‫מעילה‬

1st Mishna: If ‫ שחט‬and catch both in the south--> no ‫ מעילה‬seemingly. Tos’ (second one)
at first say this. Then they bring R’ Peretz who says that since gemara said that it still has
koka”l in it, this would apply by 1 or even 2 psulim! Every element of koko”d has in it
koka”l. There are always two tracks no matter how many “mistakes” you make. R’ Peretz
(in shita #3) lishitaseh brings a proof from “im ala lo yered”. The 1st opinion would
maybe say back that 2 psulim/mistakes in your ‫ קרבן‬remove its chance to be a ‫קרבן‬. The
reason you can make it into a koka”l with 1 psul is because we give you a pardon, but 2
mistakes is way too far and it is considered nothing, so no ‫מעילה‬. This isn’t an argument
in ‫מעילה‬, it is an argument in the idea of koka”l in every koko”d.
Even though the catching is in the north which is good, the shechitah in the south might
preclude it the ‫מעילה‬. These ‫קרבן‬ot in the mishna are pasul, but still have ‫ !!מעילה‬Even
though they are not ‫קרבן‬ot, they are still “hekdesh”. The main part of the avodah is the
throwing of the blood, but from the catching onwards it is “mitzvat kehunah”. When is
shas heteir: Zrika vs. ‫קבלה‬. Tos’ (3rd one) say that zerika and ‫ קבלה‬are essentially the
same thing; zerika was used by day/night b/c it is impossible to get the shechita in the day
and then the ‫ קבלה‬right afterwards at night. The time b/w shechita and zerika is longer
and easier to split by day and night.
Is psul of makom on the same level as the psul of night?
(Pigul in torah sounds like you shecht it in the wrong time, but torah sheba’al peh says it
means that you eat it at the wrong time. When did this change? What about chutz
limkomo makes the pigul have no karet? Pigul means that while you are doing the korbal
you don’t want it for its end purpose; it is a disgrace to G-d.)
‫ מעילה‬is the issur of taking of G-d’s property, it isn’t possible to get hana’a from it; once it
is allowed to humans, anyone could technically eat it. ‫ מעילה‬is above the rules of society
and nature. Shas heteir is a qusi-stage where the kohen can eat it but it is still in G-d’s
domain.
Just to note: all these psulim of the mishna deal with place and time. What is unique with
these things?
Gemara: You shecht or/and (see above) catch in south so it isn’t kodshei kodshim
anymore but it could turn into kodshei kalim, but koka”l only have potential for ‫מעילה‬
when the blood is thrown. In between the ‫ קבלה‬and zerika you can seemingly do ‫ מעילה‬on
it.
Rashi says that this gemara holds that night is not a mchusar zman so there will be ‫מעילה‬.
You could have said that night is mchusar zman but still there is ‫מעילה‬. The shitah (#10)
says a different reason that since at night we burn the limbs (ma’ariv), so there can be
‫מעילה‬.
The gemara puts shechitah and zerikah on the same level by the idea that the ‫ קרבן‬must be
in the day.
The first cases that had ‫ מעילה‬had potential to still be a ‫ ;קרבן‬the pigul examples do not
have potential anymore, but are still not a pigul “tree”- full-blown, yet (just a seed). (The
pigul is only full-blown once the “bad” zerika is done.) This animal still has an
element/remnant of holiness even though no potential, so still is ‫מעילה‬. This is a chidush
in pigul and in ‫ !מעילה‬This is Rashi’s read of the gemara. Tos’ say almost the opposite
that the whole chidush of the gemara here is that even though the zerika of pigul is done,
there is still ‫ !מעילה‬This seems to come from Tos’ read of the gemara that pigul is more
obvious that it has ‫ מעילה‬and the gemara is asking why we need to bring down this case.
Tos’ might hold that something always has ‫ מעילה‬and will retain its ‫ מעילה‬unless a good
zerikah (shas heteir) for example comes along. But if a bad pigul-zerika comes along,
even though the animal has no more potential to become a ‫ קרבן‬for G-d, it never is fully
emptied of its attachment to G-d. So therefore the ‫ מעילה‬stays.
