שֶׁמָּא יִדְרוֹסוּ זֶה עַל זֶה.

that perhaps each will cause the other to press the knife.

מְתִיב רַבִּי אָבִין: שָׁחַט אֶת הַוֶּושֶׁט לְמַטָּה וְאֶת הַקָּנֶה לְמַעְלָה, אוֹ אֶת הַוֶּושֶׁט לְמַעְלָה וְאֶת הַקָּנֶה לְמַטָּה – שְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְּשֵׁרָה; אַמַּאי? וְהָא לֵיכָּא שְׁחִיטָה מְפוֹרַעַת!

Rabbi Avin raises an objection from a baraita : If one slaughtered, i.e., cut, the gullet below on the neck and the windpipe above on the neck, or cut the gullet above on the neck and the windpipe below on the neck, his slaughter is valid. Based on this, Rabbi Avin asks: Why is the slaughter valid? But in that case there is no clear and obvious slaughter.

הוּא מוֹתִיב לָהּ, וְהוּא מְפָרֵק לָהּ: בִּשְׁחִיטָה הָעֲשׂוּיָה כְּקוּלְמוֹס.

He raises the objection and he resolves it. This baraita is not referring to cuts on two places on the neck; rather, it is referring to slaughter performed on a diagonal, like the point of a reed [ kekulmos ] fashioned into a writing utensil. The slaughterer begins cutting from the top of one siman and cuts diagonally downward so that when he reaches the second siman , the knife is lower down.

הַהוּא תּוֹרָא דְּאִישְׁחַט בִּשְׁנַיִם וּשְׁלֹשָׁה מְקוֹמוֹת, עַל רַב יִצְחָק בַּר שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר מָרְתָא שְׁקַל מִשּׁוּפְרֵי שׁוּפְרֵי, אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַבִּי זֵירָא: לִמַּדְתָּנוּ רַבֵּינוּ, מִשְׁנָתֵינוּ בִּשְׁנֵי סַכִּינִין וּשְׁנֵי בְּנֵי אָדָם.

The Gemara relates: There was a certain bull that was slaughtered with cuts in two or three places in the simanim on its neck. Rav Yitzḥak bar Shmuel bar Marta entered the store and took a cut of meat from the highest quality parts of the animal, thereby demonstrating that the slaughter was valid. Rabbi Zeira said to him: Our rabbi, you have taught us through your actions that the mishna: If two people are grasping a knife and slaughtering one animal, even one above and one below, is referring even to a case of two knives and two people who are each cutting the simanim at a different part of the neck with their knives.

אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר רַב: הֶחֱלִיד אֶת הַסַּכִּין בֵּין סִימָן לְסִימָן וּפְסָקוֹ – פְּסוּלָה, תַּחַת הָעוֹר – כְּשֵׁרָה.

§ Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: If one concealed the knife in the neck between one siman and the other siman , i.e., he inserted the knife between the windpipe and the gullet, and he severed the gullet first and then removed the knife and cut the windpipe, the slaughter is not valid. If one concealed the knife beneath the hide of the neck and then he cut both simanim , the slaughter is valid.

מַאי קָא מַשְׁמַע לָן? תָּנֵינָא: אוֹ שֶׁהֶחְלִיד אֶת הַסַּכִּין תַּחַת הַשֵּׁנִי וּפְסָקוֹ – רַבִּי יְשֵׁבָב אוֹמֵר: נְבֵלָה, רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר: טְרֵפָה!

The Gemara asks: What is Rav teaching us? We already learn this halakha explicitly in a mishna (32a): Or if one cut one siman and concealed the knife beneath the second siman and severed it, Rabbi Yeshevav says: The animal is an unslaughtered carcass and imparts ritual impurity through contact with it and carrying it. Rabbi Akiva says: The animal is a tereifa , and although eating it is prohibited, it does not transmit ritual impurity. Both agree that the slaughter is not valid in the sense that it does not permit the consumption of the meat of the animal.

אִי מִמַּתְנִיתִין הֲוָה אָמִינָא: הָנֵי מִילֵּי מִלְּמַטָּה לְמַעְלָה, דְּלָא קָעָבֵיד כְּדֶרֶךְ שְׁחִיטָה, אֲבָל מִלְמַעְלָה לְמַטָּה, דְּקָעָבֵיד כְּדֶרֶךְ שְׁחִיטָה – אֵימָא שַׁפִּיר דָּמֵי, קָא מַשְׁמַע לָן.

