## Bekhorot Daf 40a

###### Bekhorot 40a:1
[Bekhorot 40a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/40a:1)

בְּשׁוּשַׁן הַבִּירָה, אַחַת עַל קֶרֶן מִזְרָחִית צְפוֹנִית וְאַחַת עַל קֶרֶן מִזְרָחִית דְּרוֹמִית, שֶׁעַל קֶרֶן מִזְרָחִית צְפוֹנִית הָיְתָה יְתֵירָה עַל שֶׁל מֹשֶׁה חֲצִי אֶצְבַּע, וְשֶׁעַל קֶרֶן מִזְרָחִית דְּרוֹמִית הָיְתָה יְתֵירָה עָלֶיהָ חֲצִי אֶצְבַּע, נִמְצֵאת יְתֵירָה עַל שֶׁל מֹשֶׁה אֶצְבַּע.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**in** the chamber of **Shushan the capital,** which was located above the eastern gate of the Temple Mount, **one in the northeast corner and one in the southeast corner.** The one **that was in the northeast corner was longer than** the cubit used **by Moses** in the building of the Tabernacle, which was six handbreadths, by **half a fingerbreadth,** and the one **that was in the southeast corner was longer than** the other one by another **half a fingerbreadth.** One therefore **finds it longer than Moses’** cubit by a full **fingerbreadth.**


###### Bekhorot 40a:2
[Bekhorot 40a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/40a:2)

וְלָמָה הָיוּ אַחַת גְּדוֹלָה וְאַחַת קְטַנָּה? (כשהיו) [שֶׁהָיוּ] אוּמָּנִין נוֹטְלִין בַּקְּטַנָּה, וּמַחְזִירִין בַּגְּדוֹלָה, שֶׁלֹּא יָבוֹאוּ לִידֵי מְעִילָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The mishna continues: **And why did** the Sages **say** that there should be two measures of a cubit, **one large and one small?** It was **so that the artisans** who were working in the Temple **would take** payment according the amount of work they did, as measured **by the small** cubit, **and return** it to the Temple through their work, as measured **by the large** cubit, **so they would not come to misuse consecrated property.** If they would accept any payment that they did not deserve, they would be misusing consecrated property. It was with regard to the fingerbreadth mentioned in this mishna that the *baraita* cited above teaches that it is one-fourth of a handbreadth of any average person.


###### Bekhorot 40a:3
[Bekhorot 40a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/40a:3)

תַּרְתֵּי לְמָה לִי? חֲדָא — דְּכַסְפָּא וְזַהֲבָא, וַחֲדָא — דְּבִנְיָינָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **Why do I** need **two** large cubits? The Gemara answers: **One,** the shorter of the two, was used **to** measure **silver and gold.** Since silver and gold were valuable, the difference between the two measurements was set at only half a fingerbreadth, so that the artisans would not suffer too great a loss. **And** the other **one,** which was longer than Moses’ cubit by a full fingerbreadth, was used **in** the **construction** of wood and stone structures.


###### Bekhorot 40a:4
[Bekhorot 40a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/40a:4)

רַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק, וְאִי תֵּימָא רַב הוּנָא בַּר נָתָן, לְאוֹתָהּ שֶׁשָּׁנִינוּ: שֶׁיֵּשׁ בָּשָׂר בֵּין חוּלְיָא לְחוּלְיָא מְלֹא אֶצְבַּע.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak, and some say Rav Huna bar Natan,** said: This *baraita*, which states that a fingerbreadth is one-fourth of a handbreadth of any average person, is referring **to that which we learned** in the mishna here with regard to the blemishes of a firstborn animal: In a case **where there is a full fingerbreadth of flesh between one joint and another joint.** That measure of a full fingerbreadth is one-fourth of a handbreadth.


