Disqualifying Blemishes, Mistaken Sales, and Lay Tribunals

How the Rambam rules on lay tribunals for vows, full refunds for illicit food sales, and the precise definitions of sacrificial ear blemishes.

Laymen and the Dissolution of Vows

The Gemara addresses whether three ordinary laymen possess the authority to dissolve vows or permit a blemished בכור (firstborn animal) when no expert Sage is present. A baraita records that Rabbi Yehuda requires at least one member to be a Sage, while Ravina explains that the remaining two laymen must at least comprehend the halacha when it is explained to them.

The Rambam rules that a person seeking absolution from an oath may approach either an individual expert Sage or three laymen in an area where no Sage resides. Kessef Mishneh observes that the Rambam omits Ravina's intellectual requirement entirely, permitting any three ordinary laymen to dissolve an oath without testing their comprehension. He explains that the Rambam follows the First Tanna against Rabbi Yehuda, establishing that the Rabbanan empower three complete laymen without restriction.

אבל רבינו גם כאן גם בפירוש המשנה סתם וכתב ג' הדיוטות ולא הצריך דמסברי להו וסברי

However, our Master, both here and in his Commentary on the Mishnah, wrote categorically 'three laymen' and did not require that people explain it to them and they understand. (Kessef Mishneh on Mishneh Torah, Oaths 6:1:1)

Mistaken Transactions of Uninspected Firstborns

The Mishnah examines one who slaughters an uninspected בכור and sells its meat, only for the buyers to discover that the animal was never inspected by an expert. Because deriving benefit from an uninspected firstborn is forbidden, the sale is completely void,.

The Rambam rules that whatever the buyers consumed is disregarded, and the seller must return their full purchase money. Any meat that remains uneaten must be buried, and that payment must likewise be refunded. Kiryat Sefer explains that the seller cannot deduct anything for the consumed portions because the purchasers derived no valid halakhic benefit from forbidden meat. Har HaMoriyah notes that the halacha decisively rejects the view of Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar, who sought to deduct value when customers consumed items that do not evoke personal disgust.

הַשּׁוֹחֵט אֶת הַבְּכוֹר וּמְכָרוֹ וְנוֹדַע שֶׁלֹּא הֶרְאָהוּ לְמֻמְחֶה. מַה שֶּׁאָכְלוּ אָכְלוּ וְיַחְזִיר לָהֶם אֶת הַדָּמִים. וּמַה שֶּׁלֹּא נֶאֱכַל יִקָּבֵר וְיַחְזִיר אֶת הַדָּמִים.

When one slaughtered a firstborn and sold its meat and afterwards, it became known that he did not show it to an expert, what was eaten was eaten. The owner should, however, return the money paid by the purchasers. What was not eaten should be buried and the money returned. (Mishneh Torah, Firstlings 3:9)

Wine Mixtures and Disposing Forbidden Value

In contrast to forbidden meat, the Gemara notes that wine mixtures present an opportunity to salvage monetary value under the principle of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel,. When forbidden wine mingles with kosher wine, drinking the liquid is forbidden entirely.

The Rambam codifies that if ordinary gentile wine becomes mixed into kosher wine in any amount, the owner may sell the entire mixture to a gentile. To prevent unauthorized benefit, the owner must take the exact monetary value of the forbidden wine component and cast it into the Dead Sea. Kessef Mishneh clarifies that the Rambam fuses the ruling of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel with Rabbi Eliezer's mechanism of discarding illicit benefit into the sea, allowing the owner to enjoy the remaining money.

נִתְעָרֵב סְתָם יֵינָם בַּיַּיִן הֲרֵי זֶה אָסוּר בְּכָל שֶׁהוּא בִּשְׁתִיָּה וְיִמָּכֵר כֻּלּוֹ לְעַכּוּ"ם. וְלוֹקֵחַ דְּמֵי הַיַּיִן הָאָסוּר שֶׁבּוֹ וּמַשְׁלִיכוֹ לְיָם הַמֶּלַח

When even the smallest amount of ordinary gentile wine is mixed with wine, it is forbidden to drink. Instead, it should be sold to a gentile in its entirety. The money for the forbidden wine should be cast into the Dead Sea. (Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Foods 16:29)

Defining Ear Blemishes on the Cartilage

The Mishnah enumerates the permanent defects that disqualify sacrifices and permit a firstborn animal to be slaughtered outside the Temple. The Gemara uses the hermeneutical rule of כלל ופרט וכלל (generalization, specification, and generalization) on Deuteronomy 15:21 to determine that a blemish must be permanent and exposed, like blindness or lameness.

The Rambam codifies five blemishes in the ear, establishing that a notch in the ear cartilage is a blemish if large enough that a fingernail catches within it. However, damage to the skin surrounding the cartilage does not count as a blemish at all. Mahari Kurkus explains that while Rashi treats damage to the skin as a temporary blemish, the Rambam holds that damage confined to the outer skin does not constitute a blemish at all, even temporarily. Radbaz notes that because these specific ear defects stem from biblical exposition rather than explicit verses, the Mishnah details them first.

מִי שֶׁנִּפְגַּם סְחוּס אָזְנוֹ כְּדֵי שֶׁתַּחְגֹּר הַצִּפֹּרֶן בַּפְּגָם. אֲבָל הָעוֹר הַמֻּקָּף לִסְחוּס הָאֹזֶן אֵין בּוֹ מוּם בֵּין נִקַּב בֵּין נִסְדַּק:

One whose ear cartilage has been notched to the extent that one's nail would catch in the blemish. There is, however, no concept of a blemish with regard to the skin surrounding the cartilage of the ear, whether perforated or split. (Mishneh Torah, Admission into the Sanctuary 7:2)

The Rambam requires complete refunds for forbidden meat mistakenly consumed, allows any three laymen to dissolve oaths, and restricts sacrificial ear blemishes solely to the cartilage.

Learn Bekhorot 37 on Super Daf