Menachot 3: When the Kometz is Taken Without Proper Intentions

We have begun to examine what it means when a kometz, a fistful of flour is taken from the meal offering sh'lo lishma, without proper intentions.  In these cases the meal-offering continues to be valid but it is not credited to the owner and a replacement offering is necessary.  

Rabbi Shimon claims that a meal-offering offered sh'lo lishma would in fact be credited to the owner.  It is unlike an animal sacrifice, where all offerings share the slaughter ritual, the collection of blood, etc.  A meal-offering's preparation may or may not use oil, may or may not be pan fried or cooked in a pot.  

In another baraita, Rabbi Shimon contradicts himself.  The Gemara focuses on possible reasons for these seemingly disparate opinions.  Rava believes that we must consider the kohen who takes the kometz with the stated intention that it be brought as a different type of offering.  Rabbi Shimon states that in such a case it is valid and credited to the owner, unless of course the offering was for an animal sacrifice.  The Rashba sees this as a case where a kohen has announced that he is taking the kometz from the meal-offering with the intention to offer atonement to someone who is:

• obligated to bring a korban chatat, a sin offering
• obliged to bring a burnt offering 
• obliged to bring a peace offering 

Rabbi Shimon agrees that this would not be credited to the owner because no meal-offering actually serves these purposes.