Study Temurah folio 21B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
And then, as R' Yishmael holds that a firstborn definitely may not be eaten in the present, he says that second tithe comes and its status is derived from the juxtaposition to the firstborn. The Talmud asks: And can we derive the halakhot of sacrificial food from one another? But doesn’t R' Yoḥanan
The Talmud answers: Second tithe is considered non-sacred. Therefore, this derivation does not pertain to consecrated items. The Talmud asks: This works out well according to the one who said that we follow the halakha that is derived. If it is a consecrated item, it may not be derived from anothe
§ The Talmud cites the second statement of R' Yosei from the elders, in the continuation of the baraita above: R' Akiva says: One might have thought that a person may bring up a firstborn from outside Eretz Yisrael to Eretz Yisrael when the Temple is standing and sacrifice it. Therefore, the verse
But from a place that you may not bring up the tithe of grain, i.e., outside Eretz Yisrael, you may not bring up a firstborn from there. Therefore, the statement of the Mishnah that if one did bring up an unblemished firstborn from outside Eretz Yisrael it may be sacrificed, is in accordance with t
§ The Talmud relates the third statement in the baraita, which discusses second tithe: Ben Azzai says that one might have thought that he may bring up second tithe and eat it in any place that overlooks Jerusalem. But could this matter not be derived through logical inference: A firstborn offering r