1)

(a)Our Mishnah discusses the Shi'ur Shechitah of animals - which require both Simanim to be cut, and birds - which require only one.

(b)For the Shechitah to be Kasher - one needs to Shecht the majority of the Si'man (half is Pasul).

(c)Rebbi Yehudah requires Shechting the jugular veins too - when Shechting birds ...

(d)... in order to drain the blood.

2)

(a)The problem with the Lashon 'ha'Shochet' with which the Perek begins is that - it implies Bedi'eved, and if Shechting the two Simanim of an animal is Kasher only Bedi'eved, then what is one supposed to do Lechatchilah?

(b)One answer is that 'ha'Shochet' (Bedi'eved) refers to the one Si'man of a bird; the other that - it refers to the majority of each Si'man (since Lechatchilah, one is supposed to Shecht both Simanim, and the one Si'man of a bird, completely).

(c)Rav Kahana tries to learn from ...

1. ... the word "Veshachat" (in the Pasuk in Vayikra "Ve'shachat es ben ha'Bakar ... ") that - the Shechitah must be performed on the neck (because "Veshachat" is the acronym of 'be'Makom she'Shach, Chat'eihu' [Prepare it for eating, or cleanse it of its blood, in the place where it bends]).

2. ... the word "Vechitei" (in the Pasuk in Tazri'a "Vechitei es ha'Bayis"), or from the word "Techat'eini (in the Pasuk in Tehilim "Techat'eini be'Eizov ve'Et'har") that - Chatei is a Lashon of cleansing (or preparing).

(d)And we know that Shechitah is performed on the neck, and not on other parts of its body which also bend, such as ...

1. ... the tail - because the Lashon bends implies that it can be bent at will, but is generally straight, whereas a tail bends automatically.

2. ... the ear (or the knee) - because Shechitah requires Dam ha'Nefesh, blood that is life-giving (and which causes the animal to die when it is drained), which is not the case with regard to blood from the ear.

(e)And we learn this from the Shechitah of Kodshim, about which the Torah writes, in Acharei-Mos, "*Damo be'Nafsho hu*, va'Ani Nasativ lachem al ha'Mizbe'ach".

3)

(a)The problem with the previous D'rashah is that it is possible to Shecht from the ear and still obtain Dam ha'Nefesh -

(b)...by tearing the animal from the ear up to a point on the body where there is Dam ha'Nefesh.

(c)The other problem we have with learning the location of Shechitah from the previous Pasuk is - from where we will then learn the five Pesulim ('Shehiyah, D'rasah, Chaladah,Ikur and Hagramah')? We therefore 'kill two birds with one stone' (as we will do with regard to all the forthcoming attempts to learn Shechitah from a Pasuk) - by citing the source for the latter as a Halachah le'Moshe mi'Sinai (in which case the former is, too).

4)

(a)Rav Yeimar tries to learn Shechitah from the word "Vezavachta" (in the Pasuk in Re'ei "Vezavachta mi'Bekarcha u'mi'Tzoncha"), whose acronym is - 'mi'Makom she'Zav, Chat'eihu' (break it in a place where it flows.

(b)He learns from the word "Teichas" (in the Pasuk in Devarim "Al Tiyra ve'Al Teichas") that - 'Chat'eihu' means 'break it'.

(c)We therefore know that Shechitah is not performed on the nose - because the mucus (to which "flows" refers), flows on its own accord, and not on account of the breaking, as implied by "Veshachat".

(d)"Ve'shachat" might nevertheless be referring - to the heart, from which blood will flow when it is pierced (thereby refuting Rav Yeimar's proof).

5)

(a)Tana de'bei Rebbi Yishmael tries to learn the location of Shechitah from "Veshachat", which can also be read 'Vesachat' - whose acronym is 'be'Makom she'Sach, Chat'eihu' (in the location where it speaks [the throat], break it]).

(b)We refute this explanation too, however - by suggesting that maybe the Torah is referring to tearing the animal open from the nose (as we explained above).

(c)We remain with one Kashya on each of the above opinions (from the ear, from the heart and from the tongue, respectively), to which we - even after their respective Pesukim, from where do we then know the five Pesulim ('Shehiyah, D'rasah, Chaladah, Ikur and Hagramah')?

6)

(a)We therefore conclude that - the real source of the location of Shechitah (as well as that of the five Pesulim) is Halachah le'Moshe mi'Sinai).

