Menachos 87

Today's DA is and we are at the Mishna on the bottom of the Mishna may from where would the Gizbar take the wine that was going to be used in the B mikdash. So the involved wine the question is where did that wine come from these were places that produced the best wine in soil that's where the wine would come from second best is which were both on a mountain which was in a valley the truth is that all lands any wine that's produced in was okay however there was and a and a second best. Thus the Mishna mentions those places. You're not allowed to bring wine from a vineyard that is a fertilized field or from a field that relies on irrigation or from a field where things grow in between the vines. [snorts] You're not letting wine that comes from grapes that were sweetened as a result of the fact that they sat out in the sun for an extended period of time. >> [snorts] >> So if the wine comes from sweet grapes, it's not okay. You're not let it bring aged wine. It's okay, not sweet wine or wine that was smoked or wine. [snorts] Now let take wine from vines that grew on fences. Sometimes the vines will be interwoven in a fence. It's called a trellis. So you're not allowed to take wine from such a vine. You're supposed to take wine from vines that grow on the ground. They're closer to the earth. That's where you want the wine to come from. Additionally, you're supposed to take wine from a vineyard that was cultivated. Gather the wine that's going to be used in the mikto in large casks. You're supposed to put it in small barrels. The wine that's going to be used in the Bikto. When you put it in the barrel, you shouldn't fill the barrel all the way up to the top. And the reason is because if there's a little bit of space between the top of the wine and the cover of the barrel that causes the ray, the the aroma of the wine to gather in that area like this. When you pop open the cork, you have that smell. Additionally, when you take wine now out of this barrel, you're not supposed to take from the top part of the barrel cuz mold would sometimes gather there from the bottom because the sediment from the middle third from the middle of the middle third. How exactly did you go about to make sure that you're taking from the middle third, not from the bottom. So to get rid of the top third is easy. But the question is, what about the middle? You only want the middle and not the bottom. How do you know that some of the bottom third isn't getting into what it is you're pouring to use in the B mikdash? So the Mishna says the gizbar would sit and he had a stick in his hand as soon as he saw a little bit of sediment leave the barrel and go into what they were pouring the wine into. He would hit the bottom of the barrel with a stick and like this the person pouring would know to stop pouring. The obvious question is why couldn't you just say it? Why do you have to hit it? Tomorrow's going to ask the if there's a little bit of sediment inside the wine, it's means it has to be perfect. It says it twice is going to be a little bit of these. It's going to be possible. So the Mishna had a lot of regarding the wine that was used in the Bikto and the Gumar is going to go through now line by line explaining the Mishna. Mishna had said you're not allowed to bring wine that's sweet, wine that's cooked, wine that's smoked. grapes that were exposed to the sun and as a result became sweet and so what's the difference between and halist is wine that comes from grapes that were exposed to the sun for a very long time in a way that causes the grapes to become sweet in other words you have sweet wine musk is also sweet wine the says the says you have to edit You're right. Can't be is one and the same. The issue with both is the fact that they're the real is that is thus don't say but add into the list of meaning that is going to be said. It's true. They're both sweet wine but they're sweet for different reasons. One is sweet because it was exposed to his son. The other one is sweet because the grape was naturally sweet. If it's halist and it's sweet because it was exposed to somebody but the evidence it's going to be. If it's from a fruit that's naturally sweet it's as a result you're not supposed to use it. So even though aged wine is usually a good thing but when it came to the it was a bad thing. Why? It says, and this is a we're all familiar with [snorts] it says just like the that's the that's the carbon had to be a year old. So it's true it's a milo for the wine to be aged but at the same time there's that the has to be like the had to be the wine had to be as well does that mean just like if the is 2 years old it's ple it means that the wine that's 2 years old is going to be as well says maybe the price then maybe you see the wine is who's the one that says that you're not allowed to bring aged wine who said it in And still the price says but the evidence so what's the that aged wine is possible is because it says then just like that teaches me that you're not supposed to use aged wine. It should teach me that age is going to be possible that that you have to use for you're not allowed to use age wine is from somewhere else. The Pik says in Mish this is don't drink wine when it's very red because it's going to lead to problems. But what you see from here is that wine is best when it's the most red and wine is the most red when it's a ben and it's based on that that is the wine that was going to be used for the we want it to be that's the said so you're supposed to take vines that are that are attached to the ground additionally you're supposed to take it from a vineyard that was quote unquote cultivated