Karetot 10: Sacrifices That can be Offered on a Sliding Scale

Our Mishna teaches about sacrifices that are korban oleh v'yored, sacrifices that go up and down.  These are sacrifices that are offered on a sliding scale.  Five of them are named: 

• Shemi’at kol, cases where a person refuses to offer testimony, swearing that he does not have information that would be useful to a friend in court 

• Bituy sefatayim, someone who takes an oath l'hara o l'hetiv, committing to perform a positive act or to refrain from doing something 

• Tum’at Mikdash v'kodashav, when someone in a state of ritual impurity enters the Temple or eats consecrated food 

• Yoledet, the time when a woman is considered ritually impure after giving birth

• Metzora, someone suffering from biblical leprosy who recovers must bring various sacrifices in order to be permitted into the Temple and once again eat sacrifices, etc.

These are clear examples of rabbinical interpretations of Torah law based on practical and compassionate consideration.

Karetot 8: Women, Multiple Sacrifices, and Changing Torah Interpretation

Today we delve into women and ritual purity.  A woman is considered to be ritually impure after she has given birth for different periods of time if is has borne a boy or a girl.  After that time, she must bring sacrifices including a burnt offering and a sin offering to the Temple (Vayikra 12:6-8).  The birth offering should be a lamb but might be two turtle-doves or two young pigeons if she cannot afford the lamb.

Women did not have to visit the Temple on the Festivals and might only visit the Temple once each year.  Thus a woman might bring multiple sacrifices to the Temple after several births.  The birds would then become pricier.  

Our Mishna teaches:
Once in Jerusalem the price of a pair of doves rose to one golden dinar.  Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said, "I swear by the home of the Divine Presence I shall not sleep tonight until the price is in silver dinars".  Then he taught in the beit din: If a woman had five definite births or five definite discharges, she brings one offering and then she may eat the sacrificial meat and she is not bound to bring the other offerings.  As a result the price of a pair of birds stood at a quarter of a silver dinar each.

Rashi explains that the Torah instruction was to bring a sacrifice for each birth; however, a change was needed based on logic: "It is time to work for the Lord: they have made void Your Torah" (Tehillim 119:126).  Some rabbis argue about whether or not the Torah requirements was specific regarding multiple offerings.  The Ritva says that all agree that there is no biblical imperative to bring a separate sacrifice for each birth; instead, Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel voided a rabbinical enactment.

When the Rabbis see that one Sage might be going against Torah law, they regroup and declare that it must have been rabbinical law that was broken.  Even when Tehillim is quoted to understand the importance of interpretation, the rabbis are hesitant to speak about the process of going against Torah law for the sake of the people.

Karetot 7: Repentance Without Atonement on Yom Kippur?

In daf 6, we learned more about the ingredients mixed together to create the anointing oil.  Today's daf considers the process of atonement, particularly on Yom Kippur.  The rabbis discuss whether or not one might be atoned simply by participating in the Yom Kippur rituals even if s/he is not repentant.  

A baraita compares Yom Kippur to sin offerings and guilt offerings.  These will only bring on atonement if the person who brings them has the proper intention during the sacrifices.  A different baraita loots to Vayikra (23:28) where we are made to understand that even if one works and does not fast on Yom Kippur is forgiven on Yom Kippur.

Abaye says that there is no contradiction between these two baraitot; We cannot apply the punishment of karet to sins that violate Yom Kippur when these sins are listed at the beginning of Massekhet Karetot.  The rabbis ask how atonement might happen without repentance.  Rambam's Hilkhot Teshuva (1:1-3) shares that there must be repentance in order for atonement to be granted.  

When the Temple stood, the High Priest represented the people on Yom Kippur when bringing the se'er ha'mishtale'ach, the scapegoat, to be thrown from the cliff to Azazel (Vayikra 16:5-22).  The High Priest would recite the viduey, confessional, as a formula.  Now that the Temple and the High Priest are gone, we are each responsible for our own repentance.