The Gemara answers: If this halakha is learned from the mishna alone, I would say that this statement applies only in a case where one conceals the knife beneath the gullet and cuts it from below to above, i.e., from the nape to the front of the neck, because he did not perform the slaughter in the standard manner of slaughter. But if he cut the gullet from above to below, i.e., from the front of the neck to the nape, since he performed the slaughter in the standard manner of slaughter, say that the slaughter is valid. Therefore, Rav teaches us that with regard to any case where one conceals the knife during slaughter, his slaughter is not valid.

תַּחַת הָעוֹר כְּשֵׁרָה. בֵּי רַב אָמְרִי: תַּחַת הָעוֹר אֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ.

The Gemara proceeds to analyze the second part of that which Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: If one concealed the knife beneath the hide of the neck and then he cut both simanim in the standard manner the slaughter is valid. The school of Rav say that Rav says that in a case where one conceals the knife beneath the hide and cuts the simanim of the animal, I do not know whether the slaughter is valid, or whether it is not valid because he concealed the knife during the slaughter.

אִיבַּעֲיָא לְהוּ, לְבֵי רַב דְּאָמְרִי: תַּחַת הָעוֹר אֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ, תַּחַת מַטְלִית מַהוּ? תַּחַת צֶמֶר מְסוּבָּךְ מַהוּ? תֵּיקוּ.

A dilemma was raised before the Sages: According to the opinion of the school of Rav, who say: Beneath the hide, I do not know, if one concealed the knife beneath a cloth that is around the animal’s neck, what is the halakha ? If one concealed the knife beneath tangled wool on the neck of a sheep, what is the halakha ? The Gemara concludes: These dilemmas shall stand unresolved.

בָּעֵי רַב פַּפָּא: הֶחֱלִיד בְּמִיעוּט סִימָנִים, מַהוּ? תֵּיקוּ.

Rav Pappa raises a dilemma: If one concealed the knife in cutting the minority of the simanim and cut the majority of the simanim in the standard manner, what is the halakha ? The Gemara concludes: The dilemma shall stand unresolved.

מתני׳ הַשּׁוֹחֵט שְׁנֵי רָאשִׁין כְּאֶחָד – שְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְּשֵׁרָה. שְׁנַיִם אוֹחֲזִין בְּסַכִּין וְשׁוֹחֲטִים, אֲפִילּוּ אֶחָד לְמַעְלָה וְאֶחָד לְמַטָּה – שְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְּשֵׁרָה. הִתִּיז אֶת הָרֹאשׁ בְּבַת אַחַת – פְּסוּלָה. הָיָה שׁוֹחֵט וְהִתִּיז אֶת הָרֹאשׁ בְּבַת אַחַת, אִם יֵשׁ בַּסַּכִּין מְלֹא צַוָּאר – כְּשֵׁרָה.

With regard to one who slaughters by cutting two animals’ heads simultaneously, his slaughter is valid. If two people are grasping a knife and slaughtering one animal, even if each is holding a knife and slaughtering one above and one below, with each one slaughtering at a different point in the neck, their slaughter is valid. If one decapitated the animal in one motion not valid. one was in the process of slaughtering the animal in the standard manner and he decapitated the animal in one motion, if the length of the knife is equivalent to the breadth of the animal’s entire neck, the slaughter is valid.

הָיָה שׁוֹחֵט וְהִתִּיז שְׁנֵי רָאשִׁין בְּבַת אַחַת, אִם יֵשׁ בַּסַּכִּין מְלֹא צַוָּאר אֶחָד – כְּשֵׁרָה. בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים – בִּזְמַן שֶׁהוֹלִיךְ וְלֹא הֵבִיא, אוֹ הֵבִיא וְלֹא הוֹלִיךְ; אֲבָל אִם הוֹלִיךְ וְהֵבִיא, אֲפִילּוּ כָּל שֶׁהוּא, אֲפִילּוּ בְּאִיזְמֵל – כְּשֵׁרָה.

If one was in the process of slaughtering two animals simultaneously, and he decapitated two heads in one motion, if the length of the knife is equivalent to the breadth of an entire neck of one of the animals, the slaughter is valid. In what case is this statement, that one must be concerned about the length of the knife, said? It is when one drew the knife back and did not draw it forth, or drew it forth and did not draw it back; but if he drew it back and forth, even if the knife was of any length, even if he slaughtered with a scalpel [ be’izemel ], the slaughter is valid.

