Clarification: According to this Lashon, one needs to say that the Mishnah of Esnan goes according to Rebbi Yossi ha'Gelili, who says that 'Kodshim Kalim belong to the owner', and that is why he needs "le'Chol Neder".

Clarification (cont.): It does not go according to Rebbi - since in this Lashon, he holds that one does not leave over by the Pesach, only by Matzah and Maror exclusively.

Conclusion: However, that what we learned above, which states that 'the money in his hand is Chulin', means that it is Chulin in connection with Matzah and Maror, does not go like Rebbi Yossi ha'Gelili, since it says there that 'he has not achieved anything'.

Question: Seeing as Rebbi learns it from a Pasuk, why does he also need to come on to the reason of 'Because on that condition Yisrael declare Hekdesh their Pesachim'?

Answer: The Pasuk actually teaches us that this is what a person has in mind.

Implied Question: Despite the fact that a Mechusar Kaparah also requires Tevilah ...

Source: As we learned in the Mishnah in 'Chomer ba'Kodesh' (Chagigah, Daf 21.) 'An Onein and a Mechusar Kipurim require Tevilah for Kodesh'?

Answer #1: That is only mi'de'Rabbanan, as is evident there.

Answer #2: Moreover, that Tevilah does not require Ha'arev Shemesh, and the S'vara that 'Perhaps he will negligent' does not apply.

Question: The Riva asks that it is impossible not to get some of the money of two women mixed up in each pair of birds?

Refuted Answer: And even according to the opinion that holds 'Yesh B'reirah' ...

Refutation: It is not possible to apply it here, seeing as 'we are witnesses' that they did get mixed up?

Refuted Answer: If we could say that from all the money in the Shofar they would purchase the pairs together from each woman, the problem would be solved/

Refutation: But the Lashon 'until it is finished' does not imply that.

Answer: The Ri therefore explains that each woman would wrap up her money and place it in the Shofar.

Question: Even if he Toveled they should also not Shecht on his behalf for this reason?

Answer: The Torah writes "If he will be Tamei", and this man's Tum'ah has become weaker.

Refuted Explanation: One cannot say this with regard to his sixth day ...

Refutation #1: Since the Torah says "And they were not able to bring the Pesach on that day" ...

Refutation #1 (cont.): And not 'And they were not able to eat ... '.

Refutation #2: Alternatively, the Gemara learns from "be'Yom ha'Hu", which is superfluous; And had it been on the sixth day, it ought to have omitted it.

Question: Why did Moshe tell them to wait until Pesach Sheini. Why could they not Tovel on that day and others could have Shechted on their behalf.

Answer: Perhaps that is what they did, only at the time when they posed their question they had not yet Toveled, and Moshe told them that if they don't Tovel that day, they would have to wait until Pesach Sheini.

Observation: One cannot ask the same question on the Mishnah which permits Shechting for a Zav on the eighth day ...

Reason: Since one can answer that it mentions it on account of the Reisha 'Zav she'Ra'ah Sh'tei Re'iyos ve'Shomeres Yom Keneged Yom, Shichtin Alehah', and where we are not worried that she might have another sighting and demolish'.

Clarification: It speaks where the Meis died after Chatzos, when the Chiyuv Pesdach had already taken effect

Clarification (concl.): But had he died before Chatzos, Aninus would have already taken effect ...

Source: As the Gemara explains in 'Mi she'Hayah Tamei' (later on Daf 98.).