פירוש על בכורות 6:8

אף על פי שאינו ניכר – when it (i.e., the animal) stands, the break is not seen, but it is recognized when it walks that it limps, for it is not recognized at all, it is not a blemish.

Introduction Today’s mishnah begins by continuing to discuss blemishes of the leg. It then continues with a discussion of some additional blemishes that were added by a sage named Ila.

מומין אלו – bone of the foreleg or the bone of the hindleg that were mentioned above.

If the bone of the fore-leg or of its hind-leg is broken, even though it is not noticeable, [this is a blemish]. A broken leg counts as a blemish even if the break is not noticeable.

אילא – the name of a Sage.

These blemishes Ila enumerated in Yavneh and the sages agreed with him. As we learned in mishnah 4:5, Ila was an expert on animal blemishes, perhaps we might call him the veterinarian of his times. The above list of blemishes was recited by Ila in front of the sages in Yavneh, after the destruction of the Temple. They agreed with him that these blemishes disqualify the first-born animal from being sacrificed.

עגול כשל אדם – that it is not the manner that the roundness of the eye of an animal is like that of a human.

He also added another three cases [of blemishes]. They said to him: we have only heard these [already mentioned previously]. The above list was one that Ila had received from his teachers, and therefore the rabbis accepted it. In other words, Ila’s authority stemmed from his knowledge of tradition and not his scientific acumen. We know this because when Ila added a few more blemishes, the rabbis disagreed with him. They were willing to accept only the blemishes that they had already heard about, and not those that Ila personally added.

רוב המדבר – that is that part of the tongue that is not attached to its jaws.

[The three added by Ila were]: one whose eyeball is round like that of a human or whose mouth is like that of a pig or if the greater part of the speaking part of the tongue has been removed. A subsequent court ruled however: each of these cases is a [disqualifying] blemish. The mishnah now lists the blemishes that Ila added. Interestingly, a subsequent court agreed with Ila. Perhaps this demonstrates a shift in how courts adjudicated halakhah. While the earlier rabbis accepted only tradition, later rabbis began to accept the authority of the innovations of individual rabbis.

ובית דין של אחריהן אמרו הרי אלו מומין – and such is the Halakha.