Chullin Daf 27

All right, Daf Chaf Zayin, Wednesday's Daf, as we begin the second perek. Which sounds like a b'dieved d'choloshan, but someone who shechts one siman by a bird or two simanim by an animal, then sh'chita is k'sheira. The ruba sh'alacha k'mayo, and roiv of any one of these simanim is like the entire siman. Rubo is k'chulo. You got to cut the v'ridin, which we're going to translate as the jugular. If you only shecht half of one siman of the oif or one and a half simanim of the beheima, so that's not enough, and therefore sh'chita is p'sula. However, roiv b'oif or roiv sh'nayim b'beheima, then sh'chita is k'sheira. As long as you shecht the majority of either the one by bird or or more than 1.5 of the beheima, it'll be kosher. And it's going to be shalom u'shainim if that roiv is just mash'hu roiv, like if you used a magnifying glass to see that you just did it over 50% line, then you're okay. Or does it have to be a ruba d'minkar? That's going to be a machlokes Rishonim. Zokti G'mara, "Hashocheit", which sounds like it's lashon avar, means someone who did it already, which is mashma d'evedin, v'lechat'chila lo oif. But you tell me sh'nayim b'beheima l'chat'chila lo oif. The mishna The mishna also includes that shechting both simanim by the beheima is a kashrus. That can't be a lashon of b'dieved. But for crying out loud, that's that's mul simanim. Ad kama l'shecht v'leizilam? How much more do you want to cut? Says Zokti G'mara, which seems to be two t'rutzim. Ibo eis sima, "Echad b'oif", maybe that lashon of b'dieved is only talking about by the oif. V'ibo eis sima, "A ruba sh'alacha k'mayo", it's going on the roiv as opposed to more than the roiv. Now, the pashtus from the G'mara is that both t'rutzim are accepted and there's no machlokes in these t'rutzim. The Rif does not learn that way. The Rif seems to pasken one of these two t'rutzim. Rashi is very clear that the l'chat'chila b'dieved here is talking on a d'rabbanan d'ka level. But according to the Rif, who holds it's machlokes a t'rutzim, and we pasken like the more meikel d'ka t'rutz, that's going on the ruba sh'alacha k'mayo, that means there would be no l'chat'chila d'kapel simanim of the oif. This gets into the whole issue also whether or not there's l'chat'chila b'dieved by a matir. Because if you hold sh'chita is not a mitzva but a matir, there may not be any l'chat'chila / b'dieved when it comes to dinim that are only matir. In the same way, you don't open your mouth when you go into the mikva because of kol ha'roil b'vilas, since it's only a kashrus and paslus issue and not a mitzva like picking up a lulav. Zokti G'mara, "K'mash simanim?" Amar Rav Kahana, "I mean, in English, she shechts human etc. How do you know that shechting is on the animal's neck at all? And now we're going to go through a whole bunch of different ideas of what that muker is. Number one, so the word shechita is mashma mean mukem she shach in that place where the animal bends. You clean it and the way you clean it is by removing its dam which is by shechting it. How do you know that it's a loshen of cleaning? It's a bias. I know that it's the bias. The pasuk can tell us says you're going to clean me with this ezov and I'll be based on that. The aimem is novah. If you're telling me that the shachat means a place where the animal bends, who says the animal only bends by the neck? It also bends the tail. It's always bent there. The shach is mechulash shazak of peena. It bends means it occasionally bends but normally it's not bending. So a good example that would be the neck. The shach the tail is always bent so it's not the best use of the word. Maybe the shach is talking about the animal's ear which is naturally straight but bends from time to time. Lucky you don't have the dam and nefish that comes out of an ear. The aimem of the karban is dam and nefish. Maybe you cut from the ear until you get to the jugular. And more than that, maybe we shouldn't even use this drash at all because how do you know all these other pesulei shchita? It must be a mesorah. So shchita in the tzavar now we have a mesorah. It's a mesorah. After all halacha l'Moshe miSina. But how do you know you can do shchita on the neck? It's because of this mesorah. So if we have a mesorah so then why do I need to have the muker from the pasuk at all that Rav Kahana had brought? Because I know from the pasuk that you don't need to do more and completely sever the head and chop it off into two pieces. Different muker. So we darshan mi'mukem she'zav the place where the animal's dam is zav where it flows. That should be chatehu that's where you should sever it. So my mashma the high chatehu loshen the misbarhu. How do you know that chatehu means actually breaking something? Okay, it talks about this place where it's flowing. Maybe he's not talking about the dam from the neck. Maybe some of the animal's nose where the animal has other stuff flowing out of its nose. No, because zav al yedei chita being and it has to be flowing as a result of a cutting. The high zav may alav and the nose is running just because it runs. The aimem of the liba. Maybe it's talking about the heart of the animal which would flow if you would cut it with a knife. The same also she had a drasha of ikrumi no one. Same question. All these other pesulim how would you know that must be what am I doing with okay okay I got to go board my flight all right we're going to pick this up here on the plane see if we can finish this before take off this is now a third mocker this we're getting into country chicken here in the beginning of I'll take with the all of the season one for a sin I don't know where the animal makes a noise where the animal makes sounds he is that's where you should do that cleansing of removing the correcting the maybe that the is talking about the place where he makes a sound meaning the animals tongue the neck of being a dominant is you're not going to have the dominant by maybe you have to cut until that point and the she had dressed a little bit same must be that we know these as a and therefore likewise in the I don't know my also the same okay another mocker my here's a mocker for being from the tavern did because the prices are the same as it says in the partial of the carbon and they should arrange the different pieces of the carbon chain is you didn't need the