Bechoros Daf 40 בכורות דַף 40

The Mishnah lists additional מומין: בעל חמש רגלים או שאין לו אלא שלש – a five-legged [animal] or if it has only three [legs]; or if its feet are "קלוטות" like those of a donkey (defined later as rounded, even if they are split); or a "שחול", meaning its thigh slipped out of its socket, or a "כסול", meaning one of its thighs is higher than the other. Rav Huna says that our Mishnah, which lists a five-legged and three-legged animal as a בעל מום which may be shechted, only holds true שחסר ויתר ביד – where it is missing or has an extra foreleg. אבל ברגל טרפה נמי הוי – but if the missing or extra leg is a hindleg, it is also a tereifah, דכל יתיר כנטול דמי – because something extra is considered like it was removed. Rashi provides several reasons why an animal missing a hindleg may not be eaten.

The next Mishnah states that all the above מומין were listed by עילא in Yavneh, with the Chochomim’s approval. He added three more, which the Chochomim did not accept: שגלגל עינו עגול כשל אדם – the circle of its eye is round like a person’s, ופיו דומה כשל חזיר – or its mouth is similar to a pig’s, ושניטל רוב המדבר בלשונו – or most of the “speaking part” of the tongue was removed. A later Beis Din agreed with עילא’s additional מומין. The Gemara objects that another Mishnah proves that it is normal for an animal’s eye to be round like a person’s: if a woman aborts something resembling a בהמה, חיה, or bird, Rebbe Meir says she observes the standard period of tumah and taharah for male or female offspring, and Rebbe Yochanan explains: הואיל וגלגל עינו עגול כשל אדם – because the circle of its eye is round like that of a person. Rav Yosef answers that this latter statement is באוכמא – regarding the black (i.e., pupil) of the eye, which is round like a person’s, whereas our Mishnah is בציריא – regarding the eye socket, which is not usually round like a person’s.

In the Mishnah, Rebbe Chanina ben Antignos says that את שיבלת בעינו – [an animal] which has a wart in its eye is a מום. The Gemara objects that another Mishnah teaches that an animal with a wart may not be shechted outside the Mikdash (although it is disqualified as a korban)!? However, the Gemara counters that יבלת is written explicitly in a passuk as a מום!? The passuk cannot be limited to a wart בעינו – in its eye, since it is written סתמא – without specification, indicating it is a מום anywhere. Therefore, the Gemara explains that the passuk is discussing a wart דאית בה עצם – which has a bone, which is a מום anywhere, while the Mishnayos discuss one without a bone. The Gemara proves that a wart בגופא – on the animal’s body would not even disqualify a korban, because it is תלתול בעלמא – mere hanging flesh. Therefore, it concludes that both Mishnayos refer to a wart in the eye (without bones). Our Mishnah refers to a wart בשחור – in the black (i.e., pupil), which is a מום, but one in the white is only disqualified. Although "אין מומין בלבן" – there is no blemish in the white of the eye, we are discussing a wart דאית בה שער – which has a hair growing from it, which does disqualify a korban.