Talking Talmud

A long mishnah (or a series that are published together): If a get is written with a name of a place that is not legitimate... Or other goofs in location... If other details are wrong... When is the get not a get? Plus, how a get that is not a get can really mess up a second marriage, and children from the second marriage. Plus, co-wives are treated like the divorcing woman too. Also, a deeper dive into the country that is not legitimate, and other countries as named in divorce. Plus, Rabbi Meir's approach in creating mamzerim.

More laws on mezuzot, specifically placement of the mezuzah on the doorjamb - the Gemara's basic example is of a door on a pivot, not hinges, in contrast to modern day doors. Also, what was one to do if the entrance around the door itself couldn't take nails, etc., to affix the mezuzah? With creative solutions, depending on the material of the doorjamb. Plus, the doorposts need to be there for more than just supporting a portico or rooftop.

On the writing of a mezuzah - in terms of the scribe's method of holding the parchment, leaving space at the top and the bottom, and so on. Including shifts in the application of varying views with regard to the writing of the text itself. How was that dispute resolved? The Gemara introduces the determinant of Eliyahu the Prophet -- in the non-mezuzah example of the halitzah shoe, and when even that determining voice would be accepted as law and when it would not: namely, as guided by the widespread practice of the Jewish people. Also, the sanctity of tefillin, mezuzot, and Torah scrolls - can tefillin parchment be "demoted" to be a mezuzah? It would seem yes, except for the requirement that the mezuzah parchment needs scoring. Plus, not sitting on a bed (couch?) that as a Sefer Torah on it.

More from Rabbi Shimon Shezuri - with a question of untithed produce that was mixed with a greater portion of tithed produce. Rabbi Tarfon gives him a solution - and the Gemara suggests several other solutions Rabbi Tarfon could have made (though the Gemara also then explains why he didn't make them). Also, going back to the scribal requirements - when a tear requires replacement, with recognition of worn parchments (vellum), and how they were protected. Plus, the requirements of writing out the text for a mezuzah.

On the last 8 verses of the Torah - who wrote them? That is, how could Moshe have written them when the text itself recounts his death at the beginning of them? Plus, what does it take to "get the mitzvah" of getting the Torah at Sinai? (Spoiler: Any writing of any letter of a Torah scroll). [Who's Who: Rabbi Shimon Shezuri] Plus, the case of the shechitah of a pregnant animal - what if the fetus survives (depending on how many months it is). Plus, checking out the rulings of R. Shimon Shezuri.

More on the menorah - and also a whole host of instructions for scribes, plus a powerful piece of aggadah: How did Moshe know what the menorah was supposed to look like? Diagrams and designs of fire - displaying the menorah - came in a vision from heaven, to show what it should look like. Was there a Tabernacle of fire too? (No) Plus, other items that need the visual. Also, the story of how Moshe discovered the identity and accomplishment and "reward" of Rabbi Akiva - and God's decisions that run the world in ways that are beyond humans' abilities, even Moshe, to understand.

A new mishnah: In the category of essential "Temple accoutrements" -- with a focus on the Menorah, in the company of tefillin and tzitzit and other. The 7 branches of the Menorah are all essential. Likewise, a block of gold. Also, other, less essential details about the Menorah: 1. Moshe's ritual items were to be used forever except for the trumpets. 2. Materials from which the Menorah can still be kosher (besides gold) - and which are not valid. Plus, a diagram of the Menorah - in words.

Another daf with 2 mishnayot, with more on the fistful from the grain-offering. 1 - What if the minority of the offering weren't brought? Even if the majority of it was offered properly, this minority would invalidate the offering. Other parallel cases are brought as well. 2 - On the 2 goats of Yom Kippur, what if only one of them were brought? Would that function for atonement? (Spoiler alert: No). Likewise, 2 sheep and the 2 loaves of the grain-offering of Shavuot. And the 2 loaves themselves. Among many other listed combinations, where each component part must be present or the mitzvah is not fulfilled. Also, the 7 sprinklings of the blood of the red heifer - with a deeper dive into the intentions and directions of this sprinkling -- with a dispute that is resolved as being due to different opinions.

2 mishnayot! 1 - When is a grain-offering disqualified? And how does that connect to the blood that is collected from the animal sacrifice? With parallels between the fistful taken from the grain and that blood that is collected. Plus, the factor of impurity - if and when some portion of the grain-offering is impure, the offering may or may not have been rendered invalid. 2 - The ingredients of the grain-offering would be gathered in a sacred vessel before taking the fistful, and then transferred to a second sacred vessel. But what if it wasn't put in that sacred vessel? Is the fistful still valid? (hint: it's a machloket). Also, the question of when in the burning of the fistful from the grain does the rest of the offering become permitted for eating by the kohanim? Another machloket: from the time it begins to burn or only after "most" of the fistful is burned. With a deeper dive into that second opinion.

If the fistful that the kohen takes from the grain-offering becomes ritually impure, then the tzitz (the frontpiece) of the kohen gadol's garments will function to bring about the acceptance of the offering. Though the very fact of that working is puzzling. But why wouldn't the tzitz accept blemishes in an animal sacrifice? (among other key questions). Also, the question of intent comes into play - and the question of how the tzitz will incorporate those factors is considered seriously, by means of examples - including between shogeg and intentional, as well as an individual's offering and a communal offering. Plus, the concerns that lead to emending a rabbinic text, and the concerns of emending the text.

