(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem

Previous daf

Chulin 35



(a) Rebbi Yonasan rules that someone who eats a Shelishi shel Terumah - is forbidden to eat Terumah, but permitted to touch it.

(b) Having stated the opinion of ...

1. ... Ula (who says the same with regard to a Shelishi shel Chulin she'Na'asu be'Taharas Terumah), we nevertheless need to cite that of Rebbi Yonasan - to teach us that, even though eating real Terumah is more stringent that Chulin she'Na'asu al Taharas Terumah, one is no more forbidden to touch Terumah than one is by the latter.
2. ... Rebbi Yonasan, we still find it necessary to cite that of Ula - to teach us that even though Chulin she'Na'asu al Taharas Terumah is less stringent, eating Terumah is forbidden.
(a) Rav Yitzchak bar Shmuel bar Marsa said before Rav Nachman that if someone eats a Shelishi shel Chulin she'Na'asu al Taharas Hekdesh, his body is Tahor to eat Kodshim - because the Chachamim only decreed the Din of P'sul ha'Guf (by a Revi'i that ate a Shelishi) by real Hekdesh, but not by Chulin she'Na'asu al Taharas Hekdesh ...

(b) ... because the Din of Revi'i ba'Kodesh is mi'de'Rabbanan, and they did not extend their decree to Chulin she'Na'asu al Taharas Hekdesh.

(c) Rami bar Chama queries him however, from the Mishnah in Taharos 'Shelishi Sheini le'Kodesh ... be'Chulin she'Na'asu al Taharas Terumah' - on the assumption that if they did not decree on Chulin she'Na'asu al Taharas Hekdesh, they certainly would not have decreed on Chulin she'Na'asu al Taharas Terumah!

(d) Rav Yitzchak bar Shmuel bar Marsa replied however - that Chulin she'Na'asu al Taharas Terumah is worse (not better) than Chulin she'Na'asu al Taharas Hekdesh, in that what is Tahor regarding Terumah is not Tahor regarding Hekdesh (as we explained earlier).

(a) Rav Yitzchak bar Shmuel bar Marsa cites a Mishnah in Chagigah as the source for his answer. The Mishnah rules there that the clothes of ...
1. ... 'Perushin' (those who eat their Chulin be'Taharah) have the Din of Medras ha'Zav for those of Kohanim Ochlei Terumah (be'Taharah).
2. ... Kohanim Ochlei Terumah (be'Taharah) have the Din of Medras ha'Zav for those of Ochlei Kodesh (be'Taharah).
(b) Rava refutes the proof from that Mishnah however - because he maintains, the Medras there refers to the wives of the Perushin or of the Ochlei Terumah, who may have sat on their clothes whilst they were Tamei Nidah, a suspicion which is likely, whereas the suspicion that the fruit of the Perushin or the Ochlei Terumah (be'Taharah) became Tamei is not.

(c) Rebbi Yitzchak - does not make this distinction (like Rav Yitzchak bar Shmuel bar Marsa).




(a) The Mishnah in Chagigah refers to an Am-ha'Aretz who comes with a barrel of wine (after the wine-making season is over), which he now wants to sell to a Kohen. The Tana there rules that even if the Am ha'Aretz ...
1. ... claims that it is Tahor - he is not believed.
2. ... adds that he poured a Revi'is of Kodesh (Nesachim wine) into the barrel - then he is (see also Tosfos (DH 've'Im Amar').
(b) Rav Yirmiyah from Difti asked from there on Rebbi Yitzchak (who does not distinguish between the Medras of clothes and the Negi'ah of fruit) - according to whom the Terumah ought to be Metamei the Kodesh.

(c) To which Rebbi Yitzchak replied - that on the contrary, since the two are intermingled, since the Am ha'Aretz is believed on the Hekdesh (as we learned in Chagigah), he is believed on the Terumah as well (with a 'Migu').

