1) You can combine many Shekalim to exchange with a high valued coin “Durkonus” since it would be too heavy and difficult to transport so many smaller coins. However, you can’t redeem it on a pearl, since the value might decline and it will come out that Hekdesh will lose out. As we learned in a Braisa: you may redeem all things on money and items worth money except for Shekalim since the worth of the utensils may go down and make Hekdesh lose.

2) If a city sends their Shekalim, and it got stolen or lost, if they already made the Trumas Halishka (scooped up coins from the Shekalim to buy the Korbanos), it exempts all those who's coins got lost; so the agent bringing the coins swear to the Hekdesh’s treasurer that they weren’t negligent, and if they didn’t yet make the Trumas Halishka, they must swear to the people in the city and they need to give the Shekel again.

3) That, which we say that they have horn shaped cash boxes for the Shekalim in the countryside, that’s only for the new Shekel for this year, but not for last years ones. The above agent only can swear to the people of the city to exempt for paying if he was voluntary, but if he’s paid to do it, he’s obligated to pay for stolen and lost items. R’ Abba says that it even applies to a paid agent, and stolen refers to by armed robbers, and lost means that it was lost at sea from a sunken ship. Also, that which we say that, if it’s after the Trumas Halishka, the people of the city are exempt from giving other Shekalim, it’s only according to the opinion that it exempts all those who's coins got lost, or was collected, and those that will get collected, but not according to the opinions who argue.

4) The reason they’re swearing on Hekdesh, though usually you’re exempt; R’ Elazar answers: it’s R’ Shimon who holds that you swear on Hekdesh that a person has an obligation to replace after it was lost since it’s as if he owns it. R’ Yochanan says that it’s according to everyone since it’s a special rabbinical enactment. This would answer why they swear to the Hekdesh’s treasurer that they weren’t negligent when the city folk are exempt. However, according to R’ Elazar we must say that it means that they must swear to the city people in front of Hekdesh’s treasurer that they weren’t negligent to receive his wage for bringing it, and that they shouldn’t suspect that he still has it.

5) According to R’ Yochanan that this swearing is a special rabbinical enactment, even if the city folk forgive him from swearing, he still needs to swear for the enactment.

6) If he separates his Shekel and it gets lost; R’ Yochanan says that he’s obligated in replacing it, and Reish Lakish holds that he’s not. Although we learned that the city people need to send replacement Shekalim; that was a special enactment to have people not to be negligent with their Shekalim (by sending it with an agent, but they should bring it themselves).

7) If the first Shekalim were found, they're both Shekalim for this year and they can't count it for the next year. The first goes to the new Shekalim, and the second to the old ones. There’s an argument whether it’s the first that the owner separated, or the first that got to the treasurer’s hand.

8) If someone gives his Shekel to his friend to give it to Hekdesh, and the friend gave it for himself, if they took Trumah then, the friend transgressed Meila. If he takes Hekdesh’s money and gave his Shekalim, he transgressed Meila if they took Trumah and brought a Korban. The reason why the first one transgressed Meila if they took Trumah without bringing a Korban since it holds like R’ Shimon that the acquisition on the Korbanos happen right away, and he doesn’t worry that it would become Pasul and Hekdesh will lose since the Kohanim are very zealous and makes sure it doesn’t become Pasul. However, the latter is the Beis Medrish of Rebbi who say that it’s not binding until the Korban is brought.

9) Although, when it was brought to the Lishka, it comes to it like if it was given by the owners, and it’s like stealing an Olah and bringing it unqualified, and not explicitly for yourself, it atones for the original owner; we must say that the case is that it was given in a particular way (like R’ Gamliel did, that he put his coin in the pile right before the Trumah to make sure that the Kohein scoops up his coin) and it shows that the second one is giving it for himself.

10) The reason it’s considered Meila, on the assumption that it was destined to buy Korbanos, although it might end up in the leftovers (that’s not needed for that years Korbanos) that they buy mundane items with; it must be like R’ Meir who holds that there’s Meila in the leftovers too. Alternatively, (like we established it before), he did it like R’ Gamliel who put his coin in the pile right before the Trumah to make sure that the Kohein scoops up his coin.

11) You can’t give Maasar Sheini or Shevious money for your Shekel, the same way we say that you can’t make Kodesh a Bechor for some other Korban since it’s already holy. Rather, if it was given, you need to bring a mundane Selah and say, wherever there’s Maasar Sheini money, I’m redeeming it on this Selah.

