(R. Yochanan): If oil was put on the Kometz of a Minchas Chotei, it is Pasul;

(Reish Lakish): L'Chatchilah, one should rub the Kometz of a Minchas Chotei on the leftover oil from the Log brought for a (regular) Minchah, all the more so it is Kosher if oil was put on it!

Question: It says "Lo Yasim Aleha Shemen v'Lo Yiten Aleha Levonah"!

Answer: That forbids putting oil on it before Kemitzah.

Question (R. Yochanan - Beraisa): If a Charev (Minchas Chotei or Minchas Sotah, which is not mixed with oil) became mixed with a Balul (a Minchah that is mixed with oil), we offer it;

R. Yehudah says, we do not offer it.

Suggestion: The case is, the Kometz of a Charev became mixed with the Kometz of Minchas Nedavah.

Answer: No, the case is, Minchas Nesachim for a bull or ram (which has two Lugim of oil for each Isaron of flour) became mixed with Minchas Nesachim for a lamb (which has three Lugim of oil per Isaron. The former is called Charev, for it is drier than the latter.)

Question: Both of these are taught in the same Beraisa. Surely they are not the same case!

(Beraisa): If Minchas Nesachim for a bull or ram became mixed with that of a lamb, or if a Charev became mixed with a Balul, we offer it;

R. Yehudah says, we do not offer it.

Answer: Both are the same case. The Seifa explains the Reisha. (Even though the former is drier and absorbs from the latter, Chachamim are Machshir.)

Question (Rava): If the oil of a Kometz was squeezed onto wood, what is the law?

Are Chiburei Olim (things connected to something offered on the Mizbe'ach) considered like Olim; or not? (Rashi - if the Kometz is next to the oil, do we consider it as if the oil is inside, or is it considered Chaser? Alternatively - must we burn the wood with the Kometz (because the oil is still part of the Kometz, if it is not burned, the Kometz is Chaser), or not? Tosfos - he asks about a case in which some oil was absorbed and some is intact on the wood. Are they considered like one?)

Suggestion (Ravina): R. Yochanan and Reish Lakish argued about this!

(R. Yochanan): If one is Ma'aleh (b'Chutz) a k'Zayis of meat including a bone (there is less than a k'Zayis of meat), he is liable;

This is because Chiburei Olim (things connected to something offered on the Mizbe'ach) are considered like Olim;

(Reish Lakish): He is exempt. Chiburei Olim are not like Olim.

Rejection (Rav Ashi): No. It is not clear how either of them would hold in Rava's case:

R. Yochanan said that Chiburei Olim are like Olim only regarding a bone, for it is the same Min as meat, but wood (alternatively - oil) is not the same Min as a Kometz!

Reish Lakish said that Chiburei Olim are not like Olim only regarding a bone, for if it came off the fire, there is no Mitzvah to return it, but oil would never come off the fire.

This question is not resolved.

(Mishnah): If two Menachos became mixed together before Kemitzah:

If one can take a Kometz from each of them by itself (e.g. they are mixed only in the middle, each is by itself on the side), they are Kesherim. If not, they are Pesulim;

If a Kometz became mixed with a Minchah before Kemitzah, we are not Maktir the mixture;

If a Kohen was Maktir the mixture; the owner of the (Minchah that was) Nikmetzes was Yotzei, the owner of the other Minchah was not Yotzei.

If a Kometz became mixed with its Shirayim or those of another Minchah, we are not Maktir the mixture;

If a Kohen was Maktir the mixture; the owner was Yotzei.

(Gemara - Rav Chisda): If a Neveilah became mixed with a majority of Shechutos (slaughtered animals), it is Batel, for a Shechutah cannot become (an Av ha'Tum'ah, like) a Neveilah. (Therefore, this is like Min b'Eino Mino.)

If a Shechutah became mixed with a Neveilah, it is not Batel, for a Neveilah can become like a Shechutah (this is like Min b'Mino);

When a Neveilah rots, it becomes Tahor.

(R. Chanina): If the Batel (minority) can become like the Mevatel (majority), it is not Batel. If the Batel cannot become like the Mevatel, it is Batel.

Question: Like which Tana are these teachings?

They are not like Chachamim. Chachamim say that Olim are not Mevatel each other, but Min b'Mino is Batel (whether or not one can become like the other)!

They are not like R. Yehudah, for he says that Bitul depends on the appearance (22a, Dam Par cannot be Mevatel Dam Sa'ir, even though neither can become like the other). Min b'Mino is never Batel, whether or not one can become like the other!

Answer: They are like R. Chiya:

(Beraisa - R. Chiya): If Shechutos and Neveilos became mixed, one of these (if it is the majority) is Mevatel the other. (Rashba - if either could be Mevatel the other, whether or not it can become like the other, R. Chiya would have said Stam 'Min b'Mino is Batel', without specifying Neveilos and slaughtered animals.)

