(Mishnah): If a commoner sinned, then he was appointed [to be Kohen Gadol or Nasi], he brings like a commoner;

R. Shimon says, this is if he found out before Minuy (appointment) that he sinned. If he found out afterwards, he is exempt.

Who is the Nasi? It is the king, for it says "v'Asah Achas mi'Kol Mitzvos Hash-m Elokav" - the Nasi has no one over him, only Hash-m his G-d.

Who is the Mashi'ach? It is [a Kohen Gadol] anointed with Shemen ha'Mishchah, but not Merubah Begadim (he was not anointed. His inauguration was through wearing the extra garments of a Kohen Gadol.)

The only difference between a Kohen anointed with Shemen ha'Mishchah and Merubah Begadim is the Par brought for [mistaken Hora'ah about almost] all Mitzvos [of Kares. A Mashi'ach brings it; a Merubah Begadim brings like a commoner.]

(If the Kohen Gadol is Tamei or sick on Yom Kipur, another Kohen does the Avodah in his stead. When the former becomes Tahor or healthy, he resumes being Kohen Gadol. He is called the serving Kohen Gadol. The latter is called Kohen she'Avar.) The only differences between a serving Kohen and Kohen she'Avar are Par [that atones for the Kohanim on] Yom Kipur and Asiris ha'Efah (the daily Minchah of the Kohen Gadol. They are of the serving Kohen);

Both of them are the same regarding Avodas Yom Kipur, and they are commanded to marry a virgin, and forbidden to a widow, and may not become Tamei if a relative dies, and do not grow their hair or tear their clothes over a Mes, and [when either dies] he returns a [Shogeg] murderer [from his Ir Miklat].

(Gemara) Opinion #1 (Talmidim): R. Shimon's reason [to exempt one who found out that he sinned after Minuy] is because ascent atones.

Opinion #2 (R. Yosi): It is because [his Korban at the time of] his sin and [at the time of] his Yedi'ah are not equal.

Question: What do [these opinions] argue about?

Answer #1: They argue about the first [Mishnah of] our Perek. If a Kohen Mashi'ach sinned, and then he was removed from his position, or if a Nasi sinned and was dethroned, the Kohen Mashi'ach brings a Par, and the Nasi brings a Sa'ir. (The one who says that ascent atones, R. Shimon agrees that he is liable, for he did not ascend after sinning. The one who says that it is because his Korban at the times of his sin and his Yedi'ah are not equal, R. Shimon exempts.)

Answer #2: If they sinned b'Safek [and found out about the Safek before Minuy, and found out after Minuy that they Vadai sinned] the one who says that ascent atones, just like ascent atones for Vadai, it atones for Safek. The one who exempts because his sin and his Yedi'ah are not equal, his sin and his Yedi'ah [of the Safek] are equal [so he brings Asham Taluy. We explained this like HAGAHOS R. DINAR.]

Answer #3: If they sinned before Minuy, and also after Minuy, and they were removed [and then found out about the sins] - the one who says that ascent atones, it atoned for the first (before Minuy), and he is liable for the second and third (everything after Minuy). The one who exempts because his sin and his Yedi'ah are not equal, [the law is opposite. He is liable for what was before Minuy, and exempt for everything after Minuy.]

Answer #4: If they transgressed Shevu'as ha'Edus, Shevu'as Bituy or Tum'as Mikdash v'Kodoshav - the one who says that ascent atones, even for these it atoned. (The one who exempts because his sin and his Yedi'ah are not equal, whoever holds that a Mashi'ach or Nasi brings for these like a commoner, he is liable. We explained this like HAGAHOS R. DINAR.)

(R. Matanyah): Ascent atones only if he finds out [of his sin] while he is in his appointment.

If one ate a half-k'Zayis [e.g. of Chelev] before Minuy, and a half-k'Zayis after Minuy, even in one Helam, he is exempt.

If one ate a half-k'Zayis of Safek [Chelev] before Minuy, and a half-k'Zayis of Safek after Minuy, [a Nasi] brings Asham Taluy (but a Mashi'ach is exempt - Mishnah 2:7).

Question: Do we find something that for Vadai (a half-k'Zayis before Minuy, and a half-k'Zayis after Minuy), he is exempt, and for Safek, he is liable?!

Answer: Do we not find this?! If one ate two k'Zeisim [in one Helam], and found out Vadai about one of them, and has a Safek about the other [he brings a Chatas, and Asham Taluy, and a second Chatas when he finds out Vadai about the other. If he knew Vadai about both of them now, he would bring just one Chatas.]

Question (R. Yakov of the south, to R. Yosi): (Why doesn't the first Chatas suffice?) No matter what you will say - [even if also the second k'Zayis] he ate [was] Chelev, [the Chatas] atoned!

Answer (R. Yosi): Any [knowledge about a Safek] that obligates him to bring Asham Taluy, knowledge of the Safek obligates [a separate Chatas] for the sin.

Summation of previous answer: We find something that for Vadai he is exempt, and for Safek, he is liable. Also here (a half-k'Zayis before Minuy, and a half-k'Zayis after Minuy), Vadai is exempt and Safek is liable.

If one ate a k'Zayis before Minuy, and a k'Zayis after Minuy in one Helam, he is liable only once;

If one ate a k'Zayis of Safek before Minuy, and a k'Zayis of Safek after Minuy in one Helam, he is liable only once. In two He'elamos, he is liable twice.

