Bekhorot 79

Chapter 79

א בשושן הבירה אחת על קרן מזרחית צפונית ואחת על קרן מזרחית דרומית שעל קרן מזרחית צפונית היתה יתירה על של משה חצי אצבע ושעל קרן מזרחית דרומית היתה יתירה עליה חצי אצבע נמצאת יתירה על של משה אצבע
1 in [the gate called] the Castle of Shushan,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The eastern gate of the Temple mount on which the picture of the Castle of Shushan was sculptured, v. Mid, I, 3.');"><sup>1</sup></span> one in the north-east corner, and the other in the south-east corner That in the northeast corner was larger than the Mosaic cubit by half a finger's breadth and that of the south-east corner was larger than its companion by half a finger's breadth.
ב ולמה היו אחת גדולה ואחת קטנה כשהיו אומנין נוטלין בקטנה ומחזירין בגדולה שלא יבואו לידי מעילה
2 Consequently the latter was a finger's breadth larger than the Mosaic cubit. And why were there a large and small standard-cubit?
ג תרתי למה לי חדא דכספא וזהבא וחדא דבניינא
3 So that while the workmen used to undertake their tasks according to the smaller cubit [of Moses] but executed in accordance with the large, in order that it should not come to commit sacrilege.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Illegally benefiting from a sacred object. For if the workmen followed the Mosaic cubit, since it is not always possible to be exact, there was a fear that what was actually holy might be used in a secular manner.');"><sup>2</sup></span> And what need was there for two standard-cubits? - One standard-cubit [which was half a finger's breadth larger than that of Moses] was used for measuring gold and silver<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Mosaic cubit being stipulated but the workmen in executing the work, giving the larger cubit.');"><sup>3</sup></span>
ד רב נחמן בר יצחק ואי תימא רב הונא בר נתן לאותה ששנינו שיש בשר בין חוליא לחוליא מלא אצבע:
4 and the other [which was a whole finger's-breadth larger] was used for building [the wall]. R'Nahman B'Isaac or you may say R'Huna B'Nathan, said: [The exact measurement of a finger's breadth mentioned above has] reference to what we have learnt: OR IF THERE IS FLESH BETWEEN ONE JOINT AND ANOTHER TO THE AMOUNT OF A FINGER'S BREADTH.
ה <big><strong>מתני׳</strong></big> אין לו ביצים או אין לו אלא ביצה אחת ר' ישמעאל אומר אם יש לו שני כיסין יש לו ב' ביצים אין לו שני כיסין אין לו אלא ביצה אחת ר"ע אומר מושיבו על עכוזו וממעך אם יש ביצה סופו לצאת מעשה שמיעך ולא יצא נשחטה ונמצאת דבוקה בכסלים והתיר ר"ע ואסר רבי יוחנן בן נורי:
5 <big><b>MISHNAH: </b></big>IF [A FIRSTLING] HAS NO STONES OR IF IT ONLY HAS ONE STONE, [IT IS A BLEMISH]. R'ISHMAEL SAYS: IF IT HAS TWO BAGS, THEN IT HAS TWO STONES, BUT IF IT ONLY HAS ONE BAG, THEN IT ONLY HAS ONE STONE. R'AKIBA SAYS: [THE ANIMAL] IS PLACED ON ITS BUTTOCK<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'hollow, arched pitcher'.');"><sup>4</sup></span> AND HE RUBS [THE BAG].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And the loins, as a test.');"><sup>5</sup></span> IF A TESTICLE IS [THERE, INSIDE THE BAG] IT WILL EVENTUALLY COME OUT. IT HAPPENED THAT ONE RUBBED IT AND [THE STONE] DID NOT COME OUT, BUT WHEN IT WAS SLAUGHTERED [THE STONE] WAS FOUND ATTACHED TO THE LOINS, AND R'AKIBA PERMITTED [THE ANIMAL]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To be eaten, for it was a blemish, owing to the fact that it was not in its place.');"><sup>6</sup></span>
ו <big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> השתא אין לו אלא ביצה אחת אמרת הוי מומא אין לו כלל מיבעיא חסורי מיחסרא והכי קתני אין לו שתי ביצים בשתי כיסין אלא בכיס אחד א"נ שתי כיסין וביצה אחת הרי זה מום
6 WHILE R'JOHANAN B. NURI PROHIBITED IT.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since the stone was eventually found.');"><sup>7</sup></span> <big><b>GEMARA: </b></big>If in a case where it only has one stone, you say [in the Mishnah] that it is a blemish, in a case where it has no stones at all, is there any question?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' About its being a blemish?');"><sup>8</sup></span> - Something is omitted,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the MISHNAH:');"><sup>9</sup></span>
ז ר' ישמעאל אומר יש לו ב' כיסים בידוע שיש לו ב' ביצים אין לו אלא כיס אחד כמי שאין לו אלא ביצה אחת דמי ואתא ר"ע למימר בידוע לא אמרינן אלא מושיבו על עכוזו וממעך אם יש ביצה סופו לצאת:
7 and it must read thus: IF [THE FIRSTLING] HAS NOT the two STONES in two bags, only in one bag, OR IF IT HAS two bags containing ONLY ONE STONE, IT IS A BLEMISH. R'ISHMAEL SAYS:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Ishmael differs therefore only as regards the second clause of the Mishnah, but as regards the first, he agrees that where the animal has only one bag it is a blemish, for it is as if there was only one stone. irhpc vagn');"><sup>10</sup></span> IF IT HAS TWO BAGS, IT CERTAINLY HAS TWO STONES. IF HOWEVER IT HAS ONLY ONE BAG, IT IS AS IF IT HAS ONLY ONE STONE.
