(Continuation of Mishnah): A spit or grill is Kashered in hot water.

(Gemara) Question: What is R. Tarfon's reason?

Answer #1: "U'Fanisa va'Boker v'Halachta l'Ohalecha" - the Torah considers all the days of the festival to be like one.

Objection (Rav Achdevoy bar Ami): If so, Pigul and Nosar would not apply during the festival!

Suggestion: Perhaps this is true!

Rejection (Beraisa - R. Noson): R. Tarfon taught (that they are considered like one day) only regarding Merikah u'Shtifah.

Answer #2: R. Tarfon holds like Rav Nachman;

(Rav Nachman): Cooking Kodshim in a pot purges the pot from absorptions of the previous day's Kodshim (before they become forbidden).

(Mishnah - Chachamim): Until the time the Kodshim are eaten.

Question: What does this mean?

Answer (Rav Nachman): He waits until they are eaten (Bartenura; Rambam - until the last time they are permitted; Tosfos - he waits the entire time they are permitted), and then does Merikah u'Shtifah.

Question: What is the source of this?

Answer (R. Yochanan) Question: Right after "u'Morak v'Shutaf", it says "Kol Zachar ba'Kohanim Yochal." Why are these adjacent to each other?

Answer: This teaches that Merikah u'Shtifah is after waiting (until) the time that they are (or may be) eaten.

(Mishnah): Merikah is like rinsing a cup (from the inside). Shtifah is like rinsing a cup (from the outside).

(Beraisa - Rebbi): Merikah and Shtifah are in cold water;

Chachamim say, Merikah is in hot water, and Shtifah is in cold water.

Question: What is Chachamim's reason?

Answer: We find that hot water was needed to Kasher Kelim of Nochrim (i.e. after the war with Midyan.)

Rebbi agrees that Kashering requires hot water. Merikah u'Shtifah is after this.

Chachamim say, if cold water were used for both, the Torah would have used (forms of) the same word twice, i.e. 'Morak Murak' or Shotaf Shutaf';

The Torah used different words to teach that they are different. Merikah is in hot water, and Shtifah is in cold water.

Rebbi says, had the Torah used the same word twice, we would have thought that the same action is done twice;

It used different words to teach that they are different. Merikah is from the inside, and Shtifah is from the outside.

(Mishnah): If Kodshim and Chulin were cooked in the same pot, or Kodshei Kodoshim and Kodshim Kalim:

If it (the more severe Kedushah) is Nosen Ta'am (gives taste, in the lighter Kedushah), the lighter is eaten like the more severe;

Merikah u'Shtifah is not required. It does not disqualify anything it touches (these will be explained.)

If a wafer touched a wafer, or a piece (of meat) touched a piece, it does not forbid all of them. It forbids only the place it touched.

(Gemara) Question: What does this mean?

Answer (text of Bartenura - the Mishnah is abbreviated, it means as follows);

If it is Nosen Ta'am, the lighter is eaten like the more severe. Merikah u'Shtifah is required, and it disqualifies anything it touches;

If it is not Nosen Ta'am, the lighter is not eaten like the more severe. Merikah u'Shtifah is not required, and it does not disqualify what it touches.

Question: (When Kodshei Kodoshim were not Nosen Ta'am to Kodshim Kalim) granted, the Kodshim Kalim do not need Merikah u'Shtifah like (i.e. according to the time of) Kodshei Kodoshim, but Merikah u'Shtifah is required like Kodshim Kalim!

Answer #1 (Abaye): Indeed, the Mishnah means that Merikah u'Shtifah like Kodshei Kodoshim is not required, but Merikah u'Shtifah like Kodshim Kalim is required.

Answer #2 (Rava): The Mishnah is R. Shimon, who says that Kodshim Kalim do not require Merikah u'Shtifah.

Question: According to Rava, we understand why the Mishnah also teaches about cooking different Kodshim together (in order that a Stam Mishnah will be like R. Shimon);

According to Abaye, what do we learn from this?

