Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility Skip to content

Today's Daf Yomi

September 21, 2018 | 讬状讘 讘转砖专讬 转砖注状讟

  • This month鈥檚 learning is sponsored by Shlomo and Amalia Klapper in honor of the birth of Chiyenna Yochana, named after her great-great-grandmother, Chiyenna Kossovsky.

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Elaine Hochberg in honor of her husband, Arie Hochberg, who continues to journey through Daf Yomi with her. 鈥淎nd with thanks to Rabbanit Farber and Hadran who have made our learning possible.鈥

Menachot 42

How many strings? How far from the edge of the garment? How long do the strands need to hang down? Does one make a bracha聽on stringing the tzitzit? Can a non聽Jew make tzitzit? Can a woman? What part of the process needs to be done for the sake of tzitzit?


If the lesson doesn't play, click "Download"

讗讬谉 诇讛 砖讬注讜专 诇诪注诇讛 讗讘诇 讬砖 诇讛 砖讬注讜专 诇诪讟讛 讚讗讬 诇讗 转讬诪讗 讛讻讬 讻讬讜爪讗 讘讜 诇讜诇讘 讗讬谉 诇讜 砖讬注讜专 讛讻讬 谞诪讬 讚讗讬谉 诇讜 砖讬注讜专 讻诇诇

the baraita means that ritual fringes do not have a maximum measure, i.e., the strings can be as long as one wants; however, they do have a minimum measure, and if the strings are shorter than this measure they are not fit. As, if you do not say so, in a case similar to it, where it is taught that a lulav has no measure, is it possible that it also has no measure whatsoever?

讜讛转谞谉 诇讜诇讘 砖讬砖 讘讜 砖诇砖讛 讟驻讞讬诐 讻讚讬 诇谞注谞注 讘讜 讻砖专 讗诇讗 讗讬谉 诇讜 砖讬注讜专 诇诪注诇讛 讗讘诇 讬砖 诇讜 砖讬注讜专 诇诪讟讛 讛讻讬 谞诪讬 讗讬谉 诇讜 砖讬注讜专 诇诪注诇讛 讗讘诇 讬砖 诇讜 砖讬注讜专 诇诪讟讛

But didn鈥檛 we learn in a mishna (Sukka 29b): A lulav that has three handbreadths in length, sufficient to enable one to wave with it, is fit for use in fulfilling the mitzva? This indicates that if the lulav is less than the measure, it is not fit. Rather, it must be that a lulav has no maximum measure, but it does have a minimum measure. So too, ritual fringes have no maximum measure, but they have a minimum measure.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 爪讬爪转 讗讬谉 爪讬爪讬转 讗诇讗 注谞祝 讜讻谉 讛讜讗 讗讜诪专 讜讬拽讞谞讬 讘爪讬爪转 专讗砖讬 讜讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讜爪专讬讱 诇驻专讜讚讛 讻讬 爪讜爪讬转讗 讚讗专诪讗讬

The Sages taught in a baraita: The verse states: 鈥淭hat they prepare for themselves strings鈥 (Numbers 15:38). The term strings [tzitzit] means nothing other than strings that hang down [anaf], and so it states in the verse: 鈥淚 was taken by a lock [betzitzit] of my head鈥 (Ezekiel 8:3). And Abaye says: And one is required to separate the ritual fringes like a gentile鈥檚 lock of hair, part of which is braided and the rest of which is allowed to hang loose.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讛讟讬诇 注诇 讛拽专谉 讗讜 注诇 讛讙讚讬诇 讻砖讬专讛 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讘谉 讬注拽讘 (讗讜诪专) 驻讜住诇 讘砖转讬讛谉

The Sages taught in a baraita: If one affixed the ritual fringes to the tip of the corner or to the border [gadil], they are fit. Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya鈥檃kov disqualifies them in both cases.

讻诪讗谉 讗讝诇讗 讛讗 讚讗诪专 专讘 讙讬讚诇 讗诪专 专讘 爪讬爪讬转 爪专讬讻讛 砖转讛讗 谞讜讟驻转 注诇 讛拽专谉 砖谞讗诪专 注诇 讻谞驻讬 讘讙讚讬讛诐 讻诪讗谉 讻专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讘谉 讬注拽讘

The Gemara asks: In accordance with whose opinion is that which Rav Giddel says that Rav says: Ritual fringes must be inserted into a hole above the corner and hang down onto the corner of the garment, as it is stated: 鈥淥n the corners of their garments鈥 (Numbers 15:38)? In accordance with whose opinion is this? The Gemara answers: It is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya鈥檃kov.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讬注拽讘 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讜爪专讬讱 砖讬专讞讬拽 诪诇讗 拽砖专 讙讜讚诇

Rabbi Ya鈥檃kov says that Rabbi Yo岣nan says: And one must distance the hole through which the ritual fringes are inserted into the garment the length of a full thumb joint from the edge of the garment.

讜讗讬爪讟专讬讱 讚专讘 驻驻讗 讜讗讬爪讟专讬讱 讚专讘讬 讬注拽讘 讚讗讬 诪讚专讘 驻驻讗 讛讜讛 讗诪讬谞讗 转讜讱 砖诇砖 讚诇讗 诇讬专讞讬拽 讟驻讬 讜讻诪讛 讚诪拽专讘 诪注诇讬 讗讬爪讟专讬讱 讚专讘讬 讬注拽讘

The Gemara notes: And it was necessary to state the ruling of Rav Pappa (41b) that the ritual fringes must be inserted into a hole within three fingerbreadths of the edge of the garment, and it was also necessary to state the ruling of Rabbi Ya鈥檃kov. This is because if the location of the hole was taught only from the statement of Rav Pappa, I would say that his ruling that the hole must be within three fingerbreadths of the edge of the garment was to teach that one may not distance the hole from the edge of the garment by more than this amount, but the closer the hole is to the edge of the garment, the better. Consequently, it was necessary to include the statement of Rabbi Ya鈥檃kov.

讜讗讬 诪讚专讘讬 讬注拽讘 讛讜讛 讗诪讬谞讗 诪诇讗 拽砖专 讙讜讚诇 讚诇讗 诇讬拽专讘 讟驻讬 讜讻诪讛 讚专讞讬拽 诪注诇讬 爪专讬讻讗

And if the location of the hole was taught only from the statement of Rabbi Ya鈥檃kov, I would say that his ruling that it must be a full thumb joint away from the edge of the garment was to teach that one may not situate the hole closer than that to the edge of the garment, but the further he places it, the better. Therefore, both statements were necessary.

专讘讬谞讗 讜专讘 住诪讗 讛讜讜 讬转讘讬 拽诪讬讛 讚专讘 讗砖讬 讞讝讬讬讛 专讘 住诪讗 诇拽专谞讬讛 讚讙诇讬诪讬讛 讚专讘讬谞讗 讚住转专 讜讘爪专 诪诪诇讗 拽砖专 讙讜讚诇 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诇讗 住讘专 诇讛 诪专 诇讛讗 讚专讘讬 讬注拽讘 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讘砖注转 注砖讬讬讛 讗讬转诪专

The Gemara relates that Ravina and Rav Samma were sitting before Rav Ashi. Rav Samma saw that the corner of Ravina鈥檚 cloak was torn and therefore the hole through which the ritual fringes were inserted was less than the full length of a thumb joint from the edge of the garment. Rav Samma said to Ravina: Doesn鈥檛 the Master hold in accordance with that statement of Rabbi Ya鈥檃kov that the hole must be at least the length of a thumb joint from the edge of the garment? Ravina said to Rav Samma: It was stated that this distance is required at the time when the ritual fringes are made. If the corner tears later, causing the hole to be closer to the edge of the garment, the ritual fringes remain fit.

讗讬讻住讬祝 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 讗砖讬 诇讗 转转拽讬祝 诇讱 讞讚 诪讬谞讬讬讛讜 讻转专讬 诪讬谞谉

Rav Samma became embarrassed because he had asked his question based on a mistaken assumption. Rav Ashi said to Rav Samma: Do not be upset that Ravina is a greater scholar than you are; one of them, i.e., the Sages of Eretz Yisrael, is like two of us, i.e., the Sages of Babylonia.

