Yoma 50A

איתיביה רבי יצחק נפחא לרבי אמי: ״והוציא את כל הפר״! שיוציא את כולו.

§ R' Yitzḥak Nappaḥa raised an objection to R' Ami: “And he should remove the entire bull outside the camp” (Leviticus 4:12). This verse speaks of a bull that has been slaughtered and its fats and sacrificial parts have been burned, which proves that even after it has been slaughtered, it is still called a bull. R' Ami replied: The animal itself is not called a bull at this stage; rather, it means that he should remove the entire carcass, all that remains of the bull.

״ואת פר החטאת ואת שעיר החטאת״, אמר רב פפא: בעור ובשר ופרש דכולי עלמא לא פליגי. כי פליגי בדם. מר סבר: דם איקרי פר, ומר סבר: דם לא איקרי פר.

The Talmud raises another difficulty by citing a verse: “And the bull of the sin-offering and the goat of the sin-offering, whose blood was brought in to make atonement in the Sanctuary, should be taken outside the camp” (Leviticus 16:27). Once again, the verse proves that even after it has been slaughtered and its blood is brought into the Holy of Holies, the animal is still called a bull. Rav Pappa said: Everyone agrees that when it is intact, with its hide, its flesh, and its excrement, it is called a bull. When they disagree is with regard to the blood. One Sage holds that its blood is called a bull, and one Sage holds that blood alone is not called a bull.

אמר רב אשי: מסתברא כמאן דאמר דם איקרי פר, דכתיב: ״בזאת יבא אהרן אל הקדש בפר בן בקר״, אטו בקרניה מעייל ליה?! אלא בדמו, וקרי ליה ״פר״.

Rav Ashi said: It is reasonable to say in accordance with the one who said that blood is called part of the bull, as it is written: “With this Aaron should come into the sacred place, with a bull” (Leviticus 16:3). Is that to say that he brings it in, to the Holy of Holies, with its horns? Rather, he enters with its blood, and yet the Torah calls that “a bull.” This proves that the blood itself is called a bull.