Study Menachot folio 79A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
If one slaughtered the thanks offering and it was discovered that it is a blemished animal, R' Eliezer says: The loaves were consecrated, and R' Yehoshua says: The loaves were not consecrated. This is the statement of R' Meir, consistent with the dispute appearing in the Mishnah.
The baraita continues: R' Yehuda said: R' Eliezer and R' Yehoshua did not disagree with regard to a case where he slaughtered the thanks offering and it was discovered that it is a tereifa, as all agree that it was not consecrated; and they did not disagree with regard to a case where he slaughtere
The baraita continues: In explanation of his opinion, R' Eliezer said: Since an offering slaughtered with intent to partake of it beyond its designated time is disqualified and an offering slaughtered with intent to partake of it outside its designated area is disqualified, it is reasonable that ju
R' Eliezer said to him: I compared an offering slaughtered with intent to partake of it outside its designated area to an offering slaughtered with intent to partake of it beyond its designated time, and you compared it to an offering discovered to be a blemished animal. Let us consider to which it
R' Eliezer began to reason: We deduce the halakha with regard to a disqualification due to improper intention from that of a disqualification due to an improper intention, i.e., the halakha with regard to one who slaughters the animal with intent to partake of it outside its designated area should