1) CONDITIONS FOR “ZERIKAH”

(a) Question: What is the argument of Rebbi and R. Elazar?
(b) Answer (Beraisa – Rebbi): Blood is Meratzeh for flayed skin;
1. When skin is attached to the meat, whether a Pesul occurred before or after Zerikah, the same law applies to the skin and the meat.
(c) R. Elazar b’Rebbi Shimon says, blood is not Meratzeh for flayed skin;
1. When it is attached to the meat:
i. If a Pesul occurred before Zerikah, the same law applies to the skin and the meat;
ii. If a Pesul occurred after Zerikah, since the meat was once permitted, Kohanim receive the skin.
(d) Suggestion: These Tana’im argue like R. Eliezer and R. Yehoshua:
1. (Beraisa – R. Yehoshua): “V’Asisa Olosecha *ha’Basar veha’Dam*” – Zerikas Dam and Haktarah of the meat must both be done, one cannot be done without the other (e.g. if one of them became lost or Pasul);
2. R. Eliezer says, Zerikah can be done even without Haktarah of the meat – “V’Dam Zevachecha Yishpoch”.
3. Question: What does he learn from “V’Asisa Olosecha ha’Basar veha’Dam”
4. Answer: Just like blood is thrown, also meat – this teaches that there was a gap between the ramp and the Mizbe’ach.
5. Suggestion: Rebbi holds like R. Eliezer (Zerikah is Meratzeh even without meat, it permits skin), and R. Elazar b’Rebbi Shimon holds like R. Yehoshua (Zerikah is only for the sake of meat).
(e) Rejection: Granted, we cannot say that R. Elazar holds like R. Eliezer, he must hold like R. Yehoshua;
1. However, Rebbi could hold like R. Eliezer, or even like R. Yehoshua!
2. Version #1 (Rashi): R. Yehoshua expounded that Zerikah must permit meat, he was not more stringent than the Torah to cause a loss to Kohanim;
i. If Zerikah was done (improperly, when it will not permit meat), he admits that Kohanim receive the skin, just like he admits that the owner fulfilled his obligation!
3. Version #2 (Tosfos): R. Yehoshua decreed not to do Zerikah when the meat became Pasul, on account of when it was lost – this decree causes a loss to the owner, not to Kohanim;
i. If Zerikah was done (improperly), he does not decree that Kohanim not receive the skin, just like he does not decree that the owner did not fulfill his obligation! (End of Version #2)
ii. (Mishnah – R. Eliezer): If the meat became Tamei or Pasul, or left the Azarah, we throw the blood;
iii. R. Yehoshua says, we do not throw it;
iv. R. Yehoshua admits, if Zerikah was done, the owner fulfilled his obligation.
2) THE SKIN OF A “KORBAN PASUL”
(a) (Mishnah – R. Chanina Segan ha’Kohanim): (I never saw a skin taken to Beis ha’Sereifah.)
(b) Question: Surely, he saw Parim ha’Nisrafim and Se’irim ha’Nisrafim (e.g. of Yom Kipur!)
(c) Answer: He means, ‘I never saw a skin taken to Beis ha’Sereifah on account of a Pesul.’
(d) Question: Whenever a Pesul occurs before flaying and before Zerikah, all agree that the skin is burned! (Surely, many thousands (perhaps millions) of Korbanos were slaughtered in R. Chanina’s presence, and some were found to be Treifah!)
(e) Answer: He means, ‘I never saw a *flayed* skin taken to Beis ha’Sereifah.’
(f) Question: According to R. Elazar b’Rebbi Shimon, if a Pesul occurred after flaying and before Zerikah, the skin is burned!
(g) Answer #1: R. Chanina holds like Rebbi.
(h) Answer #2: He can even hold like R. Elazar – all agree that l’Chatchilah, we do not flay before Zerikah.
(i) Question: If a Korban was found to be Treifah in the intestines, surely it was Pasul before flaying and before Zerikah!
(j) Answer: He holds that in such a case, since the Pesul was not known before Zerikah, it is Meratzeh (so Kohanim receive the skin.)
(k) Support (Mishnah – R. Akiva): From R. Chanina we learn that (even) if a Bechor was found to be Treifah after flaying, Kohanim receive the skin.
(l) Question: Since R. Chanina says this regarding all Kodshim, why does R. Akiva specify Bechor?
(m) Answer: He teaches that the same applies to a Bechor Ba’al Mum slaughtered and flayed outside the Mikdash (even though the meat must be burned, the Kohen keeps the skin, the law is like a Treifah found in the Mikdash after Zerikah and flaying.)
(n) (R. Chiya bar Aba): The Halachah follows R. Akiva.
(o) Even R. Akiva only teaches about when a Mumcheh (expert) saw the Mum and permitted slaughtering it – if not, the skin is burned.
(p) The Halachah is like Chachamim (the meat is buried, the skin is burned – Rashi deletes this from the text, but Tosfos and the Rambam do not )
3) BURNING THE “PARIM” AND “SE’IRIM” THAT ARE BURNED
(a) (Mishnah): When Parim ha’Nisrafim and Se’irim ha’Nisrafim are burned properly, they are burned in Beis ha’Deshen (outside of all three Machanos), and they are Metamei the clothes of those engaged in burning them;
(b) When they are burned on account of a Pesul, they are burned in Beis ha’Birah (this will be explained), and they are not Metamei Begadim.
