045b - מומין אלו פרק שביעי בכורות דף מה, ע"ב

One with extra [fingers and toes] on his hands and feet:^[1]

Rabbi Yitzchak said: Both of them expounded one verse — (Shmuel II 21) And there was war again, and it is written (Shmuel II 21) and there was a man of madon, the fingers of his hands and the toes of his feet six and six.^[2]

One Master holds that [the verse] speaks to his discredit, and the other Master holds that it speaks in his praise.^[3]

Rabbah said: Why do I need that it is written six and six, twenty-four, in number?

They are [all] needed. For had the Merciful One written [only] six and six, I would have said six on his [one] hand and six on his [one] foot; [so] it wrote twenty-four.

שית דידיה ושית דכרעיה - that he had the extra [finger] on one hand and the extra [toe] on one foot, and not on both.

And had it written [only] twenty-four, I would have said [he had] five on this side and seven on that side; [so] it wrote six and six.

In number — [it speaks of an extra finger] that is counted along the hand.^[4]

It was taught [in a beraisa]: Rabbi Yehudah said: It once happened that a man came before Rabbi Tarfon with extra [fingers and toes] on his hands and feet, six and six, twenty-four. He said to him: May the likes of you multiply in Israel.

Rabbi Yosei said to him: Is that a proof? This is what he said to him: Like you, may the mamzerim and nesinim of Israel be diminished.^[5]

כמותך יתמעטו ממזרי ונתיני מישראל - may all the mamzerim in Israel be like you, and be recognizable as coming from a disqualified seed, so that [people] will not attach themselves to them.

One who has equal control of both his hands:^[6]

The Rabbis taught: An iter, whether of the hand or of the foot, is unfit. One who has equal control of both his hands — Rebbi disqualifies, and the Chachamim declare him fit.^[7]

איטר ברגל - who, when he walks, lifts his left foot first, which is not the way people do. An iter of the hand is unfit, for it is written and he shall dip his finger, and wherever "finger" and "kohen" are stated it means only the right (Zevachim 24a). And an iter of the foot [is unfit] too, for it is written to stand to minister — like the usual way of standing, whose main [weight] is on the right.

One Master holds that weakness set in on the right, and the other Master holds that strength came to the left.^[8]

דמר סבר כחישותא אתחלא - [weakness set in] for him on the right.

MISHNAH

The kushi, the gichor, the lavkan, the kipe'ach, the dwarf, the deaf-mute, the insane, the drunk, and those with pure lesions — are unfit in a person and fit in an animal.^[9]

מתני' הכושי והגיחור והלבקן והקיפח - this is explained in the Gemara.

ובעלי נגעים טהורים - such as a sapachas. For impure lesions need not be mentioned, since even for entering the Courtyard he would be liable to kares.

Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: An insane animal is not of the choicest.

Rabbi Elazar says: Those with dildulin too are unfit in a person and fit in an animal.^[10]

התלתולין - a kind of pieces of flesh that grow out and hang from them.

GEMARA

Kushi — black; gichor — white; lavkan — red.

גמ' סומקא - ros [red] in the vernacular.

Is that so? But there was that man who said to them, "Who wants lukiani?" and they turned out to be white!^[11]

לוקייני - they were white lambs. [And] a red one people usually call gohya.

Rather: kushi — black; gichor — red, as people say, "a red gichya"; lavkan — white, like that man who said to them, "Who wants lukiani?" and they turned out to be white.

The kipe'ach:^[12]

Rav Zevid taught: Tall.

Is that so? But Rabbi Abahu taught: From where [do we know] that the Holy One, blessed be He, takes pride in people of stature? As it is said (Amos 2) Yet I destroyed the Emori before them, whose height was like the height of cedars!

Rav Pappa said: [It means] a tall one who is thin and stooped.^[13]

באריכא שמיטה סניא - that he is tall and thin, not thick in proportion to his length; and because he is thin he cannot bear his height, so he bends over and looks as if his vertebrae were out of joint.

Reish Lakish said: A tall man should not marry a tall woman, lest a toren come out of them.^[14]

A dwarf should not marry a dwarf woman, lest an etzba'i [a finger-sized one] come out of them.

A white man should not marry a white woman, lest a bohak come out of them.

בוהק - one who is extremely white.

A black man should not marry a black woman, lest a tafu'ach come out of them.

טפוח - black as a pot; and its like [is found] at the end of Maseches Shabbos (157a): and they stopped up the skylight with a tefi'ach.

