1)

(a)Our Mishnah rules that Menachos whose Kometz is taken she'Ko li'Shemah - are Kasher, only the owner has not fulfilled his Neder.

(b)An example of she'Lo li'Shemah - is if the owner brought a Minchas Marcheshes (to be prepared in a deep bowl) and the Kohen performed the Kemitzah having in mind that it is a Minchah al ha'Machavas (to be prepared in a flat pan).

(c)Despite the fact that the owner is obligated to bring another Korban, the ramifications of declaring them Kasher are - that the Kometz is burned on the Mizbe'ach, and the Shirayim may be eaten by the Kohanim.

(d)The two exceptions to this rule are - a Minchas Kena'os (of s Sotah) and a Minchas Chotei (of a poor man who is Chayav a Korban Oleh ve'Yored), which, if performed she'Lo li'Sheman are Pasul

2)

(a)Besides the Kemitzah and the Haktarah, the two other Avodos she'Lo li'Shemah which render a Minchas Kena'os and a Minchas Chotei Pasul are - placing the Minchah in a K'li Shareis and taking it to the south-western corner.

(b)The Tana defines she'Lo li'Shemah in connection with a Minchas Chotei as - performing one of the above four Avodos having in mind a Minchas Nedavah.

(c)If the Kohen performed the Kemitzah li'Shemah and she'Lo li'Shemah or vice-versa - it is Pasul, too.

(d)Having taught us that li'Shemah and she'Lo li'Shemah is Pasul, the Tana nevertheless sees fit to add 'or vice-versa' - to teach us that, not only do we take into account the Kohen's final Machsavah, but we take his initial Machshavah into account as well.

3)

(a)The problem with the word Ela, in the Mishnah's statement Kol ha'Menachos ... Ela she'Lo Alu le'Ba'alim le'Shem Chovah, is that - since Ela implies that in every regard other than this one, the Korban is Kasher, what is the Tana coming to teach us?.

(b)And we answer that it teaches us a ruling of Rava, who says that - the fact an Olah has been Shechted she'Lo li'Shemah, does not permit the Kohen to then sprinkle its blood she'Lo li'Shemah.

(c)Rava's source is either a S'vara that - Two wrongs don't make a right ...

(d)... or we learn it from the Pasuk in Parshas Shoftim "Motzei Sefasecha Tishmor ... Ka'asher Nadarta Nedavah" - which begins by calling the Korban a Neder but ends by calling it a Nedavah - to teach us that if one Shechts the animal li'Shemah, then it remains a Neder, as it was originally (in which case the owner has fulfilled his duty); whereas if he Shechts it she'Lo li'Shemah, then it has the status of a Nedavah, (leaving the owner's Neder unfulfilled, and) which one is also not permitted to change.

(e)We learn from the Pasuk in Vayikra "Im Zevach Shelamim Korbano" that - a Machsheves she'Lo li'Shemah is forbidden by a Nedavah no less than by a Neder (see also Shitah Mekubetzes).

4)

(a)We suggest that the author of our Mishnah cannot be Rebbi Shimon, who says that all Menachos whose Kemitzos are performed she'Lo li'Shemah are Kasher - including a Minchas Chotei.

(b)The reason that he gives for this is the fact that - unlike the Shechitah, Zerikah or Kabalah of a Chatas or an Olah which are identical), a Minchas Machavas or Marcheshes (whose Kometz one changes for the other) are easily distinguishable, in which case, the Machshavah is merely a farce, and is overridden by the action).

(c)The Kometz of a Minchas Chotei is clearly distinguishable from that of a regular Minchah - inasmuch as it is performed on plain flour, whereas the latter Minchah is mixed with oil.

(d)We establish our Mishnah like Rebbi Shimon, according to Rav Ashi, who will later establish this ruling of Rebbi Shimon by Hareini Kometz Machavas le'Shem Marcheshes (empty words, since he did not mention the word Minchah), but not with Rabah and Rava, who will establish this ruling differently (as will be explained shortly). According to ...

1. ... Rav Ashi, Rebbi Shimon will agree in the case of our Mishnah, where he brought the *Minchas* Machavas as a *Minchas* Marcheshes, that the owner is not Yotzei.

2. ... Rabah and Rava however - the author of our Mishnah is indeed not Rebbi Shimon.

5)

(a)We query Rebbi Shimon from his own statement in another Beraisa, where he explains the Pasuk in Tzav (in connection with a Minchah) "Kodesh Kodashim Hi ka'Chatas ve'cha'Asham". The basic difference between a Chatas and an Asham (to which the Torah is now comparing a Minchah) is that - whereas a Chatas she'Lo li'Shemah is Pasul, an Asham she'Lo li'Shemah (like most other Korbanos) is Kasher.

(b)Rebbi now applies this difference to a Minchah - by comparing a Minchas Chotei to a Chatas, and a Minchas Nedavah to an Asham (with regard to Kamtzan she'Lo li'Sheman).

(c)Rabah answered 'Ka'an be'Shinuy Kodesh, Ka'an be'Shinuy Ba'alim' - the first ruling of Rebbi Shimon refers to Shinuy Kodesh (where the different Menachos are distinguishable, as we explained), whilst his second ruling speaks with reference to Shinuy Ba'alim (where the Kohen performed the Kemitzah in the name of the wrong owner), in which case the Minchah remains unchanged.

(d)Based on the fact that the P'sul by a Minchah she'Lo li'Shemah is learned from a Shelamim, Abaye queried Rabah's distinction, to which Rabah replied that - the fact that the Menachos are readily distinguishable is a S'vara, which Rebbi Shimon, who Darshens the Torah's reasons, will apply.

6)

(a)We query Rabah from an Olas ha'Of on which the Kohen performed Melikah above the Chut ha'Sikra as a Chatas ha'Of - which ought to be Kasher, according to his interpretation of Rebbi Shimon, since the fact that it was performed on the upper half of the Mizbe'ach clearly indicates that it is an Olas ha'Of (and not a Chatas, whose Melikah is performed on the lower half).

(b)We answer with a statement of Mar who stated that - Bedieved, Melikah that is performed anywhere on the Mizbe'ach is Kasher (negating the above distinction).

(c)We then ask the same Kashya on Rabah from an Olas ha'Of, on which the Kohen performs Mitzuy ha'Dam above the Chut ha'Sikra, having in mind that it is a Chatas ha'Of. We cannot give the same answer as we just gave in the case of Haza'ah - because the first Mitzuy of the Olas ha'Of must take place on the top half of the Mizbe'ach (even Bedi'eved).

(d)And we answer that for all the onlooker knows, it might just as well be the Mitzuy that comes after the Haza'ah - whose location Mar gave as anywhere on the Mizbe'ach (like he did, the Haza'ah), rendering the two indistinguishable after all.

7)

(a)Finally, we ask the same Kashya from a Chatas ha'Of, on which the Kohen performed Mitzuy ha'Dam (squeezing the blood) below the Chut ha'Sikra, having in mind that it is an Olas ha'Of, which ought to be Kasher according to Rebbi Shimon - because if is was an Olas ha'Of, then it would have taken place above the Chut ha'Sikra.

(b)And we answer that - in such a case, the Korban will indeed be Kasher, according to Rabah ...

(c)... which explains why Rebbi Shimon said she'Ein ha'Menachos Domos *li'Zevachim*, and not *le'Ofos* (seeing as there is this one case where Ofos has the same Din as Menachos).