אלא קרא יתירא הוא מכדי כתיב (דברים יב, ו) והבאת שם ואכלת לפני ה' אלהיך במקום וגו לכתוב רחמנא לא תוכל לאוכלם מיהדר מפרש בהו רחמנא למה לי אלא ליחודי להו לאוי לכל חד וחד גופא אמר רבא זר שאכל מן העולה לפני זריקה חוץ לחומה לרבי שמעון לוקה חמש ולילקי נמי משום (שמות כט, לג) וזר לא יאכל כי קדש הם הני מילי היכא דלכהנים חזי הכא דלכהנים נמי לא חזי ולילקי נמי משום (שמות כב, ל) ובשר בשדה טרפה לא תאכלו כיון שיצא בשר חוץ למחיצתו נאסר הני מילי היכא דבפנים חזי הכא דבפנים נמי לא חזי ולילקי נמי כדר' אליעזר דאמר ר' אליעזר (שמות כט, לג) לא יאכל כי קדש (הוא)
Rather, the derivation is that the entire verse beginning: “You may not eat within your gates the tithe of your grain” (Deuteronomy 12:17) is a superfluous verse. After all, it is already written: “And there you shall bring your burnt-offerings, and your sacrifices, and your tithes, and the donation of your hand, and your vows, and your gift offerings, and the firstborn of your herd and of your flock, and there you shall eat before the Lord your God” (Deuteronomy 12:6–7); all the items that must be eaten within the walls of Jerusalem are enumerated. Let the Merciful One write simply: You may not eat them, in general terms, which would constitute a prohibition for which one would be liable to receive lashes for each of the cases enumerated. Why do I need the Merciful One to again specifically enumerate and detail each of them? Rather, this repetition serves to designate additional prohibitions for each and every one of the cases enumerated in the later verse (Deuteronomy 12:17). The prohibition is derived not by means of an a fortiori inference; rather, it is derived from the superfluous verse. Rabbi Shimon derives by means of the a fortiori inferences the additional prohibition that is in effect in each of these cases. § With regard to the matter itself, Rava says: With regard to a non-priest who ate the flesh of a burnt-offering before sprinkling its blood, outside the walls, according to Rabbi Shimon he is flogged with five sets of lashes. The Gemara suggests: And let him also be flogged for violating the prohibition: “And a non-priest may not eat, as they are sacred” (Exodus 29:33). The Gemara explains: This matter prohibiting a non-priest from eating consecrated food applies only in a case where the food is fit for consumption by priests. Here, where the food is not fit for consumption by priests either, as it is not permitted for anyone to partake of a burnt-offering, there is no specific prohibition that applies to a non-priest. The Gemara suggests: And let him also be flogged for violating the prohibition: “And any flesh torn of animals in the field you shall not eat” (Exodus 22:30). From the term “in the field,” a general halakha is derived: Once the flesh emerged outside its partition and is in the field, e.g., sacrificial meat that was taken outside the Tabernacle curtains that demarcate the courtyard, there is a prohibition, and the flesh is forbidden. The Gemara explains: This matter, the prohibition against eating sacrificial flesh outside the partition of the Temple courtyard, applies only in a case where the flesh is fit for consumption inside the courtyard. Here, in the case of a burnt-offering, where the flesh is not fit for consumption inside the courtyard either, as it is not permitted for anyone to partake of a burnt-offering, there is no specific prohibition that applies to a non-priest partaking of the flesh outside the courtyard. The Gemara suggests: And let him also be flogged in accordance with the statement of Rabbi Eliezer. As Rabbi Eliezer says that when it is stated with regard to leftover flesh and loaves from the inauguration offerings: “It shall not be eaten because it is sacred” (Exodus 29:34),