Pesachim 82B

נשפך דמה, יצא דמה חוץ לקלעים ⁠— דקיימא לן בשריפה, מנלן?

or its blood was spilled, or its blood was taken outside the hangings that denoted the courtyard of the Tabernacle, we maintain that it must be burned; from where do we derive this halakha?

נפקא לן מדרבי שמעון. דתניא, רבי שמעון אומר: ״בקדש באש תשרף״⁠ — לימד על חטאת ששריפתה בקודש.

The Talmud answers: We derive it from the exposition of R' Shimon, as it was taught in a baraita that R' Shimon says: The verse that states: “Any sin-offering from which some blood has been brought to the Tent of Meeting, to make atonement in the sacred place, should not be eaten; it should be burned in fire” (Leviticus 6:23), has taught that the burning of a sin-offering is in the sacred area, the Temple courtyard.

אין לי אלא זו בלבד, שאר פסולי קדשי קדשים ואימורי קדשים קלים מנין? תלמוד לומר: ״(וכל) ... בקדש ... באש תשרף״.

I have derived only that the halakha applies to this alone, a sin-offering; with regard to the rest of the disqualified offerings of the most sacred order and the portions of offerings of lesser sanctity that are consumed on the altar, from where do we derive that they must be burned in the Temple courtyard, which is their boundary when they are valid? The verse states: “Any…in the sacred place…should be burned in fire,” which teaches that any consecrated item must be burned in a sacred place.

אשכחן קדשי קדשים, קדשים קלים מנלן? אלא: כל פסולו בקדש בשריפה, לא שנא קדשים קלים ולא שנא קדשי קדשים ⁠— גמרא גמירי לה, וחטאת דאהרן משום מעשה שהיה כך היה.

The Talmud asks further: We found a source for offerings of the most sacred order; from where do we derive that it also applies to offerings of lesser sanctity? Rather, we must say as follows: Anything disqualified in the sacred area, the Temple courtyard, must be burned. It is no different whether it is offerings of lesser sanctity, and it is no different whether it is offerings of the most sacred order; they learned it as a tradition. And the sin-offering of Aaron that was burned on the 8th day of inauguration was mentioned only because the incident that took place, took place in this way. It was not mentioned in order to teach the halakhot of offerings.