Chullin

And what is the size of a notch which renders the altar unfit?1 — Such a notch as would catch the finger-nail [when passed over it]. An objection was raised. It was taught: What size of notch renders the altar unfit? R. Simeon b. Yohai says: The size of a handbreadth; R. Eliezer b. Jacob says: The size of an olive. — This is no objection, for ‘the opinions in this [Baraitha] refer to an altar of cement, whereas here we are dealing with an altar of stones.2 R. Huna said: A slaughterer who does not present his knife3 to a Sage for examination is to be placed under the ban. Raba said: He is to be removed [from his vocation], and it is to be announced publicly that his meat is trefah. Now these Rabbis do not disagree; for the former deals with the case where the knife on examination was found to be satisfactory,4 whereas the latter deals with the case where it was not found to be satisfactory. Rabina said that where the knife was not found to be satisfactory the meat is to be soiled with dung so that it may not even be sold to gentiles. There was a case of a slaughterer who did not present his knife for examination to Raba b. Hinena. The latter thereupon put him under the ban, removed him [from his] vocation and announced publicly that his meat was trefah. Mar Zutra and R. Ashi happened to call on the said Raba b. Hinena who said to them, ‘Would you, Masters, look into this case, for there are small children dependent on him’? R. Ashi examined the knife5 and found it satisfactory; he thereupon declared him fit again [to act as slaughterer]. Mar Zutra then said to him: ‘Are you not concerned at all in overruling this Sage’?6 — R. Ashi replied. ‘We were only carrying out his instructions’. Rabbah son of R. Huna said: One may slaughter in the first instance with a loose tooth or a loose finger-nail. But have we not learnt: EXCEPTING A SCYTHE, A SAW, TEETH OR A FINGERNAIL, SINCE THESE STRANGLE? — As regards teeth there is no contradiction, for Rabbah's statement deals with a single [tooth], whereas our Mishnah deals with two [teeth];7 and as regards a finger-nail there is no contradiction, for Rabbah's statement deals with a nail that is detached from the finger, whereas our Mishnah deals with a nail that is attached to the finger. 8 MISHNAH. IF ONE SLAUGHTERED WITH A SCYTHE,9 MOVING IT FORWARD ONLY, BETH SHAMMAI DECLARE THE SLAUGHTERING INVALID, AND BETH HILLEL DECLARE IT VALID. IF THE TEETH OF THE SCYTHE WERE FILED AWAY IT IS REGARDED AS AN ORDINARY KNIFE. GEMARA. R. Hiyya b. Abba said in the name of R. Johanan. Even when Beth Hillel declared the slaughtering valid they intended thereby to teach that the animal was to be regarded as clean and not a nebelah, but as for eating it they certainly held that it was forbidden.10 R. Ashi said: This is supported by the context, for it reads in the Mishnah: BETH SHAMMAI DECLARE THE SLAUGHTERING INVALID, AND BETH HILLEL DECLARE IT VALID; but it does not read: Beth Shammai forbid it11 and Beth Hillel permit it! But according to your argument, should not the Mishnah read: ‘Beth Shammai declare it unclean and Beth Hillel declare it clean’? The fact is that the expressions ‘declare valid and invalid’ and ‘permit and forbid’ are synonymous. MISHNAH. IF ONE SLAUGHTERED [BY CUTTING] AT THE [TOP] RING12 [OF THE WINDPIPE] AND LEFT A HAIR'S BREADTH OF ITS ENTIRE CIRCUMFERENCE [TOWARDS THE HEAD]. THE SLAUGHTERING IS VALID. R. JOSE SON OF R. JUDAH SAYS, IF ONLY THERE WAS LEFT [TOWARDS THE HEAD] A HAIR'S BREADTH OF THE GREATER PART OF ITS CIRCUMFERENCE,13 [THE SLAUGHTERING IS VALID]. GEMARA. Rab and Samuel both agree that the law is in accordance with the view of R. Jose son of R. Judah.14 Howbeit, R. Jose son of R. Judah said this only with regard to the top ring, since [the cartilage] surrounds the windpipe entirely, but he did not say this with regard to the other rings.15 But does he not hold such a view with regard to the other rings? Surely it has been taught: R. Jose son of R. Judah says. whole stones. Deut. XXVII, 6. respect to a Rabbi; Ber. 29a. that must of necessity be between one tooth and the other. scythe forward the points glide over the throat without tearing. edges of the scythe would certainly tear the throat. opposed to the other rings of the trachea which are incomplete. Lit., ‘from within’, i.e., beginning at the ring and proceeding upwards or downwards. This top ring of the windpipe is regarded in this Mishnah as the uppermost limit of the prescribed area within which the slaughtering may be performed. and completed the slaughtering there. It is nevertheless valid according to R. Jose b. R. Judah, since in slaughtering it is not essential to cut through more than the greater part of the organ. being incomplete, are not regarded as the proper place for slaughtering. Accordingly Rab and Samuel hold that the slaughtering can only be performed by cutting either in the top ring or between the other rings. This is Rashi's interpretation. There are other interpretations suggested by Rashi and Tosaf. q.v.