Siman 307

The Tur and the Shulchan Aruch wrote: One may not skin a בכור in the manner of a foot-skinning, that is, to strip its skin whole through its legs. Thus far their words. And even with a blemished animal it is forbidden because it is a way of degradation, as it is like performing labor with consecrated items, for it appears like one who sells the skin for the purpose of a blacksmith's bellows. And it is also a decree lest he raise from them flocks upon flocks, for he will come to delay it from slaughtering until he finds people who seek skins (Bechorot 33). But the Rambam permits it, as written in siman 306, section 2, for he holds that this applies only to disqualified consecrated animals and not to a בכור.

The Rambam wrote in chapter 3, law 10: A bekhor that was found to be a terefah—if it is unblemished and was found to be a terefah after the hide was flayed, it shall be burned and the meat shall be buried. If it is blemished and was slaughtered due to its blemish, the meat shall be buried and the kohanim may benefit from its hide, provided it was slaughtered based on the word of an expert. Thus far his words. However, if it was slaughtered not based on the word of an expert, its law is like an unblemished one. But the Tur and the Shulchan Arukh [rule] that even if it is blemished and was slaughtered based on the word of an expert, the hide must also be buried. And that which our teacher, the Beit Yosef, wrote in section 2: If one slaughtered it and it was found to be a terefah, its hide along with its meat is forbidden for benefit and requires burial—thus far his words—his intention is even after the permission of a sage, for so wrote the Tur, and this is his wording: If one slaughtered it and it was found to be a terefah, the Rambam wrote, etc., but my father, the Rosh, of blessed memory, wrote that its hide along with its meat is forbidden for benefit and requires burial (and their dispute is in the sugya in Zevachim 104), where Rabbi Yochanan said the halakha is like Rabbi Akiva, etc., when an expert permitted it, and the halakha is like the words of the sages, see there. And the Rambam did not have this version, or he had a version where "and the halakha" refers to them, and so wrote the Bartenura there, that the halakha is like Rabbi Akiva regarding a blemished one, etc., and like the sages regarding an unblemished one, see there. And so it appears from the Rambam in the Commentary on the Mishnah, see there, for from his words it implies that they do not disagree, and it requires further study. And it must be said that he holds that the sages do not refer to Rabbi Akiva but to Rabbi Chanina the Segan HaKohanim, as Rashi wrote at the end of the sugya, see there. And it requires further study regarding an unblemished one, why there is a distinction between the hide and the meat, and the Tosafot Yom Tov has already exerted himself in this, see there, and this is not the place for it.

And our teacher, the Rema, wrote: Therefore it is good to sell it to a gentile before slaughtering. Thus far his words. And many disagree with this and hold that it is forbidden to sell it to him, for perhaps he will turn back and sell it to an Israelite, and he will shear it and work with it; and even if he slaughters it in our presence it is forbidden (Shach and the R. Eiger and Chatam Sofer). And it is possible that when an Israelite slaughters it with a kosher slaughter after the permit of a sage, he may sell it to him before the inspection of the lung (ibid.). And regarding the essence of the matter, I do not understand, for certainly his intention was so that he should not lose out on it if it is found to be treif, and therefore he should sell it to him; and where have we found such a regulation to hand it over to him? And in any case, if it is found to be treif, according to the law it surely requires burial, and perhaps because according to the Rambam its hide is permitted; and it requires further study.

The kohen must keep it and raise it until a mum falls upon it, and there is no fixed time for this matter. He may sell it even to a Yisrael even though it is tam, if he finds a Yisrael who wishes to purchase it from him and who will treat it with the kedushah of a bechor until a mum falls upon it, and then he shall permit it by the word of a mumcheh and slaughter it and eat it. This permission to sell it applies specifically when the buyer purchases it for his own needs, but to purchase it in order to profit from it is forbidden, for it is forbidden to do business with a bechor. However, if he purchased it for his own needs and afterwards he does not need it, he may go back and sell it. We have already explained this in siman 306, section 13. (And that which we wrote "even to a Yisrael," this is its explanation: it is not necessary to state to a kohen, but even to a Yisrael; however, to a Kuti it is forbidden while it is a tam).