Save "Iyun 2: Shechitas Cheresh
"
Iyun 2: Shechitas Cheresh
מתני׳ הכל שוחטין ושחיטתן כשרה חוץ מחרש שוטה וקטן שמא יקלקלו את שחיטתן וכולן ששחטו ואחרים רואין אותן שחיטתן כשרה:
MISHNA: Everyone slaughters an animal, i.e., can perform halakhically valid slaughter, and their slaughter is valid, except for a deaf-mute, an imbecile, and a minor, lest they ruin their slaughter because they lack competence. And for all of them, when they slaughtered an animal and others see and supervise them, their slaughter is valid.
Cheresh Cannot Shecht
מתני' הכל שוחטין - כל היכא דתני הכל כולהו מייתי להו בשמעתא קמייתא דערכין ומפרש הכל לאתויי מאי. והכל שוחטין דמתניתין פליגי בה אמוראי בגמרא למר לאתויי טמא בחולין ולמר לאתויי כותי או מומר:
Cheresh is not a good Shechita.

(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:

(4) This mode of slaughtering, which is spoken of in the Torah indefinitely, must be explained, so as to know on what organ of the animal sheḥitah is performed; what is the extent of sheḥitah; with what instrument, when, where and how sheḥitah is executed; what things invalidate sheḥitah; and who may serve as a shoḥet. All these details are implied in the biblical command, which states: "You shall slaughter any of your cattle or sheep … as I have instructed you, and you may eat to your heart's content in your settlements." All these details were commanded orally, like the rest of the Oral Torah which is referred to as Mitzvah (commandment), as we have explained in the introduction to this work.

We learnt about Zevicha in the Torah, and here are the details.

(א) תניא וזבחת מבקרך ומצאנך כאשר צויתיך מלמד שנצטוה משה על פה בהלכות שחיטה והנני מסדר הלכותיהן מי הראוי לשחוט וכוונת השוחט ומחשבה הפוסלת השחיטה במה שוחטין ומתי שוחטין ובאיזה מקום שוחטין ומי הם הנשחטין ושליל הנמצא בבהמה ואותו ואת בנו ובדיקת הסכין וברכת השחיטה ובדיקת הסימנים מקום השחיטה בצואר וכמה שיעור שוחטין וחמשה הלכות שחיטה והכסוי וברכתו

