Meilah 19A

– עד שיצא מן הקדש לחול.

a non-priest who partakes of teruma is not liable until the teruma leaves from the domain of the sacred to the domain of the non-sacred, as one who partakes of teruma becomes its owner, the same should apply to misuse.

מן הקדש לקדש, כגון: לקח קיני זבים, וקיני זבות, וקיני יולדות,

But in fact one is also liable for misuse if he moves an item from the domain of the sacred to the domain of the sacred for another purpose, such as if he spent funds from the Temple treasury and acquired bird nests, i.e., pairs of birds, pigeons or doves, for zavim (see Leviticus 15:13–15), or the bird nests for zavot (see Leviticus 15:28–30), or the bird nests for women after childbirth (see Leviticus 12:6–8). Although the individual is using the money of the Temple treasury for a sacred purpose, nevertheless, since these obligatory offerings should be purchased with private funds, he commits misuse by deriving personal benefit from sacred funds.

ושקל שקלו, והביא חטאתו ואשמו מן ההקדש ⁠– כיון שהוציא ⁠– מעל, דברי רבי שמעון. רבי יהודה אומר: עד שיזרוק הדם. מנין? תלמוד לומר: ״תמעל מעל״⁠ – מכל מקום.

And similarly, with regard to one who contributed his shekel, or brought his sin offering or his guilt offering from consecrated property, once he spends the funds he has committed misuse. This is the statement of R' Shimon. R' Yehuda says: He is not liable until the priest sprinkles the blood of the offerings, through which he achieves atonement, at which point he has derived his benefit from the consecrated property. The baraita returns to its question: From where is it derived that such use is also categorized as misuse? The verse states: “If anyone commits a misuse.” The inclusive language of the verse teaches that he is liable in any case.