Shechita - Two at a Time

Chulin (2:2) | Yisrael Bankier | 2 days ago

The Mishnah teaches that if one slaughtered two animals at the same time (with one long knife) then the shechita is valid.

The Gemara (29a) notes that the Mishnah is discussing the law after the fact. In other words, the Mishnah implies that one should not ideally do so. The Gemara then continues by explaining that this conclusion is only relevant for korbanot. It derives this law for the pasuk that discusses the slaughter of korbanot with wording that focuses on a single korban (tizbechuhu). For a regular animal however, one can ideally slaughter two at a time.

The Rashash (Sotah 8a) however questions the necessity of the pasuk. Slaughtering two korbanot at one time should be forbidden based on the broad principle of ein osim mitzvot chavilot chavilot -- one should not "bundle" mitzvot together to perform them all at once. He concludes that in this case there is not issue of mitzvot chavilot chavilt. Furthermore, he uses it as proof that multiple nedarim can be annulled at the same time also. Why are these cases different?

The Magen Avraham explains that there is a difference whether or not the mitzvot involved are obligatory. This is readily understood because the reason generally brought for ein osim mitzvot chavilot chavilot is because we do not want mitzvot to appear like they are burden. When it comes to mitzvot that one is not obligated to perform, and one opts to do so, "bundling them" would not give that appearance.

The Magen Avraham continues, that if we were discussing obligatory korbanot, slaughtering more than one at a time would indeed be a problem of ein osim mitzvot chavilot chavilot. The pasuk cited by the Gemara was necessary to teach that one should ideally not slaughter multiple korbanot at the same time, even if they were both voluntary korbanot.

This discussion appears to echo another one. The Gemara in Sotah (8a) records the debates regarding why the process of Sotah is not performed to two women at the same time. R' Yehuda understands that this is out of concern that one sotah will influence the other. To explain, we prefer that the sotah admit to the sin rather than going through the process. If two were standing together, and one who was indeed innocent maintained her innocence, the second, who may have been guilty, could be emboldened not to admit to the crime.

The Chachamim however understand that the law is based on a pasuk. The Gemara probes, what is difference between the two positions? It answers, where the women are visibly terrified. In that case, they are not emboldened by the presence of another and R' Yehuda would allow the process to continue together. The Gemara then asks, ein osim mitzvot chavilot chavilot. R' Yehuda would therefore agree that the two processes could not happen at the same time even in that case? The Gemara answers, that the practical difference is if two kohanim were giving the sotah women the water to drink. It would not be an issue of ein osim mitzvot chavilot chavilot, but R' Yehuda's concern would still apply.

The Tosfot however raise a difficulty on this Gemara. Recall that the Gemara asked that even if the women were very scared, there is still an issue of ein osim mitzvot chavilot chavilot. The Tosfot however asks that ein osim mitzvot chavilot chavilot is a rabbinic law, whereas the debate between R' Yehuda and the Chachamim was where there is an issue on a biblical level? The Achronim answer the Tosfot's question there in different ways. Nevertheless, the same point can be raised in the discussion one our Mishnah also. Ein osim mitzvot chavilot chavilot, which is rabbinic, cannot be raised as a question on the Gemara that was focused on the biblical source for why two korbanot cannot be offered at the same time.

The Tosfot in Moed Katan (8b) addresses ein marvin simcha be'simcha -- that we do not mix two different semachot at the same time (e.g. weddings on chol ha'moed). The Tosfot explains that source of this biblical (learnt from lavan). The Tosfot continues that the reason is similar to ein osim mitzvot chavilot chavilot, which is that one's heart should be fully dedicated to the mitzvah (or in that case the simcha). The Kerem Neta understand that the Tosfot there maintains that ein osim mitzvot chavilot chavilot is indeed biblical. If so, the original question of the Rashash makes sense.

Download