Talking Talmud

The sin-offerings and others needs to be slaughtered in the northern part of the Temple courtyard -- as derived by biblical verses. Plus, the collecting of the blood, the sprinkling of the blood, and the placement of the person collecting the blood. Also, the way "he shall slaughter it" comes to exclude. And the laying on of hands comes into play as a possible exclusion, rather than it b...

Finishing the 4th chapter, with a new mishnah: A sacrifice is slaughtered for the sake of 6 things -- all of which are far less tangible than the animal itself. The kohen's intentions have been preoccupying the Gemara for all these chapters, but now the shift, at the very end, is to the owner's intentions - that is, those of the person offering the sacrifice, even though it's handled p...

How is sacrificial blood excluded from the prohibition against "notar" and impurity? As derived from verses, that is. Likewise, how is blood not subject to me'ilah, after atonement (or even before atonement). Also, how these details are derived from verses that seem indirect or insufficient, when we might have wanted more. Also, why does the Torah mention "karet," the punis...

Two mishnayot! When an idolator brings an offering in the Temple... yes, that turns out to be something that could happen. Jewish people can't get benefit from those offerings, but there's no "misuse" of consecretion in those offerings. Likewise, there's no concern of impurity or exchanging the offering. The Gemara, of course, has some level of dispute over the stringencies a...

Anything that has permitting factors - specifically, in this case, for the consumption of the consecrated offerings - will, depending, avoid the complicating factor of pigul. If pigul is established with regard to the peace-offering (shelamim), how can it apply to other offerings that aren't quite parallel to the shelamim? The Gemara explains it all very clearly, and pigul indeed is extended e...

A new mishnah! With a list of cases that would not make a person liable for pigul. The flour of the minchah offering won't become pigul. Likewise, the frankinscense. That is, the offerings themselves may become pigul, but not the ingredients thereof. Those ingredients are what make the offering possible to begin with. Also, on the case of the consecrated food to be eaten by a person who is rit...

Following the dispute about pigul for a meal-offering, the Gemara investigates all the permitting factors for an offering to be accepted, before there are any considerations of pigul. Note that the sprinkling of the blood on the inner altar needs to be done correctly. Also, the count of blood worship tasks: 43 or 47 or 48? If the bloods of two animals mingles, there is room to be lenient, in terms...

"With the bull" - looking at the comparison between the goats that would be brought for unwitting communal idolatry and the unwitting sin in other fields. Via the juxtaposition of verses. Also, putting the sacrifices into the context of the Jewish people being beloved by God. With more details on the curtain too.

In light of the placement of blood on the inner altar - either one or two placements - preserving the atonement capacity of the offering, even without blood placed on all four corners, the question of blood on the curtain (parokhet) must be asked. The Gemara establishes that all seven placements must be made on the curtain - but it asks also about four placements, because of a verse with a plural...

What happens to the clothing that is sprayed by the blood that is being sprinkled on the altar? With implications regarding laundering the garments worn by the kohanim. Also, regarding the blood that is placed on the inner altar -- which is specifically the sin-offering (goat) of Yom Kippur and the bull offering as well. The placement of this blood is essential to the atonement.

More on Beit Hillel's understanding that one placement of blood on the altar is sufficient - as derived from the "atonement" as stated in each verse about the sin-offering. The Gemara probes whether the law can be derived via logic, which sounds plausible, and not only from the verses - for example, an inference about the outer altar placement of blood because of the placement of blo...

A new mishnah - starting chapter 4! A dispute between Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel: How many placements of blood on the altar are required for atonement? Beit Shammai says two places on the altar are necessary, while Beit Hillel says one placement is sufficient. Both of which depend on respective differences in reading verses from the Torah. Plus, what about leftover blood from previous offerings?...

A new mishnah! If one slaughters an offering with intent to leave part of it for the next day - whether blood or parts of the animal - or to remove them from the Temple, the offering is subject to a dispute whether it is valid or not. There's no verse to disqualify this case, for example. Plus, when two verses appear to teach the same thing - in terms of not leaving the offering overnight. Als...