(1) it was taught in a brita "and you shall sacrifice from you sheep and cattle as i have commanded you" this teaches us that moses was commanded by heart the laws of slaughtering. and i am organizing their law's, for example: who is fit to slaughter, and the intention one must have while doing so, and a thought witch will invalidate the slaughtering, with what does one slaughter, and when does one slaughter, and which animals can be slaughtered, and a fetus which is found in the mothers stomach, and the rule that you cant slaughter and animal and its son on the same day, and checking the knife, and the blessing recited over slaughtering. everyone may slaughter: woman and freed slaves and any person, even if we don't know that he is a authentic butcher, meaning: that he wont faint while doing it. and that we don't know that he knows the laws of shcheta. this is because most people who regularly shecht are assumed to be experts and trustworthy. When is this true,when the person isn't in front of us, then we can eat from his shechting and we rely on the assumption, but if he is in front of us we must check if he is a expert and to ask him if he fainted.and the smag writes in the name of r tam that he dosent need to know all the laws,rather if he says "on this thing i was unsure and i asked" we do call this knowing(the laws of shechita). only when he says the forbidden is permitted then he is not valid to shecht and we cant eat from his shcheta. however we can initially rely on a person with the knowledge that we will check him later,and we don't worry that we may come to eat without checking and asking him first. but if there is a person of who we know that he dosent know the laws of shechita even if he shechted in front of us two or three times,and then shechted by himself, his shechting is invalid even if we ask him did you do the following things and it seems from his answer that he did shecht properly,we canot rely on him. and even if he says "i am confident that i shechted properly it is invalid(and cant be eaten from).but anything which he does infront of us is valid, and even initially we can give him to slaughter as long as there is somone standing over him and this is provided that he sees him shechting from the begning until the end. and the bal itur wrote: if we know that he has learnt the laws of shechita even if he has not gotten a trustworthy status then he can initially shecht, and if we don't know wehter he has learnt the laws or not, then he should not initially shecht but if he did then his shechting is kosher and we don't have to check even if he is in front of us. and the rambam made a difference between a person who know the laws and a person who we have knowledge that that knows how to shecht regarding wether we must ask him or not. as he writes: one who knows the rules of shechita should shecht by himself in the beginning until he has shechted in front of a wise man many tines and is quick and accustomed (to shechita), butif he did his shechita is kosher. and he did not write that we ask him,however concerning a person who dosent know the laws of shechita he writes that if he shechts by himself we ask him, if he knows the laws of shechita then his shechita is kosher. and my master and father the rush may his memory be blessed did not make this differentiation(the one that the rambam made)rather he said that if he in front of us then we check him and ask him if he fainted, and if hes not, than we rely on the assumption concerning both of them (one who knows the laws and one who dosent).and this also the opinion of r elfas. and since most pepole are valid to shecht, if one finds a animal that is shechted properly,in a place with mostly Jews it is kosher. and even if it was stolen from him and he finds it shechted(it is kosher)because even if he is suspected to steal he isnt suspected for improper shechting.and the rambam writes that this is only if it is found ina house, but if he found it in the garbage of a house or in the street it is forbidden.and my father the rosh permited it even if it was found in the garbage of a house and he only forbade it in a garbage which was on the street, and so to the rashba permitted it unless it was found in the garbage of a street. a deaf person wich is somone who does not hear or talk and a retarded peson wich is one who goes out alone at night, or tares his clothing, or he sleeps ina cemetery, or he loses what is given to him, even in one of these instances if he does this in a fashion of retardation he is called a retarded person,and a minor that cant use his hands to shecht properly, all of these pepole cannot initially shecht even if others are watching them, but if they did anyway then it is kosher. and in any case we don't initaly give them a animal to shecht if there is no one watching them even if he wants to give it to the dogs to eat.and a deaf person who speaks but dosent hear even though he talks he shold not initaly shecht because he doesn't hear the blessing but if he did shecht even by him himself hes shechita is kosher. butd if one hearsand does not speak if he is a expert than even initially he can slaughter if another makes the blessing and a minor who isa expert should not shecht inittaly but if hr did than it is losher. and if a older person is standing and watching he can shecht even inittaly. and a person who reached the drukinis of loot the rule regarding himis like a retarded person

Moshe was taught the Hilchos Shechita Bal Peh, and the Tur is going to make an order

(ב) חֵרֵשׁ הַמְדַבֵּר וְאֵינוֹ שׁוֹמֵעַ, לֹא יִתְרֹם. וְאִם תָּרַם, תְּרוּמָתוֹ תְרוּמָה. חֵרֵשׁ שֶׁדִּבְּרוּ בוֹ חֲכָמִים בְּכָל מָקוֹם, שֶׁאֵינוֹ לֹא שׁוֹמֵעַ וְלֹא מְדַבֵּר:

(2) A “heresh”, who speaks but cannot hear, may not give terumah, but if he does so, his terumah is terumah. The “heresh” of whom the sages generally speak is one who neither hears nor speaks.

Cheresh that Chachamim are talking about is one that cannot hear and cannot speak.

