Mishneh Torah — Sacrifices Rendered Unfit הלכות פסולי המוקדשין, Chapter 2

כָּל הַדָּמִים הַנִּתָּנִין עַל מִזְבֵּחַ הַחִיצוֹן. אִם נָתַן מַתָּנָה אַחַת בִּלְבַד כִּפֵּר. וַאֲפִלּוּ בְּחַטָּאת מַתָּנָה אַחַת הִיא הָעִקָּר וּשְׁאָר הָאַרְבַּע מַתָּנוֹת לְמִצְוָה. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים יב כז) "וְדַם זְבָחֶיךָ יִשָּׁפֵךְ עַל מִזְבַּח ה' אֱלֹהֶיךָ". שְׁפִיכַת הַדָּם עַל הַמִּזְבֵּחַ הִיא הָעִקָּר:

[With regard to the presentation of] the blood from any of the sacrifices on the outer altar: as long as one makes one presentation of blood, atonement is generated. Even with regard to a sin-offering, one presentation is of fundamental importance. Making the remaining [three of] the four [required] presentations is [merely] the optimum manner of fulfilling the mitzvah, as [implied by Deuteronomy 12:27]: "The blood of your sacrifices shall you pour on the altar." notes that rather than use the method of exegesis stated in Zevachim 37b, the Rambam quotes a different prooftext. This follows a pattern demonstrated in several other places in the Mishneh Torah where the Rambam derives a concept from the apparent meaning of Biblical verses even though the traditional Rabbinic approach is to derive the idea from other sources. [One can infer that one] pouring of blood on the altar is of fundamental importance.

וְכָל הַנִּתָּנִין בִּזְרִיקָה שֶׁנְּתָנָן בִּשְׁפִיכָה יָצָא. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים יב כז) "וְדַם זְבָחֶיךָ יִשָּׁפֵךְ":

Whenever [a priest] poured [blood] over the altar when he should have cast it upon it, the obligation is fulfilled, as [implied by the verse:] "The blood of your sacrifices shall you pour."

כָּל הַדָּמִים הַנִּתָּנִין עַל מִזְבֵּחַ הַפְּנִימִי. אִם חִסֵּר אַחַת מֵהֶן לֹא כִּפֵּר. אֶלָּא כֻּלָּן הֵן עִקַּר הַכַּפָּרָה. שֶׁהֲרֵי הַכָּתוּב הִקְפִּיד עַל מִנְיָנָן שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא ד ו) (ויקרא ד יז) "שֶׁבַע פְּעָמִים":

With regard to all of the blood presented on the inner altar, 1:5. See ibid. 5:11 for a description of the manner in which the sacrifice was offered. if one of the presentations is lacking, the sacrifice does not bring atonement. Instead, all of them are integral for the atonement, for Scripture was precise with regard to their number, as [Leviticus 4:7, 17; 16:14] states: "seven times."

חַטָּאת שֶׁנָּתַן מִמֶּנּוּ מַתָּנָה אַחַת וּמֵתוּ הַבְּעָלִים. יַשְׁלִים אַרְבַּע מַתָּנוֹת לְאַחַר הַמִּיתָה:

If the owner died after one of the presentations of the blood of a sin-offering was made, the remainder of the presentations should be made after his death.

אֲבָל אִם נָתַן הָאַחַת בַּיּוֹם לֹא יִתֵּן הַשָּׁלֹשׁ בַּלַּיְלָה:

If, however, he made one presentation during the day, he should not make the [remaining] three at night. 56a) and hence should not be presented upon the altar. Hence, even though the sacrifice is acceptable, the remaining presentations should not be made.

וְאִם נָתַן אַחַת בִּפְנִים וְהִשְׁלִימָן בַּחוּץ חַיָּב מִשּׁוּם מַעֲלֶה בַּחוּץ:

If one made one [of the presentations of blood required to be made on] the inner altar on [that altar] and made the remainder on the outer [altar], he is liable for [karet] for offering [a sacrifice] outside its appropriate place. 19:13.

