Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) A "KOMETZ" THAT IS TOO BIG OR TOO SMALL

(a) (Mishnah): If the Kometz included a pebble, grain of salt, or grain of Levonah, it is Pasul.
(b) Question: Why must all of these be taught?
(c) Answer: All three cases are needed:

1. If it only taught a pebble, one might have thought that this is Posel for pebbles are not offered, but salt is offered, so it is not Posel;
2. If it only taught salt, one might have thought that this is Posel for it was not originally part of the Minchah, but Levonah was part of the Minchah, so it is not Posel;
3. The Mishnah teaches that even Levonah is Posel.

(d) (Mishnah): This is because a Kometz that is too big or Chaser is Pasul.
(e) Question: Even if it was not (too big or) Chaser, it would be Pasul, for it is a Chatzizah (between the Kometz and his hand - alternatively, it divides the Kometz itself!)
(f) Answer (R. Yirmeyah): The Mishnah must teach about when it is at the side (it is not a Chatzizah.)

(a) Question (Abaye): How is Kemitzah done?
(b) Answer (Rava): The way people normally do this (with all the fingers.)
(c) Question (Beraisa): (Each finger is needed for Kodshim -) the pinky for the Zeres (the measure of the Choshen), the ring finger (is the *first finger used for Kemitzah*), the middle finger (for the measure of an Amah), the index finger (for Haza'as Dam), the thumb (for Matanos Dam and oil on a Metzora.)
(d) Answer (Rava): When I said that all the fingers are used, I did not mean that they all hold flour - the pinky and thumb only wipe away excess sticking out of the middle three fingers.
(e) Question: How does the ring finger begin Kemitzah?
(f) Answer (Mar Zutra bar Tuvya): He bends back the middle three fingers until the palm, taking the flour inside.
(g) Support (Beraisa) Suggestion: "*Melo* (full) Kumtzo" - perhaps it should be overflowing!

1. Rejection: "B'Kumtzo" (it must be inside his hand).
2. Suggestion: "B'Kumtzo" - perhaps he should curl the fingers tightly!
3. Rejection: "Melo Kumtzo".
4. Resolution: He bends back the middle three fingers until the palm, taking the flour inside.
5. In Minchas Machavas or Marcheshes, he wipes away the excess using the pinky and thumb - this is *the* hard Avodah in the Mikdash!
6. Question: Is this really the hardest? Also Melikah and pouring the incense from the pan onto the coals (on Yom Kipur) are hard Avodos!
7. Correction: Rather, this is *one of the* hardest Avodos in the Mikdash.

(h) (Rav Papa): It is obvious to me that Kemitzah may be done the way people normally do this (with Chulin, they stick their fingers in from the side and press the flour in);
(i) Questions (Rav Papa): May one insert the fingertips and bend them back (to his palm, which is facing down?) May Kemitzah be done from the side (of the Kli? Alternatively - he puts the back of the hand into the flour, and moves it sideways so flour enters inside.) May it be done from below to above? (Rashi - he inserts the fingertips and bends them back to his palm, which is facing up; Tosfos - he inserts the palm and bends his hand, until it closes.)
(j) These questions are not resolved.
(k) (Rav Papa): It is obvious to me that Chafinah (filling the hands with Ketores on Yom Kipur) may be done the way people normally do this (with Chulin, they stick their hands in from two sides and bring them together);
(l) Questions (Rav Papa): May one insert the fingertips to take the (double) handful? May Chafinah be done from the side (of the Kli? Alternatively - he allows the Ketores to enter his hand from between his fingers.) If he took each handful by itself and brought his hands together, is this valid?
(m) These questions are not resolved.
(n) Questions (Rav Papa): If he stuck the Kometz on the wall of the (second) Kli, does this Mekadesh it?

1. If we only require the inside of the Kli, it is valid;
2. If Hanachah (placing it in the Kli) is required, this is not considered Hanachah.

(o) This question is not resolved.
(p) Question (Mar bar Rav Ashi): If he turned the Kli upside down and stuck the Kometz in (a pocket in) the bottom of the Kli, does this Mekadesh it?

1. If we only require Hanachah inside the Kli, it is valid;
2. If it must be done normally, it is invalid.

(q) This question is not resolved.

(a) (Mishnah) Question: How is Kemitzah done?
(b) Answer: He bends back the middle three fingers until the palm.
(c) If its (the Minchah's) oil is too much or Chaser, or if its Levonah is Chaser, it is Pasul.
(d) (Gemara) Question: What is the case of taking too much oil?
(e) Answer (R. Elazar): He designated two Lugim (instead of one.)
(f) Question: Why didn't he say that he mixed in oil of Chulin or of another Minchah?

1. Suggestion: Mixing in oil of Chulin or of another Minchah is not Posel.
2. Rejection (Rav Zutra bar Tuvya): If so, too much oil could not Posel Minchas Chotei (but we know that it can)!

i. It does not have any oil of its own, and the suggestion was that oil of Chulin or of another Minchah is not Posel!

