Menachot — Daf 100b

כי מטי ליליא דבי שימשי ליקדוש וליפסול אמר רבא בשקדם וסילק

מר זוטרא ואיתימא רב אשי אמר אפילו תימא בשלא קדם וסילק כיון דסידרו שלא כמצותו נעשה כמי שסדרו הקוף:

מתני׳ שתי הלחם נאכלות אין פחות משנים ולא יותר על שלשה כיצד נאפות מערב יום טוב נאכלות ביום טוב לשנים חל יום טוב להיות אחר השבת נאכלות לשלשה

לחם הפנים נאכל אין פחות מתשעה ולא יותר על אחד עשר כיצד נאפה מערב שבת ונאכל בשבת לתשעה חל יום טוב להיות ערב שבת נאכל לעשרה

שני ימים [טובים] של ראש השנה נאכל לאחד עשר ואינו דוחה לא את השבת ולא את יום טוב רבן שמעון בן גמליאל אומר משום רבי שמעון בן הסגן דוחה את יום טוב ואינו דוחה את יום צום:

גמ׳ אמר רבינא לדברי האומר נדרים ונדבות אין קריבין ביום טוב לא תימא מדאורייתא מיחזא חזו ורבנן הוא דגזרו שלא ישהא אלא מדאורייתא נמי לא חזו

דהא שתי הלחם דחובת היום הוא וליכא למימר שמא ישהא וקתני אינו דוחה לא את השבת ולא את יום טוב:

הדרן עלך פרק שתי הלחם

מתני׳ המנחות והנסכים שנטמאו עד שלא קדשו בכלי יש להם פדיון משקידשו בכלי אין להם פדיון

העופות והעצים והלבונה וכלי שרת משנטמאו אין להן פדיון שלא נאמר פדיון אלא בבהמה:

גמ׳ אמר שמואל ואפילו הן טהורין נפדין מאי טעמא כמה דלא קדשי בכלי קדושת דמים נינהו וקדושת דמים נפדין

והא נטמאו תנן הוא הדין דאף על גב דלא נטמאו ואיידי דקא בעי מיתנא סיפא משקידשו בכלי אין להן פדיון דאפילו נטמאו נמי לא תנא נמי רישא שנטמאו עד שלא קדשו בכלי

פשיטא קדושת הגוף נינהו

איצטריך סלקא דעתך אמינא הואיל ובעל מום איקרי טמא טמא נמי כבעל מום דמי ואף על גב דקדוש קדושת הגוף כי נפיל ביה מום מיפריק הני נמי ליפרוק קמשמע לן דלאו כי האי טמא קרייה רחמנא לבעל מום