הָיָה מַזֶּה וְנִקְטְעָה יָדוֹ שֶׁל מַזֶּה קֹדֶם שֶׁיַּגִּיעַ דָּם לַאֲוִיר הַמִּזְבֵּחַ. לֹא עָלְתָה לוֹ הַזָּיָה:

If [a priest] was sprinkling [the blood of a sacrifice, "sprinkling," with regard to the sin-offering of a fowl and the sin-offerings whose blood is offered on the inner altar. on the altar] and his hand was cut off before the blood reached the space above the altar, the sprinkling of the blood is not acceptable. 15a.

שִׁנָּה מַתַּן קָרְבָּנוֹת בְּחַטָּאת. בֵּין בְּחַטָּאת הַנַּעֲשֵׂית בִּפְנִים בֵּין בְּחַטָּאת הַנַּעֲשֵׂית בַּחוּץ נִפְסַל. אֲבָל בִּשְׁאָר קָדָשִׁים כְּשֵׁרִין:

If one changed [the order] of corners uses a different version. [of the altar on which the blood was presented when bringing] a sin-offering - whether for a sin-offering [whose blood] is offered on the inner altar 5:12, 14, for a description of the presentation of the blood for these sacrifices. or a sin-offering [whose blood] is offered on the outer altar:10 for a description of the presentation of the blood for these sacrifices. - [the sacrifice] is disqualified. If, however, [the order of the presentation of the blood] for other sacrifices is changed, [the sacrifices] are acceptable.

נָתַן הַדָּם מִן הַקֶּרֶן וְלִפְנִים. בֵּין בְּחַטָּאת בֵּין בִּשְׁאָר קָדָשִׁים. בֵּין בַּמִּזְבֵּחַ הַפְּנִימִי בֵּין בַּמִּזְבֵּחַ הַחִיצוֹן. פָּסוּל:

If [the priest] presented the blood beyond the corner of the altar - whether for a sin-offering or for another offering and whether for the inner altar or for the outer altar - [the sacrifice] is unacceptable.

דָּם שֶׁמִּצְוָתוֹ לִתֵּן אוֹתוֹ לְמַעְלָה מֵחֲצִי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ שֶׁנְּתָנוֹ לְמַטָּה. אוֹ שֶׁמִּצְוָתוֹ לִתְּנוֹ לְמַטָּה וּנְתָנוֹ לְמַעְלָה. אוֹ שֶׁמִּצְוָתוֹ לִתְּנוֹ בִּפְנִים בַּהֵיכָל וּנְתָנוֹ עַל מִזְבֵּחַ הַחִיצוֹן. אוֹ הַנִּתָּנִין עַל מִזְבֵּחַ הַחִיצוֹן שֶׁנְּתָנָן לִפְנִים בַּהֵיכָל. אוֹ שֶׁנָּתַן דַּם הַנִּתָּנִין בַּחוּץ עַל הַכֶּבֶשׁ שֶׁלֹּא כְּנֶגֶד הַיְסוֹד. הֲרֵי בְּשַׂר הַזֶּבַח פָּסוּל. וְאַף עַל פִּי כֵן נִתְכַּפְּרוּ הַבְּעָלִים בּוֹ כֵּיוָן שֶׁהִגִּיעַ דָּם לַמִּזְבֵּחַ. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהִגִּיעַ שֶׁלֹּא לִמְקוֹמוֹ הֲרֵי הוּא כְּמוֹ שֶׁהִגִּיעַ לִמְקוֹמוֹ לְכַפֵּר. בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים כְּשֶׁהָיָה זֶה הַזּוֹרֵק כָּשֵׁר לַעֲבוֹדָה. אֲבָל אִם קִבֵּל הַכָּשֵׁר וְנָתַן לַפָּסוּל וְנָתַן הַפָּסוּל אֶת הַנִּתָּנִין לְמַעְלָה לְמַטָּה. וְאֶת הַנִּתָּנִין בִּפְנִים בַּחוּץ. וְאֶת הַנִּתָּנִין בַּחוּץ בִּפְנִים. אוֹ שֶׁנָּתַן עַל הַכֶּבֶשׁ שֶׁלֹּא כְּנֶגֶד הַיְסוֹד. לֹא נִפְסַל בְּשַׂר הַזֶּבַח אִם נִשְׁאַר דַּם הַנֶּפֶשׁ. אֶלָּא יַחְזֹר הַכָּשֵׁר וִיקַבֵּל שְׁאָר דַּם הַנֶּפֶשׁ וְיִזְרֹק הַדָּם בִּמְקוֹמוֹ:

