìéï ìäìê æä áöã æä

(b) Explanation (Rashi): This is so two Kohanim carrying the two Sedarim [of Lechem ha'Panim] can walk side by side.

3) TOSFOS DH Melamed sheha'Luchos v'Shivrei Luchos Munachin b'Aron

úåñôåú ã"ä îìîã ùäìåçåú åùáøé ìåçåú îåðçéï áàøåï

(SUMMARY: Tosfos discusses how the Luchos fit in the Aron.)

áôø÷ ÷îà ãááà áúøà (ãó éã.) àîøéðï åäìåçåú àøëï ùùä åøçáï ùùä åòåáééï â'

(a) Citation (Bava Basra 14a): The Luchos were six [Tefachim] wide, six long, and three thick.

åàí ëì àçú áôðé òöîä äéúä ùùä òì ùùä àé àôùø ìééùáï áàøåï æå àöì æå ë''ã èôçéí ìàøáòúï

(b) Implied question: If each one by itself was six by six, it would be impossible to arrange them in the Aron side by side, for this is 24 Tefachim [by six Tefachim] for all four of them (including the two broken Luchos)!

åàøëå ùì àøåï ìø''î çîù òùøä èôçéí áàîä áú ùùä åìø' éäåãä é''á èôçéí åîçöä ãàîøéðï áàîä áú çîùä ãàîúéí åçöé àøëå

1. The length of the Aron was 15 Tefachim according to R. Meir, based on an Amah of six Tefachim, and 12 and a half Tefachim according to R. Yehudah, based on an Amah of five Tefachim, for their length was two and a half Amos!

åö''ì ùäéå ùáøé ìåçåú úçú äùìéîåú

(c) Answer #1: We must say that the broken Luchos were under the whole Luchos.

åáéøåùìîé ãù÷ìéí áô' é''â ùåôøåú (ä''à) îùîò ãàåøëï ùùä åøåçáï ùìùä åîåðçåú àåøëï (ìàøëå) [ö"ì ìøçá' - ãôåñ åéðéöéä] ùì àøåï åéëåì ìééùá àøáòúï æå àöì æå (áøçáï - áãôåñ åéðéöéä ðîç÷)

(d) Answer #2: The Yerushalmi in Shekalim (6:1) connotes that they were six long and three wide, and they were placed with their length along the width of the Aron. One can arrange all four side by side.

åäëé ðîé àéúà áôø÷ áúøà ãúòðéú éøåùìîé

(e) Support: It says so also in the Yerushalmi in Ta'anis.

åäù''ñ ùìðå ðîé ã÷àîø áá''á (ãó éã.) àøëï ùùä åøçáï ùùä îöéú ìîéîø ãîééøé áéï ùúéäï ëùäéå æå àöì æå ìøçáï

(f) Observation: Also the Bavli, which says in Ta'anis (14a) that their length was six and their width was six, you can say that it means between both of them, when they are side by side on their width.

åäà ã÷àîø ëîä ìåçåú àåëìåú áàøåï é''á èôçéí

(g) Implied question: It says "how much space do the Luchos occupy in the Aron? It is 12 Tefachim"!

äééðå áéï ìåçåú åùáøé ìåçåú ëùäéå îåðçåú æå àöì æå àøëï ìàøëå ùì àøåï:

(h) Answer: That is between the Luchos and broken Luchos [together] when they rest side by side, with their length to the length of the Aron.

99b----------------------------------------99b

4) TOSFOS DH Yachol Afilu Machmas Onso

úåñôåú ã"ä éëåì àôéìå îçîú àåðñå

(SUMMARY: Tosfos tells where this Mishnah is.)

îùðä äéà áîñëú àáåú (ô''â î''ç)

(a) Reference: This is a Mishnah in Avos (3:1).

5) TOSFOS DH Echad Shel Kesef

úåñôåú ã"ä àçã ùì ëñó

(SUMMARY: Tosfos favors texts that say "of marble.")

