039b - על אלו מומין פרק ששי בכורות דף לט, ע"ב

But did not Rabbi Zeira say in the name of Rav: One who slits the ear of the bull and afterwards receives its blood – it is invalid,^[1]

הצורם אזן הפר - [the bull of] the anointed kohen,^[2] [slit] after the shechitah.

as it is said (Vayikra 16): “And he shall take of the blood of the bull” – the bull as it already was?

שהיה כבר - at the time the blood was received it was whole.

Rather: here, where it became lacking before the receiving [of the blood]; there, where it became lacking after the receiving.^[3]

But after the receiving and before the sprinkling – is it permitted?

But it was taught in a beraisa: (Shemos 12) “An unblemished lamb, a male in its first year, shall it be for you” – that it be unblemished and in its first year at the time of the shechitah.^[4]

And from where [do we learn the same] for the receiving, the carrying and the sprinkling? The verse says “shall it be” – that all its stages be unblemished and in its first year.

He explained it as referring to “in its first year” [alone].

תרגמא אבן שנה - what it teaches, “that all its stages,” refers to “in its first year”; but unblemished we require only at the shechitah and the receiving.

So too it stands to reason,

ה"נ מסתברא - that [an animal] lacking after the receiving is valid.

as it was taught in a beraisa: Rabbi Yehoshua says: All the offerings in the Torah from which there remained an olive’s bulk of flesh or an olive’s bulk of fat^[5]

כזית בשר - for there is enough for a person’s eating.

או כזית חלב - for there is enough for the Altar’s “eating.”

– he sprinkles the blood.

זורק את הדם - but if nothing at all remained, he does not sprinkle, as it is written (Devarim 12) “And you shall offer your olos, the flesh and the blood” – if there is no flesh, there is no blood. And it teaches in any case that if an olive’s bulk remained, he sprinkles; and there is no greater lack than this, where all of it is lacking, yet it teaches that he sprinkles. Evidently, what it teaches, “all its stages,” refers to “in its first year.”

Learn from it.

But is there anything that at the time of the shechitah is in its first year, and at the time of the receiving and carrying is in its second year?

Rava said: This tells us that hours disqualify in sacrifices.^[6]

שעות פוסלות - and he comes to teach us that if this lamb was born last year on the fourteenth of Nissan at the eighth hour of the day, he must take care now to slaughter it before the ninth hour, for the ninth hour disqualifies it, and it is as though it has entered its second year.

Shall we say it is [a dispute] of Tannaim?

לימא - this question of Rav Achdevoi^[7] is [a dispute of] Tannaim.

(Vayikra 22) “And [that whose stones are] bruised, or crushed, or torn, or cut” – all of them are in the testicles; these are the words of Rabbi Yehuda.^[8]

In the testicles and not in the organ?!

בביצים ולא בגיד - in wonder. That is: if they are in the organ, is it not a blemish? Certainly it is more of a blemish, for the organ is more exposed than the testicles.

Say: also in the testicles – these are the words of Rabbi Yehuda.

Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov says: All of them are in the organ.

כולן בגיד - not in the testicles.

Rabbi Yosi says: Bruised and crushed – also in the testicles;

כתות - he crushed them with stones until they were mashed.

torn and cut – in the organ, yes; in the testicles, no.

נתוק - [torn off] completely by hand, but they still hang in the pouch.

כרות - with a knife, and they still hang in the pouch and are slightly attached; for cut is less than torn, as we said in the previous chapter (Bechoros 33b): “to include one who tears after one who cut.” The reason of Rabbi Yosi is explained below.

Is it not that they disagree about this: that one Master holds that an internal lack is called a lack, and one Master holds that it is not called a lack?

Rabbi Yehuda holds that an internal lack is called a lack.

But can you understand it so? What does Rabbi Yosi hold?

If he holds that an internal lack is called a lack – then even torn and cut too!

And if he holds that it is not called a lack – then even bruised and crushed should not [count] either!

Rather, here they disagree about visible blemishes.^[9]

אלא הכא במומין שבגלוי פליגי - for everyone agrees that an internal lack is called a lack; the one who disqualifies in the testicles does so not because of a lack, but because of a blemish.

Rabbi Yehuda holds: bruised and crushed is a blemish – for they shrink; torn and cut is a blemish – for they hang down.

דקתליין - they dangle and knock about in the pouch, and appear from outside as not attached above.

Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov holds: bruised and crushed is not a blemish – for originally too they sometimes shrink;

זימנין דכווצן - in Old French רטייר"ט (they draw back), even when they are healthy.

torn and cut is not a blemish – for originally too they sometimes hang down.

And Rabbi Yosi holds: bruised and crushed is a blemish – for they are no longer there;

דהא ליתנהו - and it is a lack.

torn and cut is not a blemish – for they are still there.

MISHNAH

[These are blemishes:] if the zoven was damaged, [or] the genitals of a female among consecrated animals; if the tail was damaged at the bone, but not at the joint; or if the tip of the tail is split [at the bone]; or if there is a finger’s breadth of flesh between one vertebra and the next.^[10]

מתני' הזובן - this is the sheath in which the pouch is hidden.

