Zevachim 16

חטאת דעבודת כוכבים דשמיעת הקול ובטוי שפתים וטומאת מקדש וקדשיו דלא כתיב בהו מנלן

how do we know [it of] the sin-offerings of idolatry, hearing a voice, swearing clearly with the lips and the defilement of the Sanctuary and its sacred objects, where ['for a sin-offering'] is not written?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The sin-offering of idolatry: And when ye shall err, and not observe all these commandments etc.; and if one person sin through error etc.');">¹</span>

חטאת דעבודת כוכבים אתיא מחטאת חלב שכן כרת כמותה והנך כולהי אתיין במה הצד:

- The sin-offering of idolatry is inferred from the sin-offering of forbidden fat, since it entails kareth, just as th latter does.

תנו רבנן פסח בזמנו לשמו כשר שלא לשמו פסול ובשאר ימות השנה לשמו פסול שלא לשמו כשר

While all the others are inferred [by analogy] through a common characteristic.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' They are inferred by analogy through the feature common to the sin-offering of forbidden fat, that of a nazirite, and that of a leper. The only feature they have in common is that they are sin-offerings, and both change in respect of sanctity and change in respect of owner disqualify them. Therefore the others here enumerated, which have the same feature, viz., that they are sin-offerings, are likewise disqualified by change of sanctity or change of owner.');">²</span>

(של"ו קבאיצ"ן ממה"ר בצ"א ב"א סימן)

Our Rabbis taught: The Passover-offering, in its season,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The time for killing it is from midday on the fourteenth of Nisan until nightfall.');">³</span>

מנא הני מילי אמר אבוה דשמואל אמר קרא (ויקרא א, י) ואם מן הצאן קרבנו לזבח שלמים לה' דבר הבא מן הצאן יהא לזבח שלמים

[if slaughtered] in its own name, is valid; if not [slaughtered] its own name, it is invalid.

אימא שלמים אין מידי אחרינא לא אמר רבי אילא א"ר יוחנן לזבח לרבות כל זבח

During the rest of the year, [if slaughtered] in its own name, it is invalid; if no [slaughtered] in its own name, it is valid.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This refers to an animal dedicated for a Passover-offering which was lost when it was required and found later. It is then to be sacrificed as a peace-offering.');">⁴</span>

אימא כל דשחיט להוי כמותה

Whence do we know it? - Said Samuel's father: Scripture saith, And if his offering for a sacrifice of peace-offerings unto the Lord be of the flock:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. III, 6.');">⁵</span>

אי הוה כתיב לשלמים וזבח כדקאמרת השתא דכתיב לזבח שלמים לכל דשחיט ליה שלמים להוי

[this teaches that] whatever comes of the flock is to be for a sacrifice of peace-offerings.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since a Passover-offering comes of the flock it is included in this deduction. Further, that can only mean after its season, for it has already been deduced supra that if it is offered for anything but itself in its season it is invalid.');">⁶</span>

אימא לזבח כלל שלמים פרט כלל ופרט אין בכלל אלא מה שבפרט שלמים אין מידי אחרינא לא

Then say, [if sacrificed as] a peace-offering, it is [valid]; but [if sacrificed as] anything it is not valid?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Whereas it is simply stated, 'if not slaughtered in its own name, it is valid', which implies that it is valid if sacrificed as any offering.');">⁷</span>

לה' הדר וכלל

Said R'Ela in R'Johanan's name: 'For a sacrifice' includes every sacrifice.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For these words (one word in the original) are superfluous, hence they are interpreted as an extension.');">⁸</span>

מתקיף לה ר' יעקב מנהר פקוד הא לא דמי כללא בתרא לכללא קמא כללא קמא מרבי זבחים ותו לא כללא בתרא לה' כל דלה' ואפי' לעופות ואפי' למנחות

Then say, For whatever purpose it is slaughtered, let it be such?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' E.g., if it is slaughtered as a burnt-offering, it is a burnt-offering. - Actually it is a peace-offering under all circumstances.');">⁹</span>

הא תנא דבי רבי ישמעאל בכללי ופרטי דריש כי האי גוונא

- If it were written, 'for peace-offering and a sacrifice' [it would be] as you say; since however it is written, 'for a sacrifice of peace-offerings', [its implication is whatever purpose it is slaughtered, let it be a peace-offering.

כלל ופרט וכלל אי אתה דן אלא כעין הפרט מה הפרט מפורש שהוא שלא לשמו וכשר אף כל שהוא שלא לשמו וכשר

Yet say, 'for a sacrifice' is a generalization, while 'of peace-offerings' is a particularization; how [in the case of] a generalization and a particularization the generalization includes only what is contained in the particularization; [hence if it is sacrificed as] a peace-offering, it is [valid], but [if it is offered as] anything else, it is not [valid]? 'Unto the Lord' is aga generalization.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In such cases the generalization includes everything that is similar to the particularization; hence, anything that comes of the flock.');">¹⁰</span>

אי מה הפרט מפורש דבר הבא בנדר ובנדבה אף כל הבא בנדר ובנדבה עולה ושלמים אין חטאת ואשם לא

To this R'Jacob of Nehar Pekod demurred: But the last generalization is dissimilar from the first, [for] the first generalization includes sacrifices but nothing else, whereas the last generalization, 'unto the Lord', implies whatever is the Lord's, even [if he slaughtered it] for fowl - [offerings],<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., if he slaughtered it as the sin-offering of a bird.');">¹¹</span>

אלא לזבח רבויא הוא

and even for meal-offerings? - This is in accordance with the Tanna of the School of R'Ishmael who applies the rule to a generalization and a particularization of this nature, [and maintains that even in such a case, where you have] a generalization, a particularization and a generalization [in this sequence,] you must be guided by the particularization: as the particularization is explicitly something that is not in its own name, and it is valid,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As explained above,');">¹²</span>

אימא לכל דשחיט ליה להוי כוותיה

so whatever that is not in its own name is valid.

א"ר אבין

Then [say:] as the particularization is explicitly something which can come as a vow or a freewill-offering,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Both are votive offerings. A vow is technically where one vows to bring a sacrifice, without specifying the animal at the time; a freewill-offering is a vow to bring a particular animal for an offering.');">¹³</span> so everything which can come as a vow or as a freewill-offering [is included]; [hence, if he slaughters the Passover-offering out of its season as] a burnt-offering or as a peace-offering it is [valid], [but if he slaughters it then as] a sin-offering or a guilt-offering, it is not [valid]! - Rather, 'For a sacrifice' is an extension.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Rashi: it is not interpreted under the rule of generalization etc., but as an extension, in which case even cases not similar to itself are included. The rule of generalization etc., is applied only where the natural sense of the passage yields a generalization and a particularization, without anything in the text being superfluous. Here, however, 'for a sacrifice of peace-offerings' is regarded as altogether superfluous, and therefore it is held to be an extension.');">¹⁴</span> Then say, for whatever it is slaughtered, let it be such!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As above,');">¹⁵</span> - Said Rabin: