Explanation: Since it taught "to this one a Korban and to this one a Korban", he needs a Pesach for each one, this shows that they are Peratim (individual vows) only when he mentions "Korban" regarding every one;

If he did not, whether he said "to this one and to this one" with a Vov, or "to this one, to this one" without a Vov, it is a Klal (one encompassing vow);

Like whom is this? Rava taught that it is like R. Shimon, who says in Shevuos (36b) regarding five who were claiming from him...

And he said "[I swear that] not to you [do I owe], not to you", that he is liable for each one only if he mentioned "Shevu'ah" regarding each;

Inference: If he did not [mention "Shevu'ah" to each], whether he said with a Vov, or without a Vov, it is a Klal.

Pesak: We hold like R. Shimon, for the Stam Tana here holds like him.

Support: Also in Kidushin (46a) the Stam Mishnah is like him regarding "be Mekudeshes to me with this date, be Mekudeshes to me with this..." (Only if he mentioned Kidushin regarding each date, they are separate acts of Kidushin, and she is Mekudeshes only if one of the dates by itself is worth a Perutah.)

Implied question: In Shevuos (36b), regarding "Shevu'ah that I do not owe to you...", there is a Stam Mishnah unlike him. What is the difference if there is one Stam [Mishnah, like Rabanan], or two Stam [Mishnayos, like R. Shimon? Perhaps the Halachah follows the one Stam!]

Answer: Even so, since Amora'im discuss the opinion of R. Shimon in Kidushin, we hold like him.

Support: Also R. Chananel and the Ramban rule like him.