From where do we derive that the sin offering needs to be slaughtered and the blood collected in the north and if not, the sacrifice is disqualified.
Whose intent is important in the sacrificies – the kohen or the owner of the sacrifice? A new opinion is brought and Abaye brings two others who seem to have a similar opinion regarding other areas of halacha. The fifth perek specifies details relating to all the sacrifices regarding location of each sacrificial rite. It begins with kodshei kodashim.
Today’s shiur is in memory of העהע בת יצחק נחמיה
From where do we derive that blood is excluded from the laws of notar and impurity? The debate between the rabbis and Rabbi Shimon regarding whether or not impurity laws apply to inedible items is further analyzed – is there debate regarding only items that become contaminated or also a person that becomes contaminated and eats the inedible item?
In what ways are sacrifices brought by non-Jews subject to the same rules as sacrifices brought by Jews? Are the criteria for where pigul applies the same for impurity and for notar?
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.