###### Bekhorot 40a:5
[Bekhorot 40a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/40a:5)

**מַתְנִי׳** אֵין לוֹ בֵּיצִים, אוֹ אֵין לוֹ אֶלָּא בֵּיצָה אַחַת. רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל אוֹמֵר: אִם יֵשׁ לוֹ שְׁנֵי כִּיסִין — יֵשׁ לוֹ שְׁתֵּי בֵּיצִים, אֵין לוֹ שְׁנֵי כִּיסִין — אֵין לוֹ אֶלָּא בֵּיצָה אַחַת. רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר: מוֹשִׁיבוֹ עַל עַכּוּזוֹ וּמְמַעֵךְ, אִם יֵשׁ בֵּיצָה — סוֹפָהּ לָצֵאת. מַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁמִּיעֵךְ וְלֹא יָצָא, נִשְׁחֲטָה וְנִמְצֵאת דְּבוּקָה בַּכְּסָלִים, וְהִתִּיר רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא וְאָסַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** The firstborn animal may be slaughtered if **it has no testicles or** if **it has only one testicle. Rabbi Yishmael says: If** the animal **has two** scrotal **sacs,** it can be assumed that **it has two testicles;** if the animal **does not have two** scrotal **sacs,** it can be assumed that **it has only one testicle. Rabbi Akiva says:** The matter can be ascertained: **One seats** the animal **on its rump and mashes** the sac; **if there is a testicle, ultimately** it is going **to emerge.** There was **an incident where one mashed** the sac **and** the testicle **did not emerge.** Then, the animal **was slaughtered and** the testicle **was discovered attached to the loins. And Rabbi Akiva permitted** the consumption of its flesh, as the testicle had not previously emerged, **and Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri prohibited** its consumption.


###### Bekhorot 40a:6
[Bekhorot 40a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/40a:6)

**גְּמָ׳** הַשְׁתָּא אֵין לוֹ אֶלָּא בֵּיצָה אַחַת אָמְרַתְּ הָוֵי מוּמָא, אֵין לוֹ כְּלָל מִיבַּעְיָא? חַסּוֹרֵי מִיחַסְּרָא וְהָכִי קָתָנֵי: אֵין לוֹ שְׁתֵּי בֵּיצִים בִּשְׁתֵּי כִּיסִין אֶלָּא בְּכִיס אֶחָד, אִי נָמֵי שְׁתֵּי כִּיסִין וּבֵיצָה אַחַת — הֲרֵי זֶה מוּם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** The mishna teaches that a firstborn may be slaughtered if it has no testicles or if it has only one testicle. The Gemara asks: **Now** that with regard to a case where **it has only one testicle you said** that **it is a blemish, is** it **necessary** to state the same in a case where **it has no** testicles **at all?** The Gemara answers that the mishna **is incomplete and this** is what **it is teaching:** If **it does not have two testicles in two** scrotal **sacs, but in one sac,** or **alternatively,** if it has **two sacs and one testicle, it is a blemish.**


###### Bekhorot 40a:7
[Bekhorot 40a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/40a:7)

רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל אוֹמֵר: יֵשׁ לוֹ שְׁתֵּי כִּיסִים — בְּיָדוּעַ שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ שְׁתֵּי בֵּיצִים, אֵין לוֹ אֶלָּא כִּיס אֶחָד — כְּמִי שֶׁאֵין לוֹ אֶלָּא בֵּיצָה אַחַת דָּמֵי, וַאֲתָא רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא לְמֵימַר: בְּיָדוּעַ לָא אָמְרִינַן, אֶלָּא מוֹשִׁיבוֹ עַל עַכּוּזוֹ וּמְמַעֵךְ, אִם יֵשׁ בֵּיצָה סוֹפוֹ לָצֵאת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara continues this version of the mishna. **Rabbi Yishmael says:** If the animal **has two** scrotal **sacs, it is known that it has two testicles,** and therefore it is not blemished and may not be slaughtered; if the animal **has only one** scrotal **sac it is considered like one that has only one testicle,** even if it actually has two testicles. **And Rabbi Akiva comes to say:** If it has two sacs, **we do not say** the claim of: **It is known. Rather, one seats** the animal **on its rump and mashes** the sac; **if there is a testicle, ultimately** it is going **to emerge.** If the testicle does not emerge, clearly it has only one testicle and is blemished.


