(Mishnah - R. Akiva): If the blood of any Korban was brought inside the Heichal (except of an inner Chatas) to atone, it is Pasul;

Chachamim say, only blood of a Chatas is Pasul;

R. Eliezer says, also blood of an Asham - "ka'Chatas ka'Asham".

Question: Why do Chachamim argue with R. Eliezer?

Answer (Rava): They learn from a Kal va'Chomer;

An Olah is entirely burned on the Mizbeach, yet if its blood enters the Heichal it is Kosher. An Asham is not entirely burned, all the more so it remains Kosher!

Question: An Olah does not atone. We cannot learn to an Asham, which atones!

Answer: A Minchas Chotei (a very poor person brings in place of an animal for certain Aveiros) proves that this is not a problem. It atones, yet if it enters the Heichal it is Kosher!

Question: Why didn't we use Chatas ha'Of to prove that even blood of something that atones can remain Kosher when brought into the Heichal?

Answer: R. Avin asked if the blood of Chatas ha'Of is Pasul if it enters the Heichal (and his question was not resolved).

Question: We cannot learn from Minchas Chotei, for it is not a Zevach!

Answer #1: We learn from a Tzad ha'Shavah of Olah and Minchas Chotei. Both are Kodshei Kodoshim, and if their blood enters the Heichal it remains Kosher. The same applies to Asham.

Objection (Rava of Barnish): We cannot learn from the Tzad ha'Shavah, for there is no minimal price of an Olah or Minchas Chotei, but Asham has a minimum price! (Four kinds of Asham must be bought for at least two Sela'im. We could not learn to them.)

Answer #2: Rather, Chachamim learn from "Damah". Its (a Chatas') blood is Pasul if it enters the Heichal, but not blood of any other Korban;

R. Eliezer expounds, if its blood enters the Heichal it is Pasul, if the meat enters, it is permitted.

Chachamim learn that from 'Dam'. The extra 'Hei' in "Damah (its blood)" excludes that of other Korbanos.

R. Eliezer does not expound the 'Hei'.

According to Chachamim (who say that Asham Lo Lishmah is Kosher), we understand why Minchah is equated to Chatas and Asham;

(Beraisa - R. Shimon): "Kodesh Kodoshim Hi ka'Chatas vecha'Asham" - Minchas Chotei is like Chatas. If the Kometz (the handful taken from a Minchah and burned on the Mizbeach) was taken Lo Lishmah, it is Pasul;

Minchas Nedavah is like Asham. If the Kometz was taken Lo Lishmah, it is Kosher.

Question: According to R. Eliezer, Chatas and Asham are both Pasul Lo Lishmah. Why must the Torah equate Menachos to both of them?

Answer: This teaches another law of R. Shimon;

(Mishnah): If the Kometz was taken not in a Keli Shares, it is Pasul;

R. Shimon says, it is Kosher.

(Rav Yehudah brei d'R. Chiya): R. Eliezer learns from "Kodesh Kodoshim Hi ka'Chatas vecha'Asham." (In Kemitzah, a Kohen folds his middle three fingers onto the palm to take from a Minchah the part (called the Kometz) that will be burned on the Mizbe'ach.) If the Kohen wants to take the Kometz to the Mizbe'ach in his hand, he must use his right hand, the hand he uses to throw the blood of Chatas;

If the Kohen wants to to take the Kometz to the Mizbe'ach in a Keli Shares, he may take it and throw it with his left hand, for he may use the left hand to carry and throw blood of an Asham.

Question: R. Shimon himself expounded this verse to teach the difference between Minchas Chotei and Minchas Nedavah!

Answer: Really, he uses the verse to teach about taking the Kometz with and without a Keli;

He learns that Minchas Chotei Lo Lishmah is Pasul from a different verse (Vayikra 5:11) that says "Hi", just like we expounded about Chatas.

Question: According to Chachamim who argue with R. Shimon, why does the Torah equate Chatas and Asham?

Answer: This teaches that Asham requires Semichah, just like Chatas.

(Mishnah - Yosi ben Choni): (Any Zevach that was slaughtered l'Shem Pesach or Chatas is Pasul.)

(R. Yochanan): R. Eliezer agrees with Yosi ben Choni.

(Rabah): (Tosfos - R. Yochanan means that he agrees about Zevachim l'Shem Pesach, but) he argues about Zevachim l'Shem Chatas.

