Zevachim Chapter 12, Mishnah 4 - where we conclude the topic we have been discussing: to whom the hides of the animals are given. Here the Mishnah discusses the question of what happens to the hide when the korban becomes invalid.
The text of the Mishnah:
"Kol hakodashim she'ira bahem pasul kodem lehefshetan - ein oran nitan lakohanim" - any korban that became invalid before its hide was flayed, its hide is not given to the kohen. Usually, the korban is not flayed until after the sprinkling of the blood, and therefore this refers to a case where the disqualification occurred before the flaying. An invalid korban is burned in the designated place in the Azarah, and therefore the meat and the hide are burned together.
The principle behind the law:
We will learn the Mishnah according to the view of Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi, as the halachah follows his opinion: as long as the hide is attached to the flesh of the animal, their status is the same. The hide is not separated after it has been decreed that the meat must be burned, and since they are attached - the hide is burned with the meat. But if they have already been separated from each other, their status is no longer the same and they go in two separate directions: even if the meat requires burning, the hide can be kept.
"Le'achar hefshetan - oran nitan lakohanim" - after their flaying, their hide is given to the kohanim:
Once the animal has been flayed, the hide is separated from the meat, and therefore even if the korban becomes invalid at that stage - the korban does not go up on the Altar and the meat requires burning, but the hide, which has already been removed, is given to the kohanim. In practice, the sprinkling of the blood, even though it does not have the power to permit the meat because it was disqualified, is effective in permitting the hides to be given to the kohanim.
The open question - a tereifah that was discovered after the flaying:
What is the law when the disqualification only becomes known after the flaying? This is common in the case of a tereifah: everything was seemingly done properly, the korban was almost completed, and only after the animal was flayed and opened up was the disqualification found inside it. At this stage, it is certain that the meat is not eaten but burned, except that at the time it was discovered, the meat was no longer attached to the hide. Are the kohanim allowed to keep the hide, or not?
The testimony of Rabbi Chanina Segan HaKohanim:
This question was not decided, but we have a testimony: "Amar Rabbi Chanina Segan HaKohanim: Miyamai lo ra'iti or yotzei leveis hasereifah" - Rabbi Chanina Segan HaKohanim said: In all my days, I have never seen a hide go out to the place of burning. Rabbi Chanina Segan HaKohanim served as a sort of deputy for the Kohen Gadol, and he managed the matters of the service. In many Mishnahs he appears and testifies about what occurred in the Beis HaMikdash, and here he testifies that during all the years he was there, he never saw a hide that had already been separated from the body be taken and burned on its own. Since cases of tereifah occur from time to time, his testimony clearly implies that even with a tereifah, the hides were left for the kohanim.
Rabbi Akiva's deduction - the law of a bechor:
Rabbi Akiva adds that from this testimony we learn not only that the kohanim keep the hides because they never burned them, but we can also deduce from it an entirely additional matter - a halachah closely related in subject but a topic in its own right: the law of a firstborn.
A firstborn is the first male born to a cow, goat, or sheep. From the moment it is born it is sanctified and must be given to a kohen, and the kohen is supposed to bring it as a firstborn offering: the blood is placed on the altar, the sacrificial parts are burned, the meat is eaten by the kohanim, and the hides are given to the kohanim. What is the law when there is no possibility of offering it?
A blemished firstborn: When the firstborn is not free of blemishes but rather possesses a blemish, and the kohanim rule that it cannot be offered because its blemish is permanent and will not improve, there is nothing that can be done with the animal other than to eat it - it may not be worked and its wool may not be sheared - but it remains the property of the kohen. Therefore, he slaughters it with a regular slaughter, flays it, cooks it, and eats it, and he keeps the hide for himself: just as he benefits from the meat, so too he benefits from the animal's hide.
A firstborn that died: If the animal died beforehand, its status is that of an animal carcass, and the kohen must bury it - the meat and the hide together. With an animal carcass, there is no permission to use the hide.
The question is: What is the law when he thought that the animal had a blemish and was not a tereifah, and therefore he does not offer it but is permitted to eat it, and he flayed it, and when he opened it he discovered that it is a tereifah and he cannot eat it? The meat requires burial - it is not given to dogs, it is not handed over for other uses, and it is not even burned, since this is not an offering but rather an animal carcass that possesses sanctity, and out of respect we bury it. But does the hide also require burial, or is the kohen permitted to keep it, since it was already separated from the meat before it became known that the animal was not kosher? This is the question.
Rabbi Akiva says: From the fact that with other offerings, if the hide was flayed and only afterward it was discovered that the animal was not kosher, the offering is burned but the kohen keeps the hide - it makes sense that the kohanim who discovered that the firstborn was a tereifah after they flayed it are also permitted to keep the hide. This is the view of Rabbi Akiva.
The view of the Sages:
The Sages disagree: "Lo ra'inu einah re'ayah" - we cannot deduce the halachah from the testimony, since what Rabbi Chanina Segan Hakohanim did not see does not prove that this is the law. It is possible that a tereifah never occurred there at all, and it is possible that it was a miracle; and it is possible that he was preoccupied with his duties as Segan and did not pay attention to the time when they burned the hides by themselves, unattached to the body. A lack of evidence is not evidence of absence, and therefore the very fact that he did not see this proves nothing. The Sages add: "Ela yotzei leveis hasereifah" - if it becomes clear that the animal is a tereifah, the hides are also burned, and a person does not keep the hide, since the animal was never fit for an offering, and was invalid the entire time.
The practical halachah:
The view of the Rambam: In these matters we always assume that the halachah follows the Rambam, as he alone is before us. The Rambam rules in accordance with Rabbi Chanina Segan Hakohanim and Rabbi Akiva: Sacrificial animals that were flayed and only after the flaying were discovered to be invalid - as well as if one went ahead and flayed them before the sprinkling of the blood and the offering became invalid - since the hide was already separated from the meat, the kohanim are permitted to keep the hide.
The view of the Shulchan Aruch: The Shulchan Aruch rules on the laws of a firstborn, since giving the firstborn animal to a kohen is one of the priestly gifts, like separating Terumah, giving challah, and the first of the fleece. The Shulchan Aruch rules in accordance with the view of the Rosh, that a firstborn that was found to be a tereifah - both its hide and its meat require burial, unlike the view of the Rambam, who explicitly rules that the hide is permitted and is given to the kohanim.
It emerges that there is a dispute among the Rishonim here, and the halachah will follow the Shulchan Aruch: With a firstborn that is discovered to be a tereifah, the kohanim do not keep the hide.
However, regarding the halachah for other offerings, the matter requires further analysis. The Rambam says explicitly that the hides, after they have been separated, if it is subsequently found that the animal is a tereifah - the kohanim are permitted to keep them. The question is whether we are compelled to say that the ruling of the Shulchan Aruch was stated specifically regarding firstborns, and if so - whether it should be applied to other offerings as well. This question remains open to the poskim.
In summary: In this Mishnah we learned that an offering that became invalid before flaying - its hide is burned with its meat, since the hide attached to the meat has the same status as the meat; and if it became invalid after flaying - the hide is given to the kohanim, as it has already been separated. We discussed the open question regarding a tereifah that was discovered after flaying, the testimony of Rabbi Chanina Segan Hakohanim that he never saw a hide going out to the place of burning, the deduction of Rabbi Akiva regarding the law of a firstborn, and the view of the Sages that "we have not seen is no proof". Practically speaking: The Rambam permits the hide to the kohanim, whereas the Shulchan Aruch rules like the Rosh that with a firstborn found to be a tereifah - the hide and the meat are buried.