Shalom,
In today's insights on the daf it says "...Rebbi Shimon maintains that blood is not one of the liquids that are Machshir..."
I understand from the sugya on 35B that R Shimon holds that only dam chalalim is machshir - not that he argues on y"d shch"t d"m. Where is my misunderstanding? Todah
Yakov, Toronto
1) I see what you mean, Reb Yakov. In fact, we have a source that shows that Rebbi Shimon agrees that blood is a liquid that is Machsir. In the Yerushalmi (Terumos 11:2, just before Mishnah 3), Rebbi Yochanan says in the name of Rebbi Shimon bar Yochai that if someone tells you that there are 8 liquids which are Machshir, you should refute this idea. One sees from here that Rebbi Shimon himself agrees that there are 7 Mashkin Machshirin. One of these must be blood. The Rash (Terumos 11:2) writes that they possessed a tradition that there are 7 liquids, and this tradition clearly included Rebbi Shimon.
One must say that when it is stated that one of the Mashkin is Dam, according to Rebbi Shimon this means specifically Dam Chalalim.
2) Nevertheless, what we wrote in the Insights to the Daf may be based on what the Mishnah Achronah writes on Mashkin 6:6, DH R'AB"A, that Rebbi Shimon maintains that all blood, with the exception of Dam Chalalim, is not called a Mashkeh. According to this view, one can argue that blood is not a liquid, and Dam Chalalim is Machshir only because of the Gezeras ha'Kasuv in Bamidbar 23:24.
Logically, the above makes a lot of sense. All of the 7 Mashkin are consumable liquids, with the exception of Dam. (This is something which is timely at this sesaon of year, since those who made the blood libels against Klal Yisrael throughout the centuries likely cited Bamidbar 23:24 in their accusations.)
According to the Mishnah Achronah, in general Dam is not called a Mashkeh in the opinion of Rebbi Shimon.
3) I believe that I can, bs'd, provide a somewhat stronger basis for the above explanation.
a. If we look carefully in the Mishnah Achronah, we will notice that two lines before what I cited he writes that "blood is not a liquid because the Torah (Vayikra 7:26) calls it a food," since it states, "And all blood you shall not eat." Since blood is not a liquid, it is not Machshir.
b. The Mishnah Achronah continues and writes that Dam Chalalim is different because the verse (Bamidbar 23:24) calls it "Shetiyah." It is a Chidush that Shetiyah is applicable to blood -- "Ein Lecha Bo Ela Chidusho" -- one cannot add on to the Chidush of the Torah. Therefore, only Dam Chalalim -- and no other kind of blood -- is considered Shetiyah, according to Rabbi Shimon.
c. It is true that, on the next line, the Mishnah Achronah writes that no blood apart from Dam Chalalim is called a Mashkeh. This suggests at least that Dam Chalalim is indeed called a Mashkeh, which does not seem to fit well with what the Kollel wrote in the Insights to the Daf (that Rebbi Shimon maintains that blood is not one of the liquids that is Machshir). However, I think that if one looks closely at the Mishnah Achronah, one will see that blood is not a liquid like the other 6 liquids. The chief factor is that the Torah calls it a food. Then, there is a Chidush that Dam Chalalim is also considered "Shetiyah," so it can be referred to as a Mashkeh, but the chief quality of Dam Chalalim is not as a liquid. The Torah calls all blood a food, and Dam Chalalim is also called "Shetiyah," so even though the Mishnah Achronah calls it a liquid, this does not mean that it is nothing more than "Shetiyah."
Chag Kasher v'Same'ach,
Dovid Bloom
Shalom,
It is a nice shtikel Torah but, at the end of the day, the Mishna Achronah cannot argue on a Yerushalmi without another source in Sha"s to back it up.
Additionally, isn't the source for the shitah of the Chachamim that all dam is considered a "mashkeh" also from the pasuk "dam challim yishteh"? Whatever lamdus you will say in R Shimon (that this is an exception to the fact that dam is really ochel) will apply to the Chachamim as well in a broader sense and the Tosefta in Shabbos (9:14) quoted by the Rambam in Pirush Mishnayos in Machshirin (6:4) clearly uses this drasha to teach us that dam is a Mashkeh, even though the posuk says "yishteh". Why should it be different according to Rav Shimon?
