Study Bekhorot folio 37B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
נעקרו אין, נפגמו ונגממו לא? בעינא ״מום רע״, וליכא! אי הכי, מום עובר נמי! אלמה תנן: ולא מן העור?
It can be inferred that if the internal gums were extracted then yes, one may slaughter the firstborn, but if they were merely damaged or they were scratched, one may not, since it is a hidden blemish. The Talmud answers: I require that it be an “ill blemish,” which must be exposed and degrading, and a hidden blemish is not considered such an “ill blemish.” The Talmud asks: If so, that all blemishes are included by the words: “Any ill blemish,” aside from hidden blemishes, a temporary blemish should also render it permitted for the firstborn to be slaughtered. Why then did we learn in the Mishnah: If the firstborn’s ear was damaged and lacking from the cartilage it may be slaughtered, but not if it is damaged and lacking from the skin, since it is a temporary blemish?
מום עובר סברא הוא, השתא מיפרק לא פרקינן עלויה, משחט שחטינן עלויה? דתניא: ״ואם כל בהמה טמאה אשר לא יקריבו ממנה קרבן לה׳״ — בבעלי מומין הכתוב מדבר.
The Talmud answers: A temporary blemish is not excluded by the exegesis but is based on logical reasoning: Now, if we do not even redeem an offering due to a temporary blemish, will we slaughter a firstborn outside the Temple, for which redemption is not performed, due to a temporary blemish? The Talmud explains the source for this assertion that an offering is not redeemed because of a temporary blemish. As it is taught in a baraita: “And if it be any impure animal, of which they may not bring an offering to YHWH” (Leviticus 27:11). The verse is speaking of ritually pure animals with blemishes.
אתה אומר בבעלי מומין שנפדו הכתוב מדבר, או אינו אלא בבהמה טמאה ממש? כשהוא אומר ״ואם בבהמה הטמאה״, הרי בהמה טמאה אמור, הא מה אני מקיים ״אשר לא יקריבו ממנה״? הוי אומר: זה בעלי מומין שנפדו.
The baraita continues: Do you say that the verse is speaking of animals with blemishes that were redeemed, or is it referring only to an actual impure animal, such as a donkey or a horse that was consecrated; but with regard to a kosher animal, perhaps its consecrated status cannot be removed by redemption even if it was blemished? When the verse states: “And if it be of an impure animal” (Leviticus 27:27), a non-kosher animal is mentioned. So how do I realize the meaning of: “Of which they may not bring an offering”? You must say that this is referring to blemished animals that were redeemed, indicating that redemption is permitted.