Reference for Zevachim 120:15
אמר רבינא אידי ואידי בקדשים קלים ולא קשיא
they engage in dark discussions.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' They discuss laws without knowing their true meaning or derive them incorrectly.');"><sup>23</sup></span> Have they not heard what was taught: During the dismantling [of the Tabernacle] on their travels,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' When the Tabernacle was dismantled and taken apart, which was when the Israelites were actually travelling.');"><sup>24</sup></span> sacrifices became unfit,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The flesh of sacrifices of higher sanctity might not be eaten, even if their blood had been sprinkled before the dismantling.');"><sup>25</sup></span> and zabin and lepers were sent out of their precincts.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The precincts which were permitted to them whilst the Israelites were encamped. Thus zabin were sent out of the Levitical camp, and lepers out of the camp of the Israelites (v. p. 276. n. 6) .');"><sup>26</sup></span> Whereas another [Baraitha] taught: Sacrifices might be eaten in two places.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' (i) Within their normally permitted boundaries, when the Tabernacle was up; and (ii) in any place, when they were actually travelling. This contradicts the former teaching.');"><sup>27</sup></span> Surely then, the former refers to sacrifices of higher sanctity, and the latter to sacrifices of lesser sanctity?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The latter may be eaten even when the Tabernacle is dismantled. At that time there would be no altar either, and that is certainly no better than when the altar stands but is damaged. This proves that sacrifices of lesser sanctity may be eaten when the altar is damaged, and thus contradicts Abaye Therefore R. Jeremiah called Abaye's teaching 'dark', i.e., incorrect.');"><sup>28</sup></span> - Said Rabina: Both refer to sacrifices of lesser sanctity, yet there is no difficulty: