Talking Talmud

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 for any of those above acts for "the next day," instead of on time - not only would the offering be invalidated (pigul, because of the improper intent), but the person would also incur karet. With a brief deep dive into the tail of the animal, and what is relevant here. But where are these details from? Two verses in the Torah address improper intent, one about place and one about time. Note that one verse is really about pigul and the other about notar - the leftover past the time issue.

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 Gemara does relate the views to each other. Also, a shift to focus on the burnt-offering, and Rabbi Shimon's understanding of the details of what invalidates such an offering - with a comparison between the mishandling or error in transferring or placing the blood vs. an issue with the suitability of the animal itself (for example, and this is the Gemara's first example of a problematic animal, the animal used in bestiality).

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 requirement. What if the slaughterer was suspended in the air? Also, a new mishnah - with a list of what is NOT acceptable to do, rather than what is, in terms of where the blood needed to be placed.

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 out before the blood reaches the air space of the bowl, is that valid or not? The answer may be a parallel to a barrel used to collect water from a pipe that may later be used for purification (or not - does the lack of fitness for purification answer the bottomless bowl question, or not?).

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 service with their right hands, and when the Torah says, "finger," it also means the right hand.

The Torah teaches that Aaron will bear the sin committed with the sacred items - but what is that sin?? We know about the concern of pigul, so what is added here? Might it be an issue of purity and impurity? Also, another disqualification from the mishnah - namely, a kohen who does his part of the service while sitting instead of standing. Plus, the principle of no two verses deriving the same law, specifically common law, as derived for other cases.

Liquid that can complete the volume of 40 se'ah of water needed for a mikveh also would work to fill the basin in the Temple. The question then is which substances meet this definition of the liquids that can indeed complete the water of a mikveh or the kiyor. Plus, a discussion of the insects that "develop from water" - and the quesiton of science in the Talmud. Also, with regard to impurity that invalidates the kohen for the service, must it come from a dead body? What about a creepy-crawlie? (or reverse the cases, for that matter) Plus, the distinction between those who bring about atonement as compared to those who achieve atonement.

What if the kohen dunks his hands and feet into the basin instead of running the water from the basin over his hands and feet? Does that work? The Gemara delves into the source verses for this practice and suggests that the water must come "from" the basin - though perhaps "in it" works as well. Also, a 3-way debate if the water in the basin remains overnight - is it valid for purification and consecration?

Halakhot brought from the land of Israel to the scholars of Babylonia - Rav Dimi quoting R. Yochanan, on the dilemma raised by Ilfa: If water is left overnight, will that work to sanctify hands and feet? Which themselves can stay sanctified overnight. Also, the question of whether leaving the Temple courtyard would require re-washing and sanctifying the kohen's hands and feet. Can the hands and feet be sanctified outside of the Temple? What about if one needs the bathroom?

On the garments of the kohen - and how he can bandage a finger with a reed, for example, while he is serving in the Temple, but not if he weren't part of the worship at that time. Plus, a full bandage being a concern of being another garment, and being a problem of adding to the required garments. Size being relevant as well. Also, the kohen gadol who purifies for the service of Yom Kippur, including washing his hands and feet, and also considering the clothing changes - missing an immersion doesn't necessarily invalidate his service. With clear details of how the kohen must position himself - which is interesting, given that it's not quite intuitive.