{"id":13590,"date":"2011-04-07T00:47:37","date_gmt":"2011-04-07T00:47:37","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/production.ou.org\/life\/other\/masechet_menahot_30a36b\/"},"modified":"2015-11-02T09:10:59","modified_gmt":"2015-11-02T14:10:59","slug":"masechet_menahot_30a36b","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.ou.org\/life\/torah\/masechet_menahot_30a36b\/","title":{"rendered":"Masechet Menachot 30a-36b"},"content":{"rendered":"

The Coming Week’s Daf Yomi by Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz<\/em><\/p>\n

This essay is based upon the insights and chidushim (original ideas) of Talmudic scholar Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz, as published in the Hebrew version of the Steinsaltz Edition of the Talmud.<\/em><\/p>\n

Menachot 30a-b: Could Moshe have written his own obituary?<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n

Rav Yehoshua bar Abba quotes Rav Gidel in the name of Rav<\/a>, as teaching that the last eight pesukim<\/em> of the Torah<\/a> have a unique status – that \u201can individual reads them in the synagogue\u201d – that they are a unique single unit. What is special about these last eight pesukim<\/em>?<\/p>\n

Rabbi Yehuda<\/a><\/u> says that Moshe<\/a> could not possibly have written the last eight pesukim<\/em> of the Torah, which open with the words “So Moshe the servant of the Lord died there in the land of Moab” (Devarim<\/a><\/u> 34:5<\/a>). How could Moshe be alive and writing that he had died!? Therefore he concludes that Yehoshua completed the last few verses of the Torah.<\/p>\n

Rabbi Shimon<\/a><\/u> rejects the possibility that the Torah was not completed by Moshe in its entirety, since the Torah describes Moshe handing the complete book to the children of Levi (see Devarim31:26<\/a>). The picture that he paints of the writing of the Torah, is Moshe writing according to the instructions of God, and beginning with the last eight pesukim<\/em>, God told Moshe what to write, and Moshe wrote according to those instructions be-dema.<\/em><\/p>\n

This term, be-dema<\/em> – apparently a reference to tears – is the subject of discussion among the rishonim<\/em><\/a><\/u> and acharonim<\/em><\/a><\/u>.<\/p>\n

The Ritva<\/a><\/u> suggests that due to his sadness, Moshe was unable to repeat these passages as he wrote them, and he wrote them while crying. According to this approach, God who is omniscient instructed Moshe to write about a future event, and there is no issue with Moshe’s inability to write that he died while he was still alive.<\/p>\n

The Ramah<\/a><\/u>‘s reading of the baraita<\/a><\/em> was that the rest of the Torah was written by Moshe in ink, and the last pesukim<\/em> were written with his tears, i.e. pseudo-writing that was preparation for Yehoshua to fill in with ink.<\/p>\n

The Maharal<\/a><\/u> writes that Moshe’s crying is indicative of the beginning of his death, as decreed by the word of God. Thus once the statement was made by God, Moshe could reasonably write that he was, in fact, dead.<\/p>\n

A final interpretation, which is brought in the name of both the Gra<\/a> and the Ba’al Shem Tov<\/a>, rests on the understanding of dema<\/em> as “a mixture.” This approach suggests that the entire Torah was a collection of letters that ordered themselves meaningfully as events took place. Moshe wrote these last pesukim<\/em> as a collection of jumbled letters, which ordered themselves and became meaningful after his passing.<\/p>\n

\n

Menachot 31a-b: Writing a mezuzah<\/em><\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n

Beginning on today’s daf<\/em>, the discussion in the Gemara<\/a> moves away from the laws of a Sefer<\/a> Torah<\/a><\/em> and turns its focus on the laws of mezuzah<\/a><\/em>, which was mentioned in the previous Mishnah<\/a> (daf 28a<\/a><\/em>).<\/p>\n

A number of the laws distinguish specifically between the way a Torah must be written and the way a mezuzah<\/em> is written. For example, certain parts of the Torah, like Parashat Ha’azinu<\/em> and Shirat ha-Yam<\/em> \u2013 the song sung by the Children of Israel upon crossing the Red Sea \u2013 are written as song or poetry<\/a>. These special songs must be written in a unique fashion, and the rest of the Torah cannot be written in that way, while a mezuzah<\/em> can be written in poetic form, even though that is not the ordinary way of writing it. Another example is the length of a given line. A line in the Torah must have at least 30 letters in the line (the word le-mishpehoteichem<\/em> written out three times), while a mezuzah<\/em> may have even two words on a given line.<\/p>\n