The words of the Rambam and the Rav (m'Bartenura) on that Mishna (I guess you meant Machshirin, not Mashkin) clearly show that dam is a mashkeh even according to R Shimon, until the animal dies. (Though, you could suggest that the Mishna Achrona is arguing on them).
Y'yasher kochacha 'chol tuv
Yakov
Reb Yakov, a big Yasher Koach as always for your very insightful He'oros!
1) The Mishnah Achronah agrees with the Yerushalmi, that according to Rebbi Shimon, Dam Chalalim is a Mashkeh, but all other kinds of blood are considered food, not liquid, according to Rebbi Shimon.
2) The Tosefta in Shabbos 9:14 seems to follow the Chachamim, not Rebbi Shimon. The proof for this is that the Tosefta brings a source that all blood is a liquid from the verse about Dam Chalalim. This does not fit with Rebbi Shimon, since the Gemara (Chulin, end of 35b) states that, according to Rebbi Shimon, Dam Chalalim is different from other kinds of blood. Only Dam Chalalim is a liquid which can be Machshir, because there is a special verse, "... he will drink" (Bamidbar 23:24). We learn from this that, according to Rebbi Shimon, the verse "Dam Chalalim Yishteh," is teaching an exception to the rule, that there is one kind of blood which is Machshir. This is not consistent with the Tosefta that derives from the verse of "Dam Chalalim Yishteh" the Din for all kinds of blood, that all blood is a liquid which is Machshir. It must be that the Tosefta follows the Chachamim, not Rebbi Shimon.
3)
a) These words of the Rambam and the Bartenura in Machshirin 6:6 (my apologies for mistakenly writing Mashkin) seem very difficult to understand. They appear to say that according to Rebbi Shimon it is only when a person dies that his blood stops being a Mashkeh, which would imply that any blood that comes from a live person is Machshir. The latter seems to be contradicted by the Gemara in Chulin (35b), which states that according to Rebbi Shimon "Dam Magafoso" -- blood that comes from the wound of a live person -- is not Machshir.
b) I therefore suggest the following Peshat in the Rambam. He means that the blood of a live person is a potential Machshir, not an actual Machshir. It is only when the person is killed by unnatural means that it becomes an actual Machshir, but while he is still alive it possesses "Toras Machshir," as the Rambam writes; it is considered by the Torah as something which still could become a Mashkeh. However, if the person died a natural death, his blood does not even possess "Toras Mashkeh" because it can now never become a Mashkeh.
c) According to this, there is no contradiction from the Rambam and Bartenura to what the Mishnah Achronah writes. The statement of the Mishnah Achronah -- that all blood apart from Dam Chalalim is not considered a Mashkeh -- is in reality stated explicitly in the Gemara in Chulin 35b.
Wishing you and all your family a Kosher and freilicher Pesach!
Dovid Bloom
Y'yasher kochacha for the comments and feedback.
1) I misunderstood you originally but if you are maskim that even according to R' Shimon at least Dam Chalalim is a mashkeh, and when the Kollel wrote ""...Rebbi Shimon maintains that blood is not one of the liquids that are Machshir..." you only meant OTHER blood, then we agree.
2) I was not suggesting that the Tosefta is like R' Shimon. I only meant that just like according to the Chachamim of the tosephsta whatever is included in the posuk is called a mashkeh, so too according to R' Shimon dam chalalim is a mashkeh. I now understand that you agree with that.
3) At first glance, I think your pshat in the Ramba"m is correct. Of course, according to Rashi's mehalech there in Chulin 35b, the gemara is not talking about human blood, though I need to think about if it is possible to even suggest that Rashi and maybe the Rambam hold that according to R' Shimon dam of a live person is machshir and the Rambam's words in pirush mishnayos could be taken literally...
Wishing you a chag kosher v'sameach.
yakov
1) Maskim!
2) I learned that the difference between the Chachamim and Rebbi Shimon is that the Chachamim learn from the verse "Dam Chalalim" that all blood is Machshir, while Rebbi Shimon maintains that one cannot broaden the verse to teach anything more than it says explicitly; the verse includes only Dam Chalalim and no other kind of blood.
3) The Rambam (Hilchos Tum'as Ochlin 10:3) maintains that even according to the Chachamim, blood that was drawn from a human for health purposes is not Machshir.
Kol Tuv,
Dovid Bloom