(b)And we conclude that "Veshachat" comes to teach us not to make the animal a Gist'ra. Besides the Isur of D'rasah, this might mean - not to cut through the entire neck.

(c)And the word "Veshachat" then implies to extract the blood (or to prepare the animal for eating) but no more.

(d)If, as we suggested, we also learn the P'sul of D'rasah from "Veshachat" (in spite of the 'Halachah ... ) - "Veshachat" will then imply drawing (the knife, which one can control [as opposed to chopping off the head, which one cannot]).

7)

(a)Rebbi Chiya in a Beraisa has a problem with the Pasuk in Vayikra "Ve'archu b'nei Aharon ha'Kohanim es ha'Nesachim [the pieces], es ha'Rosh ve'es ha'Pader" - "ha'Pader" is the fat.

(b)The problem Rebbi Chiya now has with the words "es ha'Rosh ve'es ha'Pader" is - why the Torah finds it necessary to single out the head and the fat, which would seem to be included in "es ha'Nesachim"?

(c)Based on the Pasuk there "Vehifshit es ha'Olah Venitach osah li'Nesachim", we learn from "es Rosho ve'es Pidro, Ve'Arach" that - although the head, which was already severed (Halachically, and to all intents and purposes) before the skinning (and which was not skinned together with the rest of the animal), it must nevertheless be arranged on the Mizbe'ach together with all the other pieces (that were).

8)

(a)They brought the head on the Mizbe'ach - intact; wool, beard, bones, nerves, horns, hooves and all.

(b)We deal with the fact that the previous D'rashah began with "es ha'Rosh ve'es ha'Pader", and concluded with "es Rosho ve'es Pidro ve'Arach" - by amending the quote to the original Pasuk ...

(c)... and we learn from the latter Pasuk - that the head and the fat are the first of all the limbs to be placed on the Mizbe'ach.

(d)Whereas from "ve'es ha'Pader" we learn that - when bringing the head on the Mizbe'ach, one covers the Beis-ha'Shechitah with it, because the latter is full of blood, and it is not Kavod ha'Makom to bring it open in such a state.

9)

(a)There are two distinctions between Beheimah and Of regarding Tum'ah. On the one hand ...

1. ... an animal is Metamei be'Maga u've'Masa (through either touching or carrying, but a bird is not), whilst on the other ...

2. ... a bird is Metamei Begadim a'Beis ha'Beli'ah (the person who eats it together with the clothes that he is wearing) whereas an animal is not.

(b)The Tana of another Beraisa, based on the Pasuk in Shemini "Zos Toras ha'Beheimah ve'ha'Of", learns the Din of a bird from that of an animal - inasmuch as it requires Shechitah (as the Torah writes in Vayikra, by the latter "Veshachat es ben ha'Bakar").

(c)We know that both Simanim of an animal need to be cut - from the previous Amud, where we required a Pasuk to include the head in "Ve'arach", even though it has already been severed).

(d)And the Tana subsequently learns from "Zos" that - although a bird requires Shechitah like an animal, only an animal requires both Simanim to be cut, but not a bird.

10)

(a)Rebbi Eliezer in the Beraisa learns the same Hekesh, only he learns that - Beheimah, like Of (by which it is written "u'Malak es Rosho mi'Mul Orpo") must be Shechted at the neck.

(b)He then learns from ...

1. ... " mi'Mul Orpo" (in the Pasuk in Tzav "u'Malak es Rosho mi'Mul Orpo") that - only a bird requires Shechitah at the back of the neck; whereas an animal, must be Shechted at the front.

2. ... "Zos" (in the Pasuk "Zos Toras ha'Beheimah ve'ha'Of" [quoted in the previous Beraisa]) that - only a bird requires Shechitah of only one Si'man, but an animal requires two.

(c)We learn that a bird only requires the Shechitah of one Si'man - because the Torah writes by the Melikah of a Chatas ha'Of "ve'Lo Yavdil" (and the reason that an Olas ha'Of requires the cutting of two Simanim is due to the Mitzvah of Havdalah (as we learned in the first Perek).

11)

(a)The Pasuk in Shemini concludes "ve'Chol Nefesh ha'Chayah ha'Romeses ba'Mayim". From the fact that the Torah places the Din of birds in between that of animals and fish, Tani bar Kapara extrapolates that - on the one hand, the Torah's comparison of birds to fish dictates that they cannot require the Shechitah of two Simanim (like animals); whilst on the other, the comparison to animals dictates that they cannot just be torn open (like fish). The outcome is that they require Shechitah of one Si'man.

