Bekhorot

A BA'AL HA-PIHIN AND AN ‘IKKEL — [ALL THESE DEFECTS RENDER A PRIEST UNFIT]. WHAT IS AN ‘IKKEL? ONE WHOSE LEGS DO NOT TOUCH EACH OTHER WHEN HE PUTS HIS FEET TOGETHER, [BANDY LEGGED]. IF HE HAS A LUMP PROJECTING FROM HIS THUMB,1 OR IF HIS HEEL PROJECTS BEHIND, OR IF HIS FEET ARE WIDE LIKE THOSE OF A GOOSE2 OR IF HIS FINGERS LIE ONE ABOVE THE OTHER OR IF THEY ARE GROWN TOGETHER UP TO THE ROOT [THE MIDDLE JOINT], HE IS FIT [FOR THE PRIESTHOOD]; IF BELOW THE ROOT,3 IF HE CUTS IT,4 HE IS ALSO FIT. IF HE HAS AN ADDITIONAL FINGER AND HE CUT IT OFF, IF THERE WAS A BONE IN IT, HE IS UNFIT,5 BUT IF NOT, HE IS FIT. IF HE HAS ADDITIONAL FINGERS AND ADDITIONAL TOES, ON EACH HAND AND FOOT SIX FINGERS AND SIX TOES, [MAKING ALTOGETHER] TWENTY-FOUR [FINGERS AND TOES], R. JUDAH DECLARES SUCH A PRIEST FIT FOR THE PRIESTHOOD,6 WHEREAS THE SAGES DECLARE HIM UNFIT. IF ONE HAS EQUAL STRENGTH IN BOTH HANDS, RABBI DECLARES HIM UNFIT,7 WHEREAS THE SAGES DECLARE HIM FIT.8 GEMARA. Our Rabbis taught: [Scripture says]: Broken-footed.9 I have here mentioned only the case of broken-footed [as making a priest unfit for the priesthood]. Whence do we deduce the inclusion of one who knocks his ankles against each other or one who is bandy-legged or one who is club-footed? The text states, ‘Or broken-footed’. A Tanna taught: Ba'al ha-pikin and shufnor. R. Hiyya b. Abba reported in the name of R. Johanan: Ba'al ha-pikin is one who has many calves10 and shufnor is one without calves.11 IF HE HAS A LUMP PROJECTING FROM THE THUMB, OR IF HIS HEEL PROJECTS BEHIND. Said R. Eleazar: This [latter defect] means the leg coming out in the middle of the foot.12 OR IF HIS FEET WERE AS WIDE AS THOSE OF A GOOSE. Said R. Papa: You should not say that the feet must be thin13 as well as not separated; even if they are only thin, although separated [they make a priest unfit for the priesthood]. OR IF HIS FINGERS LIE ONE ABOVE THE OTHER OR ARE GROWN TOGETHER. Our Rabbis taught: [Scripture says]: Broken-handed.14 I have here mentioned only the case of broken-handed [as making a priest unfit]. Whence do we deduce that if his fingers lie one above the other or are grown together above15 the root and he cut them that he is unfit? But did you not say [in the Mishnah that in the latter instance] he is fit? — Rather read ‘he did not cut them’. Whence then do we derive these cases? — The text states: ‘Or broken-handed’. 16 IF HE HAS AN ADDITIONAL FINGER AND HE CUT IT OFF, IF THERE WAS A BONE IN IT HE IS UNFIT. BUT IF NOT, HE IS FIT. Rabbah b. bar Hana reported in the name of R. Johanan: Provided the additional finger is counted with the others.17 Our Rabbis taught: An additional [finger] if it has a bone in it, even without a nail,18 makes a person unclean by contact and by carrying it.19 It also causes tent uncleanness,20 and is counted in the number of one hundred and twenty-five [limbs].21 Rabbah b. Bar Hana reported in the name of R. Johanan: Provided the additional finger is counted with the others. Said R. Hisda: The following ruling was taught by our great Master [Rab], may the Lord be his support! An additional finger if there is a bone in it, even without a nail, makes a person unclean by contact and by carrying it but it does not cause tent uncleanness.22 Said Rabbah b. Bar Hana: Provided the additional finger is not counted with the others. Said R. Hanina:23 They have put their teaching on the level with prophecy.24 For in either case [the ruling just quoted is difficult to understand]. If the additional finger is considered a limb [legally], then it should even cause tent uncleanness; and if it is not a limb [legally], then it should not even make a person unclean by contact and by carrying it! — Said R. Huna b. Manoah in the name of R. Aha b. Ika: The Rabbis applied here the rule of a bone which is the size of a barleycorn.25 R. Papa says: We declare him unclean in the case where the additional finger was not counted with the others on account of the case where the additional finger is counted with the others.26 But if this be so, then in the case where the additional finger is not counted with the others, it should also cause tent uncleanness? — The Rabbis made a distinction in order that terumah and consecrated ob jects might not be burnt [unnecessarily] on account of it.27 We have learnt elsewhere: The greater portion28 of a corpse [as measured by size of limbs] and the larger number of joints and limbs, even though there is not among them one quarter of a kab29 of bones, convey tent uncleanness.30 Our Rabbis taught: What is the greater part of a corpse? Two legs and a thigh, since this is the greater part of the height of a tall person.31 What is the larger number of joints and limbs? One hundred and twenty-five [limbs]. Said Rabina32 to Raba: Is it the object of the Tanna to teach us calculation?33 He replied to him: He informs us of the following as it was taught: If a person is defective [in the number of joints], having only two hundred,34 or if one35 has additional limbs, having two hundred and eighty-one, all these joints are counted in the number of one hundred and twenty-five.36 What is the reason? Follow the majority of people [who have only two hundred and forty-eight joints and limbs]. R. Judah related in the name of Samuel: The disciples of R. Ishmael once dissected the body of a prostitute who had been condemned to be burnt by the king. They examined and found two hundred and fifty-two joints and limbs. [They came and inquired of R. Ishmael: ‘How many joints has the human body?’ He replied to them: ‘Two hundred and forty-eight.]’37 Thereupon they said to him: ‘But we have examined and found two hundred and fifty-two’? He replied to them: ‘Perhaps you made the postmortem examination on a woman, in whose case Scripture adds two hinges [in her sexual organ] and two doors38 of the womb’. It was taught: R. Eleazar said: As a house has hinges,39 so a woman's body has hinges [in her sexual organ], as it is written in the Scriptures: She40 bowed herself and brought forth, for her pains [zireha] came suddenly upon her.41 R. Joshua says: As a house has doors, so a woman's womb has doors,38 as it is said in the Scriptures: Because it shut not up the doors of my mother's womb.42 R. Akiba says: As a house has a key, so a woman has a key, [the womb], as it is written in the Scriptures: And opened her womb.43 According to the opinion of R. Akiba, is there not a difficulty in connection with what R. Ishmael's disciples discovered?44 — It may be that since it is small, it was dissolved in the course of dissecting. Said Rab:45 And all these46 do not cause tent uncleanness, for it is said in the Scriptures: This is the law when a man dieth in a tent,47 [implying], a thing which is common to all human beings [causes tent uncleanness].48 Said Abaye to him: And has not a man also [some of these additional limbs]?49 Does not Scripture say: Pangs, [zirim]50 have taken hold upon me as the pangs of a woman that travailleth?51 These are hinges of flesh.52 But does not Scripture say: O my lord, by reason of the vision my pains, [zirai], have come upon me?53 — Here again the verse refers to ‘hinges’ of flesh. It also stands to reason. For if you will not say so,54 to whom then will you apply the accepted statement that there exist two hundred and forty-eight limbs [in the human body], for it can apply neither to a man nor to a woman.55 alike. Rashi in his commentary on the Mishnah appears to combine both interpretations. Tosaf. Yom Tob suggests that Rashi on the Mishnah means that they are either thin or that their length etc. the rest of the fingers. there were a piece of flesh the size of an olive on the bone, then even if the additional finger were not in line with the rest of the fingers or even if there were not a bone in the additional finger, it would have caused tent uncleanness, for the rule is that the flesh of a corpse the size of an olive causes tent uncleanness. Again, if there were not any flesh at all on the bone, then even if the additional finger were in line with the rest, it would not have been considered a limb, since bones as such do not cause tent uncleanness, unless where there is a majority of the joints or the greater part of the corpse. But now since there is a small portion of flesh, even though not the size of an olive, the additional finger of a corpse causes uncleanness because it is in line with the rest and is legally recognized as a limb. shelter over, a corpse; v. Num. XIX, 14. twenty-five limbs and joints, as this constitutes the greater number of limbs of the two hundred and forty-eight limbs and joints of which the human body is composed, the law being that the majority of the joints and limbs of a corpse causes tent uncleanness. first that there are no nails, and secondly its not being in line with the rest of the fingers. But if it has a nail in it, the additional finger makes tent uncleanness although it is not in line. also give no reason for their ruling. uncleanness. bring about laxity in a case where the additional finger is in line, where it legally causes uncleanness, the Rabbis declared uncleanness also in the former case. additional finger not in line is a genuine limb, and therefore terumah etc. might come to be wrongly burnt as a consequence. measurement applies to a tall person only but not to a small person. hundred and twenty-five, and what need is there for the Tanna of the Baraitha to teach us this? finger has six bones, this makes altogether a total of forty-eight joints of which this man is short. Thus he has only two hundred joints of the two hundred and forty-eight which the human body contains. six bones, we have a total of twenty-four additional limbs. In addition, there are five extra limbs in the case of a woman, viz. two hinges, two doors and the womb (v. infra). We have therefore altogether twenty-nine additional limbs. Add this to two hundred and forty-eight, and we have a grand total of two hundred and seventy-seven. Rashi says that he cannot account for the other four so as to make up the number to two hundred and eighty-one. R. Gershom however explains that for every six bones in a finger there is a corresponding extra bone in the arm. Consequently, as there are four additional fingers and toes, we have a further four limbs, which bring the number of joints to two hundred and eighty-one. case of a woman who has additional fingers or the bare majority in the case of one who has less than the usual number of limbs, we accept the number in all cases as the greater number of limbs causes tent uncleanness. that the womb was an extra limb, there is another limb, making two hundred and fifty-three in all. meaning human being in general and not exclusively a man. case of a man.