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

Today's Daf Yomi

October 11, 2018 | ื‘ืณ ื‘ืžืจื—ืฉื•ื•ืŸ ืชืฉืขืดื˜

  • This month's learning is dedicated by Debbie and Yossi Gevir to Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran Zoom group for their kindness, support, and care during a medically challenging year.

Menachot 62

How is the waving performed? Which item goes on the top,middle and bottom? Which directions? What is the reason behind the wavings? In the Shavuot sacrifice, are the wavings before the lambs are slaughtered the same as the wavings after or not?


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

ื›ื™ืฆื“ ืขื•ืฉื” ืžื ื™ื— ืื™ืžื•ืจื™ืŸ ืขืœ ืคื™ืกืช ื”ื™ื“ ื•ื—ื–ื” ื•ืฉื•ืง ืขืœื™ื”ืŸ ื•ื‘ื›ืœ ืžืงื•ื ืฉื™ืฉ ืœื—ื ื”ืœื—ื ืžืœืžืขืœื”

The Gemara asks: How does one perform the ritual of waving? First he places the sacrificial portions on the palm of the hand, and puts the breast and the thigh on them. And in any place, i.e., with regard to any offering, where there are loaves brought with together with the animal, the loaves are placed on the top.

ื”ื™ื›ื ืืžืจ ืจื‘ ืคืคื ื‘ืžืœื•ืื™ื

The Gemara asks: Where is it stated that the loaves must be placed on the top? Rav Pappa says: This is stated explicitly with regard to the ram offered at the inauguration of the priests, as the verse states: โ€œAnd he took the fat, and the tail, and all the fat that was upon the inward, and the lobe of the liver, and the two kidneys, and their fat, and the right thigh. And out of the basket of matzot that was before the Lord he took one matza, and one cake of oiled bread, and one wafer, and placed them on the fat, and upon the right thigh. And he put it all upon the hands of Aaron, and upon the hands of his sons, and waved them for a wave offering before the Lordโ€ (Leviticus 8:25โ€“27).

ืžืื™ ื˜ืขืžื ืื™ืœื™ืžื ืžืฉื•ื ื“ื›ืชื™ื‘ ืฉื•ืง ื”ืชืจื•ืžื” ื•ื—ื–ื” ื”ืชื ื•ืคื” ืขืœ ืืฉื™ ื”ื—ืœื‘ื™ื ื™ื‘ื™ืื• ืœื”ื ื™ืฃ ืชื ื•ืคื” ื•ื”ื›ืชื™ื‘ ืืช ื”ื—ืœื‘ ืขืœ ื”ื—ื–ื” ื™ื‘ื™ืื ื•

The Gemara inquires: What is the reason, i.e., from where is it learned, that the sacrificial portions should be placed on the bottom, and the breast and thigh on top of them? If we say it is because it is written: โ€œThe thigh of heaving and the breast of waving they shall bring upon the offerings of the fat made by fire, to wave it for a wave offering before the Lordโ€ (Leviticus 10:15), which indicates that the breast and thigh are placed on top of the fats, that is insufficient: But isnโ€™t it written elsewhere: โ€œThe fat upon the breast he shall bring, that the breast may be waved for a wave offering before the Lordโ€ (Leviticus 7:30)? That verse leads to the opposite conclusion, as it indicates that the fats are to be placed on top of the breast.

ืืžืจ ืื‘ื™ื™ ื”ื”ื•ื ื“ืžื™ื™ืชื™ ืœื™ื” ื›ื”ืŸ ืžื‘ื™ืช ื”ืžื˜ื‘ื—ื™ื™ื ื•ืจืžื™ ืœื™ื”

Abaye said: That second verse is not referring to the placement of the portions for waving. Rather, it describes their placement when the priest brings the parts of the offering from the slaughtering area in order to be waved. This priest carries the breast and thigh below the fats, and accordingly, when he overturns these parts onto the hand of the priest who will wave them, the fat will be under the breast and thigh.

ื•ื”ื›ืชื™ื‘ ื•ื™ืฉื™ืžื• ืืช ื”ื—ืœื‘ื™ื ืขืœ ื”ื—ื–ื•ืช ื”ื”ื•ื ื“ื™ื”ื™ื‘ ืœื™ื” ืœื›ื”ืŸ ืื—ืจื™ื ื ื•ืื–ื™ืœ ื•ืžืงื˜ืจ ืœื™ื”

The Gemara asks: But isnโ€™t it written: โ€œAnd they put the fat upon the breastsโ€ (Leviticus 9:20), which also indicates that the fat is to be on top of, not beneath, the breast and thigh? The Gemara answers: That verse is referring to the stage when the priest who waved them gives them to another priest, who brings the sacrificial portions up to the altar. Once again the parts are turned over in this exchange, so that the sacrificial fats are on top of the breast. And this third priest then goes and burns the sacrificial portions on the altar.

ื•ื”ื ืงื ืžืฉืžืข ืœืŸ ื“ื‘ืขื™ื ืŸ ืฉืœืฉื” ื›ื”ื ื™ื ืžืฉื•ื ื“ื›ืชื™ื‘ ื‘ืจื‘ ืขื ื”ื“ืจืช ืžืœืš

The Gemara adds: And this teaches us that we require three priests to perform this service: One to bring the parts from the slaughtering area, one to wave them, and a third to burn them upon the altar. The reason why all three acts cannot be performed by a single priest is because it is written: โ€œIn the multitude of people is the Kingโ€™s gloryโ€ (Proverbs 14:28). If a larger number of priests are involved in the Temple service, this represents greater glory for God. Therefore, it is preferable for the service to be carried out by three priests rather than one.

ื•ืฉืชื™ ื”ืœื—ื ื•ืฉื ื™ ื›ื‘ืฉื™ ืขืฆืจืช [ื•ื›ื•ืณ] ืชื ื• ืจื‘ื ืŸ ื•ื”ื ื™ืฃ ื”ื›ื”ืŸ ืืชื ืขืœ ืœื—ื ื”ื‘ื›ืจื™ื

ยง The mishna teaches: And the two loaves and the accompanying peace offering of two lambs brought on Shavuot also require waving. With regard to this waving, the Sages taught in a baraita: The verse states: โ€œAnd the priest shall wave them upon the bread of the first fruits for a wave offering before the Lord, upon the two lambs; they shall be holy to the Lord for the priestโ€ (Leviticus 23:20).

ื™ื›ื•ืœ ื™ื ื™ื— ื›ื‘ืฉื™ื ืขืœ ื’ื‘ื™ ื”ืœื—ื ืชืœืžื•ื“ ืœื•ืžืจ ืขืœ ืฉื ื™ ื›ื‘ืฉื™ื ืื™ ืขืœ ืฉื ื™ ื›ื‘ืฉื™ื ื™ื›ื•ืœ ืœื—ื ืขืœ ื’ื‘ื™ ื›ื‘ืฉื™ื ืชืœืžื•ื“ ืœื•ืžืจ ืขืœ ืœื—ื ื”ื‘ื›ืจื™ื

One might have thought that the priest who performs the waving must place the lambs on top of the bread for the waving. Therefore, the verse states: โ€œA wave offering before the Lord upon the two lambs,โ€ which indicates that the two loaves must be on top of the lambs. If the verse had stated only: โ€œUpon the two lambs,โ€ one might have thought the priest must place the bread on top of the lambs. Therefore, the verse states: โ€œUpon the bread of the first fruits,โ€ which indicates that the loaves are to be placed under the lambs for waving.

ื ื™ืฉืชืงืœ ื”ื›ืชื•ื‘ ื•ืื™ื ื™ ื™ื•ื“ืข ืื ืœื—ื ืขืœ ื’ื‘ื™ ื›ื‘ืฉื™ื ื•ืื ื›ื‘ืฉื™ื ืขืœ ื’ื‘ื™ ืœื—ื ืžื” ืžืฆื™ื ื• ื‘ื›ืœ ืžืงื•ื ืœื—ื ืœืžืขืœื” ืืฃ ื›ืืŸ ืœื—ื ืœืžืขืœื” ื”ื™ื›ื ืืžืจ ืจื‘ ืคืคื ื‘ืžื™ืœื•ืื™ื

Consequently, the verse is evenly balanced, as two contradictory conclusions can be derived from it, and I do not know whether the bread should be on top of the lambs, or whether the lambs should be on top of the bread. The baraita resolves the contradiction: Just as we find everywhere that waving is performed that the bread is placed above the other portions, so too, in the case of the two loaves and the two lambs, the bread is placed above the lambs. The Gemara interrupts its citation of the baraita to ask: Where is it stated that the loaves must be placed on top? Rav Pappa says: This is stated explicitly with regard to the ram offered at the inauguration of the priests.

ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ืกื™ ื‘ืŸ ื”ืžืฉื•ืœื ืื•ืžืจ ื›ื‘ืฉื™ื ืœืžืขืœื” ื•ืžื” ืื ื™ ืžืงื™ื™ื ืขืœ ืฉื ื™ ื›ื‘ืฉื™ื ืœื”ื•ืฆื™ื ืฉื‘ืขื”

The Gemara resumes its citation of the baraita. Rabbi Yosei ben HaMeshullam disagrees with the previous ruling, and says: It is the lambs that are placed above, and the two loaves underneath them. And how do I realize the meaning of the phrase: โ€œUpon the two lambs,โ€ which seems to indicate that the two loaves are to be placed above the lambs and not under them? Rabbi Yosei ben HaMeshullam explains: This verse teaches that the requirement to wave the lambs together with the loaves applies only to the two lambs sacrificed as communal peace offerings on Shavuot, to exclude the seven other lambs, brought as burnt offerings, which are not to be waved with the loaves.

ื—ื ื™ื ื ื‘ืŸ ื—ื›ื™ื ืื™ ืื•ืžืจ ืžื ื™ื— ืฉืชื™ ื”ืœื—ื ื‘ื™ืŸ ื™ืจื›ื•ืชื™ื”ืŸ ืฉืœ ื›ื‘ืฉื™ื ื•ืžื ื™ืฃ ื•ื ืžืฆื ืžืงื™ื™ื ืฉื ื™ ืžืงืจืื•ืช ื”ืœืœื• ืœื—ื ืขืœ ื’ื‘ื™ ื›ื‘ืฉื™ื ื•ื›ื‘ืฉื™ื ืขืœ ื’ื‘ื™ ื”ืœื—ื ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ืœืคื ื™ ืžืœืš ื‘ืฉืจ ื•ื“ื ืื™ืŸ ืขื•ืฉื™ืŸ ื›ืŸ ืœืคื ื™ ืžืœืš ืžืœื›ื™ ื”ืžืœื›ื™ื ื”ืงื“ื•ืฉ ื‘ืจื•ืš ื”ื•ื ืขื•ืฉื™ืŸ ื›ืŸ ืืœื ืžื ื™ื— ื–ื” ื‘ืฆื“ ื–ื” ื•ืžื ื™ืฃ

แธคanina ben แธคakhinai says there is a different answer: The priest places the two loaves between the thighs of the two lambs and waves them. And in this manner it is found that he realizes the meaning of both of these two verses, as the bread is on top of the lambs and the lambs are also on top of the bread. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says, in objection to this opinion: One would not do so, i.e., place bread that had been placed between the thighs of lambs, before a flesh and blood king; should one do so before the King of kings, the Holy One, Blessed be He? Rather, he places the two loaves and the two lambs alongside each other, and waves them together, and thereby fulfills the requirements of the verses in a respectful manner.

ื•ื”ื ื‘ืขื™ื ืŸ ืขืœ ืืžืจ ืœื™ื” ืจื‘ ื—ืกื“ื ืœืจื‘ ื”ืžื ื•ื ื ื•ืืžืจื™ ืœื” ืจื‘ ื”ืžื ื•ื ื ืœืจื‘ ื—ืกื“ื ืจื‘ื™ ืœื˜ืขืžื™ื” ื“ืืžืจ ืขืœ ื‘ืกืžื•ืš

The Gemara raises an objection to the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi: But we require fulfillment of the term โ€œupon [al]โ€ in the verse, either by placing the bread upon the lambs or the lambs upon the bread. In response, Rav แธคisda says to Rav Hamnuna, and some say that Rav Hamnuna says to Rav แธคisda: With this opinion, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi conforms to his standard line of reasoning, as he says that the word al can mean next to.

ื“ืชื ื™ื ื•ื ืชืช ืขืœ ื”ืžืขืจื›ืช ืœื‘ื ื” ื–ื›ื” ืจื‘ื™ ืื•ืžืจ ืขืœ ื‘ืกืžื•ืš ืืชื” ืื•ืžืจ ืขืœ ื‘ืกืžื•ืš ืื• ืื™ื ื• ืืœื ืขืœ ืžืžืฉ ื›ืฉื”ื•ื ืื•ืžืจ ื•ืกื›ืช ืขืœ ื”ืืจืŸ ืืช ื”ืคืจื›ืช ื”ื•ื™ ืื•ืžืจ ืขืœ ื‘ืกืžื•ืš

This is as it is taught in a baraita: With regard to the shewbread, the verse states: โ€œAnd you shall put pure frankincense upon [al] each rowโ€ (Leviticus 24:7). Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: Al in this instance means: Next to. The baraita asks: Do you say that al means: Next to? Or perhaps it means only actually upon? The baraita explains: When it says: โ€œAnd you shall put there the Ark of the Testimony, and you shall place a cover over [al] the Ark with the Curtainโ€ (Exodus 40:3), the word al cannot mean upon, as the Curtain that separated the Sanctuary from the Holy of Holies was hanging near the Ark, not placed on top of it. Therefore, you must say that al means next to.

ืžื•ืœื™ืš ื•ืžื‘ื™ื ืžืขืœื” ื•ืžื•ืจื™ื“ [ื•ื›ื•ืณ] ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ื—ื™ื™ื ื‘ืจ ืื‘ื ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ื—ื ืŸ ืžื•ืœื™ืš ื•ืžื‘ื™ื ืœืžื™ ืฉื”ืจื•ื—ื•ืช ืฉืœื• ืžืขืœื” ื•ืžื•ืจื™ื“ ืœืžื™ ืฉื”ืฉืžื™ื ื•ื”ืืจืฅ ืฉืœื•

ยง The mishna teaches that the two loaves and the two lambs are waved in the following manner: The priest places his two hands below the lambs, extends them to each of the four directions and brings them back, then raises and lowers them. Rabbi แธคiyya bar Abba says that Rabbi Yoแธฅanan says: He extends the lambs and brings them back in order to dedicate them to He to Whom the four directions belong. He raises and lowers them in order to dedicate them to He to Whom the heavens and the earth belong.

ื‘ืžืขืจื‘ื ืžืชื ื• ื”ื›ื™ ืืžืจ ืจื‘ ื—ืžื ื‘ืจ ืขื•ืงื‘ื ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ืกื™ ื‘ืจ ืจื‘ื™ ื—ื ื™ื ื ืžื•ืœื™ืš ื•ืžื‘ื™ื ื›ื“ื™ ืœืขืฆื•ืจ ืจื•ื—ื•ืช ืจืขื•ืช ืžืขืœื” ื•ืžื•ืจื™ื“ ื›ื“ื™ ืœืขืฆื•ืจ ื˜ืœืœื™ื ืจืขื™ื

In the West, Eretz Yisrael, they taught the idea like this: Rabbi แธคama bar Ukva says that Rabbi Yosei bar Rabbi แธคanina says: He extends the lambs and brings them back in order to request a halt to harmful winds and storms that come from all directions. Similarly, he raises and lowers them in order to halt harmful dews and rains that come from above.

ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ืกื™ ื‘ืจ ืจื‘ ืื‘ื™ืŸ ื–ืืช ืื•ืžืจืช ืฉื™ืจื™ ืžืฆื•ื” ืžืขื›ื‘ื™ื ืืช ื”ืคื•ืจืขื ื•ืช ื“ื”ื ืชื ื•ืคื” ืฉื™ืจื™ ืžืฆื•ื” ื”ื™ื ื•ืขื•ืฆืจืช ืจื•ื—ื•ืช ืจืขื•ืช ื•ื˜ืœืœื™ื ืจืขื™ื ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื” ื•ื›ืŸ ืœื•ืœื‘

Rabbi Yosei bar Rav Avin says: That is to say, i.e., it can be derived from here, that a non-essential mitzva helps prevent calamity, as waving is a non-essential mitzva; even if one failed to wave the loaves he has fulfilled his obligation, and nevertheless waving halts harmful winds and dews. Rava says: And one should conduct himself similarly with a lulav on the festival of Sukkot, i.e., he should extend and bring back and raise and lower the lulav, for the same reasons.

