## Menachot Daf 41a

###### Menachot 41a:1
[Menachot 41a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/41a:1)

וְהַגָּדוֹל יוֹצֵא בָּהּ דֶּרֶךְ עֲרַאי – חַיֶּיבֶת בְּצִיצִית, אֵין הַקָּטָן מִתְכַּסֶּה בּוֹ רֹאשׁוֹ וְרוּבּוֹ, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהַגָּדוֹל יוֹצֵא בָּהּ עֲרַאי – פְּטוּרָה, וְכֵן לְעִנְיַן כִּלְאַיִם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**and an adult goes out** in public **on occasion** while wearing **it,** it is **required** to have **ritual fringes.** But if it is **not** large enough for **a minor** to **cover his head and most of his** body **with** it, then **even if an adult goes out** in public **on occasion** while wearing **it,** it is **exempt** from ritual fringes. **And so too with regard to diverse kinds,** i.e., the prohibition against wearing wool and linen together.


###### Menachot 41a:2
[Menachot 41a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/41a:2)

וְהָוֵינַן בַּהּ: מַאי ״וְכֵן לְעִנְיַן כִּלְאַיִם״? אִילֵּימָא וְכֵן לְעִנְיַן אִיסּוּרָא דְכִלְאַיִם, וְהָא אֲנַן תְּנַן: אֵין עֲרַאי בְּכִלְאַיִם!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And we discussed it: What** is meant by: **And so too with regard to diverse kinds? If we say** that it means: **And so too with regard to the prohibition of diverse kinds,** that if a minor could not cover the majority of his head and body with it, the prohibition of diverse kinds does not apply, that is difficult: **But didn’t we learn** in a mishna (*Kilayim* 9:2): **There is no** exemption **with regard to** the prohibition of **diverse kinds** for clothing that an adult would not wear even **occasionally** in public?


###### Menachot 41a:3
[Menachot 41a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/41a:3)

וְאָמַר רַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק: וְכֵן לְעִנְיַן סָדִין בְּצִיצִית.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak says** in explanation: Rather, the *baraita* means: **And so too with regard to** whether a linen **cloak** is required **to** have **ritual fringes.** If the cloak is large enough for a minor to cover his head and most of his body with it, then it requires ritual fringes, and wearing the garment with the ritual fringes is not a violation of the prohibition of diverse kinds. But if the garment is smaller than that, it is prohibited to place ritual fringes on it, due to the prohibition of diverse kinds. Therefore, one cannot explain Shmuel’s statement to mean that a cloak that is exempt from ritual fringes because it is too small is not subject to the prohibition of diverse kinds.


###### Menachot 41a:4
[Menachot 41a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/41a:4)

אֶלָּא מַאי פְּטוּרָה – הֵטִיל לַמּוּטֶלֶת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather, what** is meant by the statement that a cloak that is **exempt** from ritual fringes is not subject to the prohibition of diverse kinds? It is referring to where one **affixed** ritual fringes **to** a garment that already had ritual fringes **affixed** to it. Even though the second set of ritual fringes is superfluous, nevertheless there is no violation of the prohibition of diverse kinds.


###### Menachot 41a:5
[Menachot 41a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/41a:5)

וְהָא אַמְרַהּ רַבִּי זֵירָא חֲדָא זִימְנָא? חֲדָא מִכְּלָל דַּחֲבֶירְתָּהּ אִיתְּמַר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But didn’t Rabbi Zeira** already **say this one time** when he stated that if one attached ritual fringes to a garment that already had ritual fringes attached to it and he then removed the first set of strings, the garment is fit? The Gemara answers: **One was stated from the other by inference,** and Rabbi Zeira did not state both statements.


###### Menachot 41a:6
[Menachot 41a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/41a:6)

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: טַלִּית כְּפוּלָה חַיֶּיבֶת בְּצִיצִית, וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן פּוֹטֵר, וְשָׁוִין שֶׁאִם כְּפָלָהּ וּתְפָרָהּ – שֶׁחַיֶּיבֶת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **The Sages taught** in a *baraita*: A very long **cloak that is folded** in half is **required** to have **ritual fringes** at the fold. **And Rabbi Shimon deems** it **exempt** from ritual fringes at the fold because that is not where the corners of the garment are located. **And** Rabbi Shimon and the Rabbis **agree that if he folded it and sewed it,** it is **required** to have ritual fringes at the fold.