There is, of course, a single tradition regarding how the two parshiyot<\/em><\/a>, or chapters, of Shema<\/em> and ve-haya im shamo’a<\/em> in mezuzot<\/em> are to be written, which has been the practice of Jewish scribes for hundreds of years. This standard model has 22 lines, each of which opens with a specific word. According to this ancient tradition, the second parsha<\/em> – ve-haya im shamo’a<\/em> – starts at the beginning of the seventh line. This does not allow for the usual split between two separate parshiyot<\/em>, which ordinarily is an empty space dividing between the conclusion of the first parsha<\/em> and the beginning of the second parsha<\/em> on the same line. This is resolved by following the position of the Rambam<\/a> so that an empty space is left following the end of the first parsha<\/em>, and the second parsha<\/em> – ve-haya im shamo’a<\/em> – is indented into the following line.<\/p>\n

\n

Menachot 32a-b: King Monbaz and a mezuzah<\/em> on a stick<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n

Regarding the laws of mezuzah<\/a><\/em>, Rav Yehuda<\/a> quotes Shmuel<\/a> as teaching that putting a mezuzah<\/em> on a stick so that it can be placed near the doorpost – or even tied on to it – is not a fulfillment of the mitzvah<\/a><\/em>, and, in fact, is dangerous. Nevertheless, the Gemara<\/a> reports that the household of King Monbaz did this very thing when they stayed in inns while traveling, so that they would at least have the remembrance of the mitzvah<\/em>.<\/p>\n

Rashi<\/a> explains that since the mitzvah<\/em> was not fulfilled, in consequence the person does not receive the protection offered by the mezuzah<\/em>, and will find himself in danger. The family of King Monbaz was traveling, and, as such, was not obligated in the commandment – the Talmud Yerushalmi<\/a><\/em> suggests that it was during wartime – and they wanted, nevertheless to remember the mitzvah<\/em>, yet have a convenient method of taking it with them.<\/p>\n

Monbaz was the king of Adiabene<\/a> at the end of the Second Temple<\/a> period. Adiabene was a small kingdom in the north of Syria on the banks of the Euphrates. In the generation prior to the destruction of the second Temple, Queen Heleni<\/a>, together with her sons Monbaz and Izates<\/a>, began to study Torah<\/a> with Jews who traveled through their kingdom, and eventually converted to Judaism. It appears that other members of the ruling elite did so, as well. Heleni visited Jerusalem a number of times and made donations both to the Temple and to the destitute people living there. Her children followed in her footsteps, and even sent troops to support the Jewish uprising during the Great Revolt. Upon his mother’s death, Monbaz declined the position of monarch, allowing his brother to become king, but he took the throne upon his brother’s death. Stories about this family, including detailed accounts of their conversion, appear in Josephus<\/a>. It appears that after his death, Monbaz was buried in the Graves of the Kings in Jerusalem together with other members of his family.<\/p>\n

The Talmud often comments that the activities of this family were praiseworthy, and we find a detailed description of their lives and their conversion to Judaism in the works of Josephus.<\/p>\n

\n

Menachot 33a-b: Where \u2013 and why \u2013 do we affix mezuzot<\/em> on our doors?<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n

Rava<\/a> teaches that we are commanded to place the mezuzah<\/a><\/em> on the doorpost facing the public domain within the tefach<\/em> \u2013 the handbreadth \u2013 closest to the outside.<\/p>\n

In discussing why this is the requirement, the Rabbanan<\/em> say that it is simply so that the mezuzah<\/em> will be reached immediately upon entering a house. Rabbi Chanina of Sura suggested that it is so that it will protect the entire house. In this context, the Gemara<\/a> quotes the following in the name of Rabbi Chanina:<\/p>\n

Come and see how the character of the Holy One, blessed be He, differs from that of men of flesh and blood. According to human standards, the king dwells within, and his servants keep guard on him from without; but with the Holy One, blessed be He, it is not so, for it is His servants that dwell within and He keeps guard over them from without; as it is said, The Lord is thy keeper; the Lord is thy shade upon thy right hand (Tehillim<\/a> 121:5<\/a>).<\/em><\/p>\n

What is this protection?<\/p>\n

Rashi<\/a> says that it protects the inhabitants of the home from destructive forces.<\/p>\n

