Makkos Daf 18 מאקוס דַף 18

Rava said: זר שאכל מן העולה לפני זריקה חוץ לחומה – if a non-Kohen eats from an עולה before זריקה, outside the wall of Yerushalayim, לרבי שמעון לוקה חמש – according to Rebbe Shimon, he receives five sets of malkus: (1) He ate kodashim outside Yerushalayim, (2) he ate it before זריקה, (3) he ate as a זר, who cannot eat even after זריקה, (4) he ate it outside the walls of the Beis Hamikdash, and (5) he ate from an עולה, can never be eaten. The Gemara above clarified that Rebbe Shimon, as well as Rava, is referring to multiple prohibitions, not actual sets of malkus, since malkus cannot be derived from a kal vachomer. The Gemara asks that Rava should have mentioned other prohibitions, and after the first two are answered, it asks that he should have included the prohibition taught by Rebbe Eliezer, that anything whose rule is "כליל תהיה" – it shall be completely burned (including עולה), is included in that passuk’s prohibition against its consumption ("לא תֵאָכֵל"). The Gemara concludes that Rava was only enumerating prohibitions derived from the specific passuk darshened by Rebbe Shimon.

Rav is quoted saying that a Kohen who ate from a חטאת or אשם before זריקה incurs malkus, because the passuk says: ואכלו אותם אשר כופר בהם – they, who received atonement through them, shall eat them, implying they may only be eaten after "כפרה" (i.e., זריקה), but they may not be eaten before כפרה, and לאו הבא מכלל עשה לאו הוא – a negative commandment implied by an עשה is considered a לאו, and incurs malkus. Rava proves, however, that a לאו implied by an עשה is not considered a לאו. Therefore, the Gemara emends Rav’s statement to be that a זר who ate from a חטאת or אשם before זריקה is פטור from malkus, even for a זר’s prohibition to eat קדשי קדשים. The above passuk, which contrasts the Kohen’s permit to eat with the זר’s prohibition, implies: כל היכא דקרינן ביה "ואכלו אותם אשר כופר בהם" – wherever we can apply the words “they who received atonement through them shall eat them” (i.e., Kohanim can eat it), קרינן ביה "וזר לא יאכל קדש" – we apply the words “but a non-Kohen shall not eat, for they are holy.” But wherever a Kohen may also not eat (e.g., before זריקה), the זר’s prohibition does not apply.

Rebbe Elazar said in the name of Rebbe Hoshaya regarding bikkurim, that הנחה – placement before the מזבח is critical to the mitzvah, but the קריאה is not. The Gemara asks that this contradicts another statement of Rebbe Elazar in Rebbe Hoshaya’s name: הפריש בכורים קודם לחג – if one separated bikkurim before Succos, ועבר עליהן החג – and Succos passed without the bikkurim being brought, ירקבו – they are left to rot. Since they were initially eligible for קריאה before Succos (the “period of joy” mentioned in the passuk), and now they are not eligible for קריאה, the mitzvah can no longer be performed. This proves that the קריאה is essential to bikkurim!? The Gemara answers that this follows Rebbe Zeira’s principle: כל הראוי לבילה – any [minchah] fit for mixing the flour and oil, אין בילה מעכבת בו – the mixing is not critical and the minchah is valid without it, ושאינו ראוי לבילה – but any [minchah] which is unfit for mixing (because of an incorrect proportion of flour to oil), בילה מעכבת בו – the mixing is critical to it, and the minchah is invalid. Here, too, although actual קריאה is not essential to bikkurim, if it is not eligible for קריאה, the bikkurim become disqualified.