###### Bekhorot 40a:8
[Bekhorot 40a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/40a:8)

וּמַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁמִּיעֵךְ וְלֹא יָצָא וְכוּ׳. תַּנְיָא, אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי: מַעֲשֶׂה בְּפָירָן שֶׁל בֵּית מְנַחֵם, שֶׁמִּיעֵךְ וְלֹא יָצָאת, וְנִשְׁחֲטָה וְנִמְצֵאת דְּבוּקָה בַּכְּסָלִים, וְהִתִּיר רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, וְאָסַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches: **And** there was **an incident where one mashed** the sac **and** the testicle **did not emerge.** Then the animal was slaughtered and the testicle was discovered attached to the loins. And Rabbi Akiva permitted the consumption of its flesh, and Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri prohibited its consumption. The Gemara elaborates on this incident: **It is taught** in a *baraita* that **Rabbi Yosei said:** There was **an incident in Piran of Beit Menaḥem where** a firstborn animal apparently had only one testicle, and someone **mashed** its sac **and** the other testicle **did not emerge. And** the animal **was slaughtered and** the testicle **was discovered attached to the loins. And Rabbi Akiva permitted** its consumption, **and Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri prohibited** its consumption.


###### Bekhorot 40a:9
[Bekhorot 40a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/40a:9)

אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא לְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי: עַד מָתַי אַתָּה מְכַלֶּה מָמוֹנָן שֶׁל יִשְׂרָאֵל! אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי לְרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא: עַד מָתַי אַתָּה מַאֲכִיל יִשְׂרָאֵל נְבֵילוֹת! לָאו מִישְׁחָט שַׁחְטֵיהּ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* continues: **Rabbi Akiva said to Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri: Until when will you consume the property of the Jewish people** by prohibiting animals in such cases? **Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri said to Rabbi Akiva: Until when will you feed the Jewish people** unslaughtered animal **carcasses?** The Gemara asks: How could Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri use the term animal carcasses here? After all, **aren’t they** properly **slaughtered?**


###### Bekhorot 40a:10
[Bekhorot 40a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/40a:10)

אֶלָּא: טְרֵיפוֹת. לָא אִיסּוּר טְרֵיפוֹת הוּא?! אֶלָּא: עַד מָתַי אַתָּה מַאֲכִיל יִשְׂרָאֵל קָדָשִׁים בַּחוּץ!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara responds: **Rather,** Yoḥanan ben Nuri actually referred to **animals with a wound that will cause them to die within twelve months [*tereifot*].** The Gemara challenges: But **it is not a prohibition of *tereifot*. Rather,** he said: **Until when will you feed the Jewish people sacrificial** animals **outside** the Temple courtyard? According to Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri this is not a blemish, and therefore the animal is an unblemished offering, which may not be eaten outside the Temple.


###### Bekhorot 40a:11
[Bekhorot 40a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/40a:11)

**מַתְנִי׳** בַּעַל חָמֵשׁ רַגְלַיִם, אוֹ שֶׁאֵין לוֹ אֶלָּא שָׁלֹשׁ, וְשֶׁרַגְלָיו קְלוּטוֹת כְּשֶׁל חֲמוֹר, וְהַשָּׁחוּל וְהַכָּסוּל. אֵיזֶהוּ שָׁחוּל? שֶׁנִּשְׁמְטָה יְרֵיכוֹ. וְכָסוּל? שֶׁאַחַת מִירֵיכוֹתָיו גְּבוֹהוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** An animal **with five legs, or** one **that has only three, or** one **whose** hooves on its **legs were closed like** those **of a donkey** and not split, **or the *shaḥul*, or the *kasul*** may be slaughtered. **What is a *shaḥul*?** It is an animal with **a thighbone that was dislocated. And** what is **a *kasul*?** It is an animal whose build is asymmetrical in **that one of its thighs is higher** than the other.