חוץ מחרש שוטה וקטן כו': קתני חרש דומיא דשוטה וקטן מה שוטה וקטן דלאו בני דעה אף חרש דלאו בר דעה הוא וקא משמע לן כדתנן חרש שדיברו חכמים בכל מקום שאינו שומע ואינו מדבר הא מדבר ואינו שומע שומע ואינו מדבר חייב תנינא להא דתנו רבנן המדבר ואינו שומע זהו חרש שומע ואינו מדבר זהו אלם זה וזה הרי הן כפקחין לכל דבריהם וממאי דמדבר ואינו שומע זהו חרש שומע ואינו מדבר זהו אלם דכתיב (תהלים לח, יד) ואני כחרש לא אשמע וכאלם לא יפתח פיו ואיבעית אימא כדאמרי אינשי אישתקיל מילוליה:

§ The mishna taught: Except for a deaf-mute, an imbecile, and a minor. The Gemara notes: By listing these three cases together the mishna is teaching that a deaf-mute is similar to an imbecile and a minor: Just as an imbecile and a minor are among those who are not of sound mind, so too the deaf-mute [ḥeresh] mentioned here is one who is not of sound mind. And this teaches us as we learned in a mishna (Terumot 1:2): The ḥeresh, whom the Sages discussed everywhere, is one who does not hear and does not speak, and therefore his mind is not lucid. It can be inferred from this that one who speaks but does not hear and one who hears but does not speak are obligated in mitzvot like any other person. The Gemara notes: We already learned this, as the Sages taught in the Tosefta (Terumot 1:2): One who speaks but does not hear, this is a deaf person. One who hears but does not speak, this is a mute. Both this one and that one are in the same legal category as those who can see and hear with regard to all matters. This shows that the ḥeresh exempted by the Sages is one who neither hears nor speaks. The Gemara asks: And from where is it derived that one who speaks but does not hear is a deaf person, and one who hears but does not speak is a mute? As it is written: “But I am as a deaf man, I hear not; and I am as a dumb man [illem] who does not open his mouth” (Psalms 38:14). If you wish, say instead that this is as people say: His speech has been taken [Ishtakeil Milulei]; the term illem is an acronym for this phrase.
If one can speak and not hear, he is considered a Cheresh, and if he cannot speak but he can hear, he is considered an Ilem, Both of which are considered a Pikeach (wise).

(ה) חֵרֵשׁ שׁוֹטֶה וְקָטָן וְשִׁכּוֹר שֶׁנִּתְבַּלְבְּלָה דַּעְתּוֹ שֶׁשָּׁחֲטוּ שְׁחִיטָתָן פְּסוּלָה מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאֵין בָּהֶן דַּעַת שֶׁמָּא יְקַלְקְלוּ. לְפִיכָךְ אִם שָׁחֲטוּ בִּפְנֵי הַיּוֹדֵעַ וְרָאָה אוֹתָן שֶׁשָּׁחֲטוּ כַּהֹגֶן שְׁחִיטָתָן כְּשֵׁרָה:

If these three shechted, it's Passul unless someone else is watching them.

(ט) מֻמְחֶה שֶׁנִּשְׁתַּתֵּק וַהֲרֵי הוּא מֵבִין וְשׁוֹמֵעַ וְדַעְתּוֹ נְכוֹנָה הֲרֵי זֶה שׁוֹחֵט לְכַתְּחִלָּה. וְכֵן מִי שֶׁאֵינוֹ שׁוֹמֵעַ הֲרֵי זֶה שׁוֹחֵט:

If someone became an Ilem, Can Shecht Lechatchila. If someone is a Cheresh, he can Shecht.

וחרש שדברו חכמים בכל מקום את שאין שומע ואינו מדבר. כתב הרמב"ם ז"ל פ"ד מהלכות שחיטה ה"ט מומחה שנשתתק והוא מבין ושומע שוחט לכתחלה וכן מי שאין שומע הרי זה שוחט. בנשתתק כתב שוחט לכתחלה אבל באין שומע כתב הרי זה שוחט ולא כתב לכתחלה לפי שאין שומע הברכה אין לו לשחוט לכתחלה כדתנא בריש תמורה חרש המדבר ואין שומע לא יתרום ואם תרם תרומתו תרומה. והכי אמר בברכות פרק היה קורא (ברכות דף טו:) אהא דתנן הקורא את שמע ולא השמיע לאזנו יצא ר' יוסי אומר לא יצא. אמר רב יוסף מחלוקת בק"ש אבל בשאר מצות ד"ה יצא ותניא לא יברך אדם ברכת המזון בלבו ואם בירך יצא ודוקא בדיעבד אבל לכתחלה לא:

In order to be Lechatchila, you need to be able to hear the Bracha.
When the Rambam says Vchen, it doesn't mean anything.

