Bekhorot 45aבכורות מ״ה א
The William Davidson Talmudתלמוד מהדורת ויליאם דוידסון
Save "Bekhorot 45a"
Toggle Reader Menu Display Settings
45aמ״ה א

ובעל הפיקים העיקל איזהו העיקל כל שהוא מקיף פרסותיו ואין ארכבותיו נוקשות זו לזו פיקה יוצא מגודלו עקיבו יוצא לאחוריו פרסותיו רחבות כשל אווז

and a ba’al happikim, and the ikkel. What is the ikkel? It is anyone who places his feet together and his knees do not knock into each other, i.e., he is bowlegged. A priest with a protuberance emerging alongside the thumb of his hand or the big toe of his foot,or one whose heel emerges and protrudes back from his foot, or one whose feet are wide like those of a goose are all disqualified from performing the Temple service.

אצבעותיו מורכבות זו על זו או קלוטות למעלה עד הפרק כשר למטה מן הפרק וחתכה כשר היתה בה יתרת וחתכה אם יש בה עצם פסול ואם לאו כשר

A priest whose fingers or toes are configured one upon the other, or one whose fingers or toes are attached, is likewise disqualified. But if they were attached from above the palm of the hand or the bottom of the foot only until the middle joint, he is fit. If they were attached below the joint, higher up on the finger or toe, and he cut to separate them, he is fit. In a case where there was an extra finger or toe on his hand or foot and he cut it, if that extra appendage contains a bone, the priest is disqualified even after it was cut, and if there is no bone the priest is fit.

יתר בידיו וברגליו שש ושש עשרים וארבע ר' יהודה מכשיר וחכמים פוסלין השולט בשתי ידיו רבי פוסל וחכמים מכשירין:

If there was an extra appendage on his hands and on his feet, six on each for a total of twenty-four, Rabbi Yehuda deems the priest fit and the Rabbis deem him disqualified. With regard to one who is ambidextrous and has control of both of his hands, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi deems the priest disqualified, as his halakhic status is like that of one who is left-handed, and the Rabbis deem him fit.

גמ׳ ת"ר (ויקרא כא, יט) שבר רגל אין לי אלא שבר רגל מנין לרבות הקישן והעיקל והקילבן ת"ל או שבר רגל תנא בעל הקיפין והשופנר א"ר חייא בר אבא א"ר יוחנן בעל הפיקין שיש לו כסתות הרבה שופנר שאין לו כסתות כל עיקר:

GEMARA: The Sages taught in a baraita: From the verse that states: “Broken-footed” (Leviticus 21:19), I have derived only that a broken leg disqualifies a priest from performing the Temple service. From where do I derive to include that the kishan, i.e., one who knocks his ankles or his knees together; the ikkel; and the kilvan are disqualified as well? The same verse states: “Or broken-footed.” The term “or” serves to include all blemishes of the leg. It was also taught in a baraita: A ba’al hakippin and the shufnar are blemished. Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba says that Rabbi Yoḥanan says: A ba’al happikin is one who has large protuberances on his leg, while a shufnar is one who has no protuberances at all.

פיקה יוצא מגודלו ועקיבו יוצא לאחוריו: א"ר אלעזר שוקו יוצא באמצע רגלו: פרסותיו רחבות כשל אווז: אמר רב פפא לא תימא דטריפה ולא סדיקא אלא כיון דטריפה אע"ג דסדיקא:

The mishna teaches that one with a protuberance emerging alongside the thumb of his hand or the big toe of his foot, and one whose heel emerges and protrudes back from his foot are disqualified. Rabbi Elazar says: The description: One whose heel emerges and protrudes back from his foot, means his calf, i.e., his lower leg, emerges from the middle of his foot. The mishna also teaches that one whose feet are wide like those of a goose is disqualified. Rav Pappa says: Do not say that this is referring only to one whose feet are entirely like those of a goose, i.e., his feet are flat and his toes are not split. Rather, once one’s feet are flat he is considered blemished, even though his toes are split.

אצבעותיו מורכבות זו על גב זו או קלוטות: ת"ר (ויקרא כא, יט) שבר יד אין לי אלא שבר יד

The mishna further teaches that a priest whose fingers or toes are configured one upon the other, or whose fingers or toes are attached, is likewise disqualified from performing the Temple service. But if they were attached from the hand or foot from above the palm of the hand or the bottom of the foot until the middle joint, or if they were attached below the joint, higher up on the finger or toe, and he cut to separate them, he is fit. The Sages taught in a baraita: The verse states: “Broken-handed” (Leviticus 21:19). I have derived only that a broken hand disqualifies a priest.