והעריה של נקבה במוקדשין - in other offerings that may be female; for with a bechor there is no female, but with shelamim, which may be female, if the genitals were damaged it is a blemish.

מן הפרק - if it was damaged between the joints it heals – [that is,] if the whole tail was not cut off but only damaged a little.

או שראש הזנב מפציל את העצם - the tip that hangs down: the skin and flesh were peeled off and the bone remained exposed; it no longer heals, since it is at the tip of the tail. מפצל is as in “which he had peeled” (Bereishis 30).

GEMARA

Rabbi Elazar said: Damaged, but not removed; the pouch, but not the male organ.

גמ' נפגם - [if] the zoven [was damaged], it is a blemish; it does not heal again.

ולא ניטל - for if it was removed it is not a blemish, for it returns to its full strength.

כיס - if it was damaged it is a blemish; but the male organ, the member itself, that was damaged is not a blemish, for it heals.

It was also taught so in a beraisa: Damaged, but not removed; the pouch, but not the male organ.

Rabbi Yosi ben HaMeshulam said: It once happened with a certain [animal] in Inbal that a wolf took it off, and it returned to its full strength.

שנטל זאב - the whole zoven.

“If the tail was damaged at the bone,” etc.^[11]

A Tanna taught: The finger of which they spoke is one of the four in the handbreadth of any person.^[12]

אצבע שאמרו וכו' - and we do not know now where it stands; therefore he asks for what halachah they said it.

אחד מארבעה בטפח - because the fingers are not equal, as we say in Menachos, in Perek HaTecheiles (Menachos 41b): a Torah handbreadth is four fingers by the thumb, six by the little finger, five (and a third by the index finger). And it says here that wherever the Sages mentioned a finger, we require one of the four in the handbreadth of any person, and that is the thumb.

For what halachah [was this said]?

למאי הלכתא - [for what halachah] did they mention a finger?

Rabbah said: With regard to techeiles,^[13]

as it was taught in a beraisa: How many strings does one put in? Beis Shammai say: Four; and Beis Hillel say: Three.

כמה חוטין - [the “how many strings”] that they mentioned with regard to tzitzis.

And how much should hang down (meshuleshes)? Beis Shammai say: Four [fingers]; and Beis Hillel say: Three.

משולשת - hanging below the edge of the garment; for one does not put it at the very edge of the garment, but raises it three fingers into the garment.

And the three that Beis Hillel speak of – [each] is one of the four in the handbreadth of any person.

אחת מארבעה - three thumbs, each of which is one of the four in a handbreadth. Another explanation: meshuleshes – how much of it should be gedil, apart from the anaf, which is not wound.^[14]

Rav Huna the son of Rav Yehoshua said: For the two cubits,^[15]

as we learned in a Mishnah: There were two cubits …

שתי אמות - two rods, each a cubit long.

Tosfos

והאמר רבי זירא אמר רב הצורם - In the second chapter of Zevachim (Zevachim 25b) the reading is “as it was taught in a beraisa: One who slits …”

כולן בגיד ולא בביצים - However, the end of the verse, “and in your land you shall not do [so],”^[16] speaks even of the testicles, in any way that [the animal] is sterilized; for even [sterilizing] by means of a potion we forbid, in Perek Shemonah Sheratzim (Shabbos 110b). And it is only with regard to a blemish that it does not count, [because it is not] a visible blemish, as the reason is explained shortly.

או שראש הזנב מפצל את העצם - Rashi explained that the skin and the flesh were peeled off and the bone remained exposed, as in “which he had peeled.” But this is difficult, for in the language of the Mishnah and the Gemara it should have said “and it was peeled.” It seems right to explain that it splits the bone in two, like the “split” [horns] said of horns in Chulin (Chulin 59b), which are split this way and that. And in the Tosefta (chapter 4) it teaches: or if the tip of the tail is split into two bones.

כמה חוטין הוא נותן ב"ש אומרים ארבעה - One must examine whether [Beis Shammai’s] four is for all together, or four for the white and four for the techeiles; and also whether it speaks of before the doubling,^[17] for when they are folded they become sixteen. And then these eight strings that we make would all be for the white. Explanation: for we rule like Beis Shammai, in Perek HaTecheiles (Menachos 41b), and if one of them is torn, it is invalid; and although we hold valid [the case] where the techeiles was cut down to a stump and [the strings] stand on the white, [that is] because all of these are for the white. And so it is implied in the Sifri on Parshas Ki Seitzei, that four strings for each kind is meant, for it teaches there: Of how many [strings] are the gedilim made? Not fewer than three strings, as the words of Beis Hillel; Beis Shammai say: four strings of techeiles and four of white, over four fingers; and the halachah is as the words of Beis Shammai. However, from what is said in HaTecheiles – Rav Yirmiyah of Difti put eight, which are sixteen; Mar the son of Ravina made it like ours – it is implied that most do as Mar the son of Ravina. Perhaps he explained the four for the white and four for the techeiles that Beis Shammai say as after they are folded, that is, two of each kind before they are doubled. According to this, what we do now is half for the white and half for the techeiles. However, the three that Beis Hillel say must perforce be before they are doubled, for three cannot be found after doubling; and then it is not parallel to Beis Shammai’s four.

