Chullin 36b (לו:) — the Talmud in English

No; it serves to exclude [

does this not come to exclude]

the esteem of sacred offerings,

and to teach that there is a form of preparation that applies only through water and not through anything else.

And we reject this:

No. One

verse teaches that preparation is required

with regard to impurity imparted by a corpse.

And one

verse teaches this

with regard to impurity imparted by a creeping creature.

And both are necessary.

For if it had taught us

with regard to

impurity imparted by a corpse

alone, I would have said:

It is there that preparation is required, because it does not become impure with

a small measure

the size of a lentil

but only with an olive-bulk of it.

But with regard to a creeping creature, which imparts impurity with a lentil-bulk, say

that it is more severe even in this regard, and

does not require preparation.

And if it had taught us

with regard to

a creeping creature

alone, I would have said:

Because it does not impart

impurity to a person and to vessels

for seven days, but a corpse,

which is more severe,

imparts

impurity to a person and to vessels

for seven days—say that it does not require preparation

with regard to food.

Therefore, both are necessary.

Rav Yosef raised an objection

from our Mishna:

Rabbi Shimon says: They became prepared through slaughter.

Rabbi Shimon is speaking of ordinary meat that is not forbidden to be eaten when impure. When he said

“they became prepared,”

he certainly meant that they can become impure,

even to count them as a first and a second degree,

and thereby cause teruma and sacred offerings, which are forbidden to be eaten when impure, to become impure.

And Rav Yosef raises a difficulty against Rabbi Elazar:

Why

do they impart impurity to others? According to your statement, should it not be derived from the verse that only preparation effected through water causes impurity to others,

whereas this is not food that came into contact with water!

Abaye said to him: They rendered it

this preparation

equivalent to preparation through water by rabbinic decree,

but by Torah law, according to Rabbi Elazar, no preparation causes impurity to others except preparation through water.

Rabbi Zeira said: Come and hear: One who harvests

grapes in order

to

tread them in

a winepress

and not for the purpose of eating them,

Beit Shammai says: They became prepared

by the liquid that emerged from them.

Beit Hillel says: They did not become prepared,

because the harvester does not desire the liquid, since it is going to waste.

And

after they debated the matter,

Beit Hillel was silent before Beit Shammai

and conceded to him. The reason is that the Sages decree lest he place the grapes in pitch-lined baskets, in which the liquids do not go to waste, and he is pleased with the liquids; and they therefore effect preparation.

And Rabbi Zeira raises a difficulty:

Why

do they effect preparation? Once the grapes of ordinary produce contract impurity, they impart impurity to teruma and sacred offerings and render them forbidden,

yet this is not food that came into contact with water,

and all that should follow, according to Rabbi Elazar, is that the food itself becomes disqualified!

Abaye said to him: They rendered it equivalent to preparation through water by rabbinic decree.

Rav Yosef said

to Abaye:

I am raising a difficulty to you

from

“They became prepared through slaughter,” and you say to me

that

they rendered it equivalent to preparation through water

by rabbinic decree.

And

so

Rabbi Zeira can say to you

a difficulty from the grapes harvested for the winepress,

and you say to him: “They rendered it equivalent to preparation through water,”

so it follows that every form of preparation they rendered equivalent to preparation through water. If so,

with regard to Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish,

who was uncertain about preparation through the esteem of sacred offerings,

also

we should say

that they rendered it equivalent to preparation through water,

and it has a first and a second degree. What, then, is the question of Reish Lakish?

He said to him,

Abaye: It is true that the Sages rendered preparation through the esteem of sacred offerings equivalent to preparation through water, and Reish Lakish was not uncertain about that. However, because this impurity is rabbinic, teruma and sacred offerings may not be burned on its account; one may only suspend them and not eat them.

But [

is it possible that]

Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish was asking whether to suspend them?

Certainly, they must be suspended by rabbinic law.

What he was asking

was whether

to burn

teruma and sacred offerings that came into contact with a sacred offering that became impure, whose preparation was effected through the esteem of sacred offerings: Should they be burned because their impurity is by Torah law, or should they not be burned because their impurity is not by Torah law?

And we learn from Abaye’s statement:

By implication,

the essential law of

the esteem of sacred offerings

that effects preparation

is by Torah law

— for the entire uncertainty was only whether it creates a first and a second degree by Torah law.

And we clarify:

From where do we know this [

from where is this learned from the Torah]?

If you say it is from what is written

with regard to the flesh of peace offerings:

“And the flesh that comes into contact with any impure thing

shall not be eaten” (Leviticus 7:19).

And we considered this verse:

This flesh—by what did it become prepared? [

This flesh, through what did it become prepared?]

If you say that it became prepared through blood

of the slaughter: Does this blood of sacred offerings effect preparation?

But Rabbi Hiyya bar Abba said that Rabbi Yohanan said: From where do we know that the blood of sacred offerings does not effect preparation? As it is stated: “You shall not eat it; you shall pour it upon the ground like water” [

Deuteronomy 12:16].

Blood that is poured like water effects preparation; blood that is not poured like water,

but rather is sprinkled on the altar,

does not effect preparation!

Rather,

let us say:

The flesh became prepared

of the peace offerings

through the liquids of the slaughterhouse [

through the liquids in the slaughterhouse of the Temple courtyard], for the flesh was washed with this water.

And we reject this: Do these waters effect preparation?

But Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Hanina, said: The liquids of the slaughterhouse—it is not enough that they are pure [

it is not enough that they are themselves pure] and do not impart impurity to sacred offerings, as Yosei ben Yoezer testified,

but they

also

do not effect preparation. And if you would say: Interpret [

establish] the testimony of Yosei ben Yoezer as referring to

a person,

and Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Hanina, added that blood does not effect preparation because of Rabbi Yohanan’s exposition that the blood of sacred offerings does not effect preparation, but the water of the slaughterhouse does effect preparation.

And we reject this:

But “the liquids

of the slaughterhouse are pure”

he said

in the plural, implying that all the liquids of the Temple courtyard do not impart impurity and do not effect preparation. The question therefore returns: Through what did the flesh become prepared, such that the Torah prohibits its consumption because of impurity?

And we say:

Rather, is it not that it became prepared through the esteem of sacred offerings,

from here it follows that the esteem of sacred offerings effects preparation for sacred offerings by Torah law, and they do not require preparation through water.

And we reject this:

Perhaps

the preparation was effected through ordinary water, and

in accordance with the statement of Rav Yehuda in the name of Shmuel.

For Rav Yehuda said in the name of Shmuel:

How can the flesh of sacred offerings become prepared without the esteem of sacred offerings?

For example, he had a cow designated as a peace offering,

and he led it through a stream

on the way to the Temple.

He slaughtered it

in the Temple courtyard

while liquid was still dripping from it,

and some fell from the hide onto the flesh, thereby effecting preparation.

And we conclude:

Rather,

we learn that the esteem of sacred offerings effects preparation

from the latter part

of the verse “And the flesh that comes into contact,” as it is written: “And the flesh—any pure person may eat flesh” (Leviticus 7:19).

“And the flesh”

is superfluous, and we derive from it

to include wood and frankincense

of sacred offerings.

But are

wood and frankincense fit for eating?

And for what reason do they contract impurity?

Rather,

because

the esteem of sacred offerings effects preparation for them and renders them food [

and makes them food].

Here too, the esteem of sacred offerings effects preparation for it

without water.