专讘 讗讞讗 讘专 讬注拽讘 专诪讬 讗专讘注 讜注讬讬祝 诇讛讜 诪讬注祝 讜诪注讬讬诇 诇讛讜 讘讙诇讬诪讗 讜讗讘讬拽 诇讛讜 诪讬讘拽 拽住讘专 讘注讬谞谉 转诪谞讬讗 讘讙诇讬诪讗 讻讬 讛讬讻讬 讚诇讬讛讜讬 讙讚讬诇 讙讚讬诇讬诐 讘诪拽讜诐 驻转讬诇

搂 With regard to attaching ritual fringes to a garment, the Gemara relates that Rav A岣 bar Ya鈥檃kov would affix four strings to the garment, and he would first fold them in half and then insert them at the point of the folds into the hole of the garment, so that on one side there were eight strings and on the other side there were four loops. He would then take the eight strings and loop them through the four loops and pull them tight, thereby attaching them to the garment. The Gemara explains that he held that we require eight strings when they are initially placed in the garment, in order that there be twisted cord and 鈥渢wisted cords鈥 (Deuteronomy 22:12), i.e., four doubled strings, at the place, i.e., the time, when he creates the loose hanging string.

专讘 讬专诪讬讛 诪讚驻转讬 专诪讬 转诪谞讬讗 讚讗讬谞讛讜 砖讬转住专 讜诇讗 讗讘讬拽 诇讛讜 诪专 讘专讬讛 讚专讘讬谞讗 注讘讬讚 讻讚讬讚谉

Rav Yirmeya of Difti would affix eight strings that are sixteen strings after they are placed in the hole of the garment and half of each string hangs down on each side, and he would not loop them as Rav Aha bar Ya鈥檃kov did. Mar, son of Ravina, would prepare ritual fringes like ours, placing four strings through the hole and allowing both ends of each string to hang down, thereby forming eight.

专讘 谞讞诪谉 讗砖讻讞讬讛 诇专讘 讗讚讗 讘专 讗讛讘讛 专诪讬 讞讜讟讬 讜拽讗 诪讘专讱 诇注砖讜转 爪讬爪讬转 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪讗讬 爪讬爪讬 砖诪注谞讗 讛讻讬 讗诪专 专讘 爪讬爪讬转 讗讬谉 爪专讬讻讛 讘专讻讛

搂 The Gemara relates that Rav Na岣an found Rav Adda bar Ahava affixing strings to a garment and reciting the blessing that concludes: To prepare ritual fringes [tzitzit]. Rav Na岣an said to Rav Adda bar Ahava: What is this tzitzi sound that I hear? This is what Rav says: Ritual fringes do not require a blessing when one attaches them to the garment.

讻讬 谞讞 谞驻砖讬讛 讚专讘 讛讜谞讗 注诇 专讘 讞住讚讗 诇诪讬专诪讗 讚专讘 讗讚专讘 讜诪讬 讗诪专 专讘 爪讬爪讬转 讗讬谉 爪专讬讱 讘专讻讛 讜讛讗 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 专讘 诪谞讬谉 诇爪讬爪讬转 讘讙讜讬 砖讛讬讗 驻住讜诇讛 砖谞讗诪专 讚讘专 讗诇 讘谞讬 讬砖专讗诇 讜注砖讜 诇讛诐 爪讬爪转 讘谞讬 讬砖专讗诇 讬注砖讜 讜诇讗 讛讙讜讬诐 讬注砖讜

With regard to this statement of Rav, the Gemara relates that when Rav Huna died, Rav 岣sda went into the study hall to raise a contradiction from one statement of Rav to another statement of Rav, as follows: Did Rav actually say that ritual fringes do not require a blessing when one attaches them to the garment? But doesn鈥檛 Rav Yehuda say that Rav says: From where is it derived that ritual fringes attached by a gentile are unfit? It is derived from a verse, as it is stated: 鈥淪peak unto the children of Israel and command them that they prepare for themselves strings鈥 (Numbers 15:38). The Sages derive from here that the children of Israel shall prepare ritual fringes, but the gentiles shall not prepare ritual fringes.

讜讛讗 诪讗讬 专讜诪讬讗 讗诪专 专讘 讬讜住祝 拽住讘专 专讘 讞住讚讗 讻诇 诪爪讜讛 砖讻砖讬专讛 讘讙讜讬 讘讬砖专讗诇 讗讬谉 爪专讬讱 诇讘专讱 讻诇 诪爪讜讛 砖驻住讜诇讛 讘讙讜讬 讘讬砖专讗诇 爪专讬讱 诇讘专讱

The Gemara asks: But what is the contradiction between these two statements of Rav? Rav Yosef said: Rav 岣sda held that in the case of any mitzva for which the necessary item is fit when produced by a gentile, if it is produced by a Jew, he does not need to recite a blessing. Conversely, any mitzva for which the necessary item is unfit when produced by a gentile, if it is produced by a Jew, he needs to recite a blessing when he produces the item.

讜讻诇诇讗 讛讜讗 讜讛专讬 诪讬诇讛 讚讻砖讬专讛 讘讙讜讬 讚转谞讬讗 注讬专 砖讗讬谉 讘讛 专讜驻讗 讬砖专讗诇 讜讬砖 讘讛 专讜驻讗 讗专诪讗讬 讜专讜驻讗 讻讜转讬 讬诪讜诇 讗专诪讗讬 讜讗诇 讬诪讜诇 讻讜转讬 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 讻讜转讬 讜诇讗 讗专诪讗讬

The Gemara asks: And is this an established principle? But what about circumcision, which is valid if performed by a gentile, as it is taught in a baraita: In a city in which there is no Jewish physician, and in which there is an Aramean, i.e., a gentile, physician and a Samaritan physician, it is preferable that the Aramean circumcise the Jewish boys of the city and the Samaritan not circumcise them; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehuda says: It is preferable that the Samaritan circumcise the boys and the Aramean not circumcise them. Nevertheless, all agree that a circumcision performed by a gentile is valid.

讜讘讬砖专讗诇 爪专讬讱 诇讘专讱 讚讗诪专 诪专 讛诪诇 讗讜诪专 讘专讜讱 讗砖专 拽讚砖谞讜 讘诪爪讜转讬讜 讜爪讜谞讜 注诇 讛诪讬诇讛

And despite the fact that circumcision performed by a gentile is valid, when it is performed by a Jew, he must recite a blessing, as the Master said: The one who circumcises a child says: Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the universe, Who has sanctified us through His mitzvot and has commanded us concerning circumcision.

诪讬讚讬 讛讜讗 讟注诪讗 讗诇讗 诇专讘 专讘 诪讬驻住讬诇 驻住讬诇 讚讗讬转诪专 诪谞讬谉 诇诪讬诇讛 讘讙讜讬 砖驻住讜诇讛 讚专讜 讘专 驻驻讗 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘 讗诪专 讜讗转讛 讗转 讘专讬转讬 转砖诪专

The Gemara answers: Is there reason to resolve the contradiction according to anyone but Rav? Rav himself invalidates circumcision performed by a gentile, as it was stated: From where is it derived that circumcision performed by a gentile is not valid? Daru bar Pappa says in the name of Rav: This is derived from the verse: 鈥淎nd God said unto Abraham: And as for you, you shall keep My covenant, you, and your seed after you throughout their generations鈥 (Genesis 17:9). The verse indicates that only the descendants of Abraham may perform circumcision.

专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讗诪专 讛诪讜诇 讬诪讜诇 讛诪诇 讬诪讜诇

Rabbi Yo岣nan says that this halakha is derived from the doubled verb in the verse: 鈥淢ust be circumcised [himmol yimmol]鈥 (Genesis 17:13), which he interprets to mean: Only one who is circumcised [hammal] may circumcise [yamul] others.

住讜讻讛 诪住讬讬注 诇讬讛 转驻讬诇讬谉 讛讜讬 转讬讜讘转讬讛

The Gemara notes that the halakha with regard to a sukka supports the opinion of Rav 岣sda, who holds that when an item used for a mitzva can be created by a gentile, a Jew who creates it does not recite a blessing. And the halakha with regard to phylacteries is a conclusive refutation of his opinion.

