ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Chulin 36
CHULIN 36 (6 Adar) - dedicated by the Feldman family in memory of their
father, the Tzadik Harav Yisrael Azriel ben Harav Chaim (Feldman) of
(a) Rebbi rules in a Beraisa that if someone Shechts and blood squirts from
the animal's neck on to a detached pumpkin of Terumah, the pumpkin is
Muchshar Lekabeil Tum'ah. Rebbi Chiya holds 'Tolin' (it hangs in the balance
[which we will explain shortly]).
(b) Rebbi Oshaya cites Rebbi Shimon - in support of Rebbi Chiya, as we shall
(c) Rav Papa states that in a case where the blood remained on the pumpkin
until the termination of the Shechitah - even Rebbi Chiya will hold that the
pumpkin is Muchshar Lekabeil Tum'ah.
(d) And they argue over a case where the blood was wiped off the pumpkin
before its completion. Rebbi ...
1. ... Chiya says that the pumpkin is not Muchshar - because he holds 'Einah
li'Shechitah Ela be'Sof' (in which case the blood is Dam Mageftah).
2. ... says that it is - because he holds Yeshnah li'Shechitah mi'Techilah
ve'Ad Sof, (in which case the blood is considered Dam Shechitah).
(a) When Rebbi Oshaya says 'Bo'u Ve'nismoch al Divrei Rebbi Shimon' (despite
the fact that Rebbi Shimon holds on principle that Dam Shechitah is not
Machshir, whereas Rebbi Chiya holds that it is), he means - that they both
agree in this case, where the blood is wiped off, that it is not Muchshar
(leaving Rebbi in the minority).
(b) Rav Ashi disagrees with Rav Papa's explanation. According to him, the
'Tolin' of Rebbi Chiya implies - permanently, because he is basically
uncertain whether the Halachah is 'Yeshno li'Shechitah mi'Techilah ve'ad
Sof' or 'Eino ... ', in which case neither can the Kohen eat the pumpkin,
nor can he burn it ...
(c) ... he cannot eat case, in case we rule 'Yeshno li'Shechitah mi'Techilah
ve'ad Sof', and he cannot burn it - in case we hold 'Einah li'Shechitah ...
(d) And when Rebbi Oshaya now says 'Bo'u ve'Nismach al Divrei Rebbi Shimon',
what he means is - that (even though Rebbi Shimon holds that Dam Shechitah
is not Machshir, whereas Rebbi Chiya holds that it is), they both agree that
the pumpkin cannot be burned (leaving Rebbi in the minority).
(a) Resh Lakish asks whether the Din of Rishon and Sheini apply to a Tz'rid
1. A 'Tz'rid shel Menachos' is - lumps of dry flour pertaining to a Minchah
with which the oil did not make contact.
(b) Resh Lakish's She'eilah is - whether 'Chibas ha'Kodesh' gives the
Hekdesh article the same Din as food that became Muchshar through contact
with water (which makes it a Rishon, and what touches it [the Rishon], a
Sheini), or whether it merely gives it a Din of P'sul ha'Guf (which is not
2. 'Chibas ha'Kodesh is - the Kedushah that renders Kodshei Mizbe'ach
Muchshar Lekabeil Tum'ah even without contact with water or one of the seven
(c) The Beraisa learns from the Pasuk in Shemini "mi'Kol ha'Ochel Asher
Ye'achel" - that only food that has contact with water is Muchshar Lekabeil
(d) Rebbi Elazar tries to prove from there - that a Tz'rid shel Menachos
does not have a Din of Rishon and Sheini.
(a) We refute Rebbi Elazar's proof from the Beraisa however - on the grounds
that Resh Lakish also knew that Pasuk, and what he asked was whether Chibas
ha'Kodesh has the same severity as water in this regard or not.
(b) Rebbi Elazar's real reason for resolving the She'eilah from the above
Beraisa is - the fact that having stated "ve'Chi Yutan Mayim al Zera",
"mi'Kol ha'Ochel Asher Ye'achel" is superfluous, and therefore comes to
teach us that the Din of Rishon and Sheini are confined to food that has
contact with water, but does extend to Chibas ha'Kodesh.
(c) We refute that too however - by explaining that we need the two Pesukim
for something else; one of them to teach us Hechsher Mayim by Tum'as Meis,
and the other, by Tum'as Sheretz.
(d) Having taught us Hechsher Mayim by Tum'as ...