(א) מומחה שנשתתק וכו' וכן מי שאינו וכו'. כתב הרא''ש על דברי רבינו בנשתתק כתב שוחט לכתחלה ובאין שומע כתב הרי זה שוחט ולא כתב לכתחלה שלפי שאינו שומע הברכה אין לו לשחוט לכתחלה כדתנן בריש תרומות (משנה ב') חרש המדבר ואינו שומע לא יתרום ואם תרם תרומתו תרומה אלא שקשה לו לישנא דוכן וצריך עיון. ולפי זה ערום לא ישחוט לכתחלה משום שאינו יכול לברך ואפי' שיעמדו אחרים על גביו ויברכו לו לא מהניא אע''ג דקי''ל ששנים ששוחטים אחד מברך שאני התם שגם הוא היה יכול לברך מה שאין כן בערום אינו יכול לברך. נמצאו כאן ג' דינים חלוקים בענין החרש. הדין הראשון חרש שאינו מדבר ואינו שומע לא ישחוט לכתחלה ואפילו אחרים עומדין על גביו ואם שחט ואחרים רואין אותו שחיטתו כשרה. הדין הב' מי ששומע ונשתתק והוא מומחה שוחט לכתחלה ואפילו אין אחרים עומדים על גביו. הדין הג' אם הוא מדבר ואינו שומע ואע''פ שהוא מומחה לא ישחוט לכתחלה משום שאינו שומע הברכה ואם שחט שחיטתו כשרה ובזה אין צריך לאחרים כלל:

3 Rules
1. A Cheresh who can't hear or speak, can only Shecht if someone is supervising
2. If someone became an Ilem, he can Shecht Lechatchila.
3. If he can speak and not hear, it's only Bedieved, because he needs to hear the Bracha.

וחרש המדבר ואינו שומע אע"פ שמדבר לכתחלה לא ישחוט מפני שאינו שומע הברכה ואם שחט אפי' בינו לבין עצמו שחיטתו כשרה: והשומע ואינו מדבר אם הוא מומחה שוחט אפילו לכתחלה אם אחר מברך וקטן מומחה ויודע לאמן את ידיו לשחוט לא ישחוט לכתחלה בינו לבין עצמו ואם שחט שחיטתו כשרה ואם גדול עומד על גביו שוחט אפילו לכתחילה ושיכור שהגיע לשכרותו של לוט דינו כשוטה ואם לא הגיע לשכרותו של לוט שוחט אפילו לכתחלה:

(1) it was taught in a brita "and you shall sacrifice from you sheep and cattle as i have commanded you" this teaches us that moses was commanded by heart the laws of slaughtering. and i am organizing their law's, for example: who is fit to slaughter, and the intention one must have while doing so, and a thought witch will invalidate the slaughtering, with what does one slaughter, and when does one slaughter, and which animals can be slaughtered, and a fetus which is found in the mothers stomach, and the rule that you cant slaughter and animal and its son on the same day, and checking the knife, and the blessing recited over slaughtering. everyone may slaughter: woman and freed slaves and any person, even if we don't know that he is a authentic butcher, meaning: that he wont faint while doing it. and that we don't know that he knows the laws of shcheta. this is because most people who regularly shecht are assumed to be experts and trustworthy. When is this true,when the person isn't in front of us, then we can eat from his shechting and we rely on the assumption, but if he is in front of us we must check if he is a expert and to ask him if he fainted.and the smag writes in the name of r tam that he dosent need to know all the laws,rather if he says "on this thing i was unsure and i asked" we do call this knowing(the laws of shechita). only when he says the forbidden is permitted then he is not valid to shecht and we cant eat from his shcheta. however we can initially rely on a person with the knowledge that we will check him later,and we don't worry that we may come to eat without checking and asking him first. but if there is a person of who we know that he dosent know the laws of shechita even if he shechted in front of us two or three times,and then shechted by himself, his shechting is invalid even if we ask him did you do the following things and it seems from his answer that he did shecht properly,we canot rely on him. and even if he says "i am confident that i shechted properly it is invalid(and cant be eaten from).but anything which he does infront of us is valid, and even initially we can give him to slaughter as long as there is somone standing over him and this is provided that he sees him shechting from the begning until the end. and the bal itur wrote: if we know that he has learnt the laws of shechita even if he has not gotten a trustworthy status then he can initially shecht, and if we don't know wehter he has learnt the laws or not, then he should not initially shecht but if he did then his shechting is kosher and we don't have to check even if he is in front of us. and the rambam made a difference between a person who know the laws and a person who we have knowledge that that knows how to shecht regarding wether we must ask him or not. as he writes: one who knows the rules of shechita should shecht by himself in the beginning until he has shechted in front of a wise man many tines and is quick and accustomed (to shechita), butif he did his shechita is kosher. and he did not write that we ask him,however concerning a person who dosent know the laws of shechita he writes that if he shechts by himself we ask him, if he knows the laws of shechita then his shechita is kosher. and my master and father the rush may his memory be blessed did not make this differentiation(the one that the rambam made)rather he said that if he in front of us then we check him and ask him if he fainted, and if hes not, than we rely on the assumption concerning both of them (one who knows the laws and one who dosent).and this also the opinion of r elfas. and since most pepole are valid to shecht, if one finds a animal that is shechted properly,in a place with mostly Jews it is kosher. and even if it was stolen from him and he finds it shechted(it is kosher)because even if he is suspected to steal he isnt suspected for improper shechting.and the rambam writes that this is only if it is found ina house, but if he found it in the garbage of a house or in the street it is forbidden.and my father the rosh permited it even if it was found in the garbage of a house and he only forbade it in a garbage which was on the street, and so to the rashba permitted it unless it was found in the garbage of a street. a deaf person wich is somone who does not hear or talk and a retarded peson wich is one who goes out alone at night, or tares his clothing, or he sleeps ina cemetery, or he loses what is given to him, even in one of these instances if he does this in a fashion of retardation he is called a retarded person,and a minor that cant use his hands to shecht properly, all of these pepole cannot initially shecht even if others are watching them, but if they did anyway then it is kosher. and in any case we don't initaly give them a animal to shecht if there is no one watching them even if he wants to give it to the dogs to eat.and a deaf person who speaks but dosent hear even though he talks he shold not initaly shecht because he doesn't hear the blessing but if he did shecht even by him himself hes shechita is kosher. butd if one hearsand does not speak if he is a expert than even initially he can slaughter if another makes the blessing and a minor who isa expert should not shecht inittaly but if hr did than it is losher. and if a older person is standing and watching he can shecht even inittaly. and a person who reached the drukinis of loot the rule regarding himis like a retarded person

If he can hear and not speak, if he is an expert, he Shechts Lechatchila, if someone makes the Bracha.

