Suggestion: Perhaps Melikah is from the (front of the) neck!

Answer: It says "u'Malak", like it says about Chatas ha'Of. Just like there it is Mul the Oref, also here.

Suggestion: We should say that just like he is not Mavdil in Chatas ha'Of, also in Olas ha'Of!

Rejection: "U'Malak...v'Hiktir" - just like the head and body are separate during Haktarah, they are separate due to Melikah.

65b (Beraisa): In Melikah of a Chatas, one cuts the spine and neckbone without cutting most of the flesh. When he reaches the foodpipe or windpipe, he cuts one of these Simanim or its majority, and most of the flesh with it;

In an Olah, he cuts both Simanim or the majority of both.

(Mishnah): If he was Mavdil in Chatas ha'Of, it is Pasul.

(Beraisa - R. Elazar b'Rebbi Shimon): I heard that the Kohen is Mavdil in Melikah of Chatas ha'Of.

(Abaye): They argue about whether cutting the majority of the flesh in Chatas ha'Of is Me'akev. Our Tana says that it is not Me'akev. Therefore, Havdalah (without pausing in between) is like Olas ha'Of. R. Elazar says that it is Me'akev. Since he must pause in between the Simanim to cut the flesh, it is unlike Olas ha'Of.

They argue about whether it is Me'akev, but all agree that l'Chatchilah one must cut the majority of the flesh in Chatas ha'Of!

Chulin 19b (Benei R. Chiya): One is Machazir the Simanim (moves them behind the spine) and does Melikah.

Version #1: They mean that also such a Melikah is Kosher.

Version #2: They mean that only such a Melikah is Kosher.

Support (for Version #1 - Mishnah): Shechitah from the Oref is invalid. Melikah from the Oref is Kosher.

If Melikah requires Chazaras Simanim, such a Shechitah is Kosher also from the Oref! Rather, Melikah is Kosher either way. The Mishnah discusses when he did not move them. (Therefore, Shechitah from the Oref is invalid.)

20a - Question (R. Yanai - Mishnah): Anything Kosher for Shechitah is invalid for Melikah. Anything Kosher for Melikah is invalid for Shechitah.

Suggestion: This teaches about Chazaras Simanim. (It is Kosher for Shechitah, and hence invalid for Melikah.)

Answer (R. Yirmeyah): No, it excludes Molich u'Mevi (moving the knife or fingernail away and returning it), which is Kosher for Shechitah but invalid for Melikah.

Question: This is like the opinion that Molich u'Mevi is invalid for Melikah. According to the opinion that it is Kosher for Melikah, what does the Mishnah teach?

Answer: Benei R. Chiya must hold that Molich u'Mevi is invalid for Melikah.

(Rav Kahana): The Mitzvah of Melikah is to (press the fingernail and) cut straight down into the neck. This is the Mitzvah.

Suggestion (R. Avin): Only this is Kosher, but not Molich u'Mevi.

Rejection (R. Yirmeyah): If this is Kosher, all the more so, Molich u'Mevi is Kosher!

Rather, 'this is the Mitzvah' means that even this (cutting through pressing) is the Mitzvah.

20b (Ze'iri): If the neckbone and most of the flesh were cut, the animal is a Neveilah.

Question (Rav Chisda): A Mishnah already teaches this!

(Mishnah): If Melikah was done with a knife, one who eats the bird (and the clothes he is wearing when he swallows) become Tamei (the bird is a Neveilah).

If cutting the neckbone and most of the flesh would not make it a Neveilah, only a Treifah, Melikah with a knife would be like slaughtering a Treifah (since the Simanim are cut after the neckbone and most of the flesh). This cannot be, for a slaughtered Treifah is not Neveilah!

Answer: Melikah done with a knife makes a Neveilah, for it is not at all like Shechitah!

Question: Why is it unlike Shechitah?

Answer #1 (Rav Huna): It is Chaladah (the knife is covered, or the Simanim are cut in the wrong direction).

