ב"ה
Rambam - 1 Chapter a Day
Issurei Mizbeiach - Chapter 2
Issurei Mizbeiach - Chapter 2
1There are a total of 50 blemishes that disqualify both a man1 and an animal.2 They have already been listed.3אכָּל הַמּוּמִין הַפּוֹסְלִין בָּאָדָם וּבַבְּהֵמָה, חֲמִשִּׁים. וּכְבָר נִמְנוּ.
2There are other blemishes that are unique to animals and are not appropriate to be found in humans at all.4 There are 23 of these; they are: a) the animal’s eyeball’s are round like humans; b) one eye is large like a calf’s and the other is small like a duck’s;5 if, however, one ear is large and one ear is small, even if it is small as a bean, it is acceptable; c) if there is an eruption in the white of the eye that has a hair growing from it;6 d) if the cartilage between its two nostrils was perforated in a place which can be seen;7 e) its mouth resembles that of a swine; i.e., its upper jaw overlapped its lower jaw, even though it is not pointed like a spit.בוְיֵשׁ מוּמִין אֲחֵרִים מְיֻחָדִין בַּבְּהֵמָה, וְאֵינָן רְאוּיִין לִהְיוֹת בָּאָדָם, וּשְׁלוֹשָׁה וְעֶשְׂרִים הֵם, וְזֶה הוּא פְּרָטָן: (א) אִם הָיָה גַּלְגַּל עֵינָהּ עָגוּל כְּשֶׁל אָדָם. (ב) עֵינָהּ אַחַת גְּדוֹלָה כְּשֶׁל עֵגֶל, וְהַשְּׁנִיָּה קְטַנָּה כְּשֶׁל אֲוָז. אֲבָל אִם הָיְתָה אֹזֶן גְּדוֹלָה וְאֹזֶן קְטַנָּה, אַפִלּוּ קְטַנָּה עַד כַּפּוֹל - כָּשֵׁר. (ג) אִם יֵשׁ בְּלֹבֶן עֵינָהּ יַבֹּלֶת שֶׁיֵּשׁ בָּהּ שֵׂעָר. (ד) אִם נִקַּב הָעוֹר שֶׁבֵּין שְׁנֵי חֹטָמֶיהָ בְּמָקוֹם הַנִּרְאֶה. (ה) פִּיהָ דּוֹמֶה לְשֶׁל חֲזִיר - פָּרוּס, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵינוֹ מְחֻדָּד כִּשְׁפוּד.
3f) If its outer tonsils8 were perforated; g) their substance was reduced, even though a portion of them remained; h) they shriveled; i) its inner tonsils were removed;9 this is considered a blemish,10 because when it opens its mouths and shriek, it will be seen that they are missing.ג(ו) חִטֶּיהָ הַחִיצוֹנוֹת שֶׁנִּקְּבוּ. (ז) אוֹ שֶׁנִּגְמְמוּ, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁנִּשְׁאַר מִקְצָתָן. (ח) אוֹ שֶׁנִּפְגְמוּ. (ט) אִם נֶעְקְרוּ חִטֶּיהָ הַפְּנִימִיּוֹת - שֶׁהֲרֵי בְּעֵת שֶׁפּוֹתַחַת פִּיהָ וְצוֹוַחַת הֵן נִרְאִין חֲסֵרִין.
4j) If its horns and their inner fibrous tissue was removed and nothing of it remained;11 a female animal that has horns is acceptable;12 k) if the substance of the skin which covers the male organ of an animal was blemished;13 l) if the substance of the female organ of an animal was blemished; m) if the substance of the tail is blemished from its bone; if its substance is blemished from its joint, it is not a blemish;14 n) if the tip of the tail was split into two with two separate bones;ד(י) אִם נִטְּלוּ קַרְנֶיהָ וְזַכְרוּתָן עִמָּהֶן, וְלֹא נִשְׁאַר מֵהֶן כְּלוּם. אֲבָל נְקֵבָה שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהּ קְרָנַיִם, כְּשֵׁרָה. (יא) אִם נִפְגַם הָעוֹר שֶׁחוֹפֶה אֶת גִּיד הַבְּהֵמָה. (יב) אִם נִפְגְמָה הָעֶרְוָה שֶׁל נְּקֵבָה. (יג) אִם נִפְגַם הַזָּנָב מִן הָעֶצֶם, אֲבָל לֹא מִן הַפֶּרֶק. (יד) אִם הָיָה רֹאשׁ הַזָּנָב מְפֻצָּל לִשְׁנַיִם, בִּשְׁנֵי עֲצָמִים.
