Menachot 31

Sugya Map

• Issue: The scope of Rabbi Ḥanina's dictum: "הלכה כרבי שמעון שזורי" (The halakha is in accordance with Rabbi Shimon Shezuri).
• Nafka Mina(s): Does this principle apply solely to Rabbi Shimon Shezuri's statements within a Mishna, or does it extend to his rulings taught in Baraitot, specifically regarding bi'ur ma'aser (tithing mixed produce)?
• Primary Sources: Menachot 31a; Mishna Kelim 18:1; Mishna Teharot 3:2.

Text Snapshot

"Rav Yeimar bar Shelamya sent to Rav Pappa: That which Ravin bar Ḥinnana said that Ulla says that Rabbi Ḥanina says: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon Shezuri, and moreover, any place where Rabbi Shimon Shezuri taught a halakha, the halakha is in accordance with his opinion, was that said even with regard to the case of one whose untithed produce became mixed together with non-sacred, i.e., tithed, produce, or was Rabbi Ḥanina referring only to cases where Rabbi Shimon Shezuri stated his opinion in the Mishna, but not in a baraita? Rav Pappa said to him: Yes, the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon Shezuri even with regard to untithed produce that was mixed together with tithed produce." Menachot 31a

• Dikduk/Leshon: The emphatic "כל מקום ששנה רבי שמעון שזורי הלכה הלכה כמותו" (any place where Rabbi Shimon Shezuri taught a halakha, the halakha is in accordance with his opinion) is explicitly interrogated to determine if "כל מקום" means any teaching, or only Mishnaic ones. Rav Pappa's terse "אין" (yes) resolves the ambiguity.

Readings

Rav Pappa

Rav Pappa's definitive "אין" (Menachot 31a) establishes that Rabbi Ḥanina's meta-halakhic rule for Rabbi Shimon Shezuri is absolute, encompassing all his teachings, irrespective of their textual origin (Mishna or Baraita). This expands the practical application of Rabbi Shimon Shezuri's rulings.

Rav Ashi (in the name of Mar Zutra via Rabbi Ḥanina of Sura)

Rav Ashi relays Rabbi Ḥanina of Sura's kushya: "מאי קמבעיא ליה? כל מקום ששנה רבי שמעון שזורי הלכה כמותו אמר" (What is the question? He said 'any place where Rabbi Shimon Shezuri taught a halakha, the halakha is in accordance with his opinion'). This rhetorical question reinforces Rav Pappa's conclusion, treating the broad application of "כל מקום" as self-evident, thus solidifying the expansive authority of Rabbi Shimon Shezuri's rulings.

Friction

The primary kushya is Rabbi Ḥanina of Sura's "מאי קמבעיא ליה?" (What is the question?). The very fact Rav Yeimar bar Shelamya posed the question implies a possible distinction between Mishnaic and Baraitaic statements for psak. The terutz is Rav Pappa's straightforward "אין," affirmed by Rabbi Ḥanina of Sura's rhetorical question, which highlights the plain meaning of "כל מקום." This resolves the potential friction by asserting that the dictum's scope is indeed universal for Rabbi Shimon Shezuri.

Intertext

The Gemara in Eruvin 13b discusses "כל מקום ששנה רבי מאיר משנה שאינה הלכה" (any place where Rabbi Meir taught a Mishna, it is not the halakha). This provides a contrasting meta-halakhic principle, where Rabbi Meir's teachings often do not reflect the final halakha. Our sugya establishes Rabbi Shimon Shezuri as the inverse: a Tanna whose halakha is always followed, underscoring his unique authority.

Psak/Practice

This sugya establishes a crucial meta-halakhic heuristic: when encountering a ruling by Rabbi Shimon Shezuri, it is to be followed as halakha l'ma'aseh, regardless of whether it appears in a Mishna, Baraita, or other Tannaic source. This provides a clear guideline for psak when considering the opinions of this particular Tanna.

Takeaway

Rabbi Shimon Shezuri's opinions hold a unique, universally authoritative status in halakha, a testament to the specific weight assigned to certain Sages' rulings.