asham

And what is the stringency of Chatos and Asham over Bechor? That [Chatos and Asham] are of high sanctity. But, to the contrary, Bechor is more stringent, as it is sanctified from birth.

And what is the stringency of Chatos and Asham over Bechor? That [Chatos and Asham] are of high sanctity. But, to the contrary, Bechor is more stringent, as it is sanctified from birth.

And what is the stringency of Ollah over Chatos and Asham? That [Ollah] is entirely burnt. But, to the contrary, Chatos and Asham are more stringent, as they atone.

And what is the stringency of Ollah over Chatos and Asham? That [Ollah] is entirely burnt. But, to the contrary, Chatos and Asham are more stringent, as they atone.

Rav Gidal says in the name of Rav (a mnemonic: KUZA) A Kohen who eats from a chatas or an asham before the zerikah gets malkus. What is the reason? That the verse states (Exodus 29,33) "And they should eat it that which grants atonement" which implies that only after it grants atonement may it be eaten but not beforehand. And a prohibition implied by a positive commandment [carries the force of] a prohibition.

Rather if this was stated, this was how it was stated: Rav Gidal says in the name of Rav A non-Kohen who eats from a chatas or an asham before the zerikah is exempt. What is the reason? That the verse states (Exodus 29,33) "And they should eat it that which grants atonement" which implies that any place where we can apply "that which grants atonement" we can apply "and a non-Kohen shall not eat for it is holy", but any place where we cannot apply "that which grants atonement" we cannot apply "and a non-Kohen shall not eat for it is holy".