Daf 49 — Menachos 49 Summary

Menachos 49 – Good Morning Raboisai Switching Sheep and Rams – What Counts as Akirah? We begin with a case from the Korbanos of Shavuos. On Shavuos there are: • שני כבשי עצרת (sheep – שלמים ) • שני אילים (rams – עולות ) What if the Kohen: • Grabbed the correct sheep, • But in his mind thought they were the rams? Or the reverse — he grabbed sheep but intended them as אילים ? If he: • Took sheep, • Shechted sheep, • And intended them לשם קרבן שְׁתֵּי הַלֶּחֶּם (Shavuos), Even if he mistakenly thought they were אילים , the korban remains valid. Why? Because the physical act matched the required korban. Akirah b’Shogeg – Does Mistaken Uprooting Count? Now we enter the core sugya: If someone uproots a korban’s identity by mistake ( שוגג ), is that considered a real עקירה ? Case: He thought the sheep were אילים and shechted them as עולות . If he had known the truth, he would not have done so. Is this mistaken intention considered valid עקירה or not? Rav Chisda suggests: Yes — even mistaken uprooting may count. Rabba argues: No — עקירה בטעות is not real עקירה . Proof from Pigul We attempt to prove from Pigul: If a Kohen performs shechitah with intent to eat the korban beyond its permitted time, even mistakenly, the korban becomes pigul. So we see that mistaken intention can affect status. The Gemara answers: There, he deliberately intended improper timing. His mistake was only halachic (he thought it was permitted). That is not true שוגג — it is deliberate intent based on incorrect halachic understanding. Therefore, no proof regarding עקירה בטעות . Proof from Minchah If a Kohen performs קמיצה on one type of מנחה but verbally calls it another type (e.g., מחבת vs מרחשת ), the korban remains valid. Why? Because the physical form of the מנחה is visible. Unlike animals — where shechitah looks identical — a מנחה ’s type is obvious. Thus: Verbal mislabeling cannot uproot something visible and concrete. Again, no proof for עקירה בטעות . Tamid and Musaf – Which Takes Priority? We now shift to a new sugya. The Tamid (daily offering) and Musaf (additional Shabbos/Yom Tov offering) do not invalidate one another. But if you only have one animal: Do you bring today’s Musaf, or save the animal for tomorrow’s Tamid? On the same day: • Tamid precedes Musaf. • Because תדיר ושאינו תדיר — תדיר קודם . But what about: Today’s Musaf vs Tomorrow’s Tamid? The Gemara concludes: There is no absolute preference stated here. Nothing Before the Tamid We know the rule: העולה — עולה ראשונה Nothing precedes the Tamid in the morning. Nothing follows the Tamid in the afternoon. That rule applies when both are available. But our case is scarcity — only one korban can be brought. Checking the Tamid for Four Days Every Tamid animal had to be inspected for four days before offering. From the pasuk: תשמרו להקריב לי במועדו This parallels Korban Pesach: והיה לכם למשמרת Just as Pesach is watched four days, so too the Tamid. This inspection is not just practical — it is a halachic requirement. Why Six Animals Must Always Be Ready Because: • Each day requires two Tamid offerings. • Each must be pre - inspected for four days. At any given time, six animals must already be in the inspection pipeline. For example: If Shabbos and two days of Rosh Hashanah occur consecutively, you need enough pre - checked animals for three full days. Thus: The Beis HaMikdash maintained a rotation system — animals in various stages of four - day inspection. Yesodos of the Daf • עקירה בטעות may not constitute true עקירה . • Pigul requires deliberate intent. • מנחה differs because its identity is visible. • Tamid precedes Musaf on the same day. • Nothing precedes or follows the Tamid. • Tamid requires four - day inspection. • The Mikdash maintained a rolling system of prepared animals. Ilui Nishmas Imi Morosi Ruth Bas Harav Menachem Mendel