Karetot 5: Anointing Oil - Use and Preparation

Today's daf continues the Gemara's conversation regarding what receives the punishment of karet.  Ha'mefatem et ha'shemen, one who prepares the anointing oil for their personal use.  First, we look at the composition of this anointing oil.

Anointing oil was used to prepare and sanctify the mishkan, Tabernacle, and the vessels used therein (Shemot 30:22-23), Aharon Ha'Kohen, the High Priest and his children.  The Gemara teaches us that kings of Israel were anointed as well, although one who replaced his father without conflict did not require anointing.

A baraita is quoted: Rabbi Yehuda taught that the oil was made of roots boiled with spices.  Rabbi Yosei disagrees; there would not be enough oil to apply to the roots for they would absorb the oil, so they could not have boiled in it.  Instead, he argues that the roots were boiled in water.  The more fragrant substance would rise to the top and the anointing oil would be poured too the water where it would absorb the fragrance.  Later the oil would be removed from the top and placed in a flask.  

In Rabbi Yehuda's opinion, the production of anointing oil involved many miracles.  For example, 12 login of oil were produced but this was enough to anoint all of the vessels in the mishkan, Aharon and his sons for the entire week of dedication of the Tabernacle.  Shemot (30:31) teaches that enough oil would be left for use at the end of days, too.

Tzori is one of the plant ingredients said to be used in the making of anointing oil.  The highest quality of oil - in this case, balsam oil as well, was taken as drips from the plant.  However, most perfume was taken by boiling the branches of a fragrant plant.  Incense and fragrant oil were also made from these plants to use medicinally, and they were extremely valuable.   Steinsaltz notes that this oil was found recently in a cave near the Dead Sea.

Karetot 4: Consuming Blood and Fat, Karet and Context

The Gemara looks our our last Mishna's statement about what is punishable by karet, a shortened life or the loss of a child or a spiritual loss.  In particular, they consider the Torah and rabbinical prohibitions regarding eating the fat of an ox, goat or sheep and the consumption of blood.

The fat referred to here is a layer on top of the muscles of each animal.  These are discrete and easy to cut away.  Some rabbis consider these to be the best parts of an animal and thus they are given to G-d for G-d's enjoyment first.  The rabbis discuss why these animals are alike and different from each other, how their sacrifices are understood within their kosher/non-kosher, domesticated/non-domesticated contexts.

Regarding the consumption of blood, the rabbis consider different stages of blood removal and how the consumption of blood is also dependent on context. Our Mishna's prohibition concerns sacrificial animals.  In Steinsaltz's notes, we learn more about three different times that we might consume an animal's blood.  The first is dam ha'nefesh, blood of the body.  This refers to the blood that is pumped out of the body at the time of slaughter.  The second is dam ha'tamzit, draining blood, which continues to flow from the arteries after the animal's heart has stopped beating.  Finally, we are prohibited from consuming the dam ha'eivarin, blood drained from the animal's limbs.

Karetot 3: Witchcraft/Sorcery as Forms of Idol Worship, Magic Tricks

After continuing to discuss prohibited behaviour that might be included in larger categories resulting in karet, the rabbis turn to cases of idolotry.  In particular, they consider prohibitions including ba'al ov, necromancy or witchcraft, and yidoni, sorcery.  In Vayikra (20:27), the Torah teaches that one who performs these activities are liable to karet and one who asks for such services are liable to receive lashes (Vayikra 19:31).  We already learned in Sanhedrin (65) that these services are about claiming to tell the future via wizardry.  The Rambam shares more detail: a necromancer will burn incense and wave a myrtle branch while reciting a formula until the questioner hears what seems like an answer coming from the depths of the ground.  S/he might also take a skull and hold it so that it seems as if the skull is speaking.  A sorcerer is one who uses the bone of an animal or bird in his/her mouth so that it seems that the object is speaking of the future or other magical events.  

