Study Chullin folio 117B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
exclusions are written in these two cases, which indicate that this halakha applies to them alone. Here, with regard to the removal of ashes, it is written: “And he shall put it” (Leviticus 6:3), indicating that this halakha applies to “it,” and nothing else. There, with regard to the heifer whose
The Talmud returns to the 3 phrases from Leviticus 17:11 cited above as teaching that the blood of offerings is not subject to the prohibition of misuse of consecrated property: And why do I need all 3 verses stated with regard to blood?
The Talmud answers: One term serves to exclude blood from the prohibition of notar. If one consumed the blood of such an offering, he is not liable for consuming notar as one who consumed the flesh would be. Rather, he is liable for violating only the prohibition against consuming blood. And one te
But no verse is required to exclude this blood from the halakha of piggul, an offering sacrificed with intention to consume it beyond its designated time, consumption of which is punishable by karet, as this exception is already derived from another source. As we learned in a Mishnah (Zevaḥim 43a):