QUESTION: There are two steps to the Kemitzah process of a Korban Minchah: first, the handful of flour is removed from the flour in the pan, and, second, the Kemitzah is placed in another Kli Shares in order to sanctify it and make it fit to be offered upon the Mizbe'ach. The Gemara discusses whether the Kemitzah is valid when either one of these steps is performed while the Kli Shares is resting on the ground. Rava (7b) rules that although the Kemitzah may be removed from a pan that is resting on the ground, it may not be placed into a Kli Shares that is resting on the ground. The Kli Shares must be in the hands of a Kohen when it is used to sanctify the flour of the Kemitzah. Rava derives this requirement from the Halachah of Kabalas ha'Dam. When the Kohen performs Kabalas ha'Dam, the vessel with which he receives the blood must be in his hands in order for the Kabalah to be valid. Similarly, the Kemitzah must be placed into a vessel that is in the hands of a Kohen in order for the Kemitzah to be valid.

The Gemara here searches for the case in which Ben Beseira applies his ruling that the flour of an invalid Kemitzah may be returned to the pan, according to those Tana'im who maintain that Ben Beseira's ruling applies only when the invalid Kemitzah was not placed into a Kli Shares. These Tana'im maintain that Ben Beseira agrees that when the invalid Kemitzah was placed into a Kli Shares, the Kemitzah may not be redone and the Korban Minchah remains Pasul. According to these Tana'im, how can the flour of the invalid Kemitzah be placed back into the pan with the rest of the flour? That pan itself is a Kli Shares, and when the invalid Kemitzah is placed back into it, the Kemitzah cannot be redone since it was placed into a Kli Shares! In what case does Ben Beseira's ruling -- that one may return the invalid Kemitzah to the pan and redo the Kemitzah -- apply?

Rav Amram answers that Ben Beseira's ruling applies in a case in which the Kemitzah is returned to the side of the pan, where the level of the flour is higher than the wall of the pan, and then it falls on its own into the depression left by its original removal. Since it falls within the walls of the pan by itself, it is not considered to have been consciously placed into a Kli Shares by a Kohen.

Rebbi Yirmeyah says that from the fact that Rav Amram does not answer simply that the case in which Ben Beseira's ruling applies is when one returns the Kemitzah to the pan while it is resting on the ground, it is evident that he maintains that a Kemitzah may be taken from a Kli Shares that is resting on the ground.

Rebbi Yirmeyah's words are difficult to understand. The Gemara has been discussing the type of Kli into which one may place the Kemitzah in order to be Mekadesh it. Why does Rebbi Yirmeyah say that a Kemitzah may be taken from a Kli Shares that is resting on the ground? One cannot answer that the two issues are interdependent, and that if one may take a Kemitzah from a Kli that is on the ground then one may also be Mekadesh a Kemitzah by placing it into a Kli that is on the ground, because, as mentioned above, Rava explicitly states that the two acts are not related.

Moreover, it is obvious from Rava's words that being Mekadesh the Kemitzah in a Kli that is on the ground is a more novel Chidush than taking the Kemitzah from a Kli that is on the ground. Why, then, does Rebbi Yirmeyah mention the lesser Chidush (that one may take the Kemitzah from a Kli that is on the ground) and not the greater Chidush (that one may place the Kemitzah into a Kli that is on the ground in order to be Mekadesh it)? (SEFAS EMES)

ANSWER: The MINCHAS AVRAHAM answers that there is a difference between Rava's ruling with regard to the Kidush of the Kemitzah, and the Gemara's discussion of the Kidush of the Kemitzah. The Gemara refers exclusively to an invalid Kemitzah; it is discussing the question of whether or not placing an invalid Kemitzah into a Kli Shares on the ground completes the Avodah of Kemitzah and makes it irrevocable and unable to be corrected. The Gemara proves that it does finalize the Kemitzah.

In contrast, Rava is discussing a valid Kemitzah, and he is addressing the question of whether or not placing a valid Kemitzah into a Kli Shares on the ground constitutes the valid Avodah of Kabalah of the Kemitzah. An Avodas Kabalah is necessary in order to prepare the Kemitzah for being offered on the Mizbe'ach. Rava derives from the Kabalas ha'Dam that the Kabalah must be done in a Kli Shares that is held in the hands of a Kohen, and not in one that is resting on the ground.

