Bekhorot 87

Chapter 87

א אע"פ שאינו כוחל שתי עיניו כאחת:
1 for although he cannot paint both his eyes with one movement,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' There is no need for the nose to be so deeply sunk in order to make him unfit for the priesthood.');"><sup>1</sup></span>
ב שתי עיניו למטה: מה שתי עיניו למעלה שתי עיניו למטה אילימא שתי עיניו למעלה דחזי למעלה שתי עיניו למטה דחזי למטה עינו אחת למעלה ועינו אחת למטה דחזאי עינו אחת למטה ועינו אחת למעלה היינו רואה את החדר ואת העלייה כאחת
2 he is still a harum. ONE WHOSE TWO EYES ARE ABOVE OR WHOSE TWO EYES ARE BELOW. What [does the Mishnah mean by the expression] BOTH EYES ABOVE AND BOTH EYES BELOW?
ג אלא שתי עיניו למעלה דקיימן למעלה שתי עיניו למטה דקיימן למטה עינו אחת למעלה ועינו אחת למטה דקיימי עינו אחת למעלה ועינו אחת למטה וקיימי כסדרן נמי ורואה את החדר ואת העלייה כאחת
3 Shall I say BOTH EYES ABOVE mean that they [continuously] see above, the expression BOTH EYES BELOW, that they see below; and ONE EYE ABOVE AND ONE EYE BELOW [means] that one eye sees below and the other above?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' But in each of these instances the eyes are in their normal and usual places.');"><sup>2</sup></span> Then the latter case would be identical with the case ONE WHO TAKES IN THE ROOM AND THE CEILING IN ONE GLANCE [mentioned later in the Mishnah]? - Rather this is the explanation: The expression BOTH EYES ABOVE means that they stand above,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the top of the forehead which is an actual change of position.');"><sup>3</sup></span> [the expression] BOTH EYES BELOW means that they stand below, [the expression] ONE EYE ABOVE AND ONE EYE BELOW means that one eye stands above and one eye below.
ד מנא הני מילי דת"ר (ויקרא כא, כ) בעינו כל מה שבעינו מכאן אמרו שתי עיניו למטה שתי עיניו למעלה עינו אחת למעלה ועינו אחת למטה ורואה את החדר ואת העלייה כאחת או שמדבר עם חבירו ואחר אומר לי רואה
4 And even where the eyes are in their normal places, there is a case of unfitness where ONE TAKES IN THE ROOM AND THE CEILING IN ONE GLANCE. Whence do we prove this? - Our Rabbis taught. Scripture says: 'In his eye',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXI, 20. Scripture could have said dak (a cataract) , teballul a blending of the black and white of the eye alone and I would have known that the eye is meant, for these blemishes only concern the eye. The text therefore 'In his eye' is superfluous, unless for the purpose of deriving other cases therefrom.');"><sup>4</sup></span> every [defect] in connection with the eye.
ה תנו רבנן (ויקרא כא, יח) עור בין סומא בשתי עיניו בין סומא באחת מעיניו חורוור והמים הקבועין מנין ת"ל איש עור
5 Hence [the Sages] say: One who has both eyes below or both eyes above or one eye above and one eye below or one who takes in the room and the ceiling in one glance or one who speaks with his friend, and another says, 'He is looking at me' - [all these defects render a priest unfit for the priesthood]. Our Rabbis taught. The text: 'Blind'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXI, 18. The word 'Blind' implies the actual removal of an eye.');"><sup>5</sup></span> means blind in both eyes or In one eye.
ו אמר רבא למה לי דכתב רחמנא איש עור דק תבלול בעינו צריכי דאי כתב רחמנא עור משום דליתנהו כלל אבל חורוור והמים הקבועין דאיתנהו ביה לא כתב רחמנא איש
6 Whence do we derive the case of white spots [on the cornea] and eyes dripping with water, [both defects being] of a permanent character? There is a scriptural text: '[A blind] man.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And we infer this from the additional word 'Man'.');"><sup>6</sup></span> Said Raba: What need is there for the Divine Law to write: 'blind man', 'dak', 'tebullal in his eye'?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. p. 294, n. 5. Could we not have inferred one or two of these blemishes from the other?');"><sup>7</sup></span> - It is necessary [to state all these cases].
