Clarification: It seems to the Ri that one cannot establish the first Beraisa like the Rabbanan, because the Tana says there that if somebody performs Melikah on a bird on the fourteenth, he has not transgressed anything.

Proof: Now why does he refer specifically to a bird? Unless it is extrapolate from it Davka on the fourteenth, but on Chol ha'Mo'ed, one is Chayav even on a bird - like Rebbi Shimon.

Conclusion: Rashi earlier however, gives a different reason to explain why the Tana mentions specifically a bird.

Clarification: Cheilev to Shelamim.

Conclusion: Granted they are not compared regarding burning, they are compared inasmuch as we do not say that even if there is someone at the end of the world who owns Chametz, they are Chayav ...

Reason: Seeing as it is logical to compare them in that regard.

Text: This is Rashi's text.

Refutation: This is not correct according to Rabeinu Tam, seeing as it is possible to infer the opposite from the Seifa.

Alternative Text: Rabeinu Tam therefore has the text 'Why is Lish'mo Patur? Since he is Shechting Shelamim as a Pesach? So we see that it requires Akirah.

Clarification: Because, if it didn't then even if one Shechted it li'Shemo,it ought to be Kasher since a Shelamim as a Pesach is Kasher, seeing as Rebbi Yehoshua declares Kasher earlier other Korbanos that one Shechts as a Pesach.

Clarification: This refers to the Levi'im/

Source: As we learned in the Tosefta 'Yisrael Shecht their Pesachim, whilst the Levi'im recite Hallel.

Question: The Ri asks from Perek Ein Ne'erachin (Erchin 11.), and from 'Keitzad Mevorchin' (B'rachos 35. & 35:) where we learned that 'One only recites Shirah over wine', whereas here we see that there is Shirah even without wine?

Question (cont.): Similarly, they would inaugurate the Azaros with two Todos and with Shir (without wine [Shavu'os 14:])?

Answer: The Ri explains that what the Gemara there means is that 'One only recites Shirah together with a Korban over wine', since we learn it from the Pasuk "It makes happy Hash-m and man", and the major drinking and Simchah come at the time of eating.

Precedent: The equivalent of which, regarding Hash-m is when a Korban is brought; That is where the Gemara says that one only recites Shirah over wine.

Conclusion: But when a Korban is not being brought, there are many places where they recited Shirah.

Sugya in Zevachim: The Gemara in Eizehu Mekoman (Zevachim 57.) asks why we do not learn from Olah, that 'Just as Olah requires "Shetayim she'Hein Arba" so too, does the Korban B'chor'?

Sugya in Zevachim (cont.): And, citing Abaye, it answers that since the Torah writes "Saviv" by both Olah and Chatas, it is a matter of 'Sh'nei Kesuvim ha'Ba'im ke'Echad', from which we do not learn.

Question: The Ri asks that, granted, we cannot learn from 'Sh'nei Kesuvim ha'Ba'im ke'Echad' via a Mah Matzinu, since it does not write it by just one of them ...

Question (cont.): But why can we not now learn B'chor, Ma'aser and Peach from the Gezeirah-Shavah ("Zerikah" "Zerikah") from Olah ...

Question (concl.): Seeing as we have a principle 'Ein Gezeirah-Shavah le'Mechtzah'?

Answer: The Ri explains that we are forced to say that Asham and Chatas, by which the Torah writes "Saviv", and we say there that they are two and even three Pesukim (together with the Olah), we could learn with a Gezeirah Shavah from Olah or Olah from them (See Maharam).

Conclusion: Now what we conclude that it is 'Sh'nei Kesuvim ha'Ba'im ke'Echad' fits nicely, because they come to preclude learning it from the Gezeirah Shavah, since it precludes those by which it is written "Saviv" where there is a Gezeirah Shavah.