Thursday 29 November 2018

Chullin 2: Women Performing Shechita

Our very first Mishna teaches us about who can and cannot perform shechita, ritual slaughter, in the Temple.  All people except for those who are deaf and mute, those who are not intellectually competent, and those who are not yet of age.  This is because they might err in their work.    Interestingly, women and Canaanites are not mentioned in this list of those who are excepted.

The rabbis wonder why women are permitted to do this very sacred act.  Some suggest that women should not take part in ritual slaughter because they are "lightheaded".  Others counter that women will not be lightheaded when they are surrounded by the sanctity of the Temple.  Interesting that the rabbis keep women from the practical study of Torah and then they call those women lightheaded.  In this case, the rabbis rule that women should be permitted to perform shechita.

Steinsaltz points out that the Ashkenazi tradition has not allowed women to take part in shechita.  This is an example of our tradition building more fences that even our Sages recommended.  

Wednesday 28 November 2018

Menachot 110: It's the Intention that Counts

Today's daf is the last of Masechet Menachot.  Before introducing our last Mishna, the rabbis continue their discussion about verses regarding meal offerings.  One of those verses lends itself to the teaching that the purity of a meal offering is like the purity of Torah study done by a married man who is not distracted by his thoughts.  

Our final Mishna teaches us about Leviticus 1:9, where an animal burnt offering is "a fire offering, an aroma pleasing to the Lord".  A burnt offering described similarly in Leviticus 1:17.   A meal offering is also a fire offering, an aroma pleasing to the Lord in Leviticus 2:2.  The repetition is utilized to help us understand that both substantial and meagre offerings have equal value given that the owner "directs his heart toward Heaven".  

The Gemara interprets other verses as if they speak to the rituals surrounding offerings.  To end our masechet, the chosen statement is about the importance of the intention behind one's offering.  How wonderful to end this very detailed and very long masechet with a commentary judging each other based on things.  It is how much we care - how much we wish to make amends - that is counted.

Tuesday 27 November 2018

Menachot 109: The Rights of Priests in Onias

A very brief note regarding today's daf:

We are introduced to two Mishnayot today, both of which consider similar circumstances.  In the first, the rabbis discuss whether or not a sacrifice is valid if it is offered in the temple in Onias, Egypt, instead of in the holy Temple in Jerusalem.  Although the priests in Onias were descendants of Aaron, the temple was a replica of Jerusalem's Temple.  The priests of Onias were not permitted to serve as priests in the Temple, even if their rituals in Onias were halachically bound; even though the Temple was built to honour G-d.  The second Mishna focuses more pointedly on those priests in Onias and the struggle as to whether or not their deeds honor G-d and thus entitle them to serve in any way in Jerusalem.

We are reminded again of the many competing sects at the time of the Temple.  Rabbinic Judaism was fighting for its place as the authority on Jewish practice.  At the same time, other groups and individuals were interpreting Torah and adapting halachic decisions to meet the needs of their communities.  We continue to face those questions regarding "what is Jewish" in times of assimilation and divided streams of Jewish interpretation and practice.  We don't wish to alienate other Jews, but sometimes 'their'  behaviours make us feel uncomfortable and we close the circle.

Monday 26 November 2018

Menachot 108: When in Doubt, Offer the Smallest or the Largest

A new case in today's Mishna: if one says that s/he will bring one if her/his lambs or oxen as a sacrifice, s/he should bring the larger and more valuable lamb or ox should be brought.  The Gemara teaches that we should assume people offer sacrifices from a place of generosity.  

The acharonim wonder how this connects with yesterday's Gemara, where a standard statement should refer to the smallest of that category.  Thus if one says, "I accept upon myself to bring a burnt offering", one should bring a lamb which is the least expensive offering.  If the principal is to offer the most expensive animal, how do we reconcile this difference?

A second Mishna teaches us that the middle-sized animal is consecrated if one states that s/he will consecrate one of his/her three lambs or bulls.  If one says "I specified the lamb or bull that I will consecrate but I do not know which animal I specified", or "My father told me that he consecrated one of the lambs or bulls before his death but I do not know which",  the largest of the animals is consecrated.