ืจื‘ ืื—ื ื‘ืจ ื™ืขืงื‘ ืžืžื˜ื™ ืœื™ื” ื•ืžื™ื™ืชื™ ืœื™ื” ื•ืžื—ื•ื™ ื”ื›ื™ ื•ืืžืจ ื’ื™ืจื ื‘ืขื™ื ื ื“ืฉื˜ื ื ื•ืœืื• ืžื™ืœืชื ื”ื™ื ืžืฉื•ื ื“ืืชื™ ืœืืชื’ืจื•ื™ื™ ื‘ื™ื”

The Gemara relates: Rav Aแธฅa bar Yaโ€™akov would extend and bring back the lulav in this manner, and would say: I am hereby shooting an arrow in the eye of Satan, as despite Satanโ€™s best efforts, the Jewish people continue to fulfill mitzvot joyously. The Gemara comments: It is not correct to say this, because this will induce Satan to come to incite the Jewish people to sin. Gloating about his victory over the evil inclination will lead Satan to redouble its efforts to corrupt them.

ืชื ื• ืจื‘ื ืŸ ื–ื‘ื—ื™ ืฉืœืžื™ ืฆื‘ื•ืจ ื˜ืขื•ื ื™ืŸ ืชื ื•ืคื” ืœืื—ืจ ืฉื—ื™ื˜ื” ื•ืชื ื•ืคืชืŸ ื›ืžื•ืช ืฉื”ืŸ ื“ื‘ืจื™ ืจื‘ื™ ื•ื—ื›ืžื™ื ืื•ืžืจื™ื ื‘ื—ื–ื” ื•ืฉื•ืง

ยง The Gemara continues to discuss halakhot concerning the waving of offerings: The Sages taught in a baraita: The communal peace offerings, which were brought on the festival of Shavuot and which must be waved while the animals are still alive, also require waving after their slaughter, and their waving after they are slaughtered is to be performed as they are, meaning that the whole animal must be waved, as was done when it was alive; this is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. And the Rabbis say: One does not wave the whole animal; rather, the waving is performed only with the breast and thigh.

ื‘ืžืื™ ืงื ืžื™ืคืœื’ื™ ืืžืจ ืœื™ื” ืจื‘ ื—ืกื“ื ืœืจื‘ ื”ืžื ื•ื ื ื•ืืžืจื™ ืœื” ืจื‘ ื”ืžื ื•ื ื ืœืจื‘ ื—ืกื“ื ื‘ื“ื•ืŸ ืžื™ื ื” ื•ืžื™ื ื” ื‘ื“ื•ืŸ ืžื™ื ื” ื•ืื•ืงื™ ื‘ืืชืจื” ืงื ืžื™ืคืœื’ื™

The Gemara inquires: With regard to what principle do Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi and the Rabbis disagree? Rav แธคisda said to Rav Hamnuna, and some say Rav Hamnuna said to Rav แธคisda: They disagree with regard to a principle about the application of verbal analogies. One adopts the exegetical principle: Infer from it and derive the details from it, meaning that when one case is derived from another by means of a verbal analogy, all the details of the source case are applied to the second case. The other Sage accepts the principle: Infer from it but interpret the halakha according to its own place, meaning that one derives only the specific detail referred to by the verbal analogy, and all other aspects of the source case are not applied to the other case.

ืจื‘ื ืŸ ืกื‘ืจื™ ื“ื•ืŸ ืžื™ื ื” ื•ืžื™ื ื” ืžื” ื–ื‘ื—ื™ ืฉืœืžื™ ื™ื—ื™ื“ ื˜ืขื•ื ื™ืŸ ืชื ื•ืคื” ืœืื—ืจ ืฉื—ื™ื˜ื” ืืฃ ื–ื‘ื—ื™ ืฉืœืžื™ ืฆื‘ื•ืจ ื˜ืขื•ื ื™ืŸ ืชื ื•ืคื” ืœืื—ืจ ืฉื—ื™ื˜ื” ื•ืžื™ื ื” ืžื” ื”ืชื ื‘ื—ื–ื” ื•ืฉื•ืง ืืฃ ื”ื›ื ื ืžื™ ื‘ื—ื–ื” ื•ืฉื•ืง

The Gemara elaborates: The waving of communal peace offerings is derived from the waving of individual peace offerings through a verbal analogy. The Rabbis maintain: Infer from it and derive the details from it, leading to the conclusion: Just as individual peace offerings require waving after slaughter, so too, communal peace offerings require waving after slaughter. And derive the details from it: Just as there, in the case of individual peace offerings, the waving is performed with the breast and thigh alone, so too here, with regard to communal peace offerings as well, the waving is with the breast and thigh alone.

ื•ืจื‘ื™ ืกื‘ืจ ื“ื•ืŸ ืžื™ื ื” ื•ืื•ืงื™ ื‘ืืชืจื” ืžื” ื–ื‘ื—ื™ ืฉืœืžื™ ื™ื—ื™ื“ ื˜ืขื•ื ื™ืŸ ืชื ื•ืคื” ืœืื—ืจ ืฉื—ื™ื˜ื” ืืฃ ื–ื‘ื—ื™ ืฉืœืžื™ ืฆื‘ื•ืจ ื˜ืขื•ื ื™ืŸ ืชื ื•ืคื” ืœืื—ืจ ืฉื—ื™ื˜ื” ื•ืื•ืงื™ ื‘ืืชืจื” ื”ืชื ื”ื•ื ื“ื—ื–ื” ื•ืฉื•ืง ืื‘ืœ ื”ื›ื ื›ืžื•ืช ืฉื”ืŸ ื›ืžื•ืช ืฉื”ืŸ ื‘ื—ื™ื™ื

And Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi maintains: Infer from it but interpret the halakha according to its own place, meaning that the basic halakha of the verbal analogy is accepted: Just as individual peace offerings require waving after slaughter, so too, communal peace offerings require waving after slaughter. But interpret the halakha according to its own place: It is only there, in the case of individual peace offerings, that the waving is performed with the breast and thigh alone. But here, in the case of communal peace offerings, the waving is as they are, i.e., the animals are waved whole, as they were when they were alive.

ืจื‘ ืคืคื ืืžืจ ื“ื›ื•ืœื™ ืขืœืžื ื“ื•ืŸ ืžื™ื ื” ื•ืžื™ื ื” ื”ื•ื ื•ื”ื™ื™ื ื• ื˜ืขืžื ื“ืจื‘ื™ ื›ื™ ื”ืชื ืžื” ื”ืชื ื“ื‘ืจ ืฉืžืชื ื” ืœื›ื”ืŸ ืืฃ ื”ื›ื ื“ื‘ืจ ืฉืžืชื ื” ืœื›ื”ืŸ

Rav Pappa said there is a different explanation of the dispute between Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi and the Rabbis: Everyone, even Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, agrees that with regard to a verbal analogy, the guiding principle is: Infer from it and derive the details from it. And this is the reason for Rabbi Yehuda HaNasiโ€™s ruling that after the slaughter of the communal peace offering one waves the entire body offering, not just the breast and thigh: It is done here like it is done there, in the case of individual peace offerings: Just as there, one waves the item that is a gift to the priest, as the breast and thigh are given to the priests to eat, so too here, with regard to the communal peace offerings, one waves the item that is a gift to the priest. Since the communal peace offerings are given to the priests in their entirety, they are also waved in their entirety.

ืจื‘ื™ื ื ืืžืจ ื“ื›ื•ืœื™ ืขืœืžื ื“ื•ืŸ ืžื™ื ื” ื•ืื•ืงื™ ื‘ืืชืจื” ื•ื”ื™ื™ื ื• ื˜ืขืžื ื“ืจื‘ื ืŸ ืฉืœืžื™ื”ื ืจื™ื‘ื•ื™ื ื”ื•ื

Ravina said an explanation which is the opposite of Rav Pappaโ€™s: Everyone, even the Rabbis, agrees that the guiding principle is: Infer from it but interpret the halakha according to its own place. And this is the reason for the ruling of the Rabbis that one waves only the breast and thigh of communal peace offerings: The verse states with regard to individual peace offerings: โ€œFor the breast of waving and the thigh of heaving I have taken from the children of Israel out of their sacrifices of peace offerings, and have given them to Aaron the priest and to his sons as an eternal portion from among the children of Israelโ€ (Leviticus 7:34). The term: โ€œTheir sacrifices of peace offerings,โ€ is in the plural, despite the fact that the verse is referring to individual peace offerings. This is an amplification, which teaches that the same halakha applies to communal peace offerings, i.e., that only the breast and the thigh are to be waved.