###### Menachot 41a:7
[Menachot 41a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/41a:7)

תְּפָרָהּ, פְּשִׁיטָא! לָא צְרִיכָא דְּנַקְטַהּ בְּסִיכֵּי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara challenges: If one **sewed it,** it is **obvious** that it is required to have ritual fringes at the fold. The Gemara explains: **No,** it is **necessary** to state this *halakha* because it is referring to a case **where he fastened it with pins** rather than sewing it in the conventional manner.


###### Menachot 41a:8
[Menachot 41a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/41a:8)

רַבָּה בַּר הוּנָא אִיקְּלַע לְבֵי רָבָא בַּר רַב נַחְמָן, חַזְיֵיהּ דַּהֲוָה מִיכַּסֵּי טַלִּית כְּפוּלָה, וּרְמֵי לֵיהּ חוּטֵי עִילָּוֵי כְּפֵילָא. אִיפְּשִׁיטָא, וַאֲתָא חוּטָא וְקָם לַהֲדֵי רֵישֵׁיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara relates that **Rabba bar Huna arrived at the house of Rava bar Rav Naḥman,** and **he saw that** Rava bar Rav Naḥman **was wearing a cloak that was folded and** that he had **affixed strings to it on** the corners of **the fold.** The cloak **unfolded, and the string** that had been on the corner of the fold now **came and settled near his head,** i.e., in the middle of the cloak, as the two sides of the cloak were in the front and back of Rava bar Rav Naḥman.


###### Menachot 41a:9
[Menachot 41a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/41a:9)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: לָאו הַיְינוּ כָּנָף דִּכְתַב רַחֲמָנָא בְּאוֹרָיְיתָא! אֲתָא שַׁדְיַיהּ, אִיכַּסִּי גְּלִימָא אַחֲרִיתִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rabba bar Huna **said to** Rava bar Rav Naḥman: **This is not** the **corner** of the garment **that the Merciful One writes** about **in the Torah.** Rava bar Rav Naḥman **went** and **threw it off,** and **he covered himself** with **a different cloak.**


###### Menachot 41a:10
[Menachot 41a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/41a:10)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: מִי סָבְרַתְּ חוֹבַת גַּבְרָא הוּא? חוֹבַת טַלִּית הוּא, זִיל רְמִי לַהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rabba bar Huna **said to** Rava bar Rav Naḥman: **Do you hold** that ritual fringes are **an obligation** incumbent upon **the man?** That is not so. Rather, **it is an obligation** that pertains to every **cloak** that one owns. Therefore, **go** and **affix** ritual fringes **to it** properly.


###### Menachot 41a:11
[Menachot 41a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/41a:11)

לֵימָא מְסַיַּיע לֵיהּ: חֲסִידִים הָרִאשׁוֹנִים, כֵּיוָן שֶׁאָרְגוּ בָּהּ שָׁלֹשׁ – הָיוּ מְטִילִין בָּהּ תְּכֵלֶת. שָׁאנֵי חֲסִידִים, דְּמַחְמְרִי אַנַּפְשַׁיְיהוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests: **Let us say** that a *baraita* **supports** the opinion of Rabba bar Huna: It is told of **the early** generations of **pious** men that **once they weaved three** fingerbreadths **of** the length of the garment, **they would affix** the white and **sky-blue** strings **to** the first two corners, even though the garment was not yet ready to be worn. This seems to prove that there is an obligation to affix ritual fringes to all the cloaks in one’s possession, even if he is not currently wearing them. The Gemara rejects this proof: The **pious** men were **different, as they would act stringently with themselves.** Therefore, one cannot adduce the actual requirement from their behavior.