The idea that the mezuzah<\/em> offers protection to the inhabitants is found in the Talmud and Midrashim<\/a><\/em>, and it has a source in the Torah<\/a> itself. When the Children of Israel were leaving Egypt, they placed the blood of the Passover sacrifice on the doorposts of their homes, an act that protected them from the destructive angel who was carrying out the Plague of the Firstborn (see Sefer<\/a> Shemot<\/a><\/em>12:23<\/a>). Furthermore, the commandment of mezuzah<\/em> closes with a promise that fulfillment of this mitzvah<\/a><\/em> will offer “long life to you and to your children.” We therefore find ancient traditions that connect mezuzah<\/em> with protection, and that people included the names of angels with the parchment. Still the Tur<\/em> and others rule that the commandment must be fulfilled for itself and not with the intention of gaining such protection.<\/p>\n

In a strongly worded statement, the Rambam<\/a> objects to treating the commandment of mezuzah<\/em> as an amulet (see Hilchot Tefillin<\/em> 5:4), and he argues that the “protection” that it offers is that it serves as a reminder of God’s presence and uniqueness, and as such, a reminder that keeps a person from sin.<\/p>\n

\n

Menachot 34a-b: Tefillin<\/em> \u2013 of heads and hands.<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n

According to the Mishnah<\/a> (daf, or page, 28a<\/a><\/em>) all four of the parshiyot<\/em>, or chapters, of the Torah<\/a> that are placed in Tefillin<\/a><\/em> (Shema<\/em> and ve-haya im shamo’a<\/em>, as in mezuzot<\/a><\/em>, as well as the two other parshiyot<\/em> where the mitzvah<\/a><\/em> of Tefillin<\/em> appears in Sefer<\/a> Shemot<\/a><\/em>, Chapter 13<\/a> \u2013 kadesh<\/em> and ve-hayah ki yevi’akhah<\/em>), must be included in order for the Tefillin<\/em> be valid. This ruling leads the Gemara<\/a> to segue from its discussion of mezuzot<\/em> to a discussion of Tefillin<\/em>.<\/p>\n

The Gemara quotes baraitot<\/a><\/em> that describe the differences between the Tefillin shel rosh<\/em> \u2013 the one placed on the head \u2013 and the Tefillin shel yad<\/em> \u2013 the one placed on the arm. The Tefillin<\/em> shel rosh<\/em> is made up of four separate pieces of parchment on which the different parshiyot<\/em> are written. These parchments are placed in four separate compartments of leather that are made together as one. Rashi<\/a> describes how the soft raw hide is placed over a mold with four protruding “fingers” so that during the processing the leather is stretched out in the appropriate form. These four compartments<\/a> are pressed together, and when finished there is a clear separation between them that can be seen even from the outside.<\/p>\n

In contrast, the baraita<\/em> teaches that in the Tefillin shel yad<\/em> all four of the parshiyot<\/em> are written on a single piece of parchment and placed in a leather box that has a single compartment.<\/p>\n

In the continuation of the Gemara, Rav Chananiah quotes Rabbi Yochanan<\/a> as teaching that although, if necessary, Tefillin shel yad<\/em> can be made into a shel rosh<\/em>, a shel rosh<\/em> cannot be made into a shel yad<\/em>, since the Tefillin<\/em> of the head have a higher level of holiness, and the general principal is that we do not lower the holiness of a sanctified object.<\/p>\n

Rashi suggests that the higher level of holiness ascribed to the Tefillin shel rosh<\/em> stems from the fact that two of the three letters of the holy Name shin-dalet-yud<\/em> are on the shel rosh<\/em> (the shin appears on the compartment and the dalet<\/em> is on the knot at the back of the Tefillin<\/em>, while only the yud<\/em> is made as a knot on the shel yad<\/em>. Others disagree with this reasoning and argue that by definition the holiness of the head \u2013 the center of human intellect \u2013 is of greater import than that of the hand.<\/p>\n

\n

Menachot 35a-b: Shapes and colors of Tefillin<\/em><\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n

The Gemara<\/a> relates that many of the specific laws regarding Tefillin<\/a><\/em> are halacha le-Moshe mi-Sinai<\/em> \u2013 laws taught orally to Moshe Rabbeinu<\/em> when he was receiving the Torah<\/a> on Mount Sinai. For example:<\/p>\n