(Beraisa #1): (Regarding eating the Milu'im it says) "Ki Chen Tzuveisi", "Ka'asher Tziveisi", and "Ka'Asher Tzivah Hash-m":

"Ki Chen Tzuveisi" - I (Moshe) was commanded that they should be eaten in Aninus;

"Ka'asher Tziveisi" - I commanded (you to eat them) at the time (after Nadav and Avihu died);

"Ka'asher Tzivah Hash-m" - I did not say this on my own.

Contradiction (Beraisa #2): The goat (Chatas Rosh Chodesh) was burned due to Aninus, therefore it says "ka'Eleh" (due to what occurred to me, i.e. becoming an Onen. All three surviving Kohanim were Onenim, so they could not eat it.)

Answer #1 (Shmuel): Beraisa #1 is like R. Yehudah (and R. Shimon). Beraisa #2 is like R. Nechemyah;

(Beraisa - R. Nechemyah): The goat was burned due to Aninus, therefore it says "ka'Eleh";

R. Yehudah and R. Shimon say, it was burned because it became Tamei;

Had it been burned due to Aninus, all three (this will be explained) should have been burned. Also, they could have eaten it at night. Also, Pinchas was with them (he could have eaten it, he was not an Onen!)

Answer #2 (Rava): Both Beraisos are like R. Nechemyah. Beraisa #1 discusses Kodshei Sha'ah (of the Milu'im). Beraisa #2 discusses Kodshei Doros (that apply to all generations.)

Question: How do R. Nechemyah and R. Yehudah explain the Parshah?

Answer - part 1: R. Nechemyah explains that Moshe asked 'why didn't you (plural) eat the Chatas?', and suggested possible ways that it may have become Pasul;

Moshe: Perhaps the blood entered the Heichal!

Aharon: "Hen Lo Huva Es Damah El ha'Kodesh Penimah."

Moshe: Perhaps the meat left Chatzer ha'Mishkan!

Aharon: It was "ba'Kodesh".

Moshe: Perhaps your sons offered it in Aninus, which disqualified it!

Aharon: They did not offer it. I did! (Aninus does not disqualify a Kohen Gadol for Avodah.)

Moshe: If so, you (plural) should have eaten it in Aninus, "Ka'asher Tziveisi"!

Aharon: "Va'Tikrenah Osi ka'Eleh v'Achalti Chatas ha'Yom ha'Yitav b'Einei Hash-m" - perhaps Hash-m commanded to eat only Kodshei Sha'ah in Aninus;

A Kal va'Chomer teaches that Kodshei Doros may not be eaten in Aninus!

Ma'aser (Sheni) is more lenient than Kodshim, yet "Lo Achalti v'Oni Mimenu" (it may not be eaten in Aninus). Kodshim are more stringent, all the more so they may not be eaten in Aninus!

"Va'Yishma Moshe va'Yitav b'Einav" - Moshe admitted his mistake. He did not say 'I did not hear' to spare himself embarrassment. Rather, he said 'I heard and I forgot.'

Answer - part 2: R. Yehudah and R. Shimon explain, Moshe asked 'why didn't you eat the Chatas?';

(The first three questions and answers are the same as above, up to 'they did not offer it. I did.')

Moshe: Perhaps amidst your sorrow, you were not careful, and it became Tamei!

Aharon: Do you suspect me of negligence? "Va'Tikrenah Osi ka'Eleh" - in spite of my loss, even if I would have lost double (i.e. all four of my sons), I would not be negligent with Kodshim!

Moshe: If so, you should have eaten it in Aninus, "Ka'asher Tziveisi"!

Aharon: Perhaps Hash-m commanded to eat only during Aninus Laylah. A Kal va'Chomer forbids eating Kodshim in Aninus during the day!

Ma'aser is more lenient than Kodshim, yet "Lo Achalti v'Oni Mimenu." Kodshim are more stringent, all the more so they may not be eaten in Aninus! (Tosfos asks that R. Yehudah holds that also Aninus of the night is mid'Oraisa. If so, the Kal va'Chomer forbids also at night!)

"Va'Yishma Moshe va'Yitav b'Einav" - Moshe admitted his mistake. He did not say 'I did not hear' to spare himself embarrassment. Rather, he said 'I heard and I forgot.'

Question: They should have kept the Chatas to eat it at night!

Answer: It became Tamei through Ones.

Question: According to Chachamim (R. Yehudah and R. Shimon), we understand why Aharon said "v'Achalti Chatas ha'Yom ha'Yitav b'Einei Hash-m" (it was forbidden during the day and permitted at night);

However, according to R. Nechemyah, whatever was forbidden by day (Kodshei Doros) was also forbidden at night!

