Bekhorot 29b (כט:) — the Talmud in English

And Rav Yehuda bar Ami said in the name of Rav Yehuda: A beit ha-peras that has been trampled,

by extensive trampling under many feet—we assume that all the bones were crushed to less than the requisite measure, and it is therefore

pure.

Alternatively,

this kohen did not become impure at all through corpse impurity. Rather,

through other forms of impurity,

such as the impurity of unslaughtered carcasses and creeping animals,

for he is not warned

as a kohen not to come into contact with them. But he is disqualified from eating teruma.

We learned in the Mishna:

If he was elderly, he may have him ride on the donkey

and give him his wages as a laborer.

The tanna taught:

he takes his wages

as an idle laborer.

And we explain:

Abaye said: It means the wage of an idle laborer from that same labor from which he is idle.

We assess how much he would agree to have deducted from his wages in order to be idle from his work. For if his work was easy and its remuneration substantial—for example, if he was piercing pearls—he would agree only if a small amount were deducted from his wages. But if his work was difficult, he would agree even if a larger amount were deducted.

Mishna:

One who is suspected with regard to firstborn animals,

a kohen who is suspected of inflicting a blemish on unblemished firstborn animals.

One may not purchase from him even the meat of deer

which are not subject to firstborn sanctity, since their meat resembles veal in color. And all the more so, one may not purchase veal from him.

Nor

may one purchase from him

untanned hides.

Perhaps they are the hides of firstborn animals, from which it is prohibited to derive benefit.

Rabbi Eliezer says: One may purchase from him the hides of

a

female animal.

And one may not purchase from him bleached wool with its filth,

wool that has been whitened by its filth.

But one may purchase from him spun wool,

woolen threads

and garments.

For they certainly are not from a firstborn animal.

Gemara:

And we explain: One may not purchase from him

the meat of deer—

because it can be confused with

the meat

of a calf.

Nor untanned hides.

It follows

that

tanned

hides

we do purchase from him.

What is the reason?

And we explain:

If it were the case

that these hides

were from a firstborn animal, he

would not have taken the trouble with them,

since

he would reason: If the Sages hear of this, they will confiscate it from me.

We learned in the Mishna:

Rabbi Eliezer says: One may purchase from him the hides of a female animal.

And we consider the matter:

What is the reason?

Since

it is known

how to distinguish between a hide that came from a male animal and a hide that came from a female animal.

And we raise an objection:

And what is the reasoning of the first tanna

?

And we explain:

If so,

that a female animal’s hide is permitted, a male animal’s hide as well

can be made to appear female,

by making marks resembling those of a female on its hide,

and he will say: Mice ate it.

And the other tanna,

what is his reason for permitting it?

He can say to you:

The work of mice is known

and it is recognizable that it was cut.

We learned in the Mishna:

And one may not purchase from him bleached wool with its filth.

And we consider the matter:

Now, wool

that is

bleached,

about which it can be said that he did not take the trouble with it and would ultimately lose his effort,

we do not

purchase

from him.

As for wool with its filth,

which is still covered with its filth and with which he has not yet taken the trouble,

is it necessary

to state that we do not purchase it? Surely it is certainly prohibited.

And we explain:

Rather,

the Mishna

teaches one matter: Wool

that is

bleached with its filth.

We learned in the Mishna:

But one may purchase from him spun wool and garments.

And we consider the matter:

Now, spun wool,

with which he has not taken the trouble, we purchase from him;

is it necessary

to state that we may purchase garments? Surely they become permitted from the time of spinning.

And we explain: Rather,

what are “garments”?

Felt.

That is, felt made from wool.

Mishna:

A person

who is suspected with regard to the Sabbatical year

of sowing during it, or of engaging in commerce with produce that possesses Sabbatical-year sanctity,

one may not purchase flax from him, even combed flax

—flax that has been combed.

The reason is that flax is a product of the soil, and its seed is fit for consumption and possesses Sabbatical-year sanctity. And this seller is suspected with regard to the Sabbatical year. Since the labor involved in processing flax is minimal, he does not fear that the Sages will discover his deeds and that he will lose the effort he invested.

But one may purchase spun flax from him,

threads made from flax,

and woven material 20 .

Gemara:

And we raise an objection:

Now, spun flax,

which is flaxen thread, we purchase from him;

woven material,

which is made after the spinning,

is it necessary

to state that it may be purchased?

And we explain:

What is “woven material”? Tikhai.

Chains made from pounded and combed flax.

Mishna:

A person

who is suspected of selling teruma as non-sacred produce—one may not purchase even water or salt from him

since the laws of teruma and tithes do not apply to them; this is a penalty that the Sages imposed upon him,

the words of Rabbi Yehuda.

Rabbi Shimon says: Any

item

that has a connection—

a connection—

to the obligation of

teruma and tithes, one may not purchase from him 21 .

Gemara:

And we consider the matter: The “any item” that Rabbi Shimon states—

what does it come to include?

And we answer:

It comes to include fish innards into which olive oil is mixed,

which is subject to the obligation of separating teruma.