אלמה תניא (ויקרא כז ג) הזכר ולא טומטום ואנדרוגינוס סמי מיכן טומטום
Why, then, is it taught in a baraita that the verse: “Then your valuation shall be for the male” (Leviticus 27:3), includes one whose status as a male is certain but not a tumtum or a hermaphrodite? The Gemara answers: Omit from this baraita the mention of a tumtum, as it is referring only to a hermaphrodite, which is a distinct entity.
ת"ש יכול לא יהא בערך איש אבל יהא בערך אשה ת"ל הזכר אם נקבה ולא טומטום ואנדרוגינוס סמי מיכן טומטום
The Gemara suggests: Come and hear the continuation of that baraita: One might have thought that these shall not be valuated according to the valuation of a man, but they shall be valuated according to the valuation of a woman. Therefore, the verse states: “The male,” and in the following verse it states: “And if she is a female, then your valuation shall be thirty shekels” (Leviticus 27:4), indicating only one whose status as a male or female is certain, but not a tumtum or a hermaphrodite, which are categorized as neither male nor female. The Gemara again answers: Omit from this baraita the mention of a tumtum, as it is referring only to a hermaphrodite.
ת"ש (ויקרא ג, א) אם זכר אם נקבה זכר ודאי נקבה ודאית ולא טומטום ואנדרוגינוס סמי מיכן טומטום
The Gemara suggests: Come and hear a baraita discussing the peace offering, with regard to which it states: “Whether male or female” (Leviticus 3:1). This indicates: Only a definite male or a definite female, but not a tumtum or a hermaphrodite. Yet again the Gemara responds: Omit from this baraita the mention of a tumtum.
ת"ש הזכר ולא נקבה כשהוא אומר למטה זכר שאין ת"ל מה ת"ל להוציא טומטום ואנדרוגינוס סמי מיכן טומטום
The Gemara suggests: Come and hear a baraita: It states with regard to a burnt offering from cattle: “A male” (Leviticus 1:3), from which it can be inferred: But not a female. When it says below, with regard to a burnt offering from sheep: “A male” (Leviticus 1:10), a second time, it is difficult to understand, as there is no need for the verse to state this. Why must the verse state “a male” again? This serves to exclude a tumtum and a hermaphrodite, which are disqualified as burnt offerings. The Gemara answers: Omit from this baraita the mention of a tumtum.
ת"ש הנעבד והמוקצה והאתנן והמחיר וטומטום ואנדרוגינוס כולן מטמאין בגדים אבית הבליעה
The Gemara suggests: Come and hear a baraita discussing the halakhot of ritual impurity imparted by a bird in the throat: Any bird that was not slaughtered in the proper manner, i.e., in its neck with a knife, has the status of a carcass. This carcass renders the one who eats it impure when it is in his throat. Bird offerings, which are killed by pinching the nape of the neck with a fingernail, are the exception to this principle, and they do not impart impurity. With regard to a bird that is worshipped as a deity, or one set aside for idol worship, or one given as payment to a prostitute, or one that was given as the price of a dog (see Deuteronomy 23:19), and similarly with regard to a bird that is a tumtum or a hermaphrodite, if one killed any of them by pinching, they are ritually impure, as they are disqualified as offerings, and the pinching does not purify them. Therefore, they all render a person and the garments he is wearing ritually impure if an olive-bulk of them comes into contact with the throat while eating.
ר"א אומר טומטום ואנדרוגינוס אין מטמאין בגדים אבית הבליעה שהיה ר"א אומר כל מקום שנאמר זכר ונקבה אתה מוציא טומטום ואנדרוגינוס מביניהם
Rabbi Eliezer says: If one pinched the neck of a tumtum or a hermaphrodite, it does not render the person and the garments he is wearing ritually impure when they are in the throat, as they are in fact fit to be sacrificed. As Rabbi Eliezer would say: Wherever it is stated explicitly in the Torah: “Male,” and: “Female,” you should exclude a tumtum and a hermaphrodite from among them, as their status is uncertain. This applies to animal offerings, with regard to which the Torah states “male” and “female.”
