Zevachim Daf 48 זבחים דַף 48

The Gemara asks that since the law requiring shechitah of קדשי קדשים in צפון was written about עולה, the Perek should begin with עולה instead of חטאות הפנימיות!? It answers: חטאת איידי דאתי מדרשא חביבא ליה – since the צפון requirement of chatas is derived from a derashah (a היקש to עולה), it is dear to [the Tanna], so he taught it first. The Gemara asks that if so, the Perek should begin with חטאות החיצונות – outer חטאות, since the היקש to עולה was written about חטאות החיצונות. It answers: איידי דנכנס דמן לפני ולפנים חביבא ליה – since the blood of [Yom Kippur korbanos] enters the innermost room of the Mikdash (the קדש הקדשים), it is dear to [the Tanna], so he taught it first. The source to shecht an עולה in צפון is: ושחט אותו על ירך המזבח צפונה – and he shall shecht it at the side of the mizbeiach, on the north. This is written regarding בן צאן – the flock, and extended to בן בקר – cattle from "ואם מן הצאן" – and if his korban is from the flock: וי"ו מוסיף על ענין ראשון – the extra letter vav adds the second subject of צאן to the first subject of cattle, וילמד עליון מתחתון – so the earlier subject derives [the צפון requirement] from the later subject.

The Gemara objects that this type of derashah seems to be a machlokes Tannaim: Rebbe Akiva darshens "ואם נפש וגו'" – and if a person etc., לחייב על ספק מעילות אשם תלוי – to obligate an asham out of doubt for doubtful transgressions of me’ilah, by connecting this passuk about אשם תלוי to the previous pesukim of אשם מעילות. The Chochomim exempt ספק me’ilah from an אשם תלוי. Apparently, they argue if we derive עליון מתחתון through וי"ו מוסיף!? Rav Pappa answers that all agree to this derashah, but the Rabbonon darshen a gezeirah shavah (חלב חלב) from a standard חטאת, teaching that אשם תלוי is only for a כרת violation, as opposed to me’ilah. Although the "וי"ו מוסיף" is a היקש, and all agree that a היקש is stronger than a gezeirah shavah, the Rabbonon say this היקש is used to teach that an אשם תלוי must be worth two silver shekels, like an אשם מעילות, despite the fact that a definite חטאת has no minimum cost.

The Gemara extends the צפון requirement to the shechitah of all חטאות, and asks, why did the Torah write "אותו" – [and he shall shecht] “it” in צפון, implying an exclusion? After the first answer is rejected, the Gemara suggests that it teaches: אותו בצפון ואין שוחט בצפון – “it” (the animal) must be in the north during shechitah, but the slaughterer need not be standing in the north when shechting. The Gemara objects that Rebbe Achiya derives this from a different passuk. It then suggests that "אותו" is teaching either that the מליקה of birds, or the shechitah of a pesach, need not be in צפון, but the Gemara concludes that there is no basis to think they would, so no passuk is needed to exclude them. Ultimately, the Gemara returns to its earlier suggestion, to exclude the שוחט from having to be in צפון, but since Rebbe Achiya derived this from elsewhere, the Gemara clarifies that the purpose of the שוחט’s exclusion from צפון is to teach an inference: אין שוחט בצפון אבל מקבל בצפון – the שוחט need not be in צפון, but the מקבל of the חטאת’s blood must stand in צפון.