(Beraisa - R. Eliezer): If a Pesach more than one year old was slaughtered Lishmah at the proper time (to slaughter Pesach, i.e. the afternoon of Erev Pesach), or if other Zevachim were slaughtered l'Shem Pesach at this time, they are Pasul;

R. Yehoshua says, they are Kosher.

R. Yehoshua: Any other day, Pesach Lishmo (l'Shem Pesach) is Pasul, yet other Zevachim l'Shem Pesach are Kosher. On Erev Pesach, when Pesach Lishmo is Kosher, all the more so other Zevachim l'Shem Pesach are Kosher!

R. Eliezer: (If you learn such a Kal va'Chomer,) perhaps you should say just the contrary! Any other day, Pesach Lishmo is Pasul, yet Pesach l'Shem another Zevach is Kosher. On Erev Pesach, when Pesach Lishmo is Kosher, all the more so it should be Kosher l'Shem another Zevach (but we know that this is wrong)!

Just like you do not learn this Kal va'Chomer, you should not learn yours!

Also, there is a difficulty with your Kal va'Chomer. Other Korbanos are Kosher l'Shem Pesach on other days, because Pesach l'Shem other Korbanos is Kosher then. We cannot say that other Zevachim l'Shem Pesach are Kosher on Erev Pesach, when Pesach l'Shem other Korbanos is Pasul!

R. Yehoshua: If you say like this, Shelamim Lo Lishmah is Pasul more than Pesach! (I.e. if Shelamim is slaughtered l'Shem Pesach at the time for Pesach, it is Pasul, but Pesach l'Shem Shelamim at the time of Shelamim (i.e. every day except Erev Pesach) is Kosher. This is unreasonable, for a verse disqualifies Pesach Lo Lishmah, but there is no such verse for Shelamim!)

R. Eliezer: I learn from a different Kal va'Chomer. Mosar Pesach becomes a Shelamim, but Mosar Shelamim is not a Pesach;

Even though Mosar Pesach is a Shelamim, if Pesach is slaughtered l'Shem Shelamim at its (Pesach's) proper time it is Pasul. Mosar Shelamim is not a Pesach, all the more so if Shelamim is slaughtered l'Shem Pesach at this time it is Pasul! (R. Tam - Rabah and R. Yochanan learned from here that R. Eliezer admits about Zevachim l'Shem Pesach. We see below that R. Eliezer argues about Zevachim l'Shem Chatas. Rashi - Rabah holds like this, but R. Yochanan holds that the same reasoning to disqualify l'Shem Pesach disqualifies l'Shem Chatas. R. Eliezer says differently about l'Shem Chatas below, i.e. to refute R. Yehoshua according to R. Yehoshua's reasoning.)

R. Yehoshua: We find that Mosar Chatas is an Olah, but Mosar Olah is not a Chatas;

Even though Mosar Chatas is an Olah, if Chatas is slaughtered l'Shem Olah it is Pasul. Will you say that (because Mosar Olah is not a Chatas), Olah slaughtered l'Shem Chatas is Pasul?!

R. Eliezer: You cannot learn from Chatas, for it is always Kosher Lishmah;

Pesach is Kosher Lishmah only on Erev Pesach, but any other day it is Pasul, therefore it disqualifies other Zevachim (if they are slaughtered l'Shem Pesach).

(Mishnah - Shimon Achi Azaryah): (Any Zevach that was slaughtered l'Shem a Korban of higher Kedushah is Kosher. A Zevach slaughtered l'Shem a Korban of lower Kedushah is Pasul.)

(Rav Ashi): Shimon learns from "v'Lo Yechalelu Es Kodshei Bnei Yisrael Es Asher Yarimu" - Shechitah l'Shem a Korban of higher Kedushah does not disqualify, but Shechitah l'Shem a lower Kedushah disqualifies.

Question: The verse is needed to teach Shmuel's law!

(Shmuel): One who eats Tevel (untithed produce) is Chayav Misah (b'Yedei Shamayim). "V'Lo Yechalelu Es Kodshei... Asher Yarimu" refers to something from which Terumah will be taken, i.e. Tevel.

Answer: If it came to teach only the first law, it would have said '...Asher Hurmu';

The future tense 'Yarimu' teaches also Shmuel's law. (Shitah - if it came to teach only Shmuel's law, it would not say "Es Kodshei Bnei Yisrael.")