###### Menachot 41a:12
[Menachot 41a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/41a:12)

וּפְלִיגָא דְּמַלְאֲכָא, דְּמַלְאֲכָא אַשְׁכְּחֵיהּ לְרַב קַטִּינָא דְּמִיכַּסֵּי סְדִינָא, אֲמַר לֵיהּ: קַטִּינָא, קַטִּינָא! סְדִינָא בְּקַיְיטָא וְסַרְבָּלָא בְּסִיתְוָא, צִיצִית שֶׁל תְּכֵלֶת מָה תְּהֵא עָלֶיהָ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara notes that this **disagrees with** what **an angel** said. **As an angel found Rav Ketina when he was wearing** a linen **cloak,** which is exempt from ritual fringes. The angel **said to him: Ketina, Ketina,** if you wear a linen **cloak in the summer and a coat [*sarbela*],** which has only two corners and is therefore also exempt from ritual fringes, **in the winter, what will become of** the **ritual fringes of sky-blue wool?** As a result, you will never fulfill the mitzva.


###### Menachot 41a:13
[Menachot 41a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/41a:13)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: עָנְשִׁיתוּ אַעֲשֵׂה? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: בִּזְמַן דְּאִיכָּא רִיתְחָא עָנְשִׁינַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rav Ketina **said to him: Do you punish** us even **for** failing to fulfill **a positive mitzva?** The angel **said to him: At a time when there is** divine **anger** and judgment, **we punish** even for the failure to fulfill a positive mitzva.


###### Menachot 41a:14
[Menachot 41a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/41a:14)

אִי אָמְרַתְּ בִּשְׁלָמָא חוֹבַת גַּבְרָא הוּא – הַיְינוּ דְּמִחַיַּיב דְּלָא קָא רָמֵי, אֶלָּא אִי אָמְרַתְּ חוֹבַת טַלִּית הוּא – הָא לָא מִיחַיְּיבָא!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara attempts to draw conclusions from the statement of the angel: **Granted, if you say** that the mitzva of ritual fringes **is an obligation** incumbent upon the **man, that is** why Rav Ketina would be **deemed liable** at a time of divine anger, **as he did not affix** ritual fringes to his cloak and thereby neglected the obligation incumbent upon him. **But if you say** that it **is an obligation** to attach them to every **cloak** that one owns, since Rav Ketina’s cloaks were not required to have ritual fringes, **he was not obligated** to attach ritual fringes to them. Why should he be punished in a time of divine anger?


###### Menachot 41a:15
[Menachot 41a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/41a:15)

אֶלָּא מַאי חוֹבַת גַּבְרָא הוּא? נְהִי דְּחַיְּיבֵיהּ רַחֲמָנָא כִּי מִיכַּסֵּי טַלִּית דְּבַת חִיּוּבָא, כִּי מִיכַּסֵּי טַלִּית דְּלָאו בַּת חִיּוּבָא הִיא, מִי חַיְּיבֵיהּ רַחֲמָנָא?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara responds: **Rather, what** should one assume, that **it is an obligation** incumbent upon the **man?** Even so, **granted that the Merciful One rendered him obligated when he is wearing a cloak that** has four corners and is therefore **subject to the obligation** of ritual fringes, but **when he is wearing a cloak that is not subject to the obligation** of ritual fringes, **did the Merciful One deem him obligated?**


###### Menachot 41a:16
[Menachot 41a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/41a:16)

אֶלָּא הָכִי קָאָמַר לֵיהּ: טַצְדְּקֵי לְמִיפְטַר נַפְשָׁךְ מִצִּיצִית?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather, this** is what the angel **is saying to** Rav Ketina: Are you seeking **ploys [*tatzdeki*] to exempt yourself from** performing the mitzva of **ritual fringes?**