ח ומעשה שמיעך ולא יצא וכו': תניא א"ר יוסי מעשה בפירן של בית מנחם שמיעך ולא יצאת ונשחטה ונמצאת דבוקה בכסלים והתיר ר"ע ואסר רבי יוחנן בן נורי
8 WHEREUPON R'AKIBA SAYS: We do not say 'it certainly has' BUT WE PLACE THE ANIMAL ON ITS BUTTOCK AND RUB [THE BAG] AND IF THERE IS A STONE [INSIDE] THEN IT COMES OUT EVENTUALLY. IF HAPPENED THAT HE RUBBED IT AND THE STONE DID NOT COME OUT etc. It has been taught: Said R'Jose: It happened at Peran<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The name of a village (Rashi) . Tosaf. renders the passage 'It happened in the stables of the house of Menahem' etc. deriving irhp vrp from .');"><sup>11</sup></span> in the house of Menahem that he rubbed [the bag] and [the stone] did not come out.
ט אמר לו ר"ע לר' יוחנן בן נורי עד מתי אתה מכלה ממונן של ישראל אמר לו רבי יוחנן בן נורי לר"ע עד מתי אתה מאכיל ישראל נבילות לאו מישחט שחטיה
9 When however it was slaughtered, the stone was found attached to the loins and R'Akiba permitted [the animal to be eaten] whereas R'Johanan B'Nuri prohibited it. Said R'Akiba to R'Johanan B'Nuri: 'How long will you waste the money of Israel'?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For since you forbid the eating of the animal as an unblemished firstling without Jerusalem, there is no other remedy except burying it.');"><sup>12</sup></span> Said R'Johanan B'Nuri to R'Akiba: 'How long will you allow Israel to eat nebelahs'?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Animals not ritually slaughtered or which died of themselves.');"><sup>13</sup></span> But do we not ritually cut it? - Rather [R'Johanan] must have said trefahs.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Animals afflicted with a fatal organic disease.');"><sup>14</sup></span> But it is not a case here of the prohibition of trefahs! Then [this is what he said to R'Akiba]: How long will you allow Israel to eat consecrated sacrifices without [the wall of Jerusalem]?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For it is an unblemished firstling which can only be eaten in Jerusalem and, according to your ruling, it will be eaten outside the walls of Jerusalem.');"><sup>15</sup></span>
י אלא טריפות לא איסור טריפות הוא אלא עד מתי אתה מאכיל ישראל קדשים בחוץ:
10 <big><b>MISHNAH: </b></big>IF [A FIRSTLING] HAS FIVE FEET OR IF IT HAS ONLY THREE FEET OR IF ITS FEET ARE CLOSED<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., uncloven hoofs.');"><sup>16</sup></span> LIKE THAT OF AN ASS OR A SHAHUL OR A KASUL [THESE ARE BLEMISHES]. WHAT IS MEANT BY SHAHUL? [AN ANIMAL] WITH A DISLOCATED HIP [WITHOUT THE SINEWS BEING SEVERED]. WHAT IS MEANT BY KASUL?
