← Back to Shiurim

Rambam — 3 Perakimרמב״ם ג׳ פרקים

משנה תורה, הלכות שחיטה א׳-ב׳

Wednesday, May 13, 2026

א׳

א׳מִצְוַת עֲשֵׂה שֶׁיִּשְׁחֹט מִי שֶׁיִּרְצֶה לֶאֱכל בְּשַׂר בְּהֵמָה חַיָּה וְעוֹף וְאַחַר כָּךְ יֹאכַל שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים יב כא) "וְזָבַחְתָּ מִבְּקָרְךָ וּמִצֹּאנְךָ". וְנֶאֱמַר בִּבְכוֹר בַּעַל מוּם (דברים יב כב) "אַךְ כַּאֲשֶׁר יֵאָכֵל אֶת הַצְּבִי וְאֶת הָאַיָּל". הָא לָמַדְתָּ שֶׁחַיָּה כִּבְהֵמָה לְעִנְיַן שְׁחִיטָה. וּבְעוֹף הוּא אוֹמֵר (ויקרא יז יג) "אֲשֶׁר יָצוּד צֵיד חַיָּה אוֹ עוֹף" וְגוֹ' (ויקרא יז יג) "וְשָׁפַךְ אֶת דָּמוֹ" מְלַמֵּד שֶׁשְּׁפִיכַת דַּם הָעוֹף כִּשְׁפִיכַת דַּם הַחַיָּה:

1It is a positive commandment1Sefer HaMitzvot (positive commandment 146) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 451) include this among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. As mentioned at the beginning of the Mishneh Torah, the Ra'avad differs and does not consider this a mitzvah. for one who desires to partake of the meat of a domesticated animal, wild beast, or fowl to slaughter [it] and then partake of it,2The Rambam's wording echo his statements in Hilchot Berachot 11:2: "There are other mitzvot that are not obligations, but resemble voluntary activities, for example, the mitzvah of mezuzah.... A person is not obligated to dwell in a house that requires a mezuzah in order to fulfill this mitzvah." Similarly, in the instance at hand, a person is not obligated to slaughter. If, however, he desires to eat meat, he must fulfill this mitzvah. as [Deuteronomy 12:21] states: "And you shall slaughter from your cattle and from your sheep." And with regard to a firstborn animal with a blemish,3Note the Kessef Mishneh who elaborates, explaining that although Rashi does not interpret the verse in the same manner the Rambam does, there is support for the Rambam's interpretation. [ibid.:22] states: "As one would partake of a deer and a gazelle." From this, we learn that a wild beast is [governed by] the same [laws] as a domesticated animal with regard to ritual slaughter.And with regard to a fowl, [Leviticus 17:13] states: "that will snare a beast or a fowl as prey... and shed its blood." This teaches that shedding the blood of a fowl is analogous to shedding the blood of a wild beast.4I.e., in both instances, ritual slaughter is required. The Kessef Mishneh notes that Chulin 27b derives this equivalence from another source and explains why the Rambam cites this verse instead.

ב׳וְהִלְכוֹת שְׁחִיטָה בְּכֻלָּן אַחַת הֵן. לְפִיכָךְ הַשּׁוֹחֵט בְּהֵמָה אוֹ חַיָּה אוֹ עוֹף מְבָרֵךְ תְּחִלָּה אֲשֶׁר קִדְּשָׁנוּ בְּמִצְוֹתָיו וְצִוָּנוּ עַל הַשְּׁחִיטָה. וְאִם לֹא בֵּרֵךְ בֵּין בְּשׁוֹגֵג בֵּין בְּמֵזִיד הַבָּשָׂר מֻתָּר. וְאָסוּר לֶאֱכל מִן הַשְּׁחוּטָה כָּל זְמַן שֶׁהִיא מְפַרְכֶּסֶת. וְהָאוֹכֵל מִמֶּנָּה קֹדֶם שֶׁתֵּצֵא נַפְשָׁהּ עוֹבֵר בְּלֹא תַּעֲשֶׂה. וַהֲרֵי הוּא בִּכְלַל (ויקרא יט כו) "לֹא תֹאכְלוּ עַל הַדָּם" וְאֵינוֹ לוֹקֶה. וּמֻתָּר לַחְתֹּךְ מִמֶּנָּה אַחַר שְׁחִיטָה קֹדֶם שֶׁתֵּצֵא נַפְשָׁהּ וּמוֹלְחוֹ יָפֶה יָפֶה וּמְדִיחוֹ יָפֶה יָפֶה וּמַנִּיחוֹ עַד שֶׁתָּמוּת וְאַחַר כָּךְ יֹאכְלֶנּוּ:

2The laws governing ritual slaughter are the same in all instances.5See the gloss of the Kessef Mishneh who explains that there are some differences between the laws governing the slaughter of each of these types of animals. Therefore one who slaughters a domesticated animal, beast, or fowl should first6For the blessings for all mitzvot must be recited before their observance (Pesachim 7b). recite the blessing: "[Blessed...] who sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us concerning7We do not, however, say "to slaughter," for, as above, the mitzvah to slaughter is not obligatory. It is dependent on the person's desire (Hilchot Berachot 11:15). ritual slaughter." If he did not recite a blessing, either consciously or inadvertently, the meat is permitted.8For after the fact, the recitation of the blessings is not essential (Kessef Mishneh).It is forbidden to partake of a slaughtered animal throughout the time it is in its death throes.9Partaking of the meat at this time does not, however, represent a transgression of the prohibitions against eating a limb or flesh from a living animal (see Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot, ch. 5). For once the animal has been slaughtered, these prohibitions no longer apply. When a person partakes of it before it dies, he transgresses a negative commandment. [This act] is included in the prohibition [Leviticus 19:26]: "Do not eat upon the blood." He does not, however, receive lashes.10This prohibition is considered as a prohibition of a general nature (Hilchot Sanhedrin 18:2-3), i.e., prohibitions that include several diverse and unrelated acts, and lashes are not given for the violation of such prohibitions.It is permitted to cut meat from it after it has been ritually slaughtered, but before it dies. That meat should be salted thoroughly, washed thoroughly,11The Rambam's words provoke a question: Of course, this meat must be salted thoroughly as must all meat so that its blood will be removed (Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot 6:10). Why would one think that this meat is different?It would appear that the explanation is that other meat may be eaten if it is roasted or its blood sealed by being cast into vinegar (ibid.:12) and these options do not apply with regard to the meat in question. and left until the animal dies. Afterwards, it may be eaten.

ג׳דָּגִים וַחֲגָבִים אֵינָן צְרִיכִים שְׁחִיטָה אֶלָּא אֲסִיפָתָן הִיא הַמַּתֶּרֶת אוֹתָן. הֲרֵי הוּא אוֹמֵר (במדבר יא כב) "הֲצֹאן וּבָקָר יִשָּׁחֵט לָהֶם וּמָצָא לָהֶם אִם אֶת כָּל דְּגֵי הַיָּם יֵאָסֵף לָהֶם", אֲסֵפַת דָּגִים כִּשְׁחִיטַת בָּקָר וְצֹאן. וּבַחֲגָבִים נֶאֱמַר (ישעיה לג ד) "אֹסֶף הֶחָסִיל", בַּאֲסִיפָה לְבַדָּהּ. לְפִיכָךְ אִם מֵתוּ מֵאֲלֵיהֶן בְּתוֹךְ הַמַּיִם מֻתָּרִין. וּמֻתָּר לְאָכְלָן חַיִּים:

3Fish and locusts need not be slaughtered. Instead, gathering them causes them to be permitted to be eaten. [This is indicated by Numbers 11:22]: "Can sheep and cattle be slaughtered for them that will suffice them? If all the fish of the sea would be gathered for them...." This indicates that gathering fish is like slaughtering cattle and sheep. And with regard to locusts, [Isaiah 33:4] states: "the gathering of the locusts," i.e., gathering alone [is sufficient]. Therefore if fish die naturally in the water, they are permitted.12One might think that man would have to gather them alive for them to be permitted. Hence the Rambam emphasizes that this is not so (Kessef Mishneh). The general principle is: Whenever the mitzvah of ritual slaughter does not apply, the prohibitions against eating flesh from a living animal and eating a dead animal do not apply. And it is permitted to eat them while they are alive.13The commentaries note that Shabbat 90b states that one who eats a live locust violates the prohibition: "Do not make your souls detestable." [See also Rama (Yoreh De'ah 13:1) who issues a similar warning with regard to partaking of live fish.) How then can the Rambam say that it is permitted?Among the resolutions of this question are:a) The passage in Shabbat refers only to a non-kosher locust, not a kosher one.b) The Rambam, here, is saying that one may cut off part of a living locust and eat it, but not that one may eat an entire locust alive.c) Here the Rambam is speaking with regard to the laws regarding ritual slaughter. He is not focusing on those involving other prohibitions.

ד׳זְבִיחָה זוֹ הָאֲמוּרָה בַּתּוֹרָה סְתָם צָרִיךְ לְפָרֵשׁ אוֹתָהּ וְלֵידַע בְּאֵי זֶה מָקוֹם מִן הַבְּהֵמָה שׁוֹחֲטִין. וְכַמָּה שִׁעוּר הַשְּׁחִיטָה. וּבְאֵי זֶה דָּבָר שׁוֹחֲטִין. וּמָתַי שׁוֹחֲטִין. וְהֵיכָן שׁוֹחֲטִין. וְכֵיצַד שׁוֹחֲטִין. וּמַה הֵן הַדְּבָרִים הַמַּפְסִידִין אֶת הַשְּׁחִיטָה. וּמִי הוּא הַשּׁוֹחֵט. וְעַל כָּל הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלּוּ צִוָּנוּ בַּתּוֹרָה וְאָמַר (דברים יב כא) "וְזָבַחְתָּ מִבְּקָרְךָ" וְגוֹ' (דברים יב כא) "כַּאֲשֶׁר צִוִּיתִךָ וְאָכַלְתָּ בִּשְׁעָרֶיךָ" וְגוֹ' שֶׁכָּל הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלּוּ עַל פֶּה צִוָּה בָּהֶן כִּשְׁאָר תּוֹרָה שֶׁבְּעַל פֶּה שֶׁהִיא הַנִּקְרֵאת (שמות כד יב) "מִצְוָה" כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ בִּתְחִלַּת חִבּוּר זֶה:

4The slaughter which the Torah mentions without elaboration must be explained so that we know: a) which place in the animal is [appropriate] for ritual slaughter?, b) what is the measure of the slaughtering process?, c) with what do we slaughter?, d) when do we slaughter?, e) in which place [on the animal's neck] do we slaughter? f) how do we slaughter, g) what factors disqualify the slaughter? h) who can slaughter?14In the following chapters, the Rambam proceeds to answer all of these questions.We were commanded concerning all of these factors in the Torah with the verse [Deuteronomy 12:21]: "And you shall slaughter from your cattle... as I commanded you." All of these factors were commanded to us orally as is true with regard to the remainder of the Oral Law which is called "the mitzvah," as we explained in the beginning of this text.15I.e., in the Introduction that precedes Hilchot Yesodei HaTorah. There the Rambam explains that the Oral Law is called "the mitzvah," because it gives us instruction concerning the observance of the mitzvot. Without it, we would not know how to fulfill them.

