Menachos Daf 6 מנחוס דַף 6

The Gemara finally concludes that the disqualification of טריפה as a korban cannot be derived, even from a צד השוה between בעל מום and יוצא דופן, שכן מומן ניכר – because their defect is recognized (a מום is physically apparent, and a יוצא דופן is publicly known), as opposed to a טריפה, whose defect is not known, so the derashah of "מן הבקר" is necessary to disqualify it. The Gemara asks that this can be derived from "ממשקה ישראל" – from the feast of Yisroel, which requires korbanos to be brought מן המותר לישראל – from that which is permitted to Yisroel. This disqualifies טריפה, which is prohibited in consumption!? Furthermore, another passuk, "כל אשר יעבור תחת השבט" – whatever shall pass under the staff (the tenth is holy as מעשר בהמה), פרט לטריפה שאינה עוברת – excludes a tereifah, which cannot pass under the staff!? The Gemara explains that all three derashos are necessary: "ממשקה ישראל" would only disqualify where it had no שעת הכושר – moment of fitness (i.e., a טריפה from birth), parallel to ערלה and כלאי הכרם (hinted in that passuk), which are immediately forbidden. The passuk of מעשר בהמה only disqualifies where it was a טריפה before becoming a korban, like the case of מעשר. "מן הבקר" teaches that even if it was a korban before becoming a טריפה, it is still disqualified.

The next Mishnah states that a מנחת חוטא or any other minchah whose קמיצה was performed by a זר, an אונן, or a Kohen with any of several other disqualifications, the קמיצה is invalid and cannot be rectified. The same applies to קמיצה done בשמאל – with his left hand. However, בן בתירא says: יחזיר ויחזור ויקמוץ בימין – he should return the קומץ to the כלי, and perform kemitzah again with his right hand. The Gemara will explain that בן בתירא argues on all the cases of the רישא as well and holds they can all be returned to the כלי and redone. The Gemara wonders why the Mishnah specified “a מנחת חוטא,” since it could have simply said “all menachos.” It answers that since Rebbe Shimon explains that a מחנת חוטא does not require oil or לבונה, שלא יהא קרבנו מהודר – so that his korban will not be elegant, one might think that he does not disqualify a מנחה whose avodah was performed by a פסול. Therefore, the Mishnah specified מנחת חוטא to teach that Rebbe Shimon agrees it is פסול.

Rav said: זר שקמץ יחזיר – if a non-Kohen performed kemitzah, he should return it to the כלי to be redone by a Kohen. After proving this statement must be according to בן בתירא, the Gemara suggests Rav is teaching that בן בתירא allows returning the קומץ in all disqualified cases of the Mishnah. However, this point is already clear from two Baraisos, so what novelty is Rav teaching? Therefore, the Gemara states that Rav said: קמץ ואפילו קידש – if he did kemitzah, he may return it to the כלי even if he already sanctified it by placing it in the second כלי. This disagrees with Rebbe Yose ben Yasyan and Rebbe Yehudah HaNachtom, who said that if he was מקדש the kometz in a כלי, it is disqualified and cannot be returned. In a second version, Rav himself said like these Tannaim, in disagreement with the Tanna Kamma who holds it may be returned even after קידוש in the כלי. Rav Nachman explains that although these Tannaim hold that kemitzah is an avodah, ולא גמרה עבודתה עד דעביד לה מתן כלי – but the avodah [of kemitzah] is not complete until he performs the placing of the kometz in the vessel.