Gemara Clarity

Chullin 89b

חולין פ״ט ע״ב

Learn Chullin 89b step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Chullin 89b in Gemara Clarity

Topic

The end of פרק כיסוי הדם, the opening משנה of פרק גיד הנשה, and the גמרא's analysis of why the משנה says the איסור applies to מוקדשין.

Overview

The amud opens by finishing פרק כיסוי הדם. A שופר or לולב of עבודה זרה is invalid because those מצוות need a minimum size, and עבודה זרה is treated as already crushed to powder. Covering blood needs no size, and crushed ash covers even better, so ash of עבודה זרה may be used. After the הדרן, פרק גיד הנשה begins with a משנה: the איסור of גיד הנשה applies everywhere and at all times, to חולין and קדשים, to בהמה and חיה, and to both legs, but not to birds. The משנה also records a מחלוקת about a שליל, and a מחלוקת between רבי מאיר and חכמים about trusting butchers. The גמרא then asks why the משנה needs to mention מוקדשין at all. It tries a few explanations and finally says the case is the unborn offspring of a קרבן, where the גיד prohibition and the holiness prohibition arrive at the same moment, so both take hold. The גמרא defends this reading against a question from the wording of the משנה. It then begins a new challenge from a משנה about a נזיר and רבי יוחנן's explanation about a נפל whose limbs are not yet joined by sinews. That challenge continues on the next amud.

Opening lines

שִׁיעוּרָא בָּעֵינַן,

we require a minimum measure,

וַעֲבוֹדָה זָרָה

and an object of idol worship,

כַּתּוֹתֵי מְכַתַּת שִׁיעוּרַאּ.

its size is considered crushed.

הָכָא, כֹּל מָה דִּמְכַתַּת

Here, the more it is crushed,

The steps (14)

  1. ResolutionWhy idol-worship ash still works for covering blood
  2. ConclusionHadran — Closing פרק כיסוי הדם
  3. StatementWhere and to what the prohibition of the sciatic nerve applies
  4. StatementDoes the prohibition apply to an unborn calf?
  5. StatementCan butchers be trusted to remove the sciatic nerve?
  6. ChallengeWhy say it applies to sacrifices? Isn't that obvious?
  7. RejectionMaybe the holiness prohibition adds on top? Then the wording would be different
  8. ResolutionNerves have no taste, so only the nerve prohibition applies
  9. ChallengeBut another משנה says the nerve does give off taste
  10. ResolutionThe case is the unborn offspring of a sacrifice
  11. ChallengeThe later clause shows the first clause is not about a fetus
  12. ResolutionThe later clause points to the מחלוקת of רבי יהודה and the רבנן
  13. ChallengeDo the two prohibitions really arrive together? A משנה about a נזיר
  14. Proofרבי יוחנן: a miscarried fetus whose limbs are not yet joined by sinews