The deaf-mute, the insane and the drunk:^[15]

A drunk? He profanes the service!

שיכור - [this is asked] in astonishment.

אחולי אחיל עבודה - for it is written (Vayikra 10) Do not drink wine or intoxicating drink, and after it is written to distinguish between the holy and the ordinary etc.

[Then] he should be counted with the blemishes that profane the service!

בהדי מומין גמורין בעי למיחשביה - yet [the Mishnah] teaches it alongside the blemishes that come about because [the kohen] is not equal to the seed of Aharon, which we said at the beginning of our perek do not profane the service.

[It speaks of one drunk] from other intoxicating things, and not in accordance with Rabbi Yehudah,^[16] as it was taught: If he ate pressed figs of Ke'ilah, or drank milk or honey, [and] entered the Mikdash — he is liable.

ודלא כר' יהודה - who gives other intoxicating things the law of wine, which profanes the service; for he says in Maseches Kerisos (13b): for wine — death, and for other intoxicants — a prohibition; and we derive it from intoxicating drink do not drink, and after it is written and to distinguish between the holy and the ordinary. Evidently, according to Rabbi Yehudah, other intoxicants profane the service.

דתניא אכל דבילה קעילית - which grows in that place [Ke'ilah] and intoxicates like wine.

דבש - mied in the vernacular — water and honey cooked together. "He is liable" — to lashes. We establish it as following Rabbi Yehudah in Perek Amru Lo in Kerisos (ibid.), for he says there: for other intoxicants — [there is] a prohibition of do not drink; and since other intoxicants are included, they profane the service, for it is written between the holy and the ordinary. And our Mishnah, which does not count them with those that profane the service, is not in accordance with Rabbi Yehudah.

MISHNAH

These are fit in a person and unfit in an animal: oso v'es beno, a tereifah, and one born by caesarean.^[17]

מתני' אותו ואת בנו - [the animal] is unfit as an offering, for it is lacking time.

One who married women in transgression is unfit until he forbids her by vow any benefit [from him].^[18]

והנושא נשים בעבירה - a divorcee or a chalutzah.

And one who defiles himself to the dead is unfit until he accepts upon himself that he will not defile himself to the dead.^[19]

GEMARA

And these are fit in a person:^[20] What is [meant by] oso v'es beno?

If you say Aharon and his sons — the corresponding [case] is a he-goat and its son; does [the prohibition] apply [to them]?

But it was taught: Oso v'es beno applies to females and does not apply to males!

Rather, [it means] a she-goat and her young — the corresponding [case] here is a kohenes and her son; is a kohenes fit for service?!

Actually, [it means] Aharon and his sons, and the corresponding [case] here is a he-goat and its son.

In the West they say in the name of Rabbi Yosei bar Avin: This says that [our Mishnah] is [the view of] Chananyah, as it was taught: Oso v'es beno applies to females and does not apply to males; Chananyah says: It applies to males and to females.^[21]

גמ' עדא אמרה - this says.

בזכרים - the father and the son or daughter.

And one who married women etc.:^[22]

It was taught: He vows and serves; [then] he goes down and divorces.

נודר ועובד - even though he has not yet divorced, he may serve once he has vowed that she shall have no benefit from him, and he from her.

But let us be concerned that he may go to a Sage and he will release it for him!^[23]

He holds that one must specify the vow.^[24]

צריך לפרט - one who comes to have his vow released must specify what he vowed about; and when [the Sage] hears that he vowed because she is forbidden to him, he will not release his vow.

This works well according to the one who says one must specify the vow; but according to the one who says one need not specify the vow, what is there to say?

We make him vow in public.^[25]

This works well according to the one who says a vow made in public cannot be released; but according to the one who says it can be released, what is there to say?

נדר שהודר ברבים - this is a dispute in Maseches Gittin (46a), concerning one who divorces his wife because of a vow, in [Perek] HaSholei'ach Get.

We make him vow …^[26]

ובשאר דברים המשכרים ודלא כר' יהודה - That which was taught at the end of the first perek of Zevachim (14b): A zar, an onen, a drunk and a blemished [kohen] — in receiving, carrying or sprinkling [the blood], [the service] is invalid — one must wonder why it mentioned "a drunk"; it should have said "those who drank wine" and "those with overgrown hair". The sage Rabbi Chaim Kohen, may his rest be in Eden,^[27] says that it speaks of other intoxicating things and follows Rabbi Yehudah, who holds that [being drunk from them] profanes the service — just as we establish the "drunk" here as drunk from other intoxicating things.