אצבעות מורכבות (למעלה) או קלוטות למעלה מן הפרק וחתכן והאמרת כשר אלא ולא חתכן מנין ת"ל או שבר יד:

From where do I derive that if his fingers or toes are configured one upon the other, or if they are attached from the hand or foot above the middle joint and he cut them to separate them, that he is disqualified? The Gemara interrupts its citation of the baraita to ask: But didn’t you say in the mishna that if he separates his fingers he is fit? Rather, the baraita is referring to a priest whose fingers or toes are attached above the middle joint and he did not cut them. From where is it derived that he is disqualified? The verse states: “Or broken-handed.”

היתה בו יתרת וחתכה אם יש בה עצם פסול ואם לאו כשר: אמר רבה בר בר חנה אמר ר' יוחנן והוא שנספרת ע"ג היד

§ The mishna teaches: In a case where there was an extra finger or toe on his hand or foot and he cut it, if that extra appendage contains a bone, the priest is disqualified even after it was cut, as he is considered to be missing a limb, and if not, the priest is fit. Rabba bar bar Ḥana says that Rabbi Yoḥanan says: And this is the halakha only in a case where it can be counted along the back of the hand or foot, i.e., the extra digit is situated in a row with his other fingers or toes. Only in such a situation is an additional appendage considered a distinct limb to the extent that if it contains a bone he is disqualified even after it has been cut away.

ת"ר יתירה שיש בה עצם ואין בה צפורן מטמא במגע ובמשא ומטמא באהל ועולה למנין קכ"ה אמר רבה בר בר חנה א"ר יוחנן ובנספרת על גב היד

With regard to extra appendages the Sages taught: In the case of an extra appendage that was cut from a corpse, which contains a bone, then even if it does not have a nail it imparts ritual impurity both through contact and by carrying it, and it imparts impurity in a tent,as is the halakha with regard to the limb of a corpse. And if the extra appendage has no flesh surrounding the bone and therefore does not impart the impurity of a limb from a corpse, it is included in the count of 125 bones, which constitute a majority of the number of bones in a human being. A majority of bones imparts impurity in a tent, even if there is no flesh on any of them. Rabba bar bar Ḥana says that Rabbi Yoḥanan says: And it is considered a limb only when it can be counted along the back of the hand or foot.

אמר רב חסדא דבר זה רבינו הגדול אמרו המקום יהיה בעזרו יתרת שיש בה עצם ואין בה צפורן מטמא במגע ובמשא ואין מטמא באהל אמר רבב"ח א"ר יוחנן ובשאינה נספרת על גב היד

Rav Ḥisda says: This matter was stated by our great rabbi, Rav, may the Omnipresent come to his assistance. An extra appendage that contains a bone and does not have a nail imparts ritual impurity through contact and by carrying, but it does not impart impurity in a tent. Rabba bar bar Ḥana says that Rabbi Yoḥanan says: And it does not impart impurity in a tent only when it is not counted along the back of the hand or foot.

א"ר יוחנן עשו דבריהם כדברי נביאות מה נפשך אי אבר הוא באהל נמי תטמא ואי לאו אבר הוא במגע ובמשא נמי לא ליטמי

Rabbi Yoḥanan says: The Sages rendered their statements in this case like statements of prophecy, i.e., there is no rationale for this halakha, as whichever way you look at it there is a difficulty: If a digit that is not counted with the other digits is considered a limb, it should impart impurity in a tent as well; and if it is not a limb, it also should not impart impurity through contact or by carrying.

אמר רב הונא בר מנוח משמיה דרב אחא בריה דרב איקא משום עצם כשעורה נגעו בה

Rav Huna bar Manoaḥ said in the name of Rav Aḥa, son of Rav Ika: This appendage imparts impurity through contact and by carrying because the Sages touched upon it, i.e., issued a ruling concerning it, and determined that the halakhot of a bone the volume of a barley grain apply to it, i.e., it is considered a bone fragment and not a limb. Accordingly, it does not impart impurity in a tent.

רב פפא אמר גזירה שאינה נספרת אטו נספרת אי הכי שאינה נספרת באהל נמי תטמא

Rav Pappa said: It is a rabbinic decree that an appendage that is not counted with the other digits imparts impurity through contact and carrying, due to a case where the appendage is counted with the other digits,in which case it is considered a limb and imparts impurity in a tent. The Gemara raises a difficulty: If so, then an appendage that is not counted should impart impurity in a tent as well.

עבדו רבנן היכירא כי היכי דלא לישרפו עלייהו תרומה וקדשים

The Gemara explains: The Sages implemented a distinction by decreeing this appendage imparts impurity only through contact and carrying, in order that people will know that this impurity applies by rabbinic law and not by Torah law. And therefore they will not come to burn teruma, i.e., the portion of produce designated for the priest, or consecrated items that have been rendered impure on account of this type of impurity, as by Torah law they are ritually pure and may not be burned.

