(Mishnah) - Question: How do you roast the Korban Pesach?

R. Yosi HaGalili: A pomegranate wood rod is inserted from its mouth until its rump and its feet and innards are inside.

R. Akiva: This is like cooking - rather they hang them around it.

(Gemara) - Question: Why was the rod made from pomegranate wood?

Answer (R. Chiya bar Ba): All woods ooze juices except for pomegranate wood.

Question: What is the case? If they are moist, even pomegranate wood oozes; if dry, other woods also do not ooze?!

Answer: Other woods are dry outside and moist inside; pomegranate wood is dry both outside and inside.

Beraisa (R. Yuda): One roasts it with a metal spit.

Rabbanan to R. Yuda: It will become heated up and cook the meat (and the Torah requires it to be roasted by fire)!

R. Yuda responds: Just as wood does not burn (when surrounded with flesh of the Korban), so metal does not become heated up.

Rabbanan to R. Yuda: Wood and metal are incomparable - wood does not conduct but metal does conduct (so if the external part becomes hot, the entire spit becomes hot).

Another text teaches: One inserts it from the rump until it reaches the mouth (in contrast to our Mishnah where the rod is inserted in the opposite direction).

According to this text, it was turned around so that it would become roasted on all sides.

Question: Why did R. Yosi HaGalili permit leaving the feet and innards inside - there is no room for the blood to ooze out?!

Answer: It is like a thick piece of meat where the fire can draw out the blood from all sides.

Answer #2: He expounded the Pasuk (Shemos 12, 9), "Rosho Al Kera'av Ve'al Kirbo'' - "its head with (next to) its feet and its innards'' - they must all be roasted together (with the feet and innards inside it).

Question: Where is there a difference between these two answers?

Answer (Difference #1): Roasting a Chulin (non-sacrificial) kid - if it is viewed as a thick piece of meat, this would also be true if it is Chulin; if it is a requirement of the Pasuk, that would not apply to Chulin.

Difference #2: If he cut from it some flesh and roasted it together with the rest of the animal - if it is viewed as a thick piece of meat, that would apply here and it is valid; if it is a requirement of the Pasuk, the Korban would be invalid.

Difference #3: If roasted in a pot above the flame - since the pot separates, the flame cannot draw all of the blood and it is invalid; if it is a requirement of the Pasuk, it is valid.

Question: How could this be valid - does the Pasuk not state (ibid), "roasted in fire'' - but not roasted in a pot?

Answer: This prohibition only applies when the flesh actually touches the pot - here, it is suspended above it.

From the following we see that R. Yosi HaGalili expounded it from the Pasuk -

All agree that when a Pasuk states "Alav'', it means "next to''.

They disagree over "Al'' (Vayikra 24, 7) - Aba Shaul says that "You shall put pure frankincense Al HaMa'areches'' means "next to each stack''. Rabbanan say that "Al HaMa'areches'' means "on top of each stack''.

Aba Shaul follows the opinion of R. Akiva and Rabbanan follow the opinion of R. Yosi HaGalili. (R. Yosi HaGalili had said (see earlier (c)) that "Al Kera'av'' meant "next to its feet'').

Rebbi: Even if he made two stacks totaling fourteen Showbreads (rather than twelve), we view the upper ones as if they do not exist and the lower ones are valid. (Even though he has put the frankincense on the upper stack, the Pasuk does not require it to be next to breads i.e. "Al'' does not mean "next to''.

R. Yosi bei R. Bun quoting R. Yochanan: Rebbi and Aba Shaul follow R. MeiR.s view of the Shulchan (that held the Showbreads - R. Meir said that it was 12 Tefachim long and 6 Tefachim wide. The Showbreads were 10 by 5 Tefachim and were arranged across the width of the Shulchan. Two Tefachim of the Showbreads were folded up on each side, leaving two Tefachim in the middle. It was upon those two Tefachim that the spoons of frankincense were placed, as the the Pasuk required "Al'' - "next to''.)

R. Tarfon: The Korban Pesach was Tuchbar - the feet and innards were stuffed inside (Toch) and were noticeable from the outside (Bar)).

R. Yishmael: They were Mekulas - entirely covering the outside of animal like a helmet.

R. Tarfon follows the opinion of R. Akiva and R. Yishmael follows the opinion of R. Yosi HaGalili -

Beraisa (R. Yosi HaGalili): What is a Mekulas kid? It is roasted whole with its head, its feet and its innards.

If he stewed or boiled it in part, it is not a Mekulas kid.

Nowadays, one may bring a Mekulas kid to the table on the first night of Succos and the last day of Pesach.

One may bring a Mekulas calf to the table on the first night of Pesach, but not a Mekulas kid.