ה׳מְקוֹם הַשְּׁחִיטָה מִן הַחַי הוּא הַצַּוָּאר. וְכָל הַצַּוָּאר כָּשֵׁר לִשְׁחִיטָה. כֵּיצַד. בַּוֵּשֶׁט מִתְּחִלַּת הַמָּקוֹם שֶׁכְּשֶׁחוֹתְכִין אוֹתוֹ מִתְכַּוֵּץ עַד מָקוֹם שֶׁיַּשְׂעִיר וְיַתְחִיל לִהְיוֹת פְּרָצִין פְּרָצִין כְּכֶרֶס. זֶה הוּא מְקוֹם הַשְּׁחִיטָה בַּוֵּשֶׁט:

5The place where an animal should be slaughtered is the neck. The entire neck is acceptable for slaughtering.What is implied? With regard to the gullet,16As will be explained in Halachah 9, ritual slaughter involves cutting the gullet and the windpipe. In this halachah, the Rambam defines where the gullet may be cut. from the beginning of the place where when it is cut, it contracts until the place where hair grows17In contrast to the surface of the gullet which is smooth. and it begins appearing fissured like the stomach, this is the place of slaughter with regard to the gullet.

ו׳שָׁחַט לְמַעְלָה מִמָּקוֹם זֶה וְהוּא הַנִּקְרָא תַּרְבַּץ הַוֵּשֶׁט אוֹ לְמַטָּה מִמָּקוֹם זֶה וְהוּא מִתְּחִלַּת בְּנֵי מֵעַיִם שְׁחִיטָתוֹ פְּסוּלָה. וְשִׁעוּר תַּרְבַּץ הַוֵּשֶׁט שֶׁאֵינוֹ רָאוּי לִשְׁחִיטָה לְמַעְלָה בִּבְהֵמָה וְחַיָּה כְּדֵי שֶׁיֹּאחַז בִּשְׁתֵּי אֶצְבְּעוֹתָיו וּבְעוֹף הַכּל לְפִי גָּדְלוֹ וְקָטְנוֹ. וּלְמַטָּה עַד הַזֶּפֶק:

6If one slaughters above this place - in the area called the entrance to the gullet18I.e., the end of the throat, where it is attached to the jaw.. - or below this place - i.e., the beginning of the digestive system, the slaughter is unacceptable.19The animal is considered a nevelah and it is forbidden to partake of it. See Chapter 3, Halachah 18 (Kessef Mishneh, note Siftei Cohen 20:5).The measure of the entrance to the gullet above which is unfit for slaughter in an animal or a beast is so one can grab it with two fingers.20This is the Rambam's interpretation of Chulin 44a. Rashi interprets that passage as referring to a space the size of four fingers. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 20:2) follows the Rambam's understanding, while the Rama cites that of Rashi. With regard to a fowl, it depends on its size. The lower limit extends until the crop.21The first of the fowl's stomachs. The crop is not considered part of the gullet and it is forbidden to slaughter there.

ז׳וְאֵי זֶה הוּא מְקוֹם שְׁחִיטָה בַּקָּנֶה. מִשִּׁפּוּי כּוֹבַע וּלְמַטָּה עַד רֹאשׁ כְּנַף הָרֵאָה כְּשֶׁתִּמְשֹׁךְ הַבְּהֵמָה צַוָּארָהּ לִרְעוֹת. זֶה הוּא מְקוֹם הַשְּׁחִיטָה בַּקָּנֶה. וְכָל שֶׁכְּנֶגֶד הַמָּקוֹם הַזֶּה מִבַּחוּץ נִקְרָא צַוָּאר:

7Where is the place of slaughter with regard to the windpipe? From the slant of its cap22The windpipe is made up of a series of rings. Above the top ring, there is a slanted covering that is called the cap. downward until the beginning of the flank of the lung when the animal extends its neck to pasture,23When the animal extends its neck, the flanks of its lungs rise upward. this is the place of slaughter with regard to the windpipe. The area opposite this place on the outside is called the neck.

ח׳אָנְסָה הַבְּהֵמָה עַצְמָהּ וּמָשְׁכָה צַוָּארָהּ הַרְבֵּה אוֹ שֶׁאִנֵּס הַשּׁוֹחֵט אֶת הַסִּימָנִין וּמְשָׁכָן לְמַעְלָה וְשָׁחַט בִּמְקוֹם שְׁחִיטָה בַּצַּוָּאר וְנִמְצֵאת הַשְּׁחִיטָה בַּקָּנֶה אוֹ בַּוֵּשֶׁט שֶׁלֹּא בִּמְקוֹם שְׁחִיטָה הֲרֵי זֶה סְפֵק נְבֵלָה:

8When the animal strained itself and extended its neck exceedingly or the slaughterer applied exertion to the signs and extended them upward, but slaughtered in the neck at the place of slaughter, there is an unresolved doubt24See Chulin 45a which discusses these questions but leaves them unresolved. whether [the animal] is a nevelah. For the place where the gullet and windpipe were cut is not the place where [the animal] is [usually] slaughtered.25I.e., the place of slaughter on the neck should be aligned with the place of slaughter on the windpipe and the gullet in their natural position. In this instance, the external place of slaughter - the position on the neck - was correct, but the signs were not cut in the usual place.

ט׳וְצָרִיךְ הַשּׁוֹחֵט שֶׁיִּשְׁחֹט בְּאֶמְצַע הַצַּוָּאר. וְאִם שָׁחַט מִן הַצְּדָדִין שְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְּשֵׁרָה. וְכַמָּה הוּא שִׁעוּר הַשְּׁחִיטָה. שְׁנֵי הַסִּימָנִין שֶׁהֵן הַקָּנֶה וְהַוֵּשֶׁט הַשְּׁחִיטָה הַמְעֻלָּה שֶׁיֵּחָתְכוּ שְׁנֵיהֶן בֵּין בִּבְהֵמָה בֵּין בְּעוֹף. וְלָזֶה יִתְכַּוֵּן הַשּׁוֹחֵט. וְאִם שָׁחַט רֹב אֶחָד מֵהֶן בְּעוֹף וְרֹב הַשְּׁנַיִם בִּבְהֵמָה וּבְחַיָּה שְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְּשֵׁרָה:

9The slaughterer must slaughter in the center of the neck. If he slaughters to the side, it is acceptable.26This applies only after the fact. At the outset, one must slaughter in the center of the neck.What is the measure of slaughter? That one [cut] the two identifying marks, the windpipe and the gullet.27Since the acceptability of the slaughter is dependent on them, they are referred to as the simanim, "signs," i.e., indications that the slaughter is acceptable. Superior slaughter involves cutting both of them, whether for an animal or a fowl and a slaughterer should have this intent. [After the fact,] if one cut the majority of one of them for a fowl and the majority of both of them for an animal or a beast, the slaughter is acceptable.

י׳שָׁחַט הָאֶחָד כֻּלּוֹ וְחֶצְיָהּ הַשֵּׁנִי בִּבְהֵמָה שְׁחִיטָתוֹ פְּסוּלָה. רֻבּוֹ שֶׁל זֶה וְרֻבּוֹ שֶׁל זֶה אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא שָׁחַט מִכָּל אֶחָד מֵהֶן אֶלָּא יֶתֶר עַל חֶצְיוֹ כְּחוּט הַשַּׂעֲרָה הֲרֵי זוֹ כְּשֵׁרָה. כֵּיוָן שֶׁשָּׁחַט יֶתֶר עַל חֶצְיוֹ כָּל שֶׁהוּא רֻבּוֹ הוּא:

10When one cut one sign entirely and half28But not the majority. of the other sign when slaughtering an animal, his slaughter is unacceptable. If he cut the majority of both signs, even though in each instance he cuts only a hair's breadth more than half, it is acceptable. Since he cut even the slightest amount more than half,29See the Turei Zahav 21:2 who emphasizes that the difference in size need not be significant. As long as more than half is cut, the slaughter is acceptable. he has cut the majority.

י״אשָׁחַט חֶצְיוֹ שֶׁל זֶה וְחֶצְיוֹ שֶׁל זֶה אֲפִלּוּ בְּעוֹף שְׁחִיטָתוֹ פְּסוּלָה. קָנֶה שֶׁהָיָה חֶצְיוֹ פָּסוּק וְשָׁחַט עַל מָקוֹם הֶחָתוּךְ מְעַט וְהִשְׁלִימוֹ לְרֹב בֵּין שֶׁהִתְחִיל לִשְׁחֹט בַּמָּקוֹם הַשָּׁלֵם וּפָגַע בַּחֲתָךְ בֵּין שֶׁהִכְנִיס אֶת הַסַּכִּין בַּחֲתָךְ וְהִשְׁלִימוֹ לְרֹב שְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְּשֵׁרָה:

11If he cut half30But no more than half. of one and half of the other - even in a fowl - the slaughter is unacceptable. When a windpipe is half slit31This is speaking about a situation where the animal is alive. The fact that an animal's windpipe is slit slightly does not cause it to be considered as a trefe. The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 21:5) adds that we must be careful that the gullet has not been punctured, for that would render the animal trefe. See the Turei Zahav 21:4 and the Siftei Cohen 21:5 who debate whether it is possible to rely on this leniency at present. See also Chapter 3, Halchot 6-7. and one cut a little more on the place of the slit, making the cut a majority, the slaughter is acceptable. [This applies] whether one begins [on a portion of the windpipe] that is intact and reaches the slit or one inserts the knife into the slit and [increases its size until it] reaches the majority.