12) If you collect money for your Shekel, and you find it to be more, it’s a mistaken Hekdesh; Beis Shammai holds a mistaken Hekdesh to be Hekdesh and it goes for the public’s voluntary Korbanos, and Beis Hillel holds it not to be Hekdesh so it’s mundane money. However, collecting for a Chatos, everyone agrees that the extra is Hekdesh. (However, everyone also agrees if he says “I’ll bring from them my Shekel or Chatos,” the extra is mundane money since he only donated in the money like the amount from the money, and not all of it.)

13) R’ Shimon explains the difference between Chatos and Shekalim: since Shekalim have a set amount, but a Chatos doesn’t. R’ Yehuda asks that Shekalim doesn’t have a set amount, as we see at the beginning of the second Beis Hamikdash that they first instituted to give a Durkanus, then they lowered it to a Selah, and then to the Shekel, which is the Torah amount, but you can never give less than the Torah’s minimum. R’ Shimon answers: however, everyone needs to give the same amount, for whatever the rabbis decided, and no one can give more. However, people can buy Chatos for different amounts.

14) This Halacha is only if he was collecting small coins for it through the year, but if he took a handful of coins and say “this is for my Shekel,” R’ Yossi quotes R’ Lazar, everyone agrees that the extra is Kodesh since he grabbed the handful with that in mind. R’ Biba quotes R’ Lazar; everyone agrees that the extra is mundane, since he knows that there’s extra and only Mekadesh the amount needed in it, and it’s not a mistaken Hekdesh.

15) If someone thought that he was obligated to bring a Chatos, and he found out he wasn’t, the animal he separated is mundane. However, if he thought that he was obligated in two Chatos, but he found out he was only obligated in one; the second one is Kodesh and needs to graze until he’s blemished and then the proceeds of its sale goes to buy public voluntary Korbanos. They wanted to compare this to Shekalim; if someone thought that he was obligated to bring a Shekel, and he found out he wasn’t, the money he separated is mundane. However, if he thought that he was obligated in two Shekel, but he found out he was only obligated in one; the second one is Kodesh and needs to go to buy public voluntary Korbanos. However, the Gemara asks on this, it shouldn’t be better than the case of taking a handful of coins and saying that it’s for his Shekel, which R’ Baiba says that it’s mundane.

16) We see that, in the days of Ezra, they took a Durkonus from everyone, which is a Selah and a half (or three Shekalim). Therefore, it’s thrice the Shekalim, so we shouldn’t bother the public to give more than thrice a year. It’s also a hint for needing Trumas Halishkah in three boxes that hold three Saah of coins thrice a year.

17) The leftovers of the Asiras Ha’eifa, the birds for a Zav, Zavah, someone who gave birth, Chatos and Asham go to buy public voluntary Korbanos. Although R’ Yochanan says the leftovers of the Asiras Ha’eifa of the Kohein Gadol is thrown out in the dead sea, (and R’ Lazar says to buy public voluntary Korbanos); we must explain the MIshna to refer to the Asiras Ha’eifa of all Jews (that is part of the Olah V’yored scale).

18) The leftovers of an Olah goes for an Olah. The leftovers of a Mincha goes for a Mincha. The leftovers of a Pesach goes for a Shlomim.

19) We learn that a Korban Pesach that passed its time (and can’t be a Pesach) is a Shlomim, as the Pasuk says “If the Korban is a sheep (or goat), it shall be a Shlomim” a Pesach that comes from sheep (or goat), it should turn into a Shlomim (but it can’t refer to Olah that can come from cattle, or an Asham that particularly comes from rams, and not all sheep or goats). However, we don’t learn it from “if a sheep is it’s Korban, it should be an Olah” since it’s more similar to a Shlomim since they’re both Kodshei Kalim and they’re both eaten.

20) Although some say that it doesn't turn into a Shlomim unless it’s Shechted to be a Shlomim; R’ Yochanan argues and says that it’s a Shlomim even if it’s Shechted to be an Olah, as the Pasuk says “a Korban, a Shlomim,” if it’s brought as a Korban, it’s a Shlomim.