o) if there was a finger’s breadth of flesh between every joint on the tail; p) if the tail was overly short. To what extent? For a kid, one vertebra is a blemish, but two are not. For a lamb, a length of two vertebrae is a blemish, but three is acceptable. q) If the tail of a kid was soft and hanging loosely like that of a pig; r) if one of the tail bones was broken.15 If, however, one of the ribs are broken, it is acceptable, because the blemish is not visible.(טו) אִם הָיָה בֵּין חֻלְיָא לְחֻלְיָא מְלוֹא אֶצְבַּע בָּשָׂר. (טז) אִם הָיָה הַזָּנָב קָצֵר. וְעַד כַּמָּה? בִּגְדִי: חֻלְיָא אַחַת, מוּם; שְׁתַּיִם, כָּשֵׁר. וּבְטָּלֶה: אֹרֶךְ שְׁתֵּי חֻלְיוֹת, מוּם; הָיְתָה שָׁלוֹשׁ, כָּשֵׁר. (יז) זְנַב הַגְּדִי שֶׁהָיָה רַךְ וּמְדֻלְדָּל, דּוֹמֶה לְשֶׁל חֲזִיר. (יח) אִם נִשְׁבַּר עֶצֶם הַזָּנָב. אֲבָל אִם נִשְׁבַּר עֶצֶם מִצַּלְעוֹתָיו - כָּשֵׁר, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאֵינוֹ בַּגָּלוּי.
5s) A five-legged animal; t) a three-legged animal;16 u) the hooves of one of its hindlegs or forelegs was round like that of a donkey even if has split hooves; v) if the hooves of one of its hindlegs or forelegs was not split like that of a donkey. This is the meaning of the term kalut mentioned in the Torah;17 w) if its hoofs and the fibrous substance inside has shriveled, even though there remains some of that fibrous substance next to the
flesh,ה(יט) בַּעַל חָמֵשׁ רַגְלַיִם. (כ) אִם אֵין לוֹ אֶלָא שָׁלוֹשׁ רַגְלַיִם. (כא) אִם הָיְתָה אַחַת מֵרַגְלָיו וְיָדָיו פַּרְסָתָהּ עֲגוּלָה כְּשֶׁל חֲמוֹר, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהִיא סְדוּקָה וּפְרוּסָה. (כב) אִם הָיְתָה רַגְלוֹ אוֹ יָדוֹ קְלוּטָה כְּשֶׁל חֲמוֹר. וְזֶהוּ "קָלוּט" (ויקרא כב, כג) הָאָמוּר בַּתּוֹרָה. (כג) אִם נִגְמְמוּ טְלָפֶיהָ וְזַכְרוּתָן עִמָּהֶן, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁנִּשְׁאַר מִזַּכְרוּתָן מְעַט קָרוֹב לַבָּשָׂר.
flesh,ה(יט) בַּעַל חָמֵשׁ רַגְלַיִם. (כ) אִם אֵין לוֹ אֶלָא שָׁלוֹשׁ רַגְלַיִם. (כא) אִם הָיְתָה אַחַת מֵרַגְלָיו וְיָדָיו פַּרְסָתָהּ עֲגוּלָה כְּשֶׁל חֲמוֹר, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהִיא סְדוּקָה וּפְרוּסָה. (כב) אִם הָיְתָה רַגְלוֹ אוֹ יָדוֹ קְלוּטָה כְּשֶׁל חֲמוֹר. וְזֶהוּ "קָלוּט" (ויקרא כב, כג) הָאָמוּר בַּתּוֹרָה. (כג) אִם נִגְמְמוּ טְלָפֶיהָ וְזַכְרוּתָן עִמָּהֶן, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁנִּשְׁאַר מִזַּכְרוּתָן מְעַט קָרוֹב לַבָּשָׂר.