(א) וחרש המדבר ואינו שומע וכו' לכתחלה לא ישחוט וכו' ז"ל הרא"ש בריש חולין כ' הרמב"ם מומחה שנשתתק והוא מבין ושומע שוחט לכתחלה וכן מי שאינו שומע וה"ז שוחט בנשתתק כתב שוחט לכתחלה אבל באינו שומע כתב ה"ז שוחט ולא כתב לכתחלה לפי שאינו שומע הברכה אין לו לשחוט לכתחלה כדתנן בריש תרומות חרש המדבר ואינו שומע לא יתרום ואם תרם תרומתו תרומה והכי אמרי' בפ"ב דברכות דבכל המצות חוץ מק"ש אע"פ שלא השמיע לאזנו יצא ודוקא בדיעבד עכ"ל ואע"פ שהרמב"ם השוה נשתתק לאינו שומע שכ"כ וכן מי שאינו שומע וכי היכי דנשתתק שוחט לכתחלה ה"ה לאינו שומע ועוד דה"ז שוחט שכתב באינו שומע לכתחלה משמע י"ל דהיינו מדין תורת שחיטה אבל מטעם הברכה יש חילוק ביניהם ובעל העיטור כ"כ ודחה דברי האומר דמדבר ואינו שומע שוחט לכתחלה:

It's Mashma that when the Rambam says Vchen that he's a Shochent Lechatchila too?!
There's a Chiluk between Shechita and Bracha, the Shomea, can hear the Bracha which adds to his Shechita, where as the Medaber can only do the Shechita.

ודע שכתוב בהג"א בשם א"ז דאלם לא ישחוט לכתחלה מפני שאינו יכול לברך כדתנן בפ"ק דתרומות האלם והערום לא יתרומו ואם תרמו תרומתן תרומה ומפרש בירושלמי משום ברכה ואין אחר העומד ע"ג יכול לברך על שחיטה אבל שנים ששוחטין אחד מברך על שניהם מיהו איני יודע אם ה"ה אלם יוצא בברכת אחר כששנים שוחטים הואיל ואין אלם עצמו יכול לברך עכ"ל. וק"ל על הרא"ש כיון דגמר מתרומה לאינו שומע דלא ישחוט לכתחלה אמאי לא גמר מינה לנשתתק נמי דלא ישחוט לכתחלה וכדמפ' בירוש' טעמא דאלם לא יתרום וי"ל דטעמא דהרא"ש דמתני' דתרומות לא תני תקנתא אבל אה"נ שאם בירך לו אחר כיון שהוא שומע לכתחלה נמי תורם: וכתב עוד בהג"א בשם א"ז דחרש המדבר ואינו שומע אע"ג דגמיר הלכות שחיטה ומוחזק דשחיט שפיר לא אכלינן משחיטתיה עכ"ל. ותמיהני דהא תניא בפ"ק דחגיגה דבין מדבר ואינו שומע בין שומע ואינו מדבר הרי הן כפקחין לכל דבריהם:

מתני׳ כסוי הדם נוהג בארץ ובחוצה לארץ בפני הבית ושלא בפני הבית בחולין אבל לא במוקדשין ונוהג בחיה ובעוף במזומן ובשאינו מזומן ונוהג בכוי מפני שהוא ספק ואין שוחטין אותו בי"ט ואם שחטו אין מכסין את דמו: גמ׳ מוקדשין מ"ט לא אילימא משום דרבי זירא דא"ר זירא השוחט צריך שיתן עפר למטה ועפר למעלה שנאמר (ויקרא יז, יג) ושפך את דמו וכסהו בעפר עפר לא נאמר אלא בעפר מלמד שהשוחט צריך שיתן עפר למטה ועפר למעלה והכא לא אפשר היכי ליעביד ליתיב וליבטליה קמוסיף אבנין וכתיב (דברי הימים א כח, יט) הכל בכתב מיד ה' עלי השכיל לא ליבטליה קא הוי חציצה נהי דלמטה לא אפשר למעלה אפשר ליעביד כסוי מי לא תניא רבי יונתן בן יוסף אומר שחט חיה ואח"כ שחט בהמה פטור מלכסות בהמה ואח"כ חיה חייב לכסות כדרבי זירא דא"ר זירא כל הראוי לבילה אין בילה מעכבת בו וכל שאינו ראוי לבילה בילה מעכבת בו
MISHNA: The mitzva of covering the blood after slaughter is in effect both in Eretz Yisrael and outside of Eretz Yisrael, both in the presence, i.e., the time, of the Temple and not in the presence of the Temple. And it is in effect with regard to non-sacred animals, but it is not in effect with regard to sacrificial ones. And it is in effect with regard to the slaughter of an undomesticated animal and a bird, with regard to animals and birds that are readily available in his home, and with regard to those that are not readily available and are hunted in the wild. And it is in effect with regard to a koy, because it is uncertain whether a koy is a domesticated animal and one is exempt from the covering of its blood or whether it is an undomesticated animal and one is obligated to cover it. And one may not slaughter a koy on a Festival, because covering its blood entails the performance of prohibited labor that is permitted only if there is a definite obligation to cover the blood. And if one slaughtered a koy on a Festival after the fact, one does not cover its blood until after the Festival. GEMARA: The Gemara asks: What is the reason one is not obligated to cover the blood of sacrificial birds? If we say it is because of the statement of Rabbi Zeira, that is difficult. As Rabbi Zeira says: One who slaughters a bird or an undomesticated animal must place earth beneath the blood and earth above it, as it is stated: “And he shall pour out its blood and cover it with earth” (Leviticus 17:13). It is not stated: Cover it with earth, but rather, “in earth,” indicating that the blood must be concealed inside the earth. The verse teaches that one who slaughters a bird or undomesticated animal must place earth beneath the blood and earth above the blood. The Gemara continues: And here, with regard to a bird offering, whose blood is presented on the altar, it is not possible for one to cover the blood with earth from beneath it. As how should one perform the covering of the blood? If one suggests that he should place earth on the altar and nullify that earth to the altar such that it will never be removed from there, this is unfeasible, since by nullifying the earth to the altar, he is adding to the structure of the altar. And it is written with regard to the construction of the Temple: “All was in writing, from the hand of the Lord, which He gave me to understand” (I Chronicles 28:19), indicating that the dimensions of the Temple and all the vessels within were given prophetically and are therefore not subject to change. And if one suggests that he should not nullify the earth to the altar, this too is problematic, as the earth constitutes an interposition between the blood of the bird and the altar. The Gemara explains why this statement of Rabbi Zeira does not sufficiently explain why one is not required to cover the blood of sacrificial birds. Granted that it is impossible to place earth beneath the blood of the bird, but it is possible to place earth above the blood of the bird. If so, let him perform a covering of the blood from above. The Gemara explains this suggestion: Isn’t it taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yonatan ben Yosef says: If one slaughtered an undomesticated animal, whose blood requires covering, and thereafter slaughtered a domesticated animal, whose blood does not require covering, in the same location as the undomesticated animal, he is exempt from the obligation to cover the blood of the undomesticated animal, as it is covered with the blood of the domesticated animal. But if one slaughtered a domesticated animal and thereafter slaughtered an undomesticated animal he is obligated to cover the latter’s blood despite the fact that there is no earth, but rather blood of the domesticated animal, beneath it. It is evident from this baraita that the mitzva of covering the blood applies even when earth cannot be placed beneath the blood. The Gemara responds: The exclusion of sacrificial birds from the mitzva of covering the blood, even from above, is in accordance with another statement of Rabbi Zeira, as Rabbi Zeira says with regard to meal offerings: For any measure of flour that is suitable for mixing with oil in a meal offering, the lack of mixing does not invalidate the meal offering. Even though there is a mitzva to mix the oil with the flour ab initio, the meal offering is fit for sacrifice even if the oil and the flour are not mixed together. And for any measure of flour that is not suitable for mixing with oil in a meal offering, the lack of mixing invalidates the meal offering. Similarly, if one slaughtered a domesticated animal and thereafter an undomesticated animal, since it was possible to cover the blood of the former before slaughtering the latter, which would allow the proper fulfillment of the mitzva of covering the blood, one is still obligated to cover the blood from above. By contrast, it is always impossible to properly perform the mitzva in the case of sacrificial birds.