כמה - Rashi explained: hanging below the edge of the garment, for one does not put it at the very edge of the garment but raises it three fingers for Beis Hillel and four for Beis Shammai. But this is difficult for his explanation, for regarding [the distance] from the corner we resolve [that it is] the full length of a thumb-joint, and “within three fingers” is mentioned there only to exclude above three. It seems right [to explain] like the other explanation Rashi gave: how much should be meshuleshes – how much of it should be gedil, apart from the anaf, which is not wound; and Beis Shammai say four fingers. And now, since the beauty of tzitzis is one-third gedil and two-thirds anaf, the gedil is four fingers and the anaf eight, twelve fingers in all; and so it is implied [by] “and four of white over four fingers.” And in Perek HaTecheiles (ibid.) Rashi explained meshuleshes as hanging in the anaf, apart from the gedil, four fingers; and according to his explanation the beauty of tzitzis is two fingers of gedil and four of anaf.

Notes

1. 1. On the previous amud Rabbi Yochanan reconciled two beraisos about an offering found with one kidney: one speaks of a kidney lost before the shechitah, which disqualifies, the other of one lost after it. The Gemara now objects from Rav: slitting the ear (tzoreim) makes a blemish, and done after the shechitah but before the blood is received, it still disqualifies.
2. 2. The kohen mashiach is the Kohen Gadol, anointed with the anointing oil. When he sins through an erroneous ruling, he brings a bull as a chatas, whose blood is taken into the Heichal (Vayikra 4:3–12).
3. 3. The blood service has four stages: shechitah (slaughter), kabbalah (receiving the blood in a vessel), holachah (carrying it to the Altar) and zerikah (sprinkling it on the Altar). The Gemara now puts the dividing line at kabbalah.
4. 4. The verse speaks of the korban Pesach, which must be unblemished and within its first year. The beraisa learns from “shall it be” that this must hold through every stage of the blood service, up to the sprinkling.
5. 5. Cheilev here means the fats of the offering that are burned on the Altar. An olive’s bulk is the smallest amount that counts as “eating,” whether by a person or by the Altar.
6. 6. An offering’s year is counted from the very hour of its birth, not from the day. So an animal can be in its first year at the shechitah and pass into its second year a little later, by the time the blood is received or carried.
7. 7. On the previous amud Rav Achdevoi bar Ami asked whether a chisaron mibifnim – the lack of an internal organ, not visible from outside – counts as a “lack” that disqualifies an offering.
8. 8. Vayikra 22:24 disqualifies an animal whose reproductive organs are ma’uch (bruised), kasus (crushed), nasuk (torn) or karus (cut). The Tannaim disagree whether these apply to the testicles, which lie hidden inside the pouch, or to the male organ, which is exposed.
9. 9. A mum she-bagaluy is a blemish that can be seen from outside. The Gemara now says the Tannaim do not argue about an internal lack at all; they argue whether each of these injuries makes the testicles look blemished from outside.
10. 10. This chapter, Al Eilu Mumin, lists the blemishes for which a bechor (a firstborn animal) may be slaughtered and eaten outside the Beis Hamikdash, and which disqualify any animal from being offered. This Mishnah adds blemishes of the zoven (the sheath of the pouch), of a female’s genitals, and of the tail.
11. 11. The Mishnah lists blemishes of the tail: damage at the bone itself, but not at a joint, which heals; a tail-tip whose bone is laid bare; and flesh a finger’s breadth long between two vertebrae. The Gemara now takes up the Mishnah’s measure of “a finger.”
12. 12. A tefach (handbreadth) is four fingers measured by the thumb, the widest finger. The “finger” the Sages use as a measure is therefore a thumb’s breadth, a quarter of an average person’s tefach.
13. 13. Techeiles here stands for tzitzis, the strings on the corners of a four-cornered garment, which include a thread dyed with the blue techeiles. The measures of tzitzis are given in fingers.
14. 14. Tzitzis have two parts: the gedil, the upper section wound and knotted together, and the anaf, the loose strands hanging below it. In this second explanation, meshuleshes is the length of the gedil alone.
15. 15. The Mishnah (Keilim 17:9) speaks of two cubit-measures kept in Shushan HaBirah, at the eastern gate of the Temple Mount: one longer than Moshe’s cubit by half a finger and the other by a whole finger. It continues on the next amud. Rav Huna holds that the beraisa’s “finger” was taught for these.
16. 16. The end of the verse, “and in your land you shall not do [so],” is the prohibition of sirus: destroying the reproductive power of any male, person or animal.
17. 17. Each string is passed through the hole in the garment and folded over, so four strings hang as eight ends. This folding is the “doubling.”