Chullin 17b (יז:) — the Talmud in English

The Sages taught:

A knife that has many notches

Even if the notches are of the type called mesukhsakhet, so that if there were only one such notch the knife would be fit, if there are two of them,

the knife is treated

as

a saw,

as though the notches were of the type that disqualifies the knife even when there is only one notch, as will be explained below.

And

a knife

that has only one notch

if that notch

“collects”

then the knife is

unfit,

but if it is

mesukhsakhet,

the knife is

fit.

The Gemara discusses this:

What is the nature of a notch that “collects,”

and what is the nature of a notch that is “mesukhsakhet”?

What form do these notches have?

And we answer:

Rabbi Eliezer said:

A notch that “collects” is one that has two points,

from two directions,

at the two ends of the notch. The expression “collects” is used because the notch collects the fingernail that is passed along the knife to examine it, between its two points. “

Mesukhsakhet”

is a notch that has only one point,

from one direction

of the notch, while at the other end the notch has been smoothed by a whetstone and there is no point there. The term mesukhsakhet is related to the notion of an obstruction, because due to this notch the knife encounters the flesh.

And we ask:

What is different about a notch

a notched knife

from two directions

that we say the knife is unfit because

the first point

at the end of the notch

weakens,

cutting the skin and flesh initially,

and the second point

the second point,

tears,

the sinews in the animal’s neck afterward? If so, even if the knife has a notch

from one direction as well,

the knife should be disqualified, because

the sharpness of the knife,

the sharp, unnotched part of the knife,

weakens

the skin and flesh first,

and the point tears,

as the single point of the notch reaches the sinews afterward and tears them.

And we answer: The case in which we deem a notch “from one direction” to be fit is specifically when it is

located at the beginning of the knife.

The notch is immediately at the beginning of the knife, and it cuts only the skin and flesh, while the sinews are cut by the rest of the knife, which is smooth.

And we ask:

Ultimately,

the slaughter should also be disqualified in the case of a notch “from one direction,” since

when it goes forward it weakens,

as the knife is moved along the neck and cuts the skin and flesh, and

when it returns it tears,

as when the knife is brought back along the neck, the single point of the notch again encounters the sinews and tears them.

And we answer:

For example, he moved the knife forward but did not bring it back,

slaughtering solely by moving the knife forward. Thus, the notch does not pass over the neck more than once.

Rava said: There are three categories of knives.

There are three possible types of notches in a knife:

a.

In the case of a notch that “collects,” one may not slaughter

with a knife containing this type of notch.

And if one slaughtered, the slaughter is unfit.

b.

In the case of a mesukhsakhet notch, one may not slaughter with it ab initio,

lest one move the knife forward and back, in which case the slaughter would be disqualified, as stated above.

But if one slaughtered, the slaughter is fit.

c.

In the case of a knife that rises and falls,

that is, there was a large notch in the knife, and the two points of the notch were smoothed with a whetstone, leaving that place lower than the rest, so that the blade of the knife appears to descend and ascend,

one may slaughter with it ab initio.

Rav Huna, son of Rav Neḥemya, said to Rav Ashi: You told us in the name of Rava: A mesukhsakhet notch is disqualifying.

But it is taught in a beraita: A mesukhsakhet notch is fit?

And we answer:

This is not difficult.

Here,

the statement of Rava that it is disqualifying,

is when he moved the knife forward and brought it back,

which disqualifies the slaughter, as stated above.

Here,

the beraita that teaches that it is fit, is when he

moved the knife forward but did not bring it back.

Rav Aḥa, son of Rav Avya, said to Rav Ashi: What is the law concerning a knife resembling a sasaa,

a knife that is not entirely smooth but does not have an actual notch, like the hair at the top of ears of grain, which has slight irregularities,

what

is the ruling? Is the knife fit?

He said to him,

Rav Ashi:

Who will give us some of the meat slaughtered with it, so that we may eat it!

That is, may the knife be fit even ab initio.

Rav Ḥisda said: From where is it derived that examination of a knife

to determine whether it has a notch, which one is obligated to perform, is required

by Torah law? As it is stated,

concerning Saul, who said:

“You shall slaughter with this and eat.”

The expression “with this” indicates that they should slaughter with the knife that he had examined for them.

And we ask: Why do we need a verse for the examination of a knife?

It is obvious! Since, if it punctures,

if there is a defect in the knife and consequently it punctures the esophagus,

it is a tereifa,

then

does it not require examination?

And we answer:

We are speaking of the obligation to have it examined by a Sage,

for the fact that one must give the knife to a Sage to examine is what we need to derive from the verse; we find that Saul examined the knife.

