1) THE BLOOD OF A KORBAN WHICH WAS TAKEN INTO THE "HEICHAL" UNNECESSARILY
OPINIONS: The Mishnah discusses a dispute between the Chachamim and Rebbi Yosi ha'Glili with regard to the blood of a Korban that was brought into the Heichal before the Zerikah was performed on the Mizbe'ach ha'Chitzon. The Chachamim maintain that such a Korban is Pasul, and even the blood that remains in the Azarah (that was not brought into the Heichal) may no longer be used for the Zerikah. Rebbi Yosi ha'Glili maintains that the remaining blood may be used. According to the Chachamim, what is supposed to be done with the Korban that is Pasul?
(a) RASHI in Pesachim (23b, DH Im Eino Inyan) learns from the context of Moshe Rabeinu's statement to the sons of Aharon that such a Korban is burned immediately. When Moshe Rabeinu saw that a Chatas had been burned, he said, "Hen Lo Huva Es Damah El ha'Kodesh" -- "Behold, its blood was not brought into the sanctuary" (Vayikra 10:18). This implies that if some of its blood had been brought into the sanctuary (i.e. the Heichal), then he would have agreed with their act of burning the Chatas immediately.
(b) TOSFOS in Pesachim (23b, DH d'Ha) quotes RABEINU SHLOMO of Troy who says that Rashi's inference is not correct. Once the sons of Aharon burned the Chatas without letting it first stay overnight (to become Pasul because of Linah as well), it is clear that they were not doing what normally would be done with a Chatas whose blood was sprinkled. The Mishnah in Pesachim (82b) states that a Korban which is Pasul because of a Pesul sheb'Gufo (an intrinsic invalidating factor) must be burned immediately. If there is a Pesul b'Dam uv'Ba'alim (an external invalidating factor, involving the blood or the owner of the Korban, but not the animal itself), the Chatas should be left overnight and then be burned. Since the case of the Mishnah is a case involving a Pesul due to the blood being brought into the Heichal, it follows that the Chatas should be left overnight and only afterwards be burned. Rabeinu Shmuel says that Moshe Rabeinu made his comment with regard to the eating of the Chatas. The inference from his words that the blood was not brought into the sanctuary is that if the blood would have been brought there, then he would have understood why they did not eat the Korban.
How does Rashi reconcile his explanation, that the Korban that is Pasul is burned immediately, with the Mishnah in Pesachim (82b) cited by Tosfos?
The KEHILOS YAKOV (Pesachim #15) answers by first explaining the Mishnah's statement which differentiates between a Pesul sheb'Gufo and a Pesul b'Dam uv'Ba'alim. A Korban that has a Pesul sheb'Gufo, an intrinsic invalidating factor, obviously may be burned right away, since it will not become any more Pasul by being left overnight. Rashi explains later in Pesachim (73b, DH Te'ubar Tzuraso) that a Pesul b'Dam uv'Ba'alim requires Ibur Tzurah (being left overnight) because its present Pesul is not so severe, and thus one may not deface a Korban by burning it for having such a Pesul. Instead, one must wait until the Korban becomes Pasul with a Pesul sheb'Gufo, which the Torah commands one to burn.
The Kehilos Yakov analyzes this further. There is nothing wrong with the meat of a Korban when the Korban's blood (that was supposed to be used for Zerikah) was spilled or taken out of the Azarah. That is, the meat itself is not Pasul. The only problem is that there is no Zerikah to make the Korban a valid Korban and to permit its meat. The same is true with regard to a Pesul b'Ba'alim, such as when the owner of a Korban Pesach becomes Tamei before the Zerikah of the blood. There is nothing wrong with the meat itself, but the Korban is not valid because the Zerikah cannot be performed due to the fact that the owner has become Tamei.
However, Rashi infers from the Mishnah here that the Pesul of a Korban when its blood is brought into the Heichal unnecessarily is a Pesul sheb'Gufo, unlike other Pesulim involving blood. This is because the Chachamim maintain that even when there is a another pitcher of blood from the animal with which the Zerikah may be performed, the Korban still is Pasul. It must be that bringing the blood into the Heichal is unlike any other Pesul involving the blood, and thus the disqualified Korban is burned immediately.
This logic seems inconsistent with the words of the Gemara later in Pesachim (83a). The Gemara there says that Rebbi Yosi ha'Glili follows the opinion (unlike the Mishnah quoted above) that even a Korban which is disqualified because of a Pesul b'Dam uv'Ba'alim is burned immediately. How does the Gemara prove this? Rebbi Yosi ha'Glili says (as Rashi here explains) that Moshe's statement implies that in any other case, a Chatas whose blood was taken into the Heichal would be burned. The Gemara almost explicitly states that this is an example of a Pesul b'Dam uv'Ba'alim, and not a Pesul sheb'Gufo, as the Kehilos Yakov explains. However, upon closer examination, this is no question at all. The Gemara is discussing the opinion of Rebbi Yosi ha'Glili, who obviously maintains that this case is a case of a Pesul b'Dam uv'Ba'alim, as he says in the Mishnah here that a second cup of blood which remained in the Azarah would be valid for Zerikah! According to the Rabanan, however, this case remains a case of a Pesul sheb'Gufo. The Kehilos Yakov later notes that the OR SAME'ACH (Hilchos Pesulei ha'Mukdashin 2:16) derives this logic from the words of the Yerushalmi.