6All of the 73 blemishes18 listed disqualify an animal from being offered as a sacrifice. If an animal that is consecrated contracts one of these blemishes, it should be redeemed and it becomes like an ordinary animal with the exception of an animal that is old, sick, or foul-smelling.19 Although such animals are unfit for sacrifice, they may not be redeemed.20 Instead, they should be maintained until they contract another permanent blemish.21 Then it should be redeemed. Similarly, a consecrated animal that contracts a temporary blemish should neither be redeemed,22 nor sacrificed.23וכָּל מוּם מִשְּׁלוֹשָׁה וְשִׁבְעִים מוּם הַמְּנוּיִין בַּבְּהֵמָה, פּוֹסְלִין אוֹתָהּ מִן הַקָּרְבָּן. וְאִם נָפַל אֶחָד מֵהֶם בִּתְּמִימָה שֶׁהִיא קֹדֶשׁ - תִּפָּדֶה וְתֵצֵא לְחֻלִּין. חוּץ מִזָּקֵן וְחוֹלֶה וּמְזֹהָם, שֶׁאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵינוֹ כָּשֵׁר לְקָרְבָּן, אֵינוֹ נִפְדֶּה; אֶלָא יְהִי קַיָּם וְרוֹעֶה עַד שֶׁיִּוָּלֵד בּוֹ מוּם אַחֵר קָבוּעַ מִשְּׁאָר הַמּוּמִין, וְיִפָּדֶה. וְכֵן בֶּהֱמַת קֳדָשִׁים שֶׁנֹלַּד בָּהּ מוּם עוֹבֵר - אֵינָהּ קְרֵבָה, וְלֹא נִפְדֵּית.
7There are four temporary blemishes that disqualify both a man and an animal:24 a) a moist skin eruption;25 b) a boil that does not resemble those of Egypt;26 c) water that descends in the eyes that is not a permanent condition;27 d) a degeneration of nerves in the eye that is not permanent.28זאַרְבָּעָה מוּמִין עוֹבְרִים יֵשׁ בַּבְּהֵמָה וּבָאָדָם, וְאֵלּוּ הֵן: (א) גָּרָב לַח.
(ב) חֲזָזִית שֶׁאֵינָהּ מִצְרִית. (ג) מַיִם שֶׁיּוֹרְדִין בָּעַיִן, וְאֵינָן קְבוּעִין.
(ד) סַנְוֵרִין שֶׁאֵינָן קְבוּעִין.
(ב) חֲזָזִית שֶׁאֵינָהּ מִצְרִית. (ג) מַיִם שֶׁיּוֹרְדִין בָּעַיִן, וְאֵינָן קְבוּעִין.
(ד) סַנְוֵרִין שֶׁאֵינָן קְבוּעִין.
8The are four other ailments that if found in an animal prevent it from being sacrificed. The rationale is that such an animal is not from the “choice,” and Scripture Deuteronomy 12:11 states that sacrifices must come “from the chosen of your vows.”29 They are: a) an animal with an eruption in the white of its eye, but it does not have hair growing from it;30 b) the substance of the horns of an animal was reduced, but their inner fibrous tissue remained;31 c) the substance of its inner tonsils were reduced; or d) its inner tonsils shriveled.32חיֵשׁ שָׁם אַרְבָּעָה חֳלָיִים אֲחֵרִים, אִם נִמְצָא אֶחָד מֵהֶם בַּבְּהֵמָה - אֵין מַקְרִיבִין אוֹתָהּ, לְפִי שֶׁאֵינָהּ מִן הַמֻּבְחָר, וְהַכָּתוּב אוֹמֵר "מִבְחַר נְדָרֶיךָ" (ראה דברים יב, יא). וְאֵלּוּ הֵן: (א) מִי שֶׁבְּלֹבֶן עֵינוֹ יַבֶּלֶת שֶׁאֵין בָּהּ שֵׂעָר. (ב) אִם נִגְמְמוּ קְרָנָיו, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁנִּשְׁאַר מִזַּכְרוּתָן מְעַט סָמוּךְ לַבָּשָׂר. (ג) אִם נִפְגְמוּ חִטָּיו הַפְּנִימִיּוֹת. (ד) אִם נִגְמְמוּ חִטָּיו הַפְּנִימִיּוֹת.