terror to repeat and those are different parts of the animal because he's already said that all the pieces of the animal are going to be arranged on the so my is this I don't know what the color of the my is so I don't know if you should because the says earlier in the that you do the of the of the and cut into pieces as long as you get to those pieces that are skinning you don't do any skinning on the it's already been disconnected from the body since already considered a separate piece before the rest of the is done on the rest of the carcass tell me that it's a driver you should range the so tell me the color of the once I already said since the Torah said you have to include it it's not going to have any of already been already been severed and disconnected based on the fact that the head is already severed how do you sever a head is already severed how do you sever a head on the throat is on the animal let's just get into these starts off bringing his from about the ration of the saying that were extra words in the same way and then afterwards he goes to a later just talking about the ration of the what is the matter with the you know what I mean I didn't know what to do this this arranging on the of the ration of the since it's already been severed from the rest of the time is this a ration of the why do I need to say it again in the ration of the head of the animal fats precede all of the other of the animal when they're brought in the time and ration turning over to the common why do I need the initial header in the that's the says it's a how does the coin actually do this process on the base of he covers this header this fat over the place where he did the and that's how he brings it out of the the reason why he does that is because covers you don't want to have the exposed coming out of that open wound so therefore you use the to cover up that part of the bottom line is this is now another marker for the to take place on the high time and I see what the because the says the Torah of the this is the of the and the and the bird in what way are they actually the same and back the other way also in the it has a in the but I think about the and is about the and the Torah is about the and the is about the and the is about the and the is about the and the is about the and the is about the and the is about the and the is about the and the is about the and the is about the by the animal. I'll give you a different thing that we make a parallel between a bird and an animal. Now, you might learn more. If you want to say just like by the case of a bird, you do it from the back of the neck, meaning melika. That's not the case by regular shchita of the wife. Specifically only being done to that melika bird, but regular shchita is not going to be done that way. Comes out that he has a muker now that the shchita is done on the tsavar, the front of the neck of the animal. What does he do with the zayis? The zayis is a meat, and he's trying to make it a ribo. Dafka limited to the bird that only has one siman, and a beheima though requires both simanim. Beheima and birds are brought in the pasuk between beheima and fish. You can't have konah and veshet by a bird. You can't tell me that the reason why the bird is there is to tell me that you have to cut both simanim like you do by a beheima. Because there's a hekesh from birds to fish. You can't go the other extreme saying you can eat a bird without shchiting it at all. So, how can you reconcile it? How do you have a hekesh both to an animal and to a fish? You split the difference. So, you only need to shat one siman by the wife. And in that way, it's in some ways like a beheima and some ways like Now, let's back up. Dog and the love of shchita and the numina. How do you know fish don't need shchita? That tzein and bakar require shchita. They only need to be gathered. All we need for fish is just to gather them, and you don't have to shat them at all. But that can't be the muker that dog and don't need shchita because of the matter of gabei they gathered also those and you still had established also you know why this are from because of the there's never a time we have a in a place where another animal gets a but so come to is all you need for there's a is the by a or maybe you just don't any kind of killing at all you could just like eat it that would be the said the from the an animal which was created from the earth whatever that exactly means whatever that exactly means is by cutting both of them they came from the water this is kind of a thing I believe the says a shot in what this might mean birds which are created from the mud they only need to have one of their cut bring your that the are created from the mud which is partially out of the water and therefore it borrows some from the aspects of the fish and you shall have similarities similarities of fish in the same way there are similarities to and bottom line is only one needs to be cut there was more of this conversation is a reference to the conversation between and the general who is from Rome that in the have a whole dialogue this is some of their dialogue this is what I am sure I have all but we learn from here that we might that the birds were created from water I have also says seems that the birds came from the land how do you reconcile that it seems that the birds came from the land how do you reconcile that it seems that the birds came from the land how do you reconcile that to this general that came from the mud which is a combination of both earth and water tell me that the general saw that his were very surprised when he said this I later on said to the it seems like you have a problem with the cash that I just pushed away this person with a piece of straw meaning I was just there him, but the it's true Min Hamayim Nevru, the birds were created from water. The love of Havaya and all of them, why were they brought to Adam Rishon which sounds like they came from the earth? That's only because they came to Adam Rishon and shame. So, Adam Rishon should give them a name. Some will say the Lashon Acher Omer Lo Yisa Min the following way. Rishon Omer Lo Talmidav and it was flipped around. Mishnah and it was what he told the Talmidim that mud was the way to reconcile between the earth and the water. I'll stop here and pick it up with Yehudah or tomorrow's stuff.