Jerusalem Talmud Pesachim 6.6

משנה: שְׁחָטוֹ שֶׁלֹּא לְאוֹכְלָיו וְשֶׁלֹּא לִמְנוּיָיו לָעֲרֵלִים וְלַטְּמֵאִים חַיָיב. לְאוֹכְלָיו וְשֶׁלֹּא לְאוֹכְלָיו לִמְנוּיָיו וְשֶׁלֹּא לִמְנוּיָיו לַמּוּלִים וְלָעֲרֵלִים לַטְּהוֹרִים וְלַטְּמֵאִים פָּטוּר. שְׁחָטוֹ וְנִמְצָא בַעַל מוּם חַיָיב. שְׁחָטוֹ וְנִמְצָא טְרֵפָה בַסֵּתֶר פָּטור. שְׁחָטוֹ וְנוֹדַע שֶׁמָּשְׁכוּ הַבְּעָלִים אֶת יָדָן אוֹ שֶׁמֵּתוּ אוֹ שֶׁנִּיטְמְאוּ פָּטוּר מִפְּנֵי שֶׁשָּׁחַט בִּרְשׁוּת:

MISHNAH: He is liable if he slaughtered it not for its eaters, or not for its subscribers, for the uncircumcised, or for the impure. He is not liable if for its eaters and not for its eaters, for its subscribers and not for its subscribers, for the circumcised and the uncircumcised, for the pure and the impure. If he slaughtered and it was found defective, he is liable. If he slaughtered and it was found internally tom, he is not liable. He is not liable if he slaughtered and it became known that the owners became disinterested in it, or they died, or they became impure, because he slaughtered with permission.

הלכה: אָמַר רִבִּי לָעְזָר. לְמִי נִצְרְכָה. לְרִבִּי מֵאִיר. אַתְיָא דְרִבִּי לָעְזָר כְּרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ. כְּמַה דְרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ אָמַר. יֵשׁ בַּעֲשִׂיָיתוֹ מִצְוָה. כֵּן רִבִּי לָעְזָר אָמַר. יֵשׁ בַּעֲשִׂיָיתוֹ מִצְוָה. אִין תֵּימַר. שַׁנְיָיא הִיא. שֶׁהוּא בַעַל מוּם. וּבַעַל מוּם אֵין דַּרְכּוֹ לְהִתְחַלֵּף. הֲרֵי עֶגֶל הֲרֵי אֵין דַּרְכּוֹ לְהִתְחַלֵּף וְאָמַר רִבִּי לָעְזָר. דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי מֵאִיר אֲפִילוּ עֵגֲל. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. אִין יִסְבּוֹר רִבִּי לָ‍עְזָר כְּרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן אַתְיָא הִיא. דְּאָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. בַּעַל מוּם אֵין דַּרְכּוֹ לְהִתְחַלֵּף. עֵגֶל דַּרְכּוֹ לְהִתְחַלֵּף. שֶׁכֵּן נִצְרָכָה (לְהִלֵּל) [לְחָלָל]. הָא בָגָלוּי חַיָיב.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Eleazar said, for whom is this needed? For Rebbi Meïr. Does Rebbi Eleazar parallel Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish? Just as Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish requires that his action be meritorious, does Rebbi Eleazar require that his action be meritorious? If you are saying that there is a difference, since this one has a defect, and a defective animal is not apt to be changed, also a calf is not apt to be changed, and Rebbi Eleazar said, the words of Rebbi Meïr: even a calf. Rebbi Yose said, if Rebbi Eleazar were of Rebbi Joḥanan’s opinion, it would be understandable, since Rebbi Joḥanan said, a defective animals is not apt to be changed, but a calf is apt to be changed, because (it was a problem for Hillel) [it is needed for the slain]. Therefore {if it was torn} in the open, he is liable.

אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. דְּרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן הִיא. רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אָחָא רִבִּי אִימִּי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ. דְּרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן הִיא. רִבִּי חָמָא בַּר עוּקְבָּה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי חֲנִינָה. הַמּוֹשֵׁךְ יָדוֹ מִפִּסְחוֹ גּוּפוֹ קָרֵב שְׁלָמִים. רִבִּי יוֹנְה אָמַר. שְׁלָמִים כְּשֵׁירִים. רִבִּי יּוֹסֵה אָמַר. שְׁלָמִים פְּסוּלִים. וְהָא תַנִּינָן. פָּטוּר. סָבְרִין מִימַר. פָּטוּר [וְ]כָשֵׁר. פָּתְרִין לֵיהּ. פָּטוּר פָּסוּל. רִבִּי יָסָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. אֵין לָךְ פֶּסַח גּוּפוֹ קָרֵב שְׁלָמִים אֶלָּא שֶׁאָבַד וְנִמְצָא מֵאַחַר שֶׁכִּיפְּרוּ הַבְּעָלִים. וְהָא תַנִּינָן. פָּטוּר. סָבְרִין מִימַר. פָּטוּר כָּשֵׁר. פָּתְרִין לָהּ. פָּטוּר פָּסוּל. שְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר. כָּל שֶׁאָמְרוּ בַּחַטָּאת מֵתָה כְּיוֹצֵא בוֹ בַפֶּסַח גּוּפוֹ קָרֵב שְׁלָמִים. וְהָא תַנִּינָן. פָּטוּר. סָבְרִין מִימַר. פָּטוּר פָּסוּל. פָּתְרִין לָהּ. פָּטוּר כָּשֵׁר.

Rebbi Joḥanan said, it is Rebbi Simeon’s. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa, Rebbi Immi in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, it is Rebbi Simeon’s. Rebbi Ḥama bar Uqba in the name of Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Ḥanina: If somebody became disinterested in his Pesaḥ, its body is brought as well-being offering. Rebbi Jonah said, qualified well-being offering. Rebbi Yose said, disqualified well-being offering. But did we not state, “not liable”? They wanted to say, not liable and qualified. They explain it, not liable and disqualified. Rebbi Yasa in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, the only Pesaḥ which itself is brought as well-being offering is what was lost and found after the owner had fulfilled his obligation. But did we not state, “not liable”? They wanted to say, not liable and qualified. They explain it, not liable and disqualified. Samuel said, in any case where they said that a purification sacrifice is allowed to die, a Pesaḥ will be brought as well-being sacrifice. But did we not state, “not liable”? They wanted to say, not liable and disqualified. They explain it, not liable and qualified.

רִבִּי יָסָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. דְּרִבִּי יְהוּדָה הִיא. דְּתַנִּינָן תַּמָּן. אֵין שׁוֹחֲטִין אֶת הַפֶּסַח עַל הַיָּחִיד. דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוּדָה. וְרַבִּי יוֹסֵה מַתִּיר. רִבִּי זְעוּרָה בְעָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי מָנָא. הַן אַשְׁכַּחְנָן פָּטוּר וְכָשֵׁר. אָמַר לֵיהּ. תַּנִּינָן הָכָא. פָּטוּר. וְתַנִּינָן תַּמָּן. כָּשֵׁר. וְעַל כּוּלָּם הָיָה רִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל בְּנוֹ שֵׁלְרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֵּן בְּרוֹקָה אוֹמֵר. תְּעוּבַּר צוּרָתוֹ וְיֵצֵא לְבֵית הַשְּׂרֵיפָה רִבִּי לָעְזָר בֵּירִבִּי יוֹסֵי בְעָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. נִיחָא שֶׁמֵּתוּ וְשֶׁנִּיטְמְאוּ. שָׁמָּשְׁכוּ הַבְּעָלִים אֶת יָדָם. מָה אֲנָן קַיָימִין. אִם בַּחַיִים. פְּסוּל מַכְשִׁיר. פָּסוּל הוּא. אִם לְאַחַר שְׁחִיטָה. יֵשׁ מְשִׁיכָה לְאַחַר שְׁחִיטָה. מֵכֵּיוָן שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ רְשׁוּת לִמְשׁוֹךְ. פְּסוּל מַכְשִׁיר הוּא. וְטָעוּן צוּרָה.

Rebbi Yasa in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, it is Rebbi Jehudah’s, as we have stated there: “One does not slaughter the Pesaḥ for a single individual, the words of Rebbi Jehudah, but Rebbi Yose permits.” Rebbi Zeˋira asked before Rebbi Mana: Where do we find “not liable and qualified”? He told him, here we stated “not liable”, and there we stated “qualified”. But about all of them did Rebbi Ismael the son of Rebbi Joḥanan ben Beroqa say, it should lose its shape and be brought to be burned. Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Yose asked before Rebbi Yose, one understands if they died or became impure. If the owners became disinterested? If they are alive, does disqualification qualify? It is disqualified. If after it was slaughtered, can one become disinterested after slaughter? Since he has the right to become disinterested, the disqualification qualifies, and it needs {losing its} shape.