Meilah 3:4 - 3:5

דשון מזבח הפנימי והמנורה – their ashes [of the incense] and the remnants of the wicks of the Menorah he would remove [from the inner altar] and place them near the outer altar, the place where he places there the removal of the ashes from altar of the outer altar, and after he took them out to there, they are not available for benefit nor do the laws of sacrilege apply, for in these, it is not written (Leviticus 6:3): “and place them beside the altar” as with the ashes of the incense of the burnt-offering.

המקדיש דשון בתחילה מועלים בו – this is what he said: a person who dedicates the monetary value of he ashes, at the outside, prior to his removing it to the Temple courtyard, the laws of sacrilege apply, as for example, that he said, “the monetary value of the ashes is upon me,” and afterwards he removed it outside and another person came and benefitted from the ashes, even though its commandment had already been performed, nevertheless, the laws of sacrilege apply, for since he benefitted from it and there is what is missing from the ashes, again, one cannot estimate how much they were worth when it is being evaluated, and is found that he is causing loss to that which is dedicated and because of this, he immediately commits sacrilege when he benefits from it.

תורין – when he sanctified them (i.e., the turtledoves) prior to their maturation and the pigeons after their maturation.

לא נהנין ולא מועלים – and this is not similar to lacking time (i.e., an offering cannot be made because its time to be offered has not yet arrived) for an animal/cattle which is holy prior to its appropriate time and it he offered it after his time, for an animal/cattle because this legal status required might easily have been attained because it is considered that it has sanctity when it possesses a defect in order to need redemption, it also has sanctify even when it is not at the appropriate time, but birds which one cannot say about them this regarding this legal status, for the defect does not invalidate the birds and they don’t have redemption, for redemption is only mentioned regarding cattle, that is so that theey don’t have the sanctity of being offered too early.

תורין שלא הגיע זמנן מועלין בהן – since later on they are appropriate, they have the application of the laws of sacrilege now. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Shimon.

במה דברים אמורים בקדשי מזבח – since milk and eggs are not appropriate for the altar, therefore they are not available for benefit and the laws of sacrilege do not apply to them.

אבל בקדשי בדק הבית – that is so that the laws of sacrilege apply to them, since they are the sanctify of money, and are appropriate for the repair of the Temple house. But in the Gemara (Tractate Meilah 12b) it explains that this Mishnah is deficient and should be read as follows: When is this said? When they sanctified the things of the body to the altar, but if their monetary value is dedicated for the altar, such as if he said, “the value of this bird,” or “the value of this animal is dedicated to the Temple” to bring from them a burnt offering, it is made as if one dedicated them for the repair of the Temple house, for certainly the dedication of the monetary value of the altar, the laws of religious sacrilege apply to the eggs and the milk.