Zevachim 165
הכא ודאי חד מקום הוא או [דילמא] יציאה קרינא ביה תיקו:
IF IT ENTERED WITHIN TO MAKE ATONEMENT. It was taught, R. Eliezer said: It is stated here, to make atonement in the holy place; and it is stated elsewhere, And there shall be no man in the tent of appointment when he goeth in to make atonement in the holy place: as there it means when he has not yet made atonement, so here too it means when he has not yet made atonement. R. Simeon said: It is stated here, 'to make atonement'; and it is stated elsewhere, 'And the bullock of the sin-offering, and the goat of the sin-offering, whose blood was brought in to make atonement': as there it means when he had [already] made atonement, so here it means where he made atonement. Wherein do they differ? - One master holds, You learn without from without, but you do not learn without from within; while the other master holds: You learn an animal from an animal, but you do not learn an animal from man.
נכנס לכפר: תניא רבי אליעזר אומר נאמר כאן לכפר בקודש ונאמר להלן (ויקרא טז, יז) וכל אדם לא יהיה באהל מועד בבואו לכפר בקדש
R. JUDAH SAID etc. But if [the priest took it in] deliberately, it is disqualified; [when?] if he made atonement, or [even] if he did not make atonement? - Said R. Jeremiah, It was taught: Since it is said, 'And the bullock of the sin-offering, and the goat of the sin-offering, whose blood was brought in to make atonement in the holy place'; why is it [further] said, And he that burneth them [shall wash his clothes]? (You ask, why is it further said, 'And he that burneth them'? that is required for itself!) - Rather [the question is] why is 'sin-offering, repeated? Because we have only learnt that when the bullock and the he-goat of the Day of Atonement are burnt they defile garments; how do we know [the same of] other [sacrifices] which are burnt? - Because 'sin-offering' is repeated: these are the words of R. Judah. R. Meir said: That [exegesis] is unnecessary. Lo, it says, 'And the bullock of the sin-offering and the he-goat of the sin-offering': now, 'to make atonement' need not be stated; why then is 'to make atonement stated? It teaches
מה להלן בשלא כיפר אף כאן בשלא כיפר
that with all atoning sacrifices, he that burns them [the sacrifices] defiles his garments. Whereas R. Judah does not understand 'to make atonement' in that way. What is the reason? Surely because he utilises it for a gezerah shawah. CHAPTER IX
רבי שמעון אומר נאמר כאן לכפר ונאמר להלן (ויקרא טז, כז) ואת פר החטאת ואת שעיר החטאת אשר הובא את דמם לכפר מה להלן בשכיפר אף כאן בשכיפר
MISHNAH. THE ALTAR SANCTIFIES WHATEVER IS ELIGIBLE FOR IT. R. JOSHUA SAID: WHATEVER IS ELIGIBLE FOR THE ALTAR FIRE DOES NOT DESCEND [THENCE] ONCE IT ASCENDED, BECAUSE IT IS SAID, THAT IS THE BURNT-OFFERING UPON ITS FIREWOOD: AS THE BURNT-OFFERING, WHICH IS ELIGIBLE FOR THE ALTAR FIRE, DOES NOT DESCEND ONCE IT ASCENDED, SO WHATEVER IS ELIGIBLE FOR THE ALTAR FIRE DOES NOT DESCEND ONCE IT ASCENDED. R. GAMALIEL SAID: WHATEVER IS ELIGIBLE FOR THE ALTAR DOES NOT DESCEND ONCE IT ASCENDED, BECAUSE IT IS SAID: THAT IS THE BURNT-OFFERING UPON ITS FIREWOOD UPON THE ALTAR: AS THE BURNT-OFFERING, WHICH IS ELIGIBLE FOR THE ALTAR, DOES NOT DESCEND ONCE IT ASCENDED, SO WHATEVER IS ELIGIBLE FOR THE ALTAR DOES NOT DESCEND ONCE IT ASCENDED. R. GAMALIEL AND R. JOSHUA DIFFER ONLY IN RESPECT OF THE BLOOD AND LIBATIONS, R. GAMALIEL MAINTAINING THAT THEY MUST NOT DESCEND, WHILE R. JOSHUA MAINTAINS THAT THEY MUST DESCEND. R. SIMEON SAID: IF THE SACRIFICE IS FIT WHILE THE LIBATIONS [WHICH ACCOMPANIED IT] ARE UNFIT; OR IF THE LIBATIONS ARE FIT WHILE THE SACRIFICE IS UNFIT; OR EVEN IF BOTH ARE UNFIT, - THE SACRIFICE MUST NOT DESCEND, WHILE THE LIBATIONS DO DESCEND.