áøåá ñôøéí âøñéðï ùì ùééù

(a) Alternative text: In most Seforim the text says "of marble."

åëï îåëç áîñëú ù÷ìéí ôø÷ é''â ùåôøåú (ãó è:) ãúðï é''â ùåìçðåú äéå áî÷ãù ç' ùì ùééù ááéú äîèáçééí åùðéí áîòøáå ùì ëáù àçã ùì ùééù åàçã ùì ëñó åùðéí áàåìí àçã ùì ùééù åàçã ùì æäá

(b) Proof: It is proven so in Shekalim (9b). A Mishnah teaches that there were 13 tables in the Mikdash - eight of marble in Beis Mitbechai (the place where Korbanos are rinsed), and two to the west of the ramp, one of marble and one of silver, and two in the Ulam, one of marble and one of gold;

åàîø áâî' úðé ùì ëñó [äéå] ø' àçà åø' îééùà åîèå áä îùåí øá ùîåàì áø øá éöç÷ ìéú ëàï ùì ëñó îôðé ùäåà îøúéç

1. And it says in the Gemara "teach that they were of silver." R. Acha, R. Maisha, and some say in the name of Rav Shmuel bar Rav Yitzchak "there were not here of silver, for it heats" (this will cause the bread to get moldy)!

ìà ëãéï úðé æä àçã îï äðñéí ùäéå áî÷ãù ùëùí ùäéå îðéçéï àåúå çí ëê (îåöéàéï) [ðøàä ùö"ì îåöàéï, ëâéøñú éôä òéðéí áù÷ìéí éæ:] àåúå çí ùðàîø (ùîåàì à ëà) ìùåí ìçí çí áéåí äì÷çå øéá''ì àîø àéï îæëéøéï îòùä ðñéí

2. Citation (9b): Was it not taught that this was one of them miracles in the Mikdash? Just like they placed them hot [from the oven], so they find them hot [a week later], for it says "Lasum Lechem Chom b'Yom Hilakcho" (and it was not moldy)! Reish Lakish said, we do not mention miracles (perhaps natural heat would make it moldy).

îùîò ãëåìä ñåâéà àùåìçðåú ùì àåìí ÷ééîà ãîéåçãéí ììçí åìà àùåìçðåú ãáéú äîèáçééí åáîòøáå ùì ëáù ãîéåçãéí ìàáøéí

3. Inference: The entire Sugya discusses the Shulchanos of the Ulam, which were special for bread, and not of Beis Mitbechai and to the west of the ramp, which were special for limbs.

åîéäå áëì äñôøéí ëúåá ùí áîùðä åáîñëú úîéã îééúé ìä áôø÷ ìà äéå ëåôúéí (ãó ìà:) àçã ùì ëñó åàçã ùì æäá áùåìçðåú ùì àåìí

(c) Rebuttal: However, in all Seforim it is written there in the Mishnah, and it is brought in Tamid (31b) "one of silver and one of gold" regarding the Shulchanos of the Ulam.

åàéï ìãçåú ãøåöä ìåîø ãëé äéëé ãàéëà ðñ àìçí ä''ð ààáøéí

(d) Implied suggestion: Perhaps [it refers to Shulchanos for limbs, and] it means that just like there was a miracle with the bread, also with the limbs!

ãàí ëï äåä ìéä ìàéúåéé îúðé' ãîñëú àáåú (ô''ä î''ä) ìà äñøéç áùø ä÷åãù îòåìí

(e) Rejection: If so, it should have brought the Mishnah in Avos (5:5) "Kodesh meat never spoiled."

