Reference for Bava Kamma 218:16

ומניין שעבודתה ועורה שלו תלמוד לומר (במדבר ה, י) ואיש את קדשיו לו יהיו הא כיצד אם היה בעל מום נותנה לכהן שבאותו משמר ועבודתה ועורה שלו

— [The fact is that] the ruling<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That a priest may not retain for himself the payment for a robbery he committed upon a proselyte, though he himself had a right to the sacrifice and the whole of the flesh. ');">²⁵</span> is derived by the analogy of the term, <i>'To the priest'</i><span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. p. 636, n. 3. ');">²⁶</span> to a similar term 'To the priest' occurring in the case of a field of [Permanent] possession,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. Lev. XXVII, 21. ');">²⁷</span> as taught:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' 'Ar. 25b. ');">²⁸</span> What is the point of the words the [permanent] possession thereof?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. Lev. XXVII, 21. ');">²⁷</span> [The point is this:] How can we know that if a field which would [in due course] have to fall to the priests in the jubilee<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. Lev. XXVII, 21. ');">²⁷</span> but was redeemed by one of the priests, he should not have the right to say, 'Since the field is destined to fall to the priests in the jubilee and as it is already in my possession it should remain mine, as is indeed only reasonable to argue, for since I have a title to a field in the possession of others, should this not be the more so when the field is in my own possession?' The text therefore significantly says. As a field devoted, the [permanent] possession thereof shall be the priest's, to indicate that a field of [permanent] possession<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which belonged as such to his father and was inherited by him; cf. Rashi' Ar. 25b. ');">²⁹</span> remains with him, whereas this [field]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which he redeemed from the Temple treasury. ');">³⁰</span> will not remain with him.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' After the arrival of the jubilee. ');">³¹</span> What then is to be done with it? It is taken from him and shared out to all his brethren the priests. Our Rabbis taught: Whence can we learn that a priest is entitled to come and sacrifice his offerings at any time and on any occasion he prefers? It is significantly stated, And come with all the desire of his mind&nbsp;… and shall minister.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XVIII, 6-7. ');">³²</span> But whence can we learn that the fee for the sacrificial operation<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'the reward of the service thereof'. I.e., the priestly portions thereof. ');">³³</span> and the skin of the animal will belong to him? It is stated: <i>And every man's hallowed thing shall be his</i>,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Num. V. 10. ');">³⁴</span> so that if he was blemished,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And thus himself unable to sacrifice but able to partake of the portions in accordance with Lev. XXI, 17-22. ');">³⁵</span> he has to give the offering to a priest of that particular division, while the fee for the operation and the skin will belong to him,

Jastrow