And what does that mean? So there were vineyards that were worked once a year and then there were vineyards that were worked twice a year. So whatever work was done in the vineyard, they would do it. That's considered a good thing. And as a result, we want that the wine that's going to be used for should come from such a vineyard owned a corner lot in a paradise and he did this. He worked it twice and when he produced wine's wine was so good it was the maya train that wine back in the times of kazal used to be diluted but in terms of how much water you needed to cut this wine to dilute it you needed twice the amount of water which was a good thing like this you're able to preserve the wine you had much more bang for your buck as far as using the wine goes and it all happened because worked the field a second time so you see there's a mile to work the field a second time and it plays itself out in matis is the wine that's going to be used for says you're not supposed to take the wine after it's produced and put it in large casks. Rather, you're supposed to put it in barrels. What kind of barrels? What does that mean? So, you're supposed to take jugs from the middle size. You're not supposed to put two next to each other. When you store it, it should be one, not two near each other. The reason is because if you can have two next to each other, one of them may go bad and it's going to cause the other one to go bad. So like this, if one goes bad, it's only going to affect itself. It won't affect the other one. If you store them in peers, then one would have an ability to affect the other. Kate said the Misha [snorts] then said that the wine that was going to be used had to be from the middle part of the wine. You don't want to use the top part because mold gathers there. You don't want to use the bottom part because you're not supposed to have said if this even possible. So you do is you take the middle and the Mishna said how do you know that you're taking the middle you know how to make sure it's not from the top third but how as you're pouring do you know you're not taking from the bottom third said the Mishna there was a gizbar who was he was literally watching it as the water was as the wine was pouring out he had a stick in his hand if he saw a little bit of sediment leave the barrel he would hit Why does he have to hit it? Why can't he just say just like is a good thing around? So if you talk while wine is being poured, it's not a good thing. And as a result, we don't want to affect the wine even in the subtlest of ways. Thus, the Gizbra wouldn't talk. He wouldn't say anything. Everybody was quiet. He would hit it with a little stick and that was the sign that he's supposed to stop pouring. Said that if the is going to be possible if somebody is this wine that has or some of the other wines that are possible. Do we say that the wine is possible? We treat it like and it's as if he was and he's going to get malus for that or not. So this is the third time we've had the thus you have the whole gives the same answer gave the other two times. So if you're going to bring for the which come from what's the best place what's the alpha for the were brought the sheep were brought to the base there was a to take sheep that were govern that their height and their width were the same. So we're talking about it's wide same width as the says and this is a so first of all why are we even bringing this right now because we just mentioned a mera from who said that said it was a milo that the kev should be as wide as it is tall is learned out from a a so now we have another said also from a and this is a that's a little better known than the previous if you look at the inra they all say that these that are sitting on They're never quiet. They're reminding and they're never ever quiet. It's referring to these are the mourn and they never forget about the even that never forgetting stating that stating that had a different shot. He understood that the P is a little bit mash that way. It sounds like appointed these people. They chose themselves to mourn. I appointed so they are said that today in gulus are sitting by the and they're never quiet and they keep reminding what are they saying what are they reminding they're saying what they're saying Now this is what they saying in goals that are being rebuild incidentally I saw the he says That's as if to say this second build that's so said the being the said that the but regardless this is all in the time of it sounds like these were there while the B stood as well then they weren't saying because there was a Then they weren't saying because that was there. What they would say is so before we go just want to go back to the last that we learned yesterday's doc. We went through it very quickly and speak out a little bit of raid and that is the gammorra was discussing the shemanz that was used for the mano versus the shemanz that was used for the monois and the standards were different for the oil that was used for the than what for the oil that was used for the remember the concluded with a little bit of and that was the says What does mean don't think that the reason is for me as if to say dwells in the needs light is incapable of providing his own light as a result light and the will be that's the emphasis you're not doing it for me you're doing it for himself proof because if I needed it then the would be next to the ish usually you put the lights next to the table where you're reading but the is and the is in that's a that it's not for another from the way put the windows wide narrow that was also right the bottom line is it's not for me rather it's for you what's for you what does it mean why do we what does need the the says the It was because it was that how was and what was the says. So the was really the through the miracle of the was really thus it's not for me it's really for the bottom line is is that was and it was a miracle that took place every single day in the Bdash. What bothered me was is we always speak out the mission discusses 10 miracles that happened etc etc and the mission does not mention so the at first glance you have a it's also it's something that everybody knows we're all familiar with the was a miracle it was such a great miracle that was if that's the case why isn't it mentioned in the office where the Mishna mentions fear the truth is has a more extended list of the miracles that happen every day in the Bdas we spoke about this in per the context over there was if a little bit of goes into aes you have to break the so the question was what happened to all the shards of the bringsal that they were swallowed up in the ground. If there was a miracle that the shards of the were broken in the azor were swallowed up in the ground. How does that mention the parade? And if you go through the Mishna doesn't mention that something to you that Mishna mentions 10 miracles really there were 18 miracles. There's another eight miracles and it's true. It's not mentioned in that but it's part of the longer list. It's part of the 18. And then goes on and he mentions the 18 the tenant of he adds the other. And one of the other eight that he mentions is this which was so it's true the didn't make the cut of the top 10 that the mentions in but it made the second tier. It made the second list. It's in Bak's list. It's in the list of the top 18. But the truth then is just to reformulate the question. Why are there even two less? Why is there a list of the 10 miracles and then there's the list of the other eight miracles? They were all Niss that happened every day in the BT. What would be wrong if there was only one list? The truth is you know asks the now doesn't mention this doesn't talk about 18. He doesn't mention the he doesn't mention the was swallowed up in the ground. The the says one line the is mentioning miracles that happened that are not even in anywhere. In other words was bothered with discussion. It's only 10. There's others there others. So why we only mentioning 10? It says it must be there's something unique about these 10. What's unique about these 10? What's unique is that that so you have to say that is in the whatever exactly the rem is we'll learn some of the sugis later but the reason it's not mentioned the Mishna is because the Mishna is only mentioning but there's a very obvious in light of some of the ra that we've spoken out there's obvious on this place and that is from the vil the vag wrote a pish on and the vague Pros is very unique. It's not a purish so much as much as it is the vaguen tracing the mus the sources from to the perk office. So if you take a look at the vaguayan every single time the Mishna says something the vaguayian is going to send you to apostics similar to what did in his beer where the vaguayan has a a source from the did the same thing to you have a which is written by the so the source is going to have to be one step back it's going to be a source from the and it's do that the said that the reason he did This is because why is it called? The first is the definition of something that's in the classic is that means there must be a scriptural source somewhere for this Mishna. It's a scriptural source for the so the guy in when he wrote his pas was to find where all the infur where exactly if that's the case is saying that I mentioned in the mission over here in are that goes against the very essence of what is the way classically said truth is if you take a look at the gy on this Mishna doesn't say anything so every single Mishna the guy has a scriptural source over here the gy doesn't say anything and it's not because the vaguen couldn't find the mar I'd say that's very very highly unlikely so the gy doesn't have a mar except for two the last two things that are mentioned in Mishna the vig doesn't have a mar what are the last two of was never in. And a person never fell when he was in said all the Jews descending upon Jerusalem at the same time. You'd think there'd be traffic. It get a little uncomfortable. It was never that way. It says on those last two it says says they're going to have a car. is it's the happiest place in the world. If a would bite, if the person would sometimes feel uncomfortable, it would be a steer. It'd be a contradiction to be clear being. So the didn't have a mart to the first eight, but the had a little bit of a rem. But the bottom line is is we have a that says what's unique about these At first glance, it's it's consistent with the guy who said that is in how could that be? It's interesting THAT THE GUY HIMSELF DIDN'T seem to have maybe this is an exception to even the last two. It's an interesting but there's another shot. If you take a look at your Mishna, there's another shot right here to explain why the Mishna mentioned 10 and not the other eight or any other miracles that may have happened every day in the BT says that you know what was unique about these 10. They were all done for the other miracles that happened there were others. Because those were not for rather the whole purpose of those was so you see in this two beautiful things number one what's unique about these 10 is it doesn't say and tells me the word means And that's what's unique about this list. These were all things that were done for the benefit of every single it was