ืจื‘ื™ ืฉืžืขื•ืŸ ืื•ืžืจ ืฉืœืฉื” ืžื™ื ื™ืŸ ื˜ืขื•ื ื™ืŸ ืฉืœืฉ ืžืฆื•ืช ืฉืชื™ื ื‘ื›ืœ ืื—ื“ ื•ืฉืœื™ืฉื™ืช ืื™ืŸ ื‘ื”ืŸ ื•ืืœื• ื”ืŸ ื–ื‘ื—ื™ ืฉืœืžื™ ื™ื—ื™ื“ ื•ื–ื‘ื—ื™ ืฉืœืžื™ ืฆื‘ื•ืจ ื•ืืฉื ืžืฆื•ืจืข

ยง The mishna teaches: Rabbi Shimon says: There are three types of offerings that require performance of three mitzvot. Two mitzvot are performed on each and every one of them, but the third mitzva is not performed in their sacrifice, meaning that each of these offerings requires two out of the same three mitzvot, but not necessarily the same two as the others. And these are the three offerings: Peace offerings brought as gift offerings by an individual, communal peace offerings, i.e., the two lambs brought with the two loaves on the festival of Shavuot, and the guilt offering of a leper.

ื–ื‘ื—ื™ ืฉืœืžื™ ื™ื—ื™ื“ ื˜ืขื•ื ื™ืŸ ืกืžื™ื›ื” ื—ื™ื™ื ื•ืชื ื•ืคื” ืฉื—ื•ื˜ื™ืŸ ื•ืื™ืŸ ื‘ื”ืŸ ืชื ื•ืคื” ื—ื™ื™ื ื–ื‘ื—ื™ ืฉืœืžื™ ืฆื‘ื•ืจ ื˜ืขื•ื ื™ืŸ ืชื ื•ืคื” ื—ื™ื™ื ื•ืฉื—ื•ื˜ื™ืŸ ื•ืื™ืŸ ื‘ื”ืŸ ืกืžื™ื›ื” ืืฉื ืžืฆื•ืจืข ื˜ืขื•ืŸ ืกืžื™ื›ื” ื•ืชื ื•ืคื” ื—ื™ ื•ืื™ืŸ ื‘ื• ืชื ื•ืคื” ืฉื—ื•ื˜

The mishna continues: Peace offerings brought by individuals require placing hands on the head of the animals while the animals are still alive, and waving after they are slaughtered, but there is no obligation of waving them while they are alive. Communal peace offerings require waving both while they are still alive and after they are slaughtered, but there is no obligation of placing hands on them. And the guilt offering of a leper requires placing hands and waving it while it is still alive, but there is no obligation of waving it after it is slaughtered.

ื•ื™ื”ื™ื• ื–ื‘ื—ื™ ืฉืœืžื™ ื™ื—ื™ื“ ื˜ืขื•ื ื™ืŸ ืชื ื•ืคื” ื—ื™ื™ื ืžืงืœ ื•ื—ื•ืžืจ ื•ืžื” ื–ื‘ื—ื™ ืฉืœืžื™ ืฆื‘ื•ืจ ืฉืื™ืŸ ื˜ืขื•ื ื™ืŸ ืกืžื™ื›ื” ื—ื™ื™ื ื˜ืขื•ื ื™ืŸ ืชื ื•ืคื” ื—ื™ื™ื ื–ื‘ื—ื™ ืฉืœืžื™ ื™ื—ื™ื“ ืฉื˜ืขื•ื ื™ืŸ ืกืžื™ื›ื” ื—ื™ื™ื ืื™ื ื• ื“ื™ืŸ ืฉื˜ืขื•ื ื™ืŸ ืชื ื•ืคื” ื—ื™ื™ื

The Gemara challenges: And let peace offerings brought by an individual require waving while still alive, as this can be derived via an a fortiori inference: And if communal peace offerings, whose halakha is more lenient than that of individual peace offerings in that they do not require placing hands on the head of offerings while they are alive, nevertheless require waving when alive, then with regard to peace offerings brought by an individual, which do require placing hands while alive, is it not logical to conclude that they require waving when alive?

ืžื™ืขื˜ ืจื—ืžื ื ื’ื‘ื™ ื–ื‘ื—ื™ ืฉืœืžื™ ืฆื‘ื•ืจ ืืชื ืื•ืชื ืœืžืขื•ื˜ื™ ื–ื‘ื—ื™ ืฉืœืžื™ ื™ื—ื™ื“

The Gemara answers: This a fortiori inference is not accepted, because the Merciful One excluded peace offerings brought by an individual, as the verse states with regard to communal peace offerings: โ€œAnd the priest shall wave them with the bread of the first fruits for a wave offering before the Lord, with the two lambsโ€ (Leviticus 23:20). The word โ€œthemโ€ serves to exclude peace offerings brought by an individual from the requirement of waving while the animal is alive.

ื•ื™ื”ื™ื• ื–ื‘ื—ื™ ืฉืœืžื™ ืฆื‘ื•ืจ ื˜ืขื•ื ื™ืŸ ืกืžื™ื›ื” ืžืงืœ ื•ื—ื•ืžืจ ื•ืžื” ื–ื‘ื—ื™ ืฉืœืžื™ ื™ื—ื™ื“ ืฉืื™ืŸ ื˜ืขื•ื ื™ืŸ ืชื ื•ืคื” ื—ื™ื™ื ื˜ืขื•ื ื™ืŸ ืกืžื™ื›ื” ื–ื‘ื—ื™ ืฉืœืžื™ ืฆื‘ื•ืจ ืฉื˜ืขื•ื ื™ืŸ ืชื ื•ืคื” ื—ื™ื™ื ืื™ื ื• ื“ื™ืŸ ืฉื˜ืขื•ื ื™ืŸ ืกืžื™ื›ื” ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ื ื ื’ืžื™ืจื™ ืฉืชื™ ืกืžื™ื›ื•ืช ื‘ืฆื‘ื•ืจ

The Gemara asks: And let communal peace offerings require placing hands, as this can be derived via an a fortiori inference: And if peace offerings brought by an individual, whose halakha is more lenient than that of communal peace offerings in that they do not require waving while alive, nevertheless require placing hands, then with regard to communal peace offerings, which do require waving when alive, is it not logical to conclude that they require placing hands? Ravina said: This a fortiori inference is not accepted, as it is learned as a tradition from Sinai that there are only two cases of placing hands in communal offerings: The scapegoat on Yom Kippur and the bull brought for an unwitting communal sin.

ื•ื™ื”ื ืืฉื ืžืฆื•ืจืข ื˜ืขื•ืŸ ืชื ื•ืคื” ืฉื—ื•ื˜ ืžืงืœ ื•ื—ื•ืžืจ ืžื” ื–ื‘ื—ื™ ืฉืœืžื™ ื™ื—ื™ื“ ืฉืื™ืŸ ื˜ืขื•ื ื™ืŸ ืชื ื•ืคื” ื—ื™ื™ื ื˜ืขื•ื ื™ืŸ ืชื ื•ืคื” ืฉื—ื•ื˜ื™ืŸ ืืฉื ืžืฆื•ืจืข ืฉื˜ืขื•ืŸ ืชื ื•ืคื” ื—ื™ ืื™ื ื• ื“ื™ืŸ ืฉื˜ืขื•ืŸ ืชื ื•ืคื” ืฉื—ื•ื˜

The Gemara further asks: And let the guilt offering of a leper require waving after the animal has been slaughtered, as this can be derived via an a fortiori inference: And if peace offerings brought by an individual, whose halakha is more lenient than that of the guilt offering of a leper in that they do not require waving when alive, nevertheless require waving after they are slaughtered, then with regard to the guilt offering of a leper, which requires waving while alive, is it not logical to conclude that it also requires waving after it is slaughtered?

ืžื™ืขื˜ ืจื—ืžื ื ื’ื‘ื™ ื–ื‘ื—ื™ ืฉืœืžื™ ื™ื—ื™ื“ ืืชื• ืื•ืชื• ืœืžืขื•ื˜ื™ ืืฉื ืžืฆื•ืจืข

The Gemara answers: The Merciful One excluded the guilt offering of a leper, as the verse states with regard to peace offerings brought by an individual: โ€œHis own hands shall bring the offerings of the Lord made by fire; the fat with the breast shall he bring; the breast, to wave it before the Lordโ€ (Leviticus 7:30). The word โ€œitโ€ serves to exclude the guilt offering of a leper from the requirement of waving after the animal has been slaughtered.

ืชื ื• ืจื‘ื ืŸ ื—ืžืฉื” ืฉื”ื‘ื™ืื• ืงืจื‘ืŸ ืื—ื“ ืื—ื“ ืžื ื™ืฃ ืขืœ ื™ื“ื™ ื›ื•ืœื ื•ื”ืืฉื” ื›ื”ืŸ ืžื ื™ืฃ ืขืœ ื™ื“ื” ื•ื›ืŸ ื”ืฉื•ืœื— ืงืจื‘ื ื•ืชื™ื• ืžืžื“ื™ื ืช ื”ื™ื ื›ื”ืŸ ืžื ื™ืฃ ืขืœ ื™ื“ื•

ยง The Sages taught: With regard to five people who brought one offering together, one of them waves the offering on behalf of all of them. And in the case of a woman who brings an offering, the priest waves the offering on her behalf. And similarly, with regard to one who sends his offerings from overseas, the priest waves them on his behalf.

