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 97
MENACHOS 96-99 - Two weeks of study material have been dedicated by Mrs.
Estanne Abraham Fawer to honor the fourth Yahrzeit of her father, Reb
Mordechai ben Eliezer Zvi (Weiner), who passed away 18 Teves 5760. May the
merit of supporting and advancing Talmud study during the week of his
Yahrzeit serve as an Iluy for his Neshamah.
1) THE "SHULCHAN" IS NOT "MEKABEL TUM'AH" ON ACCOUNT OF THE GOLD
(a) Answer #2: Perhaps the Shulchan is not Batul to its
covering, for it is made of cedar wood, which is
2) ARRANGING THE POLES
(b) Partial Rejection: Granted, this answers for Reish
Lakish, who says that only vessels of cheap wood are
Batul to their covering, but vessels of expensive wood
are not Batul;
1. It does not answer for R. Yochanan, who says that
even vessels of expensive wood are Batul!
(c) Answer #3: The Shulchan is an exception, for the Torah
calls it a Kli Etz (in spite of its covering):
1. Question: "Ha'Mizbe'ach Etz...Zeh ha'Shulchan Asher
Lifnei Hash-m" - first it calls it Mizbe'ach, then
it calls it Shulchan!
2. Answer (R. Yochanan and R. Elazar): When the Mikdash
stood, the Mizbe'ach is Mechaper for people; today,
there is no Mikdash, a man's table is Mechaper for
him (he feeds the poor on it.)
(a) (Mishnah): There were four golden Snifin...
3) THE "AMOS" OF THE "MIKDASH"
(b) Question: What is the source of this?
(c) Answer (Rav Katina): "V'Asisa Ke'arosav v'Chaposav
u'Ksosav u'Menakiyosav" - Ka'arosav are the molds,
Kaposav are the Bazichin, Kesosav are the Snifin,
Menakiyosav are the poles;
1. "Asher Yusach Bahen" - the poles cover the bread.
(d) Question (Rava - Mishnah): Arrangement or removal of the
poles is not Docheh Shabbos.
1. If the Torah commands about (arranging the bread on)
poles, it should be Docheh Shabbos!
(e) Retraction (Rava): I erred - R. Akiva says (in this very
Mishnah), the general rule is, only those things that
cannot be done before Shabbos are Docheh Shabbos.
1. Since the poles need not be arranged on Shabbos,
this is not Docheh Shabbos.
2. The reason the bread is on poles is so it will not
get moldy - the bread can be arranged on Shabbos
without poles, it will not get moldy in a half day
(the poles can be inserted after Shabbos; likewise,
if the poles are removed from the old bread before
Shabbos, the bread will not get moldy before it is
removed the next day.)
i. (Beraisa): On Erev Shabbos the poles are
removed from the breads, they are left along
the length of the Shulchan; on Motzei Shabbos,
he lifts the ends of each loaf and puts the
3. Each of the four middle loaves requires three poles
underneath it, the top loaf needs only two, since
nothing is on top of it; the bottom loaf does not
need any poles since it rests on the Shulchan.
(a) (Mishnah - R. Meir): Wherever the Torah refers to Amos in
the Mikdash, they are medium Amos, except for the Amos of
the golden (inner) Mizbe'ach, and the corners, Sovev
(walkway around the Mizbe'ach) and base of the outer
(b) R. Yehudah says, all Amos of Binyan (things attached to
the ground) are six Tefachim, all Amos of Kelim are five
(c) (R. Yochanan): Both of them expound the same verse,
"V'Eleh Midos ha'Mizbe'ach..."
(d) ("Amah Amah v'Tofach" refers to a (five Tefachim) Amah
that needs an additional Tefach to be a medium Amah, it
applies to all of the following:)
1. "V'Chek ha'Amah" - this is the base; "v'Amah Rochav"
- this is the Sovev; "u'Gvulah El Sefasah Soviv
Zeres ha'Echad" - these are the corners; "v'Zeh Gav
ha'Mizbe'ach" - this is the inner Mizbe'ach.
(e) Question: (We are thinking that all Amos from the base
until the Sovev are of five Tefachim.) What does it mean
"V'Chek ha'Amah v'Amah Rochav"?
2. R. Meir explains, only these Kelim are made
according to a five Tefachim Amah, the Amah of all
other Kelim is six Tefachim;
3. R. Yehudah explains, all Kelim are made according to
a five Tefachim Amah, like these.
(f) Answer #1: From Chek ha'Amah (the base) until v'Amah
Rochav (the Sovev), the Amos are of five Tefachim.