י״בכָּל הַשּׁוֹחֵט צָרִיךְ לִבְדֹּק הַסִּימָנִין לְאַחַר שְׁחִיטָה. וְאִם לֹא בָּדַק וְנֶחְתַּךְ הָרֹאשׁ קֹדֶם שֶׁיִּבָּדֵק הֲרֵי זוֹ נְבֵלָה. וַאֲפִלּוּ הָיָה הַשּׁוֹחֵט זָרִיז וּמָהִיר:

12Every slaughterer must check the signs after he slaughters.32To make sure that the minimal measure for slaughter was slit. If he did not check and the animal's head was cut off before he could check,33Obviously, once the head is cut off, it is no longer possible to check. [the animal] is [considered] a nevelah.34Because of the doubt involved. See the following halachah. [This applies even] if the slaughterer was adroit and expert.

י״גכָּל בְּהֵמָה בְּחַיֶּיהָ בְּחֶזְקַת אִסּוּר עוֹמֶדֶת עַד שֶׁיִּוָּדַע בְּוַדַּאי שֶׁנִּשְׁחֲטָה שְׁחִיטָה כְּשֵׁרָה:

13During its lifetime, every animal is considered to be forbidden until it is definitely known that it was slaughtered in an acceptable manner.35This is the rationale for the stringency stated in the previous halachah (Kessef Mishneh).

י״דובְּאֵי זֶה דָּבָר שׁוֹחֲטִין. בְּכָל דָּבָר בֵּין בְּסַכִּין שֶׁל מַתֶּכֶת בֵּין בְּצוּר אוֹ בִּזְכוּכִית אוֹ בִּקְרוּמִית שֶׁל קְנֵה הָאֲגַם וְכַיּוֹצֵא בָּהֶן מִדְּבָרִים הַחוֹתְכִין. וְהוּא שֶׁיִּהְיֶה פִּיהָ חַד וְלֹא יִהְיֶה בָּהּ פְּגָם. אֲבָל אִם הָיָה כְּמוֹ תֶּלֶם בְּחֻדּוֹ שֶׁל דָּבָר שֶׁשּׁוֹחֲטִין בּוֹ וַאֲפִלּוּ הָיָה הַתֶּלֶם קָטָן בְּיוֹתֵר שְׁחִיטָתוֹ פְּסוּלָה:

14With what can we slaughter? With any entity, with a metal knife, a flint, glass, the edge of a bulrush,36The Kessef Mishneh notes that many marsh plants splinter easily and they are unacceptable for they will perforate the gullet. or the like among the entities that cut. [This applies] provided its edge is sharp and does not have a barb. If, however, there was a spike at the edge of the entity with which one slaughters, even if the spike is very small,37Generally, it is accepted that a spike that can be detected by a fingernail disqualifies an animal. Nevertheless, the Rambam appears to be referring to an even smaller measure. His approach is followed by the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 18:2) which speaks of a spike that is even the size of a hairsbreadth being sufficient to disqualify a knife.Alternatively, it can be understood that the two are synanomous. This understanding is reflected by Hilchot Beit HaBechirah 1:14 which speaks about "a stone being blemished so that a fingernail would become caught in it like a knife used for ritual slaughter." the slaughter is unacceptable.38For the spike will perforate the gullet, rendering the animal trefe before the slaughter was completed (Maggid Mishneh).

ט״והָיָה הַתֶּלֶם הַזֶּה מֵרוּחַ אַחַת לֹא יִשְׁחֹט בָּהּ. וְאִם שָׁחַט דֶּרֶךְ הָרוּחַ שֶׁאֵין הַפְּגִימָה נִכֶּרֶת בָּהּ שְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְּשֵׁרָה:

15If the spike was on only one side of the knife, one should not slaughter with it [at the outset]. [After the fact,] if one slaughtered with it using the side on which the blemish was not detectable, the slaughter is acceptable.

ט״זכֵּיצַד. סַכִּין שֶׁתִּבָּדֵק בְּהוֹלָכָה וְלֹא תַּרְגִּישׁ שֶׁיֵּשׁ בָּהּ פְּגָם וּכְשֶׁתַּחְזִיר אוֹתָהּ בַּהֲבָאָה תַּרְגִּישׁ שֶׁיֵּשׁ בָּהּ פְּגָם. אִם שָׁחַט בָּהּ דֶּרֶךְ הוֹלָכָה וְלֹא הֵבִיא שְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְּשֵׁרָה. וְאִם הֵבִיא שְׁחִיטָתוֹ פְּסוּלָה:

16What is implied? There was a knife that was checked by passing it [over one's finger] and no blemish was felt on it, but when one drew it back, one felt that it had a blemish. If one slaughtered with it by passing it forwards and did not draw it back, the slaughter is acceptable. If one drew it back, the slaughter is unacceptable.39The commentaries offer two explanations for this ruling. The Rambam's position is that when the spike is felt only on one side of the knife, one may slaughter with that side. Others add that the blemish must be positioned to the very far end of the knife, either near its point or near its handle. In such an instance, it is possible that the blemish never actually touched the signs and thus did not disqualify the ritual slaughter. See Shulchan Aruch [Yoreh De'ah and Rama (18:4)].

י״זסַכִּין שֶׁהִיא עוֹלָה וְיוֹרֶדֶת כְּנָחָשׁ וְאֵין בָּהּ פְּגָם שׁוֹחֲטִין בָּהּ לְכַתְּחִלָּה. וסַכִּין שֶׁפִּיהָ חָלָק וְאֵינָהּ חַדָּה הוֹאִיל וְאֵין בָּהּ פְּגָם שׁוֹחֲטִין בָּהּ. וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוֹלִיךְ וְהֵבִיא בָּהּ כָּל הַיּוֹם עַד שֶׁשָּׁחְטָה שְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְּשֵׁרָה:

17When a knife ascends and descends [in a curve] like a snake40Who raises his head and tail, creating a curve for its body (Kessef Mishneh). but does not have a blemish, one may slaughter with it as an initial and preferred option. When the edge of a knife is smooth, but is not sharp, one may slaughter with it, since it does not have a blemish.41Since it does not have a blemish, it will not disqualify the signs. Even though one passes it back and forth the entire day until the slaughter [is completed], the slaughter is acceptable.42Provided one does not interrupt the slaughter in the middle as stated in Chapter 3, Halachah 2.

י״חסַכִּין חַדָּה שֶׁהֻשְׁחֲזָה וַהֲרֵי אֵינָהּ חֲלָקָה אֶלָּא מַגָּעָתָהּ כְּמַגָּע רֹאשׁ הַשִּׁבּלֶת שֶׁהוּא מִסְתַּבֵּךְ בְּאֶצְבַּע. הוֹאִיל וְאֵין בָּהּ פְּגָם שׁוֹחֲטִין בָּהּ:

18When a sharp knife has been whetted, but its [blade] is not smooth, instead, touching it is like touching the tip of an ear of grain which becomes snarled on one's finger, [nevertheless,] since it does not have a blemish, one may slaughter with it.43The Rama (Yoreh De'ah18:6) writes that since it is difficult to understand what exactly is meant by such a knife, we do not permit this leniency.

י״טהַתּוֹלֵשׁ קָנֶה אוֹ שֵׁן אוֹ שֶׁקָּצַץ צוּר אוֹ צִפֹּרֶן וַהֲרֵי הֵן חַדִּין וְאֵין בָּהֶן פְּגָם שׁוֹחֲטִין בָּהֶן. וְאִם נְעָצָן בַּקַּרְקַע לֹא יִשְׁחֹט בָּהֶן כְּשֶׁהֵן נְעוּצִין. וְאִם שָׁחַט שְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְּשֵׁרָה:

19When a person uproots a reed or a tooth or cuts off a flint or a nail, if they are sharp and do not have a blemish, one may slaughter with them.44As apparent from Halachah 14. If one stuck them into the ground, one should not slaughter with them while they are stuck into the ground. [After the fact,] if one slaughtered [in such a situation],45For example, by passing the animal's neck back and forth below the knife [Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 6:4)]. one's slaughter is acceptable.46As indicated by the following halachah, an entity may not be used for ritual slaughter if it is connected to its source. When an entity is stuck into the ground, it is not connected to its source and hence, after the fact, the slaughter is acceptable. Nevertheless, because of the similarity to the forbidden situation, initially, one should not use such an entity for slaughter.

כ׳שָׁחַט בָּהֶן כְּשֶׁהֵן מְחֻבָּרִין מִתְּחִלַּת בְּרִיָּתָן קֹדֶם שֶׁיַּעֲקֹר אוֹתָן שְׁחִיטָתוֹ פְּסוּלָה. וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין בָּהֶם פְּגָם:

20When one slaughtered with these entities when they were connected from the beginning of their existence, before they were uprooted, the slaughter is unacceptable47Chulin 16a states that it is a Scriptural decree that the cutting edge used for slaughter must be a separate entity, something that one could take in his hand. even if they do not have a blemish.

כ״אלָקַח לְחִי בְּהֵמָה שֶׁיֵּשׁ בּוֹ שִׁנַּיִם חַדּוֹת וְשָׁחַט בָּהֶן שְׁחִיטָתוֹ פְּסוּלָה. מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵן כְּמַגָּל. אֲבָל בְּשֵׁן אַחַת הַקְּבוּעָה בַּלֶּחִי שׁוֹחֵט בָּהּ לְכַתְּחִלָּה וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהִיא קְבוּעָה בּוֹ:

21If one took the jawbone of an animal that had sharp teeth and slaughtered with it, it is unacceptable, for they are like a sickle.48I.e., a blade with a jagged edge which is unacceptable as stated above. When, however, only one tooth is fixed in a jaw, one may slaughter with it as an initial and preferred option, even though it is set in the jaw.49Since the jaw as a whole is moveable, we are not concerned with the fact that the tooth is in a fixed position (Kessef Mishneh).

