Gemara Clarity

Chullin 36b

חולין ל״ו ע״ב

Learn Chullin 36b step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Chullin 36b in Gemara Clarity

Topic

Two פסוקים about הכשר, אביי's answer that some הכשר is only מדרבנן, and the Torah source for חיבת הקודש

Overview

The גמרא first asks whether one of two פסוקים about הכשר comes to exclude holy food (חיבת הקודש). It answers that one פסוק is for טומאת מת and one is for טומאת שרץ. Both are needed, because each kind of טומאה is stricter in its own way. Next, רב יוסף and רבי זירא challenge רבי אלעזר from cases where food becomes susceptible without water: a slaughtered animal, and grapes harvested for the winepress. אביי answers both: the חכמים treated these like הכשר by water, only מדרבנן. רב יוסף objects that this answer would also settle ריש לקיש's question about dry holy flour. אביי replies that ריש לקיש was asking about burning, which needs טומאה מדאורייתא. This shows that ריש לקיש holds חיבת הקודש is דאורייתא, so the גמרא searches for its source. A proof from the start of ויקרא 7:19 fails, because the animal may have been wet from a river. The end of the פסוק, which includes wood and frankincense, proves that holiness alone makes things able to become טמא.

Opening lines

לָאו לְמַעוֹטֵי חִיבַּת הַקֹּדֶשׁ?

Is it not to exclude items made susceptible through regard for sanctity?

לָא: חַד בְּטוּמְאַת מֵת

No: one is about impurity of a corpse,

וְחַד בְּטוּמְאַת שֶׁרֶץ.

and one is about impurity of a creeping animal.

וּצְרִיכִי, דְּאִי אַשְׁמְעִינַן טוּמְאַת מֵת –

And they are needed, for if it had taught us impurity of a corpse,

The steps (22)

  1. ProofMaybe the extra verse excludes holy food
  2. RejectionNo, one verse is about a corpse and one is about a creeping animal
  3. ResolutionWhy the corpse verse alone would not be enough
  4. ConclusionWhy the creeping-animal verse alone would not be enough, so both are needed
  5. Challengeרב יוסף challenges from רבי שמעון: slaughter makes it fully susceptible
  6. ChallengeWhy is the slaughtered animal susceptible without water?
  7. Resolutionאביי: the חכמים treated it like water, as a rabbinic rule
  8. Challengeרבי זירא's challenge from grapes harvested for the winepress
  9. Resolutionאביי gives the same answer: it is only rabbinic
  10. Challengeרב יוסף: then ריש לקיש's question has an easy answer too
  11. Resolutionריש לקיש was asking about burning, which needs טומאה מדאורייתא
  12. QuestionWhere does the תורה teach that חיבת הקודש works?
  13. ProofProposed source: the פסוק about holy meat touching טומאה
  14. ChallengeIt cannot be the animal's blood
  15. ChallengeIt cannot be the liquids of the בית המקדש slaughterhouse
  16. Rejectionרבי יוסי's rule cannot be limited to blood
  17. ProofSo it must be חיבת הקודש
  18. RejectionMaybe the cow was still wet from a river
  19. ProofA new proof from the end of the verse
  20. QuestionWood and frankincense are not food
  21. ResponseThe holiness itself makes them able to become טמא
  22. ConclusionThe same applies to our case