This is in accordance with the statement that Rav Huna says that Rav says. As Rav Huna says that Rav says: With regard to a guilt offering whose owner died or achieved atonement through a different guilt offering and which was consigned to grazing in the field until it develops a blemish, and prior to its being consigned one slaughtered it without specification of its purpose, it is fit as a burnt offering.

§ The mishna teaches: One who offers up outside the Temple courtyard a portion of the meat of a sin offering that is eaten, or who offers up a portion of several other items, is exempt. With regard to the reasoning behind this halakha, the Sages taught in a baraita: From where is it derived that one who offers up outside the Temple courtyard a portion of the meat of a sin offering, or a portion of the meat of a guilt offering, or a portion of the meat of offerings of the most sacred order, or a portion of the meat of offerings of lesser sanctity, or a portion of the surplus of the omer offering, or the two loaves, or the shewbread, or the remainder of meal offerings is exempt, as all these are eaten by the priests and not sacrificed on the altar?

The verse states with regard to the prohibition against sacrificing outside the Temple courtyard: ''Whatever man…that sacrifices a burnt offering or sacrifice, and brings it not to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting, to sacrifice it to the Lord, that man shall be cut off from his people'' (Leviticus 17:8–9). The term ''burnt offering'' teaches: Just as a burnt offering is fit for offering up upon the altar, so too, anything that is fit for offering up is included in the prohibition. All of the offerings listed in the baraita are not sacrificed upon the altar but given to the priests.

From where is it derived that even with regard to one who pours oil onto the meal offering, and one who mixes the oil into the flour of the meal offering, and one who breaks the loaves of the meal offering into pieces, and one who salts the meal offering or other offerings, and one who waves the meal offering, and one who brings the meal offering to the corner of an altar that he constructs outside the courtyard, and one who arranges the shewbread on the table outside the Sanctuary, and one who removes the ashes from the lamps of the Candelabrum, and one who removes a handful from a meal offering, and one who collects the blood of an offering in a vessel, if he did so outside the Temple courtyard he is exempt.

The verse states: ''That sacrifices a burnt offering or sacrifice'' (Leviticus 17:8). Just as sacrificing is the conclusion of the sacri-ficial service, so too, any rite that is the conclusion of a sacrificial service is included. All of these are excluded from the prohibition, as there are rites that follow them.

§ The mishna teaches: Until the Tabernacle was established, private altars were permitted and the sacrificial service was performed by the firstborn. The Gemara relates that Rav Huna bar Rav Ketina was sitting before Rav Ḥisda and was reading this verse with regard to the revelation at Sinai: ''And he sent the young men of the children of Israel, who offered burnt offerings and sacrificed peace offerings of oxen to the Lord'' (Exodus 24:5). The young men referred to in the verse were the firstborn of the Jewish people. Rav Ḥisda said to him: This is what Rabbi Asi said: They sacrificed the offerings and then ceased to serve; after that day, the firstborn no longer performed the sacrificial service.

Rav Huna thought to raise a contradiction from the mishna, which states that the firstborn performed not only the sacrificial service on that day, but also did so until the Tabernacle was established the following year. In the meanwhile, he heard Rav Ḥisda say in the name of Rav Adda bar Ahava that the burnt offering that the children of Israel sacrificed in the wilderness before the establishment of the Tabernacle did not require flaying of the skin and cutting into pieces; it was sacrificed as it was. He therefore raised the contradiction from a baraita that is equal with regard to both of them, i.e., from which Rav Huna could raise a contradiction to both of Rav Ḥisda’s statements.

As it is taught in a baraita: Until the Tabernacle was established, private altars were permitted, the sacrificial service was performed by the firstborn, and all animals were fit to be sacrificed: A domesticated animal, an undomesticated animal, or a bird; males and females; unblemished and blemished animals. All animal sacrifices were brought from animals and birds that were kosher, but not from non-kosher species.

And all offerings brought before the construction of the Tabernacle were sacrificed as burnt offerings. And the burnt offering that the Jewish people sacrificed in the wilderness before the Tabernacle was established required flaying of the skin and cutting into pieces. And today, gentiles are permitted to sacrifice offerings on private altars. The baraita states explicitly that until the Tabernacle was constructed, the sacrificial service was performed by the firstborn, and the burnt offering required flaying and cutting.

Rav Ḥisda replied that with regard to the firstborn, it is a dispute between tanna’im, as it is taught in a baraita: God said to Moses on Mount Sinai: ''And let the priests also that come near to the Lord sanctify themselves, lest the Lord break forth upon them'' (Exodus 19:22). In other words, they should separate themselves and not approach the mountain. This command was given one day after the burnt offerings and peace offerings were sacrificed in anticipation of the revelation at Sinai. With regard to this command, Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korḥa says: This command is a reference to the separation of the firstborn, as they functioned as priests. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: This command is a reference to the separation of Nadav and Avihu, who were priests.

The Gemara asks: Granted, according to the one who says that the command for the priests to sanctify themselves is referring to the separation of Nadav and Avihu, this is the meaning of that which is written after their death on the eighth day of the inauguration of the Tabernacle: ''Then Moses said to Aaron: This is it that the Lord spoke, saying: Through them that are near to Me I will be sanctified…and Aaron held his peace'' (Leviticus 10:3). Nadav and Avihu had already been warned not to draw too close: ''Lest the Lord break forth upon them.''

But according to the one who says that the command for the priests to sanctify themselves is referring to the separation of the firstborn, where is the allusion to the fact that God would be sanctified through Nadav and Avihu? The Gemara replies: As it is written: ''And there I will meet with the children of Israel; and it shall be sanctified by My glory'' (Exodus 29:43). Do not read it as ''by My glory [bikhvodi]''; rather, read it as: By My honored ones [bimekhubadai]. God will be sanctified by those considered honored by God when He reveals Himself in the Tabernacle.

The Holy One, Blessed be He, said this statement to Moses, but Moses did not know its meaning until the sons of Aaron died. Once the sons of Aaron died, Moses said to him: Aaron, my brother, your sons died only to sanctify the name of the Holy One, Blessed be He. When Aaron knew that his sons were beloved by the Omnipresent, he was silent and received a reward, as it is stated: ''And Aaron held his peace [vayidom].''

And likewise in a verse written by David it states: ''Resign yourself [dom] to the Lord, and wait patiently [vehitḥolel] for Him'' (Psalms 37:7). Although He strikes down many corpses [ḥalalim] around you, you be silent and do not complain. And likewise in a verse written by Solomon it states: ''A time to keep silence, and a time to speak'' (Ecclesiastes 3:7). There are times that one is silent and receives reward for the silence, and at times one speaks and receives reward for the speech.

And this is what Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba says that Rabbi Yoḥanan says: What is the meaning of that which is written: ''Awesome is God out of your holy places'' (Psalms 68:36)? Do not read it as: ''From your holy places [mimikdashekha]''; rather, read it as: From your holy ones [mimekudashekha]. When the Holy One, Blessed be He, carries out judgment upon His holy ones, He is feared, and exalted, and praised by all. In any event, there is no contradiction from the baraita which teaches that the first-born performed the sacrificial service before the Tabernacle was established, as this matter is the subject of a dispute between tanna’im.

But there is still a difficulty with regard to the burnt offering, as it was stated in the name of Rav Adda bar Ahava that the burnt offering that the Jewish people sacrificed in the wilderness did not require flaying of the skin or cutting into pieces, while the baraita states that it did. The Gemara replies: This is a dispute between the opinions of two tanna’im. As it is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yishmael says: The general statements, i.e., the principles of the Torah, were said at Sinai, and the details of the mitzvot that are explicated in Leviticus were said to Moses in the Tent of Meeting. This includes the halakha that the burnt offering must be flayed and cut into pieces. Consequently, it could not have been in effect before the construction of the Tabernacle.

Rabbi Akiva says: Both general statements and the details of mitzvot were said at Sinai and later taught again in the Tent of Meeting, and taught a third time by Moses to the Jewish people in the plains of Moab, when he taught the Torah to the people (see Deuteronomy 1:1). According to Rabbi Akiva’s opinion, the halakha of flaying and cutting into pieces was in effect when the Torah was given, even before the construction of the Tabernacle.

§ The Master said in the baraita: Before the Tabernacle was established, all animals were fit to be sacrificed: A domesticated animal, an undomesticated animal, or a bird. The Gemara asks: From where are these matters derived? Rav Huna said: As the verse states with regard to the offering that was sacrificed after the flood: ''And Noah built an altar to the Lord, and took of every pure animal, and of every pure fowl, and offered burnt offerings on the altar'' (Genesis 8:20). The Gemara explains: ''Animal [behema],'' is understood in accordance with its plain meaning, a domesticated animal, and the same is true of fowl; an undomesticated animal [ḥayya] is included in the term ''behema'' that is stated in the verse.