Daf Yomi - Beitza 27 - When did Rabbi Tarfon Live?

The Mishna rules that if an animal dies on Yom Tov, it is forbidden to move it since it has no permissible use. The Mishna relates a story where an animal died on Yom Tov and Rabbi Tarfon asked in the Beis Medrash if it may be moved. They responded that it may not be moved.

The Gemora cites the opinion of Rabbi Shimon who maintains that an animal that dies on Yom Tov is not muktza. It would seem that Rabbi Shimon's view would not be consistent with the opinion cited in the Mishna. The Gemora concludes that our Mishna can be referring to an animal of kodshim and there even Rabbi Shimon would admit that one would be prohibited from moving the carcass. One cannot derive any benefit from kodshim that dies and therefore it is considered muktza.

Rashi offers several reasons why one would not be able to redeem this animal and subsuquently benefit from the animal.

Pnei Yehoshua asks that the korban that we are referring to must be a bechor. This can be proven by the fact that Rabbi Tarfon lived many years after the destruction of the Beis Hamikdosh and the only korbanos that are found after the destruction of the Beis Hamikdosh are bechoros. The halacha is clear that a bechor cannot be redeemed since its sanctity is from the womb and not by one's mouth. Why is Rashi bothered with the possibility of benefit through redemption?

Rav Shlomo Zalman answers that since the Mishna relates that Rabbi Tarfon did not know the halachic ruling on this issue, it is possible to speculate that this incident transpired when Rabbi Tarfon was extremely young and at that time the Beis Hamikdosh was still standing. It can therefore be referring to any korban, which is why Rashi is discussing the possibility of redemption.

The Gemora in Kiddushin (71a) relates that Rabbi Tarfon (who was a kohen) recalled going with his uncle (who was also a kohen) to the Beis Hamikdosh for Birchas Kohanim.

It is a bit odd that the Pnei Yehoshua states that Rabbi Tarfon lived MANY years after the destruction of the Beis Hamikdosh.

I found this from Wikipedia.

Tarfon or Tarfon, (Hebrew: טרפון , from the Greek Tryphon), a member of the third generation of the Mishnah sages, who lived in the period between the destruction of the Temple (70 C.E.) and the fall of Bethar (135 C.E.). He is said to have lived in Yavneh, although it is evident that he lived also in Lydda. He was of priestly lineage, and he expressly stated that he officiated in the Temple in Jerusalem. As a priest, he would demand the heave-offering even after the Temple had fallen, while his generosity made him return to the father the redemption-money for the first-born, although it was his priestly perquisite.

Although wealthy, he possessed extraordinary modesty; in one instance he deeply regretted having mentioned his name in a time of peril, since he feared that in using his position as teacher to escape from danger he had seemingly violated the rule against utilizing knowledge of the Torah for practical ends.

Rabbi Tarfon was an adherent of the school of Shammai, though he was inclined toward leniency in the interpretation of those halakhot of Shammai which had not actually been put into practise; often he decided in direct opposition to the followers of Shammai when they imposed restrictions of excessive severity.

R. Tarfon engaged in halakhic controversies with Rabbi Akiva, with R. Simeon, and R. Eleazar ben Azaryah. He is mentioned briefly with regard to Bruriah. In the discussion as to the relative importance of theory and practise, Tarfon decided in favor of the latter. R. Tarfon was extremely bitter against those Jews who had been converted to Christianity and he swore that he would burn every book of theirs which should fall into his hands, his feeling being so intense that he had no scruples against destroying the Gospels, although the name of God occurred frequently in them. Justin Martyr's Dialog with Trypho, a proof of Christianity from the Old Testament, purports to be a dialog with Tarfon, though this has been held to be a literary device rather than historical (see Schiffman).