ז ואי כתב רחמנא איש משום דלא קא חזי כלל אבל מחסורייתא לא כתב רחמנא דק ואי כתב רחמנא דק משום דמחסרן אבל מבלבליתא לא כתב רחמנא תבלול
7 For if the Divine Law had only said 'Blind', we might have thought that the reason was because the eyes were not there,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As the word 'Blind' implies that the eyes have been removed.');"><sup>8</sup></span> but in the cases of white spots on the cornea and of dripping eyes, [both defects being] of a permanent character where the eyes are there, this is not so. Therefore Scripture says '[Blind] man'. And if the Divine Law had said 'Man' we might have thought that the reason was because the eyes cannot see at all [although they are there], but where however there was only defective vision,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' But that there is a certain amount of vision left.');"><sup>9</sup></span>
ח ואי כתב רחמנא תבלול משום דמבלבלן אבל משום משניותא לא כתב רחמנא בעינו
8 it is not so. Therefore the Divine Law says 'Dak.'
ט אמר רבא הלכך כל מחמת כהיותא אתיא מאיש מחסורייתא מדק מבלבליתא מתבלול משניותא מבעינו:
9 And if the Divine Law had said [only] Dak, we might have thought that the reason was because there was defective vision, but where there was confusion [of the colours in the eye]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Where the white of an eye invades the black and vice versa, the vision of the eye, however, not being decreased thereby.');"><sup>10</sup></span> it is not so, therefore the Divin Law says 'tebullal'.
י סכי שמש: תני רב יוסף סני שמש זגדיין מחוי רב הונא חד מדידן וחד מדידהו ואיקפד רב יהודה
10 And if the Divine Law had only said teballul, we might have thought that the reason was because of the confusion [of the colours in the eye], but where It was a case of a different location [of the eyes],<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As, for example, where both eyes are in the forehead or below the normal places etc.');"><sup>11</sup></span> it is not so. Therefore the Divine Law says: 'In his eye'. Said Raba: Consequently, every case of blindness<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Not being able to see at all, like the cases of white spots on the cornea and dripping eyes. hfx hbx');"><sup>12</sup></span> we derive from the text 'Man'. Every case of defective vision, we derive from the text 'dak'.
יא מיתיבי שכבנא שגביניו שוכבים זגדום אחד שחור ואחד לבן תנא כל זוגא דלא שוי להדדי זגדום קרי ליה
11 Every case of confusion [of colours in the eye] we derive from the text 'te ballul', and every case of a different location [in the two eyes] we derive from the text 'In his eye'. ONE WHO COVERS [HIS EYES] FROM THE SUN. R'Joseph taught: One who hates<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Changing the word into which means hating.');"><sup>13</sup></span>
יב הצירן עיניו תרוטות וצירניות דומעות דולפות טורדות
12 the sun [a blinkard]. ZAGDAN.
יג תנא הזדיר והלופין והתמיר זויר דמזור עיניה לופין דנפישין זיפיה תמיר שתמו זיפין והני גבי מומין תנו להו והתנן שנשרו ריסי עיניו פסול מפני מראית העין לא קשיא הא דאשתיור גרדומי הא דלא אישתיור גרדומי:
13 R'Huna showed by gestures, one eye like ours<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A normal one.');"><sup>14</sup></span> and the other, like theirs.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Those sitting opposite me among whom was Rab Judah whose eyes were abnormal. Tosaf. adds that Rab Judah's eyes were abnormal in this respect, that one eye was unduly large.');"><sup>15</sup></span> Rab Judah was annoyed. An objection was raised: Shakbonah is one whose eyebrows overshadow<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'lie'. Heb. 'shokbim'.');"><sup>16</sup></span> [his eyes]. Zagdan is one who has one black and one white [eyebrow]. A Tanna taught: Any pair [of eyes] which is not properly matched<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Whether in colour or size. rhm');"><sup>17</sup></span>
יד <big><strong>מתני׳</strong></big> עיניו גדולות כשל עגל או קטנות כשל אווז גופו גדול מאבריו או קטן מאבריו חוטמו גדול מאבריו או קטן מאיבריו הצומם והצומע איזהו צומע כל שאזניו קטנות והצומם כל שאזניו דומות לספוג שפתו העליונה עודפת על התחתונה התחתונה עודפת על העליונה הרי זה מום ושנשרו שיניו פסול מפני מראית העין:
14 is called zagdan. ZIRAN. It has been taught: One whose eyes are bleared<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Discharging briny liquid () . Rashi says: Round or pivot shaped. ,usruy');"><sup>18</sup></span> and granulated; weeping, dripping and running.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' 'Running' is more than 'dripping' and the latter is more than weeping'. Aruch has for restless, constantly twinkling. Another opinion is, shutting with great trouble.');"><sup>19</sup></span> A Tanna taught: Zewir, lufyon, and tamir are blemishes. Zewir is one whose eyes are unsteady [mezawar].
