Bekhorot

[thus implying that] when torn out completely [they are blemishes] but not where they are broken off or levelled [to the gum]?1 — We require [that it should appear] ‘an ill blemish’,2 which is not the case [where it is not torn out]. If this be so,3 why should not [a firstling be slaughtered] in consequence of a transitory blemish?4 Why have we learnt: BUT NOT IF THE DEFECT IS IN THE EAR-LAP? — There is a logical reason [why we do not slaughter a firstling] in consequence of a transitory blemish, for seeing that we do not redeem [a consecrated animal]5 in consequence [of a transitory blemish], shall we slaughter in consequence of it?" For it has been taught: [Scripture says]: And if it be any unclean beast of which they may not bring an offering unto the Lord.6 The text deals here with sacrifices rendered unfit which were redeemed. You say sacrifices rendered unfit. Perhaps it is really not so, but it speaks actually of an unclean animal? Since it says: ‘And if it be of an unclean beast, then he shall ransom it according to thy valuation’7 the case of an unclean animal is already stated. How then do I interpret the text ‘Of which they may not bring an offering unto the Lord’? You must say that it refers to sacrifices rendered unfit which were redeemed. I might, however, conclude that one may redeem in consequence of a transitory blemish, hence Scripture explicitly states: ‘Of which they may not bring an offering unto the Lord’, thus intimating [that it refers to] a sacrifice which is completely unfit [for the altar], but excluding this case of a transitory blemish, which although unfit for sacrifice today, is fit tomorrow. And if you prefer [another solution]8 I may say: If this be a fact [that a transitory defect is a legal blemish] then of what avail is the text ‘Lame and blind’ [which implies only permanent blemishes]? IF IT WAS SLIT, ALTHOUGH THERE WAS NOT ANY LOSS [OF SUBSTANCE]. Our Rabbis taught: A slit may be as small as you please.9 A defect [a cut] may be either through the agency of man or by nature.10 Does this imply that a slit has not the same ruling when brought about by nature? — Rather state it thus: A slit may be as small as you please, and both a slit and a cut may be either through the agency of man or by nature. And how large is a cut? — A notch deep enough to stop the finger nail.11 IF IT WAS PERFORATED AS LARGE etc. Our Rabbis taught: How large is the perforation of the ear? — As large as a karshinah. R. Jose son of R. Judah says: As large as a lentil. What is called dry? If when perforated [the sore] does not bring forth a drop of blood. R. Jose b. Ha-meshullam says: [It is called] ‘dry’ as long as it is liable to crumble. A Tanna taught: Their views are nearly alike. Whose views [are meant]? Shall I say the views of the first Tanna [quoted above] and R. Jose b. Ha-meshullam? Surely there is a considerable difference!12 — Rather you must say, the views of the first Tanna [quoted above] and R. Jose son of R. Judah.13 [But does R. Jose son of R. Judah maintain that a blemish is constituted] by [a hole] the size of a lentil and not by less than the size of a lentil? Against this I quote: Scripture says ‘An awl’.14 I have here mentioned only an awl [wherewith to bore the ear of a slave]; whence do you include also a prick, a thorn, a borer, and a stylus? Hence the text states: Then thou shalt take,14 thus including everything which can be taken in a hand. This is the view of R. Jose son of R. Judah. Rabbi says, [Since the text says] ‘An awl’, we infer that as an awl is exclusively of metal, so anything used must be of metal. And it is stated in the following clause: Said R. Eleazar: Judan the son of Rabbis15 used to expound as follows: The boring is only done through the ear-lap. The Sages, however, rule: A Hebrew slave who is a priest must not have his ear bored, because he becomes blemished. Now if you maintain that the boring was done through the ear-lap, then the Hebrew slave who is a priest cannot become blemished, hence we only bore through the top part of the ear!16 — Said Rab Hana b. Kattina: This offers no difficulty. Here for the purpose of slaughtering,17 [the size of a lentil is required] but there in the case of causing a disqualification [even a needle can render the animal blemished for the altar]. What is karshinah? Said R. Sherabya: Indian vetch. R. Oshaiah inquired from R. Huna the Great: [Must the hole be] of a size so that the karshinah may enter and come out [with ease] or as to contain a karshinah18 [only with difficulty]? — He replied to him: I have not heard the answer to this particular query, but I have heard [a solution of] a similar query. For we have learnt: A spinal column and a skull which have shrunk [do not cause uncleanness].19 And how great must be the shrinkage in the spinal column in order not to cause uncleanness? Beth Shammai say: Two vertebrae, whereas Beth Hillel say: One vertebra. And as regards the skull, Beth Shammai say: [The amount of the shrinkage] must be equal to a borer;20 and Beth Hillel say: As much as is required to be taken away from a living person in order to prove fatal.21 Now R. Hisda sat discoursing and inquired: [You say] as much as is required to be taken from a living person [so as to prove fatal]. And how much would this be? — R. Tahlifa b. Abudimi said to him: Thus did Samuel say: As much as a sela’.22 (And it was stated; R. Safra said: [R. Tahlifa] reported to [R. Hisda] a ruling [in the name of Samuel], whereas Rab Samuel b. Judah says: [R. Tahlifa] quoted [to Rab Hisda] a Baraitha [reported by Samuel]. And the way to remember23 this is by the sentence: R. Samuel b. Judah reported a Baraitha).24 Said [R. Hisda] to him [R. Tahlifa]: If so,25 then you have made the views of Beth Shammai and Beth Hillel identical. For we have learnt: In a light-hole which was not made by the agency of man,26 the size27 required is as large as a big fist, such as the fist of Ben Battiah.28 Said R. Jose: And this [fist] is as large as a big head of a man. If [the light-hole], however, was made by the agency of man, [the Sages] fixed the size to be as large as a hole made with the large [carpenter's borer kept in the Temple cell,29 which is as large as an Italian dupondium30 or as large as a Neronian sela’. And it31 has transitory blemish? needle's point which makes a hole much smaller than a lentil, is capable of maiming. the greater number of the limbs of a dead body or the greater part of a dead body. If however, they are not complete, they do not cause this uncleanness. than this size does not bring about impurity. He was a big man physically.