What we assume is "standard can say a great deal about who we are.  If we give the "best" to the altar, we are both respecting G-d and we are ignoring humility and respecting the limitations of poverty.  

Sunday 25 November 2018

Menachot 107: An Unspecified Offering: Many Reasons for Choosing Lamb

A new Mishna teaches us about the protocol when one asserts that s/he will bring a sacrifice without details about specific plans.  The Mishna tells us how to figure out what the person likely meant.  As well, we learn about what to do when one asserts specifics about an obligation to bring a sacrifice but then forgets the assertion.

The Tanna Kamma teaches one should bring a lamb (the least expensive option) if one asserts that s/he will bring a a burnt offering.  Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya teaches that one could bring a sacrifice from fowl.  

The Gemara teaches that these are complimentary interpretations because "burnt offering" referred to animal sacrifices in the Tanna Kamma's community.  When Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya was alive, "burnt offering" referred to bird sacrifices as well.

Rashi understands that the Tanna Kamma defaulted to the least expensive offering in accordance with the principal that a standard statement should refer to the smallest of that category.  The Rambam states the opposite: a standard statement should be interpreted to refer to the largest of that category.  Perhaps the case described in our Mishna was referring to an understanding that a lamb was the automatic meaning of a simple burnt offering.  Or perhaps the Rambam ruled in accordance with the Tosefta.  We also learn the possibility that although the basic law is similar to our Mishna, the Tosefta refers to one who wishes to reach a higher level of obligation.

Today's daf offers us a clear example of rabbis disagreeing with each other and ruling in opposition to each other without offering others a clear path to follow.

Saturday 24 November 2018

Menachot 106: Brining Wood - and an Offering?

Toward the end of today's daf, we are introduced to a new Mishna.  It teaches that when one obligates oneself to bring wood to the Temple, one must bring two pieces of wood or more.  These these are usually placed on the altar beside each other each morning and afternoon.  

A baraita says that bringing wood to the Temple is the same as obligating oneself to bringing a sacrifice.  Proof texts point to the use of the seemingly superfluous word korban, sacrifice in Vayikra (2:1 or 1:2) and mention of "the sacrifice of wood" in Sefer Nechemya (10:35).  

Perhaps, as asserted by Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, wood must bee brought to the Altar with ceremony - and with salt - like any other sacrifice.  Rava suggests that the wood needs kemitza, the fistful of flour, as well, if it is to be considered a sacrifice.  But if wood requires the halachot of both offerings and meal offerings, it is suggesting that the two types of sacrifices are somewhat similar to each other.  And how would kemitza be done on wood?  Rashi says that soft chips must be cut from the wood or all of the wood should be processed into smaller chips.  Tosafot interpret this as meaning that all laws of kemitza apply (the process of obtaining the handful in a priest's right hand, placing it into a special vessel, etc.)

The Peirush Kadmon (Masechet Me'ila) argues that the intent is not to introduce kemiza, but to teach that one who contributes wood must bring a meal offering as well, including salt and any other special requirements of this offering.

Thursday 22 November 2018

Menachot 104: How to Choose an Unspecified Offering

Today begins our Masechet's thirteenth perek.  We turn to learning about the use of language when one claims that an offering is coming.  The Mishna teaches that a person can say, "I accept upon myself a meal offering" and then choose one of the different types of menachot:

  • solet, a simple flour mixture
  • challot, loaves that are unleavened
  • rekikim, wafers that are unleavened
  • marcheshet, something cooked in a deep pan
Rabbi Yehuda counters that one must bring a meal-offering of solet because that is the mincha, offering, described in the Torah (Vayikra 2:11).

We are taught the many opinions of the rishonim regarding this circumstance.  The Mishneh LaMelech suggests that the Rambam accepts the argument that the owner can choose any of the five offerings.  Rashi, however, explains Vayikra 2:1 as if he agrees with Rabbi Yehuda's opinion that one only brings an offering of solet.

Rav Eliyahu Mizrahi comments on Rashi saying that Rashi does not offer halachic rulings. Instead, he presents the interpretation that best reflects the simple, straightforward meaning of Torah text.  Rabbi Yehuca's approach is certainly the more simple interpretation, but we cannot know that Rashi agreed with it.  

Wednesday 21 November 2018

Menachot 103: Unusual Meal-Offerings

The Mishna in today's daf considers what should be done when people consciously bring meal offerings in an unusual manner.

We learn that the Tanna Kamma states that the owner's statement should be amended to reflect a proper meal offering.  Regardless of what the person actually says, the offering should be as expected.  Rabbi Shimon suggests that these offerings are not brought at all because the owners stated something erroneous.  

The Gemara tells us that the Tanna Kamma of today's Mishna was following Beit Shammai.  They had taught that we listen to a speaker's first statement.  Thus one must bring a meal offering if s/he stated that s/he would bring that offering, even if subsequent statements made that impossible.  Rabbi Yochanan teaches that the Tanna Kamma would state that one who offers to bring an unusual offering would not do so and would be released from that obligation.  Only if the owner explained that the statement was unintentional would s/he be obligated to bring an offering.

Tuesday 20 November 2018

Menachot 102: Asham Taluey, Provisional Guilt Offerings

Today's Gemara teaches us about a case where someone brought an animal as an asham taluey, provisional guilt offering.  In this case the person realizes that s/he definitely did not transgress any halacha.  We are presented with three opinions.

Rabbi Meir teaches that once the owner knows that s/he did not commit the transgression, the transgression was brought in error.  Thus the animal can be returned without being redeemed.  The Sages teach that we treat this sacrifice like any other sacrifice that cannot be brought.  It is left alone until it becomes blemished and thus disqualified from sacrifice.  Then it can be redeemed and the money will go to the Temple to use for another sacrifice.  Rabbi Eliezer teaches that the animal should be offered as provisional guilt offering.  He suggests that the owner must have sinned at some point and so the sacrifice is still valid.  

Earlier, (Keritot 17-18), the Sages attempt to define the "doubt" which warrants a provisional guilt offering.  It had been known as "the guilt offering of the pious" during the Second Temple period.  At that time people would bring these offerings even if they only had a slight suspicion and not a true doubt that they had sinned.  

Monday 19 November 2018

Menachot 101: Redeeming Sacrifices that become Ritually Impure, Halacha that Suits Our Needs

Today's daf begins our twelfth perek.  It teaches that once an animal is offered as a sacrifice it cannot be redeemed.  Further, if the animal developed a blemish, it could be redeemed and another animal would be purchased to replace it.


The Mishna states that:
  • meal offerings and libations can be redeemed if they were not placed in a special vessel
  • if they were placed in that vessel, they can no longer be redeemed 
  • fowl or wood used with frankincense that became ritually impure cannot be used nor redeemed
  • those fowl/wood must be destroyed
The Gemara notes that restrictions on redeeming wood, frankincense and vessels is rabbinic.  Biblically they can be redeemed even if they were not ritually impure and thus usable.  They could not be redeemed because they are rare and there might not be enough of them for Temple services.  The rabbis teach that wood is common, but not wood without worms.  We learn that the Meiri teaches that wood with worms cannot be used on the altar because:
  • only things edible for Jews can be burned on the altar
  • worms are disgusting and thus wormy wood would disgrace the altar
It is notable that the rabbis recognize in two different points that halacha might have been created for the benefit of people, not because it was a Torah-based instruction.

Saturday 17 November 2018

Menachot 99: The Tables, The Shewbread; Learning Greek Wisdom

Before describing the Mishna introduced in today's daf, I want to mention conversations shared involving Reish Lakish and then other rabbis.  Reish Lakish teaches that we must not allow ourselves to forget the Torah that we have learned, for as it is said in Deuteronomy 4:9, we will have transgressed the prohibition against observing Torah for ourselves and guarding our souls diligently.  Rabbi Yochanan and others say that the soul is formed in forty days (following conception) just as the Torah was given in forty days.  This is the first time that I have noted mention of the formation of the soul, particularly while in utero.  There is much written about how we do not count an infant as existent until after it has survived a month following birth.

