Talking Talmud

More on Shavuot and its lambs... If older animals were brought - it's a dispute, whether they would count for the offerings of Shavuot or not. That is, if the intent is correct; if not, then not. Also, if the kohanim made something pigul - then that is invalid, even if it was done inadvertently. Plus, a new mishnah - with more on essentiality: the daily offerings and the additional offerings of a given day, when both are not possible, for whatever reason. Also, in the case of missing an offering, the ability to make it up later in the day was real, unless there was intent to miss it. But if inadvertent, fulfilling the obligation for the offering later on was acceptable. Likewise, for incense. Plus, the order of precedence in the case of a community that could only offering one of the given offerings.

The case of slaughtering 4 lambs with the 2 loaves of Shavuot (instead of 2 lambs), then how is that error handled? Two of those lambs are not offered for their own sake, since they aren't presented in the right context, as, for example, a generic peace-offering. That is, the first two lambs have already fulfilled the Shavuot requirement. Also, Rav Yitzhak comes from the land of Israel to the study halls of Babylonia, and he teaches: Animals that are offered for the wrong purpose cannot be used, but must be left to burn... And his rationale for disqualifying these offerings is by virtue of comparison with the sin-offering. Until the Gemara turns the argument on its head and suggests that this mandatory peace-offering is more similar to the voluntary peace-offering, which would leave it a valid offering. Plus, if the animal that is brought is the wrong animal, for example, if it is the wrong age, those are disqualified.

More on the loaves and lambs of Shavuot and how the slaughtering of the lambs with the proper intent consecrates the breads too. Plus, the possibility of possible consecration (which is not possible according to everyone, but it is in the view of some). Also, the strength of the connection between the lambs' slaughter and the consecration of the loaves. What happens if that bread is lost? Plus, the sprinkling of the blood for its own sake... And how if the offering is made for its own sake, there's a lot more wiggle room than when the question is not asked. Note that all these lambs - which are peace-offerings - need to be brought in a timely way.

The bond between the animal sacrifices of the holiday of Shavuot and the "Shtei ha-Lechem" loaves of the same holiday, and when they are both required, as essential, and when one could be offered without the other, if need be. Also, a deeper dive into the the loaves of the Shtei ha-Lechem to begin with, and how they have to be changed in appearance (and if and when they are to be eaten). The rabbinic approach to the lambs seems to contradict the Torah's requirement - which needs its own deeper dive, as well.

More on aspects of Temple worship that are not essential to each other. Also, the treatment of the Temple offerings for Rosh Chodesh from the Book of Yehezkel (Ezekiel) - which is not the same thing as that which is commanded in the Torah. And once the Gemara is talking about a source from Ezekiel, it opens the discussion to other challenges -- including an important story of Rabbi Haninah ben Hizkiyah and how he explained all of the difficult passages of Ezekiel. Plus, a new mishnah! Bringing us back to the discussion of essentiality. With an atypical dispute in the mishnah itself - given the explanations for the respective opinions: Rabbi Akiva, Rabbi Shimon ben Nanas, and Rabbi Shimon.