1)

(a)The Beraisa learns from the Pasuk in Re'ei "ve'Dam Zevachecha Yishafech" that - if the Kohen performed only one Matanah of the Korbanos whose blood is sprinkled on the Mizbe'ach ha'Chitzon and that require two, the Korban is Kasher.

(b)We query this from another Beraisa which learns from this Pasuk that - the blood of all Korbanos that remains after the Zerikah, must be poured on to the Y'sod.

(c)The first Tana, we explain, concurs with Rebbi, who learns that from - the word "ba'Dam" (in the Pasuk [in connection with a Chatas ha'Of "ve'ha'Nish'ar ba'Dam Yimatzeh"]), which is otherwise superfluous.

2)

(a)A third Beraisa learns from "ve'Dam Zevachecha Yishafech" that - Bedieved, if the Kohen poured the blood on to the Y'sod, instead of performing Zerikah, the Korban is Kasher (reinstating the Kashya that we just answered).

(b)And we answer that our Tana holds like Rebbi Akiva, who holds that - Zerikah and Shefichah are not interchangeable (even Bedieved).

(c)The basis of this Machlokes is the Mishnah in Pesachim, which discusses the B'rachos over the Pesach and the Zevach (the Chagigah). The B'rachah one recites over ...

1. ... the Korban Pesach is - ... Le'echol es ha'Pesach.

2. ... the Korban Chagigah is - ... Le'echol es ha'Zevach.

3)

(a)We now attribute Rebbi Yishmael's initial ruling, that the B'rachah over the Pesach covers the Chagigah - to the Pasuk "ve'Dam Zevachecha Yishafech", from which he learns that Shefichah incorporates Zerikah.

(b)Rebbi Akiva holds that - the B'rachah over one of them does not cover the other.

(c)Even Rebbi Yishmael concedes that the B'rachah over the Chagigah does not cover the Pesach - because the Pesach requires Shefichah, and nowhere do we find that Zerikah incorporates Shefichah.

(d)Rebbi Akiva disagrees with Rebbi Yishmael - because he learns from "ve'Dam Zevachecha Yishafech", that the Pesach requires Shefichah, and one cannot at the same time learn from it that Shefichah incorporates Zerikah. Note, the Tana of the first Beraisa who agrees with Rebbi Akiva that Ein Zevichah bi'Chelal Shefichah, does not agree that the Pesach requires Shefichah.

4)

(a)We cite yet another Beraisa, where Rebbi Yishmael Darshens the Pasuk in Korach "Ach B'chor Shor", from which he learns that a B'chor requires Matan Damim and Eimurim on the Mizbe'ach). And from "ve'Dam Zevachecha Yishafech" he learns that - Ma'aser Beheimah and Pesach too, require Matan Damim and Emurim on the Mizbe'ach.

(b)And we reply that our Tana holds like Rebbi Yossi ha'Gelili, who learns - this from the fact that the Torah uses the plural form for "Damam" and Chelbam" (in the continuation of the Pasuk "es Damam Tizrok ... ve'es Chelbam Taktir").

(c)We reconcile Rebbi Yishmael in the current Beraisa with Rebbi Yishmael earlier, who learned from the same Pasuk that Zerikah bi'Chelal Shefichah - by turning Rebbi Yishmael's opinion into a Machlokes Tana'im.

(d)Having concluded that the Pasuk can only be used for one of the above ...

1. ... (assuming that Rebbi Yishmael learns from "ve'Dam Zevachecha Yishafech" that the Pesach requires Shefichah) - he will agree with Rebbi Akiva with regard to the B'rachah over the Pesach covering the Chagigah and vice-versa (that one does not cover the other).

2. ... (assuming that Rebbi Yishmael learns from "ve'Dam Zevachecha Yishafech" that 'Zerikah bi'Chelal Shefichah' [seeing that he no longer holds that the Pesach requires Shefichah Lechatchilah), the B'rachah on the Pesach covers the Chagigah (and not vice-versa) - because the Pesach is the major Korban, whereas the Chagigah is only secondary.

5)

(a)When we explain that, according to Rebbi Yishmael, who interprets the entire Pasuk of B'chor by a B'chor exclusively, the following Pasuk "u'Vesaram Yih'yeh lach" does not present a problem, we are referring to - the Torah's use of the plural ...

(b)... which according to him, refers to - the B'chor of an ox, a lamb, or a goat, which are all mentioned earlier in the Pasuk, and which must all be given to the Kohen.

(c)According to Rebbi Yossi ha'Gelili however, where the Torah has since referred to Ma'aser and Pesach, which are not given to the Kohen - how can the Torah then speak about "Besaram", when it is only the B'chor that goes to the Kohen?

(d)And we solve the problem - by extrapolating from the word "Besaram", that both a B'chor Tam and a B'chor Ba'al-Mum must be given to the Kohen.

6)

(a)Rebbi Yishmael learns from the end of the Pasuk in Korach "u'che'Shok ha'Yamin l'cha Yih'yeh" that - a B'chor Ba'al-Mum must be given to the Kohen.

(b)We extrapolate from the Pasuk there "Lo Sipadeh ki Kodesh heim" that - a Temurah of the Korbanos contained in that Pasuk is not brought on the Mizbe'ach.

(c)The problem according to Rebbi Yishmael, who restricts the source Pasuk to B'chor is that - there is then no direct source to incorporate Temuras Ma'aser and Temuras Pesach in the current Halachah (whereas we know that they are included, from the two Mishnah's that we are about to discuss).