And we ask:

But did Rabbi Yoḥanan not say: The Sages said

that one must

show the knife to a Sage only out of respect for the Sage,

and it is not a Torah obligation, such that it could be derived from the verse?

And we answer: Indeed, it is

rabbinic

in nature,

and the verse

from which we derive that the knife should be shown to a Sage

is merely an asmakhta.

In the West, they examined it

the knife

in sunlight.

They looked at the edge of the knife against the sun to see clearly whether it had a notch.

In Nehardea, they examined it in water,

moving the knife over the water with the blade facing downward and lightly touching the water; if there was a notch, it appeared as though the knife made a furrow in the water as it moved.

Rav Sheshet examined it on the tip of his tongue.

He passed the knife over the edge of his tongue to feel whether it had a notch.

Rav Aḥa bar Yaakov examined it with a strand of hair

by passing it over the knife and sensing whether it caught on a notch.

In Sura they said: It consumes flesh,

since a slaughtering knife is intended to cut the flesh of the sinews,

so examine it with flesh.

Therefore, it should be examined on the flesh of the tongue or finger, which is the proper examination. If one feels that the flesh catches on a notch, the flesh of the sinews will likewise catch on it, and the slaughter is thereby disqualified. But if one examines it with another substance, the examination will not be accurate: if that substance is harder than flesh, it will pass over the notch without its presence being detected; and if it is softer than flesh, even a slight notch will be detected on it, although such a notch does not yet disqualify the slaughter.

Rav Pappa said:

A knife

requires examination on flesh and on the fingernail,

on the flesh of the finger and on

the fingernail,

and on its three sides.

One examines the knife on its three surfaces—that is, the middle of the edge and both sides of the edge—for even if the notch is on the side of the knife, it can tear the sinew.

Ravina said to Rav Ashi: Rav Sama, son of Rav Mesharsheya, told us in your name that you said to him in the name of Rava: It requires examination on flesh, on the fingernail, and on its three sides.

He said to him,

Rav Ashi to Ravina:

I said that it must be examined on flesh and on the fingernail, but I did not say that it must be examined on its three sides.

Some say

that this is what

Rav Ashi said: I said that it must be examined on flesh, on the fingernail, and on its three sides.

But

I did not say it in the name of Rava;

rather, I said it on my own authority.

Ravina and Rav Aḥa, son of Rava, were sitting before Rav Ashi.

They brought a knife before Rav Ashi for him to examine it. He said to

Rav Ashi

Rav Aḥa, son of Rava: Examine it!

Examine this knife.

He examined it

Rav Aḥa

on the fingernail, on flesh, and on its three sides.

Rav Ashi said to him: Well done!

You acted properly.

And so Rav Kahana said

that this is how it must be examined.

Rav Yemar said: Examination on the fingernail and on flesh is required.

But

examination on its three sides is not required!

Even if there is a notch on the sides of the knife, it does not disqualify the slaughter, because the edge of the knife cuts the sinew first, and immediately afterward the cut widens, so that the sides of the knife do not touch it.

And there is proof of this:

Did Rabbi Zeira not say that Shmuel said: If one heated a knife

in fire

and slaughtered with it, the slaughter is fit,

and we do not say that the heat of the knife burns the sinews and renders the animal a tereifa before the knife cuts them, because

its sharpness precedes its heating!

The knife cuts first, before the heat causes the sinews to be burned.

Rav Yemar concludes:

But this is difficult for us: There are sides

of the knife that touch the two parts of the severed sinew before the slaughter is completed, thereby rendering the animal a tereifa, since they burn and puncture the sinews.

And we say: The slaughtering place immediately widens.

It widens as soon as it is cut by the edge of the knife, and the sides of the knife do not touch the sinews at all.

Here too,

there is no need to examine the sides of the knife, since

the slaughtering place immediately widens,

as stated above.

Rav Huna bar Ketina said that Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said: There are three types of notches!

There are three cases in which a notch disqualifies, and the measure of the notch is the same in all three.

a.

A notch in a bone of

a

Paschal

offering: If one made a notch in a bone, he violated the prohibition, “You shall not break any bone in it.”

b.

A notch in the ear of a firstborn

animal: Through the notch, the firstborn acquires a blemish, and it becomes possible to slaughter it outside the Temple.

c.

A notch constituting a blemish in consecrated animals,

in female offerings that acquire a blemish through a notch in limbs where the notch is not readily discernible, and are thereby disqualified from being offered.

And Rav Ḥisda said: Also a notch in a knife,

whose measure of notching is the same as that of all these.

And the other one,

the first amora, who did not count a notch in a knife, did so because

he was not discussing non-sacred animals.

And all of them,

the measure of

their notching

is

the measure of a notch in the altar,

for an altar from which one of its stones has been notched is unfit for offering sacrifices upon it.