Question (R. Yakov of Nehar Pekod): It says about Ma'aser Sheni "v'Im Ga'ol Yig'al", to include an heir (he can redeem Ma'aser that he inherited, and he adds a fifth).

Will we likewise expound that one heir can redeem, but two heirs cannot?!

Answer: Ma'aser Sheni is different, for their father himself could have redeemed it if he jointly owned it with a partner (but partners cannot make Temurah).

Question (Rav Asi): Temurah proves that heirs acquire a Korban!

If they acquire, we understand why an heir can make Temurah;

If they do not acquire, why can an heir make Temurah?

(R. Yochanan): If the one who was Makdish an animal (even if it was to fulfill someone else's obligation) redeems it (after it became blemished), he adds a fifth;

Only the one who will get Kaparah from a Korban can make Temurah from it (but this is forbidden);

If Reuven makes his produce Terumah to exempt Shimon's Tevel, Reuven has Tovas Hana'ah (he gives the Terumah to whichever Kohen he wants).

Answer (Rav Ashi): No. Heirs get only a faint Kaparah from a Korban that they inherited (and this is enough to enable them to make Temurah).

Question: If a Korban was slaughtered Lo Lishmah, does it atone?

Answer (Rav Shisha brei d'Rav Idi): Presumably, it does not atone. If it does, why must he bring a second Korban?

Objection: If it does not atone, why do we throw the blood?

Correction (Rav Ashi): Rav Shisha asked the following. Granted, if it does not atone, we do Zerikah because it was originally Lishmah (i.e. when it was made Hekdesh), and we need a second Korban to atone;

However, if it atones, why do we need a second Korban? (Note: what was understood in the corrected version (we do Zerikah because it was originally Lishmah) could have answered the objection in the initial version. Presumably, we rejected the first version because in it, Rav Shisha never addressed how to answer an obvious objection.)

Question: (An Olah atones for certain transgressions, e.g. Bitul Aseh). Does an Olah atone for transgressions done after it was Hukdash?

Is it like a Chatas, which atones only for transgressions before it was Hukdash?

Or, perhaps it is different, for one Chatas can only atone for one transgression, but one Olah can atone for many?

Answer #1 (Beraisa) Question: (Regarding an Olah it says) "v'Samach... v'Nirtzah" - Semichah does not atone, Zerikah does - "Ki ha'Dam Hu ba'Nefesh Yechaper"!

Answer: "V'Samach... v'Nirtzah" teaches that if he treated Semichah like a remnant of the Mitzvah (i.e. omitted it), the Torah considers it as if he did not atone.

Suggestion: This means that it atones for Mitzvos Aseh (that he failed to do) before he was Makdish it, but not for (omitting) Semichah, which was after the Hekdesh.

Rejection (Rava): This does not answer our question. It does not atone for Semichah because Semichah could have been done until Shechitah;

He does not transgress until Shechitah. It is no Chidush that a Korban does not atone for transgressions after Shechitah.

Question (Rav Huna bar Yehudah): Perhaps he gets full Kaparah, but the Mitzvah was not done properly!

(Mishnah - R. Akiva): "Veha'Nosar Min ha'Shemen (will be put on the Metzora's head)... Lechaper Alav" - if he put it, he atoned. If not, he did not atone.

R. Yochanan ben Nuri says, this is a remnant of a Mitzvah. Whether or not he put it he atoned, but the Torah considers it as if he did not atone.

Question: What does it mean 'as if he did not atone'?

Suggestion: He must bring another Korban.

Rejection: He said that whether or not he put, he atoned!

Answer #1: Rather, he gets full Kaparah, but the Mitzvah was not done properly.

Summation of question: Likewise, one who omitted Semichah gets full Kaparah, but the Mitzvah was not done properly!

Answer (and Answer #2 to Question d:3): No, he (Tosfos - properly) fulfilled the Mitzvah of putting the oil on the Behonos (ear, thumb and toe), but he did not (Tosfos - properly) fulfill the Mitzvah of putting the oil on the head.

Answer #2 (to Question (a) - Beraisa - R. Shimon) Question: Why does the Tzibur bring special sheep on Shavu'os?

Interjection: Those are Shelamim of the Tzibur! (They permit bringing new grain in the Mikdash. The one who interjected knew that in the Seifa, R. Shimon says that they atone for Tum'ah.)

Correction - Question: Why does the Tzibur bring (two) goats (Chata'os) on Shavu'os?

Answer: They atone for Tamei people who entered the Mikdash or ate Kodshim.

Question: Why is the second needed?

Answer: The second atones for Tum'ah after the first was offered.

This shows that it is proper for Yisrael to constantly bring Korbanos (to bring immediate Kaparah for transgressions). We do not, for the Torah does not impose too great an obligation.

Summation of answer: The second atones for Tum'ah after the first was offered, which was after the second was Hukdash!

Rejection: Indeed, if the second was Hukdash before the first was offered, we would not throw its blood (for it would not atone for anything)!

However, the case is, the second was Hukdash after the first was offered.

Objection: It is unreasonable to say that the Torah commands to be Makdish the second after the first was offered!

Answer (Rav Papa): Korbanos Tzibur are made Hekdesh on condition. (Rashi - it is as if the second were Hukdash just before its Shechitah, in order that it can atone for Tum'ah in between);

Version #1 - Rashi [The following does not belong in our text, only in Shavu'os - (Shmuel): If a Korban Tzibur is not needed for what it was Hukdash (e.g. a Tamid that will not be needed this year) and was slaughtered Stam, it is Kosher for what it was destined to become (in this case, Kitz ha'Mizbe'ach).]

Version #2 - Tosfos - (Shmuel): Gizbarim buy Korbanos Tzibur on condition that they are not Hukdash for any particular Korban until they are slaughtered. (At that moment, they become Hukdash for the particular Korban needed.)

Rejection (Rav Yosef brei d'Rav Shmuel): R. Shimon does not say that Gizbarim buy Korbanos Tzibur on condition!

(Rav Idi bar Avin): According to R. Shimon, Temidim that will not be needed this year can be redeemed (in order to buy them back with next year's Shekalim to use for Temidim of next year) only with a blemish. Chachamim hold that they can be redeemed without a blemish!