Yoma 63B

אי ״קרבן״, שומע אני אפילו קדשי בדק הבית, שנקראו קרבן, כענין שנאמר: ״ונקרב את קרבן ה׳״, תלמוד לומר: ״ואל פתח אהל מועד לא הביאו״. כל הראוי לפתח אהל מועד ⁠— חייב עליו בחוץ, כל שאינו ראוי לפתח אהל מועד ⁠— אין חייבין עליו בחוץ.

If it would have mentioned just the word offering, I would derive that one is liable even for slaughtering animals consecrated for Temple maintenance outside the Temple, which are also called offering, as it is stated: “And we have brought YHWH’s offering, what every man has found: Articles of gold, armlets, and bracelets, rings, earrings, and pendants” (Numbers 31:50). Therefore, the verse states: “And has not brought it to the entrance to the Tent of Meeting” (Leviticus 17:4), to teach that with regard to any animal fit to be sacrificed within the entrance to the Tent of Meeting or the Temple, one is liable for slaughtering it outside the Temple. Conversely, with regard to any animal that is not fit to be sacrificed within the entrance to the Tent of Meeting, one is not liable for slaughtering it outside the Temple.

אוציא אלו שאין ראוין לפתח אהל מועד, ולא אוציא פרת חטאת ושעיר המשתלח שהוא ראוי לבוא אל פתח אהל מועד, תלמוד לומר: ״לה׳״, מי שמיוחדין לה׳, יצאו אלו שאין מיוחדין לשם.

Furthermore: I might exclude these animals consecrated for Temple maintenance, which are not fit to be sacrificed within the entrance to the Tent of Meeting because they are blemished, and I will not exclude the heifer of a purification offering and the scapegoat, which are fit to come to the entrance to the Tent of Meeting. Therefore, the verse states “to YHWH” to indicate that one is liable only for those animals that are designated exclusively for God as offerings. These, the heifer of a purification offering and the scapegoat, are excluded, as they are not designated exclusively for God as sacrificial offerings but are used for some other purpose.