Commentary for Menachot 55:18

ומאי שנא משאר מיני מתכות פסולים דכתיב כסף והויה מן הגרוטאות נמי מקשה והויה מיעט רחמנא גבי מנורה מקשה היא היא ולא חצוצרות

But if you hold that if made out of scraps it is valid and if out of other metals it is invalid, what use then will you make of the repetition of the terms 'gold' and 'beaten work'?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The force of the argument centres around the term 'beaten work' which is used four times in connection with the candlestick: twice in Ex. XXV (in vv. 31 and 36) and twice in Num: VIII, 4. If it is held that it is invalid if made out of scraps, then this term was stated twice to indicate that this condition was indispensable, and on two more occasions for the purposes given in the following exposition. If, however, it is valid if made out of scraps, then at least in one instance this term is superfluous. V. Sh. Mek a.l.');">¹⁸</span> What is the exposition [referred to]? - It was taught: Of a talent of pure gold shall it be made, with all these vessels:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ex. ibid. 39.');">¹⁹</span>

Explore commentary for Menachot 55:18. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.