(Rav Asi): R. Meir [who considers Ma'aser Sheni to be like Hekdesh] would exempt a dough of Ma'aser from Chalah; Chachamim [who consider it to be a person's money] would obligate it (all of these laws will be explained).

R. Meir would say that one is not Yotzei with Matzah of Ma'aser; Chachamim would say that one is Yotzei with it.

R. Meir would say that one is not Yotzei [taking the four species on Sukos] on Yom Tov if the Esrog is of Ma'aser; Chachamim would say that one is Yotzei.

Question (Rav Papa): I understand regarding Chalah - it says "Arisoseichem," it is obligated only if it belongs to you;

I understand regarding Esrog - it says "Lachem," it must belong to you;

But it does not say 'Matzaschem' - why must it belong to you?!

Answer (Rava or Rav Yemar): We learn from a Gezerah Shavah "Lechem-Lechem" - it says here "Lechem Oni," and it says regarding Chalah "V'Hayah ba'Achalchem mi'Lechem ha'Aretz" - just like there it must be yours, also here.

Suggestion: A Beraisa supports Rav Asi.

(Beraisa - R. Meir): A dough of Ma'aser Sheni is exempt from Chalah;

Chachamim obligate it.

Question: Why is this only a suggestion - this is exactly like Rav Asi said!

Answer: We suggest that just like they argue about Chalah [like Rav Asi says that they do], they also argue about Matzah and Esrog;

Or, perhaps this is only regarding Chalah, for it says "Arisoseichem" twice [but elsewhere, even R. Meir does not exclude Ma'aser]!

Question (Reish Lakish): May one be Yotzei with Matzah of Chalah of Ma'aser Sheni [according to Chachamim] in Yerushalayim?

We do not ask according to R. Yosi ha'Gelili - he holds that one is not Yotzei even with the 'Chulin' (i.e. the rest of the Ma'aser after taking Chalah), surely he is not Yotzei with the Chalah!

Version #1: We ask according to R. Akiva, who holds that one is Yotzei with the Chulin, for if it would become Tamei, one could redeem it and eat it anywhere:

He is not Yotzei with the Chalah, for this Heter does not apply to Tamei Chalah - it must be burned!

Or, perhaps since had he not (R. Chananel - before he) made it Chalah, it could have become Tamei and permitted everywhere [through redemption], one would be Yotzei with it, even now that he made it Chalah, he is Yotzei with it.

Version #2: We do not ask about this - surely, we say 'since' - rather, we ask about Chalah bought with Ma'aser money;

We do not ask according to Chachamim [who permit redeeming something bought with Ma'aser money if it became Tamei] - since it has a [potential] Heter everywhere, one is Yotzei with it just like with Chalah of Ma'aser itself;

We ask according to R. Yehudah, who says that it must be buried.

(Mishnah): If something bought with Ma'aser money became Tamei, we redeem it;

R. Yehudah says, it must be buried.

Do we say, since had this not been bought with Ma'aser money (rather, it itself was Ma'aser - see note 22 in Appendix), and since had he not made it Chalah, it could have been permitted anywhere if it became Tamei and was redeemed, also now he is Yotzei with it;

Or, perhaps we apply since only once! (end of Version #2)

Answer (Rava): Presumably, all Ma'aser is the same (just like one is Yotzei with Ma'aser Chulin, one is Yotzei with Chalah of Ma'aser [or Chalah bought with Ma'aser money], since Chalah itself can be used for Matzah).

(Mishnah): If one made Lachmei Todah or Rekikei Nazir [for himself, he is not Yotzei with them; if he made them to sell them, he is Yotzei].

Question: What is the source of this?

Answer #1 (Rabah): "U'Shmartem Es ha'Matzos" - Matzah must be guarded for the Mitzvah of eating it - these are guarded not for Matzas Mitzvah, rather, for the Korban.

Answer #2 (Rav Yosef): "Shiv'as Yomim Matzos Tochelu" - this refers to Matzah that may be eaten for seven days - Lachmei Todah and Rekikei Nazir may be eaten only for one day and a night.

Support (for Rabah - Beraisa #1) Suggestion: Perhaps one is Yotzei with Lachmei Todah or Rekikei Nazir!

Rejection: "U'Shmartem Es ha'Matzos" - Matzah must be guarded for the Mitzvah of eating it - these are guarded not for Matzah, rather, for the Korban.

Support (for Rav Yosef - Beraisa #2) Suggestion: Perhaps one is Yotzei with Lachmei Todah or Rekikei Nazir!

Rejection: "Shiv'as Yomim Matzos Tochelu" - this refers to Matzah that may be eaten for seven days - these may be eaten only for one day and a night.

Question (against both opinions): We should exclude them from "Lechem Oni" - these may not be eaten b'Aninus, rather, in joy!

Answer: They hold like R. Akiva, who expounds according to how it is written, i.e. "Ani" (of poverty, excluding a dough kneaded with wine, oil or honey).

Question: It should be invalid because it is Matzah Ashirah (it is kneaded with oil)!

Answer (Shmuel bar Rav Yitzchak): Less than a Revi'is of oil is used for many [large] loaves (this is not considered Ashirah).

Question: It should be invalid because it cannot be eaten anywhere [rather, only inside Yerushalayim]!

Answer (Reish Lakish): This teaches that Lachmei Todah and Rekikei Nazir could be eaten [in any walled city in Eretz Yisrael if they were offered when the Mishkan was] in Nov and Giv'on (see note 23 in Appendix).

(Beraisa - R. Ilai) Question: May one be Yotzei with Lachmei Todah or Rekikei Nazir?

R. Eliezer: I did not hear about this.

Answer (R. Yehoshua): It was taught that if one made them for himself, he is not Yotzei with them; if he made them to sell them, he is Yotzei.

Version #1 - R. Eliezer (when he heard this): Indeed, this is what Hash-m told Moshe on Sinai!

Version #2 - R. Eliezer: Can he say a Halachah [without a reason, as if it was] a tradition from Sinai?!

Question: What is the reason?

Answer (Rabah): One who makes Matzos intending to sell them has in mind that if he cannot sell them he will use them himself [therefore, he also guarded them l'Shem Mitzvas Matzah].