(Mishnah): An heir is Somech.

(Rav Chananyah - Beraisa): An heir does not Somech, and he cannot make Temurah.

Contradiction (Rava - Mishnah): An heir is Somech, he brings the Nesachim, he can make Temurah.

Rav Chananyah: Surely, my Beraisa is mistaken. I will correct it to conform to our Mishnah.

Rava: You need not correct it. Your Beraisa is like R. Yehudah:

(Beraisa): An heir is Somech, he brings the Nesachim, and he can make Temurah;

R. Yehudah says, he is not Somech, and he cannot make Temurah.

Question: What is R. Yehudah's reason?

Answer: Regarding Semichah, he expounds "Korbano", but not his father's Korban;

He learns making Hekdesh (through Temurah) from Hakravas Hekdesh (Semichah). Just like an heir does not Somech, he cannot make Temurah.

Chachamim expound "Hamer Yamir" to include an heir (he can make Temurah);

They learn Hakravah (Semichah) from making Hekdesh (Temurah). Just like an heir can make Temurah, he can Somech.

Question: How do Chachamim expound "Korbano"?

Answer: They use the three times it says 'Korbano' to teach that Reuven may not be Somech on Shimon's Korban, that Semichah does not apply to a Nochri's Korban, and that every partner on a Korban must be Somech.

R. Yehudah uses one of the three to exclude an heir. He does not expound that every partner must be Somech;

Alternatively, he holds that one 'Korbano' excludes Semichah on another's Korban, be it a Yisrael or Nochri. One 'Korbano' excludes an heir. (Another verse is needed, for sometimes an heir is considered to be just like the deceased.) The third requires all partners to be Somech.

Question: How does R. Yehudah expound "Hamer Yamir"?

Answer: This includes a woman (she can make Temurah);

(Beraisa) Question: The entire Parshah of Temurah is written in the masculine. What is the source that it also applies to women?

Answer: "Hamer Yamir" includes women.

Chachamim use "v'Im" to include women. R. Yehudah does not expound "v'Im".

(Mishnah): All do Semichah, except for a child, lunatic or Cheresh (deaf-mute), a blind person, a Nochri, a slave, a Shali'ach or a woman.

Semichah is a remnant of the Mitzvah. (If it was not done, one was Yotzei.)

One leans on the head with both hands. We slaughter right where Semichah was done. Shechitah is done right after Semichah.

(Gemara) Question: We understand why most of these may not Somech;

A child, lunatic or Cheresh lacks understanding. Nochrim are excluded, for it says "Bnei Yisrael" (Tosfos - this also excludes a woman on her own Korban);

However, why is a blind person excluded?

Answer #1 (Rav Chisda or R. Yitzchak bar Avodimi): We learn from a Gezerah Shavah "Semichah-Semichah" from the Sanhedrin (who are Somech on Par He'elam Davar. Rashi - a blind person (or any other Ba'al Mum) cannot be on the Sanhedrin. They must be unblemished, like Moshe. Tosfos asks that if so, any Ba'al Mum should be exempt from Semichah! Keren Orah - we exempt only a blind person, since Semichah must be "Lifnei Hash-m." He lacks proper awareness of being Lifnei Hash-m. Sefas Emes - the Gezerah Shavah exempts a blind person, for regarding the Sanhedrin it says "me'Einei ha'Edah", so they cannot be blind. We cannot exempt other blemishes, for our source to disqualify them for the Sanhedrin is a Hekesh to Moshe, so they cannot then teach through a Gezerah Shavah.)

Answer #2 (the other of Rav Chisda and R. Yitzchak bar Avodimi): We learn from a Gezerah Shavah "Semichah-Semichah" from Olas Re'iyah (the Olah that one must bring each festival. A blind person is exempt, for we expound 'Yir'eh - Yera'eh': Re'iyah applies to one who can see and be seen in the Mikdash);

Question: Why doesn't the second opinion learn from the Sanhedrin?

Answer: We learn a Korban Yachid from a Korban Yachid, and not from a Korban Tzibur;

Question: Why doesn't the first opinion learn from Olas Re'iyah?

Answer: We learn from a place where it explicitly says "Semichah". Semichah is not said regarding Olas Re'iyah. It is learned from the Parshah of Olas Nedavah.

