(Beraisa) Suggestion: Perhaps this applies only to the seven Haza'os, for they are always Me'akev...

Question: Where do we find that seven Haza'os are Me'akev?

Answer (Rav Papa): They are Me'akev in Parah Adumah and Taharah of a Metzora.

(Beraisa) Question: What is the source that the four Matanos are Me'akev?

Answer: "Ken Ya'aseh".

Question: We know that seven Matanos are Me'akev because it says 'seven', and "Ka'asher Asah" repeats the command for seven;

Likewise, the Torah teaches four Matanos, and "Ka'asher Asah" repeats the command!

Answer #1 (R. Yirmeyah): The Beraisa is like R. Shimon (who needs Ka'asher Asah to teach four Matanos).

(Beraisa - R. Shimon): It says (regarding Par Mashu'ach) Keranos, teaching two, and also regarding Par He'elem Davar. "Ka'Asher Asah" teaches that these are in addition to the two of Par Mashu'ach.

R. Yehudah says, "b'Ohel Mo'ed" teaches that we must put on all the (four) Keranos in the Ohel Mo'ed.

Question: What does R. Yehudah learn from "Ken Ya'aseh"?

Answer: It teaches like the following Beraisa.

(Beraisa) Question: What is the source for Semichah and pouring Shirayim of the blood of the Par of Yom Kipur?

Answer: "Ken Ya'aseh".

Question: The Beraisa above (39a-b) learned this from "la'Par"!

Answer: That teaches only about Avodos that are Me'akev Kaparah. We need Ken Ya'aseh to teach about Semichah and Shirayim, which are not Me'akev Kaparah.

Question: How does R. Shimon expound "b'Ohel Mo'ed"?

Answer: This teaches that if there was a break in the ceiling of the Heichal, the Haza'os may not be done.

Question: What is R. Yehudah's source for this?

Answer: He learns this from "Asher".

R. Shimon does not expound "Asher".

Answer #2 (to Question (c) - Abaye): The Beraisa is even like R. Yehudah. One might have thought that even though the four Matanos are written and repeated, they are not Me'akev, just like Semichah and Shirayim.

(Beraisa): "La'Par" refers to the Par of Yom Kipur.

Question: What do we learn from this?

Answer #1: It teaches that the Haza'os of the Par of Yom Kipur are Me'akev.

Objection: We already know this. It says "Chukah"! (This always teaches that a Parshah is Me'akev.)

Defense of answer (Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak): It teaches this according to R. Yehudah, who says that "Chukah" applies only to Avodos in the Kodesh ha'Kodoshim done in the white garments, and if anything was done out of order, it was not Mechaper;

He holds that Avodos outside the Kodesh ha'Kodoshim are Mechaper even if done out of order. One might have thought that since "Chukah" does not apply to them, they are not Me'akev. "La'Par" teaches that this is not so.

Objection (Rav Papa - Beraisa - R. Akiva): "V'Chilah mi'Kaper Es ha'Kodesh" - if the Kohen did all the Avodos normally necessary to be Mechaper, Chilah (he finished the Kaparah, even if some Avodos were omitted);

R. Yehudah says, we expound the words in order. If the Kohen Chilah (finished all the Avodos); he was Mechaper. If not, he was not. (This is R. Yehudah's source that all the Avodos are Me'akev!)

Answer #2 (Rav Papa): "La'Par" teaches that the laws learned from "Es", "ba'Dam" and "v'Taval" apply to the Par of Yom Kipur (we proceed to explain them):

(Rav Acha bar Yakov): (The blood must be put with his index finger.) "Es" teaches that a wart on his finger is Batel to (and considered part of) his finger. It may be used;

"Ba'Dam" teaches that he must receive enough blood in the Keli to dip his finger in (Rashi - from the beginning. He cannot add to it blood received in another Keli);

"V'Taval" teaches that he must dip his finger into the blood. He may not scrape blood from the wall of the bucket onto his finger.

The Torah must teach both of these.

Had it said only v'Taval, one might have thought that even if he did not initially receive enough blood in the Keli, it is Kosher. Therefore, it says ba'Dam;

Had it said only ba'Dam, one might have thought that he may scrape blood onto his finger. Therefore, it says v'Taval.

"Mizbach Ketores ha'Samim" teaches that the Haza'os may not be done on a (new) inner Mizbe'ach until incense has been offered on it.

Support (for Rav Papa - Beraisa - Rebbi): "V'Asah la'Par Ka'asher Asah..." teaches that everything (done to Par He'elem Davar) is done to the Par of Yom Kipur;

R. Yishmael says, a Kal va'Chomer teaches this. We find (two) Korbanos for which different animals are brought, yet the Avodos are the same. Korbanos for which when the same animal is brought, all the more so the Avodos are the same! (This will be explained.)

Rather, the first "la'Par" refers to Par He'elem Davar, and the Torah equates it to Par Mashu'ach (the second "la'Par" in the verse).

Question: Which Korbanos of different animals does R. Yishmael refer to?

Suggestion: He refers to the Par and Sa'ir of Yom Kipur.

Rejection: The blood of both of them is brought into the Kodesh ha'Kodoshim, therefore all their Avodos are the same. This is no source to equate the Avodah of Par Yom Kipur to a Par (He'elem Davar) that is not brought inside!

Answer #1: Rather, he refers to Par He'elem Davar and a Se'ir Avodah Zarah.

Rejection: Both of them atone for a known Aveirah. We cannot learn from them to the Par of Yom Kipur, which atones for Aveiros (of Tum'ah) that are not yet known!

Answer #2: Rather, he refers to Par He'elem Davar and Se'ir Yom Kipur;

Different animals are brought for them, yet the Avodos are the same (e.g. dipping the finger in the blood and sprinkling on the Paroches and the inner Mizbe'ach. Even though there are more Matanos of the blood of the Sa'ir, every Avodah of the Par applies to the Sa'ir);

A Par is brought on Yom Kipur, just like for a sin through Hora'ah of a Mashu'ach (our text, Rashi; Tosfos - of the Tzibur). All the more so the Avodos of these Korbanos should be the same regarding Es, ba'Dam and Tevilah!

This Kal va'Chomer enables us to learn Se'ir Yom Kipur from Se'ir Avodah Zarah.