טבול יום – he (i.e., a Kohen) who has immersed [in a ritual bath] and came out but his sunset has yet occurred (i.e., see the rationale provided by the Bartenura commentary in Tractate Berakhot, Chapter 1, Mishnah 1 for defining when the Shema is recited in the evening).

ומחוסר כפורים – such as person with a flux or a leper or a woman who gave birth who immersed [in a ritual bath] and their [respective] sunsets had arrived but they had not brought their atonement [sacrifices].

אינן חולקין בקדשים – since it is not appropriate for them to be eating [until they bring their sacrifices on the morrow], they do not divide [the food] for the evening when they become pure, as it is written (Leviticus 6:19): “The priest who offers it as a sin offering shall eat of it,” the Kohen that is appropriate for purification shares it, he who is not appropriate for purification does not share it. But it is impossible to state that a Kohen who is not appropriate for purification at the time of the offering does not eat, for there is a minor that is not appropriate for purification who consumes it, but by force, he should eat it, as the Biblical verse states, he should divide it in order to be able to eat from it, it is stated, for the Biblical verse excludes it from division in the language of seating, we learn from it that a Kohen who is appropriate for eating can divide it, but one who is not qualified for eating does not divide it. Therefore, those with blemishes divide it, even though they are not appropriate for purification, they are appropriate for eating, as it is written (Leviticus 21:22): “He may eat of the food of his God, of the most holy as well as the holy” (though as we learn in the previous verse, if the Kohen has a defect, he shall not be qualified to offer up the food of his God).

אונן נוגע – and he who immersed [in a ritual bath] but he whose mind was not diverted from his immersion all the while that he is a mourning a kinsman prior to burial. For if he diverted his mind and then touched it, even after he immersed [in a ritual bath], he has invalidated it.

וכל שאינו ראוי לעבודה אינו חולק בבשר – except for those who have blemishes for even though that they are not qualified for Temple service, they divide/share the meat, for we extend the scope of he Biblical verse explicitly, as it is written (Leviticus 21:22): “He may eat of the food of his God, of the most holy as well as of the holy,” and it is written (Leviticus 6:11): “Only the males among Aaron’s descendants may eat of it,” to include those with defects for the sharing of the food, if for eating, it is already stated, “he may eat….as well as of the holy.”

וטהור בשעת הקטר חלבים – which is all night long (see the end of Tractate Berakhot, Chapter 1, Mishnah 1). As for example, that he immersed and was purified with the setting of the sun.

אינו חולק – for a Kohen does not share in the Holy Things until he is pure from the time of the sprinkling of the blood until the time of the burning of the fat, but if he became ritually impure between one and the other, he does not share in the Holy Things.

כל של זכה המזבח בבשרה – such as that something making it (i.e., the meat) invalid occurred before sprinkling/tossing [of the blood], that there wasn’t a period of permissibility for the altar.

עורה לכהנים – for since the altar acquired its meat, for it was kosher/fit (see Chapter 1, Mishnah 1).

ואחד עולת אשה – as is it written (Leviticus 7:8): “So, too, the priest who offers a man’s burnt offering [shall keep the skin of the burnt offering that is offered],” I don’t have anything other than "עולת איש"/a man’s offering, from where do I learn about the burnt offering of a woman and/or that of slaves? The inference teaches us: "עולת עור"/the skin of the burnt offering: to use the additional word for the purpose of intimating something not otherwise included/widening the scope of a law. If so, why is it stated [in the Biblical verse]: "עולת איש"/a man’s offering? Excluding a person who decides by drawing lots to devote his burnt offering for the maintenance of the Temple that the hide is holy.

עורות קדשים קלים לבעלים – as it is written (Leviticus 7:8): “shall keep the skin/עור העולה of the burnt offering [that is offered],”just as the burnt offering of the Most Holy Things, so also all of the Most Holy Things.

עורות קדשי קדשים – the sin-offerings and guilt-offerings go to the Kohanim as the reason is explained further on.

אין המזבח יוכיח – that is to say, you don’t have to state that the Altar will prove that it acquired the meat of the burnt-offering but did not acquire the hide and even you should no be amazed regarding the Holiest of Holy Things for even though the Kohanim acquired their meat, that they would not acquire their hides. This is not a proof, for the altar does not have the hide in any case. But regarding the Kohanim, we have found that they did acquire the hide of the burnt-offering as an a fortiori derivation that they would acquire the hides of the Holiest of the Holy Things.

