More on the mixtures, and the unidentifiable element that was prohibited from benefit. With a strong question as to why the rule of negating the prohibited element in the majority that is not prohibited does not apply. Of course, it's a machloket - and contingent on the nature of the mixture, and whether the items can be counted and are sold individually. Plus, the comparison to a mishnah in Orlah, and specific fruits and dried fruits, with dried figs as the example.

Chapter 8! And a new mishnah. On mixtures, when something that is prohibited for benefit is mixed with "regular" items (or, in these cases, animals) of the same kind - such that that which is prohibited for benefit cannot be identified, then the whole lot would need to be put to death. Or, depending on the nature of the prohibition, perhaps all animals put out to pasture until they got a blemish, rather than put to death. Those animals were then sold, and the money was used to purchase new offerings. Also, the details that "any amount" of that which is prohibited for benefit is startling in the larger amount that might be destroyed for that small amount. Note the parallel mishnah in Tractate Temurah, and the fact that both mishnayot (here and there) are needed to teach these laws, or we might end up drawing the wrong conclusions.

A complicated daf.... with a textual comparison of biblical verses, focusing on the words "neveilah" and "treyfah" - both of which are now defined. With many categories and permutations of both, and each, when it comes to different kinds of animals. Plus, a more straightforward passage on the unusual terms of the birds with melikah, when the bird has a blemish, and then in comparison to unusual animal (non-bird) offerings, such as a goat, and then, finally, a focus on the "eglah arufah," the heifer who is then considered its own category.

More on the pinching of the bird - melikah. If done in ways that were considered inappropriate or incongruous (like, at night), then the melikah would be invalid, but without rendering anything impure - not even the clothing of the kohen. Plus, the newly introduced term of a "treyfah," but the definition is yet to come. How does the proper slaughter of a treyfah prevent the impurity that accompanies a "neveilah," carcass?

A new mishnah: When the bird is killed improperly in the context of sacrifices, it does not necessarily constitute a carcass, in terms of conveying impurity. Specifically, melikah vs. slaughtering. Note the question of maturity - including in terms of appearance - of the birds. The Gemara dives into how the phenomenon of melika makes the difference as far as the carcass of the bird is considered. Including an attempted parallel to the red heifer.

Bringing a burnt-offering from a bird can switch to be a sin-offering, if the procedure that is done is the sin-offering practice, instead of the burnt-offering practice. Plus, the queries of the Gemara on this with a contradictory case of two women who bring the burnt- and sin-offerings post childbirth, and what happens in the event of error or confusion.

Chapter 7! Opening, of course, with a new mishnah: Still, with regard to bird offerings, with all the proper details of a sin-offering for the offering to be valid. And then cases that changes an element, such that the sin-offering is incorrectly offered - whether in procedure or intent, the offerings are then invalid -- though not judged for karet. And likewise, the same review for the bird burnt-offering, olah. Also, another long mishnah - with a shift to focus on dead body of the bird, and when "nevalah" - the impurity of the body of a dead animal - might kick in, or not - because the offering does not carry that kind of impurity, or shouldn't, depending on the terms. Going back to me'ilah - the misuse of that which has been consecrated. Plus, can there be misuse of a bird olah, as consecrated? It's a machloket.

When the kohen burns the bird on the altar, in its removed separate body parts, from crop to gizzard. Plus, the examples of when the intent was wrong or the placement was wrong, and so on - and when those errors in protocol invalidated the offering, distinguishing between the sin-offering and the burnt-offering. Also, If the kohen didn't remove the crop, or other parallel removings, then, with implications for whether the offering is supposed to be a sin-offering or burn-offering. With a key dispute and 3 understandings of that particular dispute.

3 things were done on the altar above the red line - including libations of water and wine, and certain details of the bird olah (burnt-offering), and on the southeast corner. Also, specific directions or coordinates where the different parts of the offering must take place. Plus, a new mishnah! Specifically the details of the bird sin-offering. Including a vivid description of "melikah" of the bird - pinching the neck of the bird in such a way as to nearly separate the head from the body. And then all that blood would be placed (or dripped) on the altar. Also, a very long mishnah detailing various practices pertaining to the bird offerings, including that pinch on the neck -- and also the permutations of details that could go wrong with our without significant impact on the validity of the offering.

Two new mishnayot! 1 - What is the proper place of the fistful of grain of the grain-offering? Defining "kimtzah" -- scooping up the meal. That kimtzah was tantamount to the act of slaughtering of an animal sacrifice, in terms of the details surrounding it (of course, it's not animal), like where in the courtyard the procedure could be done. 2 - The bird offering - and other procedures that were done above the red line and below the red line, respectively. Plus, directing traffic on the ramp of the altar, and traversing the top of the altar too.