Bekhorot 49 elsewhere in Shas

Kiddushin 29a:18: The Sages taught: If a firstborn has not yet been redeemed and he himself has a firstborn son, he is obligated to redeem himself and he is also obligated to redeem his firstborn son, and he takes precedence over his son.
Sanhedrin 45b:12: The Gemara asks: But why not learn from this halakha a principle that can be applied in all cases of capital punishment?
Gittin 76a:5: To which side of the dispute is Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel’s statement referring?
Shevuot 26b:18: The Gemara rejects this: One cannot extrapolate from the fact that the non-verbal consecrations to the Tabernacle were effective, because teruma, which can be separated non-verbally, and donating consecrated items are two verses that come a
Sanhedrin 72b:10: The Gemara asks: But why not learn from it a principle that can be applied to all people who may be put to death?
Zevachim 57a:3: Abaye says: Why do I need the Torah to write: “And Aaron’s sons, the priests, shall present the blood, and sprinkle the blood around against the altar” (Leviticus 1:5), with regard to a burnt offering, to teach that the blood must be placed
Kiddushin 58a:8: The Gemara suggests: But let us derive a general principle concerning other prohibitions from the case of idolatry.
Nazir 37b:7: Rav Ashi said to him: This cannot serve as a proof, due to the fact that the halakhot of a nazirite and those of a sin-offering are from two verses that come as one, i.e., to teach the same matter, and any two verses that come as one do not
Chullin 117a:14: The Gemara answers: The principle does not apply in that case, because the mitzva of the removal of the ashes and the matter of the four white priestly vestments worn by the High Priest on Yom Kippur, which may not be used again, are both s
Zevachim 46a:7: The Gemara answers: The principle does not apply in that case, because the matter of the removal of the ashes and the matter of the priestly vestments, the four white garments worn by the High Priest on Yom Kippur, are both subject to the h
Keritot 6a:13: The Gemara answers: One cannot derive a general principle from this case, because the removal of the ashes and the halakha of the heifer whose neck is broken, from which one may not derive benefit after that rite has been performed, are two
Kiddushin 42b:10: The Gemara suggests: And let us derive a principle from misuse of consecrated property, that one can appoint an agent even to perform a transgression.

Learn Bekhorot 49 on Super Daf