הניחא למ"ד צריך לפרט כו' - This is a dispute between Rav Nachman and Rav Pappa in Perek HaSholei'ach (Gittin 35b). It appears that the halachah follows Rav Pappa, that one must specify, for he is the later [authority]. And even according to the texts that read there Rav Sheshes in place of Rav Pappa, the halachah does not follow Rav Nachman, for the question was not put to him as a matter of monetary law — regarding a widow who comes to collect her kesubah — but as a matter of prohibition, as is implied there when it says: And if you say that one must specify, sometimes she will cut short her words. And Rav Huna too, who is great in wisdom and in years, holds there that one must specify.

הניחא למ"ד נדר שהודר ברבים אין לו הפרה - Rashi explained: it is a dispute in Maseches Gittin, in HaSholei'ach Get L'Ishto (46a), regarding one who divorces his wife because of a vow, where Rabbi Yehudah says: Any vow that the public knew of — he may not take her back, for there is impropriety, in that she vowed a vow that has no release; and one the public did not know of — he may take her back, for he is not concerned about the [later] harm. And if you ask: from where do we know that the Rabbis disagree with Rabbi Yehudah in this, holding that [such a vow] can be released? Perhaps they disagree only about [the concern for] harm! And in that sugya there, too, the Gemara takes it as obvious that the Rabbis hold it can be released, for the Rabbis say: Did an oath take effect on them at all? And if you say [we know it] because the Rabbis do not distinguish between where the public knew of it and where it did not — in every case he may not take her back, because we are concerned about harm — which shows that it can be released: but they do not distinguish regarding [a vow made] with the public's consent either, although one could distinguish there, since in any case it cannot be released according to all! One can explain that [a vow made] with the public's consent is not discussed at all, neither by them nor by Rabbi Yehudah, so there is no difficulty if they did not explain it, even though one could distinguish; but regarding [a vow] made in public, where Rabbi Yehudah did distinguish, if it were so that it cannot be released, the Rabbis too should have explained and distinguished, saying the reverse of Rabbi Yehudah. Furthermore, regarding [a vow made] with the public's consent one can say that it can be released with the consent of those very people on whose consent he vowed, or [when it is] for a mitzvah it can be released; therefore [the Tanna] could not state flatly, regarding [a vow made] with the public's consent, that he may take her back according to the one who is concerned about harm, for sometimes it has a release and there is harm. But [a vow made] in public cannot be released, whether for a mitzvah or for a voluntary matter — in no case can it be released. Know [that this is so], for the episode of the Givonim^[28] was for a mitzvah.

דמדרינן ליה על דעת רבים - And if you ask: at the beginning of HaSholei'ach (ibid. 35b), regarding the widow — that Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel instituted that she vow to the orphans whatever they wish etc. — Rav Huna said: They taught this only when she has not remarried; but if she has remarried, we do not make her vow, because her husband can annul it for her, even if she vowed in public. But why? Let us still make her vow with the public's consent, which cannot be released, as Ameimar says here! One can explain that regarding a man's wife's vows there is no distinction between [a vow] in public and [one] with the public's consent: since according to Rav Huna [a vow made] in public can be annulled, the same applies to [one made] with the public's consent, in the case of his wife's vows. And when [the Gemara] there asks against Rav Huna, But let us be concerned that she may go to a Sage and he will release it for her, and answers, He holds one must specify the vow, it could have answered that he makes her vow with the public's consent, but it did not need to. Furthermore, one can say that Rav Huna does not hold like Ameimar: when Ameimar said "even according to the one who says a vow made in public etc.", he was not referring to the dispute of the Amoraim Rav Huna and Rav Nachman at the beginning of HaSholei'ach (ibid.), but to the dispute of Rabbi Yehudah and the Rabbis at the end of HaSholei'ach (Gittin 46a).