ועוף הואיל ולא נאמר בו זכר ונקבה אין אתה מוציא טומטום ואנדרוגינוס מביניהם סמי מיכן טומטום
But in the case of a bird offering, since “male” and “female” are not stated with regard to it, but simply doves and pigeons are stated with regard to it, you do not exclude a tumtum and a hermaphrodite from among them, as they are fit for the altar. Now if a tumtum is considered either definitely a male or a female, then why does the first tanna disqualify it from being sacrificed? The Gemara again replies: Omit from this baraita the mention of a tumtum.
ת"ש ר' אלעזר אומר הטריפה והכלאים ויוצא דופן טומטום ואנדרוגינוס לא קדושים ולא מקדישין
The Gemara suggests: Come and hear that Rabbi Elazar says: An animal with a condition that will cause it to die within twelve months [tereifa], and prohibited diverse kinds of livestock, and an animal born by caesarean section, and an animal that is a tumtum or a hermaphrodite do not become consecrated and do not render another animal consecrated in their place.
ואמר שמואל לא קדושים בתמורה ולא מקדישין לעשות תמורה סמי מיכן טומטום
And Shmuel says in explanation: They do not become consecrated by substitution, i.e., if one sought to substitute one of these animals for a sacrificial animal, it does not become sacred. And if one of these was born to a sacrificial animal, they do not render a non-sacred animal consecrated in a case where one wanted to render it a substitute for them. And if a tumtum is either a male or female, why would it not become consecrated and render another animal consecrated? The Gemara answers: Omit from this baraita the mention of a tumtum.
ת"ש ר' אלעזר אומר חמשה לא קדושים ולא מקדישין ואלו הן הטריפה והכלאים ויוצא דופן וטומטום ואנדרוגינוס וכי תימא ה"נ סמי מיכן טומטום הוו להו ארבעה אפיק טומטום ועייל יתום
The Gemara suggests: Come and hear a slightly different version of that baraita. Rabbi Elazar says: There are five types of animals that do not become consecrated and do not render another animal consecrated, and they are: A tereifa, and prohibited diverse kinds of livestock, and an animal born by caesarean section, and an animal that is a tumtum, and a hermaphrodite. And if you would say: Here too, omit from this baraita a tumtum, then there are only four types of animals listed in the baraita. The Gemara answers: Remove the mention of a tumtum and in its place insert an orphan, i.e., an animal born after the death of its mother, which is also disqualified as a sacrifice.
לימא כתנאי רבי אילעאי אומר משום ר' ישמעאל אנדרוגינוס בכור הוא ומומו עמו וחכמים אומרים אין קדושה חלה עליו ר"ש בן יהודה אומר משום ר"ש הרי הוא אומר הזכר וכל מקום שנאמר זכר אינו אלא להוציא טומטום ואנדרוגינוס
The Gemara suggests: Let us say that this question of whether a tumtum is a distinct entity or is definitely either a male or female is the subject of a dispute between tanna’im. As it is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Ilai says in the name of Rabbi Yishmael: A hermaphrodite is a firstborn, and it comes with its blemish; and the Rabbis say: It is not imbued with sanctity. Rabbi Shimon ben Yehuda says in the name of Rabbi Shimon: The verse states: “Males” (Deuteronomy 15:19), and wherever it is stated: Male,” this serves to exclude only a tumtum and a hermaphrodite. Since according to Rabbi Shimon ben Yehuda it is necessary for a verse to exclude a tumtum, like a hermaphrodite, from the category of a male, evidently in his opinion a tumtum is not considered to be one whose status as a male is uncertain but a distinct entity.
וכי תימא סמי מיכן טומטום ר"ש בן יהודה היינו רבנן אלא לאו טומטום איכא בינייהו דת"ק סבר אין קדושה חלה עליו אאנדרוגינוס אבל טומטום ספיקא הוא וקדוש מספיקא ואתא רבי שמעון
The Gemara analyzes this baraita: And if you would say: Here too, omit from this baraita a tumtum, then the opinion of Rabbi Shimon ben Yehuda is the same as that of the Rabbis, as they too maintain that a hermaphrodite is not sacred. Rather, is it not that the difference between them is with regard to the status of a tumtum, as the first tanna, i.e., the Rabbis, holds: It is not imbued with sanctity, and they are referring specifically to a hermaphrodite, which was the subject of Rabbi Ilai’s statement, but a tumtum is an uncertain case, and therefore it is sacred due to uncertainty. And Rabbi Shimon