Chullin Daf 35

All right, daf lamed hey, and we're at the top of lamed hey and with aleph, this is gemara third and final day of the tumah and taharah gemaras over here. I just to refresh our memories, we're talking about the mishnah that had said at lamed gimmel lamed beis that if you're shechting an animal, you're allowed to eat that animal biyadayim suboys lifishulay hochshuru bedam that the actual dam of the animal does not create a tumah issue for your hands which are shni eis. And we were discussing what is the matziv of this animal? Is this kodshim? Is this even maaser sheini? Is this chulin? And then we took a much deeper dive into chulin she nasu al taras kodshim and subsequently chulin she nasu al taras trumah. And now zagt the gemara, "Amara Reb Yosi bar Rebbi, ha'ochel shlishi shel trumah atzmah." Let's say a guy is a shlishi but he is wants to eat not something that's going to be treated like trumah but actual trumah. "Halacha is assur le'echel." He can't eat that trumah cuz he's a shlishi but "mutar le'iga" cuz he can't make it any worse. So he can touch the trumah. He wouldn't be able to touch kodshim but he could touch the trumah. Now lo chare this memra of Reb Yosi bar Rebbi is exactly the same as Ulla that we said yesterday that was talking about a shlishi of chulin that was al taras trumah, that you're treating like trumah. But Reb Yosi is talking about trumah itself and that's gufa the difference here. But it's through the Ulla of it's through the Reb Yosi both the actual trumah and the treating like trumah is needed. Because "Eema Ulla, if I would have only had Ulla alone about where you're treating it like trumah have I mean I had me chulin she nasu al taras trumah. I will trumah but actual trumah but again I mean assur." Maybe Ulla would be maskim that it would be assur to even touch it. Therefore it's through the Reb Yosi to say that it's mutar to touch the trumah. "Eema Reb Yosi have I mean I had me trumah I will chulin by chulin I mean shari." Go the other way and therefore it's shnei tzrichi both of these memras. "Yosif Reb Yitzchak bar Shmuel bar Marza kameder of Nachman. Yosif Reb Yitzchak omer, 'Ha'ochel shlishi shel chulin she nasu al taras kodshim tahor le'echel lecha davar she'hu shlishi be kodshim." Nothing can make a revi'i by kodshim ela kodshim mekudash belvad. Only a shlishi of kodshim itself, meaning a shlishi of kodshim that has not yet fully been mekudash and certainly Chulin that was done Al Taras HaKodesh which is not even real Kodeshim at all, that's not going to make any other Kodeshim into a Revi'i. And therefore if you eat a Shlishi of Chulin that was done Al Taras HaKodesh, it's still going to be Mutar to eat Kodeshim. And we're referencing here the different levels of Kodeshim. And as you can declare something to be Kodesh, but yet until you actually do a Ma'aseh with it, it may not actually have the real status of Kodesh. Most of Rami bar Chama, Shlishi Sheini leKodesh ve'ein Sheini leTrumah. If you eat food that's a Shlishi, the guy now becomes a Sheini Klappei Kodesh but he doesn't become a Sheini Klappei Trumah. And this is not just for actual Trumah but BeChulin she'lo Al Taras Trumah will be the same Halacha. Am I Why should the Ochel over here be a Sheini Klappei Kodesh? Halav Kodesh meKudashu. The food that he ate wasn't totally Kodesh meKudashu. It wasn't totally done. And according to what we just said, it shouldn't be Sheared at all. Am leiz Achrei Gitzcha back to Rami bar Chama, Hana leTrumah, leave the Chulin she'lo Al Taras Trumah she Taharas Tumah. He eats lehaKodesh. It's Matzev of Taharah is a Matzev of Tumah Klappei Kodesh. Meaning the level of Taharah that you need for those who eat Trumah is not enough for Kodesh. So Klappei Kodesh, we have to be Choshesh that that Ochelin that became a Shlishi was actually a Sheini. And therefore a person who eats it is a Sheini. But if it's food that was done Al Taras HaKodesh and became a Shlishi, it's not going to be Metameh the person who eats it. U'min Na'a Tameir, how do you know this? D'itsnan, because the Mishnah in Chagigah says, Bigdei Am Ha'aretz Midras lePerushin. The Mishnah tells us over there that all the clothing of an Am Ha'aretz has to be assumed that it's Tamei Midras. Even though the Am Ha'aretz says that his clothing is Tahor, the Perushim and the people who are Makpid can't be Someach on this because he's not so Makpid himself the Am Ha'aretz. And therefore we have to be Choshesh that maybe the Eishes Am Ha'aretz sat on these clothing when she was a Nidah and was Metameh with Tumas Midras. So the