(A reciter of Beraisos): "Va'Yakrev Es ha'Olah (of the Milu'im) va'Ya'aseha ka'Mishpat" it is offered like Olas Nedavah;

This teaches that Olas Chovah requires Semichah, like Olas Nedavah.

(Mishnah): A slave, Shali'ach or woman (is not Somech).

(Beraisa): (Semichah is done with) "Yado", but not with his slave's hand. He uses Yado", and not his Shali'ach's hand; He uses Yado", and not his wife's hand.

Question: Why do we need all of these?

Answer: Had the Torah said "Yado" only once, we would have said that it excludes a slave; for a slave is not obligated in (all) the Mitzvos, but a Shali'ach can be Somech, for he is (i.e. his actions are) considered like (those of) the Meshale'ach (the one who sent him);

Had it said "Yado" only twice, we would exclude only a slave and Shali'ach; for they are not considered like the owner himself, but his wife can Somech on his Korban, for she is considered like her husband.

(Mishnah): Semichah is a remnant of the Mitzvah.

(Beraisa) Question: Why does it say "v'Samach... v'Nirtzah"? Atonement does not come through Semichah, rather, through (Zerikah of) Dam - "Ki ha'Dam Hu ba'Nefesh Yechaper"!

Answer: This teaches that if one treated it like a remnant of a Mitzvah (i.e. omitted it), the Torah considers it as if he did not atone (l'Chatchilah) but did atone (b'Di'eved).

We learn similarly regarding Tenufah:

(Beraisa) Question: Why does it say "li'Snufah Lechaper"? Atonement does not come through Tenufah, rather, through Dam - "Ki ha'Dam..."!

Answer: This teaches that if one treated it like a remnant of a Mitzvah, the Torah considers it as if he did not atone, but did atone.

(Mishnah): On the head.

(Beraisa): He is Somech "Yado Al Rosh", and not on the (throat side of the) neck. He is Somech "Yado Al Rosh", and not on the back. He is Somech "Yado Al Rosh", and not on the chest.

Question: Why do we need all of these?

Answer: If the Torah taught only one exclusion, we would have excluded only the neck, for it is not even with the head; but we would not exclude the back;

Had it taught only about two exclusions, we would exclude the neck and back, but not the chest, for Tenufah is done with it.

Therefore, all three exclusions are needed.

Question: May one be Somech his hands on the sides (of the head, i.e. the jaws)?

Answer (Beraisa - Aba Bira'ah): He is Somech "Yado Al Rosh", and not on the sides.

Question (R. Yirmeyah): Is a cloth (Rashi Kesav Yad - wrapped around one's hands) a Chatzitzah?

Answer (Beraisa):...As long as nothing separates between his hands and the Korban. (I.e. a cloth is a Chatzitzah.)

(Mishnah): He is Somech with both hands.

Question: What is the source of this?

Answer (Reish Lakish): "V'Samach Aharon Es Shtei Yadav" is written missing a 'Yud', like 'Yado', yet it explicitly says that he uses both hands!

This is a Binyan Av. It teaches that wherever it says "Yado", it refers to both hands unless specified otherwise.

R. Elazar taught this in the Beis Medrash. (Sefas Emes - he also thought of this answer.) He did not say it in the name of Reish Lakish. Reish Lakish was upset.

Question (Reish Lakish): If you say that "Yado" always refers to both hands, why does it sometimes say "Yadav", e.g. "Yadav Tevi'enah", "Yadav Rav Lo", "Sikel Es Yadav"...?

He asked 24 such questions. R. Elazar could not answer. When Reish Lakish ceased to be upset, he himself answered.

Answer (Reish Lakish): "Yado" written regarding Semichah refers to both hands.

Question: Why must it say "va'Yismoch Yadav Alav"? It refers to Semichah! (It would have sufficed to say 'Yado'!)

Answer: "Yado" written regarding Semichah on animals refers to both hands.

(Mishnah): We slaughter right where Semichah was done. Shechitah is done right after Semichah.

Question: What does this mean? (Rashi Kesav Yad - since Shechitah is right after Semichah, obviously Shechitah is right where Semichah was done! Rashi - the Mishnah connotes that Shechitah is done at the same place on the animal as Semichah. Obviously, this is wrong!)

Answer: It means that Shechitah is done at the same place in the Azarah as Semichah because Shechitah is right after Semichah.