讛专讬 住讜讻讛 讚讻砖讬专讛 讘讙讜讬 讚转谞讬讗 住讜讻转 讙讜讬诐 住讜讻转 谞砖讬诐 住讜讻转 讘讛诪讛 住讜讻转 讻讜转讬讬诐 住讜讻讛 诪讻诇 诪拽讜诐 讻砖讬专讛 讜讘诇讘讚 砖转讛讗 诪住讜讻讻转 讻讛讬诇讻转讗

The Gemara explains: A sukka is fit even if it was built by a gentile, as it is taught in a baraita: With regard to a booth built by gentiles, a booth built by women, a booth for domesticated animals, a booth built by Samaritans, a booth of any sort, each is fit for use as a sukka, provided that it is roofed in accordance with the halakha.

讜讘讬砖专讗诇 讗讬谉 爪专讬讱 诇讘专讱 讚转谞讬讗 讛注讜砖讛 住讜讻讛 诇注爪诪讜 讗讜诪专 讘专讜讱 讗转讛 讛壮 讗诇讛讬谞讜 诪诇讱 讛注讜诇诐 砖讛讞讬讬谞讜 讜拽讬诪谞讜 讜讛讙讬注谞讜 诇讝诪谉 讛讝讛 讘讗 诇讬砖讘 讘讛 讗讜诪专 讘专讜讱 讗转讛 讛壮 讗诇讛讬谞讜 诪诇讱 讛注讜诇诐 讗砖专 拽讚砖谞讜 讘诪爪讜转讬讜 讜爪讜谞讜 诇讬砖讘 讘住讜讻讛 讜讗讬诇讜 诇注砖讜转 住讜讻讛 诇讗 诪讘专讱

And if a sukka was built by a Jew, he is not required to recite a blessing upon its construction, as it is taught in a baraita: One who constructs a sukka for himself recites: Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the universe, Who has given us life, sustained us, and brought us to this time. When he comes to sit in the sukka, he recites: Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the universe, Who has sanctified us through His mitzvot and commanded us to reside in the sukka. The Gemara notes that the baraita indicates that he recites a blessing at the time of construction, whereas he does not recite a blessing including the words: To construct a sukka, which confirms the opinion of Rav 岣sda.

转驻讬诇讬谉 转讬讜讘转讬讛 讜讛专讬 转驻讬诇讬谉 讚驻住讜诇讜转 讘讙讜讬 讚转谞讬 专讘 讞讬谞谞讗 讘专讬讛 讚专讘讗

By contrast, the halakha with regard to phylacteries is a conclusive refutation of Rav 岣sda鈥檚 opinion. Phylacteries are unfit when written by a gentile, as it is taught by Rav 岣nnana, son of Rava,

诪驻砖专讜谞讬讗 住驻专 转讜专讛 转驻讬诇讬谉 讜诪讝讜讝讜转 砖讻转讘谉 诪讬谉 讻讜转讬 讙讜讬 注讘讚 讗砖讛 讜拽讟谉 讜讬砖专讗诇 诪砖讜诪讚 驻住讜诇讬谉 砖谞讗诪专 讜拽砖专转诐 讜讻转讘转诐 讻诇 砖讬砖谞讜 讘拽砖讬专讛 讬砖谞讜 讘讻转讬讘讛 讻诇 砖讗讬谞讜 讘拽砖讬专讛 讗讬谞讜 讘讻转讬讘讛

of Pashronya: A Torah scroll, phylacteries, or mezuzot that were written by a heretic, a Samaritan, a gentile, a Canaanite slave, a woman, a minor, or a Jewish apostate [meshummad] are unfit, as it is stated: 鈥淎nd you shall bind them for a sign on your arm鈥and you shall write them on the doorposts of your house鈥 (Deuteronomy 6:8鈥9). From this juxtaposition, one can derive the following: Anyone who is included in the mitzva of binding the phylacteries, i.e., one who is both obligated and performs the mitzva, is included in the class of people who may write Torah scrolls, phylacteries, and mezuzot; and anyone who is not included in the mitzva of binding is not included in the class of people who may write sacred texts.

讜讘讬砖专讗诇 讗讬谉 爪专讬讱 诇讘专讱 讚砖诇讞 专讘 讞讬讬讗 讘专讬讛 讚专讘 讛讜谞讗 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 注诇 转驻讬诇讬谉 砖诇 讬讚 讗讜诪专 讘专讜讱 讗砖专 拽讚砖谞讜 讘诪爪讜转讬讜 讜爪讜谞讜 诇讛谞讬讞 转驻讬诇讬谉 注诇 转驻讬诇讬谉 砖诇 专讗砖 讗讜诪专 讘专讜讱 讗砖专 拽讚砖谞讜 讘诪爪讜转讬讜 讜爪讜谞讜 注诇 诪爪讜转 转驻讬诇讬谉 讜讗讬诇讜 诇注砖讜转 转驻讬诇讬谉 诇讗 诪讘专讱

And despite the fact that phylacteries written by a gentile are unfit, a Jew who writes them does not have to recite a blessing. As Rav 岣yya, son of Rav Huna, sent a ruling in the name of Rabbi Yo岣nan: On phylacteries of the arm one says the blessing: Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the universe, Who has sanctified us through His mitzvot and commanded us to don phylacteries. On phylacteries of the head one says the blessing: Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the universe, Who has sanctified us through His mitzvot and commanded us concerning the mitzva of phylacteries. The implication of this is that one recites blessings only when he dons the phylacteries, whereas when he writes the phylacteries he does not recite a blessing: To prepare phylacteries.

讗诇讗 诇讗讜 讛讬讬谞讜 讟注诪讗 讻诇 诪爪讜讛 讚注砖讬讬转讛 讙诪专 诪爪讜讛 讻讙讜谉 诪讬诇讛 讗祝 注诇 讙讘 讚讻砖讬专讛 讘讙讜讬 讘讬砖专讗诇 爪专讬讱 诇讘专讱 讜讻诇 诪爪讜讛 讚注砖讬讬转讛 诇讗讜 讙诪专 诪爪讜讛 讻讙讜谉 转驻讬诇讬谉 讗祝 注诇 讙讘 讚驻住讜诇讜转 讘讙讜讬 讘讬砖专讗诇 讗讬谞讜 爪专讬讱 诇讘专讱

Rather, isn鈥檛 this the reason for the distinction between different mitzvot: For any mitzva whose performance is the completion of the mitzva, such as circumcision, even though it is valid when performed by a gentile, when it is performed by a Jew he must recite a blessing. But for any mitzva where the performance of a particular act is not the completion of the mitzva, such as writing phylacteries, where one does not complete the mitzva until he dons them, even though it is not valid when performed by a gentile, when it is performed by a Jew he does not need to recite a blessing.

讜讘爪讬爪讬转 讘讛讗 拽诪讬驻诇讙讬 诪专 住讘专 讞讜讘转 讟诇讬转 讛讜讗 讜诪专 住讘专 讞讜讘转 讙讘专讗 讛讜讗

And with regard to reciting a blessing when one attaches ritual fringes to a garment, the Sages disagree about this: One Sage, Rav Adda bar Ahava, holds that it is an obligation pertaining to the cloak. Therefore, when one attaches the ritual fringes he is completing the mitzva, and he should recite a blessing: To prepare ritual fringes. And one Sage, Rav Na岣an, citing Rav, holds that it is an obligation incumbent upon the man. Consequently, the mitzva is not complete until he wears the garment, and he should not recite a blessing when he attaches the ritual fringes to the garment.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 诪专讚讻讬 诇专讘 讗砖讬 讗转讜谉 讛讻讬 诪转谞讬转讜 诇讛

Rav Mordekhai said to Rav Ashi: You teach this halakha about gentiles attaching ritual fringes to a garment in this manner, citing Rav Yehuda in the name of Rav that the ritual fringes are invalid. Consequently, Rav 岣sda raises a contradiction between this ruling and another ruling of Rav.

讗谞谉 讛讻讬 诪转谞讬谞谉 诇讛 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 专讘 诪谞讬谉 诇爪讬爪讬转 讘讙讜讬 砖讻砖讬专讛 砖谞讗诪专 讚讘专 讗诇 讘谞讬 讬砖专讗诇 讜注砖讜 诇讛诐 爪讬爪讬转 讬注砖讜 诇讛诐 讗讞专讬诐

We teach it in this way, according to which there is no contradiction: Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: From where is it derived that if ritual fringes are attached to a garment by a gentile they are valid? It is derived from that which is stated: 鈥淪peak unto the children of Israel and command them that they prepare for themselves [lahem] strings鈥 (Numbers 15:38). From the fact that the verse does not merely state: That they prepare [ve鈥檃su], but rather states 鈥ve鈥檃su lahem,鈥 which can be translated as: That they prepare for them, the indication is that even others, i.e., gentiles, shall prepare ritual fringes for them.

讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 专讘 注砖讗谉 诪谉 讛拽讜爪讬诐 讜诪谉 讛谞讬诪讬谉 讜诪谉 讛讙专讚讬谉 驻住讜诇讛 诪谉 讛住讬住讬谉 讻砖讬专讛

Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: If one prepared ritual fringes from threads that protrude from the fabric like thorns [kotzim], or if he prepared them from threads [nimin] that were used to sew the garment and remain attached to it, or from the strings [geradin] that hang from the bottom of a garment, the ritual fringes are unfit, as one must attach ritual fringes to a garment for the sake of the mitzva. But if he prepared ritual fringes from swatches of wool that were not spun for the sake of the mitzva, they are fit.

讻讬 讗诪专讬转讛 拽诪讬讛 讚砖诪讜讗诇 讗诪专 讗祝 诪谉 讛住讬住讬谉 驻住讜诇讛 讘注讬谞谉 讟讜讬讬讛 诇砖诪讛

Rav Yehuda continues: When I stated this halakha in the name of Rav before Shmuel, he said to me: Even ritual fringes tied from swatches of wool that were not spun for the sake of the mitzva are unfit, as we require the spinning of the string to be for the sake of the mitzva.

讻转谞讗讬 爪讬驻谉 讝讛讘 讗讜 砖讟诇讛 注诇讬讛谉 注讜专 讘讛诪讛 讟诪讗讛 驻住讜诇讜转 注讜专 讘讛诪讛 讟讛讜专讛 讻砖讬专讜转 讜讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖诇讗 注讬讘讚谉 诇砖诪谉 专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讗讜诪专 讗祝 注讜专 讘讛诪讛 讟讛讜专讛 驻住讜诇讜转 注讚 砖讬注讘讚谉 诇砖诪谉

The Gemara notes that this dispute is like a dispute between tanna鈥檌m, as it is taught in a baraita: If one took phylacteries and coated them with gold or patched them with the skin of a non-kosher animal, then they are unfit. But if one patched them with the skin of a kosher animal, then they are fit, and this is so even though he did not prepare the skin for their sake, i.e., for the sake of its use in a mitzva. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: Even if he patched them with the skin of a kosher animal they are unfit, until he prepares them for their sake.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗讘讬讬 诇专讘 砖诪讜讗诇 讘专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讛讗 转讻讬诇转讗 讛讬讻讬 爪讘注讬转讜 诇讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪讬讬转讬谞谉 讚诐 讞诇讝讜谉 讜住诪谞讬谉 讜专诪讬谞谉 诇讛讜 讘讬讜专讛 讜砖拽诇讬谞讗 驻讜专转讗 讘讘讬注转讗 讜讟注诪讬谞谉 诇讛讜 讘讗讜讚专讗 讜砖讚讬谞谉 诇讬讛 诇讛讛讜讗 讘讬注转讗 讜拽诇讬谞谉 诇讬讛 诇讗讜讚专讗

Abaye said to Rav Shmuel bar Rav Yehuda: How do you dye this sky-blue wool to be used for ritual fringes? Rav Shmuel bar Rav Yehuda said to Abaye: We bring blood of a 岣lazon and various herbs and put them in a pot and boil them. And then we take a bit of the resulting dye in an egg shell and test it by using it to dye a wad of wool to see if it has attained the desired hue. And then we throw away that egg shell and its contents and burn the wad of wool.

砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 转诇转 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 讟注讬诪讛 驻住讜诇讛 讜砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 讚讘注讬谞谉 爪讘讬注讛 诇砖诪讛 讜砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 讟注讬诪讛 驻住诇讛

The Gemara comments: Learn from this statement three halakhot: Learn from it that wool that was dyed for the purpose of testing the dye and not for use as ritual fringes is unfit for ritual fringes. Consequently, one burns the wad of wool so that no one will use it for ritual fringes. And learn from it that we require dyeing for the sake of the mitzva. And learn from it that using dye for testing renders all the dye in that vessel unfit. Therefore, some of the dye is removed from the pot before it is tested.

讛讬讬谞讜 讟注讬诪讛 驻住讜诇讛 讛讬讬谞讜 爪讘讬注讛 诇砖诪讛 讗诪专 专讘 讗砖讬 诪讛 讟注诐 拽讗诪专 诪讛 讟注诐 讟注讬诪讛 驻住讜诇讛 诪砖讜诐 讚讘注讬谞谉 爪讘讬注讛 诇砖诪讛

The Gemara challenges: The halakha that wool dyed for the purpose of testing the dye is unfit is the same as the requirement of dyeing for the sake of the mitzva. It is only because the sky-blue strings must be dyed for the sake of the mitzva that wool dyed as a test is unfit for use as ritual fringes, so why are these stated as two halakhot? Rav Ashi said: The statement about learning three halakhot employs the style known as: What is the reason, and it means: What is the reason that wool that was dyed for the purpose of testing is unfit? It is because we require dyeing for the sake of the mitzva.

讻转谞讗讬 讟注讬诪讛 驻住讜诇讛 诪砖讜诐 砖谞讗诪专 讻诇讬诇 转讻诇转 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇

The Gemara notes that the halakha that using the dye for testing renders all the dye in the pot unfit is subject to a dispute between tanna鈥檌m, as it is taught in a baraita: Tekhelet dye that was used for testing is unfit, as it is stated concerning the priestly vestments: 鈥淎nd you shall make the robe of the ephod entirely of blue [kelil tekhelet]鈥 (Exodus 28:31), which indicates that the dye must be used exclusively for this purpose, i.e., this must be the first item it is being used to dye. This is the statement of Rabbi 岣nina ben Gamliel.

专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讘谉 讚讛讘讗讬 讗讜诪专 讗驻讬诇讜 诪专讗讛 砖谞讬 砖讘讛 讻砖专 诪砖讜诐 砖谞讗诪专 讜砖谞讬 转讜诇注转

Rabbi Yo岣nan ben Dahavai says: Even a second appearance caused by the dye is fit, meaning even if it is the second time that the dye is being used, it is still fit. As it is stated in the verse: 鈥淎nd scarlet wool [ushni tola鈥檃t]鈥 (Leviticus 14:4), which is interpreted to mean that this may be the second [sheni] usage of the dye.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 转讻诇转 讗讬谉 诇讛 讘讚讬拽讛 讜讗讬谉 谞拽讞讬转 讗诇讗 诪谉 讛诪讜诪讞讛 转驻讬诇讬谉 讬砖 诇讛诐 讘讚讬拽讛 讜讗讬谉 谞讬拽讞讬谉 讗诇讗 诪谉 讛诪讜诪讞讛 住驻专讬诐 讜诪讝讜讝讜转 讬砖 诇讛谉 讘讚讬拽讛 讜谞讬拽讞讬谉 诪讻诇 讗讚诐

The Sages taught in a baraita: There is no reliable method of testing sky-blue wool, and therefore it may be purchased only from an expert. There is a method of testing phylacteries to ensure they were written properly, but nevertheless they may be purchased only from an expert. There is a method of testing Torah scrolls and mezuzot, and they may be purchased from anyone.

讜转讻诇转 讗讬谉 诇讛 讘讚讬拽讛 讜讛讗 专讘 讬爪讞拽 讘专讬讛 讚专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讘讚讬拽 诇讬讛 (住讬诪谉 讘讙砖诐) 诪讬讬转讬 诪讙讘讬讗 讙讬诇讗 讜诪讬讗 讚砖讘诇讬诇转讗 讜诪讬诪讬 专讙诇讬诐

The Gemara asks: And is there no method for testing sky-blue wool? But didn鈥檛 Rav Yitz岣k, son of Rav Yehuda, test it to ensure it was dyed with tekhelet? The Gemara provides a mnemonic for the test, which was carried out with items whose names contain the letters gimmel, shin, or mem. He would bring alum clay [megavya gila], and water of fenugreek [shavlilta], and urine [meimei raglayim]

  • This month鈥檚 learning is sponsored by Shlomo and Amalia Klapper in honor of the birth of Chiyenna Yochana, named after her great-great-grandmother, Chiyenna Kossovsky.