Tosfos, on the other hand, maintains that as long as no action was done directly to the meat to make it Pasul, the meat is considered to have a Pesul b'Dam uv'Ba'alim. It is also possible that Tosfos understands that the Gemara in Pesachim (83a) teaches that this case is definitely one of Pesul b'Dam uv'Ba'alim, even according to the Rabanan. (Y. MONTROSE)
82b----------------------------------------82b
2) THE NEED FOR THE VERSE OF "MI'DAMAH"
QUESTION: The Gemara discusses the possibility that if meat from a Korban was brought into the Heichal, it becomes Pasul. The Gemara suggests that the Korban becomes Pasul based on a Kal va'Chomer: If blood that is taken outside of the Beis ha'Mikdash does not cause the rest of the blood of that Korban to become disqualified with regard to Zerikah, and yet the meat of the Korban that is taken out of the Beis ha'Mikdash becomes Pasul, then certainly when blood is taken into the Heichal, which does cause the rest of the blood to become Pasul (which shows that entering the Heichal is a more severe infraction than exiting the Beis ha'Mikdash), the meat that goes into the Heichal should become Pasul as well. The Gemara answers that this is not correct. The verse states, "mi'Damah" (Vayikra 6:23) and "Damah" (Vayikra 10:18). These words teach that only blood which is supposed to remain in the Azarah but which enters the Heichal becomes Pasul and causes the Korban to become Pasul, unlike meat that enters the Heichal, which itself remains valid. RASHI (DH Damah) explains that one of the times where "Damah" is stated is extra, and thus it teaches that only blood becomes Pasul upon entering the Heichal, and not meat.
TOSFOS (DH Damah) has difficulty with this Gemara. The verse which teaches that blood that enters the Heichal disqualifies a Korban reads, "... Asher Yuva mi'Damah El Ohel Mo'ed l'Chaper" -- "Any Chatas whose blood is brought into the Ohel Mo'ed (the Heichal) in order to atone" (Vayikra 6:23). The verse clearly shows that the problem exists only when the blood is brought to atone (i.e. to perform Zerikah), but not when it is brought into the Heichal for a purpose that has nothing to do with atonement. Since meat has nothing to do with the atonement provided by the Korban, why should meat be included in this Halachah?
ANSWERS:
(a) The TZON KODASHIM refutes the underlying logic of the question. It indeed is possible that the Torah says "l'Chaper" with regard to blood in order to teach that blood -- the importance of which is that it is used for Zerikah and causes the atonement achieved by the Korban -- disqualifies the Korban only when it is brought into the Heichal for the purpose of atoning. A Pesul caused by bringing the meat into the Heichal would be derived from the Gemara's Kal va'Chomer from blood, and it would not be necessary to bring the meat into the Heichal with intent to attain atonement. Accordingly, the extra verse of "Damah" is needed in order to exclude meat from this Halachah.
(b) Alternatively, the Tzon Kodashim suggests that the answer lies in the words of the Gemara in Pesachim (59b). The Gemara there quotes the verse, "v'Achlu Osam Asher Kupar Bahem" -- "And they shall eat those things with which the atonement was made" (Shemos 29:33). A Beraisa derives from this verse that when the Kohanim eat the meat of the Korban, the owner of the Korban attains atonement. Although the Zerikah is the primary Avodah that atones for the owner, the Gemara there teaches that the Kohen's eating is also called an atonement by the Torah. Accordingly, it is understandable that the Gemara assumes that meat is also called "l'Chaper" -- such as when the Kohanim bring it into the Heichal to eat it there and thereby provide a degree of atonement for the owner (see 63a).
(c) The MITZPEH EISAN answers that when the Gemara suggests that meat should also become Pasul, it is not referring to meat alone. Rather, it is referring to a case in which the blood from the Shechitah is still clinging to the neck of the animal. The Gemara is teaching that blood that enters the Heichal when it is still part of the meat still may be used for Zerikah. Even though the blood should fall under the category of "l'Chaper" if it is brought there for the purpose of performing Zerikah, it nevertheless is not Pasul because in its present form it is considered part of the meat and it is not yet considered a separate entity of blood. (See Mitzpeh Eisan for a second answer.)
This answer has strong support in the Gemara later (92b), which states clearly that if blood on the neck of the animal is brought into the Heichal, it is not considered Pasul.
The CHAZON YECHEZKEL writes that this answer is alluded to by the RAMBAM (Hilchos Pesulei ha'Mukdashin 2:17) as well. The Rambam rules that if a person brings the Chatas itself into the Heichal, it remains valid, as the verse says, "Asher Yuva mi'Damah" (Vayikra 6:23), implying that only bringing the blood into the Heichal disqualifies the Korban, but not bringing the meat into the Heichal. The Chazon Yechezkel explains that the Rambam's usage of the words "the Chatas itself" (and not "meat from the Korban") implies that this case is similar to the case mentioned in the Gemara later (92b), in which the entire Korban was brought into the Heichal in order to perform the Kabalas ha'Dam and the Zerikah there. The Gemara, therefore, must teach that although the animal is brought "l'Chaper," the blood does not become Pasul since it is still considered meat at this stage. (Y. MONTROSE)