תנן התם רוב בנינו ורוב מנינו של מת אע"פ שאין בו רובע טמאין ת"ר איזהו רוב בנינו שני שוקיים וירך אחד הואיל ורוב גובהו בגדול איזהו רוב מנינו קכ"ה

§ With regard to impurity imparted by extra appendages, we learned in a mishna there (Oholot 2:1): A majority of the skeletal structure or a majority of the number of bones in the corpse of a dead person, even when there is not a quarter of a kav of bones among them, are impure. Concerning the ruling of this mishna, the Sages taught in a baraita: What is considered a majority of the skeletal structure of a corpse? It is two calves and one thigh, since this constitutes a majority of the height of an adult. What is considered a majority of the number of bones? One hundred and twenty-five bones.

א"ל רבינא לרבא תנא מניינא אתא לאשמועינן קמ"ל כדתניא חסר שאין בו אלא מאתים ויתר שיש בו מאתים ושמונים וא' כולן עולין למנין קכ"ה זיל בתר רובא דאינשי

Ravina said to Rava: Is the tanna coming to teach us a number? It is obvious that as there are 248 bones in the human body, 125 of them constitute a majority. Rava responded: The tanna teaches us that the halakha is as it is taught in a baraita: With regard to a corpse that lacks some bones and has only 200 bones, or one that has extra and has 281 bones, all of them are included in the count of 125. In other words, whether the number of 125 is in a majority or minority of that particular corpse, this number of bones imparts impurity, as one follows the majority of people, and most people have 248 bones.

א"ר יהודה אמר שמואל מעשה בתלמידיו של ר' ישמעאל ששלקו זונה אחת שנתחייבה שריפה למלך בדקו ומצאו בה מאתים וחמשים ושנים אמר להם שמא באשה בדקתם שהוסיף לה הכתוב שני צירים ושני דלתות

With regard to the number of limbs or bones in the human body, Rabbi Yehuda says that Shmuel says: There was an incident involving the students of Rabbi Yishmael, who boiled the corpse of a prostitute who was sentenced by the king to death by burning, in order to separate her flesh from her bones. They examined and found she had 252 limbs. They were puzzled by their finding, as the Sages say that the human body has only 248 limbs. Shmuel said to them: Perhaps you examined the corpse of a woman, as the verse added to her two hinges and two doors, for a total of 252 limbs.

תניא רבי אלעזר אומר כשם שצירים לבית כך צירים לאשה שנאמר (שמואל א ד, יט) ותכרע ותלד כי נהפכו עליה ציריה רבי יהושע אומר כשם שדלתות לבית כך דלתות לאשה שנאמר (איוב ג, י) כי לא סגר דלתי בטני

It is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Elazar says: Just as a house has hinges [tzirim], so too, a woman has hinges, as it is stated: “And she bowed herself and brought forth, for her pains [tzireha] came suddenly upon her” (I Samuel 4:19). Rabbi Yehoshua says: Just as a house has doors, so too, a woman has doors, as it is stated: “Because it did not shut the doors of my womb” (Job 3:10).

רבי עקיבא אומר כשם שמפתח לבית כך מפתח לאשה שנאמר (בראשית ל, כב) ויפתח את רחמה לרבי עקיבא קשיא דתלמידי רבי ישמעאל דלמא איידי דזוטרא אתמוחי מתמח

Rabbi Akiva says: Just as there is a key to a house, so too, there is a key to a woman, as it is stated: “And He opened her womb” (Genesis 30:22). The Gemara challenges: The incident involving the students of Rabbi Yishmael, who found that the woman had only four additional limbs rather than five, i.e., there was no key, poses a difficulty for Rabbi Akiva. The Gemara responds: Perhaps since it is small, it dissolved in the water when they boiled the corpse.

אמר רב וכולן אין מטמאין באהל שנאמר (במדבר יט, יד) זאת התורה אדם כי ימות באהל דבר השוה לכל אדם

Rav says: And all of them, i.e., all the limbs found only in a woman, do not impart impurity in a tent, as it is stated: “This is the law: When a person dies in a tent” (Numbers 19:14), indicating that only an item that is equal for all people, male and female, imparts impurity in a tent.

אמר ליה אביי ובאיש ליכא והכתיב (ישעיהו כא, ג) צירים אחזוני כצירי יולדה צירי בשר והכתיב (דניאל י, טז) אדני במראה נהפכו צירי הכא נמי צירי בשר הכי נמי מסתברא דאי לא תימא הכי מאתים וארבעים ושמנה היכי משכחת לה לא באיש ולא באשה:

Abaye said to him: And are there no hinges in a man? But isn’t it written: “Pangs [tzirim] have taken hold upon me, as the pangs of a woman in travail” (Isaiah 21:3)? The Gemara responds: The verse is referring specifically to hinges of flesh, which are not considered limbs, as they contain no bones. The Gemara persists: But isn’t it written: “My lord, by reason of the vision my pains [tzirai] come” (Daniel 10:16)? The Gemara responds: Here too, the verse is referring to hinges of flesh. The Gemara notes: So too, it is reasonable that the hinges of a male are only of flesh, as if you do not say so, then as far as the 248 limbs that the Sages stated constitute a human body, how can you find them? Neither in a man nor in a woman.