Chullin

But if this were so, then a [vital] service would have been performed by another, and it has been taught: The entire service of the Day of Atonement must be performed by the High Priest alone! — This is rather what he meant: I might have thought that [if another had not completed the slaughtering] it would have been invalid by decree of the Rabbis, (for it might have been argued that the Rabbis declared [the slaughtering] invalid);1 our Mishnah therefore teaches us. [IF A MAN CUT] THE GREATER PART OF ONE ORGAN IN THE CASE OF A BIRD, OR THE GREATER PART OF EACH ORGAN IN THE CASE OF CATTLE, THE SLAUGHTERING IS VALID. But now that it is established that there is not even a Rabbinic decree against it, wherefore is it necessary [for another] to complete the slaughtering? — It is meritorious to complete it. 2 Resh Lakish said in the name of Levi the Elder: The term shechitah applies only to the last stage of the slaughtering. R. Johanan said: The term shechitah applies to the entire process of slaughtering from beginning to end. Raba remarked: All agree that where a gentile cut the first organ of the throat and an Israelite the second, the slaughtering is invalid, for the animal has already been rendered trefah by the hand of the gentile.3 Furthermore all agree that in the case of a burnt-offering of a bird, where the priest nipped the first organ below4 [the red line] and the second organ above it, the nipping is invalid,5 for by nipping the first organ below he has already done to this offering all that is prescribed for a sin-offering of a bird. The dispute arises only where a person cut the first organ6 outside [the Sanctuary] and the second inside [the Sanctuary]. According to the one who says that the term shechitah applies to the entire process of slaughtering from beginning to end, he would in this case be liable.7 But according to the one who says that the term shechitah applies only to the last stage of the slaughtering, he would not be liable. Rabbah b. Shimi said to him: But the Master (that is R. Joseph) did not say so. For [he said that] even where a person cut the first organ8 outside the Sanctuary and the second inside he would also be liable,9 because he has done to this offering outside the Sanctuary such an extent of service as would render the sin-offering of a bird valid [if performed inside the Sanctuary]. Rather [the dispute arises only] where a person cut the lesser portion of the organ outside [the Sanctuary] and completed it inside. According to the one who says that the term shechitah applies to the entire process of slaughtering from beginning to end, he would in this case be liable. But according to the one who says that the term shechitah applies only to the last stage of the slaughtering, he would not be liable. R. Zera raised this objection: All who take part in the service of the Red Cow, either at the beginning or at the end, render their garments unclean.10 And if they do any other work at the same time,11 they render it [the Red Cow] invalid. If any invalidating defect befell it during the slaughtering it does not render unclean the garments worn by those who, either before or after the [occurrence of] the defect, took part in any service in connection with it.12 If the defect occurred during the sprinkling [of the blood], the Red Cow renders unclean the clothes worn by those who took part in any service before the defect, but it does not render unclean the clothes worn by those who took part in any service after the defect. Now if you say that the term shechitah applies to the entire process of slaughtering from beginning to end, then the Tanna should have drawn a distinction even in the slaughtering; thus: If any invalidating defect befell it during the slaughtering, it renders unclean the clothes worn by those who took part in any service before the defect,13 but not the clothes worn by those who took part in any service after the defect! — Raba replied: You are alluding, are you not, to a defect which invalidated the slaughtering? But that is quite a different matter! For it is now apparent that there never was a valid slaughtering!14 But, said Raba, if I have any difficulty [about this Mishnah] it is this: According to the one who says that the term shechitah applies only to the last stage of the slaughtering, the Tanna might have drawn a distinction even where the slaughtering of the Red Cow was entirely according to ritual, as in the case where two persons slaughtered it;15 in which case, the first does not render his clothes unclean but the second does! — R. Joseph thereupon interposed. You are suggesting, are you not, the case of two persons slaughtering one sacrifice? Away with this suggestion! For I have learnt: It is written: Thou shalt slaughter, [to teach] that two persons shall not slaughter one sacrifice; also: Thou shalt slaughter it, [to teach] that one person shall not slaughter two sacrifices [simultaneously].16 And R. Kahana had said that this exposition was based upon the Kethib which is: Thou shalt slaughter it. Whereupon Abaye said to him: Was there not reported in conjunction with this exposition the dictum of Rabbah b. Bar Hana in the name of R. Johanan, namely, that the opinion expressed was that of R. Eleazar son of R. Simeon been done by a gentile (v. supra 13a); and if it is not considered an act of shechitah then it can only be regarded as a mutilation of the organ, a defect which renders the animal trefah and any subsequent slaughtering invalid. below this line according to the particular sacrifice offered. With regard to a consecrated bird the priest, immediately after the nipping, (which in the case of a burnt-offering had to be performed whilst the priest was standing on the circuit round the altar which was above the red line) had to allow the blood to drain by pressing the neck of the bird against the wall of the altar, below the red line in the case of a sin-offering, and above it in the case of a burnt-offering. V. Zeb. 64b-65a. it is invalid here, for he has done to a burnt-offering all that is prescribed for the sin-offering, namely, the nipping of one organ above the red line. and therefore all the rules of uncleanness stated in connection with it do not apply. Johanan, applies even to the first stage of the slaughtering, so that the Red Cow should render unclean the clothes worn by those who took part in any service before the occurrence of the defect.