This is why the Gemara here does not say that "this teaches that we may be Mekadesh the Kemitzah in a Kli that is on the ground." Such a statement would be misleading, for it would imply that placing the Kemitzah into a Kli on the ground is an entirely valid Avodas Kabalah for the Kemitzah. This would not necessarily be true; placing the Kemitzah into a Kli on the ground might be valid only with regard to finalizing the Kemitzah process, for which a valid Avodas Kabalah is not necessary. Hence, the Gemara is able to prove only that one may take the Kemitzah from a Kli that is on the ground.

One questions remains. What connection is there between the fact that the Kemitzah process may be completed by placing the Kemitzah into a Kli on the ground, and the fact that one may take the Kemitzah from a Kli on the ground as part of a valid Kemitzah process?

To understand the connection between these two Halachos, it is necessary to analyze the underlying issue behind the question of whether the Kemitzah may be taken from a Kli Shares that is resting on the ground. The Minchas Avraham suggests that the question is whether a Kli Shares that is on the ground retains its status of a Kli Shares. Accordingly, the Gemara's ruling that placing a Kemitzah into a Kli that is on the ground completes the Kemitzah process proves that the Kli is considered a Kli Shares. If it is still considered a Kli Shares, then a Kemitzah may also be taken from it. Taking the Kemitzah from the Kli needs nothing more than the fact that the Kli is a Kli Shares; it is only a preparation for the Avodas ha'Kabalah and it is not an Avodah itself. This is the proof that if returning an invalid Kemitzah to such a Kli completes the Kemitzah process, then a Kemitzah may be taken from such a Kli at the beginning of the Kemitzah process. (Mordechai Zvi Dicker)

QUESTION: The Gemara derives from the verse, "... Min ha'Dam" (Vayikra 4:6), that the Kohen is to perform the Haza'as ha'Dam with the "Dam sheb'Inyan." Rava explains that this means that the Kohen must dip his finger into the Kli and take new blood for the next Haza'ah, and he may not perform the next Haza'ah with the blood that remains on his finger from the previous Haza'ah. The Gemara supports Rava's explanation from the ruling of Rebbi Elazar, who says that the remaining blood on the finger ("Shirayim sheb'Etzba") is Pasul for the next Haza'ah.

The Gemara questions this ruling from a Beraisa that states that when one finishes the Haza'os of the blood of the Parah Adumah, he should wipe his hand on the cow itself to remove the remaining blood. This implies that he must wipe his hand only at the end of the Haza'os, but not between Haza'os, and that the use of the leftover blood for the next Haza'ah is valid.

The question the Gemara asks on the ruling of Rebbi Elazar is very difficult to understand. The Mishnah in Parah (3:9) clearly states that the Kohen must immerse his finger into the blood for every Haza'ah. How can the Gemara here question Rebbi Elazar's ruling that "Shirayim sheb'Etzba" is Pasul based on a Beraisa, when the Mishnah clearly supports his ruling?

ANSWER: The BRISKER RAV answers as follows. The Mishnah in Parah, and the ruling of Rebbi Elazar, are not identical (and one cannot be derived from the other, but they complement each other). The Mishnah teaches that a new Tevilah must be done for each Haza'ah. This is a requirement to perform Tevilah; it is not a restriction on the blood that may be used for the Haza'ah. Therefore, to fulfill the requirement of the Mishnah, it suffices to return the unused blood to the vessel, perform a new Tevilah, and then do the next Haza'ah. As long as the hand with the blood on it goes back into the vessel, it is as if the blood was returned and a new Tevilah was performed. To fulfill this requirement it would not be necessary to wipe off the leftover blood after each Haza'ah. Rebbi Elazar derives from the verse that the leftover blood on the finger is not valid for the next Haza'ah, and thus one may not return that blood to the vessel, even if a new Tevilah is done afterwards. The Tevilah must be done in blood that is entirely valid for Haza'ah, and not in blood that has become Shirayim.