Koka”l: Why isn’t there ‫ מעילה‬until the zrikah? B/c the owner still has some ownership of
it. Once there is zerika, the innards are all G-d’s finally, and they have meila (the owner
eats the meat).
By the two cases of day/night, the second one (zerika in day) seems to be less of a
chidush that there is meila. Rashi says that you’re right, but it was still put in. The gemara
reads it as a possible chidush: both shechitah and zerika must be in day; you can’t have
only one (yamama he zman hakrava). Tos’ says that the order in the mishna should be
switched. Tos’ in the shita (#35) gives another answer that there is a chidush in the case
where zerika was in the day, since there were actually 2 psulim: shechita at night and
leaving the blood to sit at night (halanat dam), even for a few minutes. Nevertheless,
there is still meila-potential even with the 2 psulim. This could fit in with the R’ Peretz
above that 2 psulim won’t remove the potential for a ‫קרבן‬. The 1st opinion in Tos’ above
would have to distinguish b/w his case of darom and this one here: since in this case it got
back on track for zerika, it is still good to be able to have ‫מעילה‬.
Why is there still ‫ מעילה‬from the rabbis by kodshim that died? Also, how can the rabbis
even put holiness/‫ מעילה‬into a person?! That is in G-d’s jurisdiction! Perhaps we call it “
‫ ”מעילה‬but it is really on a much lower level. Perhaps we call it “‫ ”מעילה‬so people will
view it with the proper amount of awe and respect and deal with it properly. The gemara
brings up ‫ מעילה‬derabanan for the first time. This is the genesis of ‫ מעילה‬derabanan, yet it
is very shaky and unconvincing. The gemara even asks: Can such a thing exist?! Well,
can it? The gemara has a hava amina that kodshim that died (nevalot) should not even
have ‫ מעילה‬derabanan b/c it is disgusting to people. Why should the fact that it is
disgusting to people remove the possibility for ‫ מעילה‬derabanan. Who cares what people
think?! Perhaps ‫ מעילה‬derabanan is a smaller version of ‫ מעילה‬from the torah used in
man’s jurisdiction like ‫ מעילה‬from the torah deals with Hashem’s domain. Just as by ‫מעילה‬
from the torah, if yardo then it has no ‫מעילה‬, so too by ‫ מעילה‬derabanan, if yardo, if people
do not “accept” it and they are disgusted by it, then it won’t have ‫ מעילה‬derabanan. Now
what does the maskana do? A) This whole idea of ‫ מעילה‬derabanan is incorrect and even
things which are yoreid by man can have ‫מעילה‬. Or B) this idea of ‫ מעילה‬derabanan holds
but there is another aspect of ‫ מעילה‬derabanan which is there to make sure people treat the
dead animal properly. A fundamental and technical ‫ מעילה‬derabanan.
The shitah in #10 raises the possibility that the mishna builds starting with south, then to
south and night and then south and night and pigul. This is a wild idea. He also says that
night is more of a chidush perhaps b/c kdusha bazman is a higher level than kdusha
bamakom.
Alu (Lo) Yardu: A psul in the guf of the animal is a psul which man gives it: he bows
down to it, a prostitute is given it as payment. These animals “go down” off the altar and
they don’t have ‫( מעילה‬we’ll assume these 2 things are parallel) b/c they have already
been infused into man’s society. This is their shas heteir in a twisted way, even b4 they
ever receive holiness. They have no chance of going to G-d. A psul bakodesh is when it
gets a psul once it gets to the azara (rashi); in G-d’s domain. This has ‫מעילה‬.
Are there cases where there is ‫ מעילה‬yet it still will be brought down? We almost had a
case with Rabah, but the gemara decided to make a big chidush instead and say that he
feels the ‫ מעילה‬in the mishna is only derabanan. This shows how much the gemara wants
to stay away from the idea that ‫ מעילה‬is not necessarily synonymous with lo yardu.

The Rambam writes lhalacha that (beg of perek three in ‫ )מעילה‬Kodshim shemasu yotzu
medei ‫מעילה‬.