1. We see that everyone agrees that the 'Kapara' for the Kodesh Kodshim, the Heichal, the Mizbayach, were all separate 'Kaparas.' Once the 'Kapara' for the Kodesh Kodshim was completed, even if the blood spilled out it did not need to be repated.
Shas Lublin brings the Gevuros Ari's question. We find three other Korbonos, 'Par Kohen Moshiach', Par Helem Duvur' and 'S'ier Avodah Zoroh' where they put blood on the Heichal and on the Mizbayach. Are these also separate 'Kaparas', or not. If the blood spills after it was sprinkled towards the Poroches, do they have to be repeated or are they like the Korbons of Yom Kippur and they do not need to be comlpeted.
Shas Lublin brings that the Keren Orah says that these three Korbonos are the same as Yom Kippur (no repetition needed). And the Chazon Ish says they are different. The Chazon Ish says that on Yom Kippur the main thing about the Korbonos were the 'Chovas HaYom.' After each 'Chovah' was done it was complete. The 'Kapara' that came from the 'avodah' came about 'agav' [from the 'Avodas Hayom.]
But these three Korbonos their main objective was 'Kapara.' If the blood spilled in the middle you had to restart because there still was no 'Kapara.'
Possibly another difference between Yom Kippur and these three avodos, was that each group of 'matonos dam' accomplished a 'Kapara' for that place. The 'Matonos' in Kodesh Kodshim were to be a 'Kapara' for 'Tumas Mikdash V'Kodshov' in the Kodesh Kodshim, the ones in the Heichal were for the Heichal etc.
Once each one was complete it accomplished its mission (there was an "oif too" of 'Kapara'). There were three or four (counting the leftovers poured on the Yesod) individual 'Kaparas.' But these three Korbonos came for a mistake in P'sak followed by doing the wrong thing based on that Psak. It was one 'Kapara' for the aveirah. On a simple level it was not coming for a 'Kapara' for each place. So if the blood spilled in between you might have to start over again.
2. A second small point. The Gemara brings in the 'Log Shemen' of a Metzorah with the same idea, if the 'Shemen' spilled in between sprinkling it "L'fnei Hash-m" and the 'Matonos' of the 'B'honos' you don't repeat them.
I just want to point out, even though different places (like Kodesh Kodshim, and the Heichal) are separate 'Kaparas.' And so too here by the sprinkling it "L'fnei Hash-m" and the 'Matonos' of the 'B'honos.' Each one is separate
But you don't say that in the 'Matonos' of the 'B'honos' themselves. Even though you put on the ear or the thumb, and it spilled R' Meir would say you have to restart them. You don't look at the individual place of each 'Matonoh,' you don't say "I finished all the matonos of the ear, or of the thumb." Even though they are put on different parts of the body it's one 'Shem' of 'Matnas B'honos.' Or we look at the 'mentsch' it's one mentsch. [R' Elozor and R' Shimon won't require to repeat them, just like they don't require to repeat any of the other groups of Matonos, but not because they say the ear, the thumb etc, are separate 'matonos.]
This is of course very 'pushut.' I just wanted to underline it.
Thank you, Moshe, for your enlightening words.
Regarding the argument between the Keren Orah and the Chazon Ish - we discussed that point at length in our Insights to Zevachim 42b (see section (b) of our answere there), and cited proof to the Cahzon Ish from a Tosfos in Menachos 16a (DH Bein).
As for your explanation for the difference between Yom Kipur and the other Korbanos which have Haza'ah on the inner Mizbe'ach - please note that most Rishonim disagree with Rashi and maintain that the Gemara is not describing separate Kaparos for the Kodesh ha'Kodashim and Heichal etc. It is simply discussing where to perform the Haza'os. And even according to Rashi, it is not at all clear that the Haza'os on each part of the Mikdash provided a Kaparah specific to that part . It could be that the entire set of Haza'os provided the entire Kaparah.
Thank you for the response. Before I wrote this I glanced at the Insights here to see if it was discussed. Who would have thought that it was discussed in Zevachim? Thanks for the address.
Yes, it is 'shitas' Rashi that we are discussing. I looked over again Rashi and indeed it is not 'muchruch' that each individual group of 'matonos' on it's own, achieved the 'Kapara' for that place. Perhaps it was the collective 'matonos' of all of them that did that.
Thank you for taking the time to reply to my comments.
It's good to see that even summer Bein HaZmanim someone is still there.