Our new Mishna teaches us that at the entrance of the Sactuary, the table of marble holds the shewbread  as they cool and keep for the week. At the end of the week, they are moved to the table of gold until the frankincense is burned.  This one gold table demonstrates that the shewbread have a higher level of sanctity.  To ensure that the shewbread is on the table at all times, four priests carry in the shewbread and two bowls of frankincense.  Four other priests enter first, taking and arranging these items.  The priests stand facing particular directions as part of this ritual.  

Shewbread must always be on the table.  All of the elements of this ritual happened on the tables.  Loaves were given to all of the priests on Shabbat just as the priestly watch was replaced each week on Shabbat.  If Yom Kippur was on Shabbat, the loaves were distributed at night following the conclusion of the fast.  If Yom Kippur occurred on a Friday, the goat sin offering of Yom Kippur was eaten by the priests on Friday night, for it could only be eaten on the day it was sacrificed or the following night before midnight.

Finally, because it is not allowed to cook meat on Yom Kippur or Shabbat, the priests who had come from Babylonia would eat the meat raw.  They were said to be more "broad minded" regarding their food (they were not picky and would eat their food raw).

One of the conversations in the Gemara regards Ben Dama, son of Rabbi Yishmael's sister.  Ben Dama asked his uncle about learning Greek wisdom after he had completely learned Torah.  Rabbi Yishmael told him to continue studying Torah day and night; if he could find an hour that was neither day nor night, he could study Greek wisdom at that time.  Others argued this point, believing that there are limits on how much time one should devote to Torah study or to learning Mishnayot.

Thursday 15 November 2018

Menachot 97: The Table as an Altar

How should the table in the Temple be viewed by those who came to visit the Temple on festivals?  The Gemara reminds us of the book of Yechezkel (41:22): "the altar, three cubits high, and the length of two cubits, was wood including its corners, length and walls.  It was said, "This is the table that is before the  Lord".   Even though the table was seen as golden, it was viewed as a wooden utensil.  

Why did the description of the table begin with talk about the altar?  Rabbi Yochanan and Rabbi Elazar teach that the altar was the place of atonement while the Temple stood.  After the Temple was destroyed, the table served that same role.

Steinsaltz tells us about Rashi's commentary.  When we welcome guests to our table, that generosity and compassion is an offering of atonement.  The Maharsha says that this refers to one who limits his/her food for the sake of heaven; in memorial to the destruction of the Temple.  Others teach that it is the words of Torah shared at a meal that turn the table into an altar offering atonement.

Wednesday 14 November 2018

Menachot 96: The Loaves and the Table

Today's daf offers a very long Mishna in amud (a).  It teaches us more detailed halacha regarding preparing and placing the shewbread on the table in the Temple.  We learn very specific instructions regarding the measurements of the loaves, their "horns", and their placement on the table.

Steinsaltz teaches us about Reish Lakish's interpretations: the table is said to be "pure" (Vayikra 24:6) because we are meant to understand that the table might be easily ritually defiled.  Although static vessels do not become ritually impure, Reish Lakish believes that the table was moved to demonstrate its glory to those who visited on the festivals.  Rabbi Yehoshua had taught that the table represents G-d's direct love of the children of Israel - the miraculous loaves stayed fresh until they were eaten by the priests one week after they were placed.  The Sefat Emet taught that G-d's love was in the twelve loaves as they were similar to the twelve tribes.  They were eaten on Shabbat, which created a divine essence to last throughout the week.

The rabbis debate whether or not the priests could have carried the table from the Temple to the courtyard, heavy with the extra weight of the loaves and rods.  Perhaps the priests just described the loaves to the people.  Or perhaps the loaves emitted steam which was visible to the people.

Menachot 95: Preparing the Loaves

The rabbis continue to discuss the rules regarding the shtei halechem, the two loaves brought on Shavuot, and the lechem hapanim, twelve loaves placed on the table in the Temple.  Their traditions are similar.  At the end of today's daf, a new Mishna teaches about their preparation:

  • The Tanna Kamma: they are kneaded and arranged outside of the Temple area but baked in the Temple courtyard
  • Rabbi Yehuda: all preparations are done in the Temple area
  • Rabbi Shimon: preparation and baking can be done in or out of the Temple grounds, in Beit Pagi
We learn about the sources for these different views.  The Tanna Kamma teaches that the loaves do not become consecrated until they are baked and thus preparation need not take place on Temple grounds.  Rabbi Yehuda said that the loaves are meal offerings.  Meal offerings become holy as soon as ingredients are measured into a Temple vessel - and so preparation must be done in the Temple courtyard.   Rabbi Shimon says that the baking may be done outside of the courtyard, for the two loaves of Shavuot only becomes sanctified when the accompanying sacrifices are slaughtered.  Further, the twelve loaves become sanctified when they are placed on the Temple's table.  