If a consecrated animal had one of these blemishes, it is neither sacrificed not redeemed.33 Instead, it should be allowed to pasture until it contracts a disqualifying blemish.34 If it was sacrificed, it appears to me that it is acceptable.35אִם הָיָה אֶחָד מֵאֵלּוּ בַּקֳּדָשִׁים - לֹא קְרֵבִין, וְלֹא נִפְדִּין; אֶלָא יִרְעוּ עַד שֶׁיִּפֹּל בָּהֶן מוּם. וְאִם הִקְרִיבָן, יֵרָאֶה לִי שֶׁהֻרְצוּ.
9Similarly, when a transgression was performed with a consecrated animal36 or it killed a person, but was observed only by one witness or by the owner,37 it is neither sacrificed not redeemed until it contracts a permanent blemish.טוְכֵן בֶּהֱמַת קֳדָשִׁים שֶׁנֶּעֱבְדָה בָּהּ עֲבֵרָה, אוֹ שֶׁהֵמִיתָה אֶת הָאָדָם בְּעֵד אֶחָד אוֹ עַל פִּי הַבְּעָלִים - לֹא קְרֵבָה; וְלֹא נִפְדֵּית עַד שֶׁיִּוָּלֵד לָהּ מוּם קָבוּעַ.
10When an animal contracts one of the conditions that render it treifah38 and cause it to be forbidden to be eaten, it is forbidden to be sacrificed on the altar.39 For behold it is written Malachi 1:8: “Present it please to your governor. Would he be pleased with you or show you favor?”40יבְּהֵמָה שֶׁנֹלַּד לָהּ אַחַת מִן הַטְּרֵפוֹת הָאוֹסְרִין אוֹתָהּ בַּאֲכִילָה - אֲסוּרָה לְגַבֵּי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ. הֲרֵי הוּא אוֹמֵר "הַקְרִיבֵהוּ נָא לְפֶחָתֶךָ הֲיִרְצְךָ אוֹ הֲיִשָּׂא פָנֶיךָ" (מלאכי א, ח).
Although it is not fit to be sacrificed, it is not redeemed.41 The rationale is that we do not redeem sacrificial animals to feed their meat to the dogs. Instead, it should pasture until it dies and then be buried.42וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵינָהּ רְאוּיָה לְקָרְבָּן, אֵין פּוֹדִין אוֹתָהּ - שֶׁאֵין פּוֹדִין אֶת הַקֳּדָשִׁים לְהַאֲכִילָן לַכְּלָבִים, אֶלָא יִרְעוּ עַד שֶׁיָּמוּתוּ וְיִקָּבְרוּ.
11If it was slaughtered and discovered to be tereifah, it should be taken out to the place of burning.43 This law also applies if it is discovered that one of its internal organs is lacking even if this does not cause it to be deemed a tereifah, for example, it has only one kidney or its spleen has been removed.44 Such an animal is forbidden to be offered on the altar and must be burnt. The rationale is not because it is blemished, because an internal flaw is not considered as a disqualifying blemish.45 Instead, the rationale is that an animal that is lacking an organ should never be offered as a sacrifice, as Numbers 28:31 states: “They shall be perfect for you.” An animal with an extra organ is considered as if it was lacking one.46 Therefore if three kidneys or two spleens are found in an animal, it is unacceptable.יאנִשְׁחֲטָה וְנִמְצֵאת טְרֵפָה - הֲרֵי זוֹ תֵּצֵא לְבֵית הַשְּׂרֵפָה. וְכֵן אִם נִמְצָא אֵבֶר מֵאֵבָרֶיהָ הַפְּנִימִיִּין חָסֵר, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵינָהּ טְרֵפָה, כְּגוֹן שֶׁנִּמְצֵאת בְּכֻלְיָא אַחַת אוֹ שֶׁנִּטַּל הַטְּחוֹל - הֲרֵי זוֹ אֲסוּרָה לַמִּזְבֵּחַ, וְתִשָּׂרֵף. לֹא מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהִיא בַּעֲלַת מוּם, שֶׁאֵין חִסָרוֹן שֶׁבִּפְנִים מוּם, אֶלָא מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאֵין מַקְרִיבִין חָסֵר כְּלָל, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר "תְּמִימִם יִהְיוּ לָכֶם" (במדבר כח, יט; במדבר כח, לא). וְכָל הַיָּתֵר, כְּחָסֵר. לְפִיכָךְ, אִם נִמְצָא לָהּ שָׁלוֹשׁ כֻּלְיוֹת אוֹ שְׁנֵי טְחוֹלִים, פְּסוּלָה.
12What is meant by a permanent degeneration of nerves in the eye?47 An animal which was observed for eighty days and it did not see. We inspect it three times: on the twenty-seventh day from the time when its difficulty was sensed, on the fifty-fourth day, and on the eightieth day. If its sight returned and then was lost again,48 we count from the time it stopped seeing.יבאֵי זוֹ הִיא סַנְוֵרִין קְבוּעִים? כָּל שֶׁשָּׁהָה שְׁמוֹנִים יוֹם וְלֹא רָאָה. וּבוֹדְקִין אוֹתוֹ שְׁלוֹשָׁה פְּעָמִים - בְּיוֹם שִׁבְעָה וְעֶשְׂרִים מֵעֵת שֶׁהִרְגִּישׁוּ בּוֹ, וּבְיוֹם אַרְבָּעָה וַחֲמִשִּׁים, וּבְיוֹם שְׁמוֹנִים. אִם רָאָה, מוֹנִים לוֹ שְׁמוֹנִים מֵעֵת שֶׁפָּסְקָה הָרְאִיָּה.
13How is it known that the water in its eyes are permanent? When it ate fresh grass from Rosh Chodesh Adar until the first half of Nisan49 and then50 ate dried grass during Elul and the first half of Tishrei51 and was not healed.52 This indicates that the water is permanent.יגוּבַמֶה יִוָּדַע שֶׁהַמַּיִם קְבוּעִין? בְּשֶׁאָכְלָה עֲשָׂבִים לַחִים מֵרֹאשׁ אֲדָר וְעַד חֲצִי נִיסָן, וְאָכְלָה אַחַר כֵּן עֲשָׂבִים יְבֵשִׁים אֱלוּל וַחֲצִי תִּשְׁרֵי, וְלֹא נִתְרַפְּאָה - הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ מַיִם קְבוּעִים.
14How much of the fresh grass must be eaten in
the season for fresh grass and the dried grass in
the season for dried grass? At least53 an amount the size of a fig before its first meal in these three months.54ידוְכַמָּה תֹּאכַל מֵעֲשָׂבִים אֵלּוּ הַלַּחִים בִּזְמַן הַלַּח וְהַיְּבֵשִׁים בִּזְמַן הַיָּבֵשׁ? כִּגְרֹגֶּרֶת אוֹ יוֹתֵר קֹדֶם סְעוּדָה רִאשׁוֹנָה שֶׁל כָל יוֹם בִּשְׁלוֹשָׁה חֳדָשִׁים אֵלּוּ.
the season for fresh grass and the dried grass in
the season for dried grass? At least53 an amount the size of a fig before its first meal in these three months.54ידוְכַמָּה תֹּאכַל מֵעֲשָׂבִים אֵלּוּ הַלַּחִים בִּזְמַן הַלַּח וְהַיְּבֵשִׁים בִּזְמַן הַיָּבֵשׁ? כִּגְרֹגֶּרֶת אוֹ יוֹתֵר קֹדֶם סְעוּדָה רִאשׁוֹנָה שֶׁל כָל יוֹם בִּשְׁלוֹשָׁה חֳדָשִׁים אֵלּוּ.