יא <big><strong>מתני׳</strong></big> בעל חמש רגלים או שאין לו אלא שלש ושרגליו שהוא קלוטות כשל חמור והשחול והכסול איזהו שחול שנשמטה יריכו וכסול שאחת מיריכים גבוהות:
11 [AN ANIMAL] ONE OF WHOSE HIPS IS HIGHER THAN THE OTHER'<big><b>GEMARA:</b></big> Said Rab Huna: This<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The statement of the Mishnah, A FIRSTLING WHICH HAS FIVE FEET etc.');"><sup>17</sup></span>
יב <big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> א"ר הונא לא שנו אלא שחסר ויתר ביד אבל ברגל טרפה נמי הוי דכל יתיר כנטול דמי
12 is meant only when [the animal] has one foot too few or one too many in front;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' E.g., if in the one case it has three fore-feet as well as its two hind-feet, and in the other, it has the two hind-feet and one fore-foot. The reason is that trefah does not apply to the fore-foot.');"><sup>18</sup></span> but if behind, it is also trefah,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As well as being a blemish.');"><sup>19</sup></span>
יג אמר רב פפא לא תימא דעגילן ולא סדיקן אלא כיון דעגילן אע"ג דסדיקן:
13 for 'every addition is considered equal to the entire absence [of the respective limb]'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And the law is that if the part from the knee upwards is cut then the animal is trefah.');"><sup>20</sup></span> OR WHOSE FEET ARE CLOSED LIKE THAT OF AN ASS.
יד והשחול והכסול וכו': ת"ר איזהו כסול ואיזהו שחול שחול שנשמטה יריכו כסול שרגלו אחד בתוך הכסל ורגלו אחד ע"ג הכסל תנא השרוע והקלוט שרוע שנשתרבב לו יריכו קלוט שרגליו קלוטות כשל חמור וכשל סוס:
14 Said R'Papa: You should not say that they are round as well as not cloven,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., that in every respect it must resemble an ass in order to constitute a blemish.');"><sup>21</sup></span> but even if their feet are only round [like that of an ass] although they are no cloven, [it is a blemish].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For the hoofs of a clean animal are not round.');"><sup>22</sup></span> A SHAHUL OR A KASUL etc. Our Rabbis taught: What is meant by kasul and what is meant by shahul? Shahul means [an animal] whose hip became dislocated [without the severing of the sinews]. Kasul means [an animal] one of whose legs is fixed in the loin<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Normally the leg of an animal is attached to the fat-tail in proximity of the loin but not over it.');"><sup>23</sup></span> and the other over the loin. A Tanna taught: What is meant by a sarua' or a kalut?
טו <big><strong>מתני׳</strong></big> נשבר עצם ידו ועצם רגלו אע"פ שאינו ניכר מומין אלו מנה אילא ביבנה והודו לו חכמים
15 Sarua' means [an animal] one of whose legs is longer than the other, kalut means one whose feet are uncloven like that of an ass or a horse. <big><b>MISHNAH: </b></big>IF THE BONE OF THE FORE-FOOT [OF A FIRSTLING] OR OF ITS HIND-FOOT IS BROKEN, EVEN THOUGH IT IS NOT NOTICEABLE,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This is explained in the Gemara below.');"><sup>24</sup></span>
טז ועוד ג' הוסיף אמרו לו לא שמענו את אלו שגלגל עינו עגול כשל אדם ופיו דומה כשל חזיר ושניטל רוב המדבר בלשונו ב"ד של אחריהן אמרו ה"ז מום:
16 [THIS IS A BLEMISH]. THESE BLEMISHES ILA<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A medical expert v. supra 29a.');"><sup>25</sup></span> ENUMERATED IN JABNEH AND THE SAGES AGREED WITH HIM. HE ALSO ADDED ANOTHER THREE CASES [OF BLEMISHES]. THEY THEREUPON SAID TO HIM: WE HAVE ONLY HEARD THESE [ALREADY MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY].
יז <big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> אינו ניכר מי קא הוי מומא אמר רב פפא אינו ניכר מחמת עצמו אבל ניכר מחמת מלאכה:
17 ONE WHICH HAS ITS EYEBALL ROUND LIKE THAT OF A MAN OR A MOUTH LIKE THAT OF A SWINE OR ONE WHICH HAS LOST THE GREATER PART OF THE ANTERIOR OF THE TONGUE, [THESE ARE THE ADDITIONAL BLEMISHES]. A SUBSEQUENT BETH DIN RULED HOWEVER:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Contrary to the Sages above who oppose the additional cases of blemishes mentioned by Ila.');"><sup>26</sup></span> EACH OF THESE CASES IS A [DISQUALIFYING] BLEMISH.
יח מומין אלו מנה וכו': למימרא דלאו היינו אורחיה ורמינהו המפלת מין בהמה וחיה ועוף בין טמאין בין טהורין אם זכר תשב לזכר
18 <big><b>GEMARA: </b></big>You say EVEN THOUGH IT WAS NOT NOTICEABLE. But is it then a blemish? - Said R'Papa: [The break] is not noticeable in itself but it is noticeable owing to the animal's inability to carry out normal functions.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of walking naturally, as at present it limps.');"><sup>27</sup></span> THESE BLEMISHES ILA RECORDED etc. Does this mean to say that this is not a usual thing?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That the eyeball should be round?');"><sup>28</sup></span> The following was cited in contradiction.