Monday 12 November 2018

Menachot 94: The Shape of Shewbread

As we move toward the end of Masechet Menachot, the rabbis continue their discussion about the rituals surrounding Temple offerings.  Today's daf focuses on the shewbread.  These are the shtei ha'lechem, two loaves, brought on Shavuot that celebrate the new Harvest, and the lechem panim, twelve loaves, which are placed on a table each week.

Unlike other offerings, these are baked in a pan that provides them with a distinct shape.  In addition, they are eaten whole by the priests.  The daf focuses on details regarding the shewbread and on the table.  We do not learn how they were kneaded, baked, or shaped by their pans.  Further, we know little about the table nor its utensils. 

In the Gemara, the rabbis share some of their ideas regarding these missing details.  Rabbi Chanina says that the shewbread were shaped like open boxes.  Rabbi Yochanan says that shewbread were shaped like boats rocking on waves.  The Chazon Ish says that this disagreement was an ordinary argument, for either shape was plausible.  We are not told how much dough was used to create these shapes, but the ingredients listed earlier could easily serve either shape.

It is wonderful to read the rabbis admitting to their own creativity.  So often interpretations are presented as facts based on proofs; however, much creative thinking is required in all interpretation.

Sunday 11 November 2018

Menachot 93: Women Laying of Hands on Animal Sacrifices

A new Mishna teaches us a number of things, including the requirement that two hands are used when doing semicha, laying on hands.  We also learn that one always places hands on his animal offering except:

  • an 'imbecile'
  • a person who is 'deaf-mute'
  • a minor
  • a woman
  • a Canaanite slave
  • the agent of the offering's owner
One of the questions asked in the Gemara is about the exclusion of women.  Because of the placement of this restriction (near the Canaanite slave and the agent of the owner), the rabbis consider the woman to be the owner's wife. As his wife, why would she not be permitted to lay hands?  This is a positive, time-bound commandment and such are not required to be performed by women.  There are a number of other thoughts regarding the exclusion of women when doing semicha.

Tosafot: semicha is like shechita, slaughtering the sacrifice are similar and thus because shechita is permitted by a woman, semicha must be done by women as well.

Rabbi Akiva Eiger: semicha is performed during the day but is not necessarily time-bound.  Shechita is performed during the day, and because it is performed immediately after semicha, it is only a technicality that forces semicha to be done during the day.

The Sefat Emet: sacrifices are time-bound but women offer sacrifices just like men do.  Thus women are not released from the obligations to perform positive, time-bound commandments are not applied to sacrifices.

Rabbi Avraham Moshe Salmon (in Netivot HaKodesh): semicha is not the obligation of the one performing the sacrifice.  Instead, semicha is an obligation regarding the sacrifice itself.  Thus everyone, including women, are obligated to lay hands on animal sacrifices.

Menachot 92: Semicha, Laying of Hands

Turning to semicha, laying of hands on the animal sacrifice, today's daf begins with a Mishna. We learn that the no communal sacrifices include semicha - except for the scapegoat of Yom Kippur and the sacrifice brought when the Sanendrin err in a ruling that leads to sin.  Rabbi Shimon notes that a mistaken ruling leading to idol worship also includes semicha.

A few notes about semicha:

  • brought for a sin offering, a guilt offering, or an offering for failing to do positive commandments
  • animal is in northern part of the Temple courtyard with head facing the west
  • both hands are placed between the horns of the animal
  • the person offering recites viduey, confession 
  • semicha and video represent the connection between the person bringing the offering and the atonement sought
  • communal semicha is brought by the high priest on Yom Kippur or by three members of the Sanhedrin when they had erred leading to sin in the community
The rabbis discuss the scapegoat at some length, examining its connection to the other rules regarding semicha.

