1) "CHUTZ L'MEKOMO" AND "IM ALAH LO YERED"
QUESTION: The Mishnah lists the many ways in which a Korban (or parts of a Korban) may become Pasul and yet is left on the Mizbe'ach once it was already placed there. One of these is the Pesul of Chutz l'Mekomo.
TOSFOS (DH v'Chutz l'Mekomo) asks that this Mishnah poses a serious difficulty on the view of Rava, who says in Menachos (79a) that if one slaughters a Korban Chatas and has in mind a thought of Chutz l'Mekomo, the meat of the Korban must be taken off of the Mizbe'ach if it was placed there. How can Rava make that statement in light of the Mishnah here? Tosfos quotes RABEINU TAM in Menachos who says that the Gemara's text in Menachos should read "Todah," not "Chatas," but that emendation still does not seem to answer the question.
(a) TOSFOS answers that in fact Rabeinu Tam's emendation of the text from "Chatas" to "Todah" helps answer the question. One cannot transgress Me'ilah with the limbs of a Korban which is Kodshim Kalim until a proper Zerikah has done been performed. Since, in the case in Menachos, the Korban became Pasul during the Shechitah (because of a thought of Chutz l'Mekomo), the limbs of the Korban never attained the status of being a proper Korban after Zerikah. Accordingly, the limbs have no place on the Mizbe'ach at all, even if they were placed there mistakenly. This is in contrast to Kodshei Kodashim, the limbs of which are subject to Me'ilah already before the Zerikah. This is also in contrast with a Pesul of Chutz l'Zemano of Kodshim Kalim, in which case the Zerikah is significant because it creates the potential liability of Kares for a person who eats the meat of the Korban. According to Rava, the Zerikah of a Korban of Kodshim Kalim which has become Pasul because of Chutz l'Mekomo is inconsequential, and therefore it does not make the meat of the Korban fit to be on the Mizbe'ach at all. The Mishnah here is discussing the Pesul of Chutz l'Mekomo of Kodshei Kodashim. Since the limbs of an animal which is Kodshei Kodashim are already subject to Me'ilah before the Zerikah, they are fit enough to be left on the Mizbe'ach once they were wrongfully placed there.
(b) TOSFOS in Nidah (40b, DH Chutz l'Mekomo) explains that the Gemara here (84b) maintains that the reason why the limbs of a Korban which is Pasul because of Chutz l'Mekomo do not have to be removed from the Mizbe'ach is that this Pesul is comparable to the Pesul of Chutz l'Zemano. Rava in Menachos (79a) states his ruling according to Rebbi Yehudah's understanding of Rebbi Yehoshua, who maintains that Chutz l'Mekomo is not comparable to Chutz l'Zemano.
(c) TOSFOS in Menachos (79a, DH v'Hadar Bei Rava) explains that Rabeinu Tam's text answers the question in a different manner. Although the Pesul of Chutz l'Mekomo usually is comparable to Chutz l'Zemano, Rava refers specifically to the case of a Todah. In the case of a Todah, the Pesul of Chutz l'Mekomo is not comparable to Chutz l'Zemano, because the bread that accompanies the Todah is considered somewhat distinct from the Korban itself. Just as Chutz l'Mekomo is not compared to Chutz l'Zemano with regard to the Lachmei Todah, a Korban Todah which is Pasul because of Chutz l'Mekomo is not compared to one which is Pasul because of Chutz l'Zemano, which is why it must be removed from the Mizbe'ach if it was wrongfully placed there. (Y. MONTROSE)
2) THE SOURCE FOR THE REQUIREMENT TO REMOVE CERTAIN DISQUALIFIED KORBANOS FROM ATOP THE MIZBE'ACH
QUESTION: The Gemara explains Rebbi Yehudah's opinion about what items must be removed from the Mizbe'ach. Rebbi Yehudah expounds three phrases: "Zos," "Hi," and "ha'Olah" (specifically the letter "Heh" of "ha'Olah"). These three phrases teach that there are three cases in which something (which is Pesulo ba'Kodesh) which was placed on the Mizbe'ach must be taken down. These three cases are: the animal was slaughtered at night; the animal's blood spilled and therefore no proper Zerikah was performed; the blood was taken outside of the Azarah before the Zerikah was performed.
TOSFOS (DH Prat) asks that Rebbi Yehudah's opinion seems problematic in light of the Gemara in Me'ilah (2b). The Gemara there says that according to Rebbi Yehudah, if a Korban of Kodshei Kodashim was slaughtered in the south part of the Azarah, it not only becomes Pasul, but if its flesh is mistakenly placed on the Mizbe'ach, it must be removed. According to Rebbi Yehudah, who maintains that nothing is removed from the Mizbe'ach unless a verse teaches so, why must the flesh of Kodshei Kodashim be removed from the Mizbe'ach in such a case, if none of the three verses refers to such a case?
(a) TOSFOS answers that the Gemara earlier (36a) derives from the verse, "Kol Davar Ra" -- "any bad thing" (Devarim 17:1), that a Korban of Kodshei Kodashim slaughtered in the south part of the Azarah, and the blood of an ordinary Korban of Kodshim Kalim which is brought into the Heichal, is Pasul. Tosfos suggests that this verse is also the source that these items of Pesul must be removed from the Mizbe'ach if they are placed there.
This proposal of Tosfos is difficult to understand. On what basis does Tosfos assume that the verse teaches such a novel law? The TZON KODASHIM explains that Tosfos understands that the Torah places the previous words in the verse, "Asher Yiheyeh Vo Mum" -- "in which there will be a blemish," next to the words "Kol Davar Ra" -- "any bad thing," to teach that "Kol Davar Ra" has the status of "Asher Yiheyeh Vo Mum." This means that a Korban of Kodshei Kodashim slaughtered in the south part of the Azarah has the status of a Ba'al Mum, which must be removed from the Mizbe'ach if placed there.
The CHOK NASAN challenges this explanation. According to this explanation, if the blood of a Korban of Kodshim Kalim goes into the Heichal, its limbs also should be removed from the Mizbe'ach, since it, too, is derived from the verse of "Kol Davar Ra."
(b) In his second answer, Tosfos explains that Kodshei Kodashim slaughtered in the wrong part of the Azarah are compared to Shechutei Chutz. (See Tosfos to 68b, DH Amar Rav.) (Y. MONTROSE)