  • This month's learning is dedicated by Debbie and Yossi Gevir to Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran Zoom group for their kindness, support, and care during a medically challenging year.

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 62

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Menachot 62

ื›ื™ืฆื“ ืขื•ืฉื” ืžื ื™ื— ืื™ืžื•ืจื™ืŸ ืขืœ ืคื™ืกืช ื”ื™ื“ ื•ื—ื–ื” ื•ืฉื•ืง ืขืœื™ื”ืŸ ื•ื‘ื›ืœ ืžืงื•ื ืฉื™ืฉ ืœื—ื ื”ืœื—ื ืžืœืžืขืœื”

The Gemara asks: How does one perform the ritual of waving? First he places the sacrificial portions on the palm of the hand, and puts the breast and the thigh on them. And in any place, i.e., with regard to any offering, where there are loaves brought with together with the animal, the loaves are placed on the top.

ื”ื™ื›ื ืืžืจ ืจื‘ ืคืคื ื‘ืžืœื•ืื™ื

The Gemara asks: Where is it stated that the loaves must be placed on the top? Rav Pappa says: This is stated explicitly with regard to the ram offered at the inauguration of the priests, as the verse states: โ€œAnd he took the fat, and the tail, and all the fat that was upon the inward, and the lobe of the liver, and the two kidneys, and their fat, and the right thigh. And out of the basket of matzot that was before the Lord he took one matza, and one cake of oiled bread, and one wafer, and placed them on the fat, and upon the right thigh. And he put it all upon the hands of Aaron, and upon the hands of his sons, and waved them for a wave offering before the Lordโ€ (Leviticus 8:25โ€“27).

ืžืื™ ื˜ืขืžื ืื™ืœื™ืžื ืžืฉื•ื ื“ื›ืชื™ื‘ ืฉื•ืง ื”ืชืจื•ืžื” ื•ื—ื–ื” ื”ืชื ื•ืคื” ืขืœ ืืฉื™ ื”ื—ืœื‘ื™ื ื™ื‘ื™ืื• ืœื”ื ื™ืฃ ืชื ื•ืคื” ื•ื”ื›ืชื™ื‘ ืืช ื”ื—ืœื‘ ืขืœ ื”ื—ื–ื” ื™ื‘ื™ืื ื•

The Gemara inquires: What is the reason, i.e., from where is it learned, that the sacrificial portions should be placed on the bottom, and the breast and thigh on top of them? If we say it is because it is written: โ€œThe thigh of heaving and the breast of waving they shall bring upon the offerings of the fat made by fire, to wave it for a wave offering before the Lordโ€ (Leviticus 10:15), which indicates that the breast and thigh are placed on top of the fats, that is insufficient: But isnโ€™t it written elsewhere: โ€œThe fat upon the breast he shall bring, that the breast may be waved for a wave offering before the Lordโ€ (Leviticus 7:30)? That verse leads to the opposite conclusion, as it indicates that the fats are to be placed on top of the breast.

ืืžืจ ืื‘ื™ื™ ื”ื”ื•ื ื“ืžื™ื™ืชื™ ืœื™ื” ื›ื”ืŸ ืžื‘ื™ืช ื”ืžื˜ื‘ื—ื™ื™ื ื•ืจืžื™ ืœื™ื”

Abaye said: That second verse is not referring to the placement of the portions for waving. Rather, it describes their placement when the priest brings the parts of the offering from the slaughtering area in order to be waved. This priest carries the breast and thigh below the fats, and accordingly, when he overturns these parts onto the hand of the priest who will wave them, the fat will be under the breast and thigh.

ื•ื”ื›ืชื™ื‘ ื•ื™ืฉื™ืžื• ืืช ื”ื—ืœื‘ื™ื ืขืœ ื”ื—ื–ื•ืช ื”ื”ื•ื ื“ื™ื”ื™ื‘ ืœื™ื” ืœื›ื”ืŸ ืื—ืจื™ื ื ื•ืื–ื™ืœ ื•ืžืงื˜ืจ ืœื™ื”

The Gemara asks: But isnโ€™t it written: โ€œAnd they put the fat upon the breastsโ€ (Leviticus 9:20), which also indicates that the fat is to be on top of, not beneath, the breast and thigh? The Gemara answers: That verse is referring to the stage when the priest who waved them gives them to another priest, who brings the sacrificial portions up to the altar. Once again the parts are turned over in this exchange, so that the sacrificial fats are on top of the breast. And this third priest then goes and burns the sacrificial portions on the altar.

ื•ื”ื ืงื ืžืฉืžืข ืœืŸ ื“ื‘ืขื™ื ืŸ ืฉืœืฉื” ื›ื”ื ื™ื ืžืฉื•ื ื“ื›ืชื™ื‘ ื‘ืจื‘ ืขื ื”ื“ืจืช ืžืœืš

The Gemara adds: And this teaches us that we require three priests to perform this service: One to bring the parts from the slaughtering area, one to wave them, and a third to burn them upon the altar. The reason why all three acts cannot be performed by a single priest is because it is written: โ€œIn the multitude of people is the Kingโ€™s gloryโ€ (Proverbs 14:28). If a larger number of priests are involved in the Temple service, this represents greater glory for God. Therefore, it is preferable for the service to be carried out by three priests rather than one.

ื•ืฉืชื™ ื”ืœื—ื ื•ืฉื ื™ ื›ื‘ืฉื™ ืขืฆืจืช [ื•ื›ื•ืณ] ืชื ื• ืจื‘ื ืŸ ื•ื”ื ื™ืฃ ื”ื›ื”ืŸ ืืชื ืขืœ ืœื—ื ื”ื‘ื›ืจื™ื

ยง The mishna teaches: And the two loaves and the accompanying peace offering of two lambs brought on Shavuot also require waving. With regard to this waving, the Sages taught in a baraita: The verse states: โ€œAnd the priest shall wave them upon the bread of the first fruits for a wave offering before the Lord, upon the two lambs; they shall be holy to the Lord for the priestโ€ (Leviticus 23:20).

ื™ื›ื•ืœ ื™ื ื™ื— ื›ื‘ืฉื™ื ืขืœ ื’ื‘ื™ ื”ืœื—ื ืชืœืžื•ื“ ืœื•ืžืจ ืขืœ ืฉื ื™ ื›ื‘ืฉื™ื ืื™ ืขืœ ืฉื ื™ ื›ื‘ืฉื™ื ื™ื›ื•ืœ ืœื—ื ืขืœ ื’ื‘ื™ ื›ื‘ืฉื™ื ืชืœืžื•ื“ ืœื•ืžืจ ืขืœ ืœื—ื ื”ื‘ื›ืจื™ื

One might have thought that the priest who performs the waving must place the lambs on top of the bread for the waving. Therefore, the verse states: โ€œA wave offering before the Lord upon the two lambs,โ€ which indicates that the two loaves must be on top of the lambs. If the verse had stated only: โ€œUpon the two lambs,โ€ one might have thought the priest must place the bread on top of the lambs. Therefore, the verse states: โ€œUpon the bread of the first fruits,โ€ which indicates that the loaves are to be placed under the lambs for waving.

ื ื™ืฉืชืงืœ ื”ื›ืชื•ื‘ ื•ืื™ื ื™ ื™ื•ื“ืข ืื ืœื—ื ืขืœ ื’ื‘ื™ ื›ื‘ืฉื™ื ื•ืื ื›ื‘ืฉื™ื ืขืœ ื’ื‘ื™ ืœื—ื ืžื” ืžืฆื™ื ื• ื‘ื›ืœ ืžืงื•ื ืœื—ื ืœืžืขืœื” ืืฃ ื›ืืŸ ืœื—ื ืœืžืขืœื” ื”ื™ื›ื ืืžืจ ืจื‘ ืคืคื ื‘ืžื™ืœื•ืื™ื

Consequently, the verse is evenly balanced, as two contradictory conclusions can be derived from it, and I do not know whether the bread should be on top of the lambs, or whether the lambs should be on top of the bread. The baraita resolves the contradiction: Just as we find everywhere that waving is performed that the bread is placed above the other portions, so too, in the case of the two loaves and the two lambs, the bread is placed above the lambs. The Gemara interrupts its citation of the baraita to ask: Where is it stated that the loaves must be placed on top? Rav Pappa says: This is stated explicitly with regard to the ram offered at the inauguration of the priests.

ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ืกื™ ื‘ืŸ ื”ืžืฉื•ืœื ืื•ืžืจ ื›ื‘ืฉื™ื ืœืžืขืœื” ื•ืžื” ืื ื™ ืžืงื™ื™ื ืขืœ ืฉื ื™ ื›ื‘ืฉื™ื ืœื”ื•ืฆื™ื ืฉื‘ืขื”

The Gemara resumes its citation of the baraita. Rabbi Yosei ben HaMeshullam disagrees with the previous ruling, and says: It is the lambs that are placed above, and the two loaves underneath them. And how do I realize the meaning of the phrase: โ€œUpon the two lambs,โ€ which seems to indicate that the two loaves are to be placed above the lambs and not under them? Rabbi Yosei ben HaMeshullam explains: This verse teaches that the requirement to wave the lambs together with the loaves applies only to the two lambs sacrificed as communal peace offerings on Shavuot, to exclude the seven other lambs, brought as burnt offerings, which are not to be waved with the loaves.

ื—ื ื™ื ื ื‘ืŸ ื—ื›ื™ื ืื™ ืื•ืžืจ ืžื ื™ื— ืฉืชื™ ื”ืœื—ื ื‘ื™ืŸ ื™ืจื›ื•ืชื™ื”ืŸ ืฉืœ ื›ื‘ืฉื™ื ื•ืžื ื™ืฃ ื•ื ืžืฆื ืžืงื™ื™ื ืฉื ื™ ืžืงืจืื•ืช ื”ืœืœื• ืœื—ื ืขืœ ื’ื‘ื™ ื›ื‘ืฉื™ื ื•ื›ื‘ืฉื™ื ืขืœ ื’ื‘ื™ ื”ืœื—ื ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ืœืคื ื™ ืžืœืš ื‘ืฉืจ ื•ื“ื ืื™ืŸ ืขื•ืฉื™ืŸ ื›ืŸ ืœืคื ื™ ืžืœืš ืžืœื›ื™ ื”ืžืœื›ื™ื ื”ืงื“ื•ืฉ ื‘ืจื•ืš ื”ื•ื ืขื•ืฉื™ืŸ ื›ืŸ ืืœื ืžื ื™ื— ื–ื” ื‘ืฆื“ ื–ื” ื•ืžื ื™ืฃ

แธคanina ben แธคakhinai says there is a different answer: The priest places the two loaves between the thighs of the two lambs and waves them. And in this manner it is found that he realizes the meaning of both of these two verses, as the bread is on top of the lambs and the lambs are also on top of the bread. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says, in objection to this opinion: One would not do so, i.e., place bread that had been placed between the thighs of lambs, before a flesh and blood king; should one do so before the King of kings, the Holy One, Blessed be He? Rather, he places the two loaves and the two lambs alongside each other, and waves them together, and thereby fulfills the requirements of the verses in a respectful manner.

ื•ื”ื ื‘ืขื™ื ืŸ ืขืœ ืืžืจ ืœื™ื” ืจื‘ ื—ืกื“ื ืœืจื‘ ื”ืžื ื•ื ื ื•ืืžืจื™ ืœื” ืจื‘ ื”ืžื ื•ื ื ืœืจื‘ ื—ืกื“ื ืจื‘ื™ ืœื˜ืขืžื™ื” ื“ืืžืจ ืขืœ ื‘ืกืžื•ืš

The Gemara raises an objection to the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi: But we require fulfillment of the term โ€œupon [al]โ€ in the verse, either by placing the bread upon the lambs or the lambs upon the bread. In response, Rav แธคisda says to Rav Hamnuna, and some say that Rav Hamnuna says to Rav แธคisda: With this opinion, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi conforms to his standard line of reasoning, as he says that the word al can mean next to.

ื“ืชื ื™ื ื•ื ืชืช ืขืœ ื”ืžืขืจื›ืช ืœื‘ื ื” ื–ื›ื” ืจื‘ื™ ืื•ืžืจ ืขืœ ื‘ืกืžื•ืš ืืชื” ืื•ืžืจ ืขืœ ื‘ืกืžื•ืš ืื• ืื™ื ื• ืืœื ืขืœ ืžืžืฉ ื›ืฉื”ื•ื ืื•ืžืจ ื•ืกื›ืช ืขืœ ื”ืืจืŸ ืืช ื”ืคืจื›ืช ื”ื•ื™ ืื•ืžืจ ืขืœ ื‘ืกืžื•ืš

This is as it is taught in a baraita: With regard to the shewbread, the verse states: โ€œAnd you shall put pure frankincense upon [al] each rowโ€ (Leviticus 24:7). Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: Al in this instance means: Next to. The baraita asks: Do you say that al means: Next to? Or perhaps it means only actually upon? The baraita explains: When it says: โ€œAnd you shall put there the Ark of the Testimony, and you shall place a cover over [al] the Ark with the Curtainโ€ (Exodus 40:3), the word al cannot mean upon, as the Curtain that separated the Sanctuary from the Holy of Holies was hanging near the Ark, not placed on top of it. Therefore, you must say that al means next to.

ืžื•ืœื™ืš ื•ืžื‘ื™ื ืžืขืœื” ื•ืžื•ืจื™ื“ [ื•ื›ื•ืณ] ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ื—ื™ื™ื ื‘ืจ ืื‘ื ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ื—ื ืŸ ืžื•ืœื™ืš ื•ืžื‘ื™ื ืœืžื™ ืฉื”ืจื•ื—ื•ืช ืฉืœื• ืžืขืœื” ื•ืžื•ืจื™ื“ ืœืžื™ ืฉื”ืฉืžื™ื ื•ื”ืืจืฅ ืฉืœื•

ยง The mishna teaches that the two loaves and the two lambs are waved in the following manner: The priest places his two hands below the lambs, extends them to each of the four directions and brings them back, then raises and lowers them. Rabbi แธคiyya bar Abba says that Rabbi Yoแธฅanan says: He extends the lambs and brings them back in order to dedicate them to He to Whom the four directions belong. He raises and lowers them in order to dedicate them to He to Whom the heavens and the earth belong.

ื‘ืžืขืจื‘ื ืžืชื ื• ื”ื›ื™ ืืžืจ ืจื‘ ื—ืžื ื‘ืจ ืขื•ืงื‘ื ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ืกื™ ื‘ืจ ืจื‘ื™ ื—ื ื™ื ื ืžื•ืœื™ืš ื•ืžื‘ื™ื ื›ื“ื™ ืœืขืฆื•ืจ ืจื•ื—ื•ืช ืจืขื•ืช ืžืขืœื” ื•ืžื•ืจื™ื“ ื›ื“ื™ ืœืขืฆื•ืจ ื˜ืœืœื™ื ืจืขื™ื

In the West, Eretz Yisrael, they taught the idea like this: Rabbi แธคama bar Ukva says that Rabbi Yosei bar Rabbi แธคanina says: He extends the lambs and brings them back in order to request a halt to harmful winds and storms that come from all directions. Similarly, he raises and lowers them in order to halt harmful dews and rains that come from above.

ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ืกื™ ื‘ืจ ืจื‘ ืื‘ื™ืŸ ื–ืืช ืื•ืžืจืช ืฉื™ืจื™ ืžืฆื•ื” ืžืขื›ื‘ื™ื ืืช ื”ืคื•ืจืขื ื•ืช ื“ื”ื ืชื ื•ืคื” ืฉื™ืจื™ ืžืฆื•ื” ื”ื™ื ื•ืขื•ืฆืจืช ืจื•ื—ื•ืช ืจืขื•ืช ื•ื˜ืœืœื™ื ืจืขื™ื ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื” ื•ื›ืŸ ืœื•ืœื‘

Rabbi Yosei bar Rav Avin says: That is to say, i.e., it can be derived from here, that a non-essential mitzva helps prevent calamity, as waving is a non-essential mitzva; even if one failed to wave the loaves he has fulfilled his obligation, and nevertheless waving halts harmful winds and dews. Rava says: And one should conduct himself similarly with a lulav on the festival of Sukkot, i.e., he should extend and bring back and raise and lower the lulav, for the same reasons.

ืจื‘ ืื—ื ื‘ืจ ื™ืขืงื‘ ืžืžื˜ื™ ืœื™ื” ื•ืžื™ื™ืชื™ ืœื™ื” ื•ืžื—ื•ื™ ื”ื›ื™ ื•ืืžืจ ื’ื™ืจื ื‘ืขื™ื ื ื“ืฉื˜ื ื ื•ืœืื• ืžื™ืœืชื ื”ื™ื ืžืฉื•ื ื“ืืชื™ ืœืืชื’ืจื•ื™ื™ ื‘ื™ื”

The Gemara relates: Rav Aแธฅa bar Yaโ€™akov would extend and bring back the lulav in this manner, and would say: I am hereby shooting an arrow in the eye of Satan, as despite Satanโ€™s best efforts, the Jewish people continue to fulfill mitzvot joyously. The Gemara comments: It is not correct to say this, because this will induce Satan to come to incite the Jewish people to sin. Gloating about his victory over the evil inclination will lead Satan to redouble its efforts to corrupt them.

