Question: What is the difference between them? (Note: According to the Korban HaEidah, this question is not in the text.)

(R' Shmuel bar Avudama): Their opinions are switched during the rest of the year - if he slaughtered it Lishmah to throw its blood Lo Lishmah, during the rest of the year, according to R' Yochanan it is valid and according to R''SBL it is invalid.

R' Yochanan: It was about this that Shmuel's father told me that in Bavel they say - what is the source to say that a Pesach can be brought as a Shelamim (for example, if he separated the animal a long time before Pesach)? The pasuk states (Vayikra 3,6), "If his sacrifice is a Shelamim offering from the flock (sheep)'' - anything from the flock can become a Shelamim.

Question: The Olah offering also comes from the flock?

Answer: The pasuk refers only to something that comes from the flock. This excludes the Olah offering that can be brought even from cattle.

Question: Perhaps the pasuk refers to a Guilt offering (that may only be a non-blemished animal and may only be brought from the flock but not from cattle)?

Answer (R' Bun bar Kahana): "...from the flock'' - something that can be brought from all of the flock. This excludes the Guilt offering that can only be brought from rams (but not goats).

Question: The word "Min'' - "from'' is usually expounded to include and here you are using it to exclude?!

Answer: It is an exclusion as it can only be brought from rams. (Note: See the Korban HaEidah and others who use a different text for this answer that is also used in Maseches Shekalim.)

Question: The pasuk states (Vayikra 1, 10), "If his sacrifice is from the flock, from the sheep or from the goats as an Olah'' - surely this pasuk could teach that the Pesach offering can be brought as an Olah?!

Answer #1 (R' Avin): We change something that is eaten into something that is eaten rather than something that is not eaten (as an Olah is completely burned on the altar).

Answer #2 (R' Yosi bei R' Bun): We change something that is Kodoshim Kalim into something that is Kodoshim Kalim rather than something that is Kodshei Kodoshim.

R' Yochanan: It was about this that R' Chanina said - You say that the Pesach cannot be brought as a Shelamim unless it was slaughtered as a Shelamim, but I say that it could even be slaughtered as an Olah (and then brought as a Shelamim).

R' Ila: The reasoning of R' Yochanan is from the pasuk that states (Vayikra 3, 6), "If his sacrifice is a Shelamim offering'' - anything which is a sacrifice can be brought as a Shelamim.

Question: If he slaughtered it as an Olah, do intentions that cause disqualification for an Olah offering also do so for this sacrifice?

Question: What is the case?

If he slaughtered it as an Olah in order to throw its blood the next day - it is Pigul and invalid (even if he would have slaughtered it as a Shelamim)!

If you say that intentions that disqualify an Olah do the same for this sacrifice, it is Pigul; if you say that they do not, it is nevertheless invalid (as it is as if he intended to sacrifice Shelamim meat the next day, which is invalid but not Pigul)!

Question: A Pesach that was slaughtered during the year Lishmah and Lo Lishmah, is it valid or invalid?

Answer (R' Bun bar Chiya quoting R' Shmuel bar Aba): Since it does not have an identity (as it is not the time of the Pesach and he did not sanctify it as a Shelamim), it is as if he slaughtered it without any intention and it is valid.

Response: If so, even if during the year he slaughtered it Lishma in order to throw its blood Lo Lishmah it would be valid, as it is as if from the beginning it was slaughtered Lishmah and Lo Lishmah.

Question (R' Aba Mari): Who ever said that if he slaughtered it without any intention that it would be valid? Perhaps it must be uprooted from its status as a Korban Pesach by having intention to do so and therefore here it would be invalid!

If he slaughtered it Lo L'Ochlav; not for those reserved upon it; for the uncircumcised or for the Tamei; it is invalid.

If he intended both for L'Ochlav and Lo L'Ochlav or both for those who are reserved upon and it and those who are not, for both those who are circumcised and those who are not, for those who are Tamei and those who are Tahor, it is valid.

If he slaughtered it before noon (of the 14th) it is invalid, as the pasuk states, "in the afternoon''. If it was slaughtered before the Tamid offering, it is valid, as long as its blood was stirred until the blood of the Tamid was thrown. If its blood was thrown (first, before the blood of the Tamid), it is valid.

Question: What is the source of the requirement to slaughter it L'Ochlav (for the sake of those that will eat it)?

Answer (R' Yochanan quoting R' Yishmael): The pasuk states (Shemos 12, 4), "...each person according to what he eats (Tachosu) shall be counted''.

(R' Yashiya): It (Tachosu) is an expression in Surian, like a person who says to another, "(Kos) Slaughter for me this lamb!''

Question: What is the case of Lo L'Ochlav? If he slaughtered it for a sick person or an elderly person who are not able to eat from it a Kzayis.

Question: What is the case of "not for those reserved upon it''? If he slaughtered it for the members of a different group.

Question: Is this to say that a child (who cannot eat a Kzayis) reserved upon a Pesach offering invalidates it?

Question: Is this to say that if it was slaughtered for the sake of a person who was too distant to eat from it that it is invalid?

This is a support for the Daromians (southerners) who said that if the limbs were lost, his intent takes effect upon them as if they still exist.

Deduction: If he slaughtered it to be eaten by half of the group, it is invalid.

R' Chagai to R' Yosa: It can be explained as referring to when all of the group were sick. (However, if part of them were healthy enough to eat a Kzayis, it is valid.

Question (R' Yosa): Let it therefore teach that he slaughtered it for members of the group who were disqualified?

Answer (R' Chagai): There were members who qualified but he slaughtered it for those who did not.

R' Elazar: The Mishnah (that taught that if he slaughtered it L'Ochlav and Lo L'Ochlav, it is valid) refers to when he slaughtered it L'Ochlav in order to throw its blood both L'Ochlav and Lo L'Ochlav. However, if he slaughtered it for both, it is invalid. (Note: This explanation follows the text of the Korban HaEidah).