A new mishnah! One who has intent to handle the food of an offering to be eaten at the wrong time or wrong location - or parts of the animal that are not customarily eaten - with a measurement of a kezayit, an olive's worth. But note that less than an olive's worth of something eaten does not combine with less than an olive's worth that is burned in the wrong place or the wrong way. Pl...

More on the debates between Resh Lakish and R. Yochanan: One who has eaten meat from the sacrifices before the blood has been sprinkled... Resh Lakish says this person deserves lashes; R. Yochanan says no. But if the meat itself had become impure, everyone agrees that the one who eats it would be rendered impure - quite different from the individual becoming impure. Also, what happens if the perso...

More on Ulla's opinion (based on Resh Lakish) that partial entry is akin to a complete entry - when it comes to an impure person and the Temple. In the context of "semihah" - laying hands on the animal - needing to be done in the same place as the slaughtering of the animal, usually without interruption (though of course our case is an exception). Note the distance between the gate o...

A new chapter (3)! With a new mishnah. Which continues the topics of chapter 2. If those who are disqualified from doing the Temple service do the slaughter of the offering, the offering is still valid. That is, assuming their intentions are correct, and so on, throughout their practice. What if collecting/receiving the blood is done by someone who is qualified, but hands it off to the disqualifie...

What happens if the olive's measure of the offering was eaten in combination by 2 people? Is the concern that an olive's measure is eaten, or that the given person ate the olive measure? Or what if the olive's measure was eaten over a long, slower period of time than the usual "half a loaf of bread" time frame? Plus, even if the olive's measure was divided or slow, etc.,...

More on improper intent for time and improper intent for place - pigul is the issue with time, and one can get karet for it, while improper intent for place is not considered pigul, and karet isn't at stake, though the offering would be invalid. The issues kick in first and foremost if there were two different "avodot" - offerings - and the intents were then confused. Plus, several d...

NOTE: Current events on the day of today's daf were uplifting and moving and miraculous and poignant (and sad) in many way - today is the day that the 20 living remaining hostages held captive by Hamas were freed. We speak about it briefly in tomorrow's episode, which we recorded on this day, but in the same vein, it bears mention now too. May God provide healing and comfort for those who...

A new mishnah! (on the bottom of the previous daf). When there's intent to sprinkle from the blood outside the Temple, or to burn the sacrifical parts of the offering outside the Temple, or to eat from it outside of the Temple, or an olive measure of the skin of the tail - any of these actions would invalidate the offering, but without incurring the punishment of karet. Likewise, with intent f...

3 interpretations of the most recent mishnah: Shmuel maintains that the atonement kicks in when the blood is appropriately on the altar. Resh Lakish, however, says that if the offering is invalidated, the atonement doesn't work, but there is still room for Shmuel's understanding about atonement. A third understanding is R. Yohanan, which is that there's no atonement. Note that the Gema...

What happens if the animal to be slaughtered is partly outside of where it needs to be for the slaughtering in the courtyard - Shmuel's father answers Shmuel. Ideally, no. And then the Gemara brings other cases - what the animal were suspended in the air? Shmuel says it's fine, and his father notes that it has to be in the courtyard, and suspension in the air doesn't fulfill that requi...

A new mishnah! If the blood from the animal spills on the floor instead of being collected, and only then it's collected, that offering is invalid. The Gemara delves into the verses that teach what is necessary - in terms of what needs to be accepted. Plus, positioning in slaughtering the animal, such that no blood should fall. Also, a dilemma: if the bowl used for collecting the blood drops o...

The kohen needs to stand on the floor when he's doing the Temple service. When is a stone on the floor part of the floor, and when is it on top of the floor, and how is that counted with regard to the kohen's need to be standing on the floor? What are the implications of a loose stone, as a matter of the Temple's decorum? Also, a deep dive into the given that the kohanim must do the se...