Bekhorot 45a — the Talmud in English

And one possessing pikin and one possessing ikel,

and the Mishna explains:

What is ikel?

Anyone whose soles surround [one another],

for when he sits and joins the soles of his feet to one another,

and his knees do not touch one another,

and his knees do not join one another, for they are bent outward.

And “one possessing a pika” means that

a pika protrudes from his thumb,

that he has a piece of flesh [round, resembling a “pika”] that protrudes from his thumb, on the hand or on the foot.

His heel protrudes behind him,

that the heel of his foot projects outward, and it appears as though the lower leg stands in the middle of the sole of the foot.

His soles are broad like those of a goose,

that the sole of his foot is short like that of a goose, and its length is not greater than its breadth.

His fingers are arranged one upon another,

on his hands or on his feet.

Or

his fingers are

webbed,

that they are attached to one another. Thus, if they are joined only

above, up to the joint

in the middle of the fingers,

he is fit.

And if they are joined

below the joint

in the middle, toward the fingernails,

and he cut them,

and separated them from one another,

he is fit.

If there was in him

on his hand or on his foot an extra finger,

and he cut it, if

the extra finger

has a bone in it, he is disqualified,

for now he is lacking a limb.

But if not,

that it did not have a bone in it,

he is fit,

for it is merely a growth, and since he cut it, he is fit.

One who has six on his hands and six on his feet,

who has six fingers on each hand and on each foot. And together they are

twenty-four ;

the tannaim disagreed about this.

Rabbi Yehuda declares him fit,

for this is not a blemish. Since the number of all his fingers is equal.

And the Sages disqualify,

for although they are equal, in that each one has six, nevertheless it is a blemish and he is disqualified.

One who controls both his hands,

who has strength in his right as in his left—

Rabbi disqualifies,

for he holds that he is equally strong in both because of weakness of the right.

And the Sages declare him fit,

for they hold that the left is exceptionally healthy, and this is not due to weakness of the right.

Gemara:

It is written: “Or a man in whom there shall be a fracture of the leg or a fracture of the hand.”

The Sages taught: “A fracture of the leg”—I have only a fracture of the leg. From where to include one whose ankles knock together,

that he knocks his ankles together,

and ikel,

that when he joins the soles of his feet, his knees do not touch one another,

and kilben,

that he has a pika protruding from his thumb?

The verse states: “Or a fracture of the leg,”

“or” comes to include them.

The tannai [said]: One possessing pikin and shufnar.

Rav Hiyya bar Abba said in the name of Rabbi Yohanan: One possessing pikin

what is it?

One who has many cushions,

that his ankle is very large.

“Shufnar”

what is it?

One who has no cushions whatsoever,

that he has no ankle at all.

We learned in the Mishna:

A pika protrudes from his thumb, and his heel protrudes backward.

Rabbi Elazar said:

“His heel protrudes backward” means

his lower leg protrudes in the middle of his foot,

that the sole of the foot stands in the middle of the leg, half in front and half behind.

We learned in the Mishna:

His soles are broad like those of a goose.

Rav Pappa said: Do not say

that it is not a blemish except in the case

that it is short,

that the sole of his foot is short,

but not split,

that it is not split between the toes.

Rather, once

it is short, since the sole of his foot is short,

even though it is split,

that the toes are separated from one another, it is a blemish.

We learned in the Mishna:

His fingers are arranged one upon another, or webbed.

The Sages taught: “Or

or

a fracture of the hand.”

I have only a fracture of the hand. Fingers arranged one upon another or webbed above the joint, and he cut them.

And “above” here means toward the fingernail, like “below” in the Mishna.

And we raise an objection:

But you said

in the Mishna, “and he cut it,”

he is fit?

And we answer:

Rather,

this is what it says: Or webbed above the joint

and he did not cut them—from where

is he disqualified?

The verse states: “Or a fracture of the hand,”

“or” comes to include these.

