רב פפא אמר דכולי עלמא דון מינה ומינה הוא והיינו טעמא דרבי כי התם מה התם דבר שמתנה לכהן אף הכא דבר שמתנה לכהן Rav Pappa said there is a different explanation of the dispute between Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi and the Rabbis: Everyone, even Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, agrees that with regard to a verbal analogy, the guiding principle is: Infer from it and derive the details from it. And this is the reason for Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi’s ruling that after the slaughter of the communal peace offering one waves the entire body offering, not just the breast and thigh: It is done here like it is done there, in the case of individual peace offerings: Just as there, one waves the item that is a gift to the priest, as the breast and thigh are given to the priests to eat, so too here, with regard to the communal peace offerings, one waves the item that is a gift to the priest. Since the communal peace offerings are given to the priests in their entirety, they are also waved in their entirety.
רבינא אמר דכולי עלמא דון מינה ואוקי באתרה והיינו טעמא דרבנן שלמיהם ריבויא הוא: Ravina said an explanation which is the opposite of Rav Pappa’s: Everyone, even the Rabbis, agrees that the guiding principle is: Infer from it but interpret the halakha according to its own place. And this is the reason for the ruling of the Rabbis that one waves only the breast and thigh of communal peace offerings: The verse states with regard to individual peace offerings: “For the breast of waving and the thigh of heaving I have taken from the children of Israel out of their sacrifices of peace offerings, and have given them to Aaron the priest and to his sons as an eternal portion from among the children of Israel” (Leviticus 7:34). The term: “Their sacrifices of peace offerings,” is in the plural, despite the fact that the verse is referring to individual peace offerings. This is an amplification, which teaches that the same halakha applies to communal peace offerings, i.e., that only the breast and the thigh are to be waved.
רבי שמעון אומר שלשה מינין טעונין שלש מצות שתים בכל אחד ושלישית אין בהן ואלו הן זבחי שלמי יחיד וזבחי שלמי צבור ואשם מצורע § The mishna teaches: Rabbi Shimon says: There are three types of offerings that require performance of three mitzvot. Two mitzvot are performed on each and every one of them, but the third mitzva is not performed in their sacrifice, meaning that each of these offerings requires two out of the same three mitzvot, but not necessarily the same two as the others. And these are the three offerings: Peace offerings brought as gift offerings by an individual, communal peace offerings, i.e., the two lambs brought with the two loaves on the festival of Shavuot, and the guilt offering of a leper.
זבחי שלמי יחיד טעונין סמיכה חיים ותנופה שחוטין ואין בהן תנופה חיים זבחי שלמי צבור טעונין תנופה חיים ושחוטין ואין בהן סמיכה אשם מצורע טעון סמיכה ותנופה חי ואין בו תנופה שחוט: The mishna continues: Peace offerings brought by individuals require placing hands on the head of the animals while the animals are still alive, and waving after they are slaughtered, but there is no obligation of waving them while they are alive. Communal peace offerings require waving both while they are still alive and after they are slaughtered, but there is no obligation of placing hands on them. And the guilt offering of a leper requires placing hands and waving it while it is still alive, but there is no obligation of waving it after it is slaughtered.
ויהיו זבחי שלמי יחיד טעונין תנופה חיים מקל וחומר ומה זבחי שלמי צבור שאין טעונין סמיכה חיים טעונין תנופה חיים זבחי שלמי יחיד שטעונין סמיכה חיים אינו דין שטעונין תנופה חיים The Gemara challenges: And let peace offerings brought by an individual require waving while still alive, as this can be derived via an a fortiori inference: And if communal peace offerings, whose halakha is more lenient than that of individual peace offerings in that they do not require placing hands on the head of offerings while they are alive, nevertheless require waving when alive, then with regard to peace offerings brought by an individual, which do require placing hands while alive, is it not logical to conclude that they require waving when alive?
מיעט רחמנא גבי זבחי שלמי צבור אותם אותם למעוטי זבחי שלמי יחיד The Gemara answers: This a fortiori inference is not accepted, because the Merciful One excluded peace offerings brought by an individual, as the verse states with regard to communal peace offerings: “And the priest shall wave them with the bread of the first fruits for a wave offering before the Lord, with the two lambs” (Leviticus 23:20). The word “them” serves to exclude peace offerings brought by an individual from the requirement of waving while the animal is alive.
ויהיו זבחי שלמי צבור טעונין סמיכה מקל וחומר ומה זבחי שלמי יחיד שאין טעונין תנופה חיים טעונין סמיכה זבחי שלמי צבור שטעונין תנופה חיים אינו דין שטעונין סמיכה אמר רבינא גמירי שתי סמיכות בצבור The Gemara asks: And let communal peace offerings require placing hands, as this can be derived via an a fortiori inference: And if peace offerings brought by an individual, whose halakha is more lenient than that of communal peace offerings in that they do not require waving while alive, nevertheless require placing hands, then with regard to communal peace offerings, which do require waving when alive, is it not logical to conclude that they require placing hands? Ravina said: This a fortiori inference is not accepted, as it is learned as a tradition from Sinai that there are only two cases of placing hands in communal offerings: The scapegoat on Yom Kippur and the bull brought for an unwitting communal sin.
ויהא אשם מצורע טעון תנופה שחוט מקל וחומר מה זבחי שלמי יחיד שאין טעונין תנופה חיים טעונין תנופה שחוטין אשם מצורע שטעון תנופה חי אינו דין שטעון תנופה שחוט The Gemara further asks: And let the guilt offering of a leper require waving after the animal has been slaughtered, as this can be derived via an a fortiori inference: And if peace offerings brought by an individual, whose halakha is more lenient than that of the guilt offering of a leper in that they do not require waving when alive, nevertheless require waving after they are slaughtered, then with regard to the guilt offering of a leper, which requires waving while alive, is it not logical to conclude that it also requires waving after it is slaughtered?
מיעט רחמנא גבי זבחי שלמי יחיד אותו אותו למעוטי אשם מצורע The Gemara answers: The Merciful One excluded the guilt offering of a leper, as the verse states with regard to peace offerings brought by an individual: “His own hands shall bring the offerings of the Lord made by fire; the fat with the breast shall he bring; the breast, to wave it before the Lord” (Leviticus 7:30). The word “it” serves to exclude the guilt offering of a leper from the requirement of waving after the animal has been slaughtered.
תנו רבנן חמשה שהביאו קרבן אחד אחד מניף על ידי כולם והאשה כהן מניף על ידה וכן השולח קרבנותיו ממדינת הים כהן מניף על ידו: § The Sages taught: With regard to five people who brought one offering together, one of them waves the offering on behalf of all of them. And in the case of a woman who brings an offering, the priest waves the offering on her behalf. And similarly, with regard to one who sends his offerings from overseas, the priest waves them on his behalf.