Bekhorot

and it was cut off [unintentionally] he becomes clean. If, however, he cut it off intentionally. R. Eliezer says: When another plague spot appears on him [from which he is pronounced clean], then he is cleansed from [the first].1 But the Sages say: [In order for him to be clean], either [the second plague] must break out all over his flesh,2 or [before the cutting off of the first leprous spot], it must have decreased to less than the size of a bean?3 — Rabbah and R. Joseph both replied: R. Eliezer penalizes thus only where a person's property is concerned, not where his body is concerned. As regards his property [i.e. the firstling], one can say that he may do it [in either case]4 but as regards his body, can it be said that he would do it in either case?5 Said Raba: Is there only a contradiction between R. Eliezer here [in the Mishnah] and R. Eliezer [in Nega'im]? Is there not a similar contradiction between the Rabbis [in the Mishnah] and the Rabbis [in Nega'im]?6 — The difficulty with regard to R. Eliezer has already been solved and as regards the difficulty in the case of the Rabbis, this is also no problem. In the one case we punish him for what he did, and in the other also we punish him for what he did. In one case, [that of a firstling], we punish him for what he did, for how did he intend to make it permitted? By means of this blemish. The Rabbis therefore punished him by ordering that the firstling should not be permitted on account of this very blemish.7 And in the other case we punish him for what he did. For how did he intend to make himself appear clean? By cutting off this [bahereth]. The Rabbis therefore punished him for this very cut.8 R. Papa inquired: Does it mean ‘He shall become clean’9 or ‘And then10 he shall become clean’? What is the practical difference?11 — In the case of a bridegroom on whom there appeared this [second] leprous spot. For we learnt: In the case of a bridegroom on whom there appears a plague spot, we give him seven days [of the wedding week not to see the priest] — to him, to his garment and to his covering.12 And likewise in the case of any person on a Festival, we give him the whole Festival [in which not to see a priest].13 Now if you say that it means ‘He shall become clean’ then he is clean14 from the first plague and as regards the second, we wait seven days for him. But if you say that it means ‘And then he shall become clean’ of what avail is it that he is not unclean from the second plague, if he remains unclean by reason of the first plague?15 What [is the answer]? — Let [the question] stand over. R. Jeremiah inquired from R. Ze'ira: If one slit the ear of a firstling and he died, what is the ruling as regards penalizing his son? Should you take as a guide the rule that if a man sells his slave to a heathen16 and he dies, his son is penalized after him, the reason [there] may be because every day he is prevented from carrying out commandments.17 And should you be guided by the rule that if a man plans some work18 for [the intermediate days of] the Festival and dies, his son is not penalized after him, the reason [there] may be because he did not actually do anything forbidden.19 What then is the ruling here?20 Did the Rabbis penalize the man himself and he is no more, or perhaps does the penalty of the Rabbis apply to his property and this is still in existence? — He replied to him: We have learnt this [in a Mishnah]: A field which had its thorns removed in the sabbatical year may be sown in the period beginning with the end of the sabbatical year.21 If, however, the field had been improved22 or manured with [the excrement of cattle],it must not be sown in the period beginning with the end of the sabbatical year.23 And R. Jose b. Hanina said: We hold a tradition: If he improved the field and died, his son may sow it. Consequently we see that the Rabbis punished the man himself, but the Rabbis did not punish his son; here also the Rabbis punish the man himself but not his son. Said Abaye: We hold a tradition: see that R. Eliezer does not condemn him to be unclean for ever. has to wait till another blemish appears, then he has lost nothing, as in any case he intended waiting for another blemish to appear. We therefore condemn him never to slaughter the firstling, so as to prevent him causing blemishes. wait for the next plague. He will not do so, first because if there does not appear another plague spot he will never be clean, and secondly, because even if there appears another plague spot what benefit is it to him, since he is afflicted as before? It is therefore better for him not to cut off the bahereth and to wait in case it heals. he is not clean from the first, unless the latter plague covers all his flesh. wedding week or after the Festival. he is not clean from the first plague until the second is healed? ten times his price. Festival, the work is permitted, but this man deliberately arranged for this work to be done during the intermediate days, though he could have done it earlier.