Notes

1. 1. The Mishnah (Bechoros 45a) lists among a kohen's blemishes one with an extra finger or toe on his hands and feet — six and six, twenty-four in all. Rabbi Yehudah declares him fit and the Chachamim declare him unfit.
2. 2. Shmuel II 21:20 tells of a Philistine giant of Gath who fought David's men; his fingers and toes were six and six, twenty-four in number. Both Tannaim of the Mishnah draw their view from this verse.
3. 3. The one who reads the verse as telling of the giant's discredit treats extra fingers as a defect — the Chachamim, who disqualify. The one who reads it as his praise treats them as a sign of strength — Rabbi Yehudah, who declares him fit.
4. 4. That is, the extra finger stands in a row with the other fingers along the hand and is counted with them.
5. 5. A mamzer is the child of a union forbidden under penalty of kares or death, such as adultery; nesinim are descendants of the Givonim, who joined Israel in Yehoshua's time. Both may not marry into the congregation, so Rabbi Tarfon wished that they be recognizable, like this man.
6. 6. The Mishnah (Bechoros 45a) lists one who has equal control of both his hands, whose left hand is as strong as his right. Rebbi disqualifies him from the service and the Chachamim declare him fit.
7. 7. An iter is one whose left hand (or foot) is the dominant one, unlike most people. The service in the Mikdash is done with the right hand, so an iter is unfit.
8. 8. Rebbi holds that the ambidextrous man's right hand has weakened to the level of his left, which is a defect; the Chachamim hold that his left hand has gained strength to match his right, which is no defect.
9. 9. These defects of appearance (colors and body shapes, explained in the Gemara) and states such as deafness or madness bar a kohen from serving, but do not make an animal unfit as an offering. "Pure lesions" are skin marks that look like tzaraas but do not make a person tamei.
10. 10. Dildulin are pieces of flesh that hang from the body. Rashi's text reads התלתולין, with the same meaning.
11. 11. Lukiani sounds like lavkan, and the lambs sold under that name turned out to be white — which suggests that lavkan means white, not red.
12. 12. The Mishnah lists the kipe'ach as unfit in a kohen; the Gemara now asks what kind of person this is.
13. 13. Height in itself is praiseworthy, as the verse about the Emori shows. Rav Pappa explains that the kipe'ach is tall and thin, so that he stoops and looks as if his spine were out of joint.
14. 14. A toren is a ship's mast — that is, an overly tall child.
15. 15. The Mishnah lists the deaf-mute, the insane and the drunk as unfit in a kohen but fit in an animal. The Gemara's question rests on the law that a kohen who serves after drinking wine profanes his service (Vayikra 10:9), which is graver than a defect of appearance.
16. 16. Rabbi Yehudah holds that other intoxicants are like wine, so a kohen drunk from them who serves profanes the service; the Chachamim limit this to wine. The Mishnah's drunk is therefore one drunk from something other than wine, against Rabbi Yehudah.
17. 17. Oso v'es beno: the Torah forbids slaughtering an animal and its young on the same day (Vayikra 22:28), so the second may not be offered that day. A tereifah has a fatal defect; "yotzei dofen" is born by caesarean section. All these are unfit as offerings, yet a kohen in the parallel state may serve.
18. 18. A kohen married to a woman forbidden to him, such as a divorcee or a chalutzah, may not serve until he vows that she may have no benefit from him, which leads him to divorce her.
19. 19. A kohen may not become tamei through contact with the dead, except for close relatives. One who disregards this is barred from the service until he undertakes to keep the law.
20. 20. The Mishnah's list of what is fit in a person but unfit in an animal opens with oso v'es beno. In animals the prohibition concerns a mother and her young; the Gemara asks what parallel could exist among kohanim.
21. 21. Chananyah holds that oso v'es beno applies to a father and his young as well. Our Mishnah, which pairs Aharon and his sons with a he-goat and its son, follows his view.
22. 22. The Mishnah said that the kohen who married forbidden women is unfit until he vows to deny her benefit; the Gemara now asks whether the vow alone is enough to let him serve.
23. 23. A Sage can release a vow when the one who made it truly regrets it (hataras nedarim). If the kohen could undo his vow this way, the vow would not ensure the divorce.
24. 24. Whether one who asks for release must state what he vowed about is a dispute in Gittin 35b. If he must, the Sage would learn the vow's purpose and refuse to release it.
25. 25. A vow made in public is one made before many people. Whether a Sage can release such a vow is a dispute (Gittin 46a).
26. 26. The sentence continues on Bechoros 46a: ליה אדעת רבים — we make him vow with the consent of the public, a vow that cannot be released.
27. 27. Rabbi Chaim Kohen was one of the Tosafists, a student of Rabbeinu Tam. נ"ע stands for "nucho Eden", may his rest be in Eden.
28. 28. The Givonim tricked Yehoshua and the leaders into swearing a covenant of peace (Yehoshua 9). Although it was obtained by deceit, the oath was kept, since it was sworn before all Israel — even though it was for a mitzvah.