Thursday 8 November 2018

Menachot 90: When to Offer Libations

A new Mishna teaches us about the halacha regarding wine libations which accompanied many sacrifices.  Specifically, communal sacrifices and individual sacrifices are accompanied by these libations, with the exception of:

  • bechor, a first-born animal
  • ma'aser, an animal that is tithed and brought as a sacrifice
  • pesach, the pascal sacrifice
  • chatat, sin offerings
  • asham, guilt offerings
The rabbis note that the sin and guilt offerings brought by a metzora, a leper's sacrifices are in a different category regarding libations.

Steinsaltz teaches Rabbi Ovadiah Seforno's suggestion: the sacrifice itself acts as the connector between G-d and the person/community who is offering.  Early stories of sacrifices (Chevel/Abel, Noah, Avraham) included no libations.  The sin of the Golden Calf and the following daily communal sacrifices included a meal offering and a libation.  After the Spies reports, meal offerings and libations followed even personal sacrifices.

The Rumba's Commentary speaks to the exception of the metzora's offering.  Usually we would not want sacrifices of atonement to be decorated or beautified.  Atonement is complete by the time a metzora brings offerings.  For a Nazir, however, the sin and guilt offerings are seen as a form of atonement for denying him/herself the pleasure that accompanies the mitzvah of drinking wine.

Tuesday 6 November 2018

Menachot 88: The Magical Oil Used for Anointing in the Temple

We learned about liquid measurements used in the Temple in the Mishna that ended our last daf:

  • one hin = 12 log
  • half a hin = 6 log
  • one third of a hin = 4 log
  • one quarter of a hin = 3 log
  • one log
  • half a log
  • one quarter of a log

Was there a utensil that measured a hin given that there was no need for that measure in the Temple?  Rabbi Shimon suggests that this is the case.  The Gemara agrees, but it notes that there may have been a service that required a hin measurement.   The anointing oil was originally given for the tabernacles, the utensils and the priests.  Originally Moses was told to take a full hin of oil for that anointing (Shemot 30:24-25). Did the measurement remain in the Temple after it had been used?  Rabbi Shimon is convincing when he argues that the hin measure would have been removed once it was set aside.
Steinsaltz teaches us about the commentaries on the Gemara.  It is suggested that the tin measure was not needed because Moshe's original oil never ran out.  Magically it remained full for generations.  Masechet Horayot (11b) teaches that King Yoshiyahu hid the measure of oil in the Temple along with the Ark and the container of manna because of the destruction of the Temple that was imminent.  That container of oil is said to be used to anoint the Temple when it will be rebuilt in the future.  And since the original hin of oil will never run out, it is not necessary to find another container that measures a hin of oil.

Monday 5 November 2018

Menachot 87: Preparing Wine and Incense

Today's daf includes a Mishna that describes how to ensure that the ingredients for libations were of the highest quality.  It shares where the grapes were grown and harvested, how they were grown and how the wine should be stored.  It teaches that libations should not come from the top of the barrel where there was 'flour', the white dust of fermentation, and not from the bottom of the barrel where the sediment had settled.  

The Mishna notes that the appointed official would sit with the barrel with a measuring reed in his hand while it was poured.  When refuse was poured, he would bang on the barrel with his reed, signifying that no more wine should be poured from that barrel.

The Gemara asks why it was necessary to bang on the barrel instead of simply shouting.  Rabbi Yochanan is quoted: although speech was good for preparing the incense, it was bad for preparing the wine.  Some of the explanations include:

  • the sound waves from speech help the mixing process of preparing incense ingredients
  • a metered melody or recitation allowed the workers to work at a consistent pace
  • two workers would have to hold the mortar and speech helped them work together
These explanations focus on the ways that speech would help the people at work preparing the incense and not the incense itself.  Tosafot note that a similar statement appears in Masechet Keritot (6b).  There Rabbi Yochanan tells workers to chant, "sound well, well pound!" while they work with mortar because it is good for the incense (but not for the wine).