טו <big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> אמר רב משה רבינו עשר אמות היה שנאמר (שמות מ, יט) ויפרש את האהל על המשכן מי פרשו משה רבינו פרשו וכתיב (שמות כו, טז) עשר אמות אורך הקרש
15 Lufyon is one having thick and connected eyebrows, and tamir is one whose eyebrows are gone. And is the latter defect reckoned among disqualifying blemishes? Have we not learnt: ONE WHOSE EYELIDS ARE HAIRLESS IS UNFIT [FOR THE PRIESTHOOD] 'FOR APPEARANCE SAKE? '<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' We therefore see that it is not an actual blemish.');"><sup>20</sup></span> - This offers no difficulty. In the one case,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Mishnah which says that he is unfit merely for appearance sake.');"><sup>21</sup></span>
טז אמר ליה רב שימי בר חייא לרב אם כן עשיתו למשה רבינו בעל מום דתנן גופו גדול מאבריו או קטן מאבריו אמר ליה שימי באמה של קרש קאמר:
16 the root remains, in the other,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Tanna who states that it is a real blemish. R. Gershom interprets this passage as follows: The authority in the Baraitha refers to a case where the root of the eyebrow and eyelid remains and even so he is unfit for the priesthood, whereas the Mishnah refers to where nothing remains of the root, and therefore the unfitness is only 'for appearance sake'.');"><sup>22</sup></span> it does not remain. <big><b>MISHNAH: </b></big>ONE WHOSE EYES ARE AS LARGE AS A CALF'S OR AS SMALL AS THOSE OF A GOOSE; OR WHOSE BODY IS [UNDULY] LARGE FOR HIS LIMBS;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., his legs, hands and shoulders.');"><sup>23</sup></span> [UNDULY] SMALL FOR HIS LIMBS; OR WHOSE NOSE IS [UNDULY] LARGE FOR HIS LIMBS; OR WHOSE NOSE IS [UNDULY] SMALL FOR HIS LIMBS; ZOMEM AND ZOMEA'. WHAT IS ZOMEA'?
יז חוטמו גדול כו': תנא כאצבע קטנה:
17 ONE WHOSE AURICLES ARE VERY SMALL. WHAT IS ZOMEM? ONE WHOSE AURICLES RESEMBLE A SPONGE.
יח הצימם והצימע: תנא אף הצימח לא הוו ידעי רבנן מאי צימח שמעו לההוא טייעא דהוה קאמר מאן דבעי צימח ואישתכח גדיא חזיזא
18 IF THE UPPER LIP OVERLAPS THE LOWER OR THE LOWER LIP OVERLAPS THE UPPER, THIS IS A BLEMISH. ONE WHOSE TEETH HAVE FALLEN OUT IS UNFIT [FOR THE PRIESTHOOD] FOR APPEARANCE SAKE. <big><b>GEMARA: </b></big>Said Rab: Moses our teacher was ten cubits in height,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It is assumed, a cubit being the measurement of the fore-arm, that the standard of measurement was Moses' fore-arm.');"><sup>24</sup></span> for it is said: And he spread abroad the tent over the tabernacle.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ex. XL, 19.');"><sup>25</sup></span> Now who spread it?
