יא א"ר יוחנן השוחט בהמה בלילה בפנים (המעלה בחוץ פטור בחוץ) והעלה בחוץ חייב
11 [The emurim of a sacrifice intended to be burnt] out of bounds? Because it was likened to [the intention to burn it] after time. Where unfit [persons] received [the blood] and sprinkled it - in the case of those unfit persons who are eligible for public service. Can you then argue from what is its proper way to that where the same is not the proper way? - The Tanna relies on the extension indicated by, This is the law of the burnt-offering.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. VI, 2. For notes v. supra 51a.');"><sup>2</sup></span> R'Johanan said: If one slaughters an animal at night within<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Temple court.');"><sup>3</sup></span> and offers it<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'carries up' (its limbs) .');"><sup>4</sup></span> without,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Temple court; he offers it up by laying it on a stone or on an altar-like pile (v. Sifra on Lev. XVII, 6) .');"><sup>5</sup></span> he is culpable:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' On account of laying limbs sacrificially without, even according to R. Judah who maintained that if it ascended the altar it must still descend. Those which if laid on the altar do not descend certainly render the priest culpable if he lays them without, since these can be received by the altar (v. infra 111b) .');"><sup>6</sup></span>