21) There’s an inquiry If you Shect it for an Olah, and it came out that you had a Pigul thought if it would be an Olah, but it’s not one for a Shlomim. (So, it can’t be that he thought to sprinkle it tomorrow, since that’s Pigul by a Shlomim too. Rather (the Korban Eida explains) that you intend to burn it on the Mizbeach on the next day, which you can’t do for an Olah, but only by a Shlomim. (R’ Akiva Eiger held this to be difficult since it’s a Shlomim, this won’t be a problem. Rather, it’s like the Gra’s explanation that the inquiry is: if there’s a P’sul to think to burn it for an Olah, for if it is, then Pigul can’t take effect on something that has a different P’sul too.)

22) If you bring a Korban Pesach before the fourteenth, (which would make it a Shlomim, but is Pasul if you intend it to be a Korban Pesach), and you have intent for L'shma (i.e., for a Pesach) and Shelo L'shma, we say that the later Shelo L'shma uproots the original L'shma to make it valid. After all, a Korban Pesach the rest of the year is assumed to be L'shma (i.e., to be designated for a Korban Pesach) and, even so, if it's Shechted Shelo L'shma, it uproots it from its assumed status of L'shma. Therefore, we should assume that, if he first said L'shma, he can uproot it by saying Shelo L'shma. This is not similar to Shechting such a Pesach on the rest of the year L’shma on condition to sprinkle Shelo L’shma, that we say that it uproots the original L’shma and validates it, since the same way we don’t say that when you sprinkle Shelo L’shma uproots a Shechita that’s done unqualified, since it’s assumed that it’s done L’shma (since the Shechita, which is a full Avodah, is done completely L’shma).

23) The leftovers of the Korbanos of Nazir go to buy public voluntary Korbanos. R’ Chisda says that it’s only if the last Korban was a Chatos, so it was leftovers of the Chatos that goes to buy public voluntary Korbanos. However, if the last Korban is a Shlomim, the leftovers is also brought as a Shlomim. R’ Zeira says it’s a Halacha L’moshe M’sinai that all leftovers of the Korbanos of Nazir go to buy public voluntary Korbanos. We have a Braisa like both opinions. As one Braisa says that if the Nazir separates from the money unqualified designated to his Korbanos, and he first separates money for his Chatos, the leftovers of the money needs to go to be thrown in the dead see (according to Korban Eida’s text, but Taklin Chadasin has that it goes to public voluntary Korbanos). The other Braisa says that all the leftover money afterwards has only Shlomim and Olah. Therefore, if you have pleasure from some of it, you didn’t do Meila since it might come from the Shlomim, which there’s no Meila. However, if you did Meila with all the money, you’re Chayiv Meila since there is some Olah money in there.

24) R’ Chisda says: the leftovers of the breads of a Nazir needs to be left to rot. (After all, you can’t bring bread by itself, and it can’t go for another Nazir, since each one needs to bring his own Korban since it’s part of his Nazir vow.) The Gemara thought the same applies to the leftovers of the Nesachim of Nazir, but R’ Yossi b. Ban says, since they’re Kodshei Kodshim, their leftovers go to buy public voluntary Korbanos. The same applies, says Shmuel, to someone who separated his Shekel and dies, and also R’ Elazar says that the same goes by the leftovers of the Asiras Ha’eifa, it goes to buy public voluntary Korbanos. (However, the Chachamim say that it is thrown out in the dead sea.)

25) The leftovers of collection for redeeming captives are given to redeem other captives. However, if it was collected for an individual captive, it goes to him, and the leftovers collected for a poor person goes to other poor, but, if it was collected for an individual poor person, it goes to him. The leftovers of collection for burying the dead are given to bury other dead. However, if it was collected for an individual dead person, the Tanna Kama says that it goes to his heirs. R’ Nosson says that it goes to buy a monument for his grave. R’ Meir is in doubt if the dead person forgave it to his heirs or not, so the money is left untouched until Eliyahu comes to tell us what to do with it.

26) R’ Yirmiya holds: if you collect for a dead person to bury, and you find out that he doesn’t need it, you give it all to his heirs. R’ Isis, his student, asked: since there was never a need for collecting, the whole collection should be a mistake, and it’s not similar to collecting extra. R’ Yirmiya replied: if I, your Rebbi , didn’t teach this to you, where do you get it from?

27) If you collected a Talis for a poor man, you shouldn’t switch it with another Talis. However, you don’t protest the administrator that switches it (since it was given under his discretion).

28) When we say that someone needs to quote people directly, but if he’s his main Rebbi that all that he says is from his Rebbi, he doesn’t need to quote him since it’s always assumed that he’s saying it from his Rebbi.