Bigdei Am Ha'aretz are going to be a Midras lePerushin. The Bigdei Perushin is Midras leOchlei Trumah because Trumah is a higher level because that's a Din De'Oraisa. And therefore even though the Perushim are going to eat their Chulin beTaharah, the Kohanim who eat the Trumah have to be looking at the Perushim's clothing as Tamei because it might have been sat on by a Nidah. So what do you see from this Mishnah? That even though, if you're eating Trumah, you're protecting yourself from Tumas Madrus, that same protection is not going to be enough for people who are eating Kodshim. So, therefore, we'll also say that something that's Oichel but Taras at Trumah is going to be looked at as if it's in a Mativ of Tumah Klapae Kodshim. Amar Rava, Midrasaes Kamrat. You're talking to me about the Chashash of Tumas Madrus? Shani Midrasaes turning over Tumit Bays because Shema Tisha Alay Nishta Nida. There's a real Chashash that his wife sat on these things and made it Mamish Tumit Madrus. And that's actually pretty common. So, we have a more realistic Chashash by Kodshim that with the Chashash that these clothing became Tumae. Aval Bapae Rilaya Amrinan. Lagabai the Paeros of Trumah, we're not going to say that Klapae Kodshim we're have to worry that the Paeros are Tumae cuz it's not so common for these Paeros to become Tumae. So, therefore, the Mishnah Chigig is not really a Riot of Bitul. That the Tahara Mativ of the Oichlin of Trumah are going to be like Tumah Klapae Kodshim. You don't see a Riot. I fricked the Gemara Rabbi Yitzchak Bapae Rinam Amar. It wasn't just about the clothing. He also said this Lagabai Paeros. Even though the Mishnah was only talking about the clothing by Tumas Madrus, but it's also Nagaya to the Paeros. Fricked the Gemara, is that really true? Mosif Rabbi Yirmiyahu Difti Umriena Bapae Ri, do we say that the Paeros of Trumah Klapae Kodshim are considered Tumae? V'Hot Nan, there's a different Mishnah in Chigiga that's talking about the Yayin of the Amharits that Im Amar Ifreshti L'Saecher R' Yis Kodshim. If the owner of the wine said I already was Mafresh the R' Yis of Yayin and separated as Kodshim Naeman, he'll be believed to say that all the wine in the barrel is Tahar and can be used for Nisachim. But for and Tosis jumps on this because even if he's Naeman, Ha Eych Yochal K'ayin Trumah and the K'ayin eat it. L'Maesa, the Kodshim is being M'urav Ba. And Tosis says Al Yaday Brera. It's going to be that R' Yis Shani Asif L'Mafresh. Now, most of the Yayin inside this barrel is Trumah. V'Lo Kamah Kamah Trumah L'Kodshim. And the Trumah wine is not M'tameh the Kodshim wine in it. But instead, we say that all the wine is Tahar. Now, V'ee Amrit Taharosa Tumah Hee Eitzel Ha Kodshim. If you're telling me that the Mativ of Tahara of the Trumah is like Tumah Klapae Kodshim, so to Tameh Trumah L'Kodshim. Let that Trumah Yayin be M'tameh the Kodshim D'K'ayin. Because even if we believe the Amharits that he was Shomerit from Tumah, but L'Chara before he was Mafresh this R' is Kodesh he only was being shamrate at a level for trumah and then since that's not good enough for kodshim that Revius should once it's hofrish be automatically ruined by the rest of the wine that is touching in the barrel. So what's the point of the name monas of the amaretz? Amarlay Zocter of Yitzchok back to Revi Yermia tuma b'chiburan kamas you talking about the fact that the wine is touching the wine inside the barrel tuma b'chiburan shiny d'migo d'machana Kodesh m'havina amia trumah and when we say migo here we're using it in the loosest possible terminology but once you already being mimanen for one will be mimanen for the other. So we're not going to use the general rule that trumah is always going to be tuma k'lapi kodshim but rather we'll believe the amaretz that the trumah wine is all tahor. Masif Rav Huna bar Nosson I the brisa says a shiny sh'b'chulin m'tameh mashka chulin a shiny of chulin is m'tameh other liquids when it touches it u'poisel achlay trumah and it poisels the trumah when it touches it and of course m'tameh means it can make something tuma that it can be m'tameh something else and poisel means it's not going to be transferred past the thing that's actually touching. So it's m'tameh the mashka chulin and it's poisel the achlay trumah. V'achshli shi and a shlishi of chulin is m'tameh mashka kodesh u'poisel achlay kodesh and this is all b'chulin sh'nasu al tarasa kodesh. So the mishna is saying b'feirish that a shlishi of chulin that was nasu al tarasa kodesh can poisel the kodshim and make it into a revi which the Gemara