We addressed this issue in our Insights to the Daf. You will find a copy of our answers below.

Best wishes,

M. Kornfeld

=================

3) THE "KANIM" ATOP THE "LECHEM HA'PANIM"

QUESTION: Rebbi Chanina and Rebbi Yochanan argue about the form in which the Lechem ha'Panim are made. Rebbi Chanina says that they are made in the form of a "Teivah Perutzah." Rebbi Yochanan says that they are made in the form of a "Sefinah Rokedes." The Gemara asks a number of questions on the opinion of Rebbi Yochanan. One of the questions is that the Mishnah later (96a) teaches that three golden, half-tube rods were placed atop each loaf of the Lechem ha'Panim. These rods supported the loaf that was placed on top of them, and they made a space between the loaves, allowing air to circulate between them. The Gemara asks that if the loaves were shaped like a "Sefinah Rokedes," then how could three rods be placed on each one? The shape of the bread does not allow for more than one rod to be placed on the loaf! (See Row #4 in Graphic #6, "The Lechem ha'Panim.")

It is evident from the Gemara that the Kanim were supported by the bread. This is also evident from the Gemara later (97a) which teaches that only two Kanim were placed below the highest tier of loaves, while three Kanim were placed beneath the other tiers. The Gemara there says that the reason for this difference is that the highest tier was supporting much less weight, and thus two Kanim sufficed. It is clear from that statement that the Kanim between the lower tiers supported not only the loaves immediately above them, but also all of the tiers of loaves above that tier. Accordingly, the Kanim between the loaves must have been supported by the loaves themselves, and not by any other support that was not resting on the loaves.

How can this be reconciled with the Mishnah and Gemara later (96a) that state that there were golden Senifin, panels, that were "branched at their heads" which served to support the loaves? This implies that the Kanim that supported each loaf rested on the Senifin, and not on the loaves! (TOSFOS DH k'Min)

ANSWERS:

(a) TOSFOS (DH d'Samchei) suggests that the Senifin did not support the Kanim at all. When the Mishnah says that they supported the loaves, this means that they only provided support to the sides of the loaves to prevent them from being crushed under the weight of the upper loaves. The Kanim between the tiers, though, were supported by the loaves alone. What does the Mishnah mean when it says that the Kanim were "Mefutzalim k'Min Dukranim," branched like bamboo shoots? Tosfos explains that the word "Mefutzalim" does not mean "branched," as it means in other places (Yoma 29a, Chulin 59b). Rather, it means "indented" or "peeled" (see RASHI to Bereishis 30:37).

Tosfos explains that the Senifin covered the entire face of the bread on each side of the Shulchan (see Row #3 in Graphic #6). The Kanim that protruded from between the loaves prevented the Senifin from touching the faces of the loaves. In order to accommodate the Kanim, grooves were made on the inner side of the Senifin into which the Kanim protruded, while the remainder of the Senifin pressed directly against the loaves.

According to Tosfos, the grooves which accommodated the Kanim apparently did not provide support for the Kanim (that is, the weight of the Kanim did not rest on them), and thus the Kanim had to rest on the loaves. Why, though, were the Kanim not placed to rest on the Senifin, if doing so would give more support to the loaves?

Tosfos writes that it is possible that the Senifin did not reach past the top of the first tier of loaves (see following Insight.) Perhaps the lowest Kanim *did* rest on the Senifin (in the grooves, or "Pitzulim"). However, the upper Kanim had to rest on the loaves, since the Senifin did not reach that high. (See also Tosfos to 96b, DH Misgarto.)

(b) However, RASHI (here, 96a, and in Shemos 25:29) writes that the Kanim indeed rested on the Senifin. This is also the opinion of RABEINU GERSHOM (here, and 97a, DH Mefutzalim). This is also the opinion of the RASH and RA'AVAD (Toras Kohanim, Parshas Emor, 18:4). Why, then, was it necessary for the loaves on bottom to support to the Kanim?

TOSFOS (DH k'Min) explains that even according to Rashi, who says that the Kanim were supported at their ends by the Senifin, it was also necessary to provide support in the middle of each Kaneh in order to prevent it from cracking in the middle. Thus, the ends of each Kaneh rested on the Senifin, while the center of each Kaneh rested on the loaf.

If the loaves supported the center of the Kanim, then why was it necessary for the Senifin to support the ends? The loaves should support the entire weight of the Kanim! The answer seems to be that the weight of the upper tiers would have crushed the lower loaves had the Senifin not given partial support to the Kanim. Thus, the Senifin alleviated the burden on the lower loaves.

I understood the term "d'Magbah Lei Purta" to mean that the *rods* lifted up the *bread* a bit. (Not that the *person* lifted the *rod* above the bread a bit, as you understood.)

Best wishes,

M. Kornfeld