###### Menachot 41a:17
[Menachot 41a:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/41a:17)

אָמַר רַב טוֹבִי בַּר קִיסְנָא אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: כְּלֵי קוּפְסָא חַיָּיבִין בְּצִיצִית, וּמוֹדֶה שְׁמוּאֵל בְּזָקֵן שֶׁעֲשָׂאָהּ לִכְבוֹדוֹ שֶׁפְּטוּרָה. מַאי טַעְמָא? ״אֲשֶׁר תְּכַסֶּה בָּהּ״ אָמַר רַחֲמָנָא, הַאי לָאו לְאִיכַּסּוֹיֵי עֲבִידָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Tovi bar Kisna says** that **Shmuel says: Garments** that are not being worn but are stored in **a box are required** to have **ritual fringes,** because the mitzva pertains to the garment, not the man. **But Shmuel concedes in** the case of **an old man, where** the garment **was made** as a shroud **in his honor, that** the shroud is **exempt. What is the reason** for this? **The Merciful One states** in the Torah that one must place ritual fringes on the corners of garments **“with which you cover yourself”** (Deuteronomy 22:12). **This** shroud **is not made for** the purpose of **covering** oneself.


###### Menachot 41a:18
[Menachot 41a:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/41a:18)

בְּהָהִיא שַׁעְתָּא, וַדַּאי רָמֵינַן לֵיהּ, מִשּׁוּם ״לֹעֵג לָרָשׁ חֵרֵף עֹשֵׂהוּ״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara comments: **At that time,** i.e., a person’s burial, **we certainly affix** ritual fringes **to** the shroud, **because** otherwise it would be a violation of: **“Whoever mocks the poor blasphemes his Maker”** (Proverbs 17:5). If we did not place them, it would be mocking the deceased, as if to taunt him that now he is no longer obligated in mitzvot.


###### Menachot 41a:19
[Menachot 41a:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/41a:19)

אָמַר רַחֲבָה אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה: טַלִּית שֶׁנִּקְרְעָה חוּץ לְשָׁלֹשׁ – יִתְפּוֹר, תּוֹךְ שָׁלֹשׁ – לֹא יִתְפּוֹר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **Raḥava says** that **Rabbi Yehuda says:** In the case of **a cloak that became torn** at one of its corners, if it was torn **beyond three** fingerbreadths from the edge of the garment, one **may sew** it. But if it was torn **within three** fingerbreadths of the edge of the garment, then one **may not sew** it. There is a concern that he might use the thread with which he sewed the garment for the ritual fringes, in which case the strings would be unfit due to the principle: Prepare it, and not from what has already been prepared.


###### Menachot 41a:20
[Menachot 41a:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/41a:20)

תַּנְיָא נָמֵי הָכִי: טַלִּית שֶׁנִּקְרְעָה, חוּץ לְשָׁלֹשׁ – יִתְפּוֹר, תּוֹךְ שָׁלֹשׁ – רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר: לֹא יִתְפּוֹר, וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: יִתְפּוֹר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara comments: **This** *halakha* **is also taught** in a *baraita*: In the case of **a cloak that became torn** at one of its corners, if it was torn **beyond three** fingerbreadths from the edge of the garment, one **may sew** it. But if it was torn **within three** fingerbreadths of the edge of the garment, **Rabbi Meir says:** One **may not sew** it. **And the Rabbis say:** One **may sew** it.


###### Menachot 41a:21
[Menachot 41a:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/41a:21)

וְשָׁוִין שֶׁלֹּא יָבִיא אֲפִילּוּ אַמָּה עַל אַמָּה מִמָּקוֹם אַחֵר וּבָהּ תְּכֵלֶת, וְתוֹלֶה בָּהּ. וְשָׁוִין שֶׁמֵּבִיא תְּכֵלֶת מִמָּקוֹם אַחֵר וְתוֹלֶה בָּהּ,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** Rabbi Meir and the Rabbis **agree that one may not bring** a piece of cloth, **even** if it is **a square cubit** in size, **from elsewhere, containing** white and **sky-blue** strings, **and attach** it **to** a cloak. This is because one must attach the ritual fringes directly to the corner of the garment, rather than attaching them to a piece of cloth and then attaching that cloth to the garment. **And** Rabbi Meir and the Rabbis also **agree that one may bring** white or **sky-blue** strings **from elsewhere and attach** them **to** the garment, i.e., one may remove strings from one garment in order to attach them to another garment.