Talking Talmud

A new chapter! A new mishnah! The first shearing of your sheep's wool goes to the kohanim. But only from non-consecrated animals. And only when you have "numerous" sheep -- which may be as few as two, or maybe five. Plus, what happens if the owner would dye the wool? Also, partnership in ownership of the flocks that would be required in gifts from the first-sheared wool but are not, because of the partnership (depending on the partnership). Note the contrasts when compared to terumah. Also, the categorization of retroactive clarification -- which shows up again (yesh/ein bereirah). Plus, the ramifications of a partnership with a non-Jew, including those who are not necessarily idolators.

A new mishnah! A convert who had a cow -- and it was slaughtered before the conversion, no gifts to the kohen; if after the conversion, then the convert is obligated in the gifts. But if it's not clear which happened first -- then the convert would be exempt from giving those gifts. [Who's Who: Rav Dimi] Plus, a contradiction raised by a different case -- as based on the information provided by ant holes in grain to determine how long ago that grain was moved, and whether it was harvested after the gifts for the poor had been left. Also, more on the gifts to the poor -- leket, shikchah, and pe'ah, and how they have different constraints/leniencies, as compared to terumah, which goes to the kohen.

Rav Yosef tested Rava and Abaye, regarding the gifts that are supposed to go to the kohen - when the kohen grabs the goods, he presents himself with the defense of obtaining the materials. Abaye explains how he used to reach of the gifts, but was schooled by others to simply wait. Plus, did Abaye teach Torah when he should have been functioning as a kohen? Also, partnered ownership of animals with an idolator -- how far can that be taken?

Do the gifts to the kohen include the daughter of the kohen as a recipient, or is she considered like a yisrael for this purpose, and the gifts are only to male kohanim? Also, more on the koi (the animal that is neither "behamah" nor "haya," but has indications of each). Plus, a new mishnah! On the case of a first-born animal that is blemished, which then exempts the owner from giving the gifts to the kohanim. And if that blemished animal is mixed among 100 other (unblemished) animals, it would exempt all of them from the gifts. Also, the question of joint ownership, and how that might exempt one from those same gifts. Plus, the understanding that this mishnah is speaking to the butcher, and not the owner or the kohen, for example.

A particular levi would grab the gifts going to the kohanim, before they reached the kohanim. The people complained to Rav... which raises the question of the gifts that are not required of the levites for the kohanim. But why aren't they required of the levites? Where does Rav find this approach? The difference seems to hinge on whether the levites are part of the people. Also, any foods that are considered sacred are taken from the levites, but not the things that are not sacred. But at the end of the long discussion, it seems that Rav's view is refuted, and the levites really did have to give these gifts.