(g) Answer (R. Elazar): It is a bigger Chidush when he designated two Lugim:

1. Not only oil of Chulin or of another Minchah is Posel, but even if he designated two Lugim, and each is fitting for the Minchah, it is Posel.

(h) Question: What is R. Elazar's source for this?
(i) Answer (Rava): A difficulty in the Mishnah forced him to say this:

1. Question: It should have said 'If there is too much oil' - why did it say 'If *its* oil is too much'?
2. Answer: This teaches that even if the oil designated for it was too much, i.e. he designated two Lugim, it is Pasul.

(j) (Mishnah): If its Levonah is Chaser (it is Pasul.)
(k) (Beraisa #1 - R. Yehudah): If the Levonah became Chaser and only one grain of Levonah remains, it is Pasul; if two grains remain, it is Kosher;
(l) R. Shimon says, if one grain remains, it is Kosher; if less remains, it is Pasul.

(m) Contradiction (Beraisa #2): If any of the Kometz or Levonah is missing, it is Pasul. (This is not like either Tana!)
(n) Answer #1: Beraisa #2 should say 'If any of the Koret of Levonah is missing (i.e. less than one grain remains), it is Pasul.'
(o) Answer #2: Beraisa #1 discusses Levonah brought with a Minchah, Beraisa #2 discusses Levonah brought by itself for a Korban.
(p) Answer #3 (R. Yitzchak bar Yosef): Beraisa #2 is like R. Meir (the Tana of our Stam Mishnah), he argues with R. Yehudah and R. Shimon:

1. All agree that initially, a Kometz of Levonah is required;
2. R. Meir holds that a Kometz of Levonah must remain, R. Yehudah holds that two grains must remain, R. Shimon holds that one grain must remain.
3. All expound the same verse - "V'Es *Kol* ha'Levonah Asher Al ha'Minchah":

i. R. Meir says, all the Levonah that was fixed (required) from the beginning must remain;
ii. R. Yehudah says, "Kol" teaches that it suffices for one grain to remain, "V'Es" requires a second grain;
iii. R. Shimon expounds "Kol" the same way, but he does not expound "V'Es".

(q) (R. Yitzchak bar Yosef): They argue about Levonah brought with a Minchah, but all agree that when Levonah is brought by itself, a Kometz must be brought and remain;

i. R. Yehudah and R. Shimon learn from "Asher Al ha'Minchah" - this law (that it suffices for one or two grains to remain) only applies to Levonah that accompanies a Minchah.

(a) (R. Yitzchak bar Yosef): They argue about Levonah brought with a Minchah, but all agree that Lechem ha'Panim must be accompanied by two Komotzim, and two Komotzim must remain.
(b) Objection: This is obvious! (A Mishnah (106B) teaches that two Komotzim are required; the source to Machshir when less remains was "Kol" - this was said only regarding Levonah with a Minchah.)
(c) Answer: One might have thought, since they are brought with the Lechem ha'Panim, they are like Levonah brought with a Minchah - R. Yitzchak teaches, this is not so
(d) (R. Ami or R. Yitzchak Nafcha): They argue about Levonah brought with a Minchah, but all agree that when Levonah is brought by itself, a Kometz must be brought and remain;
(e) (The other of R. Ami and R. Yitzchak Nafcha): They argue about both of these.
(f) (Mishnah): If its Levonah is Chaser, it is Pasul.
(g) Inference: If there is too much Levonah, it is Kosher!
(h) Contradiction (Beraisa): If there is too much Levonah, it is Pasul.
(i) Version #1 - Answer (Rami bar Chama): In the Beraisa, he designated two Komtzim (this is too much, it is Posel.)
(j) Version #2 - Answer (Rami bar Chama): In the Mishnah, he designated two Komtzim (neither is Nikva (determined) that it must be brought with it, it is Kosher.)
(k) (Rami bar Chama): If he designated two Komtzim and one was lost before Kemitzah, they were not Nikva'im (it is not considered Chaser, it is Kosher);

1. If one was lost after Kemitzah, they were Nikva'im (it is Chaser, it is Pasul).

(l) (Rami bar Chama): If four Komtzim were designated for Lechem ha'Panim, two for each pan, and two were lost before the Levonah was removed, they were not Nikva'im (it is Kosher);

1. If they were lost after removing the Levonah, they were Nikva'im (it is Pasul).

(m) Question: Why must this be taught - it follows from the previous teaching!
(n) Answer: One might have thought, since the Levonah is clearly distinct from the Lechem ha'Panim, once it is time to remove it, it is as if was removed - Rami teaches, this is not so.

(a) (Mishnah): In the following cases, a Minchah is Pasul, there is no Kares (for eating the Shirayim):

1. Kemitzah was done with intent to eat the Shirayim or a k'Zayis of the Shirayim Chutz (li'Mkomo, i.e. outside the Azarah), or Lehaktir its Kometz or a k'Zayis of its Kometz b'Chutz, or Lehaktir the Levonah b'Chutz;

(b) If he intended to eat the Shirayim or a k'Zayis of the Shirayim on the morrow, or Lehaktir on the morrow its Kometz, a k'Zayis of its Kometz, or the Levonah, it is Pigul, there is Kares.