They must be eaten each day after drinking and it must be free to roam in the field while eating. It should not be alone, but with another animal for company. If all of this was done for it and it still was not healed, the water is definitely permanent. If one of these factors was lacking, there is a doubt concerning the matter55 and the animal should be neither offered,56 nor redeemed.57וְצָרִיךְ שֶׁתֹּאכַל אוֹתָן בְּכָל יוֹם אַחַר שְׁתִיָּה, וְתִהְיֶה מֻתֶּרֶת בַּשָּׂדֶה בְּעֵת אֲכִילָה, וְלֹא תִהְיֶה לְבַדָּהּ, אֶלָא הִיא וּבְהֵמָה אַחֶרֶת לִצְוֹת עִמָּהּ. אִם נַעֲשָׂה לָהּ כָּל אֵלּוּ וְלֹא נִתְרַפָּאת - הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ קְבוּעִין וַדַּאי. וְאִם חָסֵר אַחַת מִכָּל אֵלּוּ - הֲרֵי זֶה סָפֵק, וְאֵינָהּ קְרֵבָה, וְלֹא נִפְדֵּית.
15What is implied? It ate fresh grass as prescribed throughout Adar and during the first half of Nisan. Then it ate dried grass as prescribed during the second half of Nisan and the month of Iyar thus it ate the grasses for three months in the proper order.58 Or it ate a fig-sized amount of grass after eating or before drinking, or it was tied, alone, or located in a garden near a city. If it was not healed after all these treatments, there is an unresolved doubt whether the blemish is considered as permanent or temporary. Hence, if one blemished it in another manner, he is not liable for lashes.59 If it partook of the grasses in the prescribed manner during the prescribed times for eating and it was not healed, it is considered as permanently blemished.טוכֵּיצַד? אָכְלָה הַלַּח כְּמִשְׁפָּטוֹ בַּאֲדָר כֻּלּוֹ וַחֲצִי נִיסָן, וְאָכְלָה אַחֲרָיו הַיָּבֵשׁ כְּמִשְׁפָּטוֹ בַּחֲצִי נִיסָן וְאִיָּר, שֶׁנִּמְצָא שֶׁאָכְלָה בִּשְׁלוֹשָׁה חֳדָשִׁים עַל הַסֵּדֶר, אוֹ שֶׁאָכְלָה כִּגְרֹגֶּרֶת אַחַר אֲכִילָה אוֹ קֹדֶם שְׁתִיָּה, אוֹ שֶׁהָיְתָה קְשׁוּרָה, אוֹ שֶׁהָיְתָה לְבַדָּהּ, אוֹ שֶׁהָיְתָה בְּגִנָּה הַסְּמוּכָה לָעִיר, וְלֹא נִתְרַפָּאת - מִכָּל אֵלּוּ סָפֵק קְבוּעִין אוֹ עוֹבְרִים. לְפִיכָךְ אִם הִטִּיל בָּהּ מוּם אַחֵר, אֵינוֹ לוֹקֶה. אָכְלָה כְּמִשְׁפָּטֶיהָ בִּזְמַנֵּי הָאֲכִילָה וְלֹא נִתְרַפְּאָה - הֲרֵי הִיא בַּעֲלַת מוּם קָבוּעַ.
16There is an unresolved doubt whether it is considered as permanently blemished from the time it contracted the condition or from the time they despaired of its recovery. Therefore if someone redeems it before they despaired of its recovery and then derived benefit from the object used to redeem the animal60 after they despaired of its recovery,61 there is an unresolved doubt whether he derived unauthorized benefit from consecrated animals. Therefore62 he does not bring a sacrifice to atone for this transgression, as will be explained in the appropriate place.63טזיֵשׁ בַּדָּבָר סָפֵק, אִם לְמַפְרֵעַ הִיא בַּעֲלַת מוּם מֵעֵת שֶׁבָּאוּ לָהּ הַמַּיִם אוֹ מֵעֵת שֶׁנִּתְיָאֲשׁוּ מֵרְפוּאָתָהּ. לְפִיכָךְ, הַפּוֹדֶה אוֹתָהּ קֹדֶם שֶׁנִּתְיָאֲשׁוּ מֵרְפוּאָתָהּ, וְנֶהֱנָה בְּאוֹתוֹ הַפִּדְיוֹן אַחַר שֶׁנִּתְיָאֲשׁוּ מֵרְפוּאָתָהּ - הֲרֵי הוּא סָפֵק מוֹעֵל, וְאֵינוֹ מֵבִיא קָרְבַּן מְעִילָה, כְּמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר בִּמְקוֹמוֹ.
