We’re not talking about somebody who applied the blood of a korban (offering) outside the proper spot of Har Habayit. The Mishnah says that somebody who slaughtered it inside, and then the blood was received or caught in a cup, and then applied some of the blood outside and the rest inside, is liable for the blood he applied outside. The same is true if he first applied some of the blood inside and then applied the rest outside. He’s liable for the blood he applied outside, because even after he made the applications inside, all of the remaining blood is supposed to be brought inside. When he puts some of it outside, he’s violating the halacha (law). He’s violating the halacha that all the blood has to be poured in the proper spot.
The first case is obvious. If he first pours it outside and then applies it inside, it’s obvious that he did the wrong thing first. He did the essential pouring in the wrong spot and then went inside. So obviously, in that case, the person would be liable. What we’re saying here is that he’s liable even if he applied it first inside and then outside. Even there, the person did wrong, because obviously all the blood has to be put in the proper spot. Whatever is fit to be brought inside has to be brought inside.
Another halacha about an inner chatat (sin offering): if he caught the blood in two cups, and the blood in either one is allowed to be used for all the applications, the halacha is as follows. If he applied all the blood from both cups inside, he’s not liable. Obviously, he didn’t do anything wrong. The blood is being applied in the proper spot, so he’s not liable. We’re just trying to list all the different permutations of the Mishnah. If he applied the blood from both cups outside, he’s liable for both. The blood in both cups is fit to be poured onto the Mizbeach (altar), so when he pours it outside, he did something problematic.
If he applied all of the applications from the blood of one of the cups inside, and then the blood of the other one outside, he’s patur (not liable) as well. Once he completes the applications with the blood of the first cup inside, the blood of the second cup becomes unfit to be poured on the Mizbeach. When we said earlier that Rabbi Nechemya says that all the blood has to be poured on the Mizbeach and none of it could be poured out at the base of the Mizbeach, that’s only talking about when you had all the blood filled in one cup. But here, we have them in two cups. Once the necessary application was done with the first cup, whatever remains in the second cup has to be poured out. It becomes rejected, and it’s not considered essential or poured on the Mizbeach whatsoever. It’s only that first cup that is. So in that case, we would say, you know what, it’s not fit to be poured on the Mizbeach anyway, so the person is patur.
Last case: if he applied the blood of one cup outside first and then the blood of the other one inside, he’s liable for the blood applied outside, but not for the blood applied inside. So it becomes valid and atones for the owner, and it actually validates the korban chatat (sin offering). The fact that the first cup was applied in a forbidden way doesn’t invalidate the blood of the second cup, which remained poured properly inside. So the korban is considered to be a valid korban. One was done improperly, and the person is chayav (liable) for that, but the one that was done properly actually validates the whole korban chatat.
To what case could this be compared? To someone who separated his outer chatat offering, and then it became lost. Then he separates another chatat in its place, and afterwards he finds the first animal. Now both of them are standing right in front of him, ready to be offered. In that case, too, we say that either chatat is allowed to be offered. Either chatat is fit to be offered on the Mizbeach. One of them is offered. The other one becomes chatat she-kipru be'aleha. The owner received atonement, and the other animal has to die on its own. We don’t offer it as a korban.
So the law is as follows. If he slaughtered both of them inside, he’s not liable. He wasn’t permitted to slaughter the second one inside, but he did it anyway, and therefore we’re not going to hold him liable after the fact. If he slaughtered both of them outside, he’s liable for both of them, since each chatat had the ability to be offered inside and then he slaughtered it outside. When he slaughtered the first one outside, it was fit to be the korban chatat. But once that one was gone, the second one still remained possible to be offered as the korban chatat. So when he slaughtered that one outside as well, he was also liable, and he did something wrong in that case. Therefore, we say he's in that case.
If he slaughtered one inside and then the other one outside, he’s not liable for slaughtering outside, because once the first korban chatat was offered correctly inside, the second one has nothing to do with it anymore. It’s unfit to be offered inside, so when he slaughters it outside, there’s no liability.
If he slaughters one outside and then the other one inside, we say that the one slaughtered outside is the one for which he’s liable. In that type of case, he’s liable when he slaughtered it. At the time that he slaughtered it, it was fit to be chosen as the korban chatat, so he was required to offer it inside. Therefore, he did something problematic in that case. The one that was slaughtered inside still counts as a kapara (atonement) for the sin for which it was separated. Since the slaughter of the first one outside did not invalidate the second one, that was the only one left. If it was done in the proper spot, he did something correct, and he receives kapara.
If he slaughtered both inside and then applied the blood of one of them to the Mizbeach, the application of that blood makes the meat not applicable to the laws of me'ilah. Me'ilah is a person who cannot use property of the Beit Hamikdash for their own benefit. So here, he makes the meat not part of that, because by pouring the blood on, he makes the meat permitted to be eaten by the kohanim (priests). Therefore, it’s not part of the world of me'ilah anymore, no matter who benefits from it. Even if it’s a non-kohen, there may be other problems if he does that—if a non-kohen eats it. But for all intents and purposes, it’s not a problem of me'ilah. The blood makes the meat permitted.
So too, when the blood of that first chatat is poured, it exempts the meat of the second korban chatat as well from the laws of me'ilah. As soon as the first chatat blood was applied, it brings kapara to the owner, and now the korban chatat is all done. The second animal that he had becomes that type of chatat that we mentioned earlier: it becomes a korban chatat which is not actually offered. It becomes chatat she-kipru be'aleha, where the owner already received the atonement.
Again, we’re talking about the case where the person had a korban chatat, lost it, brought another one in its place, and then found the original one. So there, once the korban chatat was offered, the second one becomes not subject. It’s not considered to be sacred anymore on that level. If a person happened to use it for his own benefit, he’s not allowed to. But let’s say he did use it: the laws of me'ilah would not apply.