when Sabbath eve1 approaches let it then become hallowed and also invalidated!2 — Raba3 said, We must assume that he had removed it before then.4 Mar Zutra, or as some say, R. Ashi said, You may even assume that he had not removed it before then, since, however, he had set it down not in accordance with its prescribed rite 5 it is as though a monkey had set it.6 MISHNAH. THE TWO LOAVES WERE EATEN NEVER EARLIER THAN ON THE SECOND DAY7 AND NEVER LATER THAN ON THE THIRD DAY. HOW IS THIS EXPLAINED? [NORMALLY] THEY WERE BAKED ON THE DAY BEFORE THE FESTIVAL8 AND EATEN ON THE FESTIVAL, THAT IS, ON THE SECOND DAY. IF THE FESTIVAL FELL ON THE DAY AFTER THE SABBATH,9 THEY WOULD BE EATEN ON THE THIRD DAY. THE SHEWBREAD WAS EATEN NEVER EARLIER THAN ON THE NINTH DAY AND NEVER LATER THAN ON THE ELEVENTH DAY. HOW IS THIS EXPLAINED? [NORMALLY] IT WAS BAKED ON THE DAY BEFORE THE SABBATH AND EATEN ON THE SABBATH [OF THE FOLLOWING WEEK], THAT IS ON THE NINTH DAY. IF A FESTIVAL FELL ON THE DAY BEFORE THE SABBATH,10 IT WOULD THEN BE EATEN ON THE TENTH DAY. IF THE TWO DAYS OF THE NEW YEAR [FELL BEFORE THE SABBATH],11 IT WOULD THEN BE EATEN ON THE ELEVENTH DAY. [THE BAKING] OVERRIDES NEITHER THE SABBATH NOR THE FESTIVAL. R. SIMEON B. GAMALIEL SAYS IN THE NAME OF R. SIMEON, SON OF THE DEPUTY [HIGH PRIEST], IT OVERRIDES THE FESTIVAL BUT NOT THE FAST-DAY.12 GEMARA. Rabina said, According to him who rules that offerings in fulfilment of a vow and freewill-offerings may not be offered on a Festival,13 you should not say that Biblically they are allowed [to be offered] but the Rabbis forbade them only as a precautionary measure lest one defer [those offerings until the Festival],14 but even Biblically they are not allowed [to be offered]; for the Two Loaves are obligatory for that day,15 so that there is no reason to apprehend lest one defer [them until the Festival],16 yet [our Mishnah] states: [THE BAKING] OVERRIDES NEITHER THE SABBATH NOR THE FESTIVAL. MISHNAH. IF MEAL-OFFERINGS AND DRINK-OFFERINGS BECAME UNCLEAN BEFORE THEY WERE HALLOWED IN A VESSEL [OF MINISTRY]. THEY MAY BE REDEEMED;17 IF [THEY BECAME UNCLEAN] AFTER THEY WERE HALLOWED IN A VESSEL, THEY MAY NOT BE REDEEMED. BIRD-OFFERINGS, THE WOOD, THE FRANKINCENSE, AND THE VESSELS OF MINISTRY,18 MAY NOT BE REDEEMED, FOR THE RULE OF REDEMPTION APPLIES ONLY TO [OFFERINGS OF] CATTLE. GEMARA. Samuel said, Even though they19 are clean they may be redeemed, for so long as they have not been hallowed in a vessel of ministry they are holy only as to their value, and whatsoever is holy as to its value may be redeemed. But have we not learnt [in our Mishnah] BECAME UNCLEAN? — The rule is the same even though they were not unclean, but because the Tanna wished to state the next clause, AFTER THEY WERE HALLOWED IN A VESSEL THEY MAY NOT BE REDEEMED, in which case even though they were unclean they still may not be redeemed, he therefore stated in the first clause, BECAME UNCLEAN. IF [THEY BECAME UNCLEAN] AFTER THEY WERE HALLOWED IN A VESSEL, THEY MAY NOT BE REDEEMED.20 But this is obvious, for they are holy in themselves! — It was necessary to be stated, for I might have argued that since what is blemished is described as unclean, then surely what is unclean should be like that which is blemished; and therefore as that which has become blemished may be redeemed even though it was holy in itself, so this too may be redeemed; we are therefore taught that the Divine Law did not describe what is blemished as unclean in that sense,21 hallowed on the Friday night, and after seven full days, i.e., on the Sabbath morning after the second Friday night, the bread should become invalid. According to our Mishnah, however, the bread may be eaten the whole of the second Sabbath day until midnight! it at its proper time on the Sabbath. but the priest will have to enter on the morrow, remove it and replace it anew, and only then will the table hallow it. Where, however, the handful was taken from the meal-offering at night and put into a vessel of ministry, since night is not considered ‘out of time’, the vessel will hallow it; v. Yoma (Sonc. ed.) p. 138 and notes. Palestine. V. R.H. 30b. Thursday. unforeseen circumstance from offering them on the Festival and will then have failed in the fulfilment of his obligations. ohns ,ause and may be redeemed; once it has been hallowed in a vessel of ministry it becomes holy in itself, ;udv ,ause and may not be redeemed.