יַנִּיחַ אֶצְבָּעוֹ בְּאָזְנָיו. וְהַיְינוּ דְּאָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: מִפְּנֵי מָה אֶצְבְּעוֹתָיו שֶׁל אָדָם דּוֹמוֹת לִיתֵידוֹת? מַאי טַעֲמָא? אִילֵימָא מִשּׁוּם דִּמְחַלְּקָן – כָּל חֲדָא וַחֲדָא לְמִילְּתֵיהּ עֲבִידָא, דְּאָמַר מָר: זוֹ זֶרֶת, זוֹ קְמִיצָה, זוֹ אַמָּה, זוֹ אֶצְבַּע, זֶה גּוּדָל!

he should place his finger, which is shaped like a peg, into his ears. And that is what Rabbi Elazar said: Why are the fingers of a person similar to pegs? The Gemara asks: What is the reason that Rabbi Elazar said that fingers are like pegs? If we say that it is due to the fact that they are discrete from each other, each and every finger was designated for its own discrete, sacred matter, as the Master said: This small finger is for measuring a span, the distance between the little finger to the tip of the thumb used in measuring the breastplate of the High Priest; this next finger is used for taking a fistful of the meal-offering; this middle finger is used for measuring a cubit, the distance from the elbow to the tip of the middle finger; this one next to the thumb is the finger used to sprinkle the blood of offerings on the altar; this is the thumb, on which the blood and oil is placed in the purification ritual of a leper.

אֶלָּא: מַה טַּעַם מְשׁוּפּוֹת כִּיתֵידוֹת? שֶׁאִם יִשְׁמַע אָדָם דָּבָר שֶׁאֵינוֹ הָגוּן יַנִּיחַ אֶצְבְּעוֹתָיו בְּאָזְנָיו. תָּנָא דְּבֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל: מִפְּנֵי מָה אוֹזֶן כּוּלָּהּ קָשָׁה וְהָאַלְיָה רַכָּה? שֶׁאִם יִשְׁמַע אָדָם דָּבָר שֶׁאֵינוֹ הָגוּן – יָכוֹף אַלְיָה לְתוֹכָהּ. תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: אַל יַשְׁמִיעַ אָדָם לְאָזְנָיו דְּבָרִים בְּטֵלִים מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵן נִכְווֹת תְּחִלָּה לְאֵיבָרִים.

Rather, the question is: What is the reason that they are pointed like pegs? It is so that if a person hears an inappropriate matter, he will place his fingers in his ears. Similarly, a Sage of the school of Rabbi Yishmael taught: Why is the entire ear hard and the earlobe soft? It is so that if a person hears an inappropriate matter, he will bend his earlobe into his ear to seal it. The Sages taught: A person should not allow his ears to hear idle matters. Because of the fact that ears are very sensitive and are the first of the limbs burned, one should make certain not to expose them to anything problematic.

אִיבַּעֲיָא לְהוּ: מַהוּ לִבְעוֹל בִּתְחִלָּה בְּשַׁבָּת, דָּם מִיפְקַד פְּקִיד אוֹ חַבּוּרֵי מִיחַבַּר?

§ A dilemma was raised before the Sages: What is the halakha with regard to engaging in intercourse with one’s virgin bride for the first time on Shabbat? The dilemma is with regard to the nature of the blood that emerges as a result of the piercing of the hymen. Is it that the blood is pooled, and it is released once the hymen is pierced, so that no prohibition is violated? Or, is the blood flowing through vessels attached to the body, and it emerges as a result of a wound, so that he does violate a prohibition?

וְאִם תִּימְצֵי לוֹמַר דָּם מִיפְקַד פְּקִיד, לְדָם הוּא צָרִיךְ – וְשָׁרֵי, אוֹ דִּלְמָא לְפֶתַח הוּא צָרִיךְ – וַאֲסִיר?

And if you say that it is pooled and the intercourse does not cause a wound, there is an additional dilemma: Does the husband require the blood to flow, and that is his objective in performing the act, in which case it is permitted? Or, perhaps he requires the opening caused by the rupture of the hymen, and creating that opening is prohibited on Shabbat.

וְאִם תִּימְצֵי לוֹמַר לְדָם הוּא צָרִיךְ, וּפֶתַח מִמֵּילָא קָאָתֵי, הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן דְּאָמַר: דָּבָר שֶׁאֵין מִתְכַּוֵּין מוּתָּר, אוֹ הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה דְּאָמַר: דָּבָר שֶׁאֵין מִתְכַּוֵּין אָסוּר?

And if you say that he requires the blood, and the opening comes about incidentally as an unintended consequence, is the halakha in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon, who said: An unintentional act, i.e., a permitted action from which a forbidden labor inadvertently ensued, is permitted? Or, is the halakha in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, who said: An unintentional act is forbidden?

וְאִם תִּימְצֵי לוֹמַר הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה – מְקַלְקֵל הוּא אֵצֶל הַפֶּתַח אוֹ מְתַקֵּן הוּא אֵצֶל הַפֶּתַח?

And even if you say that the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda in this regard, is this a destructive action vis-à-vis the opening, and is it consequently permitted on Shabbat because only constructive actions are forbidden? Or, perhaps it is a constructive action vis-à-vis the opening.

אִיכָּא דְּאָמְרִי: וְאִם תִּימְצֵי לוֹמַר דָּם חַבּוּרֵי מִיחַבַּר – לְדָם הוּא צָרִיךְ וְאָסוּר, אוֹ דִּלְמָא לַהֲנָאַת עַצְמוֹ הוּא צָרִיךְ וְשָׁרֵי?

Some say that the series of dilemmas is as follows: And if you say that the blood is flowing through vessels attached to the body and emerges as a result of a wound, does the husband require the blood, and engaging in intercourse is consequently prohibited, as his intent is to cause the wound? Or, perhaps he requires the act of intercourse solely for his own pleasure, and it is permitted.

וְאִם תִּימְצֵי לוֹמַר לַהֲנָאַת עַצְמוֹ הוּא צָרִיךְ, וְדָם מִמֵּילָא קָאָתֵי – הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹ הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן?

And if you say that he requires the act of intercourse solely for his own pleasure, and the blood comes incidentally, as it was not his intent to draw blood, is the halakha in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda with regard to an unintentional act, or is it in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon?

וְאִם תִּימְצֵי לוֹמַר הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה – מְקַלְקֵל בְּחַבּוּרָה אוֹ מְתַקֵּן בְּחַבּוּרָה הוּא?

And if you say that the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda and unintentional acts are forbidden, is one destructive in causing the wound or constructive in causing the wound?

וְאִם תִּימְצֵי לוֹמַר מְקַלְקֵל בְּחַבּוּרָה הוּא – בִּמְקַלְקֵל הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה

And if you say that he is destructive in causing the wound, in cases involving destructive acts is the halakha in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, who rules that one who performs any destructive act on Shabbat is exempt, even if he did so intentionally?