If one ate three k'Zeisim and thought that they were two, and he separated one Chatas, he atoned [for all of them], like R. Yochanan taught;

R. Yochanan said that if one received Kaparah for part of the sin, he received Kaparah for all of it. Reish Lakish said that if one received Kaparah for part of the sin, he did not receive Kaparah for all of it.

If one ate five k'Zeisim and found out about a Safek about each one, and afterwards he found out Vadai, Reish Lakish says, Yedi'ah of the Safek fixes his sin (obligates a separate Chatas for each);

R. Yochanan says, Yedi'as ha'Safek does not fix his sin.

(R. Yosi bei R. Bun citing R. Shmuel bar Rav Yitzchak): Reish Lakish agrees about a Kohen Mashi'ach, that Yedi'as ha'Safek does not fix his sin.

What is the reason? "Ka'Chatas ka'Asham" - one who brings Asham Taluy, Yedi'as ha'Safek fixes his sin. One who does not bring Asham Taluy, Yedi'as ha'Safek does not fix his sin.

Contradiction: Reish Lakish contradicts himself! Here he said that Yedi'as Safek fixes for Chatas, and there he said that Yedi'as Safek does not fix for Chatas! (He established the Beraisa about two paths only like R. Yishmael. If he held that Yedi'as Safek is Yedi'ah, he would have established it like everyone, like R. Yochanan did.)

Answer: Here, [since Yedi'as Safek obligates Asham Taluy,] his Asham fixes him [for Chatas]. There, what do you have [to fix him? There is no Asham Taluy for Tum'as Mikdash v'Kodoshav!]

Question: R. Yochanan contradicts himself! Here he said that Yedi'as Safek does not fix for Chatas. There [Helam Tum'ah] he said so (the Beraisa is like everyone, for Yedi'as Safek is Yedi'ah)!

Answer: R. Yochanan said so (Yedi'as Safek is Yedi'ah) only for the first Yedi'ah [for Oleh v'Yored], which does not obligate any Korban. (We explained this like R. MEIR SIMCHAH, KORBAN HA'EDAH in Shevu'os.)

All (R. Yochanan and Reish Lakish) agree that if the first [Korban, which he separated for the first k'Zayis] was alive, it is Nidcheh (he offers only the latter Korban).

Question: What do we do with it?

Answer #1 (R. Yosi): It depends on Kaparah. (Only after he offers the latter Korban, the first dies, for then it is a Chatas whose owner atoned through another Korban.)

Answer #2 (R. Ze'ira): Any [Korban] that cannot be offered, not it or its money (for he must atone through the latter), it dies immediately. (We explained this like NO'AM YERUSHALMI.)

If one ate five k'Zeisim and found out about his Safek after he was appointed, and found out Vadai after he was deposed, according to Reish Lakish, he is exempt. According to R. Yochanan, he is liable.

Objection: Would Reish Lakish say that he is exempt, and not liable?! (He holds that Safek Yedi'ah is Yedi'ah, i.e. when Vadai Yedi'ah does not oppose it. Surely the Vadai Yedi'ah at the end obligates him! Alternatively, he holds that Safek Yedi'ah is Yedi'ah to obligate, but not to exempt.)

Correction: Rather, if one ate five k'Zeisim and found out about his Safek before Minuy, and found out Vadai after Minuy, according to Reish Lakish, [who says that if one received Kaparah for part of the sin, he did not receive Kaparah for all of it, he is liable [for each, for he was a commoner at the time of sin and at the time of Yedi'ah];

According to R. Yochanan [who says that if one received Kaparah for part of the sin, he received Kaparah for all of it], he is exempt.

All (R. Yochanan and Reish Lakish) agree that if the first [Korban, which he separated for the first k'Zayis] was alive, it is Nidcheh (he offers only the latter Korban).

Question: What do we do with it?

Answer #1 (R. Yosi): It depends on Kaparah. (Only after he offers the latter Korban, the first dies, for then it is a Chatas whose owner atoned through another Korban.)

Answer #2 (R. Ze'ira): Any [Korban] that cannot be offered, not it or its money (for he must atone through the latter), it dies immediately. (We explained this like NO'AM YERUSHALMI.)

Question: If one ate a half-k'Zayis before Minuy, and half-k'Zayis after Minuy, and a half-k'Zayis after he was deposed [in one Helam], since there was a Chiyuv Korban in the middle, do they join?

Answer #1: We learn from the following. If there were three k'Zeisim (e.g. of Chelev) in front of him, and he ate the first, and did not know, and ate the second not knowing about the first, he found out about the first and did not know about the second, and ate the third not knowing about the second, and afterwards he found out about all of them - R. Yochanan says, he is liable for the first and second (the Yedi'ah of the first separated it from the second), and exempt for the third.

Answer #2 (R. Yosi): The second depends on his intent. If he wants, he gets Kaparah for it [with] the first. If he wants, he gets Kaparah for it [with] the third.

Explanation #1: Talmidim compare this to four half k'Zeisim. (Like above, he found out about eating each after he ate the one after it.) If he was clever he brings one Korban. If not, he brings two Korbanos;

How does he do (to bring two)? He brings one for the first and second, and one for the third and fourth. If he brought for the middle two, he is exempt for the first and fourth (for each is only a half-k'Zayis, and they do not join).

Explanation #2: R. Yosi compares this to [four] whole k'Zeisim. (He found out about eating each after he ate the one after it.) If he was clever he brings two Korbanos. If not, he brings three Korbanos;

How does he do (to bring two)? He brings one for the first and second, and one for the third and fourth. If he brought [one] for the middle two, he brings for the first by itself and for the fourth by itself.