אין עורותיהן לכהנים – but rather they are burned with their hides.

לא ראיתי עור יוצא לבית השריפה – after it was flayed, if it was found to be an animal with a condition that would cause it to die within twelve months (i.e., it was found to have been torn by another animal or with a congenital defect or afflicted with a severe organ disease, even though that this disqualification was in it prior to the flaying, but it was not recognized until after it was flayed.

שהמפשיט את הבכור ונמצא טריפה – Rabbi Akiba comes to tell us that even if it was a firstling with a blemish/physical defect that was ritually slaughtered in the country on its blemish, and the Biblical verse did not permit it other than through eating, as it is written (Deuteronomy 15:21-22): [“But if it has a defect, lameness or blindness, any serious defect, you shall not sacrifice it to the LORD your God.] Eat it in your settlements, [the impure among you no less than the pure, just like the gazelle and the deer],” but if it died, its hide is forbidden and it requires burial, and it comes to teach us that where its being afflicted with a severe organ disease/congenital defect/torn by another animal was not recognized until after it was flayed, its ritual slaughter is permitted and its hide is flayed, as if its blood was sprinkled/tossed in the Temple.

יאותו הכהנים בעורו – [the priests may make use of its hide] and it is not burned.

אין לא ראיתי ראיה – for perhaps it did not happen during his life that he would find [the animal’s] severe organ disease/congenital defect/torn by another animal until after it was flaying, and if it happened, and he burned it, he didn’t see it.

אלא יצא לבית השריפה – since but prior to the flaying he came. But the Halakha is according to Rabbi Akiba regarding a firstling with a blemish/physical defect when a specialist permitted it. But not if a specialist did not permit it. But the Halakha is according to the Sages regarding a pure firstling, that the flesh [requires] burial and hide [requires] burning.

פרים הנשרפין – the bull of the anointed priest [brought as a sin-offering] and the bull for an unwitting communal sin [because of an active unwitting transgression committed by the Jewish people, as a result of an erroneous Halakhic decision handed down by the Great Sanhedrin], and the bullock of Yom Kippur [which is brought by the High Priest for himself, his family and all the members of the Priesthood].

ושעירים הנשרפים – the goat of Yom Kippur and the goats as a sin-offering for idolatry.

נשרפין בבית הדשן – outside of the three camps . But in the cemetery, outside of Jerusalem, as it is written regarding them (Leviticus 4:21): “[He shall carry the bull] outside the camp [and burn it as he burned the first bull,” that is to say, outside of three camps.

מטמאין בגדים – to those engaged with them. As is it written (Leviticus 16:28): “He who burned them shall wash his clothes [and bathe his body in water].” And every place where it states, “shall wash his clothes/יכבס בגדיו,” not only the clothes that he was wearing require washing, but also every piece of clothing that he touches while he is attached to the impurity is ritually defiled and requires washing.

שלא כמצותן – such as that they became defiled and required burning like the rest of the consecrated animals that were disqualified.

בבית הבירה – sometimes in the Temple courtyard and sometimes on the Temple Mount. How so? If a disqualification occurred to them prior to their leaving from the Temple courtyard whether prior to the sprinkling/tossing [of the blood] or after, they are burned in the place of ashes that is in the Temple courtyard. If a disqualification occurred to them after their departure from the Temple courtyard, they are burned in the place of ashes that is on the Temple Mount, and that is the Temple.

היו סובלין אותן – those that were burned in accord with their requirements, they would carry them on poles to remove them to the place where they are burned.

הראשונים – the people that carry the poles, those at one head go out first, and the latter ones at the head of the second group didn’t go out [from the Temple courtyard].

ניתך הבשר – when their burning came a conclusion, the one who assist/accompany them does not again return from defiling clothing, but before this, all those who assist/accompany at the time of the burning, defile their clothing, as it is written (Leviticus 16:28): “He who burned them shall wash his clothes, [and bathe his body in water; after that he may re-enter the camp],” at the time of the burning. The one who assists/accompanies after they became ashes defiles his clothing, the inference teaches us: "אותם"/them - those defile their clothing, when they became ashes, he does not defile his clothing. But the bulls that are burned and the goats that are burned themselves do not defile people or the clothing that touch them, but the person engaged with their burning is ritually impure from the decree of the Biblical verse. According to the Rabbis, once those who carry them on poles have gone out, and according to the words of Rabbi Shimon, when fire goes out on most of them (see Talmud Zevakhim 106a). But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Shimon.