Study Bekhorot folio 18B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
With regard to any animal whose replacements are in the possession of the priest, its owner is exempt from the mitzva of giving the priestly gifts, and R' Meir deems him obligated to give the gifts. Evidently, in a case where the replacement is in the possession of the priest, yes, R' Yosei rules
The Talmud explains that even so, R' Elazar’s statement is necessary, lest you say that R' Yosei was not expressing his own opinion but stated his opinion in accordance with the statement of R' Meir, i.e., he said to him: In my opinion, the Israelite is exempt from giving the priestly gifts even if
And Rav Pappa says with regard to the dispute between R' Meir and R' Yosei: Everyone concedes in the case of an animal whose status as tithe is uncertain that its owner is exempt from the mitzva of the priestly gifts. The Talmud asks: When Rav Pappa says that everyone concedes, to whom is he refer
The Talmud explains that the statement of Rav Pappa is necessary lest you say that the reason that R' Meir deems him obligated in the gifts is so that the halakhic category of the gifts should not be forgotten; if so, the same would apply even in the case of an animal whose status as tithe is uncer
The Talmud asks: And how can you say this? But doesn’t the latter clause teach: As R' Yosei says: With regard to any animal whose replacements are in the possession of a priest, its owner is exempt from the mitzva of giving the priestly gifts, and R' Meir deems him obligated to give the gifts. Evi