יט אמר רב חסדא עז שאין לה קרנים ורחל שיש לה קרנים כשרים לגבי מזבח
19 Moses our teacher; and Scripture says: Ten cubits shall be the length of the board.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ex. XXVI, 16.');"><sup>26</sup></span> Said R'Shimi B'Hiyya to Rab: If so, you have made out that Moses was a blemished person,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For then his body would be out of all proportion to his arms ten to one, whereas the proportion of the average person's body to his arm is only three to one.');"><sup>27</sup></span>
כ תניא נמי הכי יש דברים שהן כמומין ואינן כמומין ושוחטין עליהם במקדש אבל לא במדינה ואלו הן עז שאין לו קרנים ורחל שיש לו קרנים והצימח והצימם והצומע
20 for we have learnt: ONE WHOSE BODY IS UNDULY LARGE FOR HIS LIMBS OR UNDULY SMALL FOR HIS LIMBS. - He replied to him: 'Are you the Shimi [famed for your wisdom]. I refer to the cubit of the tabernacle.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [I.e., the ordinary cubit measure used in the Tabernacle. The ten cubits of Moses were with reference not to his own fore-arm, but somewhat to that of an ordinary person (the cubit used in the Tabernacle being slightly longer than an ordinary cubit, v. supra 40a) . The reading is that of Sh. Mek. and R. Gershom. Cur. edd.; he refers to the cubit (for the measurement) of the board. The meaning is however the same].');"><sup>28</sup></span>
כא אמר רב חסדא אמר אמימר נטלו קרנותן וזכרותן עמהן פסולה ואין פודין עליהם נטלו טלפיים וזכרותם עמהן פסולין ונפדין עליהם
21 ONE WHOSE NOSE WAS UNDULY LARGE etc. A Tanna taught: As [the width of] a small finger.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And if it is smaller or larger than this measurement, then he is rendered unfit as a priest, supposing he is of average height. tghhy');"><sup>29</sup></span> ZOMEM AND ZOMEA'. A Tanna taught: [In addition to the blemishes mentioned] zimmeah is also a blemish.
כב מיתיבי נטלו קרניין וטלפיין וזכרותן עמהן פסולין ונפדין עליהן לא קשיא הא דאיתעקור איתעקורי הא דאיגום איגומי
22 The Rabbis did not know what zimmeah was. They heard an Arab trader<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Heb. which usually means a caravan merchant.');"><sup>30</sup></span> call out: Who wants a zimmeah?
כג ודאיגום איגומי פסול ורמינהו פרה שקרניה וטלפיה שחורים יגוד תרגמה זעירי מעילוי זכרות:
23 And it was found to be a shaggy goat.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' With long lumps of hair and long depending ears.');"><sup>31</sup></span> Said R'Hisda: A goat which has no horns and a ewe which has horns are fit for the altar. So indeed it has been taught: There are some defects [in a firstling] which appear like blemishes but are not actually blemishes and in consequence of which we slaughter the animal in the Temple<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Because they are not regarded as disqualifying blemishes.');"><sup>32</sup></span> but not without the Temple. And they are the following: A goat which has no horns and an ewe which has horns, a zimmeah, a zummum and a zomea'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' These three terms have been explained above in the GEMARA:');"><sup>33</sup></span> R'Hisda reported in the name of Abimi: If its horns together with the bony inside [of the horns] have been removed, the animal is unfit for the altar, but may not be redeemed by reason of it.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If it is a consecrated animal and not a first-born. It is not redeemed because it is considered a blemish only with regard to disqualifying for the altar.');"><sup>34</sup></span> If its hoofs together with the bony inside [of the hoofs] have been removed, the animal is unfit, and may be redeemed by reason of it. An objection was raised: If the horns and hoofs together with their bony insides were removed, the animal is unfit, and may be redeemed by reason of it!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This Baraitha therefore contradicts Rab Hisda's ruling.');"><sup>35</sup></span> - This presents no difficulty. In the one case<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Baraitha just quoted.');"><sup>36</sup></span> [the horns] were uprooted,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And a depression is visible on the top.');"><sup>37</sup></span> and in the other<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The case referred to by Rab Hisda.');"><sup>38</sup></span> [the horns] were levelled.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' But the stump remained.');"><sup>39</sup></span> But if the horns were only levelled, is it even unfit [for the altar]? The following was cited in contradiction: If a [red] heifer has horns and hoofs whic are black, let him lop off [the black top of the horns and hoofs]. - Explain this as follows: [The lopping off] is from the top part of their bony inside.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' There is at the point of the horn, on the top, a piece of two or three finger-breadths to which the bony inside does not extend; if then the black did not reach the bony inside, he may lop it off, and this does not make the animal blemished.');"><sup>40</sup></span> [