HAKTARAS SHIRAYIM [Shirayim:Haktarah]
R. Yochanan: It is a Safek whether the part of the Minchah between the Kohen's fingers is considered Kometz or Shirayim.
Question: What do we do with it?
Answer (R. Chanina): First we offer the Vadai Kometz (what was within his fingers), and then the Safek. We cannot offer the Safek first, for perhaps it is really Shirayim, and the Shirayim will become Chaserim before Haktaras ha'Kometz. When this happens, we do not offer the Kometz.
Question: Offering the Safek after the Vadai Kometz is also problematic! The Torah forbids Haktaras (Shirayim of) 'Chol she'Mimenu l'Ishim' (anything partially burned on the Mizbe'ach)!
Answer #1 (Rav Yehudah brei d'R. Shimon ben Pazi): Haktarah of the Safek is (with intent that if it really is Shirayim, it is not l'Shem Kometz, rather,) l'Shem Etzim (like burning wood on the Mizbe'ach), like R. Eliezer taught:
Beraisa - R. Eliezer: "L'Re'ach Nicho'ach" - you may not offer (Chametz or honey) on the Mizbe'ach to fulfill Hash-m's will, but they may be burned l'Shem Etzim.
Question: According to Chachamim (who do not permit l'Shem Etzim), how can we answer?
Answer #2 (Rav Mari): Kemitzah is done by Kohanim with fat fingers (there is no space between their fingers).
Retraction of Answer #1: R. Eliezer agrees that l'Chatchilah, Kemitzah is done by Kohanim with fat fingers. (He permits l'Shem Etzim only b'Di'eved, e.g. when Korbanos became mixed up.)
Zevachim 77a (Mishnah - R. Eliezer): If limbs of a Chatas were mixed with limbs of an Olah, we burn all of them on the Mizbe'ach. We consider the Chatas to be like wood;
Chachamim say, we wait for Ibur Tzurah (the next day, when they are Nosar), then all are burned in Beis ha'Sereifah.
(Gemara) Question: What is R. Eliezer's reason?
Answer: "(You may not offer Chametz or honey)...v'El ha'Mizbe'ach Lo Ya'alu l'Re'ach Nicho'ach". You may not offer them (or Shirayim of Chol she'Mimenu l'Ishim) on the Mizbe'ach for Re'ach Nicho'ach, but they may be burned l'Shem Etzim.
Chachamim expound "Osam" to teach that only Chametz and honey are forbidden l'Re'ach Nicho'ach and permitted l'Shem Etzim. Other things are forbidden even l'Shem Etzim.
R. Eliezer expounds "Osam" to teach that the ramp is considered like the Mizbe'ach only regarding (the Isur to offer) Chametz and honey, not regarding other things.
Chachamim expound both from "Osam."
Our Mishnah is unlike the following Tana (who says that sometimes Chachamim permit other things l'Shem Etzim):
(Beraisa - R. Yehudah): R. Eliezer and Chachamim agree that if limbs of Chatas and Olah became mixed, we offer them.
Menachos 57b (Beraisa) Question: What is the source that one is liable for Haktarah of any of the following - meat of Chatas, Asham, other Kodshei Kodoshim (that are eaten, i.e. Shalmei Tzibur), or Kodshim Kalim; Shirayim of the Omer, Shirei Shtei ha'Lechem, Lechem ha'Panim, or Shirei Menachos?
Answer: "Ki Chol Se'or v'Chol Devash Lo Saktiru Mimenu Korban Isheh la'Shem" - it is forbidden to be Maktir the Shirayim of anything that is partially burned on the Mizbe'ach.
Question: No part of Shtei ha'Lechem or Lechem ha'Panim is offered!
Answer (Rav Sheshes): No part of them themselves is offered (but 'Kol she'Mimenu l'Ishim' applies to them, for they have Matirim that are offered (Kivsei Atzeres and Bazichei Levonah).
R. Yochanan: If one offered any of them on the ramp he is liable;
R. Elazar: He is exempt.
R. Yochanan learns from a Beraisa:
Beraisa: "Ha'Mizbe'ach" is Mechayev for bringing these onto the Mizbe'ach; "V'El ha'Mizbe'ach Lo Ya'alu..." is Mechayev for bringing onto the ramp.
R. Elazar learns from "Ki Chol Se'or v'Chol Devash..." - only for them the ramp is like the Mizbe'ach.
58a - Beraisa - R. Eliezer: The Torah forbids (Haktaras Shirayim of) Chol she'Mimenu l'Ishim;
R. Akiva says, Haktaras Shirayim of anything called Korban is forbidden.
Question: What is the difference between them?
Answer #1 (Rav Chisda): They argue about meat of Chatas ha'Of.
Answer #2 (Rav): They argue about Log Shemen of a Metzora (none is offered, but it is called Korban):
Levi - Beraisa: "Kol Korbanam" includes Log Shemen of a Metzora (it is called Korban).
Yevamos 100a - Rav Papa: The Mishnah says that if a Kohen and Yisrael became mixed up, they have the stringencies (of Yisraelim and Kohanim. This means that when either of them brings a Minchah, a Kometz is offered on the Mizbe'ach like Minchas Yisrael, and the remainder is not eaten, like Minchas Kohen;
The Kometz is offered by itself, and the remainder by itself.
