1) WHICH BLOOD IS “MACHSHIR”

(a) (Beraisa – Tana d’Vei R. Yishmael): “He will drink the blood of corpses” – this excludes blood that flows (from a dying animal), which is not Machshir.
(b) (Beraisa – Rebbi): An animal was slaughtered; some of the blood fell on a gourd – it is Huchshar;
1. R. Chiya says, Tolin (we suspend – this will be explained).
(c) (R. Oshiya): Since Rebbi and R. Chiya argue, we join R. Shimon’s opinion that blood is not Machshir, and this is the majority ruling.
(d) (Rav Papa): Rebbi and R. Chiya agree, if the blood is still on the gourd at the end of slaughter, it is Huchshar;
1. They argue when the blood was cleaned off before the second Siman was cut.
i. Rebbi holds, (we consider that) slaughter begins from the first incision, all blood that comes out is blood of slaughter;
ii. R. Chiya holds that only one moment is considered slaughter, when slaughter is completed. Before this, all blood (e.g. that fell on the gourd) is like blood of a wound, which is not Machshir. When slaughter is completed, the blood (that already came out) is considered blood of slaughter;
iii. ‘Tolin’ means, we suspend the law of the gourd until the end of slaughter, if blood is still on the gourd, it is Huchshar.
(e) Question: Why did R. Oshiya say that that we join R. Shimon’s opinion to R. Chiya’s? R. Chiya says that the blood is Machshir, R. Shimon says that it is not!
(f) Answer: If the blood was cleaned off the gourd before completion of the slaughter, they agree that it was not Huchshar; therefore, the Halachah follows them against Rebbi.
(g) (Rav Ashi): ‘Tolin’ implies that we will never resolve the doubt;
1. R. Chiya is unsure what the law is when the blood is cleaned off before slaughter is finished – he does not know when slaughter begins.
2. ‘Tolin’ means, we neither eat nor burn the gourd (if it is Terumah, and it touched something Tamei).
(h) Question: Why did R. Oshiya say that we join R. Shimon’s opinion to R. Chiya’s? R. Chiya is in doubt, R. Shimon says that the blood is not Machshir!
(i) Answer: Both agree that we do not burn the gourd, they are a majority against Rebbi. In such a case, Tolin, we neither eat nor burn it.
2) IS “CHIBAS HA’KODESH” FULLY “MACHSHIR”
(a) Question (Reish Lakish): A (part of – Rashi) a Minchah (flour-offering) was never kneaded with oil (so it was not Huchshar) – if it becomes Tamei, can it make other foods Tamei?
1. Does Chibas ha’Kodesh (a stringency of Kodshim that is Machshir Kodesh without any liquid) only Machshir to become Pasul, or is it Machshir to become Tamei (to Metamei other foods), like regular Hechsher?
(b) Answer #1 (R. Elazar – Beraisa): “Any food that will be eaten (upon which water will come)” – only food which water comes upon is Huchshar.
1. Question: Reish Lakish agrees that only water (or other drinks) are Machshir (Chulin) – he only asks if Chibas ha’Kodesh is like water falling on the Kodesh! 2. Answer: R. Elazar knew that; the Beraisa teaches that Chibas ha’Kodesh is not like water falling on the Kodesh,
i. We learn Hechsher from “When water will be put upon produce”;
ii. Question: Why must it also say “Of any food that is eaten”
36b—————————————36b

iii. Suggestion: This excludes Chibas ha’Kodesh, i.e. it is not like water falling on the Kodesh.
iv. Rejection: No – one verse teaches about Tum’as Mes (it only applies after Hechsher), the other teaches (the same) about Tum’as Sheratzim.
v. If we only had a verse about Tum’as Mes, one might have thought that no Hechsher is needed for Tum’as Sheratzim, since it is stringent (even a lentil’s size of a Sheretz is Metamei);
vi. If we only had a verse about Tum’as Sheratzim, one might have thought that no Hechsher is needed for Tum’as Mes, since it is stringent (it is Metamei for seven days).
vii. Therefore, neither verse is free to exclude Chibas ha’Kodesh.
(c) Objection (against R. Elazar, and Answer #2 – Rav Yosef – Mishnah – R. Shimon): The meat is Huchshar through the slaughter.
1. The Hechsher is even to Metamei other foods, even though water never came upon the meat. (The same applies to Chibas ha’Kodesh!)
(d) Answer (Abaye): (Reish Lakish’s question and R. Elazar’s answer pertain to the law mid’Oraisa;) the Mishnah teaches that mid’Rabanan, Chibas ha’Kodesh is like water falling on the Kodesh.
(e) Question (R. Zeira – Beraisa – Shamai): If one picks grapes to make wine, they are Huchshar (even though he is unhappy about the juice which comes out, for it is lost);
1. Hillel says, they are not Huchshar. Hillel later retracted and agreed with Shamai.
2. The Hechsher is even to Metamei other foods, even though he never wanted liquid to fall on the grapes. (The same applies to Chibas ha’Kodesh!)
(f) Answer (Abaye): Mid’Rabanan, Chibas ha’Kodesh is like water falling on the Kodesh.
(g) Objection (Rav Yosef): You answered R. Zeira and myself by saying that mid’Rabanan, it is as if water came upon them – but Reish Lakish only asked if mid’Rabanan, it is as if water came upon the Kodesh!
(h) Answer (Abaye): If it was only mid’Rabanan, we would not burn Terumah or Kodshim that touched the meat, we would just not eat it – do you really think that Reish Lakish asked about this?!
1. Rather, he asked if we burn what touches the meat – he is unsure if mid’Oraisa, it is as if water came upon the Kodesh!
3) THE SOURCE FOR CHIBAS “HA’KODESH”
(a) Question: If Chibas ha’Kodesh is mid’Oraisa, what is the source for it?
1. Suggestion: “(Kodesh) meat that will touch anything Tamei (may not be eaten)” – this teaches that meat of Korbanos is Huchshar.
2. Question: How did it become Huchshar?
i. Suggestion: It became Huchshar through its blood.
ii. Rejection: R. Chiya bar Aba taught, “You will pour (the blood) on the ground like water” – only water which is poured on the ground is Machshir (to exclude blood of Korbanos, which is collected in a vessel)!
3. Answer #1: It became Huchshar through liquids of the Mitbach (the place in the Mikdash where the meat is rinsed).
4. Rejection: But R. Yosi bar Chanina taught, liquids in the Mitbach are Tehorim (do not become Tamei) – further, they are not even Machshir!
i. Suggestion: Perhaps he only referred to blood of the Mitbach (not the other liquids).
ii. Rejection: He said, the *liquids* (*are* Tehorim)!
5. Answer #2: The meat is Huchshar through Chibas ha’Kodesh.
6. Rejection: Perhaps the Hechsher was (not through Chibas ha’Kodesh, rather,) like Rav Yehudah established.
i. (Rav Yehudah): The Korban was taken through a river, and it was still wet when it was slaughtered.
(b) Answer: We learn Chibas ha’Kodesh from the end of the verse – “*And the* meat” – this includes wood and frankincense (that they can become Tamei).
1. Question: But these are not foods!
2. Answer: Because of Chibas ha’Kodesh, they are considered foods, they are Mekabel Tum’ah – likewise, Chibas ha’Kodesh is Machshir Kodesh meat without a liquid!
(c) Question: What is the conclusion regarding Reish Lakish’s question, does Chibas ha’Kodesh only Machshir to become Pasul, or even to become Tamei?
(d) This question is unresolved.