say that the money has been consecrated; and here, in the baraita mentioned before, you say that Rabbi Shimon ben Yehuda says in the name of Rabbi Shimon that if one consecrates shekels in the present day, they are not consecrated. He said to him: There, regarding the shekels, one does not consecrate ab initio because the mitzva is to bring the communal offerings each year from the new collection of half-shekels, those collected for that year, and these shekels, those consecrated in the present day, will necessarily be from the old collection, whenever the Temple is rebuilt, and as such have no use. For this reason, even if he consecrated shekels, they remain non-sacred. And here, however, with regard to the convert's money set aside for his pair of doves, what have you to say? In what sense is this consecrated money old? The disqualification of the old collection only applies to shekels used to purchase communal offerings, and other private consecrated items and a convert's pair of doves do not need to be purchased from a new collection. Money consecrated now can be used to acquire a convert's pair of doves. And therefore, if he went ahead and consecrated a quarter-dinar of silver in order to acquire a pair of doves, it is consecrated, and he should set it aside until the Temple is rebuilt. According to Rabbi Yosei's reasoning, the shekels are not consecrated because they have no use, as long as the Temple is not rebuilt this year. The Gemara asks: Why are they not consecrated? Perhaps the Temple will be rebuilt again as at first, and the collection of the Temple Treasury chamber will be collected from the new collection in its proper time on the first of Nisan. If that comes to pass, his shekels will be from the current year, and their consecration would have a point. And here too, what have you to say? What are the grounds for a distinction between the convert's offering whose illicit consecration is effective and the shekels whose illicit consecration is ineffective? The Gemara does not offer an answer. Apropos the dispute in the mishna about someone who went ahead and consecrated first fruits in the present day, Rav Hamnuna and Rav Adda bar Ahava said in the name of Rav: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon that they are not consecrated.