Footnotes
1.
I.e., a priest from serving in the Temple.
2.
From being offered as a sacrifice.
3.
See Hilchot Bi’at HaMikdash, ch.7.
4.
See the gloss of the Radbaz who explains that it appears that the Rambam’s intent is not that if these conditions are found in men, they do not disqualify a priest. Instead, the intent is that it is extremely uncommon to find such a condition in a human. Hence, they are “not appropriate.” Nevertheless, if a priest does have such a condition, it is considered as a blemish and he is disqualified.
5.
If, however, both are small or both are large, this is not considered a blemish. Note the contrast to the blemishes for humans mentioned in Hilchot Bi’at HaMikdash 8:6 (Kessef Mishneh).
6.
If, however, it does not have a hair, it is not considered as a blemish (Bechorot 40b).
7.
Compare to Hilchot Bi’at HaMikdash 7:6.
8.
Our translation is taken from the Rambam’s Commentary to the Mishnah (Bechorot 6:4). There he also suggests an alternative meaning, the animal’s teeth.
9.
If, however, their substance was merely reduced, this is not considered as a disqualifying blemish. See Halachah 8 and notes.
10.
I.e., this explanation is necessary because usually, the inner tonsils are not seen.
11.
Compare to Halachah 8.
12.
Similarly, if a male was born without horns, their absence is not considered as a blemish (Ma’aseh Rokeach).
13.
I e., the portion of the female organ that projects outside the body [the Rambam’s Commentary to the Mishnah (Bechorot 6:5)].
14.
Rashi (Bechorot 39b) explains that the tail of an animal is made up of several vertebrae. If it is severed in the midst of a vertebra, it is considered as a blemish. If, however, it is severed at the joint between one vertebra and another, it is not considered as a blemish.
15.
The commentaries refer to Hilchot Bi’at HaMikdash 7:11 which states: “Whenever there is a groove made in any bone that is apparent, it is considered a blemish. It is included in the category charutz mentioned in the Torah.” The tail is considered such a limb; the ribs are not.
16.
See the parallel to Hilchot Shechitah 8:11.
18.
The 23 mentioned here and the 50 mentioned in Hilchot Bi’at HaMikdash, ch. 7.
19.
These blemishes are mentioned in Hilchot Bi’at HaMikdash 7:12-13.
20.
Rashi (Bechorot 41b) states: “Because these are not absolute blemishes.”
21.
Which would disqualify it in its own right.
22.
Because as of yet, it is not permanently disqualified as a sacrifice.
23.
Because in its present state, it is not fit for sacrifice.
24.
In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Bechorot 2:2), the Rambam also mentions a dislocated or broken limb that can be healed.
25.
See Chapter 1, Halachah 5, and Hilchot Bi’at HaMikdash 6:4.
26.
Unlike the boils visited upon the Egyptians in the Ten Plagues, these boils are moist inside and can possibly heal.
27.
And thus prevents the animal or the person from seeing. As the Rambam explains in his Commentary to the Mishnah (Bechorot 6:3), there are times when this blemish will heal and the water will cease running. Then the sight of the person or animal will return. See Halachot 13-15 which describe the process through which it is determined whether the water in an animal’s eyes is permanent or not.
28.
See the Rambam’s Commentary to the Mishnah (loc. cit.).
29.
The commentaries note that the Hebrew wording is not quoted exactly. See also Chapter 7, Halachah 11.
30.
If hair is growing from it, it is considered as a permanent blemish, as stated in Halachah 2.
31.
Compare to Halachah 4.
32.
Compare to Halachah 3. Since its inner tonsils are seen only when it shrieks, as long as something of their substance remains, it is not considered a disqualifying blemish. Nevertheless, the animal is not sacrificed.