104b—————————————104b

(c) If the animal was being carried out on poles, when the people in front have left the Azarah but not the people in back, those in front are Metamei Begadim, those in back are not Metamei Begadim until they themselves leave;
(d) When all have left, all are Metamei Begadim.
(e) R. Shimon says, they are not Metamei Begadim until the majority of the animal catches fire.
(f) Those engaged in burning after the meat melted are not Metamei Begadim. (Bartenura, Rambam – this clause is also R. Shimon, Chachamim argue (106A).)
(g) (Gemara) Question: What is Beis ha’Birah?
(h) Answer #1 (Rabah bar bar Chanah): It is a place in Har ha’Bayis called ‘Birah’ (building).
(i) Answer #2 (Reish Lakish): All of Har ha’Bayis is called Birah – “Ha’Birah Asher Hachinosi”.
(j) (Rav Nachman): There are three Batei ha’Deshen:
1. A big one is in the Azarah, to burn Pasul Kodshei Kodoshim and Eimurim of Kodshim Kalim, and Parim and Se’irim ha’Nisrafim that became Pasul before Zerikah;
2. Another is in Har ha’Bayis, for Parim and Se’irim ha’Nisrafim that became Pasul after Zerikah;
3. The third is outside all three Machanos, l’Chatchilah, Parim and Se’irim ha’Nisrafim are burned there.
(k) (Levi – Beraisa): There are three Batei ha’Deshen:
1. A big one is in the Azarah for Pasul Kodshei Kodoshim and Eimurim of Kodshim Kalim, and Parim and Se’irim ha’Nisrafim that became Pasul before *or after* Zerikah;
2. Another is in Har ha’Bayis for Parim and Se’irim ha’Nisrafim that became Pasul while being taken out to be burned;
3. The third is outside all three Machanos, for Kosher Parim and Se’irim ha’Nisrafim.
4) WHAT IS POSEL THE “PARIM” AND “SE’IRIM” THAT ARE BURNED?
(a) Question (R. Yirmeyah): Does Linah disqualify Parim and Se’irim ha’Nisrafim?
1. Perhaps Linah only applies to meat that is consumed (by people or the Mizbe’ach), but these are burned outside;
2. Or, perhaps this makes no difference!
(b) Answer #1 (Rava): Abaye asked this, and I answered from the following:
1. (Beraisa): (R. Shimon and Chachamim argue about one who was Mefagel in the Eimurim of Parim ha’Nisrafim, but) both agree that if one was Mefagel in the meat, this does not take effect (because the meat is not eaten).
2. Suggestion: Just like intent does not take effect on the meat, also Linah.
(c) Rejection: No, perhaps intent does not take effect, but Linah does.
(d) Answer #2 (Beraisa): Me’ilah applies to Parim and Se’irim ha’Nisrafim from the time they are Hukdeshu;
1. After slaughter, they have full Kedushas Mizbe’ach, they become Teme’im if touched by a Tevul Yom or Mechushar Kipurim, Linah disqualifies them.
2. Suggestion: Linah of the meat disqualifies them!
(e) Rejection: No, the Beraisa discusses Linah of the Eimurim.
1. Question: The Seifa says, Me’ilah applies to them even in Beis ha’Deshen, until the meat is melted.
i. Since the end of the Beraisa discusses the meat, also the beginning!
2. Answer: No, the Seifa discusses the meat, the Reisha discusses the Eimurim.
(f) Answer #3: Levi taught, one Beis ha’Deshen is in Har ha’Bayis for Parim and Se’irim ha’Nisrafim that became Pasul while being taken out.
1. Suggestion: They became Pasul through Linah!
(g) Rejection: No, they became Pasul through Tum’ah or Yetzi’ah (leaving the Azarah before Zerikah).
(h) Question (R. Elazar): Does Yetzi’ah Posel Parim and Se’irim ha’Nisrafim?
1. Question: What is his question? (They must leave the Azarah, this is not a Pesul!)
2. Answer (R. Yirmeyah bar Aba): He asks according to Reish Lakish, who is Posel Yotzei (meat of Kodshim Kalim that left the Azarah before Zerikah), even though it will be permitted to take the meat out later:
i. Perhaps Reish Lakish is Posel there, for there is never an obligation to take it out, but he would Machshir here, for (later) the Parim must be taken out;
ii. Or, perhaps he is Posel whenever something leaves prematurely.
(i) Answer: Levi taught, one Beis ha’Deshen is in Har ha’Bayis for Parim and Se’irim ha’Nisrafim that became Pasul while being taken out.
1. Suggestion: They became Pasul through Yetzi’ah!
(j) Rejection: No, they became Pasul through Tum’ah or Linah.
(k) Question (R. Elazar): If the minority of a limb of Parim and Se’irim ha’Nisrafim came out, and this helps comprise a majority of the animal, what is the law? (Tosfos – if it became Pasul, do we burn it in the Azarah, like an animal that never left? Rashi – is it Metamei Begadim? (Rashi later explains like Tosfos, but Chok Noson deletes this ‘retraction’ from Rashi); Rambam – if this was before Zerikah, is it Pasul for leaving the Azarah too early?)
1. Do we view it as if this limb did not leave at all (so a majority did not leave), or does the part that left join to make a majority?
(l) Rejection: That would be obvious, the fact that the majority of this limb is inside does not prevail over the fact that the majority of the animal left!
(m) Correction: Rather, he asked, if the majority of a limb came out, and this helps comprise exactly half of the animal – do we view it as if the entire limb came out (so a majority has left)?