###### Bekhorot 40a:12
[Bekhorot 40a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/40a:12)

**גְּמָ׳** אָמַר רַב הוּנָא: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא שֶׁחָסֵר וְיָתֵר בַּיָּד, אֲבָל בָּרֶגֶל — טְרֵפָה נָמֵי הָוֵי, דְּכֹל יָתֵיר כְּנָטוּל דָּמֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** The mishna teaches that an animal with five legs or three legs is blemished. **Rav Huna says:** The Sages **taught** this **only** in a case **where** the animal **was missing or had an additional foreleg. But** if it was missing or had **an** additional **hind leg,** not only is it blemished, but **it is also a *tereifa*.** The reason is **that any extra** limb **is like a removed** limb, and an animal whose hind leg was removed is a *tereifa*.


###### Bekhorot 40a:13
[Bekhorot 40a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/40a:13)

אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא: לָא תֵּימָא דַּעֲגִילָן וְלָא סְדִיקָן, אֶלָּא כֵּיוָן דַּעֲגִילָן, אַף עַל גַּב דִּסְדִיקָן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
With regard to the ruling of the mishna that an animal whose hooves were closed like those of a donkey is blemished, **Rav Pappa says: Do not say** that it is a blemish only in a case **where** its hooves are entirely like those of a donkey, i.e., **round and not split** at all. **Rather, when they are round, even though they are** also **split,** it is still considered a blemish.


###### Bekhorot 40a:14
[Bekhorot 40a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/40a:14)

וְהַשָּׁחוּל וְהַכָּסוּל וְכוּ׳. תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: אֵיזֶהוּ כָּסוּל וְאֵיזֶהוּ שָׁחוּל? שָׁחוּל — שֶׁנִּשְׁמְטָה יְרֵיכוֹ, כָּסוּל — שֶׁרַגְלוֹ אֶחָד בְּתוֹךְ הַכֶּסֶל, וְרַגְלוֹ אֶחָד עַל גַּבֵּי הַכֶּסֶל. תָּנָא: הַשָּׂרוּעַ וְהַקָּלוּט — שָׂרוּעַ שֶׁנִּשְׁתַּרְבֵּב לוֹ יְרֵיכוֹ, קָלוּט — שֶׁרַגְלָיו קְלוּטוֹת כְּשֶׁל חֲמוֹר וּכְשֶׁל סוּס.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The mishna teaches: **Or the *shaḥul*, or the *kasul*** may be slaughtered. In this regard, **the Sages taught: What is** the ***kasul* and what is** the ***shaḥul*?** The ***shaḥul*** is an animal with **a thighbone that was dislocated.** The ***kasul*** is an animal that is irregular in **that one of its legs is inside the loin,** i.e., in its proper place, **and** in **one of its legs** the bone is dislocated and is **above the loin.** It is **taught** in a *baraita*: What are **the *saru’a* and *kalut*** mentioned in the Torah (see Leviticus 22:23) among the animals disqualified from being sacrificed? The ***saru’a*** is one **whose thigh is longer** than the other; the ***kalut*** is one **whose** hooves on **its legs are closed like** those **of a donkey and like** those **of a horse.**


###### Bekhorot 40a:15
[Bekhorot 40a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/40a:15)

**מַתְנִי׳** נִשְׁבַּר עֶצֶם יָדוֹ וְעֶצֶם רַגְלוֹ, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵינוֹ נִיכָּר. מוּמִין אֵלּוּ מָנָה אִילָא בְּיַבְנֶה, וְהוֹדוּ לוֹ חֲכָמִים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** Additional blemishes that permit the slaughter of the firstborn include those where **the bone of its foreleg or the bone of its hind leg was broken, even though it is not conspicuous.** With regard to **these blemishes** listed in this chapter, **Ila,** who was expert in blemishes of the firstborn, **enumerated** them **in Yavne, and the Sages deferred to his** expertise.