כ״בלִבֵּן הַסַּכִּין בָּאוּר וְשָׁחַט בָּהּ שְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְּשֵׁרָה. סַכִּין שֶׁצִּדָּהּ אֶחָד מַגָּל וְצִדָּהּ הַשֵּׁנִי יָפֶה לֹא יִשְׁחֹט בַּצַּד הַיָּפֶה לְכַתְּחִלָּה גְּזֵרָה שֶׁמָּא יִשְׁחֹט בַּצַּד הָאַחֵר. וְאִם שָׁחַט הוֹאִיל וּבַצַּד הַיָּפֶה שָׁחַט שְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְּשֵׁרָה:

22When one made a knife white-hot in fire and slaughtered with it, the slaughter is acceptable.50We do not say that rather than cut the signs, the knife burnt them. The latter would disqualify the slaughter.It must be noted that the Tur (see also the gloss of the Radbaz) quotes the Rambam as ruling that the slaughter is unacceptable for the above reason. This approach is also followed by many other Rishonim. In his Kessef Mishneh, Rav Yosef Caro states that the Rambam rules that the slaughter is acceptable. In his Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 9:1), however, he quotes both views without stating which should be followed. All authorities agree that such a knife should not be used as an initial and preferred option. If one side of a knife is [jagged-edge like] a sickle and the other side is desirable, [i.e., smooth,] one should not slaughter with the desirable side as an initial and preferred measure. [This is] a decree lest one slaughter with the other side. If one slaughtered [with it], since one slaughtered with the desirable side, the slaughter is acceptable.

כ״גהַשּׁוֹחֵט צָרִיךְ שֶׁיִּבְדֹּק הַסַּכִּין בְּחֻדָּהּ וּמִצַּד זֶה וּמִצַּד זֶה. וְכֵיצַד בּוֹדְקָהּ. מוֹלִיכָהּ וּמְבִיאָהּ עַל בְּשַׂר אֶצְבָּעוֹ וּמוֹלִיכָהּ וּמְבִיאָהּ עַל צִפָּרְנוֹ מִשָּׁלֹשׁ רוּחוֹתֶיהָ שֶׁהֵן פִּיהָ וּשְׁנֵי צְדָדָיו כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יִהְיֶה בָּהּ פְּגָם כְּלָל וְאַחַר כָּךְ יִשְׁחֹט בָּהּ:

23A slaughterer must check the knife at its tip and at both of its sides [before slaughtering]. How must he check it? He must pass it over and draw it back over the flesh of his finger and pass it over and draw it back51Using the same motions as he would use to slaughter an animal. over his fingernail on three edges, i.e., its tip and both of its sides so that it will not have a blemish at all. [Only] afterwards, should he slaughter with it.

כ״דוְצָרִיךְ לִבְדֹּק כֵּן אַחַר הַשְּׁחִיטָה שֶׁאִם מָצָא בָּהּ פְּגָם אַחַר הַשְּׁחִיטָה הֲרֵי זוֹ סְפֵק נְבֵלָה שֶׁמָּא בָּעוֹר נִפְגְּמָה וּכְשֶׁשָּׁחַט הַסִּימָנִים בְּסַכִּין פְּגוּמָה שָׁחַט. לְפִיכָךְ הַשּׁוֹחֵט בְּהֵמוֹת רַבּוֹת אוֹ עוֹפוֹת רַבִּים צָרִיךְ לִבְדֹּק בֵּין כָּל אַחַת וְאַחַת. שֶׁאִם לֹא בָּדַק וּבָדַק בָּאַחֲרוֹנָה וְנִמְצֵאת סַכִּין פְּגוּמָה הֲרֵי הַכּל סְפֵק נְבֵלוֹת וַאֲפִלּוּ הָרִאשׁוֹנָה:

24It must [also] be inspected in this manner after slaughter.52The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam, maintaining that after ritual slaughter, no inspection is necessary unless the person desires to use the knife to slaughter another animal immeidately. In his Kessef Mishneh, Rav Yosef Caro justifies the Rambam's ruling and he cites it in his Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 18:3). For if a blemish is discovered on it afterwards, there is an unresolved doubt whether the animal is a nevelah.53This ruling also depends on the principle stated in Halachah 13, that during its lifetime, an animal is forbidden. Hence it is not permitted unless we are certain that it was slaughtered in a proper manner (Radbaz; Siftei Cohen 18:2). For perhaps [the knife] became blemished [when cutting] the skin and when he cut the signs, he cut them with a blemished knife.54And this would cause the slaughter to be unacceptable as mentioned above.For this reason, when a person slaughters many animals or many fowl,55The Kessef Mishneh notes that since the skin of a fowl is soft, it is not very probable that this caused the blemish on the knife. Nevertheless, our Sages adopted this stringency. he must inspect [the knife] between each [slaughter]. For if he did not check, and then checked [after slaughtering] the last one and discovered [the knife] to be blemished, there is an unresolved doubt whether all of them - even the first - are nevelot56See Chapter 3, Halachah 18, for the ramifications of this ruling. or not.57I.e., it is possible that the knife could have become blemished when cutting the skin of the first animal. Hence, that animal - and all the subsequent ones - were slaughtered with an unacceptable knife.

כ״הבָּדַק הַסַּכִּין וְשָׁחַט בָּהּ וְלֹא בְּדָקָהּ אַחַר שְׁחִיטָה וְשָׁבַר בָּהּ עֶצֶם אוֹ עֵץ וְכַיּוֹצֵא בָּהֶן וְאַחַר כָּךְ בָּדַק וּמְצָאָהּ פְּגוּמָה שְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְּשֵׁרָה. שֶׁחֶזְקַת הַסַּכִּין שֶׁנִּפְגְּמָה בַּדָּבָר הַקָּשֶׁה שֶׁשָּׁבַר בָּהּ. וְכֵן אִם פָּשַׁע וְלֹא בָּדַק הַסַּכִּין אוֹ שֶׁאָבְדָה הַסַּכִּין עַד שֶׁלֹּא יִבְדֹּק שְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְּשֵׁרָה:

25When one inspected a knife, slaughtered with it, but did not inspect it after slaughtering, and then used it to break a bone, a piece of wood, or the like, and afterwards, inspected it and discovered it to be unacceptable, his slaughter is acceptable. [The rationale is that] the prevailing assumption is that the knife became blemished on the hard entity which it was used to break.58Since he checked the knife at the outset and it was acceptable, we rely on probability. As long as we have a way of explaining how the knife was blemished, we do not say it was blemished on the animal's skin, for the likelihood of that happening is very low. Similarly, if one was negligent and did not check his knife [after slaughtering] or the knife was lost before it could be checked, the slaughter is acceptable.59Here also, since the knife was inspected initially, there is no reason to suspect that the slaughter was unacceptable, we do not disqualify it [Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 18:12)] .

כ״וכָּל טַבָּח שֶׁלֹּא בָּדַק הַסַּכִּין שֶׁלּוֹ שֶׁשּׁוֹחֵט בָּהּ לִפְנֵי חָכָם וְשָׁחַט בָּהּ לְעַצְמוֹ בּוֹדְקִין אוֹתָהּ. אִם נִמְצֵאת יָפָה וּבְדוּקָה מְנַדִּין אוֹתוֹ לְפִי שֶׁיִּסְמֹךְ עַל עַצְמוֹ פַּעַם אַחֶרֶת וְתִהְיֶה פְּגוּמָה וְיִשְׁחֹט בָּהּ. ואִם נִמְצֵאת פְּגוּמָה מַעֲבִירִין אוֹתוֹ וּמְנַדִּין אוֹתוֹ וּמַכְרִיזִין עַל כָּל בָּשָׂר שֶׁשָּׁחַט שֶׁהוּא טְרֵפָה:

26Whenever a slaughterer60This is referring to a slaughterer who slaughters on behalf of people at large, not only for his own private purposes. does not have the knife with which he slaughters inspected by a wise man61The Radbaz notes that the Rambam's words appear to differ slightly from the simple meaning of Chullin 18a, his source. From Chullin, it appears that the necessity to show the knife to the wise man is a mere token of respect, while from the Rambam it appears that it is a necessary safeguard to check that the slaughter is kosher.The difference between these approaches can lead to a variance in practice. If we say that this inspection is merely for the sake of respect, then the sages may forgo the respect due them and allow an expert to slaughter even though he does not present his knife. If, however, it is a necessary precaution to insure that the slaughter is performed correctly, an inspection is always necessary.Both of these perspectives have continued to be given emphasis throughout the Rabbinic literature, although the halachah as prescribed by the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 18:17) is that a sage may forgo the honor due him. The present custom in many slaughtering houses today is for the slaughterers to work in pairs and for one to check the knife of the other. At times, a visiting Rabbinic authority comes and he inspects the knives of all of the slaughterers. and uses it to slaughter for himself, we inspect it. If it is discovered to be desirable [and passes] the examination, we, nevertheless, place him under a ban of ostracism [lest] he rely on himself on another occasion and then the knife will be blemished, but he will still slaughter with it. If [upon examination] the knife is discovered to be blemished, he is removed from his position and placed under a ban of ostracism. We pronounce all the meat that he slaughtered to be unacceptable.62I.e., we assume that not only on this occasion, but on others, he slaughtered using an unacceptable knife, thus disqualifying the meat.

כ״זכַּמָּה הוּא אֹרֶךְ הַסַּכִּין שֶׁשּׁוֹחֵט. כָּל שֶׁהוּא. וְהוּא שֶׁלֹּא יִהְיֶה דָּבָר דַּק שֶׁנּוֹקֵב וְאֵינוֹ שׁוֹחֵט כְּמוֹ רֹאשׁ הָאִזְמֵל הַקָּטָן וְכַיּוֹצֵא בּוֹ:

27How long must the knife with which one slaughters be? Even the slightest length, provided it is not [overly] thin to the extent that it pierces and does not slit63As will be explained, ritual slaughter is accomplished by drawing the knife back and forth across the neck. If a knife is two small to enable this, it should not be used [Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 8:1)]. like the head of a blade or the like.64See the Ramah (Yoreh De'ah 24:2) who quotes opinions that require a knife used to slaughter a animal to be twice the length of the animal's neck. The custom is also to use a knife of such measure for a fowl.

כ״חוּמָתַי שׁוֹחֲטִין. בְּכָל זְמַן. בֵּין בַּיּוֹם בֵּין בַּלַּיְלָה. וְהוּא שֶׁתִּהְיֶה אֲבוּקָה עִמּוֹ כְּדֵי שֶׁיִּרְאֶה מַה יַּעֲשֶׂה. וְאִם שָׁחַט בַּאֲפֵלָה שְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְּשֵׁרָה:

28When can one slaughter? Any time, whether during the day or during the night, provided that [at night] he has a torch65Two candles are considered a torch [Rama (Yoreh De'ah 11:1)]. with him so that he sees what he is doing.66Otherwise, it is possible that the animal will be slaughtered incorrectly without him realizing. If a person slaughters in darkness, his slaughter is acceptable.67Nevertheless, it is forbidden to do so as an initial and preferred option [Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 11:1)].