ืชื ื• ืจื‘ื ืŸ ื–ื‘ื—ื™ ืฉืœืžื™ ืฆื‘ื•ืจ ื˜ืขื•ื ื™ืŸ ืชื ื•ืคื” ืœืื—ืจ ืฉื—ื™ื˜ื” ื•ืชื ื•ืคืชืŸ ื›ืžื•ืช ืฉื”ืŸ ื“ื‘ืจื™ ืจื‘ื™ ื•ื—ื›ืžื™ื ืื•ืžืจื™ื ื‘ื—ื–ื” ื•ืฉื•ืง

ยง The Gemara continues to discuss halakhot concerning the waving of offerings: The Sages taught in a baraita: The communal peace offerings, which were brought on the festival of Shavuot and which must be waved while the animals are still alive, also require waving after their slaughter, and their waving after they are slaughtered is to be performed as they are, meaning that the whole animal must be waved, as was done when it was alive; this is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. And the Rabbis say: One does not wave the whole animal; rather, the waving is performed only with the breast and thigh.

ื‘ืžืื™ ืงื ืžื™ืคืœื’ื™ ืืžืจ ืœื™ื” ืจื‘ ื—ืกื“ื ืœืจื‘ ื”ืžื ื•ื ื ื•ืืžืจื™ ืœื” ืจื‘ ื”ืžื ื•ื ื ืœืจื‘ ื—ืกื“ื ื‘ื“ื•ืŸ ืžื™ื ื” ื•ืžื™ื ื” ื‘ื“ื•ืŸ ืžื™ื ื” ื•ืื•ืงื™ ื‘ืืชืจื” ืงื ืžื™ืคืœื’ื™

The Gemara inquires: With regard to what principle do Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi and the Rabbis disagree? Rav แธคisda said to Rav Hamnuna, and some say Rav Hamnuna said to Rav แธคisda: They disagree with regard to a principle about the application of verbal analogies. One adopts the exegetical principle: Infer from it and derive the details from it, meaning that when one case is derived from another by means of a verbal analogy, all the details of the source case are applied to the second case. The other Sage accepts the principle: Infer from it but interpret the halakha according to its own place, meaning that one derives only the specific detail referred to by the verbal analogy, and all other aspects of the source case are not applied to the other case.

ืจื‘ื ืŸ ืกื‘ืจื™ ื“ื•ืŸ ืžื™ื ื” ื•ืžื™ื ื” ืžื” ื–ื‘ื—ื™ ืฉืœืžื™ ื™ื—ื™ื“ ื˜ืขื•ื ื™ืŸ ืชื ื•ืคื” ืœืื—ืจ ืฉื—ื™ื˜ื” ืืฃ ื–ื‘ื—ื™ ืฉืœืžื™ ืฆื‘ื•ืจ ื˜ืขื•ื ื™ืŸ ืชื ื•ืคื” ืœืื—ืจ ืฉื—ื™ื˜ื” ื•ืžื™ื ื” ืžื” ื”ืชื ื‘ื—ื–ื” ื•ืฉื•ืง ืืฃ ื”ื›ื ื ืžื™ ื‘ื—ื–ื” ื•ืฉื•ืง

The Gemara elaborates: The waving of communal peace offerings is derived from the waving of individual peace offerings through a verbal analogy. The Rabbis maintain: Infer from it and derive the details from it, leading to the conclusion: Just as individual peace offerings require waving after slaughter, so too, communal peace offerings require waving after slaughter. And derive the details from it: Just as there, in the case of individual peace offerings, the waving is performed with the breast and thigh alone, so too here, with regard to communal peace offerings as well, the waving is with the breast and thigh alone.

ื•ืจื‘ื™ ืกื‘ืจ ื“ื•ืŸ ืžื™ื ื” ื•ืื•ืงื™ ื‘ืืชืจื” ืžื” ื–ื‘ื—ื™ ืฉืœืžื™ ื™ื—ื™ื“ ื˜ืขื•ื ื™ืŸ ืชื ื•ืคื” ืœืื—ืจ ืฉื—ื™ื˜ื” ืืฃ ื–ื‘ื—ื™ ืฉืœืžื™ ืฆื‘ื•ืจ ื˜ืขื•ื ื™ืŸ ืชื ื•ืคื” ืœืื—ืจ ืฉื—ื™ื˜ื” ื•ืื•ืงื™ ื‘ืืชืจื” ื”ืชื ื”ื•ื ื“ื—ื–ื” ื•ืฉื•ืง ืื‘ืœ ื”ื›ื ื›ืžื•ืช ืฉื”ืŸ ื›ืžื•ืช ืฉื”ืŸ ื‘ื—ื™ื™ื

And Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi maintains: Infer from it but interpret the halakha according to its own place, meaning that the basic halakha of the verbal analogy is accepted: Just as individual peace offerings require waving after slaughter, so too, communal peace offerings require waving after slaughter. But interpret the halakha according to its own place: It is only there, in the case of individual peace offerings, that the waving is performed with the breast and thigh alone. But here, in the case of communal peace offerings, the waving is as they are, i.e., the animals are waved whole, as they were when they were alive.

ืจื‘ ืคืคื ืืžืจ ื“ื›ื•ืœื™ ืขืœืžื ื“ื•ืŸ ืžื™ื ื” ื•ืžื™ื ื” ื”ื•ื ื•ื”ื™ื™ื ื• ื˜ืขืžื ื“ืจื‘ื™ ื›ื™ ื”ืชื ืžื” ื”ืชื ื“ื‘ืจ ืฉืžืชื ื” ืœื›ื”ืŸ ืืฃ ื”ื›ื ื“ื‘ืจ ืฉืžืชื ื” ืœื›ื”ืŸ

Rav Pappa said there is a different explanation of the dispute between Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi and the Rabbis: Everyone, even Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, agrees that with regard to a verbal analogy, the guiding principle is: Infer from it and derive the details from it. And this is the reason for Rabbi Yehuda HaNasiโ€™s ruling that after the slaughter of the communal peace offering one waves the entire body offering, not just the breast and thigh: It is done here like it is done there, in the case of individual peace offerings: Just as there, one waves the item that is a gift to the priest, as the breast and thigh are given to the priests to eat, so too here, with regard to the communal peace offerings, one waves the item that is a gift to the priest. Since the communal peace offerings are given to the priests in their entirety, they are also waved in their entirety.

ืจื‘ื™ื ื ืืžืจ ื“ื›ื•ืœื™ ืขืœืžื ื“ื•ืŸ ืžื™ื ื” ื•ืื•ืงื™ ื‘ืืชืจื” ื•ื”ื™ื™ื ื• ื˜ืขืžื ื“ืจื‘ื ืŸ ืฉืœืžื™ื”ื ืจื™ื‘ื•ื™ื ื”ื•ื

Ravina said an explanation which is the opposite of Rav Pappaโ€™s: Everyone, even the Rabbis, agrees that the guiding principle is: Infer from it but interpret the halakha according to its own place. And this is the reason for the ruling of the Rabbis that one waves only the breast and thigh of communal peace offerings: The verse states with regard to individual peace offerings: โ€œFor the breast of waving and the thigh of heaving I have taken from the children of Israel out of their sacrifices of peace offerings, and have given them to Aaron the priest and to his sons as an eternal portion from among the children of Israelโ€ (Leviticus 7:34). The term: โ€œTheir sacrifices of peace offerings,โ€ is in the plural, despite the fact that the verse is referring to individual peace offerings. This is an amplification, which teaches that the same halakha applies to communal peace offerings, i.e., that only the breast and the thigh are to be waved.

ืจื‘ื™ ืฉืžืขื•ืŸ ืื•ืžืจ ืฉืœืฉื” ืžื™ื ื™ืŸ ื˜ืขื•ื ื™ืŸ ืฉืœืฉ ืžืฆื•ืช ืฉืชื™ื ื‘ื›ืœ ืื—ื“ ื•ืฉืœื™ืฉื™ืช ืื™ืŸ ื‘ื”ืŸ ื•ืืœื• ื”ืŸ ื–ื‘ื—ื™ ืฉืœืžื™ ื™ื—ื™ื“ ื•ื–ื‘ื—ื™ ืฉืœืžื™ ืฆื‘ื•ืจ ื•ืืฉื ืžืฆื•ืจืข

ยง The mishna teaches: Rabbi Shimon says: There are three types of offerings that require performance of three mitzvot. Two mitzvot are performed on each and every one of them, but the third mitzva is not performed in their sacrifice, meaning that each of these offerings requires two out of the same three mitzvot, but not necessarily the same two as the others. And these are the three offerings: Peace offerings brought as gift offerings by an individual, communal peace offerings, i.e., the two lambs brought with the two loaves on the festival of Shavuot, and the guilt offering of a leper.