åá÷åðè' îùîò ëâéøñà áîúðé' ãäëà ùì ùééù åáâî' ááøééúà ùì ëñó åôé' ùí á÷åðèøñ áâîøà ãäàé ã÷øé ìä ááøééúà ëñó [ö"ì îùåí ãùééù ìáï ëëñó - éùø åèåá]

(f) Remark: Rashi connotes like the text in our Mishnah here "of marble", and in the Gemara in the Beraisa "of silver", Rashi explained there in the Gemara (99a) that the Beraisa calls it silver because marble is white, like silver.

[ö"ì åàéï ðøàä ãáøééúà ãúðé ùì ëñó - éùø åèåá] äéà áøééúà ãù÷ìéí åôìåâúà ãúðàé äéà

(g) Rebuttal: The Beraisa that taught "of silver" is the Beraisa of Shekalim. Tana'im argue about this.

åäà ãôøéê áîñëú úîéã (ãó ìà:) îëãé àéï òðéåú áî÷åí òùéøåú àîàé òáãé ãùééù ðéòáãå ãëñôà åãäáà åîùðé ø' ùîåàì áø øá éöç÷ îôðé ùîøúéç

(h) Explanation: It asks in Tamid (31b) "there is no poverty in the place of wealth. Why did they make it of marble? They should make it of silver or gold!", and R. Shmuel bar Rav Yitzchak said "because it makes hot"...

àëåìäå ôøéê åø' ùîåàì áø øá éöç÷ ìèòîéä ãçééù ìäëé áîñëú ù÷ìéí (ãó éà:)

1. It asked about all (marble tables, i.e. also in the Ulam). R. Shmuel bar Rav Yitzchak holds like he taught elsewhere, that he is concerned for this (lest heat promote spoilage) in Shekalim (11b).

6) TOSFOS DH Mahu Lilmod Chachmas Yevanis

úåñôåú ã"ä îäå ììîåã çëîú éåðéú

(SUMMARY: Tosfos questions his Havah Amina.)

úéîä åëé ìà äéä éåãò ãâæøå òìéä åìòéì ôéøùúé áøéù øáé éùîòàì (ãó ñã: ã''ä àøåø)

(a) Question: Did he not know that Chachamim decreed against it?! I explained above (64b DH Arur. They permitted for a need, e.g. for R. Gamliel's household, for they were close to the kingdom. Ben Dama did not have such a great need. Alternatively, initially they decreed and people did not accept it. Later (after Ben Dama asked), they decreed and people accepted it.)

7) TOSFOS DH Lo Yehu Alecha Chovah

úåñôåú ã"ä ìà éäå òìéê çåáä

(SUMMARY: Tosfos gives three explanations of this.)

ëàãí ùéù ìå çåá åàåîø îúé àôøòðå åàôèø ëê ìà éàîø àùðä ôø÷ àçã åàôèø ùàé àúä øùàé ìôèåø àú òöîê îäï ëê ôéøù á÷åðèøñ

(a) Explanation #1 (Rashi): This is like a person who has a debt, and says "when will I pay it, and be exempt?" One should not say so, "I will learn one Perek and be exempt", for you may not exempt yourself.

òåã éù ìôøù ìà éäå òìéê çåáä ùìà úòñå÷ àìà áäï åàé àúä øùàé ìôèåø òöîê îäï ùìà úòñå÷ áäï ëìì àìà éôä úìîåã úåøä òí ãøê àøõ

(b) Explanation #2: It should not be an obligation on you, that you will engage only in [Torah], and you may not exempt yourself, and not engage in [Torah] at all. Rather, it is good to learn Torah with Derech Eretz (a job).

àé ðîé ìà éäå òìéê çåá ììîåã ëì äúåøä ëãúðï áîñëú àáåú (ô''á îè''æ) ìà òìéê äîìàëä ìâîåø åìà àúä áï çåøéï ìéáèì:

(c) Explanation #3: It is not an obligation on you to learn the entire Torah, like the Mishnah in Avos (2:16) "the task is not upon you to finish it, and you are not free to neglect it."

OTHER D.A.F. RESOURCES ON THIS DAF