כ״טהַשּׁוֹחֵט בְּיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים אוֹ בְּשַׁבָּת בְּשׁוֹגֵג אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאִלּוּ הָיָה מֵזִיד הָיָה מִתְחַיֵּב בְּנַפְשׁוֹ אוֹ מִתְחַיֵּב מַלְקוֹת עַל יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים שְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְּשֵׁרָה:

29When a person inadvertently slaughters on Yom Kippur or the Sabbath,68I.e., he was not aware that the day was either the Sabbath or Yom Kippur; alternatively, he did not know that it was forbidden to slaughter on these holy days. his slaughter is acceptable,69The Turei Zahav 11:2 states that one must, nevertheless, wait until the conclusion of the Sabbath or Yom Kippur before partaking of the meat, as is the law when one cooks on the Sabbath. even though were he to have been acting willfully he would be liable for his life70For slaughtering on the Sabbath. or for lashes [for slaughtering] on Yom Kippur.71If he does so intentionally, he is considered as an apostate who desecrates the Sabbath and his slaughter is disqualified (the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah, Chullin 1:1; see Chapter 4, Halachah 14). The Siftei Cohen 11:3 states that in certain instances the leniency would also apply if he slaughters intentionally.

ב׳

א׳בְכָל מָקוֹם מֻתָּר לִשְׁחֹט חוּץ מִן הָעֲזָרָה. שֶׁאֵין שׁוֹחֲטִין בָּעֲזָרָה אֶלָּא קָדְשֵׁי מִזְבֵּחַ בִּלְבַד. אֲבָל הַחֻלִּין אָסוּר לְשָׁחֳטָן בָּעֲזָרָה בֵּין בְּהֵמָה בֵּין חַיָּה בֵּין עוֹף. וְכֵן הוּא אוֹמֵר בִּבְשַׂר תַּאֲוָה (דברים יב כא) "כִּי יִרְחַק מִמְּךָ הַמָּקוֹם אֲשֶׁר יִבְחַר ה'" וְגוֹ' (דברים יב כא) "וְזָבַחְתָּ מִבְּקָרְךָ וּמִצֹּאנְךָ" וְגוֹ' (דברים יב כא) "וְאָכַלְתָּ בִּשְׁעָרֶיךָ". הָא לָמַדְתָּ שֶׁאֵין שׁוֹחֲטִין בְּשַׂר תַּאֲוָה אֶלָּא חוּץ לַמָּקוֹם (דברים יב כא) "אֲשֶׁר בָּחַר ה'":

1It is permitted to slaughter an animal in any place except the Temple courtyard. For only animals consecrated for [sacrifice on the altar] may be sacrificed in the Temple courtyard. Ordinary animals, by contrast, whether domesticated animals, beasts, or fowl, are forbidden to be sacrificed in the Temple courtyard. Similarly, [Deuteronomy 12:21] states with regard to meat [which man] desires [to eat]:1This is the term the Sifri to the above verse and other Rabbinic texts use to describe ordinary meat in contrast to animals offered as sacrifices. "When the place that God will choose will be distant from you... and you shall slaughter from your cattle and your sheep... and you shall eat in your gates." One may infer that meat [which man] desires [to eat] may be slaughtered only outside "the place that God will choose."

ב׳וְזֶה שֶׁנִּשְׁחַט חוּץ לַמָּקוֹם הוּא שֶׁמֻּתָּר לְאָכְלוֹ בְּכָל הַשְּׁעָרִים. אֲבָל הַשּׁוֹחֵט חֻלִּין בָּעֲזָרָה אוֹתוֹ הַבָּשָׂר טָהוֹר וְאָסוּר בַּהֲנָיָה כְּבָשָׂר בְּחָלָב וְכַיּוֹצֵא בּוֹ. וְקוֹבְרִים אוֹתוֹ וְאֶפְרוֹ אָסוּר אֲפִלּוּ שָׁחַט לִרְפוּאָה אוֹ לַאֲכִילַת עַכּוּ"ם אוֹ לְהַאֲכִיל לִכְלָבִים. אֲבָל הַנּוֹחֵר בָּעֲזָרָה. וְהַמְעַקֵּר. וְעַכּוּ"ם שֶׁשָּׁחַט. וְהַשּׁוֹחֵט וְנִמְצָא טְרֵפָה. וְהַשּׁוֹחֵט בְּהֵמָה חַיָּה וְעוֹף הַטְּמֵאִים בָּעֲזָרָה. הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ כֻּלָּן מֻתָּרִין בַּהֲנָיָה:

2[Meat from animals] slaughtered outside this [holy] place is permitted to be eaten everywhere. If, however, one slaughters an ordinary animal in the Temple courtyard, that meat is ritually pure,2Since the slaughter was acceptable, the animal is not considered as a nevelah. Hence it does not impart ritual impurity. but it is forbidden to benefit from it like meat mixed with milk and the like. It must be buried; [if it is burnt,] its ashes are forbidden [to be used].3See Hilchot Pesulei HaMekudashim 19:13-14.[The above applies] even if one slaughters for healing purposes,4Without intending to partake of the meat. I.e., using the meat for this or the following purposes is forbidden. to feed a gentile, or to feed dogs. If, however, one cuts off an animal's head in the Temple courtyard, one rips the signs from their place, a gentile slaughters, [a Jew] slaughters, but the animal was discovered to be trefe, or one slaughters a non-kosher domesticated animal, beast, or fowl in the Temple courtyard, it is permitted to benefit from all of the above.5For the prohibition is only against slaughtering ordinary animals in the Temple courtyard, for this resembles the slaughter of the sacrifices (Kessef Mishneh). Since none of the above actions are considered as ritual slaughter, they do not cause the animal to become forbidden.

ג׳וְלֹא בְּהֵמָה וְחַיָּה בִּלְבַד אֶלָּא כָּל הַחֻלִּין אָסוּר לְהַכְנִיסָן לַעֲזָרָה. אֲפִלּוּ בְּשַׂר שְׁחוּטָה אוֹ פֵּרוֹת וּפַת. אִם עָבַר וְהִכְנִיסָן מֻתָּרִין בַּאֲכִילָה כְּשֶׁהָיוּ. וּדְבָרִים אֵלּוּ כֻּלָּן דִּבְרֵי קַבָּלָה הֵן. וְכָל הַשּׁוֹחֵט חֻלִּין בָּעֲזָרָה אוֹ הָאוֹכֵל כְּזַיִת מִבְּשַׂר חֻלִּין שֶׁנִּשְׁחֲטוּ בָּעֲזָרָה מַכִּין אוֹתוֹ מַכַּת מַרְדּוּת:

3This does not apply only to domesticated animals or beasts. Instead, it is forbidden to bring all ordinary food into the Temple courtyard. [This includes] even meat from a slaughtered [animal], fruit, or bread.6The Rashba (as quoted by the Kessef Mishneh) questions the Rambam's ruling, stating that the prohibition applies only to fruit that resemble the first fruits and bread that resembles the loaves of the Thanksgiving offering. If one transgresses and brings in such food, it is permitted to partake of this food as it was beforehand.All of the above concepts are part of the Oral Tradition. Whenever anyone slaughters in the Temple courtyard or eats an olive-sized portion of the meat of ordinary [animals that were] slaughtered in the Temple courtyard, he is liable for stripes for rebellious conduct.7Since the prohibition is not explicitly mentioned in the Torah, he is not liable for lashes - as appropriate for the violation of an explicit Scriptural prohibition (Kessef Mishneh). Nevertheless, since the source for the prohibition is a Scriptural verse, it has the weight of a Scriptural commandment. Others, however, interpret the Rambam as implying that the prohibition is entirely Rabbinic. The verse cited previously is merely an asmachta.The above applies to the prohibition against slaughetring in the Temple Courtyard. With regard to partaking of the meat, all authorities agree that the prohibition is Rabbinic in origin. See Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot 16:6.

ד׳הָאוֹמֵר בְּהֵמָה זוֹ שְׁלָמִים וּוְלָדָהּ חֻלִּין. אִם נִשְׁחֲטָה בָּעֲזָרָה וְלָדָהּ מֻתָּר בַּאֲכִילָה. לְפִי שֶׁאֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לִשְׁחֹט אוֹתוֹ בְּרִחוּק מָקוֹם:

4[The following rule applies when] a person says: "This animal is [consecrated as] a peace offering, but [the fetus it is carrying] remains of ordinary status." If it is slaughtered in the Temple courtyard, it is permitted to partake of its offspring, because it is forbidden to slaughter [the mother] outside [the Temple courtyard].8As stated in Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot 5:13-14, when a pregnant animal is slaughtered, the fetus it is carrying is considered as one of its limbs. Even if it lives, it does not have to be slaughtered again; the slaughter of its mother causes it to be permitted.In this instance, the mother may not be slaughtered outside the Temple courtyard. Since there is no other way for the fetus to be permitted, the slaughter of the mother inside the Temple courtyard does not cause it to be forbidden.

ה׳אֵין שׁוֹחֲטִין לְתוֹךְ יַמִּים וּנְהָרוֹת שֶׁמָּא יֹאמְרוּ עוֹבֵד מַיִם הוּא זֶה וְנִרְאֶה כְּמַקְרִיב לַמַּיִם. וְלֹא יִשְׁחֹט לִכְלִי מָלֵא מַיִם שֶׁמָּא יֹאמְרוּ לַצּוּרָה שֶׁתֵּרָאֶה בַּמַּיִם שָׁחַט. וְלֹא יִשְׁחֹט בְּתוֹךְ כֵּלִים וְלֹא לְתוֹךְ הַגֻּמָּא שֶׁכֵּן דֶּרֶךְ עוֹבְדֵי עַכּוּ"ם. וְאִם שָׁחַט שְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְּשֵׁרָה:

5One should not slaughter into9I.e., pour the blood directly into. seas or rivers, lest [an onlooker] say: "He is worshipping the water,"10In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Chullin 2:9), the Rambam writes that we suspect that the person worships "the element of water," water in its pure elemental state and not the water before us. and it would appear as if he is offering a sacrifice to the water. Nor should one slaughter into a utensil filled with water, lest one say: "He is slaughtering into the form that appears in the water."11In this context also, the Rambam (ibid.) explains that we fear he is worshipping the power that controls the image seen in the water. Nor should he slaughter into utensils12Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 11:3) writes that we fear that onlookers will say that he is collecting blood to offer it to false deities. or into a pit for this is the way of idolaters. If one slaughters in the above manner, his slaughter is acceptable.

