Chulin 20 - DIFFERENCES BETWEEN SLAUGHTER AND
1) DIFFERENCES BETWEEN SLAUGHTER AND "MELIKAH"
(a) Question (against Benei R. Chiya - R. Yanai - Mishnah): Anything Kosher for slaughter is invalid for Melikah; anything Kosher for Melikah is invalid for slaughter.
1. Question: What do we learn from this?
2. Suggestion: It teaches about moving the Simanim behind the spine (it is Kosher for slaughter, and hence invalid for Melikah). (Since the first clause teaches a Chidush, we can say that the second clause was included for parallel structure.)
(b) Answer #1 (to both questions - Rabah bar bar Chanah): No - it teaches about a tooth or fingernail (Rashi - when attached, these are Kosher for Melikah, and invalid for slaughter; others explain - when detached, these are Kosher for slaughter and invalid for Melikah).
(c) Rejection: Another Mishnah teaches this (15B or 68A)!
(d) Answer #2 (to both questions - R. Yirmeyah): It excludes going back and forth (moving the knife or fingernail away and returning it), which is Kosher for slaughter and invalid for Melikah.
1. This is according to the opinion that back and forth is invalid for Melikah.
2. Question: According to the opinion that it is Kosher for Melikah, what does the Mishnah teach?
3. Answer: Benei R. Chiya must hold that back and forth is invalid for Melikah.
(e) (Rav Kahana): The Mitzvah of Melikah is to cut (by pressing the fingernail) straight down into the neck.
1. Suggestion (R. Avin): He holds, only this is Kosher, not going back and forth.
2. Rejection (R. Yirmeyah): If this is Kosher, all the more so, back and forth!
3. Question: If so, what does he exclude (by saying '*This* is the Mitzvah)?
4. Answer: He means, *even* cutting by pressing is the Mitzvah.
(f) (R. Yirmeyah): Whatever is Kosher for slaughter, correspondingly on the Oref is Kosher for Melikah.
1. Inference: Whatever is invalid for slaughter is invalid for Melikah.
2. Question: What does this teach?
i. Suggestion: It teaches that Ikur (uprooting the Simanim) disqualifies Melikah.
ii. Rejection: Rami bar Yechezkeil taught that Ikur does not apply to birds!
3. Answer (Rav Papa): It teaches that Melikah is invalid on the (back of the) head.
4. Question: This is obvious - the Torah said, "Facing the Oref"!
5. Answer: Rav Papa meant, the bottom of the back of the head (where it slants in; alternatively, he cut on an incline until he reached the Simanim).
i. (Rav Huna): If the first third was Hagramah, and the last two thirds were proper slaughter, it is invalid.
ii. (R. Yirmeyah teaches that the same applies to Melikah.)
(a) (Rav Acha): Rami bar Yechezkel taught that Ikur does not apply to birds - this is according to the opinion that the Torah does not require slaughter of birds;
(b) According to the opinion that slaughter (of birds) is mid'Oraisa, Ikur applies to birds.
(c) Objection (Rav Ashi): Just the opposite! If slaughter is mid'Oraisa, we can say that a tradition from Sinai teaches that Ikur does not apply to birds;
1. Even if a verse teaches that birds must be slaughtered like animals, many laws of slaughter are only a tradition, perhaps Ikur was a tradition;
2. But if Chachamim obligated slaughter, presumably they equate birds to animals regarding all laws of slaughter!
(d) (Rava bar Kisi): Rami bar Yechezkeil's teaching that Ikur does not apply to birds only refers to Melikah, but Ikur disqualifies slaughter of birds.
(e) Question: But R. Yirmeyah taught, whatever is Kosher for slaughter, correspondingly on the Oref is Kosher for Melikah; we inferred, whatever is invalid for slaughter is invalid for Melikah!
(f) Answer: Rava bar Kisi argues with R. Yirmeyah.
3) CUTTING THE NECKBONE BEFORE THE "SIMANIM"
(a) (Ze'iri): If the neckbone and much flesh was cut, the animal is a Neveilah.
(b) Question #1 (Rav Chisda): A Mishnah already teaches this!
1. (Mishnah): If Melikah was done with a knife, if someone later eats the bird, he and the clothes he is wearing (when he swallows) become Teme'im (the bird is Neveilah).
2. If cutting the neckbone and much flesh would not make it a Neveilah, only a Treifah, Melikah with a knife would be like slaughtering a Treifah (since the Simanim are cut after the neckbone and much flesh);
i. This cannot be, for a slaughtered Treifah is not Neveilah!
(c) Answer: Really, cutting the neckbone and much flesh only makes it Treifah; Melikah done with a knife makes a Neveilah, for it is not at all like slaughter!
(d) Question: Why not?
(e) Answer #1 (Rav Huna): It is Chaladah (Rashi - the knife is covered up in the neck when it cuts the Simanim; Tosfos - the Simanim are cut in the wrong direction, from back to front).
(f) Answer #2 (Rava): It is Drasah (he cuts by pressing, not by moving back and forth).
1. Rav Huna did not answer like Rava, for he holds that back and forth is valid for Melikah;
2. Rava did not answer like Rav Huna, for he holds that Chaladah is only when the knife is *totally* hidden, like a CHuLDAH (rodent) in a mousehole.
(g) Question #2 (Rava): According to Ze'iri, what does Melikah accomplish - the bird is already dead before the Simanim are cut!
1. Counter-question (Abaye): (Even without Ze'iri,) how do you understand Melikah of an Olah, in which both Simanim must be cut?
i. Cutting one Siman already kills the bird (it suffices for slaughter, or Melikah of a Chatas) - the second Siman is cut on a dead bird!
2. Answer (Rava): Cutting the second Siman is not part of the Melikah, it is to fulfill the Mitzvah of dividing (the head from the body), which applies after death.
3. Question (Abaye): If so, also the skin should be cut!
4. Answer (Rava): The Mitzvah of dividing only applies to what must be cut in slaughter (i.e., the Simanim).
5. Question (Abaye): But Chachamim say that the Simanim must be totally cut for Melikah, whereas for slaughter, it suffices to cut the majority of each Siman!
6. Correction (Rava): Rather, the Mitzvah of dividing applies only to those things that must be cut in slaughter.