Explanation: Rashi explained that Rav holds that any Yad that is not used to carry the food is not considered a Yad.

Question: This is difficult, as why is enough to be able to hold onto considered a Yad (and when there is more than this amount it is not)?

Answer #1: It appears that this is because enough to hold onto or more means he can hold the meat itself and (thereby) carry it.

Answer #2: Alternatively, it is because as long as he did not skin enough to hold onto it is difficult to skin it, and sometimes he will leave it this way and use this skin to carry it from place to place. However, once he skins an amount he can hold onto it is no longer difficult to skin it, and he does not stop skinning until he skins the entire thing.

Answer #2 (cont.): Similarly, if he skins it for the purpose of making a skin that will be a container for honey (see Rashi), the Mishnah says it is only a Yad if he has not yet finished skinning the chest, because the chest is difficult to skin. Since it is difficult, a person will sometimes stop skinning (in the middle of skinning the chest) for a while and in the meantime need to carry it. However, once he skins the chest, it is not normal to leave it like that.

Answer #3: One can also explain that the reason of Rav who says that what was skinned is pure from then on because the skin has to be enough to hold onto due to the skinning. However, if it is more than the amount he needs to hold onto it is impure.

Answer #3 (cont.): If he holds onto the edge of the skin, he cannot pull forcefully and skin. If he only has an amount of skin that he can hold onto next to the meat, he cannot hold the skin well in order to pull it. Therefore, until this amount he can pull forcefully at the edge of the skin, but not if there is more.

Answer #3 (cont.): This is as Rashi explains regarding the Gemara's answer later that, "this is regarding the first Tefach." When he skins three Tefachim, he cannot hold onto the edge of the skin nor the middle of the skin.

Opinion: Some say that the entire Mishnah is discussing the skin being a Shomer (not a Yad). When it is enough to hold onto the skin is considered a Shomer, and certainly when it is less. If a (dead) Sheretz touched this amount that was skinned, the skin causes the meat to become impure because it is a Shomer.

Implied Question: This is despite the fact that the Gemara earlier said (118a) that only the skin opposite the flesh is a Shomer.

Answer: The skin here is considered opposite the flesh since it is all considered connected. The same applies to skinning in order to make a container for honey, as long as the chest is connected it is all considered connected.

Proof #1: However, one cannot explain that the Mishnah is referring to Yados. This is because according to Rav Asi, who says that the Tefach next to the flesh is impure due to Yad, it is difficult to understand why all of the skin should be considered a connection. He should only say that the Tefach close to the chest is impure, as what is the difference between the chest and the other limbs?

Proof #1 (cont.): Rather, it must be that the reason is because it is a Shomer, and therefore all of the skin is considered connected.

Proof #2: Similarly, the phrase "this is a connection" implies that the reason is because of Shomer. How can this phrase apply to a Yad?

Proof #2 (cont.): This is apparent from the Toras Kohanim that says, "with its Neveilah - and not skin that is being skinned for a carpet, as this is impure if it is enough to hold onto, and a skin for a honey container is impure until he skins the entire chest. One might think that less than this amount is excluded. This is why the Pasuk says, "it will be impure."

Proof #2 (cont.): This is why the reason that skin for a carpet is impure if it is less than the amount one would hold onto is because it is a Shomer, as we derive (118a) that a Shomer of a Neveilah is impure from the word "it will be impure." (This is also the Pasuk quoted by the Toras Kohanim regarding this case.) We derive Yad from "for you." This was explained by Rabeinu Yaakov from Orleans.

Observation: We do not have this text in our version of the Toras Kohanim.

Proof #2 (cont.): However, according to Rebbi Yaakov from Orleans (and his text - Maharam), the Toras Kohanim and our Gemara say that until one has enough to hold onto the skin is impure, as opposed to when one has enough to hold onto. This is what is meant by the phrase "less than the amount" mentioned in Toras Kohanim.

Explanation: This is a question on Rav who says that the skin is pure. The Gemara answers, the case is regarding the first Tefach. This refers to the first Tefach that comes off (partially) when he starts to skin the animal until he has enough to hold onto. This Tefach is a double Tefach, as the Gemara explains later. The Beraisa is explains that the amount one holds onto is a Tefach next to the flesh.

Explanation: Rabeinu Tam explains that since most of it was torn it is pure retroactively from when it started to be torn.

Proof: The terminology "that he started to tear" supports his explanation.

Observation: The difficulty with Rashi's explanation was explained earlier (72b, Tosfos DH "b'Sha'as").

Question: Why is this difficult? The case there is different, as it is a Gezeiras ha'Kasuv not to separate!

Answer: The implication is that only a small majority is required. This is why the Gemara asks a question that a clear majority should be required.

Observation: In Zevachim (94b) we say that even if he left an amount that was enough for a scarf, it is only impure according to Rabbinic law.

Explanation: It appears that according to Rebbi Yochanan it is not enough to leave enough skin that is the amount of a scarf, as we say regarding a Talis. Rather, every item is going to have a different amount depending on what amount is significant for it. For skin, this amount is five by five Tefachim.

Proof: It is now understandable why the Gemara asks later that the skin should be pure once it is less than five by five Tefachim. If skin would also suffice with an amount of a scarf, it is difficult to understand the Gemara later.

Proof (cont.): If an amount of a scarf is less than five Tefachim, as is implied by the second version quoted by the Gemara, the Gemara should ask on Rebbi Yochanan why it is pure if he makes it less than five Tefachim. If the size of a scarf is more than five Tefachim, why is it impure when there is five Tefachim? It is not the size of a scarf!

Implied Question: One can answer that this is not a proof, as according to this version Rebbi Yochanan holds that it is enough to have skin that is important like a scarf which is less than a size of five Tefachim, as implied later.

Implied Question: The Gemara later asks, "When he lessens the size to less than five it is pure" even though it is the amount of a scarf (as stated above).

Answer: The case is where he wants it for a Zav to sit on (which is why it must be at least five Tefachim), as stated later according to Reish Lakish. However, according to the second version of Rebbi Yochanan, certainly it must be five Tefachim.

Question: The Ri finds this difficult. What is the Gemara's question? He obviously does not care about it as he is skinning the animal, and he wants the entire animal skinned!

Answer: In our case he is careful not to skin too much, in order that it should be easy to carry and (later) skin.

Question: The Ri finds this difficult. How can the Gemara compare the law regarding a Yad to the case earlier?

Answer: The comparison is that just as we say that skin that is torn is considered connected, so too we should say that skin that is skinned is considered connected, and it should be a Yad as if it had not yet been skinned.

Question: According to Rebbi Yochanan who says that skin does not become strong (like it was originally), he will admit that if a person sowed it up it is indeed impure. This certainly is true regarding skin that was never torn!

Answer: The Gemara currently thinks that skin on the neck, even if it becomes detached on its own, is not any worse than skin that is not sown and not connected, as it is considered connected. Just as skin that was torn can become strong again, so too skin that was on the neck, even though it comes off on its own, should be considered connected. The Gemara answers, since it is normal that it comes off by itself it is worse than skin that is torn, and is therefore not considered connected.