Question: It is forbidden to be Maktir the Shirayim of Chol she'Mimenu l'Ishim!
Answer #1 (R. Yehudah brei d'R. Shimon Ben Pazi): He burns it l'Shem Etzim, like R. Elazar taught:
(Beraisa - R. Elazar): You may not offer l'Re'ach Nicho'ach", but you may burn l'Shem Etzim.
This is according to R. Elazar. According to Chachamim (who do not permit l'Shem Etzim), how can we answer?
Answer #2: We do like R. Elazar b'Rebbi Shimon.
(Beraisa - R. Elazar b'Rebbi Shimon): The Kometz is offered by itself, and the remainder is scattered in the place where ashes from the Mizbe'ach are placed.
Chachamim argue with R. Elazar b'Rebbi Shimon only regarding the Minchas Chotei of a Kohen, since they say that it is totally offered. They agree regarding a Safek Kohen (the Shirayim cannot be offered, lest he is a Yisrael and a Lav forbids offering them).
Rambam (Hilchos Isurei Mizbe'ach 5:1,3): It is forbidden to be Maktir Se'or or honey. One is liable only if he offered them with a Korban or l'Shem Korban. If he was Maktir them by themselves he is exempt. hold that is forbidden "l'Re'ach Nicho'ach", but it is permitted l'Shem Etzim.
Ri Korkus (3): Anything not l'Shem Korban is called l'Shem Etzim.
Rashash (brought in Frankel Rambam Likutim) and Chak Noson (Zevachim 77a DH v'Rabanan): The Kesef Mishneh says that this is learned from Zevachim 76. This is wrong, for that is like R. Eliezer, and the Halachah does not follow him. (The Rambam (Pesulei ha'Mukdashim 6:20) rules that if limbs of Chatas and Olah became mixed, none of them may be offered.) Rather, the Rambam learns from Chachamim (77a), "Osam" (Chametz and honey) are forbidden l'Re'ach Nicho'ach and permitted l'Shem Etzim. Other things are forbidden even l'Shem Etzim.
Aruch l'Ner (Yevamos 100a DH l'Shum Olah): The Rambam rules unlike R. Eliezer regarding Shirayim (in Halachah 5, brought below) and regarding Shirei Minchah of a Safek Kohen (Hilchos Ma'aseh ha'Korbanos 12:11).
Aruch ha'Shulchan ha'Asid (Kodshim 57:19): The Rambam brings the Heter to burn l'Shem Etzim regarding Se'or and honey because the verse from which we learn this Heter primarily discusses Se'or and honey. The Isur of Haktaras Shi'urim is also learned from this verse. Obviously, the Heter l'Shem Etzim also applies to them, so the Rambam did not need to say this.
Rambam (ibid.): Even if something is not fit for Haktarah, if one was Maktir it with Se'or or honey he is lashed, because it is part of a Korban.
Rebuttal (Ra'avad): The Rambam errs. He thinks that the Beraisa teaches that one is not liable for Se'or or honey unless it is offered with something called Korban.
Mar'eh ha'Panim (Shabbos 45a DH R. Eliezer): The correct text of the Rambam should say one is liable for Haktarah of things not fit for Haktarah 'ki'Dvash' (like honey), not 'bi'Dvash' (with honey).
Rambam (ibid. 4): For example, if one was Maktir a k'Zayis of meat of Chatas or Kodshim Kalim or Shirei Menachos with Se'or or honey on the Mizbe'ach or ramp he is lashed, for these are called Korban.
Question: R. Akiva (Menachos 58a) says that the Isur depends on what is called Korban. What is the source for this?
Answer (Sefas Emes Menachos 58a DH Boi): Rashi (DH Kol) says that we learn from "Korban Reishis". But why is one liable for Log Shemen of Metzora? None is offered! This forced the Rambam to learn that the Isur is for Se'or or honey. Normally, there is a Heter l'Shem Etzim, but when they are offered with anything called Korban it is forbidden.
Rambam (ibid. 5): It is forbidden to burn on the Mizbe'ach anything that should not be burned, such as meat of Chatas or Asham or Shirayim of Menachos. There is an Isur Haktarah for Shirayim of anything partially burned on the Mizbe'ach.
Question (Kesef Mishneh): Why does the Rambam omit liability for the ramp? This is like R. Elazar, against R. Yochanan!
Answer #1 (Ri Korkus): The Sugya in Menachos is like R. Elazar.
Answer #2 (Sefas Emes ibid.) Question: The Rambam holds that Haktaras Shirayim without Se'or or honey is Asur, but one is not lashed for it. If so, how does he explain the argument of R. Yochanan and R. Elazar about putting them on the ramp? In any case one is not lashed! And why does he rule like R. Elazar?
Answer: He explains that they argue about a mixture containing Se'or or honey. R. Elazar includes the ramp to be like the Mizbe'ach only regarding pure Se'or or honey. R. Yochanan includes the ramp even for a mixture, but agrees that without Se'or or honey there is no Isur. The Rambam rules like R. Yochanan.