Answer: Aharon meant 'had I eaten the obligatory Korban of this day (i.e. Chatas Rosh Chodesh, which is Kodshei Doros), would Hash-m be pleased?!'

Version #1 (our text, Rashi) Question: According to R. Nechemyah, we understand why Aharon said "Hen ha'Yom Hikrivu" (this was an obligatory Korban of this day, i.e. Kodshei Doros, so they could not eat it);

How do Chachamim explain this? They do not distinguish between the Korbanos! (All were forbidden during the day and permitted at night.)

Version #2 (Tosfos) Question: According to Chachamim, we understand "Hen ha'Yom Hikrivu" (we could not eat it until night, and it became Tamei in the interim);

According to R. Nechemyah, anything forbidden during the day was also forbidden at night! (end of Version #2)

Answer: This was said incredulously. Did my sons offer it (in Aninus, which disqualifies)?! No, I offered it!

(Beraisa - R. Yehudah (and R. Shimon)): If it was burned due to Aninus, all three should have been burned.

Question: Which three Korbanos do they refer to?

Answer (Beraisa): "V'Es Se'ir (ha'Chatas Darash Darash Moshe)" refers to the Chatas that Nachshon voluntarily offered;

"Ha'Chatas" refers to the Chatas of the eighth day of the Milu'im;

"Darash" refers to the Chatas of Rosh Chodesh.

Suggestion: Perhaps all three of them were burned!

Rejection: "V'Hinei Nisraf" (singular) - teaches that only one of them was burned.

Question: "Darash Darash" connotes two investigations. What were they?

Answer: Moshe asked why one Chatas was burned, and the others were not being eaten.

Question: How do we know which was burned?

Answer: "V'Oso Nasan Lachem Lases Es Avon ha'Edah" is Chatas Rosh Chodesh (which atones for Tum'ah of the congregation).

Question: Seemingly, this refutes R. Nechemyah!

Answer: R. Nechemyah holds that Kodshei Sha'ah are permitted to an Onen.

(Beraisa - R. Yehudah): (If it was burned due to Aninus...) also, they could have eaten it at night!

Question: Seemingly, this refutes R. Nechemyah!

Answer: R. Nechemyah holds that Aninus Laylah is mid'Oraisa. (R. Yehudah holds that this is true for all generations, but not at the time of the Milu'im.)

(Beraisa - R. Yehudah): ...Pinchas was with them! (He could have eaten it.)

Question: Seemingly, this refutes R. Nechemyah!

Answer: R. Nechemyah holds like R. Elazar (or Rav Ashi);

(R. Elazar): Pinchas did not become a Kohen until after he killed Zimri - "v'Haysah Lo ul'Zar'o Acharav Bris Kehunas Olam."

(Rav Ashi): He did not become a Kohen until after he resolved the conflict between the Shevatim (when Bnei Gad and Bnei Reuven built their own Mizbe'ach) - "va'Yishma Pinchas ha'Kohen..." (This is the first time he himself is called a Kohen.)

Question: How does Rav Ashi explain "v'Haysah Lo ul'Zar'o..."?

Answer: That was only a Brachah.

Question: How does R. Elazar explain "va'Yishma Pinchas ha'Kohen"?

Answer: That teaches that (all or most of) the future Kohanim Gedolim would descend from him.

(Rav): Moshe was a Kohen Gadol, he received a share of Kodshim - "me'Eil ha'Milu'im l'Moshe Hayah l'Manah."

Question (Beraisa): ...Pinchas was with them!

According to Rav, they should have also asked that Moshe was with them! (He could have eaten the Chatas!)

Answer: Perhaps (they did not ask, because) Moshe had no time to eat, for he was always speaking with Hash-m!

Moshe went up Har Sinai early (at the start of the morning), and came down early.

Question (Beraisa): "(A Ba'al Mum) mi'Kodshei ha'Kodoshim u'Min ha'Kodoshim Yochel";

Question: Why must it mention both Kodshei Kodoshim and Kodshim (Kalim)?

Answer: Had it said only Kodshei Kodoshim, one might have thought that only they are permitted (to a Ba'al Mum), because they are (or were) permitted to a Zar and Kohanim;

Had it said only Kodshim Kalim, one might have thought that only they are permitted, because they are more lenient.

Summation of question - suggestion: The Beraisa says that Kodshei Kodoshim are (were) permitted to a Zar. This refers to Moshe!

Answer (Rav Sheshes): No, they are permitted to a Zar if they were offered on a Bamah;

This is like the opinion that Menachos may be offered on a Bamah. (There is no other case of Kodshei Kodoshim. All agree that Chatas and Asham are not offered on Bamos, and Olah is never eaten.)