7)

(a)The Mishnah in ...

1. ... Temurah states Temuras B'chor u'Ma'aser, hein u'Veladan ad Sof Kol ha'Olam - Harei hein ki'Bechor u'Ma'aser, Veye'achlu be'Muman le'Ba'alim.

2. ... Pesachim, quoting Rebbi Yehoshua, rules that - sometimes a Temuras Pesach is sacrificed and sometimes it is not, only he was unable to explain it.

(b)Rebbi Akiva solved Rebbi Yehoshua's quandary - by establishing the former ruling where the swap took place with a Korban Pesach after its time (when it becomes a regular Shelamim), whereas the latter ruling speaks where the swap was made on the afternoon of Erev Pesach (when it is a Temuras Pesach).

(c)Rebbi Yossi ha'Gelili learns the Din by Temuras B'chor and Temuras Pesach from - "Lo Sipadeh ki Kodesh heim".

(d)Rebbi Yishmael learns from ...

1. ... the Gezeirah-Shavah 'Ya'avor' 'Ya'avor' ("Kol asher Ya'avor Tachas ha'Sheivet" [in Bechukosai, in connection with Ma'aser Beheimah], from "Veha'avarta Kol Peter Rechem" [in Bo, in connection with B'chor]) that - Temuras Ma'aser, like Temuras B'chor, is not brought on the Mizbe'ach.

2. ... the words "Im Kesev" (in the Pasuk in Vayikra (in connection with the Korban Shelamim "Im Kesev Makriv") that - a Temuras Pesach after Pesach is brought on the Mizbe'ach.

3. ... the word "Hu" (in the same Pasuk) that - a Temuras Pesach on Erev Pesach afternoon is not.

8)

(a)In order to find a source for the Din in our Mishnah Kol ha'Nitnin al Mizbach ha'Chitzon sha'Nasnan Matanah Achas Kiper, we establish the Tana'im in the Beraisa (who learn the various D'rashos from "ve'Dam Zevachecha Yishafech" for other things) like Beis Hillel - who learn that a Chatas, which normally requires four Matanos, is Kasher with only one, and we Darshen Kal-va'Chomer other Korbanos, which only require two to begin with.

9)

(a)Rav Huna ascribes Beis-Shamai's minimum of two Matanos by a Chatas to the three times the word "Karnos" (in the plural) appears in the Parshah of Chatas Chitzonah in Vayikra; once by the Sa'ir of the Nasi, and twice by the Chatas Yachid, once by the Kisbah and once by the Se'irah) ...

(b)... totaling six K'ranos, from which Beis Shamai extrapolate - four Lechatchilah and two Bedieved.

(c)Beis-Hillel learn four Matanos from the same words - because they follow the Mesores (the spelling), and two of the words "Karnos" are missing a 'Vav'. So they explain - four Keranos, one of which is crucial.

(d)Beis Shamai on the other hand - follow the Mikra (the way it is read, which includes a 'Vav').

(e)We reject the suggestion that all four "K'ranos" come le'Mitzvah (Lechatchilah), despite the fact that in the realm of Kodshim, whatever is not repeated is generally Lechatchilah - inasmuch as there is no such thing as a Kaparah 'free of charge'. At least one Matanah must be performed in order for there to be a Kaparah.

10)

(a)Alternatively, Rav Huna combines the Mikra (six) and the Masores (four) to explain how Beis Hillel arrive at their opinion - because on average this leaves us with five K'ranos, four Lechatchilah, and one Bedieved.

(b)Some Tana'im learn the four Batim in Tefilin from the three times "le'Totafos" is written in the Torah - due to the fact that two of them are written minus a 'Vav' (and they follow the Mesores, like Beis Hillel).

(c)According to Rav Huna's second explanation in Beis-Hillel, Tefilin ought to contain - five Parshiyos (the average of four [the Mesores] and six [the Mikra]) ...

(d)... and Beis Hillel learn the four Parshiyos of Tefilin - via the acronym 'Tat' be'Kaspi Shetayim, 'Pas' be Afriki Shetayim' ('Tat' means two in Caspian, and 'Pas' means two in African), like Rebbi Akiva.

11)

(a)By Succos too, the Torah writes three times "ba'Sukos". According to Rav Huna's second explanation in Beis-Hillel, a Succah ought to have at least five walls (since there too, two of the words "ba'Succos" are written minus a 'Vav'.

(b)And we arrive at ...

1. ... three - after using one of the five for the basic Chiyuv of Succah, and another for the S'chach.

2. ... two and a bit - via Halachah le'Moshe mi'Sinai, which detracts the third wall to a bit (plus a Tzuras ha'Pesach).

12)

(a)Based on the Pasuk in Tazri'a "Vetam'ah Shevu'ayim ke'Nidasah", a woman is Tamei - for two weeks, after giving birth to a girl.

(b)Bearing in mind that there too, the Torah writes "Shevu'ayim" without a 'Vav', she ought to be Tamei (according to Rav Huna's second explanation) - for forty-two days (half the difference between the fourteen days of "Shevu'ayim" and the seventy of "Shiv'im" (fifty-six days. Half of fifty-six is twenty-eight [14 + 28 = 42]).

(c)We learn from the word "ke'Nidasah" however that - her Tum'ah is close to the seven days of Nidus (indicating that here we must ignore the Mesorah altogether, because if we contend with it, the seventy days that the word implies, is too far removed from the seven days of Nidus).