QUESTION: The Mishnah states that when a person dedicates one, two, or five Lugin of wine to be used as Nesachim, his words are meaningless, because the amounts brought for Nesachim of Korbanos are either three Lugin (for a sheep), four Lugin (for a ram), or six (for a bull). An amount larger than these may be used for the Nesachim for a combination of Korbanos (for example, seven would be used for one sheep and one ram; see RASHI DH Ein Misnadvin).

TOSFOS (DH Ein Misnadvin) asks that this law seems to contradict the law of the Mishnah earlier. The Mishnah earlier (103a) states that when a person dedicates a half-Isaron of flour as a Minchah, he is obligated to bring a whole Isaron. If he dedicates one and a half Esronim, he must bring two. Why, for Nesachim, does his mistake invalidate his pledge, while it does not invalidate his pledge for Menachos, but rather it requires him to bring the next possible amount?

(a) TOSFOS answers as follows. If a person would pledge to bring, for example, one Log of Nesachim by saying "Harei Alai" -- "it is upon me [an obligation to bring]" (as he says in the case of a Minchah in the previous Mishnah), he indeed would have to bring the next amount, which is that of the Nesachim of a sheep. Since the person obligated himself to bring Nesachim, his obligation is moved up to the appropriate level. However, the Mishnah here refers to a person who has a specific amount of Nesachim in front of him and he declares, "Harei Elu Nesachim" -- "these are Nesachim." Since the amount in front of him is not a proper amount for Nesachim, they cannot be called Nesachim.

Tosfos notes that RASHI (DH Yesh Keva) obviously does not agree with this distinction, because Rashi explains that the Gemara's question refers to a case of "Harei Alai," and not "Harei Elu."

(b) The LECHEM MISHNEH (Hilchos Ma'aseh ha'Korbanos 17:14) answers that in the case of a Minchah in the previous Mishnah, the person says that he wants to bring a "Minchah" of a half-Isaron. He clearly wants to bring a Minchah offering, as indicated by his words, but he does not know that he cannot bring a half-Isaron as a Minchah. When he clarifies his intent (see Insights to 103a), he is told that he must bring a whole Isaron. In contrast, when a person says, "I am dedicating these Lugin," and he does not say that he is dedicating them for Nesachim, his words are not binding if the Lugin are not the proper amount for Nesachim. His words cannot obligate him to bring Nesachim since he did not specify any intent to bring a Korban. Only when the amount he mentions in his statement matches the requirements of the Korban is his dedication valid.

According to this approach, if a person says, "I am dedicating two Lugin as Nesachim," then indeed he becomes obligated to bring three Lugin (the amount for a sheep), since he shows his intent to bring a proper amount for a Korban Nesachim. This is also the opinion of the RADVAZ.

(c) The KIRYAS SEFER (quoted by the Lechem Mishneh) answers that a Korban Minchah differs fundamentally from Nesachim, since there is a Minchah that is brought in half-Isaron portions: the Chavitei Kohen Gadol (half of an Isaron is brought in the morning, and half at night). Therefore, when a person dedicates a half-Isaron, he must bring an entire Isaron, similar to the entire amount of the Chavitei Kohen Gadol. However, there is no case in which one or two Lugin are brought by themselves as Nesachim. Since the person's dedication matches no possible Nesachim offering, it is invalid. (See also MISHNEH L'MELECH, TZON KODASHIM, and TAHARAS HA'KODESH.) (Y. MONTROSE)

OPINIONS: The Mishnah discusses one who pledged to bring a Minchah but did not specify what type of Minchah he wanted to bring. The Mishnah states that he must bring one Minchah, and he may choose whichever type of Minchah that he wants. The Mishnah continues and says that one who pledged to bring Menachos, without specifying how many or what type, must bring two Menachos. In this case, must the person bring two of the same type of Menachos, or may he bring two different types of Menachos?

(a) RASHI (DH Menachos) says that in such a case one must bring two Menachos of the same type. This law seems to be expressed by an explicit Beraisa in the Gemara later (105a). The Beraisa states that one who says, "Min Menachos Alai," is obligated to bring "two Menachos of one type."

(b) The RAMBAM (Hilchos Ma'aseh ha'Korbanos 17:5) writes that one who says, "Harei Alai Menachos," must bring "two types of Menachos."

How does the Rambam understand the Beraisa that says that he must bring two Menachos of the same type?

1. The KESEF MISHNEH and MAHARI KURKUS write that the text of the Rambam must be an error, and the word "Minei" ("types of") should be omitted. The Rambam is saying that one must bring "two Menachos" (of the same type), and not that he must bring "two types of Menachos."

2. The RADVAZ answers that the Rambam's intention is to teach that there is a difference between the case of pledging "Menachos" and the case of pledging "a type of Menachos." The Rambam is discussing the first case, in which the person says that he will bring "Menachos." In this case, there is no reason why he should not be able to bring any two types of Menachos that he wants. The Rambam agrees that one may bring two of the same type, and he is merely teaching that even two different types are allowed. This is in contrast to the case in which a person says that he will bring "a type of Menachos." In such a case, the Rambam agrees with the Beraisa that a person must bring two of the same type of Minchah. This is because the person limits himself in his statement to one type of Minchah.

The SEFAS EMES concurs with the understanding of the Radvaz. He suggests further that Rashi actually agrees with the Rambam, and Rashi means that a person also fulfills his obligation by bringing two Menachos of one type, but not that he only fulfills his obligation with one type. This seems logical, since there seems to be no implication in the statement of "Menachos" that should require one to bring two Menachos from only one type, as the person did not discuss the type at all. On the contrary, his statement used the plural form, "I will bring Menachos," and thus it may even be preferable that he bring different types of Menachos. This point is also suggested by the LIKUTEI HALACHOS and YAD BINYAMIN. (Y. MONTROSE)