ו׳שׁוֹחֲטִין לִכְלִי מַיִם עֲכוּרִין שֶׁאֵין הַצּוּרָה נִרְאֵית בָּהֶן. וְכֵן שׁוֹחֵט חוּץ לְגֻמָּא וְהַדָּם שׁוֹתֵת וְיוֹרֵד לַגֻּמָּא. וּבַשּׁוּק לֹא יַעֲשֶׂה כֵּן שֶׁמָּא יְחַקֶּה אֶת הַמִּינִים. וְאִם שָׁחַט לְגֻמָּא בַּשּׁוּק אָסוּר לֶאֱכל מִשְּׁחִיטָתוֹ עַד שֶׁיִּבְדְּקוּ אַחֲרָיו שֶׁמָּא מִין הוּא. וּמֻתָּר לִשְׁחֹט עַל דֹּפֶן הַסְּפִינָה וְהַדָּם שׁוֹתֵת עַל הַדֹּפֶן וְיוֹרֵד לַמַּיִם. וּמֻתָּר לִשְׁחֹט עַל גַּבֵּי הַכֵּלִים:

6One may slaughter into murky water in which an image may not be seen. Similarly, one may slaughter outside a pit and allow the blood to flow and descend into a pit. One should not do this in the marketplace so as not to mimic the gentiles. [Indeed,] if one slaughters into a pit in the marketplace, it is forbidden to eat from his slaughter until his [character] is examined, lest he be a heretic.13Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 12:2) mentions this ruling, but also the ruling of the Rashba that, after the fact, the slaughter is permitted. The Rama rules that, in the present age, when pagan rites are uncommonly practiced, one may rely on the more lenient view.It is permitted to slaughter on the wall of a ship, [although] the blood will flow down the wall and descend into the water.14As long as he is not slaughtering directly into the water, it does not appear that he is worshipping it. [Similarly,] it is permitted to slaughter above [the outer surface of] utensils.

ז׳כֵּיצַד שׁוֹחֲטִין. מוֹתֵחַ אֶת הַצַּוָּאר וּמוֹלִיךְ הַסַּכִּין וּמְבִיאָהּ עַד שֶׁשּׁוֹחֵט. בֵּין שֶׁהָיְתָה הַבְּהֵמָה רְבוּצָה בֵּין שֶׁהָיְתָה עוֹמֶדֶת וְאָחַז בְּעָרְפָּהּ וְהַסַּכִּין בְּיָדוֹ מִלְּמַטָּה וְשָׁחַט הֲרֵי זוֹ כְּשֵׁרָה:

7How does one slaughter? One extends the neck and passes the knife back and forth until [the animal] is slaughtered. Whether the animal was lying down15And thus the knife was above its neck. or it was standing and one held the back of its neck, held the knife in his hand below, and slaughtered, the slaughter is acceptable.

ח׳נָעַץ אֶת הַסַּכִּין בַּכֹּתֶל וְהֶעֱבִיר הַצַּוָּאר עָלֶיהָ עַד שֶׁנִּשְׁחַט שְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְּשֵׁרָה. וְהוּא שֶׁיִּהְיֶה צַוָּאר הַבְּהֵמָה לְמַטָּה וְסַכִּין לְמַעְלָה. שֶׁאִם הָיָה צַוַּאר בְּהֵמָה לְמַעְלָה מִן הַסַּכִּין שֶׁמָּא תֵּרֵד הַבְּהֵמָה בְּכֹבֶד גּוּפָהּ וְתֵחָתֵךְ בְּלֹא הוֹלָכָה וַהֲבָאָה וְאֵין זוֹ שְׁחִיטָה כְּמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר. לְפִיכָךְ אִם הָיָה עוֹף בֵּין שֶׁהָיָה צַוָּארוֹ לְמַעְלָה מִן הַסַּכִּין הַנְּעוּצָה אוֹ לְמַטָּה מִמֶּנּוּ שְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְּשֵׁרָה:

8If one implanted a knife in the wall and brought the neck [of an animal back and forth] over it until it was slaughtered, the slaughter is acceptable, provided the neck of the animal is below and the knife is above.16See Chapter 1, Halachah 19. For if the neck of the animal will be above the knife, it is possible that the animal will descend with the weight of its body [on the knife] and cut [its throat] without [it being brought back and forth].17The Turand the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 6:4) rule that slaughtering an animal in such a manner is unacceptable even if the slaughterer states that he is certain the animal's throat was not pierced in this manner. The rationale is that an animal's head is heavy and its weight will most likely cause its throat to be pierced. This is not ritual slaughter, as will be explained.18Chapter 3, Halachah 11. Even though the throat of the animal is cut, it is not considered ritual slaughter. Ritual slaughter involves bringing the knife back and forth across the neck or bringing the neck back and forth across the knife. Any other act that cuts its throat is not acceptable. Therefore, if we are speaking about a fowl, whether its neck is above the knife that is implanted or below it, the slaughter is acceptable.19Since a fowl is light, the slaughterer can hold it securely and maneuver it back and forth over the knife without difficulty. See Chullin 16b.

ט׳הַשּׁוֹחֵט וְהוֹלִיךְ אֶת הַסַּכִּין וְלֹא הֱבִיאָהּ אוֹ הֱבִיאָהּ וְלֹא הוֹלִיכָהּ וְשָׁחַט שְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְּשֵׁרָה. הוֹלִיךְ וְהֵבִיא עַד שֶׁחָתַךְ הָרֹאשׁ וְהִתִּיזוֹ שְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְּשֵׁרָה. הוֹלִיךְ וְלֹא הֵבִיא אוֹ הֵבִיא וְלֹא הוֹלִיךְ וְהִתִּיז אֶת הָרֹאשׁ בְּהוֹלָכָה בִּלְבַד אוֹ בַּהֲבָאָה בִּלְבַד. אִם יֵשׁ בַּסַּכִּין כִּמְלֹא שְׁנֵי צַוָּארִים מִצַּוְּארֵי הַנִּשְׁחָט שְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְּשֵׁרָה וְאִם לָאו שְׁחִיטָתוֹ פְּסוּלָה. שָׁחַט שְׁנֵי רָאשִׁים כְּאֶחָד שְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְּשֵׁרָה:

9When a person slaughters and draws the knife forward, but does not draw it back, draws it back, but does not draw it forward, his slaughter is acceptable.20Provided the slaughter of the animal is accomplished in that one action. If the slaughterer lifts the knife, that disqualifies the slaughter.If he drew the knife back and forth until he cut off the head entirely, his slaughter is acceptable. [The following rules apply if] he drew the knife forward, but did not draw it back, drew it back, but did not draw it forward, and cut off the head while drawing it forward alone or drawing it back alone. If the knife is twice as long21The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 24:2) requires that a knife be of this length even if one does not cut off the animal's head. as the width of the neck of the animal being slaughtered, his slaughter is acceptable. If not, his slaughter is not acceptable.22For it is not feasible that passing a knife the length of the animal's neck alone will be sufficient to slice off its head in one motion [Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.)]. Hence, we must assume that the animal's head was severed by pressing the knife against the neck. This disqualifies the slaughter as stated in Chapter 3, Halachah 11.If one slaughters the heads [of two animals] together, his slaughter is acceptable.

י׳שְׁנַיִם שֶׁאָחֲזוּ בְּסַכִּין אֲפִלּוּ אֶחָד מִצַּד זֶה וְשֵׁנִי מִצַּד אַחֵר כְּנֶגְדּוֹ וְשָׁחֲטוּ שְׁחִיטָתָן כְּשֵׁרָה. וְכֵן שְׁנַיִם שֶׁאָחֲזוּ שְׁנֵי סַכִּינִין וְשָׁחֲטוּ כְּאֶחָד בִּשְׁנֵי מְקוֹמוֹת בַּצַּוָּאר שְׁחִיטָתָן כְּשֵׁרָה. וַאֲפִלּוּ שָׁחַט זֶה הַוֵּשֶׁט בִּלְבַד אוֹ רֻבּוֹ וְהַשֵּׁנִי שָׁחַט בְּמָקוֹם אַחֵר הַקָּנֶה אוֹ רֻבּוֹ הֲרֵי שְׁחִיטָה זוֹ כְּשֵׁרָה וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין הַשְּׁחִיטָה כֻּלָּהּ בְּמָקוֹם אֶחָד. וְכֵן שְׁחִיטָה הָעֲשׂוּיָה כְּקֻלְמוֹס וּשְׁחִיטָה הָעֲשׂוּיָה כְּמַסְרֵק כְּשֵׁרָה:

10When two people hold unto a knife together - even when one is holding from one side and the other from the other side - and they slaughter together, the slaughter is acceptable. Similarly, if two people hold two knives and both slaughter simultaneously in two places in the neck, their slaughter is acceptable. This applies even if one slit the gullet alone or its majority and the other cut the windpipe or its majority in another place, this slaughter is acceptable even though the slaughter was not entirely in the same place.Similarly, slaughter in the form of a reed23He cut in a slant, cutting the windpipe at an angle and continuing to descend at that angle and cutting the gullet. and slaughter in the form of a comb24The Kessef Mishneh interprets this as meaning that the person cut in several places on the signs. Others interpret it as meaning a cut that slants back and forth (Turei Zahav 21:3). are acceptable.

י״אאֵין שְׁחִיטַת הַחֻלִּין צְרִיכָה כַּוָּנָה אֶלָּא אֲפִלּוּ שָׁחַט כְּמִתְעַסֵּק אוֹ דֶּרֶךְ שְׂחוֹק אוֹ שֶׁזָּרַק סַכִּין לְנָעֳצָהּ בַּכֹּתֶל וְשָׁחֲטָה בַּהֲלִיכָתָהּ הוֹאִיל וְהַשְּׁחִיטָה כָּרָאוּי בִּמְקוֹמָהּ וְשִׁעוּרָהּ הֲרֵי זוֹ כְּשֵׁרָה:

11The slaughter of ordinary animals25In contrast to the slaughter of sacrificial animals (see Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim 1:3). does not require focused attention.26Here, we are not speaking about refined spiritual intentions; the Rambam is stating that even if the person slaughters the animal without paying attention to what he is doing or even if he had no intent to slaughter it, the slaughter is acceptable. Even if one slaughtered when [wielding a knife] aimlessly, in jest, or [even] if he threw a knife to implant it in the wall and it slaughtered an animal as it was passing, since it slaughtered properly in the appropriate place and with the appropriate measure, it is acceptable.