done. That's what's unique. There were others. The others weren't. That's why they're on the outside looking in. That's why they didn't make this cut. That's why they're not in this. What was then the purpose of those other miracles? if they weren't which means it wasn't just in that was but all eight miracles says were not mentioned in this right over here the reason the ground they were all either way that's the first the second is so the purpose of the wasash That is the says in the that for the 40 years that was during bay there were miracles that happened every single day in the B after was no longer. So all those miracles went away. One of the miracles that the Mishna mentions is that the was so this that talks about that talks about it existed during bay and it existed for 40 years of bay which 40 years the 40 years that shimatic was but after was no longer at that point those miracles the no longer existed but alopon of the 40 years that shimat was kodal There was a said about he said that is gonna allow the to rebuild the base and he's going to get through and the word is spelled there's no at the end it's say the reason it's five things that existed during that didn't exist during bay the lists the five things is a question in the proper gear But one of the five that everybody agrees is the right. So whereas there was during the was not in the second mikdash. If that's the case, let's do the arithmetic. The Gomorrah says in that there was during the 40 years of the says and that the was and the says that there's no okay how do you reconcile these three but the ter is part you have to say the and there's different levels It's true that there was which suggest it was definitely and it's also true that one of the five things that were lacking from because but at the same time it was not qualitatively on the same level as the existed during this is a theme that we've spoken about not recently but over the years but just one. I mean this was already aesh but just one other and that is that how could you say that there was no during we know but as it relates to so for example But etc etc. It's all based on the fact that there's no as it relates to etc. But as it relates to that says the at first glance what's this says I'm going to explain it to you myself. You don't need no for this. The ra himself explains it. gets it from and there's always there's always so what's going on if there's always then there was definitely that means even I'll ask you another question we're asking how does he do with this the says that means today. So what's this? Okay, you want to tell me there's a lot of things we don't have. But the says we do have the says how did the understand of which comes from the ter levels of course the ra saying butina and so we're dominating the we want to go back to the real but I'll come upon in just the second a third a Yeah. Is a hashtagma [laughter] classic I should say and that is that [snorts] we know that many of the kin in the BA mikdash had ben. There were poles a fixed to the sides of them and the purpose of the bad was so that when the levim carried the kum the mishkun in the ba mikdash they would carry it with the poles. the head poles, the head poles, the head poles, etc., etc. The says if somebody would remove the of the he would get malus. Now that's only true for the it's not true for the it's not true for the it's and at first glance it's what's the reason that if somebody removes the for the he gets mal but if somebody removes the one of the other kum in the mishk he's not going to get I'm going to tell you and be a raamita this is a raamita that's very important especially as we come now closer to the sugas that discuss the if you go through the parishes it would seem that every single night the would light them in. He would have to make sure that there was enough oil to last until the morning. Rashi says long enough for the leaves. But the point is it would light the entire night. The next morning the would come and it would be made of the rice. He would clean up the rice. He would prepare and then at night repeat he would do the same thing. There was a miracle with etc etc. And that is the sheet of all the with the exception of the ra the held a very big theam says that the used to light twice just like he brought the twice and there were two times that the carbon was brought he would light the man twice twice as well he would light the at night and he would make sure that it should be and then in the morning when he would be made of from the night before he would light the again and then at night he would repeat and the rabbs explains he says it because I believe that the definition of includes that mate doesn't just mean to clean it also means to light thus if the claim was in the morning by definition it means it was in the morning that is the everybody's on this but that is says what's in the ra but says he calls it what's sham he says you know I think sham is because and by the way it's a beginning all in a different if you want to look it up it's going to but the bottom line is it says that the made a very big deal about the fact that even though there was a commandment to light them but at the same time says don't think I need you to light up my bias that's not what this is all about it's not for me it's for you it's It's it's for you. It's but it's not for me. But there would have been a maybe for and that's why we needed to do certain things to make it clear that that's not what's going on. The is the is the way the windows were were made. This is all to that nobody should think that the reason there's because maybe needs says maybe the hell