Commentary for Menachot 111:20

וחכ"א יקיז אף במקום שעושין בו מום ובלבד שלא ישחוט [על אותו מום] ר"ש אומר

but in the other case another shaped it and he baked it.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The other would then be liable for the shaping, whilst he would be liable for the baking which involves two counts, the baking proper and vtpt the completion of the shaping. V. however, Tosaf. s.v. , and com. of R. Gershom.');">²³</span> Our Rabbis taught: If a firstling<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The firstling, after Temple times, since it can no longer be offered, is given to the priest, but he is forbidden to slaughter it unless it is blemished. It is, however, forbidden to blemish a firstling or any consecrated beast.');">²⁴</span> was attacked with congestion, it may be bled in a place where no blemish would result, but it may not be bled in a place where a blemish would result.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' E.g., to bleed the firstling at the ear or lip would leave a scar or blemish.');">²⁵</span> So R'Meir. The Sages say, It may be bled even in a place where a blemish would result, provided that it is not slaughtered by reason of that blemish.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For otherwise it is to be feared that the owner would bleed it deliberately, although it was not suffering from congestion, in order to be allowed to slaughter it.');">²⁶</span> R'Simeon says,

Explore commentary for Menachot 111:20. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.