Previous daf

1)

(a) According to Rav Idi bar Avin ... Amar Rebbi Yochanan, Rebbi Shimon holds that Temidin that are not needed cannot be redeemed without a blemish, whereas the Rabbanan hold that they can.
What is the basis of their Machlokes?

(b) What did Rebbi Yosef b'rei de'Rav Shemayah ask from here on Rav Papa's previous explanation?

(a) When Rebbi Yirmiyah asked Rebbi Zeira why, having received the blood of the two goats of Shevu'os in two separate vessels, and having already sprinkled the blood of the first one, they needed to sprinkle the blood of the second one, what did the latter reply?

(b) And what does Rebbi Yosef b'rei de'Rav Shemayah infer from the fact that Rebbi Yirmiyah asked his Kashya with reference to an Asei after the Shechitah?

(c) What problem does that create with the alternative explanation in Rebbi Shimon (that we discussed above [that the Pasuk speaks when they designated the two goats at two different times])?

(d) Rav Papa (had no answer to the first Kashya). He answered the second Kashya however 'Dilma Im Timtzi Lomar ka'Amar'.
What did he mean by that?

(e) How does that answer the Kashya? What is now the outcome of the initial She'eilah?

(a) Rabah validates Reuven's Todah that was Shechted on behalf of Shimon (who is also obligated to bring a Todah). Rav Chisda invalidates it.
What is the basis of their Machlokes?

(b) Rabah learns his ruling from a Beraisa.
Why does Aba Chanin in the name of Rebbi Eliezer validate a Todah that was Shechted as a Shelamim?

(c) Rabah extrapolates from there that a Todah as a Todah is definitely Kasher.
How do we counter Rabah's proof?

(d) Then why does the Tana need to add that [his] Shelamim le'Shem Todah is Pasul? Why did he not conclude that even a Todah for [someone else's] Todah is Pasul, how much more so [his] one Todah as another Todah'?

(a) We already discussed Rava's statement (earlier we cited it in the name of Rav Yehudah Amar Rav) 'Chatas she'Shachtah le'Shem Chatas Kesheirah, le'Shem Olah, Pesulah'.
What does he mean by 'Chatas ... le'Shem Chatas'?

(b) From which Pasuk in Vayikra does he learn his dual ruling?

(c) And what does Rava extrapolate from the Pasuk "Ve'chiper Alav" with regard to Reuven's Chatas that is Shechted as Shimon's on the one hand, and as Shimon's Olah, on the other?

(d) Like whom does Rava hold in the previous dispute, Rabah or Rav Chisda?

(a) Based on the previous case, why does Rava then rule that a Chatas that was Shechted for no particular sin, is Pasul?

(b) On what basis does Rava explain that a Chatas atones for Chayvei Asei?

(c) Rava also said that a Chatas that was Shechted for someone who is Chayav an Olah is Kasher.
Why is that?

(d) Then why does he rule Pasul in the current case?

6)

(a) We already discussed Rava's statement forbidding sprinking an Olah she'Lo li'Shemah, even after having Shechted it she'Lo li'Shemah. He also invalidates an Olah that is Shechted with Shinuy Kodesh after the owner's death.
What does he say about such an Olah that is Shechted with Shinuy Ba'alim.

(b) What did Rav Pinchas b'rei de'Rav Ami say?

(c) Rav Ashi questioned what he meant by that.
What are the ramifications of Rav Ashi's query? What does Rav Pinchas mean if we take his words ...

1. ... literally?
2. ... with a pinch of salt?

(d) What did Rav Pinchas b'rei de'Rav reply?

(a) We have learned that an Olah comes to atone for an Asei or a La'av ha'Nitak la'Asei.
What problem do we have with that, assuming the sinner ...

1. ... did not do Teshuvah?
2. ... did Teshuvah? What does the Beraisa say about this?

(b) How does Rebbi Shimon in a Beraisa, explain the sequence of first Chatas, then Olah, that pertains to most cases where both are required?

(c) This Beraisa serves as a proof for a statement of Rava.
Which statement?

(a) What do we learn from the Pasuk in Re'ei ...

1. ... "Sh'mor es Chodesh ha'Aviv, Ve'asisa Pesach"?
2. ... "Va'amartem Zevach Pesach Hu"?

(b) Why do we initially think that the Pasuk there needs to add "Ve'zavachta Pesach la'Hashem Elokecha"?

(c) What objection do we raise to this D'rashah?

(a) What problem does Rav Nachman Amar Rabah bar Avuhah have with the continuation of the Pasuk "Tzon u'Vakar"?

(b) What does he in fact, learn from it?

(c) So Rav Safra concludes that "Ve'zavachta Pesach ... " teaches us Rav Nachman's Din, and "Sh'mor es Chodesh ha'Aviv, Ve'asisa Pesach" and "Va'amartem Zevach Pesach", Shinuy Kodesh and Shinuy Ba'alim respectively. What do we then learn from "(Zevach Pesach) Hu"?

(d) And he learns all the other Avodos by Pesach from Shechitah, with the S'vara of 'Ho'il Ve'gali Gali'.
What does Rav Ashi say about that?

(a) From which Pasuk then, does Rav Ashi learn all the other Avodos?

(b) Which Korbanos does the continuation of the Pasuk "be'Yom Tzavoso es B'nei Yisrael Le'hakriv es Korbeneihem" come to include?

(c) How does he initially learn all three from Shelamim?

(a) How does Rav Ashi go on to learn Pesach exclusively from the same Hekesh?

(b) Seeing as he now learns Shinuy Kodesh and Shinuy Ba'alim (by Pesach) Lechatchilah from " ... Le'hakriv es Korbeneihem", from where does he now know Bedi'eved?

(c) Which of the previous D'rashos is now superfluous?

(d) We therefore conclude that "Hu" by the Korban Pesach comes to preclude from Rebbi Eliezer's interpretation of "Hu" by Asham.
What did Rebbi Yehoshua say to Rebbi Eliezer, who Darshened from the latter "Hu" that an Asham she'Lo li'Shemo is Pasul?

Next daf