Kommentar zu Wajikra 4:5

אל אהל מועד‎ [AND THE PRIEST … SHALL BRING IT] TO THE APPOINTED TENT — to the Tabernacle — and, later, in the House of Eternity (the Temple at Jerusalem), into the Heichal (cf. Rashi on Exodus 29:43).

To the Heichal. This does not refer specifically to the Mishkon, but rather the same applies to the Beis HaMikdosh, as it is written in Parshas Chukas (Bamidbar 19:13): “He has defiled the Mishkon of Adonoy,” and afterwards it is written (v. 20): “For he has defiled the Mikdosh of Adonoy.” Our Sages derived from this (Shavuos 16b): If it says Mishkon, why does it say Mikdosh? And if it says Mikdosh, why does it say Mishkon? Rather, it applies the laws of this to that, and of that to this. Perforce, there is no difference between them, but only that Scripture uses the term Mishkon because it was in existence at that time. [You might ask:] Why did Rashi not explain this above (1:3) with regard to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting? [The answer is:] Because there it refers to the courtyard, and the term “courtyard” applies equally to the Mishkon and the eternal house [Mikdosh]. However, the term “Tent of Meeting” is applicable only to the Mishkon, and the holiness of the Mishkon was exchanged for the holiness of the eternal house, for this one’s holiness was temporary and this one’s holiness is eternal, [thus, it was necessary to explain that although this is so, the mitzvah of ‘bringing’ applies to them both].

ולקח הכהן המשיח מדם הפר, “the High Priest is to take some of the blood of this bull;” the expression לקח both here and again in Exodus 24,6 [in the past tense, i.e. ויקח] teach us that just as in Exodus Moses used a bowl in which the blood was placed, so the High Priest here is also supposed to place that blood in a bowl first.