###### Bekhorot 40a:16
[Bekhorot 40a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/40a:16)

וְעוֹד שְׁלֹשָׁה הוֹסִיף, אָמְרוּ לוֹ: לֹא שָׁמַעְנוּ אֶת אֵלּוּ. שֶׁגַּלְגַּל עֵינוֹ עָגוֹל כְּשֶׁל אָדָם, וּפִיו דּוֹמֶה כְּשֶׁל חֲזִיר, וְשֶׁנִּיטַּל רוֹב הַמְדַבֵּר בִּלְשׁוֹנוֹ. בֵּית דִּין שֶׁל אַחֲרֵיהֶן אָמְרוּ: הֲרֵי זֶה מוּם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** Ila **added three additional** blemishes, and the Sages **said to him: We did not hear** about **those.** Ila added: An animal **whose eye is round like** that **of a person, or whose mouth is similar to** that **of a pig, or where most of** the segment of **its tongue** corresponding to the segment that facilitates **speech** in the tongue of a person **was removed. The court that followed them said** with regard to each of those three blemishes: **That is a blemish** that enables the slaughter of the firstborn.


###### Bekhorot 40a:17
[Bekhorot 40a:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/40a:17)

**גְּמָ׳** אֵינוֹ נִיכָּר, מִי קָא הָוֵי מוּמָא? אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא: אֵינוֹ נִיכָּר מֵחֲמַת עַצְמוֹ, אֲבָל נִיכָּר מֵחֲמַת מְלָאכָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** The mishna teaches that if the bone of its foreleg or the bone of its hind leg was broken it is considered a blemish, despite the fact that it is not conspicuous. The Gemara asks: If **it is not conspicuous, is it a blemish?** A blemish must be on an exposed part of the body (see 37b). **Rav Pappa says:** The mishna means that **it is not conspicuous on its own account,** i.e., the shape of the leg is no different from the usual. **But it is conspicuous on account of** its **work,** i.e., the manner in which the animal walks.


###### Bekhorot 40a:18
[Bekhorot 40a:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/40a:18)

מוּמִין אֵלּוּ מָנָה וְכוּ׳. לְמֵימְרָא דְּלָאו הַיְינוּ אוֹרְחֵיהּ? וּרְמִינְהוּ: הַמַּפֶּלֶת מִין בְּהֵמָה וְחַיָּה וָעוֹף, בֵּין טְמֵאִין בֵּין טְהוֹרִין, אִם זָכָר תֵּשֵׁב לְזָכָר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches that with regard to **these blemishes** listed in this chapter, Ila **enumerated** them in Yavne, and he added three more, including an animal whose eye is round like that of a person. The Gemara asks: Is this **to say that it is not the manner** of animals to have eyes of this kind? **And** one can **raise a contradiction** from a mishna (*Nidda* 21a): With regard to a woman **who miscarries** a fetus in the form of **a type of domesticated animal, undomesticated animal, or bird, whether it is a non-kosher** animal **or whether it is a kosher** animal, **if it is male,** the woman **observes** the periods of impurity, i.e., seven days, and purity, i.e., thirty-three days, established in the Torah **for** a woman who gives birth to **a male.**


###### Bekhorot 40a:19
[Bekhorot 40a:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/40a:19)

אִם נְקֵבָה — תֵּשֵׁב לִנְקֵבָה, אֵינוֹ יָדוּעַ — תֵּשֵׁב לְזָכָר וְלִנְקֵבָה, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**If** it is **female,** the woman **observes** the periods of impurity, i.e., fourteen days, and purity, i.e., sixty-six days, established in the Torah **for** a woman who gives birth to **a female.** If its sex **is unknown,** the woman **observes** the more severe restrictions from the case of the birth **of a male and** the more severe restrictions from the case of the birth **of a female:** She is impure for fourteen days like a woman who gave birth to a female, but blood that she sees thereafter is pure until only forty days after birth, like a woman who gave birth to a male. This is **the statement of Rabbi Meir.**


###### Bekhorot 40a:20
[Bekhorot 40a:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/40a:20)

וְאָמַר רַבָּה בַּר בַּר חָנָה אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: מַאי טַעְמֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי מֵאִיר? הוֹאִיל וְגַלְגַּל עֵינוֹ עָגוֹל כְּשֶׁל אָדָם! אָמַר רַב יוֹסֵף: לָא קַשְׁיָא, הָא בְּאוּכָּמָא, הָא בְּחִיוָּורָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And Rabba bar bar Ḥana says** that **Rabbi Yoḥanan says: What is the reason of Rabbi Meir? Since the eye** of these animals **is round like** that **of a person,** a woman who miscarries a fetus of this kind is impure. **Rav Yosef said** in resolution of this apparent contradiction: It is **not difficult; this** is referring **to the black** portion of the eye, whereas **that** is referring **to the white** portion of the eye.


