Talking Talmud

A kohen who isn't wearing all of the priestly garments cannot do the service. And he has to wear them well - but if they are too long or too short or too worn out, that would still be acceptable. But not if we doubled up or left off one of them (4 garments for a regular kohen, 8 for the kohen gadol). What about a bandage (we'll see tomorrow that it depends). Or dirty. All of those factors would invalidate the service. Also, the fabric of the garments have very specific criteria as well - in terms of it being fine linen and the way the threads are made.

The mishnah identified the person handling the offering with the status of a "tevul yom" -- one who is waiting until nightfall for the purity effected by immersing in the mikveh earlier in the day to kick in -- as one whose offering would not be valid. So the search for the source for this conclusion is undertaken by the Gemara - including a comparison to shaving the head and/or points of the face. Also, a sampling of the establishment of norms for those who might bring such a korban - in this case, a zav or one akin to a zav, with an unhealthy seminal emission (one who is a mehusar kippurim) - with a connection to the red heifer.

Chapter 2 - with 2 new forms of disqualification: the wrong person or a person with the wrong status bringing the offering -- or bringing it at the wrong time. The mishnah lists the many people who would invalidate the offering just by virtue of who they are or what their status is. And then the Gemara looks to source each of the people who would have invalidated the offering, with an effort to find the precise ones. Plus, the example of the "onen," the acute mourner, if he is the kohen gadol, whose service would invalidate the offering. As sourced in the story of Nadav and Avihu, and Aaron's refraining from offering sacrifices immediately after their shocking deaths.

More on whether the conveyance of the blood from the place of slaughter to the altar needs to be via walking. Plus, how to handle a bird, whose slaughtering is already at the altar, without collection and conveyance of the blood. The discussion, when reported in the land of Israel generated laughter, which is eventually explained. What about a non-kohen doing the conveying? With all kinds of possible permutations.

Where is the sin-offering slaughtered? And what happens if the offering is slaughtered elsewhere? [What's What: The footprint of the Temple, and which areas are where.] And how does the incorrect intent in the wrong place have impact on the validity of the offering? Plus, the question of whether conveying the blood from one part of the Temple to another needs intent (and whether it needs walking to be valid). Also, can a non-kohen do this aspect of the service? What aspects of this process is the formal "avodah," and what parts are just maintenance, as it were?

A new mishnah! If a Korban Pesach and a sin-offering were slaughtered, but not for their own sakes correctly, then they won't be fit for those specific purposes. And this need for correct intent applies to all 4 acts of worship with regard to the blood - correct slaughter, collecting the blood, conveying it to the altar, and sprinkling it on the altar. But whether conveying the blood is truly part of this worship is opened for discussion. Also, a discussion of pigul - namely, the meat of an offering outside of its specific time of offering. Including a discussion of a kohen who dips a finger in the blood and whether that has impact on the validity of the korban and also on the question of pigul. Part of the issue is that most laws of these offerings are derived from the peace-offering, shelamim, but pigul has different halakhot for the sin-offering.

More on the timing of the slaughtering of the Korban Pesach - whether it needs to be done in the afternoon of the 14th of Nisan or whether the morning of the 14th works too. Also, a newborn animal and how it can't be offered and also can't be given as a tithe. Plus, the case of one who does wrong (eating forbidden fat), designates his sin-offering, becomes a heretic (so his designation is negated and the offering is disqualified), and then comes back to faith -- is the offering reinstated? What about someone who loses his cognitive abilities (at the same point where the first one became a heretic), and then he was healed - is the offering reinstated? Both cases are necessary, as the Gemara explains. What if the court rules that the fat isn't actually forbidden? And then retracts the ruling that it was permitted - is that offering disqualified or no? Plus, the time that all the sages agreed.

More on the parallels and comparsions between various offerings, and the way intent for the particular offering does (or does not) invalidate a meal-offering. Including whether the blood of the given (animal) offering can be present in the Holy of Holies. Also, a new mishnah! Is a Korban Pesach that is slaughtered in the morning of the 14th of Nisan considered slaughtered at the wrong time? Plus, the new wrinkle of whether the offering is eaten, as compared to the korban olah, which is not. And returning to the question of early on the 14th of Nisan counts as the correct time for the Pesach sacrifice.

A beraita quoting a dispute between between R. Eliezer and R. Yehoshua. A comparison between the sin-offering and the guilt-offering, distinguishing between them in several ways, including details about the way blood was applied to the altar, above and below a red line on the altar. With other details being similar to uphold the comparisons.

Can one switch a Korban Pesach to be a different offering? Or any offerings to be other offerings? How similar or dissimilar would the two different offerings need to be? To establish the various boundaries for the offerings, as they emerge from comparison to the Korban Pesach. [Who's Who: Mavog] [Who's Who: Rav Mesharshiyah] To establish that there are different kinds of sin-offerings, with real practical differences among them.