1) Not every Kli Kodesh is necessarily a Kli Shares. See, for example, Menachos 96a, where there is a dispute between Rebbi Yehudah and Rebbi Shimon. Rebbi Yehudah maintains that the oven makes Kodesh anything placed in it, while Rebbi Shimon holds that the Tanur is not Mekadesh. In other words, Rebbi Yehudah maintains that the oven is a Kli Shares but Rebbi Shimon maintains that it is not.

However, Rebbi Shimon clearly agrees that the oven posseses Kedushah. Even items nowadays in a shul possess the Kedushah of a Beis Kneses. See Shulchan Aruch OC 144:3, and Mishnah Berurah there (#10), that, for example, the table that the Sefer Torah is placed upon possesses Kedushah.

2) See also Sukah 50b, where there is a dispute about whether the main part of the Mitzvah of "Shir" is done by musical instruments or by vocals. The Rambam (Hilchos Kli ha'Mikdash 3:3) rules that the main part of the Mitzvah is performed by singing. Therefore, musical instruments do not have a Din of Kli Shares, but they are Klei Kodesh.

Kesivah v'Chasimah Tovah,

Dovid Bloom

1) It seems to me that a bazach is also a kli shares. My proof for this is from the Mishnah in Tamid 4:3 which describes how the Korban Tamid was sacrificed. The 6th Kohen standing in the row received the inner parts of the stomach which were placed in a bazach. The Bartenura writes that this is a spoon.

Now, there is a very letter important letter that Rav Meir Shapira zt'l of Lublin (the founder of the worldwide dafyomi cycle) wrote to the Rogatchover Gaon zt'l. This concerns the Mishnah in Tamid 3:4 which tells us that 93 vessels were used every day in the Beis Hamikdash service. The Rambam Hilchos Temidin u'Musofin 6:1 seems to say that these were Kli Shares. Rav Shapira makes a list of the 93 vessels, and the 9th vessel on the list is this bazach. So if a bazach for receiving the inner parts of the korban is considered a kli shares, I suggest that a bazach for receiving the mincha is also a kli shares.

2) I suggest that there is a nafka mina between a kli shares and a kli kodesh, and my proof is from Gemara Zevachim 88a. There a Braisa is cited that if Kli Kodesh became perforated one does not melt them down but one makes new ones (Rambam Hilchos Klei Hamikdash 1:14). The braisa continues to say that if a knife was damaged one does not sharpen it.

The next part of my argument is Tosfos Zevachim 47a DH Eizehu in the name of Rabeinu Efraim who maintains that the knife for shechita does not have to be a kli shares. Now, how is Tosfos going to understand the Braisa on 88a? If the words kli shares and kli kodesh are interchangeable, then this would mean that the braisa starts off discussing kli shares but continues to discuss vessels which are not kli shares. This seems rather inconsistent that the braisa should suddenly change theme. However if we say that kli kodesh means any vessels used in the Beis Hamikdash, even if they possess a lower level of kedusha than kli shares, then it makes sense that the braisa starts off discussing all kli kodesh, and gives the example of the shechitah knife and tells us what to do if it gets damaged.

3) Rabeinu Efraim understands that the nafka mina is that if the shechitah knife would be considered a kli shares one could not bring a knife from one's home to use in the Beis Hamikdash. I argue that since it is only a kli kodesh, one may bring it from home (see Pesachm 66)

Yasher Koach Gadol

Dovid Bloom