Study Meilah folio 6A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
The Talmud cites another source that might resolve the issue: Come and hear a baraita that can provide a proof with regard to the meaning of R' Yehoshua’s statement about a period of fitness to the priests: R' Shimon says that there is a case of notar, when the blood was left overnight and was rend
The baraita elaborates: How so? If the blood was left over and someone consumed the meat before the sprinkling of the blood, he is liable for misusing consecrated property. But if it was consumed after the sprinkling of the blood, he is not liable for misusing consecrated property, as the sprinklin
The Talmud notes: In any event, R' Shimon teaches that if one consumes the meat before the leftover blood was sprinkled, he is liable for misusing it. Is this not referring to a case where there was time left in the day to sprinkle the blood that had already been collected in the service vessel, a
And accordingly, one may conclude from the baraita that it is fitness of consuming the meat of the offering that we learned in R' Yehoshua’s statement in the Mishnah. It is the fitness of consuming the meat of the offering that removes the possibility of being liable for the prohibition of misuse, n
The Talmud refutes this conclusion: No, the baraita is not referring to a case where there was time left in the day to sprinkle the blood that had already been collected. Rather, it is referring to a situation where the priest collected the blood shortly before sunset, where there was no time left