Chullin 99a

חולין צ״ט ע״א

Learn Chullin 99a step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Chullin 99a in Gemara Clarity

Topic

The נזיר's foreleg as a חידוש for nullifying the flavor of קדשים, and אביי's challenge to the one-hundred rule from the משנה of split beans and lentils

Overview

The amud begins with the cooked foreleg (זרוע בשלה) of the נזיר's ram, which is קדשים, yet its flavor does not forbid the rest of the ram. The גמרא asks whether we can learn from this that the flavor of קדשים is always nullified. It answers no: the פסוק about חטאת teaches that food absorbing its flavor takes on its status. The נזיר case is a חידוש, and we do not learn general rules from a חידוש. We still learn the 100 or 60 measure from it, because that is only a stringency: by Torah law a simple majority would be enough. רבינא gives another reading of the case: it comes to permit the place of the cut (מקום חתך). Then רב דימי repeats the rule that forbidden food is nullified only in one hundred. אביי challenges him from a משנה about תרומה split beans cooked with lentils, where taste alone decides, and argues that the amount that works there must be sixty, not one hundred.

Opening lines

The steps (11)

1. ChallengeLet us learn from the נזיר's foreleg
2. ResolutionThe Torah revealed about חטאת that absorbed flavor takes on its status
3. ChallengeWhy learn from חטאת rather than from the נזיר?
4. ResolutionThe נזיר's foreleg is a חידוש
5. ChallengeThen don't learn 100 or 60 from it either
6. ResolutionWe learn only a stringency from it
7. Statementרבינא: the ברייתא comes to permit the place of the cut
8. Statementרב דימי repeats the one-hundred teaching
9. Challengeאביי questions whether every prohibition needs one hundred
10. ProofSplit beans and lentils: taste decides, not one hundred
11. ChallengeIf not in 101, then it must be in sixty