יט אם נקבה תשב לנקבה אינו ידוע תשב לזכר ולנקבה דברי ר"מ
19 If a woman gives birth to a kind of animal, beast or bird, whether clean or unclean, if it is a male she must observe the regulations relating to the birth of a male,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., seven days of impurity and then the continuation for thirty-three days in blood of purification. Lit., 'she sits'.');"><sup>29</sup></span>
כ ואמר רבה בר בר חנה א"ר יוחנן מ"ט דר"מ הואיל וגלגל עינו עגול כשל אדם אמר רב יוסף ל"ק הא באוכמא הא בחיוורא:
20 and if it is a female she must observe the regulations relating to the birth of a female.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., fourteen impure days and then continue with sixty-six days of the blood of purification.');"><sup>30</sup></span> If [the sex], however, is not known, then she must keep the regulations relating both to a male and a female.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The stricter rules of both sexes i.e., fourteen impure days and only thirty-three pure days.');"><sup>31</sup></span> These are the words of R'Meir. And Rabbah B'Bar Hana reported in the name of R'Johanan: What is the reason of R'Meir?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who maintains that if a woman gives birth to a species of animal etc. it is considered as a genuine offspring.');"><sup>32</sup></span>
כא ופיו דומה כשל חזיר: אמר רב פפא לא תימא דשפיד ופרוס אלא כיון דפרוס אף על גב דלא שפיד:
21 Since its eyeball is round like that of a man.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' We therefore see that a round eyeball is not an abnormal feature.');"><sup>33</sup></span> - Said R'Joseph: This offers no difficulty. In one case the shape of the black of the eye is meant,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which is a usual thing. thrhm trvhm');"><sup>34</sup></span>
כב ושניטל רוב המדבר שבלשונו: מתני' מני רבי יהודה היא דתניא ואת שניטל רוב הלשון רבי יהודה אומר רוב המדבר של לשונו:
22 and in the other the slit<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It is unusual for this to be round. The reading of the text is , according to Rashi and R. Gershom. R. Hananel has , referring to truuhj the red parts surrounding the black of the eye. Cur. edd. , 'the white part'.');"><sup>35</sup></span> [in which the eye is seated is meant]. OR HAS A MOUTH LIKE THAT OF A SWINE. Said R'Papa: You should not say<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That we compare it with the swine in all particulars in order to constitute a blemish. shpas xurpu');"><sup>36</sup></span> that the mouth must be pointed besides the lip being parted, but if [the lip] is parted, even though the mouth is not pointed.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It is a blemish. Another interpretation of given by Rashi is: The mouth is round besides the upper lip and upper jaws overlapping the lower jaws.');"><sup>37</sup></span> OR ONE WHICH HAD THE GREATER PART OF THE ANTERIOR OF THE TONGUE REMOVED.
כג <big><strong>מתני׳</strong></big> ומעשה שהלחי התחתון עודף על העליון ושאל ר"ג לחכמים ואמרו הרי זה מום:
23 Whose opinion does this represent? - It is that of R'Judah. For it has been taught: And one which has the greater part of the tongue removed; R'Judah, however, says: The greater part of the anterior of the tongue.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And since the Mishnah speaks of the anterior part of the tongue, must represent the view of R. Judah and not that of the first Tanna quoted.');"><sup>38</sup></span>
כד <big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> מאי תנא דקתני ומעשה משום דתנן פיו דומה לחזיר ופליגי רבנן עליה דרבי וקאמרינן כי פליגי רבנן עליה דרבי בשפתו עליונה עודפת על התחתונה אבל שהתחתונה עודפת על העליונה הרי זה מום
24 <big><b>MISHNAH: </b></big>AND IT HAPPENED THAT THE LOWER JAW [OF A FIRSTLING] WAS LARGER THAN THE UPPER JAW. R'SIMEON B. GAMALIEL ASKED THE SAGES [FOR A RULING] AND THEY SAID: THIS IS A BLEMISH. <big><b>GEMARA: </b></big>What has he taught that he cites an incident?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Similar to that quoted in the Mishnah and on a similar subject.');"><sup>39</sup></span> - Since we have learnt [in the previous] Mishnah: Or its mouth was like that of a swine, and the Rabbis differ from R'[Ila].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' When they declare above: We have only heard these already mentioned etc.');"><sup>40</sup></span> And it is with reference to this that we are now told that the Rabbis differ from R'[Ila] only where the upper lip is larger than the lower one, but where the lower lip is larger than the upper one, [they agree that] this is a [disqualifying] blemish.
Previous ChapterNext Chapter