י״בלְפִיכָךְ חֵרֵשׁ אוֹ שׁוֹטֶה אוֹ קָטָן אוֹ שִׁכּוֹר שֶׁנִּתְבַּלְבְּלָה דַּעְתּוֹ וּמִי שֶׁאֲחָזַתּוּ רוּחַ רָעָה שֶׁשָּׁחֲטוּ וַאֲחֵרִים רוֹאִין אוֹתָם שֶׁהַשְּׁחִיטָה כְּתִקְנָהּ הֲרֵי זוֹ כְּשֵׁרָה. אֲבָל סַכִּין שֶׁנָּפְלָה וְשָׁחֲטָה אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁשָּׁחֲטָה כְּדַרְכָּהּ הֲרֵי זוֹ פְּסוּלָה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים יב כא) "וְזָבַחְתָּ" עַד שֶׁיִּהְיֶה הַזּוֹבֵחַ אָדָם וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵינוֹ מִתְכַּוֵּן לִשְׁחִיטָה:

12Accordingly,27Since the deed is significant and not the intent. when a deafmute, an emotional or an intellectual unstable individual, a minor, a drunk whose mind is befuddled,28While he is intoxicated, he may reach the point where he is no longer able to control his conduct. See Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 1:8). a person who became overtaken by an evil spirit slaughters and others observe that he slaughters in the correct manner,29The others must watch. Otherwise, there is no way that we can insure that the slaughter is acceptable. Indeed, if such a person slaughters in private, the slaughter is disqualified [Rama (Yoreh De'ah 1:5)]. [the slaughter] is acceptable.30This applies only after the fact [Radbaz; see Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 1:5)]. At the outset, only a person fully in control of his intellect and emotions should be entrusted with ritual slaughter.If, by contrast, a knife falls31On its own accord or because of the wind. If, however, a person pushed the knife, since it was set in motion by human action, the slaughter is acceptable (Chullin 31a). and slaughters [an animal] on its way, it is not acceptable even if it slaughtered it in [the appropriate] manner. For [Deuteronomy, loc. cit.] states: "You shall slaughter," implying that a man must slaughter. [His actions are acceptable,] even if he does not intend to slaughter.

י״גגַּלְגַּל שֶׁל אֶבֶן אוֹ שֶׁל עֵץ שֶׁהָיְתָה הַסַּכִּין קְבוּעָה בּוֹ וְסִבֵּב אָדָם אֶת הַגַּלְגַּל וְשָׂם צַוַּאר הָעוֹף אוֹ הַבְּהֵמָה כְּנֶגְדּוֹ עַד שֶׁנִּשְׁחַט בִּסְבִיבַת הַגַּלְגַּל הֲרֵי זוֹ כְּשֵׁרָה. וְאִם הַמַּיִם הֵן הַמְסַבְּבִין אֶת הַגַּלְגַּל וְשָׂם אֶת הַצַּוָּאר כְּנֶגְדּוֹ בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁסִּבֵּב וְנִשְׁחַט הֲרֵי זוֹ פְּסוּלָה. וְאִם פָּטַר אָדָם אֶת הַמַּיִם עַד שֶׁבָּאוּ וְסִבְּבוּ אֶת הַגַּלְגַּל וְשָׁחַט בִּסְבִיבָתוֹ הֲרֵי זוֹ כְּשֵׁרָה שֶׁהֲרֵי מִכֹּחַ אָדָם בָּא. בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים בִּסְבִיבָה רִאשׁוֹנָה שֶׁהִיא מִכֹּחַ הָאָדָם אֲבָל מִסְּבִיבָה שְׁנִיָּה וּלְאַחֲרֶיהָ אֵינָהּ מִכֹּחַ הָאָדָם אֶלָּא מִכֹּחַ הַמַּיִם בְּהִלּוּכָן:

13[The following laws apply if there is] a stone or wooden wheel with a knife affixed to it. If a person turned the wheel and placed the neck of a fowl or an animal opposite it and slaughtered by turning the wheel, [the slaughter] is acceptable. If water is turning the wheel and he placed the neck of [the animal] opposite it while it was turning causing it to be slaughtered, it is unacceptable.32For the animal was slaughtered by the power of the water and not by human power. If a person caused the water to flow until they turned the wheel and caused it to slaughter by turning it, [the slaughter] is acceptable.33Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 7:1) rules that the slaughter is acceptable only after the fact. At the outset, one should not slaughter in this manner. The Siftei Cohen 7:1 states that this is the Rambam's opinion with regard to the first clause of the halachah as well. For [the activity] came as a result of man's actions.When does the above apply? With regard to the first turn, for that comes from man's power. The second and subsequent turns, however, do not come from man's power, but from the power of the flowing water.

י״דהַשּׁוֹחֵט לְשֵׁם הָרִים לְשֵׁם גְּבָעוֹת לְשֵׁם יַמִּים לְשֵׁם נְהָרוֹת לְשֵׁם מִדְבָּרוֹת אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא נִתְכַּוִּן לְעָבְדָן אֶלָּא לִרְפוּאָה וְכַיּוֹצֵא בָּהּ מִדִּבְרֵי הֲבַאי שֶׁאוֹמְרִין הָעַכּוּ"ם הֲרֵי שְׁחִיטָתוֹ פְּסוּלָה. אֲבָל אִם שָׁחַט לְשֵׁם מַזַּל הַיָּם אוֹ מַזַּל הָהָר אוֹ לְכוֹכָבִים וּמַזָּלוֹת וְכַיּוֹצֵא בָּהֶן הֲרֵי זוֹ אֲסוּרָה בַּהֲנָיָה כְּכָל תִּקְרֹבֶת עַכּוּ"ם:

14When a person slaughters for the sake of mountains, hills, seas, rivers, or deserts, his slaughter is unacceptable even when he does not intend to worship these entities, but merely for curative purposes or the like according to the empty words related by the gentiles, the slaughter is unacceptable.34It is forbidden to partake of the animal, because this resembles bringing a sacrifice to a false deity. Nevertheless, since one is bringing the offering for a particular purpose and not in actual worship of the false deity, it is not forbidden to benefit from the animal (Kessef Mishneh). If, however, one slaughtered for the sake of the spiritual source35This is the translation of the Hebrew term mazal; i.e., the person is not worshipping the material entity but the spiritual source from which its existence emanates. of the sea, the mountain, the stars, the constellations, or the like, it is forbidden to benefit from the animal36For this is considered as worshipping a false deity. like all offerings brought to false deities.37See Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot 11:1; Hilchot Avodat Kochavim 7:2.

ט״והַשּׁוֹחֵט אֶת הַבְּהֵמָה לִזְרֹק דָּמָהּ לְעַכּוּ"ם אוֹ לְהַקְטִיר חֶלְבָּהּ לְעַכּוּ"ם הֲרֵי זוֹ אֲסוּרָה. שֶׁלְּמֵדִין מַחֲשָׁבָה בַּחוּץ בְּחֻלִּין מִמַּחְשֶׁבֶת הַקָּדָשִׁים בִּפְנִים. שֶׁמַּחֲשָׁבָה כָּזוֹ פּוֹסֶלֶת בָּהֶן כְּמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר בְּהִלְכוֹת פְּסוּלֵי הַמֻּקְדָּשִׁין:

15When a person slaughters an animal [with the intent of] sprinkling its blood for the sake of false deities or burning its fats for the sake of false deities,38He is not slaughtering the animal itself for the sake of the false deity - in which instance, there would be no question that it is forbidden - but, nevertheless, at the time of slaughter, he does intend to offer its blood or fats to the false deity. it is forbidden. For we derive [the laws governing] one's intent outside [the Temple] with regard to [slaughtering] ordinary animals from those pertaining to the intent with regard to [slaughtering] consecrated animals within [the Temple]. For such an intent disqualifies them, as will be explained in Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim.39In Chapter 15, Halachah 10, of those halachot, the Rambam writes that one who slaughters a sacrificial animal with the proper intent for the sake of sprinkling its blood or burning its fats for an improper intent, the slaughter is unacceptable.

ט״זשְׁחָטָהּ וְאַחַר כָּךְ חָשַׁב לִזְרֹק דָּמָהּ לְעַכּוּ"ם אוֹ לְהַקְטִיר חֶלְבָּהּ לְעַכּוּ"ם הֲרֵי זוֹ אֲסוּרָה מִסָּפֵק. שֶׁמָּא סוֹפוֹ הוֹכִיחַ עַל תְּחִלָּתוֹ וּבְמַחֲשָׁבָה כָּזוֹ שָׁחַט:

16When a person slaughtered [an animal] and afterwards, thought to sprinkle its blood for the sake of false deities or to burn its fats for the sake of false deities, it is forbidden because of the doubt involved.40The Turei Zahav 4:2 writes that according to the Rambam, because of the doubt, it is forbidden to benefit from the animal. Others (see also Siftei Cohen 4:2) rule that it is forbidden to partake of the animal's meat, but one may benefit from it. Perhaps the ultimate result showed what his initial intent was and it was with this intent that he slaughtered.