Question: Which Tana does R. Chiya hold like?

He is not like Chachamim. Chachamim say that Olim are not Mevatel each other, but Min b'Mino is (always) Batel!

He is not like R. Yehudah, for he says that Min b'Mino is not (ever) Batel!

Answer: He is like R. Yehudah. Really, R. Yehudah says that Min b'Mino is not Batel only when one can become like the other, but if one cannot become like the other, there is Bitul;

Rav Chisda says that it depends on the Mevatel (if it cannot become like the Batel, there is Bitul);

R. Chanina says that it depends on the Batel (if it cannot become like the Mevatel, there is Bitul).

(Mishnah): If two Menachos became mixed together before Kemitzah, if one can take a Kometz from each of them by itself they are Kesherim. If not, they are Pesulim.

Observation: After taking one Kometz, the rest of that Minchah is Shirayim;

(Surely, there are pieces of the Tevel (the Minchah from which Kometz was not taken) amidst a majority of Shirayim. If these pieces became Batel, the Tevel would be considered Chaser before Kemitzah!)

Since both are Kesherim, we infer that the Shirayim are not Mevatel the Tevel. (We cannot infer whether the Tevel is Mevatel (pieces of) the Shirayim, for Chisaron after Kemitzah is not Posel.)

Question: Which Tana is this like?

It is not like Chachamim. Chachamim say that Olim are not Mevatel each other, but Min b'Mino is Batel (and Shirayim are not Olim)!

Answer: Clearly, it is like R. Yehudah.

Question: We understand according to R. Chanina. Since the Batel (Tevel) can become like the Mevatel (Shirayim) (through Kemitzah), there is no Bitul;

However, Rav Chisda holds that since the Mevatel cannot become like the Batel, there should be Bitul. The second Minchah should be Pasul!

Suggestion: Rav Chisda must say that our Mishnah is unlike R. Chiya!

Answer: No, he explains like R. Zeira;

(R. Zeira): It says "Haktarah" regarding the Kometz and regarding Shirayim. Just like Kamatzim are not Mevatel Kamatzim (even R. Yehudah agrees to this in our Mishnah), also Shirayim are not Mevatel Kamatzim.

(Mishnah): If a Kometz became mixed with a Minchah before Kemitzah, we are not Maktir the mixture;

If a Kohen was Maktir the mixture; the owner of the Nikmetzes was Yotzei. The owner of the Tevel was not Yotzei.

Inference: Since the Nikmetzes is Kosher, it follows that the Tevel does not Mevatel the Kometz.

Question: Which Tana is this like?

It is not like Chachamim - they say that Olim are not Mevatel each other, but Min b'Mino is Batel (the Tevel is not considered Olim, for it will not be offered)!

Answer: Clearly, it is like R. Yehudah.

Question: We understand according to Rav Chisda - since (part of) the Mevatel (Tevel) can become like the Batel (Kometz) (by doing Kemitzah), there is no Bitul;

according to R. Chanina, since the Batel cannot become like the Mevatel, there should be Bitul, the Nikmetzes should be Pasul!

Suggestion: R. Chanina must say that our Mishnah is unlike R. Chiya!

Answer: No, he explains like R. Zeira.

(R. Zeira): It says "Haktarah" regarding Kometz and Shirayim - just like Kamatzim are not Mevatel Kamatzim (even according to R. Yehudah), Shirayim are not Mevatel Kamatzim.

(Mishnah): If a Kometz became mixed with (its Shirayim or) Shirayim of another Minchah, we are not Maktir the mixture;

If a Kohen was Maktir the mixture; the owner was Yotzei.

Inference: Since it is Kosher, it follows that the Shirayim are not Mevatel the Kometz.

Question: Which Tana is this like?

Answer: It is not like Chachamim. (They would say that the Shirayim Mevatel the Kometz.) Rather, it is like R. Yehudah.

Question: Neither the Mevatel (Shirayim) nor Batel (Kometz) can become like the other. Rav Chisda and R. Chanina should agree that there is Bitul. This is unlike R. Chiya!

Answer (R. Zeira): It says "Haktarah" regarding Kometz and Shirayim. Just like Kamatzim are not Mevatel Kamatzim, Shirayim are not Mevatel Kamatzim.

(Beraisa): If Matzah was seasoned with Ketzach (black cumin) or sesame or other spices, it is Kosher, for it is (still) Matzah, just it is called seasoned Matzah.

We are thinking that the spices are the majority.

Question: We understand according to R. Chanina. Since the Batel (Matzah) can become like the Mevatel (spices), when it will become moldy (it will lose the status of Matzah), it is not Batel;

according to Rav Chisda, since the Mevatel cannot become like the Batel, there should be Bitul!

Answer: The case is, the Matzah is the majority, and not the spices.

Support: (Beraisa): It is Matzah, just it is called seasoned Matzah.