Chullin Daf 36 צולין דַף 36

A Baraisa states: השוחט והתיז דם על הדלעת – if one shechts and blood spattered onto a gourd [of terumah], Rebbe says הוכשר – [the gourd] becomes susceptible to tumah, but Rebbe Chiya says תולין – we suspend its status. Rav Pappa explains that if the blood remained on the gourd until the shechitah was completed, all agree it is מכשיר. They argue where the blood was wiped away between the shechitah of the two סימנים. Rebbe holds ישנה לשחיטה מתחילה ועד סוף – shechitah is [considered shechitah] from beginning to end, so the blood is considered "דם שחיטה", and is מכשיר. Rebbe Chiya holds אינה לשחיטה אלא בסוף – shechitah is only [considered shechitah] at the end, so blood which was wiped away beforehand is only דם מכה – blood of a wound, and not מכשיר. He says its status is “suspended” until we determine if the blood remained at the shechitah’s completion. Rav Ashi explains that Rebbe Chiya is uncertain if ישנה לשחיטה מתחלה ועד סוף, so the gourd’s status remains in doubt (and it is neither eaten nor burned). Rebbe Oshaya says that we may rely on Rebbe Simon’s opinion (that blood of shechitah is never מכשיר), who forms a majority together with Rebbe Chiya (albeit for different reasons).

Reish Lakish asked: צריד של מנחות – if a dry part of a minchah touches tumah, מונין בו ראשון ושני – do we count it as a ראשון or שני לטומאה (to be metamei others), or is it only tamei itself, but cannot be metamei others? Do we say כי מהניא חבת הקדש לאפסולי גופיה – that the “esteem for hekdesh” renders it susceptible to tumah only for disqualifying [the hekdesh] itself (making it prohibited to eat), but not to count tumah of ראשון and שני? Rebbe Elazar sought to prove that only liquid can generate full-fledged tumah, but his proof is deflected. Rav Yosef proves that shechitah is מכשיר meat for full-fledged tumah (according to Rebbe Shimon), but Abaye answers עשאוהו כהכשר מים מדרבנן – they made [the הכשר of shechitah] the same as the susceptibility caused by water, by Rabbinical [decree]. Abaye answers the same to Rebbe Zeira’s proof that grapes which become wet from juice during picking become susceptible to full-fledged tumah, despite the liquid being against the owner’s wishes. Abaye concedes that in Reish Lakish’s case as well, it would Rabbinically be counted as a ראשון and שני, but his inquiry was whether it has full-fledged tumah מדאורייתא.

Since Reish Lakish’s question was only whether tumah of חיבת הקודש is counted as a ראשון and שני even מדאורייתא, he clearly assumes that the basic principle of חיבת הקודש (disqualifying the kodashim itself) is מדאורייתא. The Gemara asks for the source, and first offers a proof from a passuk discussing kodashim meat becoming tamei. Since blood from the shechitah of korbanos is not מכשיר (since it may not be “spilled like water,” but is needed for זריקה), and משקי בית מטבחיא – liquids from the slaughtering place in the Mikdash are not מכשיר (Biblically), the meat must have become susceptible to tumah through חיבת הקודש, proving that חיבת הקודש is מדאורייתא. However, the Gemara answers that the passuk may be discussing a korban which walked through water, and that water touched the meat after shechitah and was מכשיר it. Rather, the source is from the derashah in that passuk: "והבשר" – “and the meat…” לרבות עצים ולבונה – this is to include wood and frankincense as susceptible to tumah. Since these items are inedible, it must be that חיבת הקודש is מכשיר them, and they are considered like food regarding tumah.