י״זהַשּׁוֹחֵט לְשֵׁם קָדָשִׁים שֶׁמִּתְנַדְּבִין וְנִדָּרִים כְּמוֹתָן שְׁחִיטָתוֹ פְּסוּלָה שֶׁזֶּה כְּשׁוֹחֵט קָדָשִׁים בַּחוּץ. שָׁחַט לְשֵׁם קָדָשִׁים שֶׁאֵינָן בָּאִין בְּנֵדֶר וּנְדָבָה שְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְּשֵׁרָה:

17When a person slaughters [an animal] for the sake of [a type of] sacrifice for which one could consecrate an animal through a vow or through a pledge,41As indicated in the following halachah, there are certain sacrifices that a person may offer on his own initiative. Since he has not actually consecrated the animal, the prohibition against sacrificing consecrated animals outside the Temple does not apply according to Scriptural Law. Nevertheless, because of the impression created, our Sages forbade the slaughter of an animal for that intent (Maggid Mishneh). The Tur (Yoreh De'ah 5), however, states that we fear that he might have consecrated it, implying that there is a question of a Scriptural prohibition involved.The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 5:1) rules that this law applies even when the slaughtered animal has a blemish which would disqualify it as a sacrifice, for there are times when a person will conceal the blemish. the slaughter is unacceptable.42From the fact that the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah, sec. 7) quotes this and the following halachot, we see that these laws also apply in the present age although the Temple is destroyed. See the conclusion of the gloss of the Maggid Mishneh to Halachah 20 which mentions a difference of opinion concerning this matter. For this is comparable to slaughtering consecrated animals outside [the Temple courtyard]. If he slaughters [an animal] for the sake of [a type of] sacrifice for which one could not designate an animal through a vow or through a pledge,43As indicated in the following halachah, there are other sacrifices for which a person may consecrate an animal only when he is required to bring that offering. He may not pledge such a sacrifice on his own initiative. the slaughter is acceptable.44Since he cannot consecrate animals for such offerings, we do not worry about the impression that may be created. On the contrary, an onlooker will consider the person's statements facetious (Siftei Cohen 5:4)

י״חכֵּיצַד. הַשּׁוֹחֵט לְשֵׁם עוֹלָה לְשֵׁם שְׁלָמִים לְשֵׁם תּוֹדָה לְשֵׁם פֶּסַח שְׁחִיטָתוֹ פְּסוּלָה. הוֹאִיל וְהַפֶּסַח מַפְרִישׁ אוֹתוֹ בְּכָל הַשָּׁנָה בְּכָל עֵת שֶׁיִּרְצֶה הֲרֵי הוּא דּוֹמֶה לְדָבָר הַנִּדָּר וְהַנִּדָּב. שָׁחַט לְשֵׁם חַטָּאת לְשֵׁם אָשָׁם וַדַּאי לְשֵׁם אָשָׁם תָּלוּי לְשֵׁם בְּכוֹר לְשֵׁם מַעֲשֵׂר לְשֵׁם תְּמוּרָה שְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְּשֵׁרָה:

18What is implied? When one slaughters [an animal] for the sake of a burnt offering, for the sake of a peace offering, for the sake of a thanksgiving offering, or for the sake of a Paschal offering, the slaughter is unacceptable.45For these are sacrifices that a person can consecrate on his own initiative. Hence slaughtering an animal for this purpose is forbidden as stated in the previous halachah. Since a Paschal offering may be designated every year at any time one desires, it resembles a sacrifice that can be consecrated through a vow or through a pledge.46Seemingly, the Paschal offering does not resemble the others for it is an obligation incumbent on a person and can be brought only on the fourteenth of Nisan (Chullin 41b). Nevertheless, it is placed in this category for the reason explained by the Rambam.If one slaughters [an animal] for the sake of a sin offering, for the sake of a certain guilt offering, for the sake of a doubtful guilt offering,47The instance of a doubtful guilt offering is debated in Chullin, loc. cit., without the Talmud reaching a definite conclusion concerning the matter. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah, loc. cit.) quotes the Rambam's view. The Tur and the Rama, however, follow the view that a person can consecrate a doubtful guilt offering on his own initiative and hence, forbid ritual slaughter for this intent. for the sake of a firstborn offering,48For a firstborn animal is consecrated by birth; a person cannot consecrate it through his statements. for the sake of a tithe offering,49For the tithe offerings are consecrated through the tithing rite; a person cannot consecrate it through his statements. or for the sake of a substitute [for any offering],50For unless a person has a consecrated animal at home, there is no reason that an onlooker might think that the substitution is of consequence (Chullin, loc. cit.). the slaughter is acceptable.51For these are sacrifices that a person cannot consecrate unless he is required to.

י״טהָיָה מְחֻיָּב חַטָּאת וְשָׁחַט וְאָמַר לְחַטָּאתִי שְׁחִיטָתוֹ פְּסוּלָה. הָיָה לוֹ קָרְבָּן בְּתוֹךְ בֵּיתוֹ וְשָׁחַט וְאָמַר לְשֵׁם תְּמוּרַת זִבְחִי שְׁחִיטָתוֹ פְּסוּלָה שֶׁהֲרֵי הֵמִיר בּוֹ:

19When a person is liable for a sin offering and he slaughters, saying: "For the sake of my sin offering," his slaughter is unacceptable.52Rashi (Chullin, loc. cit.) explains that when a person is liable to bring a sin offering, he makes the matter known so that he will be embarrassed and thus further his atonement. Therefore the onlookers will know of his obligation and will not regard his statements as facetious. If he had a sacrificial animal in his home and he slaughters, saying: "For the sake of a substitution for my sacrifice," his slaughter is unacceptable, for he substituted the animal [for the consecrated one].53From the Rambam's words, it would appear that this is not merely a Rabbinical safeguard, but that his statements bring about a substitution (temurah) of the animal and he is liable for slaughtering it outside the Temple courtyard.

כ׳הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁשָּׁחֲטָה לְשֵׁם עוֹלַת יוֹלֶדֶת וְאָמְרָה זוֹ לְעוֹלָתִי שְׁחִיטָתָהּ כְּשֵׁרָה. שֶׁאֵין עוֹלַת יוֹלֶדֶת בָּאָה בְּנֵדֶר וּנְדָבָה וַהֲרֵי אֵינָהּ יוֹלֶדֶת שֶׁנִּתְחַיְּבָה בְּעוֹלָה. וְאֵין חוֹשְׁשִׁין לָהּ שֶׁמָּא הִפִּילָה. שֶׁכָּל הַמַּפֶּלֶת קוֹל יֵשׁ לָהּ. אֲבָל הַשּׁוֹחֵט לְשֵׁם עוֹלַת נָזִיר אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵינוֹ נָזִיר שְׁחִיטָתוֹ פְּסוּלָה שֶׁעִקַּר הַנְּזִירוּת נֵדֶר מִן הַנְּדָרִים:

20When a woman slaughters54As stated in Chapter 4, Halachah 4, a woman may slaughter animals. And since she may slaughter ordinary animals, her slaughter of sacrificial animals would be acceptable. Note, however, the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Chullin 2:10) which speaks about a man slaughtering an animal on behalf of a woman. for the sake of the burnt offering brought by a woman who gave birth, saying: "This is for the sake of my burnt offering," her slaughter is acceptable.55Since this offering cannot be brought on a person's own initiative, her statements are considered facetious. [The rationale is that the obligation to bring] the burnt offering of a woman who gave birth cannot be initiated through a vow or through a pledge and this woman has not given birth and thus is not obligated to bring a burnt offering. We do not suspect that she had a miscarriage.56A woman who miscarries is also obligated to bring such a burnt offering. For it will become public knowledge if a woman miscarries.57The word here matches the Rambam's statements in the revised text of his Commentary to the Mishnah (loc. cit.) as published by Rav Kappach. The Rambam's original text - and the version of his Commentary to the Mishnah commonly circulated - present an entirely different conception of this halachah.When, by contrast, a person slaughters for the sake of a burnt offering brought by a Nazarite, his slaughter is unacceptable even if he is not a Nazarite. [The rationale is that] the fundamental dimension of being a Nazarite is a vow like other vows.58Hence we suspect that perhaps he took a Nazarite vow in private and the matter has not become known (Kessef Mishneh, Lechem Mishneh).

כ״אשְׁנַיִם אוֹחֲזִין בְּסַכִּין וְשׁוֹחֲטִין. אֶחָד מִתְכַּוֵּן לְשֵׁם דָּבָר שֶׁהַשּׁוֹחֵט לוֹ שְׁחִיטָתוֹ אֲסוּרָה. וְהַשֵּׁנִי לֹא הָיְתָה לוֹ כַּוָּנָה כְּלָל וַאֲפִלּוּ נִתְכַּוֵּן לְשֵׁם דָּבָר הַמֻּתָּר לְהִתְכַּוֵּן לוֹ הֲרֵי זוֹ פְּסוּלָה. וְכֵן אִם שָׁחַט זֶה אַחַר זֶה וְהִתְכַּוֵּן הָאֶחָד מֵהֶן לְשֵׁם דָּבָר הַפָּסוּל פּוֹסֵל. בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים כְּשֶׁהָיָה לוֹ בָּהּ שֻׁתָּפוּת אֲבָל אִם אֵין לוֹ בָּהּ שֻׁתָּפוּת אֵינָהּ אֲסוּרָה. שֶׁאֵין אָדָם מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל אוֹסֵר דָּבָר שֶׁאֵינוֹ שֶׁלּוֹ שֶׁאֵין כַּוָּנָתוֹ אֶלָּא לְצַעֲרוֹ:

21When two people hold a knife and slaughter, one has in mind an intent that would disqualify the slaughter and the other has nothing at all in mind - or even if he had in mind an intent that is permitted - the slaughter is unacceptable.59Since his activity in slaughtering the animal was significant, his intent is also of consequence. Similarly, if they slaughtered one after the other60I.e., without waiting; thus the slaughter is not disqualified. and one had an intent that disqualifies the slaughter, it is disqualified.When does the above apply? When [the person with the undesirable intent] has a share in the animal. If, however, he does not have a share in the animal, it does not become forbidden. For a Jewish person does not cause something that does not belong to him to become forbidden. He is acting only to cause his colleague anguish.61He makes such statements to make it appear that the slaughter is unacceptable so that his colleague will suffer anguish. Nevertheless, his statements have no effect. The Rambam's view is quoted by the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 5:3). The Tur and the Rama states that there are opinions which forbid the slaughter regardless of whether the other person has a share in the animal or not because of the impression that is created.

כ״ביִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁשָּׁחַט לְעַכּוּ"ם אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהָעַכּוּ"ם מִתְכַּוֵּן לְכָל מַה שֶּׁיִּרְצֶה שְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְּשֵׁרָה. שֶׁאֵין חוֹשְׁשִׁין אֶלָּא לְמַחְשֶׁבֶת הַזּוֹבֵחַ לֹא לְמַחְשֶׁבֶת בַּעַל הַבְּהֵמָה. לְפִיכָךְ עַכּוּ"ם שֶׁשָּׁחַט לְיִשְׂרָאֵל אֲפִלּוּ הָיָה קָטָן שְׁחִיטָתוֹ נְבֵלָה כְּמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר:

22When a Jew slaughters for a gentile, the slaughter is acceptable regardless of the thoughts the gentile has in mind.62I.e., even if the gentile considers it as a sacrifice to a false deity. For we are concerned only with the thoughts of the person slaughtering and not the thoughts of the owner of the animal.63See Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim 14:1. Therefore when a gentile - even a minor64Who is to young to be involved in the worship of false deities. - slaughters for the sake of a Jew, the animal he slaughters is a nevelah, as will be explained.65As stated in Chapter 4, Halachot 11-12, the gentile's slaughter is not considered halachicly significant and it is as if the animal died without being slaughtered.

← Back to Shiurim · View source ↗ · Text courtesy of Sefaria