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
Previous daf Menachos 38
***** PEREK HA'TECHEILES ****
1) "TECHEILES" AND "LAVAN" ARE NOT "ME'AKEV" EACH OTHER
(a) (Mishnah): (The Torah commands to put woolen thread(s)
dyed Techeiles on each of the four corners of a garment,
in addition to Lavan (strings that are the same color as
the garment, which is usually white).) Techeiles is not
Me'akev the Lavan, nor is Lavan Me'akev Techeiles;
(b) The Tefilin Shel Yad is not Me'akev Shel Rosh, nor
(c) (Gemara) Suggestion: Our Mishnah is not like Rebbi!
1. (Beraisa - Rebbi): "U'R'isim Oso" - Techeiles and
Lavan are Me'akev each other;
(d) Rejection (Rav Yehudah): The Mishnah can even be like
Rebbi, it teaches that the order is not Me'akev.
2. Chachamim say, they are not Me'akev each other.
3. Question: What is Rebbi's reason?
4. Answer: It says "ha'Kanaf" - strings like the corner
(i.e. Lavan), and "Pesil Techeiles", and it says
"U'R'isim Oso" (it refers to Techeiles and Lavan in
the singular, to teach that they must both be
i. Chachamim explain, this connotes that you will
see each of them by itself.
1. (Beraisa): The Mitzvah is to put the Lavan first
(Rashi - in each corner; Shitah Mekubetzes - the
first windings (of one string around the others)
should be Lavan); if one put Techeiles first, he
fulfilled his obligation, but he missed a Mitzvah.
2. Question: What Mitzvah did he miss?
2) REMNANTS OF "TZITZIS"
(e) Question: This explains 'Techeiles is not Me'akev Lavan'
- how do we explain 'Lavan is not Me'akev Techeiles'?
i. Suggestion: He missed the Mitzvah of Lavan, but
fulfilled the Mitzvah of Techeiles.
3. Answer (Rav Yehudah): He lacks a Mitzvah, and
fulfilled a Mitzvah.
ii. Rejection: This is unlike Rebbi, he says that
each is Me'akev the other!
4. Question: What Mitzvah does he lack?
5. Answer: He did not do the Mitzvah in the best way.
(f) (Shitah Mekubetzes deletes Rami bar Chama's answer from
the text here, it appears later.)
(g) Levi asked similarly:
1. Question (Levi): How do you explain 'Techeiles is
not Me'akev Lavan, and Lavan is not Me'akev
(h) Answer #1 (Rami bar Chama): This teaches about a garment
that is entirely Techeiles, the Mitzvah is to put
Techeiles first, for this is like "ha'Kanaf";
2. Answer (Shmuel): This (the first clause) teaches
about a white garment, the Mitzvah is to put the
i. Question: What is the reason?
3. Question (Levi): This explains 'Techeiles is not
Me'akev Lavan' - how do you explain 'Lavan is not
ii. Answer: It says "ha'Kanaf" - strings like the
corner. (Afterwards, it says "Pesil
iii. If Techeiles was put first, this is not
1. If Lavan was put first, this is not Me'akev.
(i) Objection (Rava): It does not depend on the color of the
garment (we always put Lavan first)!
(a) Answer #2 (Rava): It teaches about remnants (if Tzitzis
were cut off):
1. (The first clause teaches that) if the Techeiles
strings were cut off and the Lavan remains, it is
Kosher - (the latter clause teaches that) if the
Lavan was cut off and the Techeiles remains, it is
(b) Question: How much must remain?
2. (Benei R. Chiya): Remnants of Techeiles (or Lavan
strings) are Kosher; remnants of Ezov branches are
Kosher (for Parah Adumah or Metzora).
(c) Answer (Bar Hameduri): Enough must remain in order that
one could make a bow.
(d) Question: Must one be able to make a bow of all the
strings together, or each by itself?
(e) This question is not resolved.
(f) Question (Rav Ashi): If one could not make a bow because
the strings were thick, but if they were thinner one
could, what is the law?
(g) Answer (Rav Ada brei d'Rava): If they were thin, it would
be Kosher - all the more so, if the strings are thicker,
the Mitzvah is more recognizable!
(h) Question: Who are the Chachamim that argue with Rebbi?
(i) Answer: They hold like R. Yitzchak.
1. (Beraisa - R. Yitzchak): If one does not have
Techeiles, he puts Lavan.
(j) (Rava): This teaches that one must tie the strings
together after each Chulya (winding; Shitah Mekubetzes -
really, we only show that it is not enough to tie after
the last Chulya; Tosfos - presumably, they must be tied
between each Chulya and the next);
1. If this was not necessary, if only a small remnant
remains, the last knot would become undone, and the
whole Gedil would become undone!
(k) Rejection: Perhaps it is not *necessary*, and Benei R.
Chiya taught that remnants are Kosher only in a case in
which the strings happened to be tied!