This is why the Mishnah does not provide support for Rebbi Elazar, and why the Gemara's position from the Beraisa stands. The Beraisa shows that it is not necessary to clean off the blood from the finger, even though a new Tevilah definitely is necessary, as is clear from the Mishnah in Parah. This contradicts Rebbi Elazar's words that aside from the new Tevilah that must be done, the old blood must be cleaned off. (Mordechai Zvi Dicker)

QUESTION: The Gemara quotes a Beraisa that states that when the Kohen finishes performing the Haza'os of the blood of the Parah Adumah, he should wipe his hand on the cow itself to remove the remaining blood. This implies that he must wipe his hand only at the end of the Haza'os, but not between Haza'os, and that using the leftover blood for the next Haza'ah is valid. The Gemara explains that the leftover blood is not valid for Haza'ah, and the Beraisa means that when one finishes all of the Haza'os, he must wipe his hand, while between each Haza'ah, he must wipe his finger. On what is he supposed to wipe his finger between each Haza'ah? (See Rashi DH b'Mai Mekane'ach, and see next Insight.) Abaye answers that he is to wipe his finger on the edge of the vessel containing the blood. Abaye derives this from the verse which refers to the vessels as "Keforei Zahav" (Ezra 1:10), implying that they "clean off" ("Mekaper") the blood.

According to the Girsa of our text, the Gemara is discussing the Haza'os of the blood of the Parah Adumah. The RAMBAM, however, records this Halachah with regard to the Haza'os performed on the Mizbe'ach ha'Penimi (Hilchos Ma'aseh ha'Korbanos 5:8). The Rambam writes, "When he finishes placing the blood on the corner [of the Mizbe'ach], he is to wipe his finger on the edge of the vessel, and afterwards he is to immerse his hand a second time [into the blood inside the vessel], because the blood that remains on his finger is disqualified from being placed on another corner [of the Mizbe'ach]."

It seems that the Rambam has a different Girsa in the Gemara (see SHITAH MEKUBETZES #16). Instead of the word, "Etzba'o b'Mai Mekane'ach," the Rambam's Gemara reads, "Bifnim b'Mai Mekane'ach." That is, the Gemara is asking that when the Haza'os of blood are done inside the Heichal, where is the Kohen supposed to wipe off the blood from his hand? Abaye answers that he is to wipe his hand on the edge of the vessel.

There is another difference between the way the Rambam learns the Gemara and the way that Rashi learns it. Rashi learns that the Shirayim of blood on the finger is Pasul and must be discarded. Since the Kohen has no other place to wipe the blood, he is to wipe it on the edge of the vessel, and thus the vessel is referred to as "Keforei Zahav." The Rambam, however, mentions that the Shirayim of blood on the finger "is disqualified from being placed on another corner [of the Mizbe'ach]." The BRISKER RAV infers from this wording that the Rambam maintains that the blood is disqualified only from being used for another Haza'ah, but it is valid with regard to the law that the remaining blood must be poured on the Yesod of the Mizbe'ach. That is, the blood leftover on the Kohen's hand is identical to the blood leftover in the vessel after the Haza'os. Accordingly, the purpose of wiping off the blood on the edge of the vessel is not to discard it (as Rashi learns), but rather to store it temporarily until the Haza'os are finished, at which time it is poured on the Yesod together with the rest of the Shirayim in the vessel. The term "Keforei Zahav," therefore, is not merely a descriptive term that refers to the convenient cleaning property of the vessel. Rather, it is the name of the vessel itself, and it describes the purpose of the vessel as a temporary storage place for the Shirayim on the finger and as a preparation for pouring it onto the Yesod. (MINCHAS AVRAHAM) (Mordechai Zvi Dicker)

QUESTION: The Gemara quotes a Beraisa that states that when the Kohen finishes performing the Haza'os of the blood of the Parah Adumah, he should wipe his hand on the cow itself to remove the remaining blood. This implies that he must wipe his hand only at the end of the Haza'os, but not between Haza'os, and that using the leftover blood for the next Haza'ah is valid. The Gemara explains that the leftover blood is not valid for Haza'ah, and the Beraisa means that when one finishes all of the Haza'os, he must wipe his hand, while between each Haza'ah, he must wipe his finger. On what is he supposed to wipe his finger between each Haza'ah? Abaye answers that he is to wipe his finger on the edge of the vessel containing the blood. Abaye derives this from the verse which refers to the vessels as "Keforei Zahav" (Ezra 1:10), implying that they "clean off" ("Mekaper") the blood.