Answer #2 (Rava): It is Drasah (pressing, and not by Molich u'Mevi).

Rav Huna did not answer like Rava, for he holds that Molich u'Mevi is valid for Melikah.

Rambam (Hilchos Ma'aseh ha'Korbanos 6:6): In Chatas ha'Of, he does not separate the head from the body. If he did it is Pasul, and he is lashed.

Yam Shel Shlomo (Chulin 1:42 DH Melikas): Semag (Lav 327) says that the Rambam holds that the Lav is to separate the head from the body. He supports this from Zevachim, which learns Melikas Olas ha'Of from Chatas ha'Of. It thought to learn that just like he is not Mavdil in Chatas ha'Of, also in Olas ha'Of; a verse refuted this. This is difficult. In Chulin (20b), we say that (cutting the majority of) the skin does not apply to Melikah. Also, Chachamim and R. Elazar (b'Rebbi Shimon) argue about whether one must cut the entire Simanim, or just the majority (21b). Chachamim learn only that the entire Simanim must be cut, but not that one must separate the head from the body. We learn from R. Elazar that even if it is connected through flesh, it is not considered connected; this is not Me'akev Havdalah. Rashi explains that whatever he cuts more than needed (for Melikah) is Havdalah. This does not include fully cutting a Siman, for l'Chatchilah the entire Siman should be cut. Also Tosfos holds that Lo Yavdil applies to the second Siman, but not to flesh.

Rambam (23): To do Melikah, he cuts with his fingernail and descends opposite the Oref. He may be Molich u'Mevi, or press down. We are not concerned if the Simanim are uprooted. He cuts the spine and neckbone without most of the flesh. If he cut most of the flesh, it is as if it died before he reached the Simanim. He must cut both Simanim in an Olah when descending. Melikah with a knife or from the side is not Melikah. It is like choking the bird or Nechirah (tearing the Simanim). The entire Oref is Kosher for Melikah.

Ri Korkus: R. Avin thought that going Molich u'Mevi is Pasul for Melikah. R. Yirmeyah taught that all the more so, Molich u'Mevi is Kosher. Also, Rava and Rav Huna argued about this, and Rav Huna is Machshir. Therefore, we are Machshir. Oref is opposite the face. Mul Oref is opposite the neck. It sees (is in line with) what is opposite the face.

Kesef Mishneh: The Rambam rules like Rav Huna, for R. Avin and R. Yirmeyah hold like him.

Yam Shel Shlomo (DH Amru): We should rule like Rava against Rav Huna, for he is Basra (lived later)! Perhaps the Rambam rules like Rav Huna because we concluded 'Bnei R. Chiya hold that Molich u'Mevi is Pasul', which connotes that this is not the Halachah. R. Avin thought to say like Rava, but R. Yirmeyah corrected him, for whatever the Torah did not explicitly say cannot be like Shechitah, it is better to do Melikah like Shechitah. Also, the text should not say 'Rava'. We do not find that he argued with Rav Huna. Rather, it should say 'Rabah'. Rashi (20a DH ha'Nicha) says that Rabah argues with Rav Huna. Since Molich u'Mevi is Pasul, the Halachah does not follow Bnei R. Chiya. The Mizrachi erred.

Note - Tosfos (Menachos 36a DH Amar) proved that Rava never saw Rav Huna, for Rav Huna died before Rav Yehudah, and Rava was born when Rav Yehudah died. The Chasam Sofer (Sukah 42a (16)) questioned this proof, for Tosfos (Chulin 13a) proved there were two Chachamim named Rav Huna.

Rashi (Chulin 20a DH Kotzetz): Rav Kahana teaches that he cuts without Molich u'Mevi. He does not exclude Molich u'Mevi, for all the more so it is Kosher! The Torah explicitly excluded a knife and the neck. Whatever it did not explicitly exclude, it is better to do Melikah like Shechitah.