Sunday 4 November 2018

Menachot 86: Grades of Oil by Quality

Before introducing two new Mishnayot, today's daf reminds us about the qualities and uses of oil of myrrh.  This oil, produced from the oil of olives that have not yet reached one third of their growth, was used both as a perfume and as a depilatory.  Women spread this on their skin for its hair removal properties and its perfume.  Oil of myrrh was never fit for sacrifice. A vessel gathers the oil, and the olives are placed around the basket to ensure that the best olive oil is gather.

Three annual harvests of olives each year.  The first new Mishna tells us about the first harvest: ripe olives are picked from the top of the tree as they ripen first. They are crushed with a mortar and placed in a many-hooded wicker basket.  The second grade of oil comes from olives picked from the roof - these olives ripen next.  All oil is gathered when a wooden beam or possibly stones pressed on the olives once their oil stops seeping on its own.  Finally, the olives are ground with a millstone and pressed down upon with a beam of wood.  The third olives are collected from what remains on the trees. They are dried on the rooftop and then processed like the other olives.  The first grade oil is used to light the candelabrum in the Temple.  The rest is fit for use in meal offerings.  

The second Mishna in today's daf ranks all nine grades of oils by quality, from highest to lowest:

  • First grade of oil from first harvest
  • second grade of oil from first harvest AND/OR first grade of oil from the second harvest
  • third grade of oil from first harvest AND/OR second grade of oil from the third harvest
  • third grade of oil produced from the third harvest
But wouldn't meal offerings require the highest quality of refined olive oil?  After all, oil that is consumed on the altar would be as important as the oil burned away from the altar in the candelabrum.  The rabbis turn to the interpretation of an instruction in Leviticus (24:2), "Refined pounded olive oil for illumination".  This is said to mean that refined, pounded oil is required only for the Candelabrum.

Saturday 3 November 2018

Menachot 85: Preparing produce for the Meal Offering

We learn a new Mishna regarding the preparation of grain for the meal offering.  High quality grain produces fine flour.

  • no offerings should come from fertilized field, irrigated fields or fields of trees for these fields cannot produce optimal quality grains
  • if one does bring an offering from those fields, it is fit for sacrifice
  • fields should be plowed but not sown in the first year
  • in the second year the field should be sown seventy days before Pesach
  • the Temple treasurer inspects the flour for quality by immersing his hand into the flour and finding no flour powder covering his hand when he removes it
  • if the flour is unfit, it is sifted with a fine sifter until no power remains
  • if over half of the flour has become wormy, it is unfit
One of the Gemara's discussions focuses on bikurim, the first fruits brought to the Temple.  Bikurim are supposed to be only brought from the seven species (wheat, barley, grapes, figs, dates, olives and pomegranates).  They must not be brought from mountainous regions, etc.  Are bikurim similarly dismissed if they are less than optimal quality, like the flour brought for the meal offering?  

Rabbi Yochanan and Reish Lakish disagree: Rabbi Yochanan says that such fruit is not fit, while Reish Lakish believes that they would become sanctified just as blemished animals became sanctified if they met the basic requirements of a sacrifice.  We are told of Rav Elazar's commentary regarding his friend/teacher, Rabbi Yochanan.  In a dream, Rav Elazar saw Rabbi Yochanan interpreting a Torah verse which explains both the limitation on types of produce to sacrifice and from where that produce might be gathered.

Thursday 1 November 2018

Menachot 83: The Choicest Crops - From Where?

Today's daf considers the grain, oil and wine brought in meal offerings and in libations.  The rabbis wish to determine whether they must originate in ha'aretz or whether they can be imported from elsewhere.

A first Mishna teaches:

  • the omer offering, the two loaves at the end of the barley harvest at Pesach and wheat harvest on Shavuot must originate in Israeli grown produce
  • all other offerings can originate anywhere
  • all of the ingredients bus come from the choice production of the harvest
  • solet, fine wheat flour, comes from Machinis or Zatecha as a first choice
  • Aforayim would be the second choice origin of solet
Tosafot question the source of the requirement for the most choice produce.  If we know that choice materials are brought to the Torah, that would be assumed as a basic requirement.  We would be allowed the choices materials from other countries as well.  The second Mishna suggests that second choice crops might be acceptable.