Talmud su Levitico 6:18

From where that a Pesaḥ must be in the name of its owner? Is it not a logical argument⁵⁷דִּין usually introduces an informal argument de minore ad majus.? Since a purification sacrifice, where intent for the uncircumcised or impure⁵⁸Sacrifices of the uncircumcised (e. g., a hemophiliac who may not be circumcised) or an impure person (e. g., a resident outside the Land) sent through third persons are accepted in the Temple. But any uncircumcised is excluded from the Pesaḥ(Ex.12:48) and the person who will not be pure by nightfall is excluded by the requirement that the Pesaḥ be slaughtered for the group of subscribers (Ex. 12:3–4); adding the name of a person prohibited from eating sacred food will invalidate the slaughter. This argument is somewhat circular; since the argument is rejected for other reasons, this does not have to be pointed out. does not invalidate it, needs to be in the name of the owner, Pesaḥ, where intent for the uncircumcised or impure does invalidate it, is it not logical that it needs to be in the name of its owner? No. If you are saying about purification sacrifice which is most holy⁵⁹It may be eaten only by male Cohanim in the Temple precinct., would you say that about Pesaḥ which is a simple sanctum⁶⁰It may be eaten by every pure person within the walls of the city of the Temple.? Rebbi Yose said, did you not argue about intent? The Torah insisted about intent for Pesaḥ more than for purification sacrifice. Rebbi Ḥananiah said before Rebbi Mana: Do we infer this from the purification sacrifice of the sufferer from skin disease? But is not the purification sacrifice of the sufferer from skin disease separate for something new⁶¹As stated in Mishnah Menaḥot 9:6, no purification offering other than that of the sufferer from skin disease needs accompanying offerings of flour and wine. The offering of flour is explicit in Lev. 14:10; that of wine is inferred in Sifra Mesoraˋ Pereq 2(10).? And one cannot infer from anything which is separate for something new⁶²This is R. Ismael’s 12th hermeneutical principle: Anything which was in a group, but is taken from the group to be under a separate rule, cannot be returned to its original group unless the verse returns it explicitly. An example is the reparation sacrifice of the sufferer from skin disease, whose blood is not for the altar but for the right thumb and right great toe of the owner, but which Lev. 14:13 declares to follow the rules of reparation sacrifices in all respects. Such a note is missing for the purification sacrifice. The Babli, Zevaḥim 8a, accepts the argument as valid.. He told him, from where do you infer that it be invalid if not for its purpose? Not from the following verse, he shall slaughter it as purification sacrifice⁶³Lev. 4:33. Sifra Wayyiqra II (Ḥovah)
Pereq 11(3)., and it is written: this is the doctrine of the purification sacrifice⁶⁴Lev. 6:18. Babli Zevaḥim 9a. Interpreted differently in Sifra Ṣaw Parašah 3(1).. There is one doctrine for all purification sacrifices. But from the place where it is being inferred, there it permits inferences⁶⁵Since the flour offering does not accompany the purification offering of the sufferer from skin disease but his elevation offering (14:20), the attribution of the wine offering to the purification offering is an inference of the oral tradition which cannot override Lev. 6:18..

They asked Rebbi Eliezer, what is the status of the eleventh generation of a bastard? He said to them, bring to me a third generation and I shall declare him pure¹⁹⁶The same statement is in the Babli, 78b.. What is Rebbi Eliezer’s reason since he does not seem to follow Rebbi Ḥanina? As Rebbi Ḥanina said, once every sixty to seventy years the Holy One, praise to Him, brings a plague into the world to finish off the bastards and he takes the qualified ones with them in order not to publicize the sinners¹⁹⁷This describes the situation in the later Roman Empire where the plague had become endemic during the reign of the emperor Hadrian.. This parallels what Rebbi Levi said in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: “In the place where the ascent offering has its throat cut before the Eternal, the purification sacrifice has its throat cut,¹⁹⁸Lev. 6:18; the purification sacrifice atones for inadvertent sins. In the Babli, Soṭah 32b, the statement is by R. Joḥanan in the name of R. Simeon bar Ioḥai.” in order not to publicize the sinners. What is the reason? “¹⁹⁹Is. 31:2. Also He is wise and brings evil;” should it not rather be “brings good”? But to teach you that even the evil that the Holy One, praise to Him, brings to the world, He brings in wisdom. “His word He did not remove,” why all this? “He overcomes the house of evildoers and accomplices of workers of iniquity.” That parallels what Rebbi Levi said in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: “In the place where the ascent offering has its throat cut before the Eternal, the purification sacrifice has its throat cut,” in order not to publicize the sinners. Rav Huna said, no bastard lives more than thirty days²⁰⁰A convenient legal fiction which allows every male to marry every female without investigating his or her background. The same statement in the Babli, 78b.. When Rebbi Ze‘ira immigrated here, he heard voices call “he-bastard, she-bastard”. He said, what is this? There goes that of Rav Huna, since Rav Huna said, no bastard lives more than thirty days. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa said to him, I was with you when Rebbi Abba, Rav Huna said in the name of Rav: No bastard lives more than thirty days, when? If it is unknown. Therefore, if it is known, he lives²⁰¹In the parallel, Qiddushin 3:13, the argument is by Rebbi Uqba bar Aḥa. In the Babli, 78b, the entire argument is R. Ze‘ira’s, based on a statement of his teacher Rav Jehudah..

Also, it was stated²¹⁸Sifry Deut. 192.: They all have to bring proof except from this one whose witnesses are with him²¹⁹The military instructors realize that they are better off without the coward. But all others have to prove their case.. This follows him who said that he cannot stand in military engagements and see a drawn sword. But following him who says that he is one who is fearful because of his sins, he has to bring proof. Therefore the Torah appended him to all of these²⁰⁷The person betrothed or who had built, etc. that he should return because of them²⁰⁸That only his officer but not the public would know that he returns as a coward but not as one of the legitimate cases.
In Sifry Deut. 197, R. Yose is quoted to exclude anyone over 40 years old. But in Tosephta 7:22, and Midrash Tannaïm Deut. 20:8, the reading is similar to the Mishnah., not to publicize the sinners. This comes as Rebbi Levi said in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish²²⁰In the Babli, 32b, a similar statement by R. Joḥanan in the name of R. Simeon ben Ioḥai. Cf. Yebamot 8:3, Note 198.: ²²¹Lev. 6:18.“At the place where the elevation offering is being slaughtered, the purification offering is being slaughtered before the Eternal,” not to publicize the sinners²²²Even though elevation offerings are male and purification offerings female, the difference can be seen only by close inspection, so also the sinner could be detected only by inquiry..