Zevachim 3

מתני׳ <big><strong>כל</strong></big> הזבחים שנזבחו שלא לשמן כשרים אלא שלא עלו לבעלים לשם חובה חוץ מן הפסח והחטאת הפסח בזמנו והחטאת בכל זמן

MISHNAH ALL SACRIFICES SLAUGHTERED NOT IN THEIR OWN NAME<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e. under a different designation. E.g., a burnt-offering slaughtered as a peace-offering.');">¹</span> ARE VALID,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' They count as a sacrifice, and all their rites, such as sprinkling the blood, burning the emurim (v. Glos) . and eating the flesh, must be performed.');">²</span>

רבי אליעזר אומר אף האשם הפסח בזמנו והחטאת והאשם בכל זמן אמר רבי אליעזר החטאת באה על חטא והאשם בא על חטא מה חטאת פסולה שלא לשמה אף האשם פסול שלא לשמו

SAVE THAT THEY DO NOT FREE THEIR OWNERS OF THEIR OBLIGATION,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If the owner vowed e.g.. a burnt-offering, this sacrifice does not free him of his obligation and he must bring another.');">³</span> WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE PASSOVER-OFFERING AND THE SIN-OFFERING.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' These are altogether invalid; hence they must be burnt (not on the altar) , and the usual rites may not be performed.');">⁴</span>

יוסי בן חוני אומר הנשחטין לשם פסח ולשם חטאת פסולין

[THIS HOLDS GOOD OF] A PASSOVER-OFFERING IN ITS PROPER TIME;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. from midday on the eve of Passover until nightfall.');">⁵</span> AND A SIN-OFFERING AT ALL TIMES.

שמעון אחי עזריה אומר שחטן לשם גבוה מהן כשרין לשם נמוך מהן פסולין

R'ELIEZER SAID: ALSO THE GUILT-OFFERING [IS INVALID]. [AND THE LAW HOLDS GOOD OF] A PASSOVER-OFFERING IN ITS PROPER TIME, AND A SIN-OFFERING AND A GUILT-OFFERING AT ALL TIMES.

כיצד קדשי קדשים ששחטן לשם קדשים קלים פסולין קדשים קלים ששחטן לשם קדשי קדשים כשרין הבכור והמעשר ששחטן לשם שלמים כשרין שלמים ששחטן לשם בכור ולשם מעשר פסולין:

R'ELIEZER ARGUED: THE SIN-OFFERING COMES ON ACCOUNT OF SIN, AND THE GUILT-OFFERING COMES ON ACCOUNT OF SIN: AS A SIN-OFFERING [ SLAUGHTERED] NOT IN ITS OWN NAME IS INVALID, SO IS THE GUILT-OFFERING INVALID [SLAUGHTERED] NOT IN ITS OWN NAME. JOSE B. HONI SAID: [SACRIFICES] SLAUGHTERED IN THE NAME OF A PASSOVER-OFFERING OR A SIN-OFFERING ARE INVALID.

<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> למה לי למיתנא אלא שלא עלו ליתני ולא עלו לבעלים לשם חובה

SIMEON THE BROTHER OF 'AZARIAH<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sotah 21a.');">⁶</span> SAID: IF ONE SLAUGHTERED THEM UNDER A HIGHER DESIGNATION THAN THEIR OWN THEY ARE VALID; UNDER A LOWER DESIGNATION THAN THEIR OWN, THEY ARE INVALID.

הא קמ"ל לבעלים הוא דלא עלו לשם חובה אבל בקדושתייהו קיימי ואסור לשנויי בהו

HOW SO? IF ONE SLAUGHTERED MOST SACRED SACRIFICES UNDER THE DESIGNATION OF LESSER SACRIFICES,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sacrifices were divided into two categories: (i) Most sacred; these included the sin-offering, meal-offering, burnt-offering and guilt-offering; and (ii) Lesser sacrifices e.g.,the peace-offering. Passover-offering and the thanksoffering.');">⁷</span>

וכדרבא דאמר רבא עולה ששחטה שלא לשמה אסור לזרוק דמה שלא לשמה

THEY ARE INVALID; IF ONE SLAUGHTERED LESSER SACRIFICES UNDER THE DESIGNATION OF MOST SACRED SACRIFICES, THEY ARE VALID. IF ONE SLAUGHTERED A FIRSTLING OR TITHE IN THE NAME OF A PEACE-OFFERING,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The sanctity of the former is lower, v. infra 89a.');">⁸</span>

איבעית אימא סברא איבעית אימא קרא איבעית אימא סברא משום דשני בה כל הני לישני בה וליזיל

IT IS VALID; IF ONE SLAUGHTERED A PEACE-OFFERING IN THE NAME OF A FIRSTLING OR TITHE, IT IS INVALID. <big><b>GEMARA: </b></big>Why must [the Tanna] teach, SAVE THAT THEY DO NOT FREE [THEIR OWNERS OF THEIR OBLIGATION]; let him teach, 'and they do not free their owners of their obligation? '<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which is more in keeping with the terse style of the MISHNAH:');">⁹</span>

איבעית אימא קרא (דברים כג, כד) מוצא שפתיך תשמור ועשית כאשר נדרת לה' אלהיך נדבה וגו' האי נדבה

- He informs us this: they merely do not free their owners of their obligation. yet they retain their [original] sanctity, and no alteration therein is permitted, in accordance with Raba's dictum. For Raba said: If a burnt-offering was slaughtered under a different designation, its blood must not be sprinkled under a different designation.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' But as the blood of a burnt-offering.');">¹⁰</span> If you wish, I can say [this follows] from reason, and if you wish I can say, from Scripture. If you wish, I can say [this follows] from reason: because he made an alteration therein [once], is he to go on making alterations therein?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Obviously not-one wrong does not authorise another!');">¹¹</span> And if you wish, I can say [it follows] from Scripture: That which is gone out of thy lip thou shalt observe and do; according as thou hast vowed a freewill-offering unto the Lord thy God etc. :<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XXIII,24.');">¹²</span> is this a freewill-offering -