We continue in chapter 1 of tractate Zevachim, Mishnah 2. The entire chapter deals with one question: what is the law of a sacrifice - an animal offering - that was slaughtered for the sake of another type of sacrifice? In the previous Mishnah we learned that it depends: as a general rule the sacrifice is valid, but the owner does not fulfill his obligation with it, whereas the chatas and the Pesach are exceptions and are completely invalid. Our Mishnah brings different answers to that same question - these too distinguish between the cases, but with a different list of exceptions.
The view of Rabbi Yosi ben Choni:
The words of the Mishnah: "Rabbi Yosi ben Choni omer: hanishchatin leshem Pesach uleshem chatas pesulin" - Rabbi Yosi ben Choni says: those slaughtered for the sake of a Pesach or for the sake of a chatas are invalid. Rabbi Yosi ben Choni agrees with the rule of the previous Mishnah - that the sacrifice is valid but the owner does not fulfill his obligation, and a Pesach or chatas slaughtered not for their own sake are invalid - but he adds the reverse case to the list of invalid offerings as well: a person who slaughters an animal that is not a Pesach and not a chatas, but slaughters it for their sake. For example, one who slaughters an olah for the sake of a chatas, or one who slaughters shelamim for the sake of a Pesach - these too are completely invalid.
And what is his reasoning? He derives this via a kal vachomer, which is based on the following principle.
The principle of the kal vachomer - leftover funds of a Pesach and a chatas:
Let us begin with the Pesach. A person who designates money for monetary sanctity, and applies sanctity to it for the purpose of buying a Pesach offering - for example, he separates one hundred dollars and says it shall be for his Pesach offering - and ultimately buys the lamb for only eighty dollars, what should he do with the remaining twenty? The leftover, the excess money, is used specifically to buy shelamim. We find that the Pesach has an inherent potential, on a certain level, toward shelamim.
The opposite is not true: one who separates one hundred dollars to buy shelamim and the animal costs eighty, cannot buy a Pesach offering with the leftover funds. There is therefore no potential in shelamim to become a Pesach. From here Rabbi Yosi ben Choni says: if one who slaughters a Pesach - which has a certain level of potential for shelamim - for the sake of shelamim, meaning for a different sake, is completely invalid, kal vachomer that one who slaughters shelamim which have no potential for a Pesach at all, and does so for the sake of a Pesach, it is certainly not valid but rather invalid.
That same exact logic works for the chatas: one who separates one hundred dollars to buy a chatas and buys it for eighty, uses the leftover specifically to buy an olah. We find that the chatas has the potential of an olah on a certain level. And the opposite is not true - one who separates one hundred dollars for an olah and buys it for eighty cannot buy a chatas with the leftover funds, and the olah has no potential to be a chatas. We already learned from the previous Mishnah that one who slaughters a chatas - which has the potential of an olah - for the sake of an olah, it is invalid. Kal vachomer that one who takes an olah, which has no potential to be a chatas, and slaughters it for the sake of a chatas, it will certainly be invalid. This is the reasoning of Rabbi Yosi ben Choni, and the halachah is not in accordance with his view.
The view of Shimon achi Azaryah:
Here an unusual title appears: Shimon achi Azaryah - Shimon the brother of Azaryah, rather than his son. The reason for this is that these two brothers, Shimon and Azaryah, were partners like the model of Yissachar and Zevulun: Shimon sat in the study hall, and Azaryah engaged in business and supported him. And since they both share the reward equally, they are mentioned together - Shimon the brother of Azaryah.
His answer to the question of one who slaughters for a different sake is completely different. His words: "Shechatan leshem gavoha meihen - kesherin" - if the sacrifice was slaughtered for the sake of a sacrifice that stands higher in the hierarchy, meaning it is more sanctified, it is valid. "Leshem namuch meihen - pesulin" - if the animal was slaughtered, or its blood was received, brought, or sprinkled, for the sake of a less sanctified sacrifice, standing lower on the scale of sanctity, it is not valid.
The hierarchy of sanctity:
According to this approach, there are three levels. The eight types of animal offerings - olah, chatas, asham, shelamim, todah, maaser, bechor, and pesach - are divided into three categories based on their level of sanctity. Until now, we have only discussed two:
Kodshei kodashim (the most holy offerings): Olah, chatas, and asham.
Kodashim kalim (the less holy offerings): Shelamim, todah, maaser, bechor, and pesach.
We noted three main differences between them:
Applicability of me'ilah.
The location of the service - for kodshei kodashim, specifically in the northern part of the Azarah.
Eating the meat - for kodshei kodashim, the meat is eaten only by male kohanim and within the Azarah, whereas kodashim kalim are eaten even by the owners and anywhere within Jerusalem.
Hence the first distinction in terms of more holy and less holy, and this is the first thing Shimon the brother of Azaryah says. For example: an animal dedicated as kodshei kodashim - olah, chatas, or asham - where during the blood services the work was done with the thought that it was one of the kodashim kalim - shelamim, todah, maaser, bechor, or pesach - is completely invalid. This is a completely different approach from our first Mishnah. In contrast, an animal dedicated as kodashim kalim and slaughtered for the sake of a more holy offering - olah, chatas, or asham - is valid.
He has another hierarchy as well: he divides kodashim kalim into two categories - the shelamim and the todah in one category, and the maaser, the bechor, and the pesach in a lower, less holy category. The reason for this is four characteristics that distinguish the shelamim from the maaser, the bechor, and the pesach:
Semichah: For shelamim and todah, the person places his hands and leans on the head of the animal before its slaughter, and there is no semichah for maaser, bechor, and pesach.
Nesachim: The shelamim and todah are accompanied by wine libations and a minchah offering, which does not apply to maaser, bechor, and pesach.
Tenufas chazeh veshok: The kohen receives as a gift the breast - the chest and throat area of the animal - and the thigh, the right hind leg, and eats them as part of the shelamim, while the owners eat the rest. However, before the burning of the eimurim, they are waved, together with the breast and the thigh, in all six directions like a lulav. And this does not apply to maaser, bechor, and pesach.
Mattan damim, and perhaps the most important of them: For shelamim and todah, the blood is applied to all four walls - two sprinklings that are four, on two corners that constitute the four walls. However, for maaser, bechor, and pesach, it is sufficient to pour it on only one wall.
Therefore, based on the same logic it states: "Bechor umaaser sheshechatan leshem shelamim" - A bechor or maaser that he slaughtered for the sake of shelamim - "kesheirim" - are valid, whereas "shelamim sheshechatan leshem bechor" - shelamim that he slaughtered for the sake of a bechor - or for the sake of maaser - "pesulin" - are invalid. Note that there is no explicit mention of the pesach here, and there is a good reason to assume that in his opinion the pesach is not valid in any case, as was explained above. Regardless, his derivations and reasoning are based on verses, but the halachah is not decided like him, and the Sages did not accept the approach of Shimon the brother of Azaryah.