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Elaine Hochberg in honor of her husband, Arie Hochberg, who continues to journey through Daf Yomi with her. 鈥淎nd with thanks to Rabbanit Farber and Hadran who have made our learning possible.鈥

Want to explore more about the Daf?

See insights from our partners, contributors and community of women learners

Sorry, there aren't any posts in this category yet. We're adding more soon!

Menachot 42

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Menachot 42

讗讬谉 诇讛 砖讬注讜专 诇诪注诇讛 讗讘诇 讬砖 诇讛 砖讬注讜专 诇诪讟讛 讚讗讬 诇讗 转讬诪讗 讛讻讬 讻讬讜爪讗 讘讜 诇讜诇讘 讗讬谉 诇讜 砖讬注讜专 讛讻讬 谞诪讬 讚讗讬谉 诇讜 砖讬注讜专 讻诇诇

the baraita means that ritual fringes do not have a maximum measure, i.e., the strings can be as long as one wants; however, they do have a minimum measure, and if the strings are shorter than this measure they are not fit. As, if you do not say so, in a case similar to it, where it is taught that a lulav has no measure, is it possible that it also has no measure whatsoever?

讜讛转谞谉 诇讜诇讘 砖讬砖 讘讜 砖诇砖讛 讟驻讞讬诐 讻讚讬 诇谞注谞注 讘讜 讻砖专 讗诇讗 讗讬谉 诇讜 砖讬注讜专 诇诪注诇讛 讗讘诇 讬砖 诇讜 砖讬注讜专 诇诪讟讛 讛讻讬 谞诪讬 讗讬谉 诇讜 砖讬注讜专 诇诪注诇讛 讗讘诇 讬砖 诇讜 砖讬注讜专 诇诪讟讛

But didn鈥檛 we learn in a mishna (Sukka 29b): A lulav that has three handbreadths in length, sufficient to enable one to wave with it, is fit for use in fulfilling the mitzva? This indicates that if the lulav is less than the measure, it is not fit. Rather, it must be that a lulav has no maximum measure, but it does have a minimum measure. So too, ritual fringes have no maximum measure, but they have a minimum measure.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 爪讬爪转 讗讬谉 爪讬爪讬转 讗诇讗 注谞祝 讜讻谉 讛讜讗 讗讜诪专 讜讬拽讞谞讬 讘爪讬爪转 专讗砖讬 讜讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讜爪专讬讱 诇驻专讜讚讛 讻讬 爪讜爪讬转讗 讚讗专诪讗讬

The Sages taught in a baraita: The verse states: 鈥淭hat they prepare for themselves strings鈥 (Numbers 15:38). The term strings [tzitzit] means nothing other than strings that hang down [anaf], and so it states in the verse: 鈥淚 was taken by a lock [betzitzit] of my head鈥 (Ezekiel 8:3). And Abaye says: And one is required to separate the ritual fringes like a gentile鈥檚 lock of hair, part of which is braided and the rest of which is allowed to hang loose.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讛讟讬诇 注诇 讛拽专谉 讗讜 注诇 讛讙讚讬诇 讻砖讬专讛 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讘谉 讬注拽讘 (讗讜诪专) 驻讜住诇 讘砖转讬讛谉

The Sages taught in a baraita: If one affixed the ritual fringes to the tip of the corner or to the border [gadil], they are fit. Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya鈥檃kov disqualifies them in both cases.

讻诪讗谉 讗讝诇讗 讛讗 讚讗诪专 专讘 讙讬讚诇 讗诪专 专讘 爪讬爪讬转 爪专讬讻讛 砖转讛讗 谞讜讟驻转 注诇 讛拽专谉 砖谞讗诪专 注诇 讻谞驻讬 讘讙讚讬讛诐 讻诪讗谉 讻专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讘谉 讬注拽讘

The Gemara asks: In accordance with whose opinion is that which Rav Giddel says that Rav says: Ritual fringes must be inserted into a hole above the corner and hang down onto the corner of the garment, as it is stated: 鈥淥n the corners of their garments鈥 (Numbers 15:38)? In accordance with whose opinion is this? The Gemara answers: It is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya鈥檃kov.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讬注拽讘 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讜爪专讬讱 砖讬专讞讬拽 诪诇讗 拽砖专 讙讜讚诇

Rabbi Ya鈥檃kov says that Rabbi Yo岣nan says: And one must distance the hole through which the ritual fringes are inserted into the garment the length of a full thumb joint from the edge of the garment.

讜讗讬爪讟专讬讱 讚专讘 驻驻讗 讜讗讬爪讟专讬讱 讚专讘讬 讬注拽讘 讚讗讬 诪讚专讘 驻驻讗 讛讜讛 讗诪讬谞讗 转讜讱 砖诇砖 讚诇讗 诇讬专讞讬拽 讟驻讬 讜讻诪讛 讚诪拽专讘 诪注诇讬 讗讬爪讟专讬讱 讚专讘讬 讬注拽讘

The Gemara notes: And it was necessary to state the ruling of Rav Pappa (41b) that the ritual fringes must be inserted into a hole within three fingerbreadths of the edge of the garment, and it was also necessary to state the ruling of Rabbi Ya鈥檃kov. This is because if the location of the hole was taught only from the statement of Rav Pappa, I would say that his ruling that the hole must be within three fingerbreadths of the edge of the garment was to teach that one may not distance the hole from the edge of the garment by more than this amount, but the closer the hole is to the edge of the garment, the better. Consequently, it was necessary to include the statement of Rabbi Ya鈥檃kov.

讜讗讬 诪讚专讘讬 讬注拽讘 讛讜讛 讗诪讬谞讗 诪诇讗 拽砖专 讙讜讚诇 讚诇讗 诇讬拽专讘 讟驻讬 讜讻诪讛 讚专讞讬拽 诪注诇讬 爪专讬讻讗

And if the location of the hole was taught only from the statement of Rabbi Ya鈥檃kov, I would say that his ruling that it must be a full thumb joint away from the edge of the garment was to teach that one may not situate the hole closer than that to the edge of the garment, but the further he places it, the better. Therefore, both statements were necessary.

专讘讬谞讗 讜专讘 住诪讗 讛讜讜 讬转讘讬 拽诪讬讛 讚专讘 讗砖讬 讞讝讬讬讛 专讘 住诪讗 诇拽专谞讬讛 讚讙诇讬诪讬讛 讚专讘讬谞讗 讚住转专 讜讘爪专 诪诪诇讗 拽砖专 讙讜讚诇 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诇讗 住讘专 诇讛 诪专 诇讛讗 讚专讘讬 讬注拽讘 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讘砖注转 注砖讬讬讛 讗讬转诪专

The Gemara relates that Ravina and Rav Samma were sitting before Rav Ashi. Rav Samma saw that the corner of Ravina鈥檚 cloak was torn and therefore the hole through which the ritual fringes were inserted was less than the full length of a thumb joint from the edge of the garment. Rav Samma said to Ravina: Doesn鈥檛 the Master hold in accordance with that statement of Rabbi Ya鈥檃kov that the hole must be at least the length of a thumb joint from the edge of the garment? Ravina said to Rav Samma: It was stated that this distance is required at the time when the ritual fringes are made. If the corner tears later, causing the hole to be closer to the edge of the garment, the ritual fringes remain fit.

讗讬讻住讬祝 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 讗砖讬 诇讗 转转拽讬祝 诇讱 讞讚 诪讬谞讬讬讛讜 讻转专讬 诪讬谞谉

Rav Samma became embarrassed because he had asked his question based on a mistaken assumption. Rav Ashi said to Rav Samma: Do not be upset that Ravina is a greater scholar than you are; one of them, i.e., the Sages of Eretz Yisrael, is like two of us, i.e., the Sages of Babylonia.