Question (R. Zeira): Does Shimon (who says that if it was slaughtered l'Shem a higher Kedushah, it is Kosher) hold (like the first Tana) that he is not Yotzei (and they argue only about Shechitah l'Shem a lower Kedushah)?

Or, does he hold that he was Yotzei (and they argue in both cases)?

Answer (Abaye - Seifa): If a Bechor or Ma'aser was slaughtered l'Shem Shelamim, it is Kosher. If a Shelamim was slaughtered l'Shem Bechor or Ma'aser, it is Pasul;

'Kosher' cannot mean that he was Yotzei. This does not apply to Bechor and Ma'aser!

Rather, it must mean that it is Kosher, and he was not Yotzei. Surely, 'Kosher' means this also in the Reisha!

Rejection: No. In the Seifa it means that he was not Yotzei, but in the Reisha it means that he was Yotzei!

Question: (If we would learn from the Seifa (what 'Kosher' means) to the Reisha, we would understand why it was taught. However, if we do not), is the Chidush of the Seifa that a Zevach slaughtered l'Shem a lower Kedushah is Pasul)?!

We already know this from the Reisha!

(Reisha): If Kodshei Kodoshim were slaughtered l'Shem Kodshim Kalim, (they are Pasul...)

Answer: One might have thought that only such a case disqualifies (because Kodshei Kodoshim are much more Kodesh than Kodshim Kalim), but not when Kodshim Kalim are slaughtered l'Shem Kodshim Kalim (since they have the same Kedushah). The Seifa (Shelamim slaughtered l'Shem Bechor or Ma'aser) teaches that this is not so.

Objection: Another Mishnah teaches that Shelamim is more Kodesh than Bechor!

(Mishnah): (If there are Shelamim and Bechoros to offer,) we offer Shelamim first, because its blood must be thrown on all four walls of the Mizbeach, and it requires Semichah, Nesachim and waving the chest and foreleg.

Answer: Primarily, our Mishnah teaches that Shelamim is more Kodesh. That Mishnah taught it in passing.

(Mishnah - R. Yehoshua): If a Pesach was slaughtered Lo Lishmah in the morning of Erev Pesach, it is Kosher, as if it were slaughtered on the previous day;

Ben Beseira says, it is Pasul, as if it were slaughtered in the afternoon.

Shimon Ben Azai says, I heard from 72 elder on the day that R. Elazar ben Azaryah was appointed Nasi, that any Zevach that is eaten that was slaughtered Lo Lishmah is Kosher, but the owner was not Yotzei, except for Pesach and Chatas.

Ben Azai disqualifies Olah, but otherwise he agrees with the first Tana (of the Mishnah 2a). Chachamim did not agree with him.

(Gemara - R. Elazar): Ben Beseira says that a Pesach slaughtered (Lishmah) in the morning of Erev Pesach is Kosher, because the entire day is its proper time.

Question #1: If so, why did he say 'as if it were slaughtered in the afternoon'? (He equates morning and afternoon!)

Answer: He said this for parallel structure to R. Yehoshua, who said 'as if it were slaughtered on the previous day'.

Question #2: If so, why did R. Yehoshua and Ben Beseira argue about Pesach Lo Lishmah? They should argue about Lishmah!

Answer: Had they argued about Lishmah, one might have thought that R. Yehoshua admits that Pesach Lo Lishmah is Pasul, because part of the day is the proper time to slaughter the Pesach.

Question: "(Pesach is slaughtered) Bein ha'Arbayim (in the afternoon)"!

Answer (Ula brei d'Rav Ila'i): No, Bein ha'Arbayim means between the nights (after the end of the previous night and before the next night, i.e. anytime during the day).

Question: It says "Bein ha'Arbayim" regarding the second Tamid offered each day. It may be offered any time of the day! (It must be in the afternoon.)

Answer: Since the first Tamid is offered "ba'Boker", surely "Bein ha'Arbayim" written about the second means in the afternoon.

Suggestion: Perhaps the first must be in the morning, but the second can be offered anytime in the day!

Answer: "Es ha'Keves Echad Ta'aseh ba'Boker" - we may not offer two in the morning.

Question: Regarding the Menorah, it says "Bein ha'Arbayim." Will we say that it may be lit anytime in the day?!

Answer: There, it also says "me'Erev Ad Boker";

(Beraisa): "Me'Erev Ad Boker" - one must put enough oil in the lamps so that they will burn from evening until morning.

Also, this teaches that no Avodah (that must be done by day) may be done after lighting the Menorah, until the next morning.