(g) Question: How tall is the Mizbe'ach?
(h) Answer: It is 10 Amos; six of the Amos (from the base
until the Sovev) are of five Tefachim, the other four are
of six Tefachim, in all the Mizbe'ach is 54 Tefachim.
(i) Half the height is 27 Tefachim; three Tefachim above this
is the Sovev, for it is 24 Tefachim below the top.
(j) (Mishnah): The Chut ha'Sikra girds the Mizbe'ach in the
middle, to distinguish between (the place for) upper and
(k) Objection (Beraisa): To offer Olas ha'Of, the Kohen
ascends the ramp, turns to the Sovev, and comes to the
1. Melikah is done Mul (in line with) the Oref, he
fully cuts both Simanim, and presses the bird
against the Mizbe'ach to squeeze out the blood;
(l) Answer #2: Rather, (all 10 Amos of the Mizbe'ach's height
are of six Tefachim, the verse refers to five-Tefachim
Amos of the Mizbe'ach's width -) Chek ha'Amah is the base
(it juts out one Amah), Amah Rochav is the Sovev, Gevulah
El Sefasah Soviv is the corners;
2. If he squeezed out the blood even an Amah below his
legs (which are on the Sovev), it is Kosher.
3. If the Sovev is only three Tefachim above the Chut
ha'Sikra, the Beraisa is Machshir two (or three)
Tefachim below the Chut ha'Sikra (but Dam Olas ha'Of
must be above!)
1. The Mizbe'ach is 10 Amos tall, each is six Tefachim.
Half the height is 30 Tefachim; six Tefachim above
this is the Sovev, for it is 24 Tefachim below the
(m) Objection: We cannot say that all these Amos of the
Mizbe'ach's width are five Tefachim!
2. (Beraisa): If he squeezed out the blood even an Amah
below his legs, it is Kosher.
1. (Mishnah): The (base of the) Mizbe'ach was 32 Amos
by 32 Amos; the base was one Amah tall, the
Mizbe'ach was recessed one Amah (in each direction),
the Mizbe'ach above the base was 30 Amos square;
2. Question #1: (The outer Mizbe'ach was 32 Amos of six
Tefachim, for it is attached.) If the base juts out
an Amah of only five Tefachim, the Mizbe'ach above
the base was 30 Amos *and two Tefachim* square!
3. (Mishnah): Above the base, the Mizbe'ach rose five
Amos until the Sovev, then it recessed one Amah, the
Mizbe'ach above the Sovev was 28 Amos square;
4. Question #2: If (also) the Amah of the Sovev is five
Tefachim, the Mizbe'ach above the Sovev was 28 Amos
*and four Tefachim* square!
5. Suggestion (to answer both questions): Perhaps the
Tana omits the extra Tefachim and only teaches the
number of full Amos.
6. Rejection: This answer does not help for the next
7. (Mishnah): Each corner was one Amah square, the
Mizbe'ach within the corners was 26 Amos square;
8. Question #3: If all these Amos are of five Tefachim,
the Mizbe'ach within the corners was 26 Amos and six
Tefachim, i.e. 27 Amos square!
9. Answer: The Tana did not bother to give the precise
number of Amos.
10. (Mishnah): The walkway on top of the Mizbe'ach
(within the corners) was one Amah in each direction,
the Ma'arachah was 24 Amos square.
11. Question #4: (Granted, the walkway was an Amah of
six Tefachim - still,) the Ma'arachah was only 25
12. Suggestion: Here also, the Tana was not precise.
13. Rejection: We cannot say that the Navi was not
i. Suggestion: "Veha'Ari'el (the Ma'arachah)
Shteim Esreh Orech bi'Shteim Esreh Rochav
Ravu'a El Arba'as Reva'av" - perhaps it is only
12 Amos square!
14. Suggestion: Perhaps six of the 32 Amos of the
Mizbe'ach are of five Tefachim (in all, it is 31
Amos of six Tefachim!)
ii. Rejection: "El Arba'as Reva'av" teaches that it
is 12 in each direction emanating from the
center, i.e. 24 Amos square!
15. Rejection: If so, the calculation of the length of
the Azarah is wrong!
16. (Mishnah): The Azarah was 187 Amos long by 135 Amos
i. Its length, from east to west - 11 Amos where
Yisraelim normally walk, 11 Amos where only
Kohanim normally walk, 32 Amos for the
Mizbe'ach, 22 Amos between the Mizbe'ach and
the Ulam, 100 Amos for the Heichal (including
the Ulam), 11 Amos in back of the Heichal, 187
Amos in all.