CHULIN 31-43 - Two weeks of study material have been dedicated by Mrs. Estanne Abraham Fawer to honor the Yahrzeit of her father, Rav Mordechai ben Eliezer Zvi (Rabbi Morton Weiner) Z'L, who passed away on 18 Teves 5760. May the merit of supporting and advancing Dafyomi study -- which was so important to him -- during the weeks of his Yahrzeit serve as an Iluy for his Neshamah.
1) "SHEHIYAH B'MI'UT SIMANIM"
OPINIONS: Rav Huna brei d'Rav Nasan asks what the Halachah is in a case in which the Shochet was "Shahah b'Mi'ut Simanim. " The Gemara leaves his question unanswered ("Teiku").
How exactly was this act of Shehiyah in a minority of the Simanim done?
(a) RASHI explains that the Shochet paused during the Shechitah after he cut a majority of the Simanim. This is the same way Rashi explains the question regarding Chaladah done to a minority of the Simanim (30b; see Insights there).
However, according to Rashi, how is it possible for a Shechitah that was done properly (a majority of the Simanim were cut) and is valid to become Pasul afterwards?
1. The RASHBA (30b, DH Hichlid) says that the Pesul is mid'Rabanan, "so that it not appear as though he is slaughtering the animal with an act (Shehiyah) that invalidates Shechitah."
2. The TEVU'OS SHOR (23:9) disagrees with the Rashba and says that the words, "It is all one Shechitah," which Rashi (DH Mahu) uses imply that the Pesul is mid'Oraisa. The Tevu'os Shor explains that although the Shechitah was already valid, nevertheless since the cutting of the last part of the Simanim is also part of the Shechitah process, Shehiyah at that point can invalidate the Shechitah. The Torah says that if a Shechitah is done in two separate parts (with a pause in between), the entire Shechitah is invalid. Therefore, although the animal became permitted when a majority of the Simanim was cut, it loses that status retroactively as a result of the Shehiyah in the last part of the Shechitah.
RAV ELCHANAN WASSERMAN Hy'd (in KOVETZ INYANIM) has difficulty with the approach of the Tevu'os Shor. How can a Shechitah that was already valid become Pasul because of a Shehiyah that occurs afterwards?
Rav Elchanan explains as follows. When one cuts most of the Simanim, the Shechitah is valid because of "Rubo k'Chulo" -- it is as if he cut all of the Simanim. When one cuts the majority of a Siman properly, the rule of "Rubo k'Chulo" applies, and the entire Siman is considered to have been cut properly. However, when the entire Siman actually was cut, with a majority cut properly and a minority cut improperly, the rule of "Rubo k'Chulo" cannot apply to give the entire Siman the status of having been cut properly. ("Rov" is not "k'Chulo" when there is an actual "Kulo.") Accordingly, the Shechitah is invalidated when the final minority is cut improperly, even though a majority was cut properly. (See also Insights to Chulin 30:3.)
Rav Elchanan explains that the source for this rule -- that "Rubo k'Chulo" applies only when there is no actual "Kulo" -- is the law that a Zavah must count seven clean days before she becomes Tahor. When the seventh day arrives, she may become Tahor at the beginning of the day since, with regard to counting days, a part of a day is like the entire day. However, if she becomes a Zavah again at the end of that seventh day, she becomes Tamei retroactively. The reason for this is that once the entire day has actually arrived, the Taharah takes effect only with the entire clean day. Since it turned out that the entire day was not a clean day (since she became a Zavah at the end of the day), the Taharah does not take effect.
Similarly, with regard to Shechitah, once the Shechitah has been completed the entire Shechitah must be done properly and "Rubo k'Chulo" does not apply. (Mordechai Zvi Dicker)
(b) TOSFOS (31b, DH Hichlid) quotes RABEINU TAM who explains that the Shochet paused during the first part of the Shechitah, before he cut a majority. The Gemara is discussing a pause after the first minority of the Kaneh (trachea) was cut. The Shechitah might be valid even though there was a pause, because the Halachah is that when one finds half of the trachea already cut and he performs Shechitah at that point, bringing the cut to a majority of the Kaneh, the Shechitah is valid (28a, 29a). (This is because a cut in half of the trachea does not render the animal a Tereifah. In contrast, if there was a cut in the esophagus before the Shechitah, the animal is a Tereifah.)
According to Rabeinu Tam, if the Shehiyah took place during the final minority (the case of the Gemara according to Rashi's explanation), the Shechitah certainly is valid.
(c) Tosfos quotes RABEINU OSHIYA who explains that the Gemara is discussing neither Shehiyah at the beginning of the Shechitah nor Shehiyah at the end of the Shechitah. A pause after cutting either the first minority, or the last minority, of the Siman does not invalidate the Shechitah, according to Rabeinu Oshiya. The Gemara's question involves Shehiyah that occurs in the middle of the Shechitah. In the Gemara earlier, Rava teaches that when one spends an entire day slaughtering a single animal (because the blade of the knife is dull), his Shechitah is valid (provided, of course, that he does not stop in the middle of the Shechitah, and provided that there is no defect on the blade). Rav Huna brei d'Rav Nasan is asking what the Halachah is in a case in which the Shochet finished cutting the majority of the first Siman, and then he spent a few minutes cutting the remaining minority of that Siman, and then he continued cutting the second Siman. Is the time that he took to cut the remaining minority of the first Siman considered a pause in the Shechitah, since it is not necessary to cut the remaining minority once a majority has been cut (and it is considered like cutting a different part of the body, and constitutes Shehiyah), or is the remaining minority considered part of the Shechitah process, and the cutting of that minority does not constitute a pause between cutting the first Siman and cutting the second? This is Rav Huna's question.
2) THE STATUS OF THE LUNG AFTER THE TRACHEA IS CUT
OPINIONS: The Gemara quotes Reish Lakish who rules that when the trachea was cut, and then the lung became punctured before the esophagus was cut, the Shechitah nevertheless is valid. Since the lung depends on the air flow from the trachea, once the trachea has been cut the lung is rendered useless, and it is as if it has been detached from the animal ("k'Mancha b'Dikula Damya"). A puncture in the lung at that point cannot render the animal a Tereifah.
Does the Gemara mean literally that the lung is considered detached from the animal after the trachea is cut? This would mean that whenever an animal is slaughtered, the lung should become permitted to eat after a single Siman is cut (i.e. the trachea), since it has become detached from the animal before the esophagus is cut!
(a) The ROSH YOSEF understands that this indeed is what the Gemara means. The lung becomes permitted with the cutting of a single Siman, because that single Siman constitutes the life-source of the lung.
(b) The RASHBA (Toras ha'Bayis 2:3) explains that the lung is considered detached only with regard to the laws of Tereifos. Since the lung is no longer connected to its life-source, it cannot cause the animal to become a Tereifah. However, in order to permit the lung to be eaten, both Simanim of the animal must be cut. If the lung was removed before the Shechitah was completed, it is prohibited.
The CHAZON ISH (3:19) adds that the lung, after the trachea is cut, is considered like an "Ever ha'Meduldal," a limb that is cut off from an animal such that the limb cannot live. The Halachah is that if such an animal is slaughtered, the limb becomes permitted to eat with the Shechitah. Similarly, in the case of the Gemara here, the lung becomes permitted by the rest of the Shechitah, even though the lung itself is disconnected from its life-source when the trachea alone is cut.
This follows the Rashba's understanding that the lung is not considered detached completely, for if it would be considered detached completely, then the Shechitah would not be able to permit it. (Mordechai Zvi Dicker)