Commentary for Zevachim 206:18

רבא אמר מדרישא ר"א ברבי שמעון סיפא נמי ר"א בר"ש מאי קודם הפשט

R'AKIBA OBSERVED: WE LEARN FROM HIS WORDS THAT IF ONE FLAYS A FIRSTLING AND IT IS FOUND TO BE TEREFAH,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Though this disqualification occurred before it was even slaughtered.');">¹⁶</span> THE PRIESTS HAVE A RIGHT TO ITS SKIN. BUT THE SAGES MAINTAIN: 'I HAVE NEVER SEEN' IS NOT PROOF: RATHER, IT [THE SKIN] MUST GO FORTH TO THE PLACE OF BURNING.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since it was disqualified before it was flayed.');">¹⁷</span> <big><b>GEMARA: </b></big>[The preceding Mishnah teaches,] Whenever the altar does not acquire the flesh, the priests do not acquire the skin, [which implies,] even though the skin was stripped before the sprinkling [of the blood]. Who is the author of this? R'Eleazar B'R'Simeon, who maintained: The blood does not propitiate on behalf of the skin when it is by itself.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If the flesh becomes disqualified after the animal is flayed, so that the sprinkling does not 'propitiate' on behalf of the flesh, i.e., it does not render the flesh permitted, it does not propitiate on behalf of the skin either, i.e., it does not permit the skin to the priests.');">¹⁸</span> Then consider the second clause:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. the present MISHNAH:');">¹⁹</span> ALL SACRIFICES WHICH BECAME DISQUALIFIED: [IF THIS HAPPENED] BEFORE THEY WERE FLAYED, THEIR SKINS DO NOT BELONG TO THE PRIESTS; [IF IT OCCURRED] AFTER THEY WERE FLAYED, THEIR SKINS BELONG TO THE PRIESTS: this agrees with Rabbi, who maintained: The blood propitiates on behalf of the skin when it is by itself. Thus the first clause agrees with R'Eleazar B'R'Simeon, while the second clause agrees with Rabbi? - Said Abaye: Since the second clause agrees with Rabbi, the first clause too agrees with Rabbi; Rabbi however admits that flaying is not done before sprinkling.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Though the blood does propitiate on behalf of the skin by itself, he admits that it is very rare for the skin to be by itself when the blood is sprinkled, since the flaying is generally done afterwards, in order not to keep the blood so long. Hence the preceding Mishnah assumes that the skin was not stripped before the sprinkling. If, however, it was, the skin would belong to the priests, notwithstanding that the altar did not acquire its flesh.');">²⁰</span> Raba said: Since the first clause agrees with R'Eleazar B'R'Simeon, the second clause too agrees with R'Eleazar B'R'Simeon, What however is meant by 'before flaying'

Explore commentary for Zevachim 206:18. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.