A Yissachar / Zebulun Partnership in Loving Memory of Yishak ben Simcha A"H & Felicia bat Miriam A"H
Rabbi Eli Mansour

Daf Yomi

Meilah 15A - 15B (12th Cycle Daf Yomi Shiur)

Lectured by Rabbi Eli Mansour

Published
April 14, 2008
Duration
39:28

This transcript was auto-generated and polished for readability. While we aim for accuracy, errors may occur. If you notice a mistake, please click to submit corrections.

The Eddie B Sit Edition, an audio series dedicated to the study of Talmud Bavli, presents a session focused on Masechet Meilah. This particular learning is dedicated by Mr. Chaim Dana, a valued member of our community, who is blessed with the prayer for a complete recovery for Rav Chaim ben Simcha. We invoke the divine presence to grant him healing of both body and soul, and may his recovery be imminent. We also express our hopes for success, health, and happiness for Mr. Dana and his family, now and forever.

Today, we delve into Daf Tes Vav, studying the first amud of this daf as we enter the new chapter, Perek Revi'i. Our exploration begins with the Mishnah, which states: “Kodshei mizbeach mitztarfin zeh im zeh l'meilah.” This means that the sacrificial items designated for the altar can combine with one another to incur the liability of meilah (benefiting from sacred items). This is distinct from other types of sacrifices.

When one benefits from a portion of one sacrificial item and a portion of another, these can be combined to reach the minimum measure required for meilah, which is the value of a shaveh prutah. According to the commentary, if one benefits from sacred items of the altar valued at half a prutah from one and half a prutah from another, these amounts combine to constitute a liability for meilah.

However, Tosafot presents a differing view, suggesting that the measure for meilah is a kezayit. They contend that while the benefit is indeed measured by a shaveh prutah, when it involves eating, the measure should be a kezayit. This leads to a machloket regarding whether the combination for meilah is determined by a kezayit or a shaveh prutah.

Furthermore, the Mishnah discusses liability for cases of pigul, notar, and tamei. All types of sacrifices can combine to incur these liabilities as well. For example, if one consumes a half-kezayit from one sacrifice and a half-kezayit from another, they can be held liable for these prohibitions even if they are not from the same sacrifice.

The Mishnah continues, stating that Kodshei bedek habayit items, which are designated for the maintenance of the Temple, can also combine for the purposes of meilah. However, it is important to note that pigul does not apply to these items, as they do not possess the same sanctity as sacrificial offerings. The commentary clarifies that Kodshei bedek habayit are sanctified for their monetary value, not as sacrifices.

Moreover, the Mishnah emphasizes that both Kodshei mizbeach and Kodshei bedek habayit can combine with each other to create a liability for meilah, but not for other prohibitions like pigul, notar, or tamei, which do not apply to Kodshei bedek habayit.

In discussing the concept of tziruf, the Gemara raises a question regarding the necessity of distinguishing between Kodshei mizbeach and Kodshei bedek habayit. It suggests that even though one is dealing with different types of sanctity—one being physical and the other monetary—both can combine for the purpose of meilah.

As the discussion continues, Rabbi Yannai introduces a significant chiddush, positing that liability for meilah only applies to Kodshei bedek habayit and korban olah. According to him, only these items, which are entirely dedicated to Hashem, incur meilah, while other offerings, like korban shelamim, which allow for human benefit, do not.

The Gemara questions Rabbi Yannai's reasoning, citing the scriptural basis for understanding meilah. It notes that the verse specifically refers to sacred items dedicated to Hashem, implying that other offerings may also incur meilah under certain conditions. This leads to a deeper examination of the sources and interpretations surrounding the laws of meilah.

Ultimately, the discussion highlights the need for precise definitions and distinctions within halachic discourse, particularly regarding the application of meilah to various types of sacred items. The Gemara concludes that further exploration of the scriptural sources is necessary to clarify which items indeed incur liability for meilah.

As we progress through the daf, we will continue to unravel these complex halachic principles, ensuring that we maintain clarity and precision in our understanding of the laws surrounding meilah and the sanctity of offerings to Hashem.