כא וחכ"א יקיז ובלבד שלא יטיל בו מום התם מתוך שאדם בהול
21 Now what cord is meant: Shall we say an ordinary [bucket] cord: [how does it state] R'Judah permits it', - surely it is a permanent knot, for he will certainly come to abandon it?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., leave it there as a thing having no other purpose than this.');"><sup>30</sup></span> Hence it is obvious that a weaver's [rope<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which is not usually used for drawing water, and will not consequently be left there.');"><sup>31</sup></span> is meant]. and [yet] the Rabbis preventively forbid a weaver's cord on account of an ordinary cord? - Even so: one rope may be mistaken for another, [whereas] looping cannot be mistaken for knotting. But, wherever one [normally] holds aloof from it, does not R'Judah preventively forbid? Surely we learned: If a firstling is attacked with congestion, even if it should die [otherwise]. we must not bleed it: th is R'Judah's view;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' One must not inflict a permanent blemish on a firstling. R. Judah rules that the animal must not be bled even without inflicting a permanent blemish upon it, lest one come to do so even by making a permanent blemish. Thus R. Judah forbids preventively, though people do hold aloof from sacred animals, to which category a firstling belongs.');"><sup>32</sup></span> but the Sages rule: He may bleed [it], providing that he does not inflict a [permanent] blemish upon it? - There, because one is excited