Answer: It must teach both cases;

Had it taught only Kodshim and Chulin, one might have thought that Chulin can Mevatel Kodshim, for they are not Mino, but different kinds of Kodshim cannot Mevatel each other;

Had it taught only Kodshei Kodoshim and Kodshim Kalim, one might have thought that only Kodshim have the strength to be Mevatel Kodshim, but Chulin cannot be Mevatel Kodshim.

(Mishnah): If a wafer touched a wafer (or a piece (of meat) touched a piece...)

(Beraisa) Suggestion: Perhaps "Kol Asher Yiga" teaches that it forbids even if it nothing was absorbed!

Rejection: "Bi'Vsarah" teaches that this is only if taste was absorbed into the meat.

Suggestion: Perhaps if it touched part of a piece, the entire piece is forbidden!

Rejection: "Yiga" - only what touched is forbidden;

The part that absorbed is cut off (and the rest is permitted.)

"Bi'Vsarah" - touching sinews, bones, horns or hooves does not forbid;

"Yikdash" - what touches Kodshim becomes like the Kodshim:

If the Kodshim is Pasul, the touched food is Pasul. If the Kodshim is Kosher, the touched food is eaten with the stringencies of the Kodshim.

Question: If Kodshim became forbidden through touching Pasul Kodshim, the Mitzvas Aseh to eat Kodshim should override the Lav (of eating (something that absorbed) Pasul Kodshim!)

Answer #1 (Rava): An Aseh does not override a Lav pertaining to the Mikdash:

(Beraisa - R. Shimon ben Menasiya): "V'Etzem Lo Sishberu Vo" - bones (of Korban Pesach) with or without marrow may not be broken.

Question: (To eat marrow, one must break the bone.) The Aseh to eat the meat (which includes marrow) should override the Lav!

Answer: This teaches that an Aseh does not override a Lav of the Mikdash.

Answer #2 (Rav Ashi): "Yikdash" is an Aseh (to treat what touches Kodshim like the Kodshim. Eating food that absorbed Pasul Kodshim violates this Aseh.) The Aseh to eat Kodshim does not override a Lav and an Aseh.

Question: The verse teaches about food that touched Chatas. What is the source if it touched other Kodshim?

Answer #1 (Shmuel citing R. Eliezer): "Zos ha'Torah la'Olah la'Minchah vela'Chatas vela'Asham vela'Milu'im ul'Zevach ha'Shelamim" (equates all these Korbanos to each other. The Gemara explains the verse in order. The answer to the question is at the top of Daf 98a.)

"La'Olah" - all are like Olah, so a Kli (Shares) is required.

Question: Which Kli is required?

Suggestion: A Mizrak (bucket) is required for Kabalah.

Rejection: We would not need a Hekesh to Olah for this. We could learn from "ul'Zevach ha'Shelamim", which refers to Shalmei Tzibur (the entire verse discusses Kodshei Kodoshim). We know that a Kli is needed for them - "va'Yikach Moshe Chatzi ha'Dam va'Yasem ba'Aganos"!

Answer: A knife is required for Shechitah.

Question: What is the source for this?

Answer: "Va'Yishlach Avraham Es Yado va'Yikach Es ha'Ma'acheles" - he used the knife for an Olah, "va'Ya'alehu l'Olah Tachas Beno."

"La'Minchah" - are all like Minchah, which only male Kohanim may eat.

Question: Which of them must be learned from Minchah?

Suggestion: We learn Chatas and Asham from Minchah.

Rejection: It explicitly says about Chatas and Asham "Kol Zachar ba'Kohanim Yochalenu"!

Answer: We learn Shalmei Tzibur from Minchah.

Question: A different verse teaches this!

"B'Kodesh ha'Kodoshim Tochalenu Kol Zachar Yochal Oso" teaches that only male Kohanim may eat Shalmei Tzibur.

Answer: R. Eliezer learns from the Hekesh to Minchah. Other Tana'im learn from that verse. (The Gemara did not say that the latter Drashah is a Beraisa, but it is in Yalkut Shimoni Tzav 509.)