In the case of blood offered on the outer altar, if the first sprinkling was valid and the second was with a disqualified thought, what is the ruling?
In this law, the first sprinkling is the decisive point, thus a disqualified thought in a later sprinkling does not negate the atonement that has already been established.
Question 2
What is required for pigul to apply to an offering whose blood is offered inside?
The internal blood sprinklings are considered one unit, thus pigul depends on the spread of the thought of time across the whole.
Question 3
A priest in the courtyard slaughters an internal sin offering with the thought to sprinkle its blood tomorrow. Is this pigul?
When the thought is expressed in a place that does not match the future place of service, there is no application of pigul.
Question 4
What is correct regarding the thanksgiving offering and the loaves concerning pigul thoughts?
The bread is considered secondary to the thanksgiving offering, thus it follows it; however, the offering does not follow a thought in the bread by itself.
Question 5
The festival lambs were properly slaughtered, the bread was lost, and then the blood was sprinkled with a thought outside its time. What is the outcome?
Rambam presents this case as a doubt that has not been definitively resolved.