Midrasz do Kapłańska 22:23

5) (Vayikra 22:23) ("And an ox or a lamb, sarua or kalut, a gift you may make it, and as a vow it shall not be accepted.") Whence is it derived that all of the disqualifiers of ox and lamb render them unacceptable (as offerings)? From (the superfluous) "And an ox or a lamb" — to include all disqualifiers of ox and lamb (as rendering them unacceptable as offerings).

6) sarua: an animal whose thigh has come out of joint. "and kalut": one whose hooves are fused (and not split), as those of an ass. "a gift you may make it": For Temple maintenance. And whence is a vow derived (as similarly permissible)? From "and as a vow." I might think (that it is permissible) even for the altar (i.e., as an offering); it is, therefore, written "it shall not be accepted." This tells me only of a vow. Whence do I derive the same for a gift? (— It is understood as if it were written) "and as a vow and as a gift (for the altar) it will not be received." Rebbi says: It is derived from its context (that altar offerings are being referred to), it being written "and as a vow it shall not be accepted." And which holy thin effects acceptance? The altar (offerings), as it is written (in that context, Vayikra 1:4, "and it shall effect acceptance for him and make atonement for him.")

7) "a gift you may make it": "It you may make a gift, but you may not make an unblemished animal a gift for Temple maintenance.