that's why they lit the during the day as well cuz had the only been lit at night you would think oh at night it's very dark so at night needs light but during the day oh that's why we don't like the so again TO BE THAT THOUGHT that I believe that was that the ra took took this idea of and ran with it so to speak and said that maybe that's the beer obviously the Ram held this but at the end of the day the held that the reason there's a mitz to light in the morning not just at night is so that you shouldn't think so says it's amazing how goes from here to what is about to say that based on that I'll explain to you why there was an idea of not to remove the bad because the purpose of the poles was to carry the ca say the was different. the was so if there would be that the only time the poles have to be in the is while you're carrying the but if you're not carrying the you can remove it like you can with the people would think that the purpose of the bm was really to carry the but really the purpose of the b was not to carry the was so to emphasize that point you know you know you're not ever allowed to remove the body or even when you're not carrying it to show that the purpose of the bad or is not to be able to carry the because you're never carrying the but rather the purpose of the bad is that it should be there and that's why even when you're not carrying it to emphasize this idea of for the same reason that the said that during the day to show that it's for the same reason to show that really is nicer it's nicer there's a fourth Let's sing a little bit more. a new parish named. There were two mid that were used to measure the and the was going to be used for the in the mdash is one was measured in the other one measured says there weren't two there were three two of them measured in is and the other one measured is going to explain why you needed two the size of an is what what did they use with the iso That's what they use all for right almost all is how much did you have if you had an issue if they brought a that came along with it had three if there was an aisle it had two so you would think maybe there was a measuring cup that measured three iso and maybe there was a measuring cup that measured two is we're applicable that's not the way it worked It was always one. So if you're going to need three LAR, you're going to just measure three of them. What do that was used for? Because the meant was also one, but he brought it's like this. He had to know what's a half and a half. So he used the says It says the word is in twice. There were two measuring cups. Each one measured in one was if you would heap it. So if you would fill up this cup and it was heaping, you would overflow it a little bit. That's when it measured in isar. The other one was a little bit bigger. So the other one if you just filled it up to the top even without heaping it, that's when it measured is. And the purpose of both of these were for the one that was the one that was in if he filled it up to the top that was used for and the other ones the other one was used for all the other said no you didn't need two measuring cups that measured in one that was one was for one for the and one for the other all there was was one and the know because it says the suggest there were two that measured in obviously suggest that there was only one says according to that there was only one do with posor mayor how do you know that there was a a measuring cup is used it from the extra is coming to teach me is to tell me to do with two that measured in. So the says that brought the is coming to teach me an extra measuring cup that measured a half of what dove. So they use the VV to be but forget the what about the what did they do with that? It sounds like one is according to it's not true there was so they knows it was also but at the end of the day the words it sounds like there was one said two that measured in says the word that measured in. So what does this teach me? It's coming to teach me what the Mishna had said that there was none that measured two is there were none that measured three is it was any time you were going to need is you were only you're always going to use a measuring cup that measured in is so there was none that measured two there was none that measured how the Rabon knew know that the Rabonan used the is to teach me one is and not two that measured in isa All right. They can't use it then. You didn't have a measuring cup that measured two and a measuring cup that measured three. So how then do the know that there was no two and there was no three? They learn it from the tiny a little dot in your in the middle of the word when it's describing the of the first day of there's a little dot there. So what does that come to teach me? It's learned out from the dota. What is you learn from that? Nothing. He didn't said that there were measuring cups that measured according to one according to mayor two. There were no measuring cups that measured two even though sometimes you needed to for example if you were bringing an aisle. There were no measuring cups that measured three even though sometimes you need three. For example, if you're bringing all there was was one that measured an isar one according to the two coin. What's the difference between the two according to one you would have to heap in order to get the isar and the other one even if it was you would get the there was also a measuring cup that measured. What was the purpose of that? So the said wasn't but it was brought in two halves. So it was used to measure the two halves. What did they measured half the you didn't bring you weren't allowed to bring the maybe you saw in what you had to do was you had to bring it completely and then divide it into two. So what do you mean you measured the half is you never imagined half is what you did was you measured an is then you divided it into two. So why you being say you're right wrong word doesn't mean it means means they would divide the is by having these two cups that each of which was a half is but the point not measuring the half is because when you're on the measuring level you're doing it with the isar but you take the isari now have to divide it into two how do you know to divide it into equal halves because you had a measuring cup each of one each one of which measured God said there were two that measured in one was one measured in if it was heaping. The other one was what about did it measure if it was or did it measure if it was why you only ask me why aren't you bothered with he said it's a whole different I don't even know if the is not my question I'm asking Romeor who already said that you needed two different for the one that measured in one was one was godish. So I want to know right now we'll talk about but right now was that was that what does that mean that the was so it makes sense that the because what was the used for also for the so if the sorrow in Ra's world was the one that was when being used for the it makes sense that the should also be and so if the was it certainly makes sense that the according to would be another exactly how did they divide so the ended up being 12 kalas and they had to be equal. The question is when they're dividing each individual kala. So you have two halves. Each half is going to create six kalas. But the question is you have to make you know ideally equalized kalas. That's really part of the sh. Do you have to have equal sized kal? Because if you have to have equal sized kalas you're going to have to have a mechanism of how you're going to measure it to make sure that each one is going to be equal. And that was the sh they do and really the underlying sh was if it's being done by it means it could be it could be approximate. If it's being done with a cle that that would suggest that it has to be done a little bit more precise because if it's a what kind of are you going to bring meaning you can't just bring a kal into the maybe but it's not so simple to just bring a k into the bd so we had the kim that we know we had the but we don't have a mida to start measuring now each individual kawa to make sure that they're the same size the only thing you can think of is bring in a scale and maybe weigh it. Weigh each like this. You make sure each little is the same size, right? Why not? Why can't you bring a scale? Why can't it be a bring it into the because there's a in the talks about how there's going to be such so little bread that they're going to have to take the crumbs and they're going to weigh it on a scale. So like this they'll be able to have what to eat. So the the torin is mentioned the scale is mentioned in a puzzing in the context of we don't want to bring into the md said it must be that they didn't use a they use the yad and even though it's going to be very hard the to figure it out precisely it's not a problem another sh we know that the had on it obviously the balis but it also add. Now the were in they were inside spoons. So it was inside a spoon. The was to the what the was to the what the was to the it would eventually go on to the get its kaduca obviously it's going to go on the and it needs kadusha how did it get its kadusha from the what if the was put directly on the could the bead or could it not bead because that's where the black belongs. But it can't be where he told him it can't be. So we'll see more about this later on. of the sash. So we're going to get to these gumaras the gar that talk about some of the specifics of the upon but you know we're all familiar somewhat with the picture the bread they were folded up on the sides right they were like uh you had these two sides and there's how tall those walls on this that you made from the said like this according to that says it was it was two and a half comes out that had an ability to 15 why because each side of the had six was Six and six each one is 2 and 1/2 6 * 2 and 1/2 is 15. So it comes out and said that says that the fold was 2 and 12 had an ability up to 15 that says that they folded only was only 12. What exactly was trying to say? We know the was. So is doing the math for us that you know the that everybody knows the was according to one you see it could be up to 15 according to the other must be up to 12. We know that there's no is saying is doing the math for us but we don't need help with the math must be saying you know must be saying that from the we can learn that the had an ability other things [laughter] up to 15 and up to 12 what's the other thing it must be the le so you have a from the holds that that the could be not only the but it could be as well. This is a this was an on what said again asked whether the hadility so he told him no says what do you mean what did mean when he said 12 probably something else which must be soar says no we know that not all kadushas were created equally this kadusha and this kadusha sometimes you find kadusha as it relates to it's kadesh enough that you could actually put on. Sometimes you find that it's not enough that you can put on but it's enough that it can become you're right we're saying something other than but that means it's as it relates to he want to know if the was put on the can I now take the and put it on the that's already a whole different story that's it cannot be kesh we will stop