תלמוד על במדבר 18:18

⁶³This paragraph also is in Qiddušin 2:8 (fol. 62d–63a). Rebbi Jehudah bar Pazi in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: Alive, but not slaughtered⁶⁴The Mishnah, which states that a live firstling may be given as a marriage gift, is interpreted to mean that after slaughter it will be permitted to the bride.. There⁶⁵Mishnah Qiddušin 2:8; also quoted Demay 1:3, Notes 185–187: “If somebody uses his share in the holiest sacrifices or simple holy sacrifices as marriage gifts, the marriage is not valid. With Second Tithes, be it intentional or in error, the marriage is not valid, the words of R. Meїr. Rebbi Jehudah said, if in error, the marriage is not valid, if intentional, the marriage is valid.” Rebbi Meїr declares that holiest sacrifices, the Cohen’s share of simple sacrifices, and the Second Tithe are all Heaven’s property offered, as the case may be, to the Cohen, his family, or the layman and his family for consumption in Jerusalem. Hence, for R. Meїr, the basic conditions for a valid marriage are not satisfied.
R. Jehudah agrees that under normal circumstances, Second Tithe in Jerusalem cannot be exchanged. However, since it must be redeemed if it became ritually impure, it can also be exchanged unlawfully. His position is explained in Peah, Chapter 7, Note 135. He also holds that the Cohen’s share of the sacrifices is his personal property. Hence, at least as far as simple sacrifices are concerned, the woman becomes his wife through the marriage and can legally consume the meat given to her. R. Jehudah also asserts that Second Tithe is always the owner’s property, even before exchange. However, it cannot be used as a marriage gift directly since there is a lien on it that it should be used only for consumption, and that lien must first be removed by conscient redemption or exchange.
The Babli (Qiddušin 52b) goes to great lengths to find a case in which a woman might receive a Cohen’s part of the holiest sacrifices which must be eaten by male Cohanim in those parts of the Temple yard into which others may enter only when required by the necessities of sacrificial rites. It also holds (Baba Qama 12b) that the statement about the firstling is valid only in the absence of a Temple; a position difficult to reconcile with the first part of the Mishnah., we have stated: “If somebody betrothes a woman with his share in most holy or simple holy sacrifices, she is not betrothed.” Rebbi Jehudah bar Pazi said, Rebbi Jehudah learns all dedicated things from the firstling. Just as one may betrothe a woman with a firstling, so all sacrifices may be used to betrothe a woman. Rebbi Meїr learns all sacrifices from animal tithe. Just as one may not betrothe a woman with animal tithe, so no sacrifices may be used to betrothe a woman. The opinion of Rebbi Jehudah bar Pazi is inverted. There⁶⁶In Qiddušin 2:8., he says, alive or slaughtered. But here, he says alive, but not slaughtered. There in his own name, here in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi. Even if you say there and here in his own name; if he betrothes while it is still alive and with what is scheduled to fall to him⁶⁷This is a very hypothetical answer which, as seen in the following text, is immediately discarded. It is possible to marry a woman by a future benefit as, e. g., the offer of future services (Qiddušin 3:6). However, since the Cohen’s part of sacrificial meat is defined only at the moment of distribution, one runs into the problem of retroactivity (Demay 6:10, Note 160).. After slaughter, what is the reason of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi? (Num. 18:18): “Their meat shall be for you, like the breast of weaving⁶⁸The part of the Cohen from a family sacrifice, to be eaten by the Cohen’s family but not the Cohen’s property. The verse identifies the holiness of the firstling with that of the Cohen’s share in a Temple sacrifice..” And what is the reason of Rebbi Jehudah ben Pazi? “Shall be for you”, even after slaughtering. How does Rebbi Joshua ben Levi uphold “shall be for you”? He added another being⁶⁹“Their meat shall be for you; like the breast of weaving and the right thigh it shall be for you.” It is implied that the Cohen has maximal use of the firstling. This is taken to mean that the period after slaughter in which the firstling may be eaten is the maximal period found in the Torah for any sacrifice.
In the Babli, Zebaḥim 57a, the discussion is quoted in the name of Tannaїm of the first and second generations. that it should be eaten during two days and one night.

¹⁸¹From here to the end of the paragraph, the text is from Ma‘aser Šeni 1:2, Notes 63–69 (מ). The only major addition is a quote of the Mishnah here. Rebbi Jehudah bar Pazi in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: Alive, but not slaughtered. And Rebbi Jehudah bar Pazi said, Rebbi Meïr learns all sacrifices from animal tithe. Just as one may not become betrothed to a woman with animal tithe, so no sacrifices may be used to become betrothed to a woman. Rebbi Jehudah learns all dedicated things from the firstling. Just as one may become betrothed to a woman with a firstling, so all sacrifices may be used to become betrothed to a woman. The opinion of Rebbi Jehudah bar Pazi is inverted. There, he says, alive or slaughtered. But here, he says alive, but not slaughtered. There in his own name, here in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi. Even if you say there and here in his own name; if he becomes betrothed while it is still alive and with what is scheduled to fall to him. After slaughter, what is the reason of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi? (Num. 18:18): “Their meat shall be for you, like the breast of weaving.” And what is the reason of Rebbi Jehudah ben Pazi? “Shall be for you”¹⁸²The text is misquoted here, correct in Ma‘aser Šeni., even after slaughtering. How does Rebbi Joshua ben Levi uphold “shall be for you”¹⁸²The text is misquoted here, correct in Ma‘aser Šeni.? He added another being that it should be eaten during two days and one night.