(a) The Mishnah in Taharos rules that ...
1. ... 'Sheini she'be'Chulin renders Chulin liquid - a Rishon, and Ochlei Terumah, Pasul.
2. ... 'Shelishi (she'be'Chulin) renders Kodesh liquid Tamei - and Ochlei Kodesh, a Revi'i (Pasul but not Tamei).
(b) The Tana establishes 'Kodesh' as - Chulin she'Na'asu al Taharas Hekdesh.

(c) We reconcile this with Rav Yitzchak bar Shmuel bar Marsa (who confines the decree of Revi'i to real Hekdesh) - by making this a Machlokes Tana'im (as we will now see).

(d) The Tana Kama in a Beraisa considers Chulin she'Na'asu al Taharas Hekdesh, Chulin. Rebbi Elazar b'Rebbi Tzadok says 'Harei Hein ki'Terumah', to which he adds - that it is Metamei two (a Rishon and a Sheini) and renders Pasul one (a Shelishi), but not a Revi'i (like Rebbi Yitzchak bar Shmuel bar Marsa).

(a) Rav Asi rules that, according to Rebbi Shimon - the Shechitah is Machshir Lekabeil Tum'ah, but not the blood.

(b) Consequently - if blood from the Shechitah falls onto seeds, they do not become Muchshar Lekabeil Tum'ah.

(c) There is no proof for Rav Asi from our Mishnah, where Rebbi Shimon says 'Huchsheru bi'Shechitah', implying but not via the blood - because he may well mean 'Af bi'Shechitah' (but certainly via the blood).

(a) We extrapolate from Rebbi Shimon in a Mishnah in Machshirin 'Dam ha'Meis Eino Machshir' - 'Ha Dam Shechitah Machshir (a Kashya on Rav Asi).

(b) We refute this Kashya however, by changing the inference - to 'Ha Dam Chalalim Machshir'.

(c) In that case, we ask, why Rebbi Shimon does not rather present the case of Dam Shechitah than Dam ha'Meis - to counter the Torah's comparison of the blood of Shechitah to water ("al ha'Aretz Tishpechenu ka'Mayim"), as we shall see shortly.

(d) We answer that in fact, Dam ha'Meis is a bigger Chidush than Dam Shechitah - because we might otherwise have thought that, based on the S'vara 'Mah li Katleih Ihu, Mah li Katleih Mal'ach ha'Maves?', Dam ha'Meis should not be any different than Dam Chalalim.

(a) Rebbi Shimon in a Beraisa rules that Dam Magefto - the blood from a wound, is not Machshir either.

(b) And here too, we explain that, according to Rav Asi, Rebbi Shimon prefers to present the Din of Dam Magefto than Dam Shechitah, because - due to the S'vara 'Mah li Katleih Kulah, Mah li Katleih Palga?', we might have thought that Dam Magefto should not be any different than Dam Chalalim.

(c) We would not however, think the same about Dam Shechitah - because it is not called 'Dam Chalalim', but 'Dam Zavu'ach'.

(a) We learn from the Pasuk "ve'Dam Chalalim Yishteh" - that the blood of an animal that has been slain is Machshir.

(b) By the same token, we would have expected to learn from the Pasuk "al ha'Aretz Tishpechenu ka'Mayim" - that Dam Shechutah is Machshir, too.

(c) According to Rav Asi in Rebbi Shimon however, we learn from there - that the blood of Pesulei ha'Mukdashin (animals of Hekdesh which obtained a Mum and were subsequently redeemed) is Mutar be'Hana'ah.

(d) We would otherwise have thought that it is forbidden - just like their wool and their work is.

(a) Tana de'Bei Rebbi Yishmael learns from "ve'Dam Chalalim Yishteh" that Dam Kilu'ach is not Machshir. 'Dam Kilu'ach' - is the blood that spurts from the animal after the initial drops that drip from it.

(b) It is the blood that turns black at the end that is Machshir (Dam Chalalim).

Next daf


For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,