Temurah 10B

לעוברה גופיה, אבל הכא דאקדשיה לאימיה ⁠— הא בכלל אימיה לא קדוש.

the fetus itself. But here, where he consecrated its pregnant mother, not the fetus itself, one might think that this fetus is not consecrated along with its mother.

ואי אשמעינן בתרייתא ⁠— התם הוא דאקדיש לה, וכל דאית בה, אבל הכא דאקדשיה ליה ⁠— כיון דליתיה אבראי, לא קדיש. צריכא.

And if R' Yoḥanan had taught us only this last case, of one who consecrates a pregnant animal, I might have said that it is only there that its fetus is sacred, as he consecrated the animal and all that is inside it, including the fetus. But here, where he consecrated the fetus itself, since the object of the consecration is not outside its mother, as it has yet to be born, one might say that it is not consecrated. Therefore, it was necessary for R' Yoḥanan to state both halakhot.

לישנא אחרינא, מאי קא משמע לן? אם שיירו ⁠— משוייר, ועובר לאו ירך אמו הוא, ותרתי למה לי?

§ The Talmud cites another version of the discussion: What is R' Yoḥanan teaching us when he says above that one may atone with either the mother or the offspring? He is evidently saying that if he explicitly excluded the fetus from his consecration, it is excluded, and only the mother is consecrated. And the reason is that a fetus is not considered the thigh of its mother but a separate entity that can possess a different status. But if so, why do I need two halakhot to teach me this, both with regard to one who consecrates a pregnant animal and with regard to one who consecrates the fetus alone?

צריכא, דאי אתמר בהא ⁠— משום דאימיה חזיא לגופיה, מגו דנחתא קדושה לה נחתא נמי לולד, אבל אידך ⁠— לא. קא משמע לן הדא.

The Talmud answers: Both halakhot are necessary, as, if it was stated only with regard to that case of one who consecrates a pregnant animal, I would say that the fetus is consecrated because its mother is fit to be consecrated itself, and since sanctity applies to her, it likewise applies to the offspring. But in the other case of one who consecrates a fetus alone, perhaps it is not consecrated. Therefore, R' Yoḥanan teaches us this case as well.