Question #4 (R. Yitzchak bar Shmuel bar Marsa): Why can't he bring another animal with bread, and stipulate:

If the remaining animal is the Temurah, this is a Todah and its bread;

If the remaining animal is the Todah, the new animal is Temuras Todah!

Answer (Rav Nachman): One is lashed for making Temurah. Surely we do not do so l'Chatchilah!

Question #5 (Rav Ila, Abaye and Rabanan): According to R. Yochanan, if Lachmei Todah were outside the Azarah but within Beis Pagi, the bread is Mekudash. Why can't he bring bread to there, and stipulate:

If the remaining animal is the Todah, this is its bread. If not, the bread is Chulin!

Answer: This will not work, for four breads must be (made Terumah and) waved;

Tenufah must be Lifnei Hash-m (inside the Azarah). We cannot bring the bread inside, for perhaps it is Chulin b'Azarah!

Question #6 (Rav Shisha brei d'Rav Idi): Chizkiyah holds that if Todah was slaughtered for 80 loaves, 40 of them become Kodesh. If so, there is a solution!

He brings another animal with 80 breads, and stipulates. If the remaining animal is a Todah, this is another Todah, and the breads are for the two Todos;

If the remaining animal is the Temurah, the new animal is Todah, 40 of the breads should become Kodesh for it.

Answer: We may not do this, lest this cause 40 of the breads to be wasted (if they are not eaten within one day. Perhaps they are really Chulin, and we transgress 'Bal Tashchis'. Alternatively, perhaps the Kohanim will not be able to finish all eight 'Terumah' loaves (or they will not strive to finish them, for they suspect that they are not really Terumah), and some will be burned, even though (really) four of them are not Terumah, and Yisraelim should have eaten them!)

Question #7 (Rav Ashi): (R. Yochanan says that if one was Makdish a pregnant animal for a Chatas and it gave birth, he may offer the mother or child to be Yotzei.) According to R. Yochanan, he should bring a pregnant animal, wait for it to give birth, bring the mother and child with 80 breads, and stipulate:

If the remaining animal is Temurah, the mother and child are both Todos, the 80 breads are for them;

If the remaining animal is Todah, the mother is Todah, the child is Mosar Todah (or vice-versa), the breads are for the two Todos. (This is not like being Makdish Mosar l'Chatchilah, for he was Makdish one animal, and part of it became Todah.)

Answer (Rav Kahana): You assume that R. Yochanan holds that one may Meshayer (leave a remnant, i.e. the fetus is independent, can be a Korban by itself, it does not automatically receive its mother's Kedushah);

Perhaps R. Yochanan holds that one cannot Meshayer. One may be Yotzei with mother or child, because he holds that one may get atonement through Shevach Hekdesh!

Question #8 (Rav Dimi brei d'Rav Huna): Why can't he say 'Alai Todah', bring two animals with 80 breads, and stipulate:

If the remaining animal is a Temurah, the two new animals are Todos, the breads are for them;

If the remaining animal is Todah, one new animal is Todah, the other is Acharayus, and the breads are for the Todos.

Answer (Ravina): It says "Tov Asher Lo Sidor mishe'Tidor v'Lo Seshalem." All agree that l'Chatchilah, we do not vow ('Alai', which obligates one to replace the Korban if it is lost)!

(Mishnah): If one said 'Alai Todah', he must bring it and its bread from Chulin (i.e. he may not use money of Ma'aser Sheni);

If he said 'Alai Todah from Chulin, and its bread will be from Ma'aser', he must bring it and its bread from Chulin;

If he said 'Alai Todah from Ma'aser, and its bread will be from Chulin', he brings like he said;

If he said 'it (Todah) and its bread will be from Ma'aser', he brings like he said;

He may not make the bread from wheat of Ma'aser Sheni. Rather, he buys it from money of Ma'aser Sheni.

(Gemara - Rav Huna): If one says 'Alai Lachmei Todah', he must bring a Todah and its bread.

Question: What is the reason?

Answer: He knows that one cannot bring Lachmei Todah without Todah. He intends to bring a Todah and its bread. He said only the last words of his intent.

Question (Mishnah): If he said 'Alai Todah from Ma'aser, and its bread will be from Chulin', he brings like he said;

We should say that his vow to bring bread from Chulin obligates him to bring also Todah from Chulin!

Answer: There is different. Since he said that the Todah will be from Ma'aser, it is as if he vowed to bring bread for someone else that will bring a Todah.

Question: In the previous clause, he vowed a Todah from Chulin and bread from Ma'aser, he must bring both from Chulin;

We do not say that it is as if he vowed to bring a Todah for someone else who will bring bread!

Answer: The Todah is primary. It is reasonable that he vows to bring bread for someone else who will bring a Todah, but not vice-versa.

Question (Beraisa): If one said 'Alai Todah without bread', or 'Alai Zevach without Nesachim', we force him to bring a Todah with bread, or a Zevach with Nesachim;

Inference: Had he not said 'Todah' (rather, Lachmei Todah), he would be exempt!

Answer: No. Even then, he would be obligated;

The Tana taught 'Todah without bread' for parallel structure with 'Zevach without Nesachim.' There, he needed to teach Zevach, for one can bring Nesachim by themselves.

Question: Why is he obligated? Granted, 'Todah' obligates him to bring Todah and bread, but 'without bread' is a retraction!

Answer #1 (Chizkiyah): The Beraisa is like Beis Shamai, who say Tefos Lashon Rishon (we follow the first thing he said. He cannot retract);

(Mishnah - Beis Shamai): If one said 'I am a Nazir from figs and dates', he is a (regular) Nazir;

Beis Hillel say, he is not a Nazir. (Most Meforshim hold that he may eat figs and dates; the Rambam forbids.)

Answer #2 (R. Yochanan): It is even like Beis Hillel. The case is, he says 'had I known that one cannot bring a Todah without bread, I would have vowed properly (to bring bread also).'

Question: The Beraisa says that we force him to bring a Todah with bread. This shows that he does not want to bring them!

Answer: The case is, he explained his intent (to vow properly). Later he retracted and does not want to fulfill it, therefore we force him.

Question (Beraisa): If one said 'Alai Todah without bread', or 'Alai Zevach without Nesachim', and they told him that he must bring a Todah with bread, or a Zevach with Nesachim, and he said 'had I known this, I would not have vowed', we force to to fulfill his vow. We tell him "Shemor v'Shamata."

Chizkiyah would say that also this is like Beis Shamai. How can R. Yochanan explain this like Beis Hillel? (He explicitly says that he would not have vowed!)

Answer: R. Yochanan admits that this Beraisa is like Beis Shamai.

Question: How do we understand "Shemor v'Shamata"?

Answer #1 (Abaye): "Shemor" - bring a Todah; "v'Shamata" - bring the bread;

Answer #2 (Rava): "Shemor" - bring a Todah and its bread; "v'Shamata" - do not make such a vow again.

(Mishnah): If he said 'It (Todah) and its bread will be from Ma'aser', he brings like he said.

Question: Must he bring from Ma'aser? (Surely, it is better to bring from Chulin!)

Answer (Rav Nachman and Rav Chisda): It means that he may bring from Ma'aser.

(Mishnah): He may not make the bread from wheat of Ma'aser Sheni. Rather, he buys it from money of Ma'aser Sheni.

(Rav Nachman, Rav Chisda and R. Zeira): (This means that) he may not make the bread from wheat of Ma'aser Sheni, but he may make the bread from wheat bought with money of Ma'aser Sheni.

R. Yirmeyah: He may not use even wheat bought with Ma'aser money!