Rashi (Vayikra 1:15 DH ha'Kohen): He uses his fingernail to cut Mul the Oref. He cuts the neckbone until he reaches the Simanim, and cuts them.

Mizrachi (on Rashi): Cutting the neckbone immediately makes it a Neveilah! This is like Zeiri taught. If so, it is already dead before he cuts the Simanim! We would not ask this if it only made a Tereifah, for this is the Mitzvah (to make it a Tereifah, and finish the Melikah without pausing), just like an animal is Tereifah from the beginning of Shechitah, once the foodpipe is pierced. The Gemara answered that he cuts the neckbone without the majority of the flesh. When we say that he cuts the neckbone until he reaches the Simanim, this does not exclude Chazaras Simanim. R. Yanai said that it excludes this, but Rabah bar bar Chanah rejected this and said that it excludes Molich u'Mevi.

Lechem Mishneh: The Mizrachi explained that pressing is Kosher, and all the more so Molich u'Mevi. How can he permit Chazarah? The Gemara said that the one who permits Molich u'Mevi cannot permit Chazaras Simanim!

Question (Chasam Sofer Chulin 19a DH u'Mistabra): Tosfos asked why we say only presumably the version that he may be Machazir is correct. The opinion that he must do so was refuted! He answered that all agree that in either case it is Kosher; they argue about what is the ideal Mitzvah. If so, what is the support? Perhaps one must be Machazir (l'Chatchilah), but b'Di'eved it is Kosher without this, and the Mishnah teaches the following difference. In Shechitah, even if he was Machazir, it is Pasul unless he knows that he cut the Simanim before the neckbone. Melikah is Kosher even if he cut the neckbone before the Simanim!

Answer (Chasam Sofer): The Gemara relies on the conclusion. Due to R. Yanai's question, we conclude that Bnei R. Chiya must hold that he is not Molich u'Mevi. If so, presumably he may be Machazir. The Mishnah cannot discuss one who was Machazir, but he is unsure if he cut the Simanim first. This cannot be if he cuts without Molich u'Mevi! Rather, he may be Machazir. Perhaps this is why R. Yanai said that Bnei R. Chiya were refuted. (He held that they mandate Chazarah.) How can they explain 'what is Kosher for Shechitah is Pasul for Melikah?' They must say that it excludes Molich u'Mevi (it is Pasul for Melikah). If so, presumably he may be Machazir, like we said above!

Chasam Sofer (19b DH u'Meyushav): My answer also defends the Mizrachi. R. Yanai's question was only according to the version that he must be Machazir. There is no question according to the other version.

Question (Lechem Mishneh): In Zevachim, the Gemara connotes that one cuts the majority of the flesh. One opinion holds that it is Me'akev. All agree that it is l'Chatchilah. Why did the Rambam omit this?

Answer #1 (Chasam Sofer 21a DH ul'Mai): We hold like R. Shimon ben Elyakim. Tosfos says that the Beraisa above was R. Elazar b'Rebbi Shimon, and not Rabanan. We can say that R. Elazar b'Rebbi Shimon holds that there is a Mitzvah to cut most of the flesh after the majority of the Siman, but Rabanan say that one should not cut, lest he cut more and transgress "Lo Yavdil."

Answer #2 (Keren Orah 65b DH v'Shitas): The Rambam holds that the Isur to separate Chatas ha'Of, and the Mitzvah to separate Olas ha'Of, is to totally sever the head from the body. There is no distinctwion in Melikah. One may totally cut both Simanim in Chatas. If so, the Isur of Havdalah pertains to most of the flesh. In Chatas one must leave most of the flesh, and in Olah one must cut it. This is why the Rambam did not say that one cuts the majority of the flesh in Chatas ha'Of. The Beraisa that says that one cuts most of the flesh also in Chatas is like the Tana'im who hold that Havdalah applies only to the Simanim, and in Chatas one must cut only one Siman.