כִּ֥י כָל־אִ֛ישׁ אֲשֶׁר־בּ֥וֹ מ֖וּם לֹ֣א יִקְרָ֑ב אִ֤ישׁ עִוֵּר֙ א֣וֹ פִסֵּ֔חַ א֥וֹ חָרֻ֖ם א֥וֹ שָׂרֽוּעַ׃
Porque <span class="x" onmousemove="Show('perush','Este es el <b>71er Precepto Negativo</b> enumerado por el Rambam en el Prefacio a Mishné Torá, su “Compendio de la Ley Hebrea” para todo el Pueblo de Israel.',event);" onmouseout="Close();">ningún varón en el cual hubiere falta, se allegará</span>: varón ciego, o cojo, o falto, o sobrado,
On the Special Laws
§ 80. Redundant … excrescence. The E.V. in Lev. 21:18 has “anything superfluous,” which prima facie would seem to be represented here by κατὰ πλεονασμὸν περιττεύσαντος. But in the LXX the word in the list of defects corresponding to the Hebrew translated as “superfluous” is ὠτότμητος, “with a split ear.” Is this one of the few cases where Philo seems somehow to have known the Hebrew? Heinemann does not notice the point.