专讘 讗讞讗 讘专 讬注拽讘 专诪讬 讗专讘注 讜注讬讬祝 诇讛讜 诪讬注祝 讜诪注讬讬诇 诇讛讜 讘讙诇讬诪讗 讜讗讘讬拽 诇讛讜 诪讬讘拽 拽住讘专 讘注讬谞谉 转诪谞讬讗 讘讙诇讬诪讗 讻讬 讛讬讻讬 讚诇讬讛讜讬 讙讚讬诇 讙讚讬诇讬诐 讘诪拽讜诐 驻转讬诇

搂 With regard to attaching ritual fringes to a garment, the Gemara relates that Rav A岣 bar Ya鈥檃kov would affix four strings to the garment, and he would first fold them in half and then insert them at the point of the folds into the hole of the garment, so that on one side there were eight strings and on the other side there were four loops. He would then take the eight strings and loop them through the four loops and pull them tight, thereby attaching them to the garment. The Gemara explains that he held that we require eight strings when they are initially placed in the garment, in order that there be twisted cord and 鈥渢wisted cords鈥 (Deuteronomy 22:12), i.e., four doubled strings, at the place, i.e., the time, when he creates the loose hanging string.

专讘 讬专诪讬讛 诪讚驻转讬 专诪讬 转诪谞讬讗 讚讗讬谞讛讜 砖讬转住专 讜诇讗 讗讘讬拽 诇讛讜 诪专 讘专讬讛 讚专讘讬谞讗 注讘讬讚 讻讚讬讚谉

Rav Yirmeya of Difti would affix eight strings that are sixteen strings after they are placed in the hole of the garment and half of each string hangs down on each side, and he would not loop them as Rav Aha bar Ya鈥檃kov did. Mar, son of Ravina, would prepare ritual fringes like ours, placing four strings through the hole and allowing both ends of each string to hang down, thereby forming eight.

专讘 谞讞诪谉 讗砖讻讞讬讛 诇专讘 讗讚讗 讘专 讗讛讘讛 专诪讬 讞讜讟讬 讜拽讗 诪讘专讱 诇注砖讜转 爪讬爪讬转 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪讗讬 爪讬爪讬 砖诪注谞讗 讛讻讬 讗诪专 专讘 爪讬爪讬转 讗讬谉 爪专讬讻讛 讘专讻讛

搂 The Gemara relates that Rav Na岣an found Rav Adda bar Ahava affixing strings to a garment and reciting the blessing that concludes: To prepare ritual fringes [tzitzit]. Rav Na岣an said to Rav Adda bar Ahava: What is this tzitzi sound that I hear? This is what Rav says: Ritual fringes do not require a blessing when one attaches them to the garment.

讻讬 谞讞 谞驻砖讬讛 讚专讘 讛讜谞讗 注诇 专讘 讞住讚讗 诇诪讬专诪讗 讚专讘 讗讚专讘 讜诪讬 讗诪专 专讘 爪讬爪讬转 讗讬谉 爪专讬讱 讘专讻讛 讜讛讗 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 专讘 诪谞讬谉 诇爪讬爪讬转 讘讙讜讬 砖讛讬讗 驻住讜诇讛 砖谞讗诪专 讚讘专 讗诇 讘谞讬 讬砖专讗诇 讜注砖讜 诇讛诐 爪讬爪转 讘谞讬 讬砖专讗诇 讬注砖讜 讜诇讗 讛讙讜讬诐 讬注砖讜

With regard to this statement of Rav, the Gemara relates that when Rav Huna died, Rav 岣sda went into the study hall to raise a contradiction from one statement of Rav to another statement of Rav, as follows: Did Rav actually say that ritual fringes do not require a blessing when one attaches them to the garment? But doesn鈥檛 Rav Yehuda say that Rav says: From where is it derived that ritual fringes attached by a gentile are unfit? It is derived from a verse, as it is stated: 鈥淪peak unto the children of Israel and command them that they prepare for themselves strings鈥 (Numbers 15:38). The Sages derive from here that the children of Israel shall prepare ritual fringes, but the gentiles shall not prepare ritual fringes.

讜讛讗 诪讗讬 专讜诪讬讗 讗诪专 专讘 讬讜住祝 拽住讘专 专讘 讞住讚讗 讻诇 诪爪讜讛 砖讻砖讬专讛 讘讙讜讬 讘讬砖专讗诇 讗讬谉 爪专讬讱 诇讘专讱 讻诇 诪爪讜讛 砖驻住讜诇讛 讘讙讜讬 讘讬砖专讗诇 爪专讬讱 诇讘专讱

The Gemara asks: But what is the contradiction between these two statements of Rav? Rav Yosef said: Rav 岣sda held that in the case of any mitzva for which the necessary item is fit when produced by a gentile, if it is produced by a Jew, he does not need to recite a blessing. Conversely, any mitzva for which the necessary item is unfit when produced by a gentile, if it is produced by a Jew, he needs to recite a blessing when he produces the item.

讜讻诇诇讗 讛讜讗 讜讛专讬 诪讬诇讛 讚讻砖讬专讛 讘讙讜讬 讚转谞讬讗 注讬专 砖讗讬谉 讘讛 专讜驻讗 讬砖专讗诇 讜讬砖 讘讛 专讜驻讗 讗专诪讗讬 讜专讜驻讗 讻讜转讬 讬诪讜诇 讗专诪讗讬 讜讗诇 讬诪讜诇 讻讜转讬 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 讻讜转讬 讜诇讗 讗专诪讗讬

The Gemara asks: And is this an established principle? But what about circumcision, which is valid if performed by a gentile, as it is taught in a baraita: In a city in which there is no Jewish physician, and in which there is an Aramean, i.e., a gentile, physician and a Samaritan physician, it is preferable that the Aramean circumcise the Jewish boys of the city and the Samaritan not circumcise them; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehuda says: It is preferable that the Samaritan circumcise the boys and the Aramean not circumcise them. Nevertheless, all agree that a circumcision performed by a gentile is valid.

讜讘讬砖专讗诇 爪专讬讱 诇讘专讱 讚讗诪专 诪专 讛诪诇 讗讜诪专 讘专讜讱 讗砖专 拽讚砖谞讜 讘诪爪讜转讬讜 讜爪讜谞讜 注诇 讛诪讬诇讛

And despite the fact that circumcision performed by a gentile is valid, when it is performed by a Jew, he must recite a blessing, as the Master said: The one who circumcises a child says: Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the universe, Who has sanctified us through His mitzvot and has commanded us concerning circumcision.

诪讬讚讬 讛讜讗 讟注诪讗 讗诇讗 诇专讘 专讘 诪讬驻住讬诇 驻住讬诇 讚讗讬转诪专 诪谞讬谉 诇诪讬诇讛 讘讙讜讬 砖驻住讜诇讛 讚专讜 讘专 驻驻讗 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘 讗诪专 讜讗转讛 讗转 讘专讬转讬 转砖诪专

The Gemara answers: Is there reason to resolve the contradiction according to anyone but Rav? Rav himself invalidates circumcision performed by a gentile, as it was stated: From where is it derived that circumcision performed by a gentile is not valid? Daru bar Pappa says in the name of Rav: This is derived from the verse: 鈥淎nd God said unto Abraham: And as for you, you shall keep My covenant, you, and your seed after you throughout their generations鈥 (Genesis 17:9). The verse indicates that only the descendants of Abraham may perform circumcision.

专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讗诪专 讛诪讜诇 讬诪讜诇 讛诪诇 讬诪讜诇

Rabbi Yo岣nan says that this halakha is derived from the doubled verb in the verse: 鈥淢ust be circumcised [himmol yimmol]鈥 (Genesis 17:13), which he interprets to mean: Only one who is circumcised [hammal] may circumcise [yamul] others.

住讜讻讛 诪住讬讬注 诇讬讛 转驻讬诇讬谉 讛讜讬 转讬讜讘转讬讛

The Gemara notes that the halakha with regard to a sukka supports the opinion of Rav 岣sda, who holds that when an item used for a mitzva can be created by a gentile, a Jew who creates it does not recite a blessing. And the halakha with regard to phylacteries is a conclusive refutation of his opinion.