The Gemara notes one sorcerer mentioned in Sanhedrin.  King Shaul had eradicated witches from Israel.  He searched out an esher ba'alat ov to call up prophet Shmuel from the dead to get his advice (I Shmuel 28) before the Pelishtim war.  Shmuel did not appear in a regular manner; instead he spoke through the body of the esher ba'alat ov.  While the book tells that this was necromancy at work, the Geonim teach that this was both sleight of hand and psychology.  The witch was taught to read her clients' needs.  She seemed surprised to learn that King Shaul had come to her, but the message that he would be killed in battle was her own message rather than one of a ghost.

Karetot 2: Meaning of Karet, When the Consequence is Karet

Our first Mishna outlines which prohibited actions, when done intentionally, is liable to karet*,  We learn that there are thirty-six cases that lead us to being punishment by karet:

• engaging in sexual intercourse with
• one's mother
• the wife of one's father even if she is not his mother 
• one's daughter
• another man
• one who has copulated with an animal
• a woman who has copulated with an animal
• a woman and her daughter
• a married woman
• one's sister
• one's father's sister
• one's mother's sister
• one's wife's sister
• one's brother's wife
• the wife of one's father's brother
• the wife of one's mother's brother
• a menstruating woman

• Karet is also the consequence for
• one who blasphemes the name of Heaven
• one who worships an idol
• one who gives one of his children to Molech, a different community's idol
• one who desecrates Shabbat
• one who is ritually impure and eats sacrificial food
• one who enters the Temple while ritually impure
• one who eats forbidden fat
• one who consumes blood
• one who eats meat left over from an offering time after notar, the time allotted for consumption
• one what eats meat of an offering that is piggul, sacrificed with the intent to consume it after its designated time
• one who one who slaughters and offers up these animals outside of the temple
• one who eats leavened bread on Pesach
• one who eats or performs prohibited labour on Yom Kippur
• One who blends the anointing oil just like Moshe did in the wilderness
• one who blends the incense according for purposes other than use on the temple
• one who applies annointing oil to one's skin
• one who does not fulfil the mitzvah of bringing the Paschal offering
• one who does not fulfil the obligation of circumcision
• these last two and different from the other reasons as they are positive mitzvoth
• We are reminded that regarding these sins, one is liable to receive karet for intentional violation and that we bring a sin offering for an unwitting violation
• When the violation's motivation is unknown, one is liable to bring provisional guilt offering provisional guild offering which provides provision al atonement until he learn whether or not he sinned
• Regarding sins that involve entering the Temple inappropriately, one must bring a sliding- scale offering for a definite transgression
• The Rabbi say that the halacha is the same regarding one who blasphemes, for "You shall have one law for him who performs the action unwittingly (Numbers15:29) excluding one who blasphemes and one who does not perform an action with sins but with speech

Each one of these cases is discussed at length.  Many of them include several categories, and others are combined to equal just one case of prohibited action.  The Gemara discusses some of these actions in detail.  As well, the rabbis note that when one might be liable for karet as well as another punishment, like lashes, and how this might be negotiated.  Finally, we learn that the rabbis are aware of the importance of witnesses in cases of karet - one must be seen transgressing by two people and one must be warned that the act is forbidden with a consequence of karet.

 * The meaning of karet is alternately defined as being forbidden from the world-to-come, ending one's life early - for example before 50, losing one's child, or having one's soul tortured in the world-to-come

Temura 34: Must Chametz be Destroyed by Burning?

Massechet Temura ends with today's daf.  While a number of our Mishna's statements are discussed, the Gemara spends much of its time on the burning of chametz on Pesach.  Can it be removed in other ways?

If chametz is something that is burned, then the author of the Mishna is siding with Rabbi Yehuda (who ruled that chametz can only be destroyed by burning).  In Massechet Pesachim (21) the sages teach that we are permitted to destroy chametz by crumbling it up and throwing it into the wind or the sea.