When blood that according to [the Torah's] command should have been presented above the midpoint of the altar 2:9, there was a scarlet band dividing the upper half of the altar from the lower half. Sin-offerings of animals (Hilchot Ma'aseh HaKorbanot 5:7) and burnt-offerings of fowl (ibid. 6:20) should be offered above the midpoint of the altar. was presented below it;if according to [the Torah's] command, it should have been presented below the midpoint of the altar, but it was presented above it;if [blood that] according to [the Torah's] command should have been presented inside [the Temple] 3:6), the Rambam states that this refers to blood presented on the inner altar, on the Parochet (the curtain separating between the Sanctuary and the Holy of Holies), and within the Holy of Holies itself. and was presented on the outer altar;if [blood that] should have been presented on the outer altar was presented in [the Temple]; orif blood that should have been presented on the outer [altar] was presented on the ramp in a place that is not opposite the foundation [of the altar], 57b; Zevachim 87a), after the fact, presenting the blood on it is considered equivalent to presenting it on the altar itself.[in all these instances,] the meat of the sacrifice is unacceptable. Nevertheless, the owners of the sacrifices receive atonement because of it, for its blood has reached the altar. Although it did not reach the proper place, it is as if it reached its [proper] place with regard to atonement.When does the above apply? When the person casting [the blood] is acceptable for Temple service. If, however, a person fit for Temple service received [the blood] and gave it to a person who is unacceptable and that unacceptable person presented [blood] that should have been presented above [the midpoint] of the altar below its midpoint, [blood] that should have been presented [on the] outer [altar] was presented inside [the Temple Sanctuary], [blood] that should have been presented inside [the Temple Sanctuary] was presented[on the] outer [altar], or one presented [the blood] on the ramp in a place that is not opposite the foundation [of the altar], the meat of the sacrifice is not disqualified if [any of the sacrificial animal's] blood of life remains. Instead, an acceptable person should receive the remainder of the blood of life and cast it [on the altar] in its appropriate place.

דְּמֵי קָדָשִׁים שֶׁנִּתְעָרְבוּ. בֵּין דָּם בְּדָם. בֵּין כּוֹסוֹת בְּכוֹסוֹת. אִם נִתְעָרְבוּ הַנִּתָּנִין מַתָּנָה אַחַת בַּנִּתָּנִין מַתָּנָה אַחַת. יִתֵּן הַכּל מַתָּנָה אַחַת. וְכֵן הַנִּתָּנִין מַתַּן אַרְבַּע בַּנִּתָּנִין מַתַּן אַרְבַּע. יִתֵּן הַכּל מַתַּן אַרְבַּע. נִתְעָרְבוּ הַנִּתָּנִין מַתָּנָה אַחַת בַּנִּתָּנִין מַתַּן שְׁתַּיִם שֶׁהֵן אַרְבַּע. יִתֵּן הַכּל מַתָּנָה אַחַת. נִתְעָרְבוּ הַנִּתָּנִין לְמַעְלָה בַּנִּתָּנִין לְמַטָּה. יִשָּׁפֵךְ הַכּל לָאַמָּה וְהַזְּבָחִים פְּסוּלִין. אֲפִלּוּ נִתְעָרְבוּ שְׁיָרֵי הַחַטָּאת עִם דַּם הָעוֹלָה שֶׁמְּקוֹם הַכּל לְמַטָּה יִשָּׁפֵךְ הַכּל לָאַמָּה:

[The following rules apply when] the blood of sacrificial animals becomes mixed between two types of blood or between two cups of blood. If [the blood of sacrifices that require] one presentation [of blood] was mixed with [the blood of others that require] one presentation [of blood], 5:17. one presentation should be made of the entire [mixture]. Similarly, if [the blood of sacrifices that require] four presentations [of blood was mixed] with [the blood of others that require] four presentations, four presentations should be made of the entire [mixture]. If, [however, the blood of sacrifices that require] one presentation [of blood] was mixed with [the blood of others that require] two presentations that are four, 5:6. one presentation should be made of the entire [mixture]. 8:10). And after the fact, it is sufficient to make one presentation of the blood of sacrifices that require more as stated in Halachah 1. Although in failing to make the four presentations required for a sin-offering, the priest is detracting from the Torah's commandments and that is also forbidden, he is not performing an act when doing so.If [blood that was] to be presented on the upper [half of the altar] became mixed with [blood that was] to be presented on the lower [half of the altar], all [the blood] should be poured into the [waste] channel 2:11. and the sacrifices are disqualified. Even if the remainder of [the blood from] a sin-offering is mixed with the blood of a burnt-offering in which instance, all of the blood should be presented on the bottom of the altar, the entire [mixture] should be poured into the [waste] channel.

וְאִם לֹא שָׁאַל אֶלָּא נָתַן מִן הַתַּעֲרוֹבוֹת לְמַעְלָה וּלְמַטָּה הֲרֵי זֶה כָּשֵׁר. נָתַן לְמַעְלָה וְשָׁאַל יִתֵּן לְמַטָּה וְאֵלּוּ וְאֵלּוּ עָלוּ לוֹ:

If [blood from a sin-offering became mixed with the remnants of the blood of a burnt-offering] 81b. and [the priest] did not inquire [concerning the law], but instead presented some of the mixture on the upper portion [of the altar] and some on the lower portion, it is acceptable. If he presented a portion on the upper [portion of the altar] and then inquired, he should present [the remainder] on the lower portion. He is considered to have fulfilled his obligation for both [sacrifices].

נִתְעָרְבוּ הַנִּתָּנִין בִּפְנִים בַּנִּתָּנִין בַּחוּץ. יִשְׁפֹּךְ הַכּל לָאַמָּה. וְאִם לֹא שָׁאַל וְלָקַח דַּם הַתַּעֲרֹבֶת וְנָתַן מִמֶּנּוּ בִּפְנִים וּבַחוּץ. בֵּין שֶׁנָּתַן בִּפְנִים וְחָזַר וְנָתַן בַּחוּץ אוֹ בַּחוּץ וְחָזַר וְנָתַן בִּפְנִים הַכּל כָּשֵׁר. בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים בִּשְׁאָר דָּמִים הַנִּתָּנִים בַּחוּץ חוּץ מִן הַחַטָּאת. אֲבָל דַּם חַטָּאת הַנַּעֲשֵׂית בַּחוּץ שֶׁנִּתְעָרֵב בְּדַם חַטָּאת הַנַּעֲשֵׂית בִּפְנִים. אִם נָתַן בַּחוּץ וְחָזַר וְנָתַן בִּפְנִים כָּשֵׁר. נָתַן בִּפְנִים וְחָזַר וְנָתַן בַּחוּץ פְּסוּלָה. שֶׁדַּם חַטָּאת שֶׁנִּכְנַס לַהֵיכָל אֲפִלּוּ חַטַּאת יָחִיד הַנֶּאֱכֶלֶת אֲסוּרָה. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא ו כג) "וְכָל חַטָּאת אֲשֶׁר יוּבָא מִדָּמָהּ" וְגוֹ'. וְהוּא שֶׁיָּבוֹא דֶּרֶךְ שַׁעַר הַהֵיכָל. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר יוּבָא דֶּרֶךְ בִּיאָה. אֲבָל אִם הִכְנִיסוֹ בְּפִשְׁפָּשׁ אוֹ דֶּרֶךְ חַלּוֹן אוֹ גַּג. אֵינוֹ נִפְסַל:

If blood that was required to be presented in the Temple building became mixed with blood to be presented on the outer [altar], the entire [mixture] should be poured into the [waste] channel. If he did not inquire and took the mixture of the blood and presented some in the Temple [building] and some outside - whether first he presented it inside and then he presented it outside or first he presented it outside and then he presented it inside - everything is acceptable.When does the above apply? With regard to the blood [of the sacrifices that must] be presented on the outer [altar] with the exception of a sin-offering. If, however, the blood of a sin-offering that should be presented outside becomes mixed with the blood of a sin-offering that should be presented inside, it is acceptable [only] if one made the presentation outside and then made the presentation inside. If, however, one made the presentation inside and then made the presentation outside, [the sacrifice whose blood was to be presented outside] is unacceptable. [The rationale is that] the blood of a sin-offering that was brought into the Temple building - even the blood of a sin-offering brought by an individual [whose meat] should be eaten notes that from the standard published text of Zevachim 82a, it would appear that the concept is more obvious with regard to an individual sin-offering than a communal sin-offering. They assume that the Rambam had a different version of the text. - becomes forbidden, as [implied by Leviticus 6:23]: "Any sin-offering whose blood has been brought [into the Tent of Meeting... shall not be eaten]."[The above applies] provided [the blood] is brought in through the gate to the Temple Building, for the prooftext speaks of it being "brought," implying an ordinary manner of entrance. has as its root the word ba which means "come," leading to the inference the Rambam draws. See parallels in Hilchot Bi'at HaMikdash 3:19; Hilchot Tuma'at Tzara'at 16:5. If, however, it was brought in through a wicket 4:6 with regard to the wickets leading to the Sanctuary. or through a window or the roof, it is not disqualified.

פַּר הֶעְלֵם וְשָׂעִיר עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה שֶׁדָּמָם נִכְנָס לַהֵיכָל. אִם הִכְנִיסוֹ לְקֹדֶשׁ הַקָּדָשִׁים נִפְסַל שֶׁבְּמָקוֹם זֶה פְּנִימָה שֶׁל מְקוֹמָן הוּא. וְכֵן פַּר וְשָׂעִיר שֶׁל יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים שֶׁדָּמָם נִכְנָס לְקֹדֶשׁ הַקָּדָשִׁים אִם הִכְנִיס דָּמָם לְקֹדֶשׁ הַקָּדָשִׁים וְהִזָּה מִמֶּנּוּ וְהוֹצִיאוֹ לַהֵיכָל וְחָזַר וְהִכְנִיסוֹ לְקֹדֶשׁ הַקָּדָשִׁים נִפְסַל וְאֵינוֹ גּוֹמֵר מִמֶּנּוּ הַזָּיוֹת שֶׁבְּקֹדֶשׁ הַקָּדָשִׁים כֵּיוָן שֶׁיָּצָא יָצָא. וְכֵן אִם גָּמַר הַזָּיוֹת שֶׁבְּקֹדֶשׁ הַקָּדָשִׁים וְהוֹצִיאָן לַהֵיכָל. וְהִזָּה מִקְצָת הַזָּיוֹת וְהוֹצִיאָן חוּץ לַהֵיכָל וְחָזַר וְהִכְנִיסָן לַהֵיכָל. אֵינוֹ גּוֹמֵר הַזָּיוֹת שֶׁבַּהֵיכָל. שֶׁכֵּיוָן שֶׁיָּצָא הַדָּם חוּץ לִמְקוֹמוֹ נִפְסַל:

When the blood from a bull brought [because of the violation of a law] forgotten [by the High Court] or from a goat brought [because of the violation of the prohibition against] idol worship 1:16 and notes for a description of these sacrifices. which should be brought into the Sanctuary was brought to the Holy of Holies, it is disqualified. For this place is inward with regard to the appropriate place for this blood.Similarly, with regard to the bull and the goat brought on Yom Kippur 1:1; 4:1. whose blood is brought into the Holy of Holies, if the blood [of these offerings] was brought into the Holy of Holies and sprinkled there, was then taken to the Sanctuary and afterwards, returned to the Holy of Holies, it is disqualified. [The High Priest] should not complete the sprinkling [of the blood] in the Holy of Holies. Once he departs, he has departed. 82b-83a) has a different understanding of the passage on which the Rambam's ruling was based and hence, objects. The Kessef Mishneh offers grounds to justify the Rambam's understanding.Similarly, if he completed the sprinklings in the Holy of Holies, then brought the blood into the Sanctuary and made some of the sprinklings [required there], then took [the blood] out of the Sanctuary and afterwards returned it, he should not complete the sprinklings in the Sanctuary. [The rationale is that] since the blood was taken out of its place, it became disqualified. 83a leaves this as an unresolved question, the Rambam should not rule that it is definitely disqualified. He explains that although one of the Sages considered it an unresolved issue, when the entire passage is considered, it would appear that it is not acceptable.

חַטָּאת שֶׁקִּבֵּל דָּמָהּ בִּשְׁנֵי כּוֹסוֹת וְיָצָא אֶחָד מֵהֶם לַחוּץ. הַפְּנִימִי כָּשֵׁר וְיַזֶּה מִמֶּנּוּ. נִכְנַס אֶחָד מֵהֶם לַהֵיכָל וְהִזָּה מִמֶּנּוּ שָׁם. אַף הַחִיצוֹן פָּסוּל. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא ו כג) "אֲשֶׁר יוּבָא מִדָּמָהּ" אֲפִלּוּ מִקְצָת דָּמָהּ אִם נִכְנַס לְכַפֵּר בַּקֹּדֶשׁ נִפְסְלָה:

If the blood of an [ordinary] sin-offering was received in two cups and one of them was taken outside, the one that remained inside is acceptable and the sprinklings may be performed. If, [by contrast,] one [of the cups] was taken into the Sanctuary and sprinkled there, even the one left outside is disqualified, as [implied by the prooftext] : "whose blood has been brought in," i.e., even if only a portion of its blood was brought in to the Sanctuary to bring about atonement, it is disqualified.

דַּם חַטָּאת שֶׁהִכְנִיסוֹ לְכַפֵּר בּוֹ בִּפְנִים. וְלֹא כִּפֵּר אֶלָּא הוֹצִיאוֹ וְלֹא הִזָּה מִמֶּנּוּ בִּפְנִים כְּלוּם. אִם הִכְנִיסוֹ בְּשׁוֹגֵג הֲרֵי זֶה כָּשֵׁר וּמַזֶּה מִמֶּנּוּ בַּחוּץ שֶׁהֲרֵי לֹא כִּפֵּר בַּקֹּדֶשׁ. וְאִם הִכְנִיסוֹ בְּמֵזִיד פָּסוּל:

[The following rules apply when] the blood of an [ordinary] sin-offering was taken into [the Sanctuary] to achieve atonement, but nothing was done and instead, he took it out without sprinkling it inside. If he brought it in unknowingly, [the blood] remains acceptable and should be sprinkled outside, for nothing to achieve atonement was done in the Sanctuary. If he brought it in intentionally, it is disqualified. and Rav Yosef Corcus note that this ruling appears to contradict Zevachim 36a. The Kessef Mishneh concludes that although the Rambam's ruling can be reconciled with the passage, the resolution still leaves certain points that require explanation.

הִכְנִיס הַחַטָּאת עַצְמָהּ לַהֵיכָל כְּשֵׁרָה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא ו כג) "אֲשֶׁר יוּבָא מִדָּמָהּ" וְלֹא בְּשָׂרָהּ:

If the sin-offering itself was brought into the Sanctuary, 92b). it is acceptable, because [the prooftext] mentions "whose blood was brought in," [i.e., it is the blood] and not the meat [that disqualifies it].

חַטַּאת הָעוֹף שֶׁפִּרְכְּסָה וְנִכְנְסָה לַהֵיכָל כְּשֵׁרָה:

When a sin-offering of a fowl moved in its death throes and entered the Sanctuary, it is acceptable.

הִכְנִיס דַּם חַטַּאת הָעוֹף לַהֵיכָל בְּצַוָּארָהּ הֲרֵי זֶה סָפֵק אִם הַצַּוָּאר חָשׁוּב כִּכְלִי:

If the blood of a sin-offering of a fowl was taken into the Sanctuary in its neck, there is an unresolved doubt whether its neck is considered a receptacle [which would disqualify the sacrifice].

