Meilah, Chapter 1, Mishnah 3. Our chapter is tracing when the prohibition of me'ilah, benefiting from what belongs to Hekdesh, attaches to a korban and when it falls away. The previous mishnah recorded a dispute between Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Akiva regarding kodshei kodashim whose meat left the courtyard of the Beit Hamikdash before the zerikah, the sprinkling of the blood, was performed. Our mishnah takes the identical argument and applies it to a different case: the eimurim, the sacrificial portions burned on the mizbeach, of kodashim kalim.
Why kodashim kalim are different to begin with
Kodashim kalim are not classified as kodshei Hashem in the full sense, because the owner retains a share in them: he himself is permitted to eat the meat. For that reason, before the zerikah there is no me'ilah on them at all. The picture changes once all the avodot have been completed with the zerikah. At that point the eimurim, which are designated for the mizbeach and for no human being, stand as the portion belonging to Hashem, and me'ilah applies to them.
That sets up the question of our mishnah: what happens if those eimurim were taken outside the courtyard before the blood was sprinkled? Does the zerikah that follows still succeed in placing them under the laws of me'ilah?
The words of the mishnah
The case is stated at the outset: "Eimurei kodashim kalim", the portions of an offering of lesser sanctity that are destined for the mizbeach, "sheyatzu", which were carried out of the azarah, "lifnei zerikat damim", at a point earlier than the sprinkling of that korban's blood.
"Rabbi Eliezer omer, ein mo'alin bahen." Rabbi Eliezer rules that they are not subject to me'ilah. His reasoning follows exactly what he held in the previous mishnah. Once the eimurim have left the place where they must remain, they are disqualified, and a zerikah performed afterwards is not a valid zerikah. An invalid zerikah accomplishes nothing. Just as, in the case of kodshei kodashim, Rabbi Eliezer held that such a zerikah cannot remove the meat from me'ilah, so here it cannot bring the eimurim into me'ilah. They never fully become the property of Hashem.
The mishnah adds, "ve'ein chayavin aleihen", no liability is incurred on their account, "mishum pigul, notar, ve'tamei". The principle here was already set out in the previous mishnah: these three transgressions, whose penalty is karet, come into force only where the entire order of avodot was carried out as it should be. In our case the portions were taken away from the area in which they belonged, the Har Habayit, and the sprinkling done afterward has no standing. The result is that no such liability arises, whether the eimurim were offered with an intention that would render them pigul, whether they remained beyond their permitted time, or whether tumah reached them.
The view of Rabbi Akiva
"Rabbi Akiva omer, mo'alin bahen." Rabbi Akiva, consistent with his position in the previous mishnah, holds that me'ilah does apply. In his view the zerikah performed afterwards is effective, and it places the eimurim under the laws of me'ilah, notwithstanding that they had already been disqualified by leaving the courtyard.
The mishnah concludes his opinion with "ve'chayavin aleihen", one does bear liability for them, "mishum pigul, notar, ve'tamei". Once the sprinkling is treated as valid, everything that flows from it follows too, and a person who eats from these eimurim in any of those three circumstances incurs karet. Rabbi Akiva's principle is that a zerikah done as prescribed restores the korban to its standing: the avodah is viewed as having been accomplished, and every halachah that hinges on a completed service, me'ilah among them, now applies.