POINT BY POINT SUMMARY
Prepared by Rabbi P. Feldman
of Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
Ask A Question on the daf
MENACHOS 2 - dedicated anonymously in appreciation of D.A.F.'s work by a
subscriber in the Upper West Side of Manhattan.
1) "MENACHOS" WHICH WERE OFFERED "SHE' LO LISHMAN"
(a) (Mishnah): If Kemitzah (taking a handful to be burned on
the Mizbe'ach) of any Minchah was Lo Lishmah (with intent
for a different Minchah, e.g. the Kohen said 'I take the
Kometz l'Shem *Minchas Machavas* (one cooked in a shallow
pan)', and it was really Marcheshes (cooked in a deep
pan)), it is Kosher (we offer the Kometz, the rest of the
Minchah is eaten), but Lo Alu l'Shem Chovah (the owner
did not fulfill his obligation);
1. The only exceptions are Minchas Chotei (that a very
poor person brings for a Chatas for certain
transgressions) and Minchas Kena'os (that a Sotah
brings) - if any of the following Avodos were done
Lo Lishmah in either of them, it is Pasul:
(b) (Gemara) Question: Why did the Tana say *but* Lo Alu
(l'Shem Chovah)? (He could have omitted this word!)
i. Kemitzah, Nesinah (putting the Kometz in a
second Kli Shares), Holachah (bringing the
Kometz to the top of the Mizbe'ach) or
2. It is Pasul whether all of these Avodos were Lo
Lishmah, or some Avodos were Lishmah and later
Avodos Lo Lishmah, or vice-versa.
3. The case of Lishmah followed by Lo Lishmah -
Kemitzah (of a Minchas Chotei) was l'Shem Minchas
Chotei, a later Avodah was l'Shem Minchas Nedavah;
4. The case of Lo Lishmah followed by Lishmah -
Kemitzah was l'Shem Minchas Nedavah, a later Avodah
was l'Shem Minchas Chotei.
(c) Answer: He teaches that even though Lo Alu, the Minchah
is still Kosher, it is forbidden to do another Avodah
(Nesinah, Holachah or Haktarah) Lo Lishmah.
1. (Rava): If an Olah was slaughtered Lo Lishmah, it is
forbidden to do Zerikah Lo Lishmah.
2. We can learn from reasoning or a verse.
i. Reasoning - because it was (improperly)
slaughtered Lo Lishmah, should we do another
Avodah Lo Lishmah?!
ii. A verse - "...V'Asisa ka'Asher
iii. Question: Why does the Torah call a Neder (a
vow to bring a Korban with Acharayos (if the
animal becomes lost or disqualified, he must
bring another)) 'Nedavah' (a Korban without
iv. Answer: If you did like your Neder (vow, i.e.
the Korban was offered Lishmah), it is a Neder
(you fulfilled your vow); if not, it is a
Nedavah (you did not fulfill your vow).
2) IS THE MISHNAH LIKE R. SHIMON?
v. The Torah calls a Zevach slaughtered Lo Lishmah
a Nedavah - a Nedavah may not be offered Lo
(a) Suggestion: The Mishnah is unlike R. Shimon.
3) WHEN IS THE "MINCHAH" VALID ACCORDING TO R. SHIMON?
1. (Beraisa #1 - R. Shimon): If Kemitzah of any Minchah
(even Minchas Chotei) was Lo Lishmah, it is Kosher
and Alah (l'Shem Chovah);
(b) Question: This is not difficult for Rav Ashi, who says
that R. Shimon is (fully) Machshir only when he said
(about a Minchas Machavas) 'l'Shem Marcheshes' (without
saying 'Minchah') - our Mishnah is even like R. Shimon,
the case is, he said 'l'Shem *Minchas* Marcheshes', all
agree that Lo Alah;
2. Menachos are unlike Zevachim:
i. If Kemitzah was l'Shem Marcheshes and it was
really (cooked in a) Machavas (such a Minchah
is drier), this is evident (therefore, the
intent has no effect);
3. This is not the case regarding Zevachim - slaughter
and Zerikah are the same for all of them (therefore,
Lo Lishmah is not Meratzeh (Oleh l'Shem Chovah), it
is even Posel some Zevachim (Chatas and Pesach)).