נִשְׁפַּךְ דַּם חַטַּאת הָעוֹף וַאֲסָפוֹ. הֲרֵי זֶה סָפֵק אִם הַכְּלִי פּוֹסֵל בְּדָמָהּ אוֹ אֵינוֹ פּוֹסֵל. לְפִיכָךְ תִּשָּׂרֵף כְּכָל חַטַּאת הָעוֹף שֶׁהוּא סָפֵק:

If the blood of a sin-offering of a fowl was spilled and then collected, 7:6. The question is whether collecting the blood in a receptacle disqualifies the sacrifice or not, i.e., when the Torah stated that the blood of a sin-offering of a fowl should be presented directly on the altar was that granting permission (but not negating, presenting it from a receptacle) or stating that it must be presented in this manner (see Zevachim 92b). there is an unresolved question: Does the receptacle disqualify the blood or not? Therefore the fowl should be burnt states that this also applies to the situation mentioned in Halachah 19. like all the sin-offerings of fowl concerning which there are unresolved doubts.

חַטָּאת שֶׁקִּבֵּל דָּמָהּ בְּאַרְבָּעָה כּוֹסוֹת. וְנָתַן מַתָּנָה אַחַת מִכָּל כּוֹס וְכוֹס. שְׁיָרֵי אַרְבַּעְתָּן נִשְׁפָּךְ עַל הַיְסוֹד שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא ד ל) (ויקרא ד לד) "וְאֶת כָּל דָּמָהּ יִשְׁפֹּך"ְ. נָתַן אַרְבַּע הַמַּתָּנוֹת מִכּוֹס אֶחָד. שְׁיָרֵי אוֹתוֹ הַכּוֹס נִשְׁפָּךְ עַל הַיְסוֹד וּשְׁאָר הַכּוֹסוֹת נִשְׁפָּכִין לָאַמָּה:

When [a priest] received the blood of a sin-offering in four cups and made one presentation [on the altar] from each cup, the remainder of all four cups is poured on the altar's base, as [Leviticus 4:30] states: "And all of its blood shall be poured [on the base of the altar]." If he made all four presentations from one cup, the remnants of that cup should be poured on the altar's base and the other cups poured in the drainage canal. 57b derives this from the fact that Leviticus 4:30 states: "Its blood should be poured on the altar's base," implying that there are times when all of its blood is not poured there.

דָּם שֶׁנָּפַל לְתוֹךְ הַמַּיִם אוֹ לְתוֹךְ דָּמֵי חֻלִּין לֹא יַזֶּה מִמֶּנּוּ וְאִם הִזָּה פָּסוּל. נָפַל מַיִם לְתוֹךְ הַדָּם שֶׁבַּמִּזְרָק. אִם יֵשׁ בּוֹ מַרְאֵה דָּם כָּשֵׁר. נָפַל לְתוֹכוֹ יַיִן אוֹ דַּם חֻלִּין. אוֹמְדִין אוֹתוֹ אִלּוּ הָיוּ מַיִם. אִם רְאוּיִין לְבַטֵּל דָּם שֶׁבַּמִּזְרָק עַד שֶׁלֹּא יִהְיוּ מַרְאָיו מַרְאֵה דָּם הֲרֵי זֶה לֹא יַזֶּה מִמֶּנּוּ. וְאִם אֵינָם רְאוּיִין לְבַטֵּל מַרְאָיו יַזֶּה מִמֶּנּוּ:

When blood falls into water or into ordinary blood, it should not be sprinkled on the altar. If it was sprinkled, it is disqualified. 77b). When water fell into blood in a receptacle, if it has the appearance of blood, it is acceptable. If wine or ordinary blood fell into it, we make an assessment [as follows]: Were it to have been water would there have been enough to nullify the blood in the receptacle to the extent that it would no longer have the appearance of blood, he should not sprinkle from [the mixture]. If there would not have been enough to nullify its appearance, he should sprinkle from it. 14:6; Hilchot Metamei Mishkav UMoshav 2:6.

