Zevachim 76
מאי לאו אפלגיה דמזבח כדאמרי אינשי טהר טיהרא דיומא אמר רבא בר שילא לא אגילוייה דכתיב (שמות כד, י) וכעצם השמים לטוהר
<br> Surely that means on the [upper] half of the altar, as people say, The noon-light shines, and so it is midday? Said Raba b. Shila, No: [it means] on the [altar's] top surface [cleared] from ashes, for it is written, and the like of the very heaven for clearness. But there is the remainder [of the blood]? - The [pouring out of] the remainder [at the altar's base] is not essential. But there is the remainder of inner sin-offerings, which, according to one view is essential? We mean in one and the same place. <br>
והאיכא שירים שירים לא מעכבי
It was taught: R. Eliezer b. Jacob said: Beth Shammai maintain [that] two applications in the case of the sin-offering and one in the case of all [other] sacrifices permit [them for consumption] and may render them piggul; Beth Hillel rule: One application [only] in the case of a sin-offering and one in the case of all [other] sacrifices permit [them for consumption] and may render them piggul. To this R. Oshaia demurred: If so, this [controversy] should be recited among the lenient rulings of Beth Shammai and the stricter rulings of Beth Hillel? - Said Raba to him: When the question was [first] asked, it was whether [the sacrifice] was permitted, so that Beth Shammai were stricter.
והאיכא שירים הפנימים דאיכא דמ"ד מעכבי בחד מקום קאמרינן:
R. Johanan said: The three [final] applications of sin-offerings may not be made at night, and are made after [the owners'] death, while he who presents them without the Temple court is culpable. <br>
תניא רבי אליעזר בן יעקב אומר בית שמאי אומרים שתי מתנות שבחטאת ואחת שבכל הזבחים מתירות
R. Papa said: In some respects [they are] as the first blood, while in others they are as the last: [In respect of sprinkling them] without [the Temple court], at night, zaruth, [the requirement of] a service-vessel, [sprinkling on] the horn, [with] the finger, washing, and residue, they are as the first blood. [In respect of] death, not permitting [the flesh], not rendering [it] piggul, and not entering within, they are as the last blood. <br>
ומפגלות בית הלל אומרים אחת שבחטאת ואחת שבכל הזבחים מתרת ומפגלת
R. Papa said: How do I know it? - Because we learnt: If [the blood] spurted [direct] from the [animal's] throat on to the [priest's] garment, it does not need washing; from the horn or from the base [of the altar], it does not need washing. Hence, [if some] of [the blood] which was fit for the horn [spurted on the garment], it does need washing. Then on your reasoning [you may argue, 'If it spurted] from the base, it does not need washing; hence if some [of the blood] which was fit for the base [spurted on the garment], it does need washing? [Yet surely] it is written, And if aught of the blood which is to be sprinkled [spurt] upon any garment, thou shalt wash that whereon it was sprinkled in a holy place, which excludes this [residue], as the [blood] has already been sprinkled? [Hence you must say that] this is in accordance with R. Nehemiah, for we learnt: R. Nehemiah said: If one presented the residue of the blood without [the Temple court], he is liable. But granted that you know R. Nehemiah [to rule thus] in respect of presenting [the blood without the Temple court], by analogy with the limbs and the fat pieces, do you [however] know him [to rule thus] in respect of washing? - Yes,<br>