Meilah 12A

מזבח החיצון, דכתיב ביה: ״ושמו אצל המזבח״. מזבח הפנימי מנלן?

that the ashes of the external altar are subject to misuse, as it is written in the context of those ashes: “And he should put it beside the altar” (Leviticus 6:3). This teaches that these ashes must be interred, despite the fact that their mitzva has been performed by its removal, and therefore they are subject to misuse. But from where do we derive that the ashes of the inner altar are also subject to misuse?

אמר רבי אלעזר: דאמר קרא: ״והסיר את מראתו בנצתה״⁠ – אם אינו ענין למזבח החיצון, תנהו ענין למזבח הפנימי.

R' Elazar said in response: It is derived from the fact that the verse states with regard to a bird sacrificed as a burnt offering: “And he should take away its crop with its feathers, and cast it beside the altar on the east part, in the place of the ashes” (Leviticus 1:16), referring to the location for the placement of the removed ashes. If this verse is not needed for the matter of the external altar, as that halakha is already derived from the phrase: “And he should put them beside the altar” (Leviticus 6:3), apply it to the matter of the ashes of the inner altar, teaching that these ashes must also be placed there.

אימא: אידי ואידי במזבח החיצון, ולקבוע לו מקום!

The Talmud questions this conclusion: One can say that this and that, i.e., both verses cited above, are stated with regard to the ashes that are on the external altar, and the additional verse is necessary to fix its place, i.e., that it should be put on the east part, which is mentioned only in Leviticus 1:16. If so, there is no source for the placement of the ashes of the inner altar.