Rava asks: If one takes a fistful of the grain and squeezes out the oil onto wood, does mean the fistful is missing its oil? Would that be invalid for an offering? How is that oil paralleled in animal sacrifice? (Or isn't it parallel?) Also, a new mishnah: Grain-offerings which haven't yet had the fistful taken from either one, and now the grain is mixed together - can they each have the fistful taken, or are they too blended? If the latter, then they're both invalid. The Gemara follows, with a dispute between Rav Hisda and Rabbi Hanina, regarding how meat that came to be in a mixture between impure meat and pure meat - when is the one kind negated or nullified in the other kind?

A new mishnah! A handful of one grain-offering that is mixed with another handful of grain... according to the rabbis' view, the mingling does not invalidate the sacrifice. Burning it on the altar is fine. But Rabbi Yehudah notes that select grain-offerings would not be valid in these circumstances. The Gemara then delves into parsing Rabbi Yehudah's position here, with comparison to the animal sacrifices of Zevahim. Plus, the question of when and whether substances can be nullified in the mixture of something of its same kind or something that much more different from the original. Note - these laws of mixtures are relevant to all areas of Halakhah, not just the sacrificial realm... except that the "no nullification" rule IS specific to the sacrificial realm. Or at least, when it's items of the same substance and also being offered on the altar. But the case is determined to be difficult.

More on salt... including the verses that require it for the grain-offerings, as well as the "melach s'domit" - salt from the Sodom region. As compared to salt that is quarried from a rock. The sacrificial hides were treated with salt too. So what is meant by "for the sacrifice" as compared to "for their eating"? They didn't only eat the holy foods - the regular foods could be eaten alongside. Note also that temple salt itself wasn't considered reserved for the kohanim. Plus, a comparison between the salt and the frankincense.

Rav Huna challenges Rav about whether salt is required for the grain-offering, even though it isn't presented in the Torah with double-language (as other requirements are). Which opens the discussion of the salt in new ways. Also, the Torah verse about salt and the grain-offering makes it clear that salt is essential to the offering. In contrast, in the case of the grain-offering, to the blood on the altar. Plus, a mnemonic to help remember the factors that would nonetheless require salt.

Wherever you have the word "torah" (meaning, law, not the Torah in total) and the word "chukah" (meaning, statute) - then the capacity to invalidate the offering kicks in . But does that mean either/or or both? It certainly sounds like both - but the Gemara tracks it through and either/or sounds better by the end... Plus, the list of occasions or specific categories of people for which these terms are present in context in the Torah. Also, scriptural repetition about the requirements of the grain-offering establishes those details (where the repetition takes place) as essential. But the offering itself must be a permanent one for this essential status. Until the case where temporary status seems not to be a problem, in light of the number of repetitions...?

If one has intent to leave blood over from an animal sacrifice, does everyone agree that doing so would invalidate the offering? The Tannaim hash it out - with a focus on Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi and Rabbi Elazar ben Shamua. With a lot of heartfelt drama in the details of this passage. Also, a new mishnah: If you didn't do a whole slew of the tasks associated with the grain-offering, the tasks on that list won't invalidate the offering. Plus, the Gemara that delves into the specifics of those tasks, and why those details matter to preserve the validity of the offerings. And more on the Temple service for the shelamim - peace-offerings too. Plus, the 15 tasks associated with these grain-offerings all together.

Rabbi Hanina helped Rabbi Hamnuna with understanding something in Torah that he counted as equivalent to all the rest of his Torah learning: namely, on the burning of the handful and pigul, of course. Also, starting chapter 3 with a new mishnah! Taking the fistful of grain, but as something that is not meant to be eaten or that which is not meant to be burned - that would still be valid (except for one who disagrees). With a delving into these details, and then a conundrum regarding the double-language in the source verses.

A long mishnah - on the affect of pigul when it only affects part of the "permitter" - matirin - namely, by burning one part, the rest becomes permitted for consumption. Including a dispute between Rabbi Meir and the sages -- which leads to other areas of dispute between them. And further, a dispute between Rav and Shmuel about the dispute of Rabbi Meir and the sages. Also, the 43 (or 47 or 48) presentations of blood from the animal sacrifices of Yom Kippur. Also, a sesame seed and the smallest amount of potential pigul. Plus, a rejection of Rabbi Meir's views here.

2 mishanyot! 1 - How combinations can make items pigul or not. With the cases of the thanksgiving offering (animal offering plus loaves) and also the "Shtei HaLehem" - lambs and 2 loaves of Shavuot. Also, a long discussion about what question Rabbi Elazar asked of Rav (to determine the question itself), in terms of pigul with varied factors -- the order of events, with regard to offerings, intent, minimal measure, and so on. Plus, a mention of "cannabis" (hemp) in the context of mixtures. 2 - Pigul intent renders the libations pigul once they've been sanctified, but the libations, if brought with pigul intent, would not make the offerings themselves pigul.

Is there such a thing as pigul for half of the offering? It's a machloket! And a further development of Rabbi Yosei's position, which doesn't presume karet and whether some amount of pigul intent contaminates everything - for example, the 2 loaves of lechem ha-panim. What is the smallest unit, so to speak, that can become a problem of pigul? Or can it be in parts at all? Also, what about mitigating factors against the phenomenon of pigul - to make an offering permitted, when it might have become pigul? Also, delving into the position of Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi, regarding combining intents and whether pigul results. Plus, the implications of a communal offering (vs. a personal one), with regard to purity/impurity.