finally says tanayee. This is actually a big machlokes tanayim whether or not chulin that was nasu al tarasa kodesh can make other kodshim into a revi. So Rav Yitzchok is going like the other tana that argues with the tana of our brisa that we just quoted d'tanya because the brisa says chulin sh'nasu al tarasa kodesh harayhain k'chulin but Rav Eliezer Rav Betzalel claims harayhain k'trumah and that in what way it in that l'tameh shnayim u'l'poisel echad. It can be m'tameh on two levels meaning a rishon and a shaini and can poisel one more level of a shlishi but Rav Elozar Rav Yitzchok agrees with shitas Rav Yitzchok that chulin that's nasu al tarasa kodesh cannot make the kodshim into a revi and therefore Rav Yitzchok holds this shita even though the tana of the previous brisa doesn't agree with him. Okay. Zoct the Gemara Rav Shimon aimer this is the last part of the mishna over there back in lamed gimmel that chuksharu b'shchita once these animals are g'shachtin it's not about the blood. The itself makes it just from the actual slicing of the neck itself. I that the is and it's not the dumb. So let's say that our mission is actually arrived to this memory from cuz it says in the mission of you should have hooked me to my love will I die for some reason no lay off you should have been being a little but it is the blood that's making the meat. It's even the but certainly the dumb would also make it to touch my brain right from over the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission and the mission that dumb will not be a couple of my love for dumb is my it's only the dumb of a natural death of an animal but let's say dumb that comes as a result of a that should be my couple of no no right way dumb it just means that the dumb of an animal is not killed like mauled or however otherwise it dies but not like the will be my couple of all dumb what's going to happen dumb way my how can you even suggest that last minute dumb what dumb of a maze you should have told us that dumb is not going to be my couple of and certainly regular dumb from animals that died of natural causes shouldn't be my couple of and for the dumb of a maze what's the because I'll get a molecular e who molecular e who molecular e who who cares how the animal died and therefore so just like the dumb of a animals going to be my couple of so to the dumb of any animal that dies is going to be my couple of one and therefore to say not that way that tells us that the dumb of an animal that died naturally is not going to be my a of tuma, about you should himself would be masking at dam shrita would also not be macable tuma. Tush miles bring a right from a brisa Rebbe Shimon omer dam magofasi ain I mashir the dam of an animal's wound is not going to be martial a couple tuma. So my love her dam shrita is mashir like her dam halala mashir. It's just saying that if it dies without shrita it could be martial a couple tuma. What I will dam shrita my what's going to be like by actual dam shrita like mashir lash mean and dam shrita because he can't dam magofasi. No cuz dam magofasi is strict like because he can't mean that malik kol malik kol palga the same kind of a hidish and the Rebbe Shimon held that he had to be dafka say that dam magofasi is not going to make it like hooksha like a couple tuma, but you can't be mad like from that that dam shrita would make it macable tuma because he takahol it's not. Who may Shimon dam halala dam mashir? What's so special about dead animal blood that is mashir like a couple tuma? Cuz the possuk says the dam halala yishta to lotion of drinking. So we look at dam like it's a drink. But dam shrita not mix it. How are they going to be coming? So we should also learn that dam shrita should be comparable to water. And to be mashir the possuk should be macable tuma. So why is Rebbe Shimon holding that it my say it doesn't have to be the gamara cuz dam and the makdashim to us. The point according to Rebbe Shimon is that the possuk can be matter the dam of these makdashim. So it's used up and therefore you can't learn from this possuk that dam shrita is mashir like a couple tuma. Moving over to menalif kasalkadi hoyo asiri gizavida since the makdashim still have the iser of gizavida dam only by kavura. I might think there's a special halachic consideration that the dam can't be used and needs to be nikbar. It has to be buried. The Torah tells us that it's just like the water that's muter by hana'a and therefore so too is the dam of the makdashim. And we're going to stop here. I'm picking up with Friday's daf for the ton of Shimon.