loader from loading.io

Menachot 54 - March 6, 17 Adar

Daf Yomi for Women - Hadran

Release Date: 03/06/2026

Menachot 70 - March 22, 4 Nisan show art Menachot 70 - March 22, 4 Nisan

Daf Yomi for Women - Hadran

info_outline
Menachot 69 - Shabbat March 21, 3 Nisan show art Menachot 69 - Shabbat March 21, 3 Nisan

Daf Yomi for Women - Hadran

info_outline
Menachot 68 - March 20, 2 Nisan show art Menachot 68 - March 20, 2 Nisan

Daf Yomi for Women - Hadran

info_outline
Menachot 67 - Rosh Chodesh Nisan - March 19, 1 Nisan show art Menachot 67 - Rosh Chodesh Nisan - March 19, 1 Nisan

Daf Yomi for Women - Hadran

info_outline
Menachot 66 - March 18, 29 Adar show art Menachot 66 - March 18, 29 Adar

Daf Yomi for Women - Hadran

The Gemara cites a second braita featuring five arguments against the Baytusi claim that the Omer offering must always be brought on the first Sunday following the first day of Pesach. The braita concludes by deriving from the biblical verses that both the harvesting and the counting of the Omer must take place at night, while the actual sacrifice is offered during the day. Rava reviews the nine rabbinic arguments presented against the Baytusim(compiled from both braitot) and systematically rejects the first three claims found in each. The Mishna continues by describing the process of...

info_outline
Menachot 65 - March 17, 28 Adar show art Menachot 65 - March 17, 28 Adar

Daf Yomi for Women - Hadran

The Mishna details the ceremony of the Omer harvest, a public event designed to openly reject the opinion of the Baytusim (Boethusians) who held that the date for the Omer offering was the first Sunday after the first day of Pesach. Before the Pesach holiday, messengers of the Beit Din tied the standing barley into bundles to facilitate a quick harvest. On the night following the first day of Passover, residents from surrounding towns gathered to watch as the harvester and the crowd engaged in a question-and-answer ceremony confirming three times each detail: "Has the sun set?", "With this...

info_outline
Menachot 64 - March 16, 27 Adar show art Menachot 64 - March 16, 27 Adar

Daf Yomi for Women - Hadran

info_outline
Menachot 63 - March 15, 26 Adar show art Menachot 63 - March 15, 26 Adar

Daf Yomi for Women - Hadran

info_outline
Menachot 62 - Shabbat March 14, 25 Adar show art Menachot 62 - Shabbat March 14, 25 Adar

Daf Yomi for Women - Hadran

info_outline
Menachot 61 - March 13, 24 Adar show art Menachot 61 - March 13, 24 Adar

Daf Yomi for Women - Hadran

Rabbi Shimon derives from the words "et hamincha" that many additional menachot require hagasha (bringing the offering to the altar). However, he uses three other specific exclusions from the verse to exempt certain offerings: The two loaves and showbread: Excluded from the word "m’eleh" (from these), as these are not burned on the altar. The mincha of libations: Excluded from "v’hikriva" (and he shall bring it), as these offerings accompany animal sacrifices. Voluntary offerings of kohanim and the kohen gadol's griddle cakes: Excluded from "v’higisha" (and he shall bring it near), as...

info_outline
 
More Episodes

There is a debate regarding whether apple juice can be used to leaven the dough for the two mincha offerings that are required to be chametz. In Mishna Terumot 10:2, it is explained that apples of teruma that leaven a dough are significant and cannot be nullified; this is because leavening is considered a transformative action that fundamentally alters the dough. While it may initially appear that the Mishna supports the position that apple juice is a valid leavening agent for these offerings, the text can also be reconciled with the opposing view. One can distinguish between different levels of leavening, suggesting that the "leavening" mentioned in the Mishna may be chametz nukshe, which does not satisfy the specific leavening requirements for the mincha offerings.

Rabbi Ila and Rav Yitzchak bar Avdimi debate whether the mincha of a sinner, which is offered without oil, may contain water. Initially, the Gemara assumes the root of this debate is whether we determine the measurement of an item that has changed form based on its original state or its current state. If we follow the current size, water may be added because the kometz (handful) is measured based on the substance in its present form. However, if it must be measured by its original size, adding water would mean the handful no longer contains the required amount of flour, as the volume has been altered by the liquid. Ultimately, the Gemara rejects this explanation and concludes that both sages agree items are measured by their current state; their actual debate concerns how to interpret the requirement for a sinner’s mincha to be "dry"—whether this means it must be completely dry of all liquid, or merely dry of oil.

The Gemara continues to delve into whether the halakhic measurements of items that have changed in size are determined by their present state or their original state. A Mishna in Uktzin 2:8 is cited regarding the laws of ritual impurity (tumah) for a piece of meat that has shrunk to less than the size of an egg (kebeitzah)—the minimum volume required to transmit impurity. Two groups of sages disagree over the correct version of this Mishna: one asserting that we assess the item based on its original size, and the other maintaining we assess it by its current size.

The Gemara raises a difficulty against the opinion that items are measured by their original size; specifically, in a case where meat expanded to exceed the size of an egg, it is ruled to transmit impurity. This challenge is resolved by explaining that the law in that specific source is Rabbinic in nature, rather than a Torah law. A second difficulty is raised from a braita discussing the opposite case: if meat shrinks below the required volume, it no longer transmits impurity. However, Raba rejects this proof, explaining that all would agree an item cannot transmit impurity if its current state is too small. He clarifies that the sages were only stringent in cases where an item was originally too small but later expanded to the requisite volume. The true point of disagreement, according to Raba, is a case where the item originally met the requirement, shrunk, and then expanded again. The question is whether the item was "rejected" (nidcheh) during its middle stage - thereby losing its ability to transfer impurity permanently - or if it regains its ability to transmit impurity upon re-expanding.

A difficulty is then raised against the position that it remains pure even after re-expanding.

A challenge from Tosefta Terumot 4:2 is brought against Raba’s premise that everyone agrees a shrunken item is measured by its current state. This challenge involves the laws of separating tithes from fresh figs for dried ones; however, the difficulty is ultimately resolved by explaining that the case does not concern standard tithes, but rather terumat ma'aser (the tithe of the tithe). Unlike regular ma’aser, terumat ma'aser does not require an exact measurement, and it is considered preferable to err on the side of generosity by giving more to the Kohen.