1. ... Meis (which is Metamei only with a Shi'ur k'Zayis), the Torah
nevertheless needs to repeat it by Tum'as Sheretz - which is Metamei with
the smaller Shi'ur of k'Adashah (the size of a lentil), which we would
therefore have otherwise thought does not require Hechsher Mayim.
2. ... Sheretz (which is Metamei for only one day), the Torah still finds it
necessary to repeat it by Tum'as Meis - which is Metamei for seven days.
(a) We extrapolate from Rebbi Shimon in our Mishnah 'Huchsheru
bi'Shechitah' - that one counts Rishon and Sheini, as 'Huchsheru'
customarily implies (despite the fact that the animals were not Huchsheru by
means of water (which seems to resolve Resh Lakish's She'eilah (and pose a
Kashya on Rebbi Elazar, at one and the same time).
(b) Shamai rules that grapes that one picks for wine making are Huchshar
Lekabeil Tum'ah - due to the juice that oozes from the grapes.
(c) Hillel ultimately agrees with Shamai. Initially however - he ruled 'Lo
(d) Rebbi Zeira, who also makes the same observation from here as Rav Yosef
did from the previous Beraisa, does not consider the grapes 'Ochel ha'Ba
be'Mayim' - because the owner does not want the juice to drip out from the
grapes, since it merely goes to waste.
(a) Abaye rejects the proofs of both Rav Yosef and Rebbi Zeira - on the
grounds that the Rabbanan decreed Hechsher Mayim in both of the above cases.
(b) The reason that the Rabbanan issued such a decree in the case of Shamai
is - because they suspected that one might then come to pick the grapes with
closed baskets, which do not allow the juice to escape.
(c) The difference whether the Terumah grapes are a Rishon min ha'Torah or
only mi'de'Rabbanan - lies in the obligation to burn them, which does not
apply to Tum'ah mi'de'Rabbanan,
(a) Rav Yosef's objection to Abaye's answer ...
1. ... to his Kashya (from Shechitah) that Rishon and Sheini by Shechitah is
only mi'de'Rabbanan is - that when Rebbi Shimon said 'Huchsheru
bi'Shechitah', he seems to have meant mi'd'Oraysa, and not mi'de'Rabbanan.
(b) To which Abaye replied - that this is indeed the case, and Resh Lakish
was not asking about Terumah or Kodesh that touched the Tz'rid shel Menachos
becoming a Sheini, but about whether one is oligated to burn them or not.
2. ... to Rebbi Zeira's Kashya (from 'ha'Botzer le'Gas') is - that, in that
case, perhaps by Tz'rid shel Menachos too, the Chachamim issued a decree
(rendering Resh Lakish's She'eilah groundless).
(c) And we extrapolate that Chibas ha'Kodesh must be d'Oraysa - because
otherwise, it would certainly be forbidden to burn them (as we just learned
a little earlier).
(a) Bearing in mind that the Pasuk "ve'ha'Basar Asher Yiga be'Chol Tamei" is
referring to Kodshim, we know that the Basar did not become Muchshar
Lekabeil Tum'ah through ...
1. ... its own blood (or through that of other Kodshim animals) - because as
we learned earlier in the name of Rebbi Chiya bar Aba Amar Rebbi Yochanan,
the blood of Kodshim is not Machshir.
(b) ... and is not subject to Tum'ah, either.
2. ... the water with which they would wash the Kodshim animals in the Bei
Mitbechaya - because, as stated by Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Chanina 'Mashkei Bei
Matbechaya' is not Machshir ...
(c) We nevertheless reject the proof from there that Chibas ha'Kodesh is
d'Oraysa, based on a statement of Rav Yehudah Amar Shmuel - who established
the Pasuk when the owner, on the way to Yerushalayim, led the cow that he
was bringing as a Shelamim, through a stream of water, and water was still
on it when he later Shechted it (which is how it became Muchshar Lekabeil
(a) We learn from the Pasuk "*ve'ha'Basar*, Kol Tahor Yochal Basar" - that
even wood and Levonah of Hekdesh are subject to Tum'ah.
(b) The problem with this D'rashah is - that the Pasuk in question is
referring to Tum'as Ochlin, and seeing that wood and frankincense are not
food, on what grounds are they included?
(c) So we learn from there - that Chibas ha'Kodesh must be the factor that
is Machshir them Lekabeil Tum'ah. By the same token then, it is also
Machshir dry Kodshim (such as 'Tz'rid shel Menachos) Lekabeil Tum'ah, too.
(d) The conclusion of Resh Lakish's She'eilah (whether we count Rishon and
Sheini by Chibas ha'Kodesh or not) is - 'Teiku'.