A braita is brought showing the derivation of pigul applying to all types of sacrifices even though the verse regarding pigul was stated only by a peace offering (shlamim). However it is only in cases similar to peace offerings where there is something that permits either the meat to be eaten or parts to be burned on the altar. Various sections of this braita are analyzed and questioned by the gemara.
Rabbi Meir says that if one has a pigul thought during the sprinkling of one of the corners of the inner altar (in the sin offerings brought on the inner altar), the meat is pigul and if one eats, it, one will get karet. The rabbis disagree. There is a debate regarding the reason for Rabbi Meir’s opinion. Sources are brought to raise contradictions to both sides. One is resolved and others aren’t.
Drashot relating to the various inner sin offerings are discussed and comparisons are made based on various drashot.
Various drashot are brought regarding the verse about the bull offering of the community and compare from there to other offerings. What comparisons are made and according to whose opinions?
Rav Papa brings a proof from an inference from a mishna that if blood got on one’s clothing from the remaining 3 sprinklings (before all 3 were sprinkled), one would need to wash one’s clothing (law of kibus, laundering). The proof is questioned but ultimately resolved. A braita is brought explaining the source for the halacha in the mishna that all the sprinklings for the sin offerings that are done in the inner sanctuary are necessary.
What is the source for Beit Hillel regarding his argument with Beit Shamai about a sin offering – if blood was only sprinkled on one corner of the altar, was atonement effected? Two different sources are brought. Rabbi Yochanan and Rav Papa list the status of the other 3 sprinklings (after atonement is effected) regarding various halachot – in some ways they are like the first and in other ways not.
There is a debate regarding why during the sacrificing of the Pashal sacrifices, the drain was plugged to that the blood would stay in the azara. What parts of the animal are susceptible to pigul? Rabbi Elezar says that certain cases where a thought regarding a part of the animal (like a fetus) will not cause the part or the animal’s meat to become pigul but a thought regarding the animal that would render the animals’meat pigul would also render the fetus pigul. Several sources are brought to prove his opinion and also an attempt to contradict his opinion.
Various debates of Rabbi Yochanan and Reish Lakish are brought regarding impurities in the mikdash. How does the mishna allow for some mistakes to be rectified?
Three different versions are brought regarding what Reish Lakish said. Questions (and possible support) are brought regarding two of the versions.
Who is allowed to slaughter the animal for a sacrifice? The mishna words it in a way that sounds like it is only post facto allowed – however this contradicts another source which indicates it is permitted ab initio. The mishna also indicated that if an impure person slaughtered. it is allowed, however another source contradicts and seems to indicate it is not allowed. Ula explains that an impure person who even puts a bit of one’s body into the azara of the mikdash it is forbidden. A question is brought from a tannatic source against him and a potential proof is brought. Both are rejected.