(b)We learn from the Pasuk in Beha'aloscha "ha'Tzon u'Vakar Yishachet lahem, Im es Kol Degei ha'Yam Ye'asef lahem" that - fish may be eaten when they are gathered, and do not require Shechitah.

(c)We query this Limud however, from the Pasuk there "Vaya'sfu es ha'Selav" - which cannot come to exempt birds from Shechitah (as that would clash with the Torah's comparison of birds to animals, as we just explained).

(d)We justify the different translations however - based on the fact that "Ye'asef" written by fish occurs in the same Pasuk as Shechitah (which it therefore comes to preclude), whereas "Vaya'asfu" written by birds is not.

12)

(a)Ubar Gelila'ah explains that animals require the Shechitah of both Simanim, because they were created from earth, and fish require none, because they were created from water - since the tougher the element from which a creature is created, the more vitality it possesses, and the more difficult it is to kill it.

(b)A bird, he explains - requires the Shechitah of only one Si'man, because Hash-m created it out of mud, which is a combination of the two.

(c)Shmuel Keputka'ah proves the connection between birds and fish - from the fact that the former have scales on their legs.

(d)When Kontrikun the Mayor pointed out an apparent discrepancy between the Pasuk in Bereishis, where Hash-m ordered the water to produce the birds, and the Pasuk there which records how Hash-m created them from earth, Rabban Gamliel (see Tosfos DH 've'Od Sha'alo') answered - that they were made from mud (as we just explained).

13)

(a)Rabban Gamliel's Talmidim reacted to the above explanation - by looking at each other (a sign that they did not like their Rebbe's answer).

(b)He replied that this is what he told his enemy (to get him off his back), but that in reality - they were created from water.

(c)Nevertheless, he explained, the Torah adds "ve'es Kol Of ha'Shamayim", after the Pasuk "Vayitzer Hash-m Elokim min ha'Adamah Kol Chayas ha'Sadeh" - because it pertains to the following phrase, which describes how Hash-m brought all the animals to Adam, to give them names (and not to the previous one, which teaches us from what the animals were created).

(d)Others invert the two answers of Rabban Gamliel, telling Kontrikun the Mayor that Hash-m created the birds out of water, and his Talmidim that they were made out of mud - because when all's said and done, the birds are inserted in the Pasuk of "Vayitzer" (or because even the Pasuk which describes the birds' creation from water, adds the words "al ha'Aretz").

14)

(a)Rav Yehudah in the name of Rebbi Yitzchak ben Pinchas learns from the Pasuk in Acharei-Mos (in connection with Kisuy ha'Dam) "Veshafach es Damo ... " that - one only needs to spill the blood of a bird, but not to Shecht it.

(b)And he learns from the Hekesh "Zos Toras ha'Beheimah ve'ha'Of" that - Shechitas ha'Of is performed on the neck (like the Melikah of a Kodshim bird [like Rebbi Eliezer learned above]).

(c)An he defines a Nivlas Of - as one that either died naturally or that was killed by spilling the blood of another part of the body other than the Simanim.

(d)Despite the fact that the Pasuk is talking about Chayos as well as Ofos, Rav Yehudah learns that "Ve'shafach es Damo" is coming to exempt birds from Shechitah, and not Chayos - because it is written immediately after "O Of asher Ye'achel".

15)

(a)We query Rav Yehudah from the Beraisa 'ha'Shochet ve'Nisnavlah be'Yado, ha'Nocher v'ha'Me'aker, Patur mi'Lechasos' in that - seeing as Shechitah is not necessary, why does Nocher not obligate Kisuy ha'Dam?

(b)To answer this - we establish the Beraisa by a Chayah (which Rav Yehudah agrees, requires Shechitah).

(c)And we query him further from another Beraisa, where the Tana rules that someone who Shechts because he needs the blood to cover it - is Chayav to cover the blood (even though he does not intend to eat the bird or the Chayah [as we shall now see]).

(d)To avoid having to cover the blood, the Tana advises 'O Nochro O Okro'. We think that the Tana is talking about a bird (a Kashya on Rav Yehudah) - because the blood bird of a b is a known antidote against moths.

(e)We answer - by establishing this Beraisa by a Chayah too, because its blood can be used to dye leather red.