(Mishnah): If the flesh became Tamei but the fats did not, he does not throw the blood; (as the main purpose of the sacrifice is for human consumption).

If the fats became Tamei but the flesh did not, he throws the blood.

But this is not the case with other sacrifices - even if the flesh became Tamei and the fats did not, he throws the blood; (as the blood permits the limbs on the altar).

(Gemara): The Mishnah does not follow the opinion of R. Noson who said that one fulfils his obligation through the throwing of the blood of the Korban Pesach, even without eating.

Question: What is his reasoning?

Answer: The Pasuk states (Shemos 12, 6), "And all of the congregation of the assembly of Israel shall slaughter it in the afternoon'' - "it'', meaning even if it is the only Pesach brought, all fulfil their obligation with one act of throwing the blood; as it is possible for everyone to eat from it a kzayis?!

It is obvious that if the flesh became Tamei and limbs did not, that he throws the blood for the limbs and certainly if the limbs became Tamei and the flesh did not, he throws the blood for the flesh.

Query: If the flesh became Tamei and the limbs were lost, what is the law (since they did not both become Tamei, it is valid; or alternatively, since neither are available, it is invalid)?

Answer (R. Simi): (A parallel Beraisa taught that if the Shirayim became Tamei or lost and the Minchah did not, he should still bring it). This is parallel to the above query and we can therefore conclude that he should throw the blood.

Rejection (Rebbi): That Beraisa is not a proof as it follows the opinion of R. Eliezer who said that it is valid even without the Shirayim,

Query: Public sacrifices that are brought when only the Kohanim are in a state of Tum'ah - can they be eaten in Tum'ah?

How could the meat remain Tahor if the Kohanim are Tamei? If it was slaughtered by blemished Kohanim and thrown by Tameyim (i.e. it was not touched by them).

Answer (R. Hila): The Pasuk states (Vayikra 7, 19), "And the flesh that touches anything Tamei shall not eat''; this implies that if it was not touched by anyone Tamei (as the Tahor blemished Kohanim slaughtered it]; "and as for the (Tahor) flesh, any Tahor can eat it'' - we therefore see that Tahor people may eat from it.

R 'Zeira: If the Pesach can be brought in Tum'ah and eaten in Tum'ah, so too here, it is as if it is brought in Tum'ah!

Question: Where did R. Zeira say this? As Rebbi said - since we do not allow him to throw, it is as if it has been brought in Tum'ah; or alternatively, if he would have transgressed and thrown the blood, it would have been accepted, it is not as if it is brought in Tum'ah?

Answer: Learn from the following - R. Hoshiya said (Shemos 28, 38), "And Aharon will carry the sin of Hekdesh''. The Pasuk refers to the sin (Tum'ah) of the sacrifice, but not to those that bring it (Tum'ah of the Kohanim).

There is a difference between Tum'ah in private and public sacrifices - for private sacrifices, if he has another animal to replace it, we require him to do so; if not, we do not permit him to throw the blood if it became Tamei. If he transgressed and threw the blood, it is accepted.

(There is also a difference between those that bring private and public sacrifices.) For those who are Tamei that bring a private sacrifice, whether or not he has another animal to replace it, if he threw the blood it is invalid.

For public sacrifices that are Tamei, if he has another to replace it, we require him to do so; if not, we permit him to throw its blood.

For those who are Tamei that bring a public sacrifice, whether or not he has a replacement, if he transgressed and threw the blood, it is accepted.

R. Elazar: The Mishnah (that taught that if they are brought in Tum'ah, they may be eaten in Tum'ah) refers to when they were Tamei before the slaughtering; but if not, it cannot be eaten in a state of Tum'ah.

If they slaughtered it in state of Taharah and the congegration became Tamei, the blood must be thrown in Taharah, but the meat cannot be eaten in Tum'ah.

R. Ila quoting R. Yochanan: This is authored by R. Noson who said that one can fulfil his obligation by throwing without eating.

If they slaughtered it in Taharah and the blood became Tamei, he throws the blood in Tum'ah but he cannot eat the flesh in Tum'ah.

R. Yirmiyah quoting R. Yochanan: This law is to prevent suspicion, as people will say that we saw the Pesach was brought in Taharah but the blood was thrown in Tum'ah.

Question: If so, he should not throw the blood in Tum'ah, so that people should not say that we saw the Pesach being brought in Taharah and the blood thrown in Tum'ah.

One must conclude that this Beraisa is authored by R. Noson - R. Noson agrees that for the sacrifice to be valid, it must be slaughtered for one who is able to eat it; this excludes a sick or elderly person.

R. Noson agrees that if the slaughterer became Tamei thereby making the flesh Tamei while slaughtering, it may not be eaten and the group's sacrifice is postponed until Pesach Sheni.

R. Noson agrees that if a wart is found on the skin of the Korban, the group's sacrifice is postponed until Pesach Sheni.

If the skins of the Pesach of five groups became mixed up and a wart was found on one of them, all of them are taken out to burn, but all of the groups are exempt from Pesach Sheni.

The Gemara stated earlier that the Beraisa is authored by R. Noson (see earlier 2)(k)).

One could answer that in fact, all agree to this Beraisa - it refers to a case when the congregation became Tamei from Kever Tehom (lit. Tum'ah of the deep - a doubtful Tum'ah caused by sources of Tum'ah that cannot be verified). (In such a case, the Tzitz atones for the Tum'ah and allows the sacrifice to be accepted, even though the flesh may not be eaten since the owner might be Tamei.)

According to R. Noson, even if he was informed before the blood was thrown, he throws the blood. (Note: These words are removed by the Korban HaEidah.)

R. Yochanan/ R. Yishmael quoting R. Yehoshua: One Pasuk states (Bamidbar 18, 17), "But a first-born ox or sheep or goat etc. (you shall throw their blood and burn their fats'' - this implies that one only throws the blood when there are fats and flesh). Another Pasuk states (Vayikra 17, 6), "And the Kohen shall throw the blood upon the altar of Hash-m at the entrance to the Tent of Meeting, and he shall burn the fat as a pleasant odour before Hashem''. (This implies, however, that one throws the blood even if there is only flesh to eat, or only limbs (fats) to burn)?!

Mishnah in Menachos: If the Shirayim became Tamei, burnt or lost; according to R. Eliezer it is valid and according to R. Yehoshua it is invalid. If the Kometz was not sanctified in a Temple vessel it is invalid; R. Yishmael said that it is valid. If he each time he burned half of his Kometz, it is valid.

According to R. Eliezer, if there is no blood, there is no flesh; even if there is no flesh, there is blood. If there is no Kometz, there are no Shirayim; even if there are no Shirayim, there is Kometz.

According to R. Yehoshua, if there is no blood, there is no flesh; if there is no flesh, there is no blood. If there is no Kometz, there are no Shirayim; if there are no Shirayim, there is no Kometz.

Note: These words are removed from the text by Rav Chaim Kanievski.

R. Yosa bei R. Bun quoting Rav/R. Yochanan: R. Yehoshua agrees that if he transgressed and threw the blood, it is accepted.