דַּם הַקָּדָשִׁים שֶׁנִּתְעָרֵב בְּדַם פְּסוּלֵי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ אוֹ בְּדַם הַקָּדָשִׁים שֶׁנִּפְסְלוּ בִּשְׁחִיטָה. יִשָּׁפֵךְ הַכּל לָאַמָּה. וַאֲפִלּוּ קָרְבוּ כָּל הַכּוֹסוֹת חוּץ מֵאֶחָד יִשָּׁפֵךְ לָאַמָּה וְכָל אוֹתָן הַזְּבָחִים פְּסוּלִים. נִתְעָרֵב בְּדַם הַתַּמְצִית יִשָּׁפֵךְ לָאַמָּה. וְאִם לֹא שָׁאַל וְנָתַן כָּשֵׁר:

When the blood of sacrificial animals becomes mixed with the blood of animals that are disqualified from the altar or with the blood of sacrificial animals that were disqualified because of unsatisfactory ritual slaughter, the entire mixture should be poured into the drainage canal.). Even if all the cups [of blood] were offered aside from one, it should be poured into the drainage canal and all of those offerings are unacceptable.If the [life-]blood [of a sacrificial animal] became mixed with blood concentrated [in the limbs],). [the mixture] should be poured into the drainage canal.). If, [however,] one did not ask and presented [the blood on the altar], [the sacrifice] is acceptable.

הָאֵימוּרִין וְאֵיבְרֵי הָעוֹלוֹת וְהַקְּמָצִים וְהַלְּבוֹנָה וּמְנָחוֹת הַנִּשְׂרָפוֹת אַחַר שֶׁנִּתְקַדְּשׁוּ בִּכְלִי שָׁרֵת. אִם זָרַק אֶחָד מִכָּל אֵלּוּ עַל גַּבֵּי הָאִשִּׁים בֵּין בְּיָד בֵּין בִּכְלִי בֵּין בְּיָמִין בֵּין בִּשְׂמֹאל הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ כְּשֵׁרִים:

If one cast the organs and fats offered on the altar, the limbs of burnt-offerings, the handfuls [of meal offered on the altar], the frankincense, or the meal-offerings that are to be burnt on the [altar's] pyre after they were consecrated in a sacred utensil, whether by hand or with a utensil, whether with one's right hand or with one's left hand, they are acceptable.

הַיַּיִן וְהַמַּיִם שֶׁנִּסְכָן בֵּין בִּקְעָרָה בֵּין בְּהִין בֵּין בִּשְׁאָר כְּלֵי הַשָּׁרֵת כְּשֵׁרִים. נִסְּכָן בִּכְלִי חֹל אוֹ בְּיָדוֹ פְּסוּלִין:

When wine or water was poured [on the altar as a libation] with a bowl, the hin measure, 1:17-18. or another sacred utensil, it is acceptable. If they were poured with an ordinary vessel or by hand, they are unacceptable.

אֵיבָרִים שֶׁסִּדְּרָן וְכֵן קֹמֶץ שֶׁסִּדְּרוֹ וְסִדֵּר הָעֵצִים שֶׁל מַעֲרָכָה לְמַעְלָה מֵהֶם. אוֹ שֶׁסִּדְּרָן מִצִּדֵּי הָעֵצִים. הֲרֵי זֶה סָפֵק אִם דֶּרֶךְ הַקְטָרָה בְּכָךְ אוֹ אֵין דֶּרֶךְ הַקְטָרָה בְּכָךְ. לְפִיכָךְ לֹא יַעֲשֶׂה כֵן לְכַתְּחִלָּה וְאִם עָשָׂה הֻרְצָה:

When one arranged the limbs [of a burnt-offering] or the handful [of meal from a meal-offering] and then arranged the logs for the altar's pyre above them or arranged them at the side of the limbs, there is an unresolved doubt whether this is considered as the typical way of having them consumed by fire or not. Therefore as an initial preference, one should not offer them in this manner, but if one did, it is acceptable.