R. Chanina, der Adjutant des Hohepriesters, sagte aus: In all meinen Tagen habe ich nie gesehen, wie die Haut (eines Ankers [eines erstgeborenen Tieres]) zum Brandort ging [nachdem sie geschunden worden war, wenn es so war Es wurde festgestellt, dass es sich um Treifah handelt, obwohl das Psul (der disqualifizierende Faktor) vor dem Enthäuten darin war —da es erst nach dem Enthäuten erkannt wurde]. R. Akiva sagte: Aus seinen Worten erfahren wir, dass, wenn man einen Anker fliegt und sich herausstellt, dass es sich um eine Treifah handelt, die Cohanim ihre Haut genießen können und sie nicht verbrannt wird. [R. Akiva kommt, um uns zu hören, dass sogar ein unreiner Anker, der wegen seines Makels außerhalb des Heiligtums geschlachtet wird, die Tora (die es nicht erlaubt hat, geopfert zu werden, sondern) nur gegessen und geschrieben wird (5. Mose 15:21). : "In deinen Toren (dh außerhalb des Heiligtums) sollst du es essen"—Wenn es starb, ist seine Haut verboten und es muss beerdigt werden. Und R. Akiva teilte uns mit, dass, wenn es eine Treifah ist, erst erkannt wird, nachdem es enthäutet wurde, seine Schechita und sein Enthäuten seine Haut zulassen, als ob sein Blut im Heiligtum gespritzt worden wäre.] Die Weisen sagen: "Wir haben nicht gesehen "ist kein Beweis [dh vielleicht ist es in seinen Tagen nie passiert, dass es nach dem Enthäuten Treifah war, und wenn es passiert ist und sie es verbrannt haben, hat er es nicht gesehen]; aber es geht raus zum brennplatz.
Bartenura on Mishnah Eduyot
לא ראיתי עור יוצא לבית השריפה – After its hide was flayed, if it was found torn. Even though that this disqualification was upon it prior to its hide being removed, since it was not recognized other than after the hide’s removal.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Eduyot
Introduction
Mishnah two discusses burning the hides of sacrificially unfit animals.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Eduyot
שהמפשיט את הבכור ונמצא טריפה – but Rabbi Akiva comes to teach us (a new point), that even a firstling which has defect when it is slaughtered outside of Jerusalem on its defect, and the Biblical verse did not permit it other than for eating, as it is written (Deuteronomy 15:22): “Eat it in your settlements [the unclean among you no less than the clean, just like the gazelle and the deer],” but if it died, its hide is forbidden and it requires burial, and Rabbi Akiva teaches us that where it is “terefah”/torn status is not known until after the hide is flayed, the permitted it to be slaughtered and the flaying of its hide is like its blood was cast in the Temple.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Eduyot
Rabbi Hanina, chief of the priests, said: “All my days I never saw a hide taken out to the place of burning.” Rabbi Akiba said: “From his words we infer that whoever flays the hide of the firstborn beast and it is found to be trefah, the priests may enjoy the use of the hide.” But the Sages say: “[A testimony which consists of] ‘we didn’t see’ is not a proof; rather the hide must be taken out to the place of burning. In Tractate Zevahim 12:4 the Mishnah teaches that if a sacrificial animal is found to be unfit as a sacrifice before it’s hide is flayed, the entire animal must be burnt. If it is found to be unfit after it’s hide is flayed, the priests may keep the hide. Rabbi Hanina testifies that he never saw a hide being burnt. In other words, according to Rabbi Hanina if they already removed the hide, the priests may make use of it, even though the animal was deemed unfit to be a sacrifice. Rabbi Akiva learns from this that if one flays the hide of a firstborn animal, which belongs to the priests, and then discovers that it was a trefah, an animal with an internal flaw that would have caused its death, the priests may keep the hide. Since the flaw was not known before the hide was removed, the hide becomes the property of the priests. The Sages respond to Rabbi Akiva that the type of testimony that Rabbi Hanina transmitted is not reliable enough to base upon it halakhic solutions. Not seeing something does not mean that it did not happen. Since they exclude Rabbi Hanina’s testimony the law is that the hide must be burnt with the rest of the animal, and the priests are forbidden to receive benefit from it.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Eduyot
יאותו הכהנים בעורו – and it is not burned.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Eduyot
אין לא ראיתי ראיה – lest it did not happen in his days that it would be found “terefah”/torn after the hide had been flayed, and if it happened and they burned it, he did not see it.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Eduyot
אלא יצא לבית השריפה – since prior to the flaying it had come. And the Halakha is according to Rabbi Akiva regarding a firstling with a defect when a specialist permitted it, but if a specialist did not permit it, no. And the Halakha is according to the Sages in regard to a pure firstling, that the flesh is buried and hide is burned.
