Zevachim 63

וכולן שקיבלו את הדם חוץ לזמנו וחוץ למקומו אם יש דם הנפש יחזור הכשר ויקבל

BUT IF ANY OF THESE RECEIVED THE BLOOD [INTENDING TO EAT THE FLESH OR BURN THE EMURIM] AFTER TIME OR WITHOUT BOUNDS AND LIFE-BLOOD IS [STILL] AVAILABLE, A FIT [PRIEST] MUST RECEIVE [IT] A SECOND TIME. IF A FIT PERSON RECEIVED [THE BLOOD] AND GAVE [IT] TO AN UNFIT ONE, HE MUST RETURN IT TO THE FIT ONE.

קיבל הכשר ונתן לפסול יחזיר לכשר קיבל בימינו ונתן לשמאלו יחזיר לימינו קיבל בכלי קדש ונתן לכלי חול יחזיר לכלי קדש נשפך מן הכלי על הרצפה ואספו כשר

IF HE RECEIVED [THE BLOOD] IN HIS RIGHT HAND AND TRANSFERRED [IT] TO HIS LEFT, HE MUST RE-TRANSFER IT TO HIS RIGHT. IF HE RECEIVED [IT] IN A SACRED VESSEL AND POURED IT [THENCE] INTO A SECULAR [NON-SACRED] VESSEL, HE MUST RETURN IT TO THE SACRED VESSEL.

נתנו על גבי הכבש שלא כנגד היסוד נתן את הניתנין למטה למעלן ואת הניתנין למעלן למטה ואת הניתנין בפנים בחוץ ואת הניתנין בחוץ בפנים אם יש דם הנפש יחזור הכשר ויקבל:

IF IT SPILT FROM THE VESSEL ON TO THE PAVEMENT AND ONE COLLECTED IT, IT IS FIT. IF [THE PRIEST] APPLIED IT ON THE ASCENT [OR ON THE ALTAR], [BUT] NOT OVER AGAINST ITS BASE; [OR] IF HE APPLIED WHAT SHOULD BE APPLIED BELOW [THE SCARLET LINE] ABOVE [IT], OR WHAT SHOULD BE APPLIED ABOVE, BELOW; OR WHAT SHOULD BE APPLIED WITHIN [HE APPLIED] WITHOUT, OR WHAT SHOULD BE APPLIED WITHOUT, WITHIN<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra ');">¹</span>

<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> שחטו דיעבד אין לכתחלה לא

AND LIFE-BLOOD IS [STILL] AVAILABLE, A FIT [PRIEST] MUST RECEIVE [BLOOD] ANEW. <big><b>GEMARA: </b></big>'WHO SLAUGHTERED' [implies] only if done, but not at the very outset.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., if they slaughtered, it is valid; but we do not permit them to slaughter in the first place.');">²</span>

ורמינהו ושחט שחיטה בזר כשרה שהשחיטה כשרה בזרים ובנשים ובעבדים ובטמאים ואפילו בקדשי קדשים או אינו אלא בכהנים

But the following contradicts it: And he shall slaughter:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. I, 5.');">³</span> [this teaches that] slaughtering by a zar is valid,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since Scripture does not specify a priest.');">⁴</span>

אמרת וכי מאין באתה מכלל שנאמר (במדבר יח, ז) ואתה ובניך אתך תשמרו את כהונתכם לכל דבר המזבח

for slaughtering by zarim, women, slaves, and unclean persons is valid, even in the case of most sacred sacrifices. Yet perhaps that is not so, but rather [it must be done] by priests?

יכול אף בשחיטה ת"ל (ויקרא א, ה) ושחט את בן הבקר לפני ה' והקריבו וגו' מקבלה ואילך מצות כהונה לימד על השחיטה שכשרה בכל אדם

You can answer: Whence do you come [to propose this]? From the fact that it is said, And thou and thy sons with thee shall keep the priesthood in everything that pertaineth to the altar,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Num. XVIII, 7.');">⁵</span>

הוא הדין דאפי' לכתחילה נמי ומשום דקא בעי למיתנא טמאים דלכתחילה לא גזירה שמא יגעו בבשר תנא ששחטו

you might think that this applies to shechitah too. Therefore Scripture states, And he shall kill the bullock before the Lord; and Aaron's sons, the priests, shall present the blood:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. I, 5.');">⁶</span>

וטמא דיעבד שפיר דמי ורמינהו וסמך ושחט מה סמיכה בטהורים אף שחיטה בטהורים מדרבנן

from receiving onwards priesthood is prescribed, which teaches that shechitah by any person is valid!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This implies at the very outset.');">⁷</span> - The truth is that it [may be performed] even at the very outset too, but because [the Tanna] wishes to include unclean, who may not [slaughter] in the first place lest they touch the flesh,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And defile it.');">⁸</span>

מ"ש סמיכה דכתיב לפני ה' שחיטה נמי הכתיב לפני ה' אפשר דעביד סכין ארוכה ושחיט

he states, WHO SLAUGHTERED. Is then [the slaughtering by] an unclean person well if it was done?

סמיכה נמי אפשר דמעייל ידיה וסמיך קסבר ביאה במקצת שמה ביאה

The following, however, contradicts it: And he shall lay [his hands upon the head of the burnt-offering.] and he shall kill the bullock [before th Lord]:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. I, 4f.');">⁹</span> as 'laying' must be [done] by clean [persons only], so must shechitah [be done] by clean [persons only]? - That is [only] a Rabbinical law.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By Scriptural law, however, shechitah may be done in the first place by unclean persons; hence their shechitah is valid, if performed, even by Rabbinical law. The exegesis is therefore to be understood as a mere support to the law, and not as its source.');">¹⁰</span>

רב חסדא מתני איפכא וסמך ושחט מה שחיטה בטהורין אף סמיכה בטהורין מאי שנא שחיטה דכתיב לפני ה'

Why does 'laying' differ? because it is written, before the Lord?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the text just quoted. Since shechitah must be 'before the Lord' i.e., in the Temple court, 'laying' too must be done there, as shechitah immediately follows it. Hence unclean are excluded, since they may not enter the Temple court.');">¹¹</span> Yet surely 'before the Lord' is written of shechitah too? - It is possible to make a long knife and slaughter.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The sacrifice, which is within, while he stands without.');">¹²</span> But in the case of 'laying' too, he can project his hands [into the Temple court] and lay?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' While his body is without.');">¹³</span> - He holds that partial entry is designated entry.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Even if his hands only enter the Temple court, it is as though he entered it entirely.');">¹⁴</span> R'Hisda recited it reversely: And he shall lay. and he shall kill: as shechitah requires clean persons 'laying' requires clean persons. Why does shechitah differ? because it is written, 'before the Lord'?