###### Bekhorot 40a:21
[Bekhorot 40a:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/40a:21)

וּפִיו דּוֹמֶה כְּשֶׁל חֲזִיר. אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא: לָא תֵּימָא דִּשְׁפִיד וּפְרִוס, אֶלָּא כֵּיוָן דִּפְרִוס אַף עַל גַּב דְּלָא שְׁפִיד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The mishna teaches: **Or its mouth is similar to** that **of a pig. Rav Pappa says: Do not say** that this is referring only to a case **where** the mouth is **pointed and** the upper lip **overlaps** the bottom lip, exactly like that of a pig. **Rather, when it overlaps, even though it is not pointed,** this is a blemish.


###### Bekhorot 40a:22
[Bekhorot 40a:22](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/40a:22)

וְשֶׁנִּיטַּל רוֹב הַמְדַבֵּר שֶׁבִּלְשׁוֹנוֹ. מַתְנִיתִין מַנִּי? רַבִּי יְהוּדָה הִיא, דְּתַנְיָא: וְאֶת שֶׁנִּיטַּל רוֹב הַלָּשׁוֹן, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: רוֹב הַמְדַבֵּר שֶׁל לְשׁוֹנוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The mishna teaches: **Or that most of** the segment of **its tongue** corresponding to the segment that facilitates **speech** in the tongue of a person **was removed.** The Gemara asks: **Whose** opinion is expressed in **the mishna? It is** the opinion of **Rabbi Yehuda, as it is taught** in a *baraita*: **Or that most of its tongue was removed; Rabbi Yehuda says: Most of** the segment of **its tongue** corresponding to the segment that facilitates **speech** in the tongue of a person must be removed to be considered a blemish.


###### Bekhorot 40a:23
[Bekhorot 40a:23](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/40a:23)

**מַתְנִי׳** וּמַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁהַלְּחִי הַתַּחְתּוֹן עוֹדֵף עַל הָעֶלְיוֹן, וְשָׁאַל רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל לַחֲכָמִים, וְאָמְרוּ: הֲרֵי זֶה מוּם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** **And** there was **an incident where the lower jaw** of the firstborn **protruded beyond the upper** jaw, **and Rabban Gamliel asked the Sages** for a ruling, **and they said: That is a blemish** that enables the slaughter of the firstborn.


###### Bekhorot 40a:24
[Bekhorot 40a:24](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/40a:24)

**גְּמָ׳** מַאי תַּנָּא דְּקָתָנֵי ״וּמַעֲשֶׂה״? מִשּׁוּם דִּתְנַן ״פִּיו דּוֹמֶה לַחֲזִיר״, וּפְלִיגִי רַבָּנַן עֲלֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי, וְקָאָמְרִינַן: כִּי פְּלִיגִי רַבָּנַן עֲלֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי בִּשְׂפָתוֹ עֶלְיוֹנָה עוֹדֶפֶת עַל הַתַּחְתּוֹנָה, אֲבָל שֶׁהַתַּחְתּוֹנָה עוֹדֶפֶת עַל הָעֶלְיוֹנָה — הֲרֵי זֶה מוּם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** The Gemara asks: **What** is the ruling **taught** in the previous mishna **that** the *tanna* is referring to when he **teaches** here: **And** there was **an incident?** The Gemara answers: **Since we learned** in the list of blemishes in the previous mishna the case where **its mouth is similar to** that **of a pig, and the Rabbis disagree with Rabbi** Ila in that case, **we say** here that **when the Rabbis disagree with Rabbi** Ila, it is only in a case **where its upper lip overlaps the lower** lip. **But** in a case **where the lower** jaw **protrudes beyond the upper** jaw, everyone agrees that **this is a blemish.**