גמ׳ מְנָהָנֵי מִילֵּי? אֲמַר שְׁמוּאֵל, דְּאָמַר קְרָא: ״חֵץ שָׁחוּט לְשׁוֹנָם מִרְמָה דִבֵּר״.

The mishna stated: If one decapitated the animal in one motion, the slaughter is not valid. The Gemara asks: From where is this matter derived? Shmuel said: It is derived from a verse, as the verse states: “Their tongue is a sharpened [ shaḥut ] arrow, it speaks deceit” (Jeremiah 9:7). Just as an arrow is propelled by drawing back the bowstring, so too, slaughter [ sheḥita ] must be performed by drawing the knife across the animal’s neck and not by pressing the knife or striking the neck with the knife.

תָּנָא דְּבֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל: ״וְשָׁחַט״ – אֵין ״וְשָׁחַט״ אֶלָּא וּמָשַׁךְ, וְכֵן הוּא אוֹמֵר: ״זָהָב שָׁחוּט״, וְאוֹמֵר ״חֵץ שָׁחוּט לְשׁוֹנָם מִרְמָה דִבֵּר״.

Likewise, the school of Rabbi Yishmael taught: The verse states: “And he shall slaughter [ veshaḥat ] the young bull before the Lord” (Leviticus 1:5). The term “ veshaḥat ” means nothing other than: And he shall draw the knife across the neck of the animal. And similarly, the verse states: “And King Solomon made two hundred targets of drawn [ shaḥut ] gold” (I Kings 10:16), meaning gold that is smoothed in the manner of goldsmiths. And the verse states: “Their tongue is a sharpened arrow, it speaks deceit” (Jeremiah 9:7).

מַאי ״וְאוֹמֵר״? וְכִי תֵּימָא: ״זָהָב שָׁחוּט״ – שֶׁנִּטְוָוה כְּחוּט הוּא, תָּא שְׁמַע: ״חֵץ שָׁחוּט לְשׁוֹנָם״.

The Gemara asks: What is the purpose of citing the additional verse introduced with the term: And the verse states? The Gemara answers: And if you would say that the term “drawn [ shaḥut ] gold” means that the gold was spun like soft thread [ keḥut ], come and hear: “Their tongue is a sharpened [ shaḥut ] arrow.” In this verse, shaḥut means drawn like the bowstring that propels an arrow, and is not a reference to thread.

רָבָא הֲוָה בָּדֵיק לֵיהּ גִּירָא לְרַבִּי יוֹנָה בַּר תַּחְלִיפָא, וְשָׁחַט בָּהּ עוֹפָא בַּהֲדֵי דְּפָרַח. וְדִלְמָא עֲבִיד חֲלָדָה! חָזֵינַן

The Gemara relates: Rava would examine the arrow for Rabbi Yona bar Taḥlifa to ensure that there were no notches in it. And Rava shot the arrow and slaughtered a bird with it as it was flying. The Gemara challenges: And perhaps when the arrow cut the bird’s neck it performed an inverted slaughter, with the arrow concealed in the neck, and cut the simanim from back to front. The Gemara responds: We see

סְתִימְתָאָה, אֲבָל חֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: שְׁנַיִם שׁוֹחֲטִים זֶבַח אֶחָד!

which is cited unattributed, baraitot without attribution. But the Rabbis say: Two people may slaughter one offering. According to the Rabbis, Rava’s difficulty remains: Let the mishna teach a case where they slaughtered it with two men, as the heifer does not render the first man who slaughters impure, as the slaughter did not yet begin, and the heifer renders the latter man impure.

וּלְרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן נַמִי לִפְלוֹג, כְּגוֹן דְּשָׁחַט חַד גַּבְרָא בִּשְׁנֵי סוּדָרִים, דְּסוּדָר קַמָּא לָא מִטַּמֵּא, וְסוּדָר בַּתְרָא מִטַּמֵּא! אֶלָּא, בִּפְסוּלָא דְּפָרָה קָא מַיְירֵי, בְּהֶכְשֵׁרָהּ לָא קָא מַיְירֵי.

And according to the opinion of Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, who holds that two people may not slaughter one offering, let the tanna of the mishna also distinguish and teach a case where one man slaughtered with two cloths on his head, starting the slaughter with one and replacing it with the other midway through the slaughter, as in that case, since halakhic slaughter is accomplished only at its conclusion, the first cloth is not rendered impure but the latter cloth is rendered impure. Rather, one must say that the tanna is speaking only in reference to cases involving the disqualification of the red heifer itself, but he is not speaking in reference to cases involving a fit red heifer, and no proof may be cited from here.