Bekhorot 42A

אלמה תניא: ״הזכר״⁠ — ולא טומטום ואנדרוגינוס! סמי מיכן טומטום.

Why, then, is it taught in a baraita that the verse: “Then your valuation should be for the male” (Leviticus 27:3), includes one whose status as a male is certain but not a tumtum or a hermaphrodite? The Talmud answers: Omit from this baraita the mention of a tumtum, as it is referring only to a hermaphrodite, which is a distinct entity.

תא שמע: יכול לא יהא בערך איש, אבל יהא בערך אשה? תלמוד לומר: ״הזכר... אם נקבה״, ולא טומטום ואנדרוגינוס! סמי מיכן טומטום.

The Talmud suggests: Come and hear the continuation of that baraita: One might have thought that these should not be valuated according to the valuation of a man, but they should 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 should be 30 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 Talmud again answers: Omit from this baraita the mention of a tumtum, as it is referring only to a hermaphrodite.

תא שמע: ״אם זכר אם נקבה״⁠ — זכר ודאי נקבה ודאית, ולא טומטום ואנדרוגינוס. סמי מיכן טומטום.

The Talmud 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 Talmud responds: Omit from this baraita the mention of a tumtum.

תא שמע: ״הזכר״⁠ — ולא נקבה. כשהוא אומר למטה ״זכר״, שאין תלמוד לומר; מה תלמוד לומר? להוציא טומטום ואנדרוגינוס. סמי מיכן טומטום.

The Talmud 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 Talmud answers: Omit from this baraita the mention of a tumtum.