33.
For an animal is redeemed only when it has a disqualifying blemish.
34.
At which point, it can be redeemed.
35.
For its blemish did not disqualify it..
36.
It was sodomized, used for relations with a woman, worshiped as a false deity, or consecrated for that purpose, as stated in Chapter 3, Halachah 6.
37.
Were it to have been observed by two witnesses, Torah Law would require it to be executed. This punishment is not given when the murder was observed only by one witness or the owner. See Chapter 4, Halachah 2.
38.
An animal that will die within twelve months and is hence, forbidden to be eaten.
39.
See the Kessef Mishneh who debates whether the disqualification is Scriptural or Rabbinic in origin.
40.
The passage in Malachi speaks of bringing blemished animals for sacrifice. The prophet asks whether a mortal governor would appreciate being given such offerings. Certainly, they are inappropriate to be offered to God.
41.
For there would be no purpose in its redemption, since it is inappropriate to use it as food for animals as the Rambam continues to explain.
42.
See Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashin 19:11.
43.
I.e., the place where impure sacrifices are burnt not as offerings. See ibid.:1. If the animal was known to be tereifah and slaughtered, it should be buried rather than burnt (Radbaz).
44.
See Hilchot Shechitah 8:25; 6:20 which states that these conditions do not render an animal as treifah.
45.
See Halachah 4; Hilchot Bi’at HaMikdash 7:11.
46.
And is hence disqualified as a sacrifice. This is a general principle in Torah Law. See Hilchot Bi’at HaMikdash 7:5; Hilchot Shechitah 8:4, 11, et al.
47.
Which disqualifies an animal as a sacrifice, as stated in Hilchot Bi’at HaMikdash 7:5; see also Halachah 7 of this chapter.
48.
In the midst of the above period.
49.
In Eretz Yisrael, these months are directly after the rainy season and the grasses are still fresh.
50.
I.e., the grasses were eaten in this order.
51.
In these months, rain has not descended for more than half a year and the grasses have dried.
52.
Eating these grasses is a natural cure for this malady. See the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Bechorot 6:3).
53.
Needless to say, eating more increases the therapeutic value.
54.
I.e., the two month and a half periods.
55.
Our Sages (Bechorot 39a) discuss all these aspects of the animal’s treatment. If the treatment was not administered correctly, it is possible that the blemish is not permanent and could be healed through proper treatment.
56.
For even if the blemish is merely temporary, it is, nevertheless, unfit to be sacrificed.
57.
For until it is established that the blemish is permanent, the animal cannot be redeemed.
58.
But not at the appropriate time of year.
59.
It is forbidden to cause a consecrated animal to incur a disqualifying blemish. Nevertheless, if the animal is already blemished, one who causes such a blemish is not liable for lashes, as stated in Chapter 1, Halachah 8. Since we are unsure of this animal’s status, we cannot hold the one who causes the blemish liable.
60.
Thus if the redemption was valid, the article used to redeem the animal is consecrated and the person who benefited from it transgressed. If, however, the redemption was not valid, the article is not given that status and hence, there is no transgression involved.
61.
I.e., even if the benefit was derived after they despaired of its recovery, in which instance, it was definitely permanently blemished, since it was redeemed before that time, the situation is still questionable, as explained.
62.
I.e., because the matter is unresolved.
63.
See Hilchot Me’ilah 1:5; Hilchot Shegagot 9:11. As will be explained in the notes to those halachot, it is not necessary to bring a sacrifice conditionally, stipulating: “If I transgressed, this will serve as atonement for my transgression, and if I did not transgress, it will be considered a free-will offering” (Radbaz).
Rabbi Eliyahu Touger is a noted author and translator, widely published for his works on Chassidut and Maimonides.
Published and copyright by Moznaim Publications, all rights reserved.
To purchase this book or the entire series, please click here.
To purchase this book or the entire series, please click here.
The text on this page contains sacred literature. Please do not deface or discard.
Vowelized Hebrew text courtesy Torat Emet under CC 2.5 license.
The text on this page contains sacred literature. Please do not deface or discard.
