Reference for Yevamot 133:9

אי אמרת בשלמא עובר במעי זרה זר הוא היינו דקא"ל זו שמעתי וזו לא שמעתי אלא אי אמרת ילוד מאכיל שאין ילוד אין מאכיל מאי זו שמעתי וזו לא שמעתי איהי היא קשיא

is regarded as a non-priest,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. p. 448, n. 9. ');">²⁸</span> it was correct for him to say, 'The first I heard, but the other I did not'. If you maintain, however, [that R. Jose's reason is because] the born may bestow the right of eating and the unborn may not, what [could he have meant by] 'The first I have heard but the other I have not heard', when the principle is the same! — This is indeed a difficulty. Said Rab Judah in the name of Samuel: This<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The ruling in our Mishnah. ');">²⁹</span> is the opinion of R. Jose; but the Sages said: If he<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The deceased priest. ');">³⁰</span>

Jastrow