讛专讬 住讜讻讛 讚讻砖讬专讛 讘讙讜讬 讚转谞讬讗 住讜讻转 讙讜讬诐 住讜讻转 谞砖讬诐 住讜讻转 讘讛诪讛 住讜讻转 讻讜转讬讬诐 住讜讻讛 诪讻诇 诪拽讜诐 讻砖讬专讛 讜讘诇讘讚 砖转讛讗 诪住讜讻讻转 讻讛讬诇讻转讗

The Gemara explains: A sukka is fit even if it was built by a gentile, as it is taught in a baraita: With regard to a booth built by gentiles, a booth built by women, a booth for domesticated animals, a booth built by Samaritans, a booth of any sort, each is fit for use as a sukka, provided that it is roofed in accordance with the halakha.

讜讘讬砖专讗诇 讗讬谉 爪专讬讱 诇讘专讱 讚转谞讬讗 讛注讜砖讛 住讜讻讛 诇注爪诪讜 讗讜诪专 讘专讜讱 讗转讛 讛壮 讗诇讛讬谞讜 诪诇讱 讛注讜诇诐 砖讛讞讬讬谞讜 讜拽讬诪谞讜 讜讛讙讬注谞讜 诇讝诪谉 讛讝讛 讘讗 诇讬砖讘 讘讛 讗讜诪专 讘专讜讱 讗转讛 讛壮 讗诇讛讬谞讜 诪诇讱 讛注讜诇诐 讗砖专 拽讚砖谞讜 讘诪爪讜转讬讜 讜爪讜谞讜 诇讬砖讘 讘住讜讻讛 讜讗讬诇讜 诇注砖讜转 住讜讻讛 诇讗 诪讘专讱

And if a sukka was built by a Jew, he is not required to recite a blessing upon its construction, as it is taught in a baraita: One who constructs a sukka for himself recites: Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the universe, Who has given us life, sustained us, and brought us to this time. When he comes to sit in the sukka, he recites: Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the universe, Who has sanctified us through His mitzvot and commanded us to reside in the sukka. The Gemara notes that the baraita indicates that he recites a blessing at the time of construction, whereas he does not recite a blessing including the words: To construct a sukka, which confirms the opinion of Rav 岣sda.

转驻讬诇讬谉 转讬讜讘转讬讛 讜讛专讬 转驻讬诇讬谉 讚驻住讜诇讜转 讘讙讜讬 讚转谞讬 专讘 讞讬谞谞讗 讘专讬讛 讚专讘讗

By contrast, the halakha with regard to phylacteries is a conclusive refutation of Rav 岣sda鈥檚 opinion. Phylacteries are unfit when written by a gentile, as it is taught by Rav 岣nnana, son of Rava,

诪驻砖专讜谞讬讗 住驻专 转讜专讛 转驻讬诇讬谉 讜诪讝讜讝讜转 砖讻转讘谉 诪讬谉 讻讜转讬 讙讜讬 注讘讚 讗砖讛 讜拽讟谉 讜讬砖专讗诇 诪砖讜诪讚 驻住讜诇讬谉 砖谞讗诪专 讜拽砖专转诐 讜讻转讘转诐 讻诇 砖讬砖谞讜 讘拽砖讬专讛 讬砖谞讜 讘讻转讬讘讛 讻诇 砖讗讬谞讜 讘拽砖讬专讛 讗讬谞讜 讘讻转讬讘讛

of Pashronya: A Torah scroll, phylacteries, or mezuzot that were written by a heretic, a Samaritan, a gentile, a Canaanite slave, a woman, a minor, or a Jewish apostate [meshummad] are unfit, as it is stated: 鈥淎nd you shall bind them for a sign on your arm鈥and you shall write them on the doorposts of your house鈥 (Deuteronomy 6:8鈥9). From this juxtaposition, one can derive the following: Anyone who is included in the mitzva of binding the phylacteries, i.e., one who is both obligated and performs the mitzva, is included in the class of people who may write Torah scrolls, phylacteries, and mezuzot; and anyone who is not included in the mitzva of binding is not included in the class of people who may write sacred texts.

讜讘讬砖专讗诇 讗讬谉 爪专讬讱 诇讘专讱 讚砖诇讞 专讘 讞讬讬讗 讘专讬讛 讚专讘 讛讜谞讗 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 注诇 转驻讬诇讬谉 砖诇 讬讚 讗讜诪专 讘专讜讱 讗砖专 拽讚砖谞讜 讘诪爪讜转讬讜 讜爪讜谞讜 诇讛谞讬讞 转驻讬诇讬谉 注诇 转驻讬诇讬谉 砖诇 专讗砖 讗讜诪专 讘专讜讱 讗砖专 拽讚砖谞讜 讘诪爪讜转讬讜 讜爪讜谞讜 注诇 诪爪讜转 转驻讬诇讬谉 讜讗讬诇讜 诇注砖讜转 转驻讬诇讬谉 诇讗 诪讘专讱

And despite the fact that phylacteries written by a gentile are unfit, a Jew who writes them does not have to recite a blessing. As Rav 岣yya, son of Rav Huna, sent a ruling in the name of Rabbi Yo岣nan: On phylacteries of the arm one says the blessing: Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the universe, Who has sanctified us through His mitzvot and commanded us to don phylacteries. On phylacteries of the head one says the blessing: Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the universe, Who has sanctified us through His mitzvot and commanded us concerning the mitzva of phylacteries. The implication of this is that one recites blessings only when he dons the phylacteries, whereas when he writes the phylacteries he does not recite a blessing: To prepare phylacteries.

讗诇讗 诇讗讜 讛讬讬谞讜 讟注诪讗 讻诇 诪爪讜讛 讚注砖讬讬转讛 讙诪专 诪爪讜讛 讻讙讜谉 诪讬诇讛 讗祝 注诇 讙讘 讚讻砖讬专讛 讘讙讜讬 讘讬砖专讗诇 爪专讬讱 诇讘专讱 讜讻诇 诪爪讜讛 讚注砖讬讬转讛 诇讗讜 讙诪专 诪爪讜讛 讻讙讜谉 转驻讬诇讬谉 讗祝 注诇 讙讘 讚驻住讜诇讜转 讘讙讜讬 讘讬砖专讗诇 讗讬谞讜 爪专讬讱 诇讘专讱

Rather, isn鈥檛 this the reason for the distinction between different mitzvot: For any mitzva whose performance is the completion of the mitzva, such as circumcision, even though it is valid when performed by a gentile, when it is performed by a Jew he must recite a blessing. But for any mitzva where the performance of a particular act is not the completion of the mitzva, such as writing phylacteries, where one does not complete the mitzva until he dons them, even though it is not valid when performed by a gentile, when it is performed by a Jew he does not need to recite a blessing.

讜讘爪讬爪讬转 讘讛讗 拽诪讬驻诇讙讬 诪专 住讘专 讞讜讘转 讟诇讬转 讛讜讗 讜诪专 住讘专 讞讜讘转 讙讘专讗 讛讜讗

And with regard to reciting a blessing when one attaches ritual fringes to a garment, the Sages disagree about this: One Sage, Rav Adda bar Ahava, holds that it is an obligation pertaining to the cloak. Therefore, when one attaches the ritual fringes he is completing the mitzva, and he should recite a blessing: To prepare ritual fringes. And one Sage, Rav Na岣an, citing Rav, holds that it is an obligation incumbent upon the man. Consequently, the mitzva is not complete until he wears the garment, and he should not recite a blessing when he attaches the ritual fringes to the garment.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 诪专讚讻讬 诇专讘 讗砖讬 讗转讜谉 讛讻讬 诪转谞讬转讜 诇讛

Rav Mordekhai said to Rav Ashi: You teach this halakha about gentiles attaching ritual fringes to a garment in this manner, citing Rav Yehuda in the name of Rav that the ritual fringes are invalid. Consequently, Rav 岣sda raises a contradiction between this ruling and another ruling of Rav.

讗谞谉 讛讻讬 诪转谞讬谞谉 诇讛 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 专讘 诪谞讬谉 诇爪讬爪讬转 讘讙讜讬 砖讻砖讬专讛 砖谞讗诪专 讚讘专 讗诇 讘谞讬 讬砖专讗诇 讜注砖讜 诇讛诐 爪讬爪讬转 讬注砖讜 诇讛诐 讗讞专讬诐

We teach it in this way, according to which there is no contradiction: Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: From where is it derived that if ritual fringes are attached to a garment by a gentile they are valid? It is derived from that which is stated: 鈥淪peak unto the children of Israel and command them that they prepare for themselves [lahem] strings鈥 (Numbers 15:38). From the fact that the verse does not merely state: That they prepare [ve鈥檃su], but rather states 鈥ve鈥檃su lahem,鈥 which can be translated as: That they prepare for them, the indication is that even others, i.e., gentiles, shall prepare ritual fringes for them.

讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 专讘 注砖讗谉 诪谉 讛拽讜爪讬诐 讜诪谉 讛谞讬诪讬谉 讜诪谉 讛讙专讚讬谉 驻住讜诇讛 诪谉 讛住讬住讬谉 讻砖讬专讛

Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: If one prepared ritual fringes from threads that protrude from the fabric like thorns [kotzim], or if he prepared them from threads [nimin] that were used to sew the garment and remain attached to it, or from the strings [geradin] that hang from the bottom of a garment, the ritual fringes are unfit, as one must attach ritual fringes to a garment for the sake of the mitzva. But if he prepared ritual fringes from swatches of wool that were not spun for the sake of the mitzva, they are fit.

讻讬 讗诪专讬转讛 拽诪讬讛 讚砖诪讜讗诇 讗诪专 讗祝 诪谉 讛住讬住讬谉 驻住讜诇讛 讘注讬谞谉 讟讜讬讬讛 诇砖诪讛

Rav Yehuda continues: When I stated this halakha in the name of Rav before Shmuel, he said to me: Even ritual fringes tied from swatches of wool that were not spun for the sake of the mitzva are unfit, as we require the spinning of the string to be for the sake of the mitzva.

讻转谞讗讬 爪讬驻谉 讝讛讘 讗讜 砖讟诇讛 注诇讬讛谉 注讜专 讘讛诪讛 讟诪讗讛 驻住讜诇讜转 注讜专 讘讛诪讛 讟讛讜专讛 讻砖讬专讜转 讜讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖诇讗 注讬讘讚谉 诇砖诪谉 专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讗讜诪专 讗祝 注讜专 讘讛诪讛 讟讛讜专讛 驻住讜诇讜转 注讚 砖讬注讘讚谉 诇砖诪谉

The Gemara notes that this dispute is like a dispute between tanna鈥檌m, as it is taught in a baraita: If one took phylacteries and coated them with gold or patched them with the skin of a non-kosher animal, then they are unfit. But if one patched them with the skin of a kosher animal, then they are fit, and this is so even though he did not prepare the skin for their sake, i.e., for the sake of its use in a mitzva. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: Even if he patched them with the skin of a kosher animal they are unfit, until he prepares them for their sake.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗讘讬讬 诇专讘 砖诪讜讗诇 讘专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讛讗 转讻讬诇转讗 讛讬讻讬 爪讘注讬转讜 诇讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪讬讬转讬谞谉 讚诐 讞诇讝讜谉 讜住诪谞讬谉 讜专诪讬谞谉 诇讛讜 讘讬讜专讛 讜砖拽诇讬谞讗 驻讜专转讗 讘讘讬注转讗 讜讟注诪讬谞谉 诇讛讜 讘讗讜讚专讗 讜砖讚讬谞谉 诇讬讛 诇讛讛讜讗 讘讬注转讗 讜拽诇讬谞谉 诇讬讛 诇讗讜讚专讗

Abaye said to Rav Shmuel bar Rav Yehuda: How do you dye this sky-blue wool to be used for ritual fringes? Rav Shmuel bar Rav Yehuda said to Abaye: We bring blood of a 岣lazon and various herbs and put them in a pot and boil them. And then we take a bit of the resulting dye in an egg shell and test it by using it to dye a wad of wool to see if it has attained the desired hue. And then we throw away that egg shell and its contents and burn the wad of wool.

砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 转诇转 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 讟注讬诪讛 驻住讜诇讛 讜砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 讚讘注讬谞谉 爪讘讬注讛 诇砖诪讛 讜砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 讟注讬诪讛 驻住诇讛

The Gemara comments: Learn from this statement three halakhot: Learn from it that wool that was dyed for the purpose of testing the dye and not for use as ritual fringes is unfit for ritual fringes. Consequently, one burns the wad of wool so that no one will use it for ritual fringes. And learn from it that we require dyeing for the sake of the mitzva. And learn from it that using dye for testing renders all the dye in that vessel unfit. Therefore, some of the dye is removed from the pot before it is tested.

讛讬讬谞讜 讟注讬诪讛 驻住讜诇讛 讛讬讬谞讜 爪讘讬注讛 诇砖诪讛 讗诪专 专讘 讗砖讬 诪讛 讟注诐 拽讗诪专 诪讛 讟注诐 讟注讬诪讛 驻住讜诇讛 诪砖讜诐 讚讘注讬谞谉 爪讘讬注讛 诇砖诪讛

The Gemara challenges: The halakha that wool dyed for the purpose of testing the dye is unfit is the same as the requirement of dyeing for the sake of the mitzva. It is only because the sky-blue strings must be dyed for the sake of the mitzva that wool dyed as a test is unfit for use as ritual fringes, so why are these stated as two halakhot? Rav Ashi said: The statement about learning three halakhot employs the style known as: What is the reason, and it means: What is the reason that wool that was dyed for the purpose of testing is unfit? It is because we require dyeing for the sake of the mitzva.

讻转谞讗讬 讟注讬诪讛 驻住讜诇讛 诪砖讜诐 砖谞讗诪专 讻诇讬诇 转讻诇转 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇

The Gemara notes that the halakha that using the dye for testing renders all the dye in the pot unfit is subject to a dispute between tanna鈥檌m, as it is taught in a baraita: Tekhelet dye that was used for testing is unfit, as it is stated concerning the priestly vestments: 鈥淎nd you shall make the robe of the ephod entirely of blue [kelil tekhelet]鈥 (Exodus 28:31), which indicates that the dye must be used exclusively for this purpose, i.e., this must be the first item it is being used to dye. This is the statement of Rabbi 岣nina ben Gamliel.

专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讘谉 讚讛讘讗讬 讗讜诪专 讗驻讬诇讜 诪专讗讛 砖谞讬 砖讘讛 讻砖专 诪砖讜诐 砖谞讗诪专 讜砖谞讬 转讜诇注转

Rabbi Yo岣nan ben Dahavai says: Even a second appearance caused by the dye is fit, meaning even if it is the second time that the dye is being used, it is still fit. As it is stated in the verse: 鈥淎nd scarlet wool [ushni tola鈥檃t]鈥 (Leviticus 14:4), which is interpreted to mean that this may be the second [sheni] usage of the dye.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 转讻诇转 讗讬谉 诇讛 讘讚讬拽讛 讜讗讬谉 谞拽讞讬转 讗诇讗 诪谉 讛诪讜诪讞讛 转驻讬诇讬谉 讬砖 诇讛诐 讘讚讬拽讛 讜讗讬谉 谞讬拽讞讬谉 讗诇讗 诪谉 讛诪讜诪讞讛 住驻专讬诐 讜诪讝讜讝讜转 讬砖 诇讛谉 讘讚讬拽讛 讜谞讬拽讞讬谉 诪讻诇 讗讚诐

The Sages taught in a baraita: There is no reliable method of testing sky-blue wool, and therefore it may be purchased only from an expert. There is a method of testing phylacteries to ensure they were written properly, but nevertheless they may be purchased only from an expert. There is a method of testing Torah scrolls and mezuzot, and they may be purchased from anyone.

讜转讻诇转 讗讬谉 诇讛 讘讚讬拽讛 讜讛讗 专讘 讬爪讞拽 讘专讬讛 讚专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讘讚讬拽 诇讬讛 (住讬诪谉 讘讙砖诐) 诪讬讬转讬 诪讙讘讬讗 讙讬诇讗 讜诪讬讗 讚砖讘诇讬诇转讗 讜诪讬诪讬 专讙诇讬诐

The Gemara asks: And is there no method for testing sky-blue wool? But didn鈥檛 Rav Yitz岣k, son of Rav Yehuda, test it to ensure it was dyed with tekhelet? The Gemara provides a mnemonic for the test, which was carried out with items whose names contain the letters gimmel, shin, or mem. He would bring alum clay [megavya gila], and water of fenugreek [shavlilta], and urine [meimei raglayim]

Scroll To Top