Rabbi Chayyim Soloveitchik wrote in Chidushei Rabbi Chayyim HaLevi (Hilchot Chametz u'Matza) that these arguments are dependent on the definition of the term bi'ur, destruction.  Is this actually a  positive mitzvah, or is simply directing us to clear our property of chametz?  

Rabbi Yehuda argues that destroying chametz involves burning because burning is the only way to completely erase an object.  The sages argue that the removal of chametz does not require burning; the positive mitzvah is to remove chametz from our property.

We learn that the halacha follows the opinion of the sages, even though Rabbi Yehuda's opinion is not disputed.  Chametz can be destroyed by any means, but many people follow the tradition of burning it (Rema, Shulchan Aruch Orach Chayim 445:1).

Temura 33: What is Buried and What is Burned

Today's daf contains the final Mishna of Massechet Terumah.  It examines what must be buried and what must be burned according to Jewish law.  

What must be buried:

• If a sacrificial animal miscarries, the fetus is buried
• If a sacrificial animal miscarries a placenta, the placenta is buried
• an ox that will be stoned (Shemot 21-28)
• a heifer whose neck is broken (Devarim 21:4-8)
• birds brought to the Temple as part of the purification of a leper
• the hair of a nazarite who becomes ritually impure (Bamidbar 6:5)
• a donkey's firstborn (Shemot 13:13)
• a mixture of meat cooked in milk (Shemot 23:19; 34:26; Devarim 14:21)
• non-sacred animals slaughtered in the Temple/courtyard

What must be Burned:

• Chametz on Pesach
• Teruma that has become ritually defiled
• Orla, fruit grown in the first three years after planting (Vayikra 19:23)
• mixed seeds in a vineyard (Devarim 22:9)

All consecrated animals that are piggul, slaughtered with the intention of being eaten after their allotted time are to be burned along with those being eaten beyond their allotted place.

Today's Mishna ends with a caveat: we may burn the bread and oil oil of ritually defiled teruma.  Teruma is given to kohanim as a gift and the priests can derive benefit from it even after defilement.  The example given is that something that cannot be eaten is permitted to be used as fuel.  Other than this, items must be burned and no benefit can be derived from them.

Temura 32: What is Similar Between the Two Types of Consecrations

Today's Mishna teaches about halacha where there is no difference between kedushat mizbe'ach, an animal set aside to be sacrificed on the altar, and kedushat bedeck ha'bayit, an object that is consecrated for use through the Temple's treasury.  

There are several examples.  One is that dedications for the altar and dedications for repairing the Temple cannot be changed from one holiness to another.  Bringing a burnt offering to substitute for a peace offering or vice versa is forbidden.  As well, dedicating something to repair the Temple cannot be exchanged for a dedication for the alter or vice versa.  The Rambam rules that we should be even more stringent than that. 

Another example in our Mishna notes that carcasses must be buried and not redeemed when consecrated animals die.  Rabbi Shimon argues that when something is consecrated for use through the treasury, the animal can be redeemed even after it has died.  

The Gemara walks us through the issue with redeeming sanctified animals after they have died: they cannot be redeemed and fed to dogs as food.  Blemished dedications can only be given to the dogs when the animals have become treifa, because they can be examined and appraised while they are alive (Vayikra 27:11-12).  The Sages and Rabbi Shimon disagree because of Rabbi Shimon's belief that the practice of setting animals before us to be appraised only applied to animals brought on the altar (and not to animals brought for use by the treasury).

Temura 31: Different Types of Consecration

Today's daf introduces the seventh perek of Teruma, which teaches us about the differences between kedushat mizbe'ach, animals consecrated for sacrifice on the altar, and kedushat bedek ha'bayit, objects consecrated for use by the Temple treasury for maintenance.  The Torah has taught us that that only when the owner of an animal with intrinsic holiness attempts to switch the sanctity to another animal that the both animals will become holy.

The Mishna teaches us:

• the owner of an animal that is brought as a sacrifice may continue to derive some benefits from the animal
• kedushat bedek ha'bayit applies to everything but kedushat mizbe'ach applies only to animals that can be sacrificed

The Gemara looks at the definition of the word "everything" in this context.  Ravina suggests that it includes shefuye ve'niva, holy shavings and fallen leaves from a tree that has been dedicated to the Temple treasury for keeping.  Regarding these 'neva', Rashi teaches that these leaves can be composted and used as fertilizer, while the Ramban says that these are the hard knobs on trees.

Temura 30: What Can Be Used in Sacrifice, What is Sanctified

We cannot use tainted money - that used to pay for etnan zona, a sex worker's services, or mechir kelev, to pay for a dog (Devarim 23:19).  Today's Mishna explains that this applies to animal sacrifices as well as other sacrifices.  If one paid for sexual services with win or oil or fine flour, those objects cannot be used to buy sacrifices.

There is an exception: when payment is made using something already consecrated for sacrifice.  Once sanctified, an object no longer belongs to its former owner.  Our Mishna notes that this also applies to birds.  Rashi and Rambam argue about this last point.

Temura 27: Paying Beyond the Value of the Original Sanctified Animal

We have learned that temura - trading a sanctified animal for another animal - is not permitted and both animals will become sanctified.  However, we have also learned that under certain conditions this is permitted.  If a sanctified animal develops a blemish, it must be redeemed and another animal for sacrificed is purchased with that money.  We learned from the Mishna on yesterday's daf that if that exchange were made, the new animal would make up the value of the original animal even if it is worth more than the replacement.

Rabbi Yochanan teaches us that the exchange is permitted according to Torah law, and the sages simply added their opinions about making up the value of the original animal.. Reish Lakish states that making up the value of the original animal is derived from the Torah, as well.

Shmuel taught that a sanctified object worth at least a maneh was redeemed on a peruta, the smallest coin in use during the times of the Mishna, it is a permitted.*. Rabbi Yochanan ruled that in Emet L'yaakov, Rabbi Yaakov Kaminetsky suggests that if Reish Lakish agrees with Shmuel, he can explain that there are two separate parts to a sanctified object.  First, it hold a holiness.  Second, a consecrated animal is the communal property of the Jewish people.  The holiness might be removed through temura, but the full value should be paid as fair compensation.


*  Perutot are worth very little, for example
   1 dinar =192 perutot
   19,200 perutot = 1 maneh

Temura 26: Two Statements About Sacrifice

What should be done if the owner of an ola, burnt offering, and a shelamim, peace offering, attempts to switch one or both of his/her animals using the laws of temura, what should be done?

The Mishna states that Rabbi Meir encountered a case where one animal is about to replace a sanctified animal, and the person says "this animal is hereby the substitute of the ola, the substitute of the shelamim," we accept the first statement and the animal is declared an ola.  

Rabbi Yosei states that if the owner really intended for the animal to substitute for both, the two statements cannot be made simultaneously and thus the animal is declared to be half-ola, half-shelamim.  That animal cannot be sacrificed, and so all wait until it develops a blemish that would would render it unfit for sacrifice.  Once halacha allows it to be redeemed for money, half of the proceeds buy an ola and the other buy a shelamim.  If the owner changes his/her mind after making the first statement, then only the first statement is valid.

Rabbi Yitzchak b'Rabbi Yosei says in the name of Rabbi Yochanan that all agree to the principle of tefos lashon rishon, accept the first statement.  If the person said that "this animal should substitute for the ola and then it should substitute for the shelamim," even Rabbi Yosei would rule like Rabbi Meir.  

This Mishna is discussed in Massechet Zevachim (30), the Gemara does not speak of tefos lashon rishon as a significant factor.  It seems to assume that the principle is rejected by both Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yosei.  The Gemara assumes that they differ on how to understand the intention of the person who is making the statements and their intention when stating that the person changed his/her mind.

Temura 25: Can We Change Our Minds Regarding Sacrifices?

Our Mishna teaches about Rabbi Meir's words: when the offspring of this animal shall be a burnt offering and the animal itself shall be a peace offering, his words hold.  But if he says first that the animal shall be a peace offering and then inadvertently its young shall be a burnt offering, its young are regarded as the young of a peace offering.   

Rabbi Yosei says that if he intended to say this at first, and since it is impossible to mention both kinds of sacrifices at the same time, his worlds would stand.  After he already said intentionally "this shall be a peace offering", he changes his mind and says "its young shall be a burnt offering", its young is regarded as the youth of a peace offering.

Rabbi Meir's teaching is clear.  Although she one has the ability to sanctify the embryo of a pregnant animal separately from its mother, that is only if he first sanctified the embryos.  If the mother is sancified first, the embryo automatically takes on its mother's sanctity and they must be sacrifice ed together.  Rabbi Yosei argues that if the person's intent was to state different sanctification for the motherland the embryo, it even the mother is mentioned first.  Once his makes his statement, however, it must hold.

Rav Pappa says that this teaching is important in a case where the statements were made tech k'dei kibbur, within the span of utterance.  Jewish laws generally allow one to change his/her mind and restate intentions within a short amount oaf time.  This would be the amount of time that it takes to welcome one's teacher - shalom alecheim, mori v'rabbi.  Sanctified objects cannot be returned, however.

---

Temura 24: Skinning Animals on Yamim Tovim

Our Gemara teaches that our Sages said: One may not flay an animal from the feet on holy days; likewise one may not flay from the feet a firstborn or dedications unfit for sacrifice even on a weekday.  Animals' skins were removed by cutting straight lines from the bottom to the top of its stomach, keeping the skin whole so that it could be used as a container for liquids or small items.  

We know that skinning an animal on yamim tovim should be prohibited.  Slaughtering is allowed for food, but skinning involves work.  The Gemara offers several examples of why a first-born animal or a sanctified animal found to be unfit for sacrifice should be forbidden.  We learn that in the west (in Israel, )amrei b'ma'arava, this looks like performing work with sanctified animals.  Rashi says that this is not technically true.  There is no law against working with a sanctified animal after it is dead.  However, it seems inappropriate, which is enough to forbid the action.

Temura 23: When and Where is a Gift Consumed?

In Vayikra 6:9, we learn "And that which is left thereof shall Aaron  and his sons eat; it shall be eaten without leaven I a holy place; in the court of the tent of meeting shall they eat it".  Out Gemara quotes a barita to explain that passage:

Why does the text state "They shall eat"?  This teaches us that if there was only a small quantity of the meal offering gate priests may eat chullin, unsanctified, food and teruma, priestly offerings, with it in order to make a full and satisfying meal.  What is the point of the expression, "They shall it eat"?  In order to teach us that if the quantity was large the priests must not eat chullin or teruma with it, in order that the meal offering should not make an achila gasa, an over-sated meal.

Rashi says that chullin is easy to bring to the Temple court as one can eat chullin outside of the court and the continue the meal offering in the Temple court.  Tosafot say that there is no restriction when bringing an object into the Temple court as long as no service is performed with it.  

We learn that achila gasa usually refers to eating ravenously; without etiquette.  As well, if someone continues eating after s/he is full, eating becomes unpleasant.  That action does not meet the Jewish definition of eating.

Temura 20: Birds as Burnt Offerings

We continue the discussion of yesterday's Mishna regarding whether or not an inappropriate asham, guilt offering, should be sold immediately or should be sold only after she develops a mum, a blemish.  Rabbi Shimon believes that if a female is sacrificed as an ola, a burnt offering (a sacrifice brought only from male animals), it develops kedushat ha'guf, inherent sanctity.  This is because there is a case where an olat ha'of, a burnt offering brought from a bird.  

Rabbi Elazar ben Azaraif says that we should automatically bring an ola without defining which type: a tor, turtledove, or a ben-yona, pigeon.  In Vayikra (1:14), we learn that torim and b'nei yona may be brought as sacrifices.  Massechet Chullin (1:5) tells us that the tor can only be brought as an adult while the yona can only be brought immediately after hatching.  These are distinct periods of time (only four or five days after hatching, these birds are called adults).

Temura 19: What to do with a Female Asham

Today's daf includes a Mishna discussing what should be done when one brings a female animal as an asham, a guilt offering, when only males are sanctified as guilt offerings.  The Mishna tells us that we can wait for the animal to develop a permanent blemish and then the animal can be sold.  At that point the money is sanctified and it can be used to purchase an appropriate asham.   Rabbi Shimon disagrees.  He argues that because the female animal is already 'blemished' in that she is the wrong sex, we do not have to wait for her to develop a mum, blemish.

The Gemara questions how much influence the kedushat ha'guf, inherent holiness, might be related to kedushat damim, its monetary value.  Rava decides that an animal that is fit for sacrifice is consecrated for its value automatically receives inherent consecration and must be sacrificed instead of being sold.

Temura 18: Bringing a Sacrifice Immediately

Today the Gemara teaches a Torah law requiring a person who claims that he will bring a sacrifice immediately must bring that offering on the first day of one of the shalosh regalim, the three Festivals (Pesach, Shavuot, Sukkot).  If there is a delay, he is transgressing this mitzvah daily.  

Rav Ashi says that this was a reference to Shavuot when the second animal was sacrificed, which would have been the first opportunity to sacrifice the animal after Pesach.  Rav Zevid quotes Rava saying that the animal or the owner might have been ill and unable to bring the sacrifice on Shavuot and so it was left until the next Sukkot.  

In Massechet Rosh HaShana (6), the Gemara states that the sacrifice must be brought within the annual cycle of holidays.  

Temura 17: The Status of Offspring and Temura

Perek III begins on today's daf.  The first Mishna tells us that the offspring of a korban shelamim, peace offering, is also sanctified.  As well, their temura, exchanged animals, are in the same category as the intended animals.  The sacrifice of this second animals will include semicha, placing hands on the animal's head, wine libations and giving the breast and the thigh of the animal to the priest.

Our Mishna applies this halacha to a peace offering but not to all sacrifices.  For example, regarding a korban chatat, a sin offering, the offspring of the korban chatat and and the temura of the korban chatat are left to die.  They cannot be used for any purpose, whether that is holy or secular.

Temura 16: What Torah has been Forgotten

We learn about Rabbi Yosef ben Yo'ezer's recollections about the teachings of putting one's hands on the head of a sacrificial animal.  In his very old age, he argued that this was not required.  The rabbis seem to understand that his capacity was compromised.  However, this opens the question of how to understand the different arguments of different rabbis.  

Commentary suggests that the Jewish people forgot over 3000 directions and instructions taught by Moshe.  How could the Sages hold so many different interpretations when we were taught one version of G-d's words?  The prophets and priests were expected to follow G-d's words as well, but Yehoshua, Shmuel, Pinches and Elazar all said that lo ba'shamayim hi, the Torah is not in Heaven (Devarim 30:12).  Their suggestion is that since Mount Sinai, each generation is expected to have Sages who will consider what has come before them and act as new interpreters of Torah meaning.  They are not actually communicating directly with G-d.

The daf continues to consider some of the people involved with these considerations.  We are introduced to Achsah, a beautiful woman married to Caleb (whose ancestry is questioned).  Spiritual references to "above and below" are mentioned, explained as this world and the world to come; spiritual knowledge and the waters in the desert.

At the end of our daf, a new Mishna that discusses the stringencies on sacrificial animals and on substitutes.