Zevachim 35B

הא חישב באימורין ⁠– נתפגלו אימורין עצמן.

derive instead as follows: But if he intended, with regard to the sacrificial portions of the bulls, to burn them beyond their designated time, the sacrificial portions themselves are rendered piggul, and one is liable to receive karet for eating them. The flesh of the bulls is never rendered piggul.

תא שמע: פרים הנשרפים ושעירים הנשרפים ⁠– מועלין בהן משהוקדשו. נשחטו ⁠– הוכשרו ליפסל בטבול יום ובמחוסר כיפורים ובלינה.

The Talmud suggests: Come and hear a proof from a Mishnah (Me’ila 9a): In the case of the bulls that are burned and the goats that are burned, one who derives benefit from them is liable for misuse of consecrated property from the time that they were consecrated. Once they were slaughtered, they are susceptible to being rendered disqualified for sacrifice through contact with one who immersed that day, and through contact with one who has not yet brought an atonement offering, and through being left overnight without the requirements of the offering having been fulfilled.

מאי, לאו לינת בשר ⁠– ושמע מינה: מגו דפסלה בלינה, פסלה בה מחשבה?

The Talmud derives: What, is it not referring to the flesh being left overnight, which would render it not valid? And conclude from the Mishnah that since the flesh is rendered disqualified by being left overnight, the flesh is also rendered disqualified by the intention to burn the sacrificial portions the next day, i.e., it is subject to piggul, which is in accordance with the statement of R' Elazar.

לא; לינת אימורים. הא מדקתני סיפא: כולן מועלין בהן על בית הדשן עד שיותך הבשר ⁠– מכלל דרישא לינת בשר! מידי איריא?! הא כדאיתה והא כדאיתה; רישא אימורים, וסיפא בשר.

The Talmud responds: No, it is referring to leaving overnight the sacrificial portions of the offering, not the flesh. Likewise, only the sacrificial portions are rendered piggul by intent to eat them after their designated time. The Talmud asks: But from the fact that the latter clause teaches: One who derives benefit from all of them by the place of the ashes where they are burned is liable for misuse of consecrated property until the flesh is completely scorched, it may be inferred that the first clause of the Mishnah is also referring to the flesh being left overnight. The Talmud answers: Are the cases comparable? This case is as it is, and that case is as it is. The first clause is referring to the sacrificial portions that are consumed on the altar, and the latter clause is referring to the flesh.