RASHI (DH b'Mai Mekane'ach) explains that the reason why the Kohen cannot wipe his finger on the body of the cow between each Haza'ah, just as he wipes his hand at the end of all of the Haza'os, is that it is not practical to require that the Kohen descend from Har ha'Mishchah (the Mount of Olives, where the blood is sprinkled towards Yerushalayim) between each Haza'ah in order to wipe his finger on the cow that is at the bottom of the mountain, and then return to Har ha'Mishchah to perform the next Haza'ah.

However, as TOSFOS (DH Ela Etzba'o) points out, Rashi in Zevachim (93b, DH ba'Meh Yekane'ach) gives an entirely different reason for why the Kohen may not wipe his finger on the body of the cow. Rashi there explains that if he would wipe his finger on the Parah between the Haza'os, then hairs from the Parah would become stuck to his fingers and cause a separation between his finger and the blood that needs to be sprinkled.

Why does Rashi give two different explanations for why the Kohen cannot wipe his finger on the body of the cow between each Haza'ah?

ANSWER: RAV YAAKOV D. HOMNICK explains that the difference in Rashi's explanation is based on a fundamental difference between the way that the Gemara in Menachos understands the nature of the leftover blood (Shirayim) of the Haza'os, and the way that the Gemara in Zevachim understands it.

This difference is evident from another apparent contradiction in the words of Rashi in these two Sugyos. In Zevachim, Rashi (DH Mekane'ach Yado) says that the reason why the blood must be wiped off of the hand (onto the cow) at the end of the Haza'os is that the blood must be burned together with the Parah Adumah. Rashi in Menachos, however, makes no mention (in DH Gamar) of this requirement to burn the leftover blood.

It is apparent that Rashi understands that according to the Gemara in Zevachim, the leftover blood of each Haza'ah loses its status as blood designated for Haza'ah, and it returns to its status as ordinary blood of the Parah Adumah (which, consequently, must be burned together with the rest of the cow).

In contrast, the Gemara here in Menachos maintains that the leftover blood of each Haza'ah retains its status as blood designated for Haza'ah. Once the blood has been removed from the vessel for the sake of Haza'ah, it loses its status as ordinary blood of the Parah Adumah and is no longer subject to the requirement that it be burned together with the rest of the cow, even when it later becomes Shirayim. Rather, it is considered Shirayim of blood used for Haza'ah. The reason why the blood leftover on the Kohen's hand after all of the Haza'os is wiped on the cow is not that the blood itself needs to be burned with the cow, but rather it is wiped on the cow merely to clean the Kohen's fingers and to treat the blood in a respectful manner, since blood that was designated for Haza'ah should not be discarded disrespectfully. Similarly, the wiping of the blood from the Kohen's finger on the edge of the vessel between each Haza'ah is done merely to clean off the blood in a respectful manner. It is not done in order to perform any additional Avodah with the blood. (For this reason, Rashi in Menachos (DH b'Sefas Mizrak) comments merely that the vessel is called "Keforei Zahav" because he cleans his hand on it, while in Zevachim, Rashi (DH Keforei Zahav) adds that the vessel is "a Kli Shares," alluding to the fact that the blood is placed on the edge of the vessel because it still must be used for another Avodah (the burning of the Parah Adumah), and it must be transported with a Kli Shares.)

This also explains why Rashi gives a different reason in each Sugya for why the Kohen cannot wipe his finger on the cow after each Haza'ah. The Gemara in Menachos maintains that since no additional requirement needs to be fulfilled with the leftover blood in order to prepare it for an Avodah, but rather the blood merely needs to be wiped off (so that it not get mixed with the blood that is valid for Haza'ah) in a respectful manner, it is clear that the Kohen is not required to descend the mountain in order to wipe off his finger on the cow. However, the Gemara in Zevachim maintains that wiping off the blood from the finger is done not merely to clean off the blood, but rather it is done in order to prepare the blood for being burned with the Parah Adumah. Accordingly, the Kohen should be required to descend the mountain between each Haza'ah and wipe the Shirayim-blood off of his finger onto the body of the Parah Adumah in order to prepare the blood to be burned together with the Parah Adumah! However, as Rashi explains in Zevachim, there is a different reason why the Kohen should not wipe his finger on the cow between each Haza'ah: in order to prevent his finger from becoming soiled with the hairs of the cow.

(As for why Rashi understands that the Gemara in Zevachim and the Gemara in Menachos disagree about the nature of the blood that remains after the Haza'os, see personal correspondence of Rav Yaakov D. HOMNICK for an extensive explanation of the Sugya.)