We learned in the Mishna:

If there was in him an extra [finger] and he cut it, if it has a bone, he is disqualified, and if not, he is fit.

Rabba bar bar Hana said in the name of Rabbi Yohanan: And when it is counted along the hand,

this matter—that an extra finger is considered a limb—is specifically when it stands in one row with the other fingers and is counted with them; but if not, it does not disqualify him if he cut it, even if it has a bone.

The law is that an olive-sized portion of flesh from the dead imparts impurity under one roof, and through contact and carrying; but less than this measure does not impart impurity under one roof, nor through contact and carrying.

But with the bones of the dead, the measure is as follows: a bone the size of a barley grain imparts impurity through contact and carrying, but under one roof it imparts impurity only if there were among the bones “the majority of the structure”—the majority of the structure of the bones of the body—or “the majority of the number”—the majority of the number of the bones of the limbs. Likewise, a measure of a quarter-kav of bones imparts impurity under one roof.

These measures apply to flesh or to bones, but a complete limb that has a bone and a little flesh, even less than an olive-sized portion, imparts impurity under one roof.

The Sages taught:

A finger

that has a bone,

and has upon it less than an olive-sized portion of flesh, even though

it has no fingernail,

nevertheless it is considered a “limb.” And it

imparts impurity through contact, carrying, and under one roof,

for since it has the status of a limb, it imparts impurity under one roof even though it does not have an olive-sized portion of flesh upon it.

And it is included in the count of 125

for if there were no flesh at all upon the bone of the extra finger, it would not impart impurity under one roof on its own, but it joins the count of the 125 bones of the limbs, which are the majority of the limbs of a person who has 248 bones of the limbs, and “the majority of the number” imparts impurity under one roof.

Rabba bar bar Hana said in the name of Rabbi Yohanan:

This matter, that the bone of the extra finger is considered a limb so as to impart impurity under one roof, is specifically

when it is counted along the hand.

Rav Hisda said: This matter, our great master—

Rav—

said it; may the Omnipresent be his help!

A finger

that has a bone and has no fingernail imparts impurity through contact and carrying, but does not impart impurity under one roof!

Rabba bar bar Hana said in the name of Rabbi Yohanan: Rav was speaking of one that is not counted along the hand,

for then it is not considered a limb, and therefore it does not impart impurity under one roof.

Rabbi Hanina said: They made their words like the words of prophecy,

they did not give a reason for their words, like prophets, who do not need to give a reason for their words, since even without a reason people heed them. For

whatever way you look at it!

This extra [finger],

if it is a limb, it should also impart impurity under one roof. And if it is not a limb, it should not impart impurity through contact and carrying either.

And why did they distinguish between impurity through contact and carrying and impurity under one roof?

And we answer:

Rav Huna bar Menaḥem said in the name of Rav Aha, son of Rav Ika: Because of a bone the size of a barley grain, they touched upon it.

For even if it is not a limb, in any event there is here a bone the size of a barley grain, which is the measure for imparting impurity through contact and carrying.

Rav Pappa said: This matter, that it imparts impurity through contact and carrying, is

The reason it imparts impurity through contact and carrying is that

a decree

concerning an extra finger

that is not counted, on account of

an extra finger that is

counted

30 . And we raise an objection: If so,

that we issue a decree, then a finger

that is not counted—

should also impart impurity under one roof.

And why do we not issue a decree that it should impart impurity under one roof?

And we answer: The Sages did not issue a decree that it should impart impurity under one roof for this reason:

the Sages made an indication, so that they would not burn teruma and sacred things on account of them.

For teruma and sacred things that became impure are subject to burning. But when they became impure through impurity of rabbinic status, one does not burn them on account of this impurity; therefore, here they did not issue a decree concerning impurity under one roof, so that they would recognize that this impurity is only rabbinic.