ื–ื‘ื—ื™ ืฉืœืžื™ ื™ื—ื™ื“ ื˜ืขื•ื ื™ืŸ ืกืžื™ื›ื” ื—ื™ื™ื ื•ืชื ื•ืคื” ืฉื—ื•ื˜ื™ืŸ ื•ืื™ืŸ ื‘ื”ืŸ ืชื ื•ืคื” ื—ื™ื™ื ื–ื‘ื—ื™ ืฉืœืžื™ ืฆื‘ื•ืจ ื˜ืขื•ื ื™ืŸ ืชื ื•ืคื” ื—ื™ื™ื ื•ืฉื—ื•ื˜ื™ืŸ ื•ืื™ืŸ ื‘ื”ืŸ ืกืžื™ื›ื” ืืฉื ืžืฆื•ืจืข ื˜ืขื•ืŸ ืกืžื™ื›ื” ื•ืชื ื•ืคื” ื—ื™ ื•ืื™ืŸ ื‘ื• ืชื ื•ืคื” ืฉื—ื•ื˜

The mishna continues: Peace offerings brought by individuals require placing hands on the head of the animals while the animals are still alive, and waving after they are slaughtered, but there is no obligation of waving them while they are alive. Communal peace offerings require waving both while they are still alive and after they are slaughtered, but there is no obligation of placing hands on them. And the guilt offering of a leper requires placing hands and waving it while it is still alive, but there is no obligation of waving it after it is slaughtered.

ื•ื™ื”ื™ื• ื–ื‘ื—ื™ ืฉืœืžื™ ื™ื—ื™ื“ ื˜ืขื•ื ื™ืŸ ืชื ื•ืคื” ื—ื™ื™ื ืžืงืœ ื•ื—ื•ืžืจ ื•ืžื” ื–ื‘ื—ื™ ืฉืœืžื™ ืฆื‘ื•ืจ ืฉืื™ืŸ ื˜ืขื•ื ื™ืŸ ืกืžื™ื›ื” ื—ื™ื™ื ื˜ืขื•ื ื™ืŸ ืชื ื•ืคื” ื—ื™ื™ื ื–ื‘ื—ื™ ืฉืœืžื™ ื™ื—ื™ื“ ืฉื˜ืขื•ื ื™ืŸ ืกืžื™ื›ื” ื—ื™ื™ื ืื™ื ื• ื“ื™ืŸ ืฉื˜ืขื•ื ื™ืŸ ืชื ื•ืคื” ื—ื™ื™ื

The Gemara challenges: And let peace offerings brought by an individual require waving while still alive, as this can be derived via an a fortiori inference: And if communal peace offerings, whose halakha is more lenient than that of individual peace offerings in that they do not require placing hands on the head of offerings while they are alive, nevertheless require waving when alive, then with regard to peace offerings brought by an individual, which do require placing hands while alive, is it not logical to conclude that they require waving when alive?

ืžื™ืขื˜ ืจื—ืžื ื ื’ื‘ื™ ื–ื‘ื—ื™ ืฉืœืžื™ ืฆื‘ื•ืจ ืืชื ืื•ืชื ืœืžืขื•ื˜ื™ ื–ื‘ื—ื™ ืฉืœืžื™ ื™ื—ื™ื“

The Gemara answers: This a fortiori inference is not accepted, because the Merciful One excluded peace offerings brought by an individual, as the verse states with regard to communal peace offerings: โ€œAnd the priest shall wave them with the bread of the first fruits for a wave offering before the Lord, with the two lambsโ€ (Leviticus 23:20). The word โ€œthemโ€ serves to exclude peace offerings brought by an individual from the requirement of waving while the animal is alive.

ื•ื™ื”ื™ื• ื–ื‘ื—ื™ ืฉืœืžื™ ืฆื‘ื•ืจ ื˜ืขื•ื ื™ืŸ ืกืžื™ื›ื” ืžืงืœ ื•ื—ื•ืžืจ ื•ืžื” ื–ื‘ื—ื™ ืฉืœืžื™ ื™ื—ื™ื“ ืฉืื™ืŸ ื˜ืขื•ื ื™ืŸ ืชื ื•ืคื” ื—ื™ื™ื ื˜ืขื•ื ื™ืŸ ืกืžื™ื›ื” ื–ื‘ื—ื™ ืฉืœืžื™ ืฆื‘ื•ืจ ืฉื˜ืขื•ื ื™ืŸ ืชื ื•ืคื” ื—ื™ื™ื ืื™ื ื• ื“ื™ืŸ ืฉื˜ืขื•ื ื™ืŸ ืกืžื™ื›ื” ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ื ื ื’ืžื™ืจื™ ืฉืชื™ ืกืžื™ื›ื•ืช ื‘ืฆื‘ื•ืจ

The Gemara asks: And let communal peace offerings require placing hands, as this can be derived via an a fortiori inference: And if peace offerings brought by an individual, whose halakha is more lenient than that of communal peace offerings in that they do not require waving while alive, nevertheless require placing hands, then with regard to communal peace offerings, which do require waving when alive, is it not logical to conclude that they require placing hands? Ravina said: This a fortiori inference is not accepted, as it is learned as a tradition from Sinai that there are only two cases of placing hands in communal offerings: The scapegoat on Yom Kippur and the bull brought for an unwitting communal sin.

ื•ื™ื”ื ืืฉื ืžืฆื•ืจืข ื˜ืขื•ืŸ ืชื ื•ืคื” ืฉื—ื•ื˜ ืžืงืœ ื•ื—ื•ืžืจ ืžื” ื–ื‘ื—ื™ ืฉืœืžื™ ื™ื—ื™ื“ ืฉืื™ืŸ ื˜ืขื•ื ื™ืŸ ืชื ื•ืคื” ื—ื™ื™ื ื˜ืขื•ื ื™ืŸ ืชื ื•ืคื” ืฉื—ื•ื˜ื™ืŸ ืืฉื ืžืฆื•ืจืข ืฉื˜ืขื•ืŸ ืชื ื•ืคื” ื—ื™ ืื™ื ื• ื“ื™ืŸ ืฉื˜ืขื•ืŸ ืชื ื•ืคื” ืฉื—ื•ื˜

The Gemara further asks: And let the guilt offering of a leper require waving after the animal has been slaughtered, as this can be derived via an a fortiori inference: And if peace offerings brought by an individual, whose halakha is more lenient than that of the guilt offering of a leper in that they do not require waving when alive, nevertheless require waving after they are slaughtered, then with regard to the guilt offering of a leper, which requires waving while alive, is it not logical to conclude that it also requires waving after it is slaughtered?

ืžื™ืขื˜ ืจื—ืžื ื ื’ื‘ื™ ื–ื‘ื—ื™ ืฉืœืžื™ ื™ื—ื™ื“ ืืชื• ืื•ืชื• ืœืžืขื•ื˜ื™ ืืฉื ืžืฆื•ืจืข

The Gemara answers: The Merciful One excluded the guilt offering of a leper, as the verse states with regard to peace offerings brought by an individual: โ€œHis own hands shall bring the offerings of the Lord made by fire; the fat with the breast shall he bring; the breast, to wave it before the Lordโ€ (Leviticus 7:30). The word โ€œitโ€ serves to exclude the guilt offering of a leper from the requirement of waving after the animal has been slaughtered.

ืชื ื• ืจื‘ื ืŸ ื—ืžืฉื” ืฉื”ื‘ื™ืื• ืงืจื‘ืŸ ืื—ื“ ืื—ื“ ืžื ื™ืฃ ืขืœ ื™ื“ื™ ื›ื•ืœื ื•ื”ืืฉื” ื›ื”ืŸ ืžื ื™ืฃ ืขืœ ื™ื“ื” ื•ื›ืŸ ื”ืฉื•ืœื— ืงืจื‘ื ื•ืชื™ื• ืžืžื“ื™ื ืช ื”ื™ื ื›ื”ืŸ ืžื ื™ืฃ ืขืœ ื™ื“ื•

ยง The Sages taught: With regard to five people who brought one offering together, one of them waves the offering on behalf of all of them. And in the case of a woman who brings an offering, the priest waves the offering on her behalf. And similarly, with regard to one who sends his offerings from overseas, the priest waves them on his behalf.

Scroll To Top