Question: Why don't we answer that Avodah of the limbs and fats is Kosher during the day, therefore Rabanan enacted a lottery, lest Kohanim come to fight, since it is Kosher during the day and dear to them, for there is not yet Ones of sleep! (They are not tired yet.)

Answer: The Gemara asked a proper question. The one who brought limbs of the afternoon Tamid from the ramp to the Mizbe'ach needed to stay awake at night until they were consumed, so if they will fly off the Mizbe'ach, he will return them to the Ma'arachah;

Therefore, we ask that if so, it was not dear to them, and it was not common that they would come for it, for then they would need to stay awake until midnight, in order to return what flies off from it (the limbs and fats).

Question: What is the source that there were two enactments?

Perhaps initially they thought that they will not fight about it, but once they saw that they were fighting, and also coming to danger, they needed to enact a lottery;

They said, if we enact a lottery, they will refrain from coming, for they will say "who says that it will fall on me?"

They enacted then that whoever merits Terumas ha'Deshen will also merit arranging the Ma'arachah and two logs!

Answer: He (Rav Ashi) does not literally mean that there were two enactments;

Rather, perhaps it was at once. It is properly called two enactments, since the enactment of a lottery was because too many people came, and due to concern lest people not come;

They enacted then that whoever merits Terumas ha'Deshen merits arranging the Ma'arachah...

[Therefore] it is properly called two enactments, even if they enacted them at one time.

Implied question: The words "once they enacted a lottery, [Kohanim] did not come" connotes that after this [the enactment of a lottery], they enacted [that whoever merits Terumas ha'Deshen also arranges the Ma'arachah]!

Answer #1: We need not be concerned if he was not so precise with his words. Rav Ashi explains the matter as if there were enactments at two times [to teach that there were two reasons for it], and automatically we will establish them to be at once.

Answer #2: Since it says "whoever merited Terumas ha'Deshen will merit...", and does not say whoever will merit Terumas ha'Deshen will merit arranging the Ma'arachah", this shows that it was not at one time.

Rather, it was like this. Chachamim saw that Kohanim were not coming, and once only a few Kohanim came, and there were not Kohanim to arrange the Ma'arachah after [the one who merited Terumas - Tosfos Yeshanim] ha'Deshen;

Then they said that whoever merited Terumas ha'Deshen will merit arranging the Ma'arachah.

Question: What is the source that the punishment was not also due to Uriyah?

Answer #1: It says only "v"Es ha'Kavsah Yeshalem." (The female lamb was a parable for Bas Sheva.)

Answer #2: It says "Arbatayim", i.e. one Aveirah, i.e. Arayos;

If it were for both Arayos of Bas Sheva and killing Uriyah, he was punished through the death of the baby, and [of] Amnon, and [the rape of] Tamar, and [the rebellion of] Avshalom. If so, he was not punished four-fold.

Question #1: If so, he was punished more than four-fold!

Question #2: Perhaps he received Tzara'as due to the episode with Uriyah!

Alternatively, if he received Tzara'as due to [Bi'ah with] Bas Sheva, perhaps one of the others, i.e. the baby, Amnon, Tamar, and Avshalom was due to Uriyah;

What is the source that he was not punished due to Uriyah?

Answer (to Question #2): Since it says "you killed him through the sword of Bnei Amon", and we expound (Kidushin 43a) just like you will not be punished for the sword of Bnei Amon, you will not be punished for Uriyah.

Repetition of Question #1: If so, he was punished more than four-fold!

Answer #1: Perhaps Amnon and Tamar count like one.

Answer #2: Perhaps Tamar and receiving Tzara'as count like one. They are unlike the others. The baby, Amnon, and Avshalom all died.

Tamar did not die. Also, she was a Bas Yafes To'ar (i.e. she was not Halachically his daughter).

Even though David had Tzara'as for six months, since he was cured, it was not equal to the others [which were permanent death]. Therefore, we can say that these two (Tamar and the Tzara'as) are counted like one.

Implied question: Why don't we ask also that it was a sin for him to sing Shirah over the downfall of Sha'ul, like it says in Mo'ed Katan (16b) - "Shigayon l'David Asher Shar la'Shem Al Divrei Kush (Sha'ul) Ben Yemini"!

Answer: That was considered like Shegagah, like it says "Shigayon l'David", for one is not accountable for [mistakes made amidst] his pain. Sha'ul was pursuing him [to kill him.]