Talking Talmud

A debate between Rabbi Shimon and Rabbi Meir, as to whether a first-born donkey is permitted for benefit. Whether the animal is decapitated is a relevant element to the disagreement. Plus, the question of food impurity -- that which isn't forbidden for benefit is food, and vice versa, but then it can become impure. But then what about meat and milk that are cooked together, and prohibited for benefit? Because that's not Rabbi Shimon's opinion. The system of food impurity seems to be internal to itself. Also, the case of slaughtering a first-born animal for practice in slaughtering. [Who's Who? Nimos (and Rabbi Yehoshua HaGarsi)] Plus, Rashi's comment, as well as that of Rabbenu Gershom.

A new mishnah! When two donkeys are born at the same time, and it's not clear which one should be offered as a first-born (or a male and female and not clear which was born first). Also, the redemption of the first-born donkey with a lamb (or a kid). Note that a lamb can be used multiple times to redeem a donkey, given the proper procedure. Also, the Gemara delves into the case of designating a lamb as a possible redeemer -- with the sharp question why the owner who designates the lamb has to designate, since it will remain in his possession regardless.

Non-kosher fish "spawn" their offspring and nurse, where kosher fish lay eggs - with the exception of a bat, which lays eggs and also nurses, with many more factors to characterize the various animals (including wild geese and domesticated geese). Also, "dulfanim" -- "children of the sea" -- reproduce like people, and they may be dolphins or mermaid or sirens or something else. Plus, a question about the gestation of the snake. Also, philosophical discussion of the length of snakes gestation - 7 years? 3 years? 4 years? Note the Athenian sages. Eventually to debate the sages before the Roman caesar. Plus, social status and other timely decisions of the ancient world (12 of them).

When an impure animal appears to be born to a pure animal, the animal can be consumed if and only if its head and more resembles the kosher mother. But can a kosher animal and a non-kosher animal truly mate? It seems not. To the extent that an animal that looks like it's the progeny of both perhaps may have been born of two kosher animals, but where one had a mutation to look like a non-kosher animal. Also, the question of how practical the concern was about this kind of progeny of kosher-and-non-kosher animals. Plus, a new mishnah! On fish, where the non-kosher fish swallowed a kosher fish or the reverse. Note that the distinction between non-kosher fish (usually sea creatures or sea food) and kosher fish is the difference between spawning progeny vs. laying eggs.

The link to Dr. Jeremy Brown's Talmudology post: https://www.talmudology.com/jeremybrownmdgmailcom/2016/8/14/pigxsheep-y7df4

When the progeny of an animal doesn't quite resemble the mother animal, but has some similar traits, will it require the first-born status? Note the complicating factors of a kosher animal giving birth to a non-kosher animal, or vice versa. Also, the Gemara delves into the non-kosher animals here, because the question of their milk (say, a camel), their brine, and more might seem logical -- that the milk would be prohibited as much as the non-kosher elements of the animals. But maybe the milk is allowed. Because even milk from a kosher animal (like cow's milk from a cow) seems a radical thing to be permitted.