We learned there: The majority of the structure—

the majority of the bones constituting the structure of the body of the dead—

and the majority of its number—

the majority of the number of the bones of its limbs—

of the dead, even though they do not contain

the measure of

a quarter

of a kav of bones,

are impure

under one roof.

The Sages taught: What is the majority of the structure? Two lower legs and one thigh.

And the reason that with this we consider it the majority of the structure is:

since it is the majority of his height in a large person,

for this is the majority of the height of a large person [that is, an ordinary person whose limbs are not small in relation to his body], without the head.

What is the majority of the number—

125.

Ravina said to Rava:

But

did the tannai come to inform us of a number?

Since there are 248 limbs in a person, it is obvious that the majority is 125.

He said to him: This it comes to inform us, as it is taught:

A person

who is lacking, who has only two hundred

limbs instead of 248, such as one who was born lacking two fingers on each hand and foot, which are eight, and each finger has six bones, making 48 that are lacking.

And one who has an excess, who has 281

limbs, such as a woman, for every woman has five limbs more than a man, as follows, and this woman was born with four extra fingers, having an additional finger on each hand and foot, and each finger has six bones, making 29 extra; and when they are added to the 248 limbs, they make 277.

All of them,

all these extra [limbs] are considered limbs, and they

are included in the count of 125.

And we learn from this beraita that although for this man, who has 281 limbs, his majority is 141, and likewise regarding one who is lacking, who has only 200 limbs, his majority is 101, nevertheless only 125 is considered the majority. And this is the novelty that the preceding beraita comes to inform us.

What is the reason?

Follow the majority of people,

and among the majority of people 125 is the majority of the number.

Rav Yehuda said in the name of Shmuel: An incident occurred involving a disciple of Rabbi Yishmael: they boiled a certain prostitute who had been sentenced to burning by the king; they examined her and found in her 252

limbs.

They came and asked Rabbi Yishmael: How many limbs are there in a person? He said to them: 248.

They said to him: But we examined and found 252

limbs?

He said to them: Perhaps you examined a woman? For Scripture added to her two hinges and two doors!

It is taught: Rabbi Elazar says: Just as a house has hinges, so a woman has hinges, as it is stated: “And she crouched and gave birth, for her hinges were turned upon her,”

the hinges of the doors of her womb.

Rabbi Yehoshua says: Just as a house has doors, so a woman has doors, as it is stated: “For He did not close the doors of my womb”

Rabbi Akiva says: Just as a house has a key, so a woman has a key, as it is stated: “And He opened her womb.”

And we inquire about it:

For Rabbi Akiva, it is difficult

regarding the matter that

the disciples of Rabbi Yishmael

counted and found 252, whereas according to Rabbi Akiva it would be 253.

And we answer:

Perhaps, since it is small,

the woman’s key

was completely dissolved,

it dissolved on account of the boiling, and therefore they did not find it.

Rav said: And all of them,

all these five limbs that are extra in a woman,

do not impart impurity under one roof

of the dead, like all the limbs that impart impurity under one roof on their own,

as it is stated: “This is the law: When a person dies in a tent.” A matter that is equal to every person.

[And this is not like the extra finger above, for the bone of the finger is equal in every person.]

Abaye said to him:

This matter that you said, that these are not equal in every person—would it be difficult

and

that

a man does not have

those limbs?

And it is written:

“Labor pains seized me like the labor pains of a woman in childbirth.”

Learn from this that they also exist in a man.

And we answer: These

are flesh hinges,

and they have no bone, and a complete limb is not considered a limb when it has no bone.

And we further ask:

But it is written: “My lord, in the vision my hinges were turned”?

And we answer:

Here too, they are flesh hinges.

Here too, it is reasonable

in accordance with what we answered, that these hinges have no bone,

for if you do not say so, how can you find 248?

Neither in a man nor in a woman!?

For a man also has more than 248. Rather, learn from this that the hinges are not considered limbs in a person, since they have no bone.