ii. If he did Kemitzah l'Shem Blulah (a Minchah
mixed with oil) and it was really Charevah
(without oil, i.e. Minchas Chotei), this is
1. But according to Rabah and Rava, R. Shimon argues in
both cases, must we say that the Mishnah is unlike
(c) Suggestion: Perhaps they answer like Rabah says (below),
that R. Shimon is Machshir only regarding Shinuy Kodesh
(l'Shem the wrong Korban), but he admits regarding Shinuy
Ba'alim (l'Shem the wrong owner - since the Lo Lishmah is
not evident, Lo Alah; this is the case in our Mishnah).
1. Rejection: Our Mishnah discusses Shinuy Kodesh!
(d) Conclusion: Indeed, Rabah and Rava must say that the
Mishnah is unlike R. Shimon.
i. (Mishnah): Lishmah followed by Lo Lishmah -
(Kemitzah of Minchas Chotei was) l'Shem Minchas
Chotei, a later Avodah was l'Shem Minchas
2. Suggestion: Perhaps they answer like Rava says
(below), that R. Shimon is Machshir only regarding a
Minchah l'Shem a different Minchah, but he admits
regarding a Minchah l'Shem a Zevach that Lo Alu (and
our Mishnah discusses this).
3. Rejection: Our Mishnah discusses a Minchah l'Shem a
i. (Mishnah): Lo Lishmah followed by Lishmah -
Kemitzah was l'Shem Minchas Nedavah, a later
Avodah was l'Shem Minchas Chotei.
(a) Question: R. Shimon contradicts what he said elsewhere!
1. (Beraisa #2 - R. Shimon): "Kodesh Kodoshim Hi
ka'Chatas veka'Asham" - some Menachos are like
Chatas, some Menachos are like Asham:
(b) Answer #1 (Rabah): In Beraisa #1, R. Shimon discusses
Shinuy Kodesh, he says 'Teratzeh'; in Beraisa #2, he
discusses Shinuy Ba'alim. (Other answers to this question
will be given on Daf 3B.)
2. Minchas Chotei is like Chatas - therefore, if
Kemitzah was Lo Lishmah it is Pasul, like Chatas Lo
3. Minchas Nedavah is like Asham - therefore, if
Kemitzah was Lo Lishmah it is Kosher, like Asham Lo
i. However, if an Asham was Lo Lishmah, Lo Alah -
the same applies to a Minchah Lo Lishmah.
(c) Question (Abaye): A Hekesh teaches that Menachos are like
Zevachim, improper intent is Posel - this applies to
Shinuy Kodesh and Shinuy Ba'alim!
(d) Answer (Rabah): R. Shimon distinguished whether or not
the improper intent is evident - he expounds according to
1. Shinuy Ba'alim is not evident, it is Posel - Shinuy
Kodesh is evident (i.e. that this was not cooked in
a Machavas) therefore the intent is Batul.
(e) Question #1: If so, if Melikah of Olas ha'Of was done
above (on the top half of the Mizbe'ach) l'Shem Chatas
ha'Of, Teratzeh (it should be Kosher and Oleh l'Shem
Chovah), for the Lo Lishmah is evident, Chatas is done
(f) Answer: Melikah of Chatas ha'Of may also be done above
(so it is not evident, this could be a Chatas).
1. Melikah anywhere on the Mizbe'ach is Kosher.
(g) Question #2: If Mitzuy (squeezing out the blood) of Olas
ha'Of was done above l'Shem Chatas ha'Of, Teratzeh, for
the Lo Lishmah is evident;
1. Chatas ha'Of is done below, and Haza'ah (sprinkling)
is done with its blood!
(h) Answer: This is not evident - also in Chatas ha'Of,
Mitzuy is done (after Haza'ah), and Mitzuy anywhere on
the Mizbe'ach is Kosher.