Talmud su Levitico 7:14
וְהִקְרִ֨יב מִמֶּ֤נּוּ אֶחָד֙ מִכָּל־קָרְבָּ֔ן תְּרוּמָ֖ה לַיהוָ֑ה לַכֹּהֵ֗ן הַזֹּרֵ֛ק אֶת־דַּ֥ם הַשְּׁלָמִ֖ים ל֥וֹ יִהְיֶֽה׃
E ne presenterà uno da ogni offerta per un dono all'Eterno; sarà il sacerdote's che schizza il sangue delle offerte di pace contro l'altare.
Jerusalem Talmud Yevamot
Are sacrifices forbidden for the uncircumcised? One cannot deduce the answer from Passover since they are not subject to [the prohibition of] breaking a bone18No bone may be broken of the Passover sacrifice; Ex. 12:46. The bone marrow of other sacrificial animals is not forbidden. Therefore, no argument de minore ad majus is possible from Passover to other sacrifices., neither from heave since that would be inference after inference19In general, the rules of R. Ismael may be combined with one another; an exeption are the rules of sacrifices and sanctified matter. This is discussed in detail in the Babli, Zebaḥim Chapter 5, which has no parallel in the Yerushalmi. Even though the authorities quoted there are all Babylonian, the reference here shows that the basis of the arguments is a Yerushalmi tradition. It is stated in Babli, Zebaḥim 50a, that rules 2 and 3 in the scheme of R. Ismael cannot be used one after the other. Since the exclusion of the uncircumcised from heave was an application of rule 2 (Note 12), the result cannot be used as premiss for an argument of type 3. An attempt to formulate the rules in an extension of symbolic logic is in H. Guggenheimer, Über ein bemerkenswertes logisches System aus der Antike, Methodos 1951, 150–164.. At the end, you have to say “from it, from it20An application of rule 2 (Note 12)..” Since “from it”21Ex. 12:9 (once), 10 (twice). The Babli must reject this argument since it deduces laws of Passover from all three instances of the word. which was said in the laws of Passover implies that the uncircumcised is disqualified, so “from it”22Lev. 7:14. The verse is quoted in Mishnah Menaḥot 8:2. which was said in the laws of sacrifices must imply that the uncircumcised is disqualified. Are sacrifices forbidden for the mourner?23There is no inference to be drawn from Lev. 10:6 since, after the death of Nadab and Abihu, Aaron and his sons were commanded not to mourn. “From it, from it.” Since “from it” which was said in the laws of tithe24The Second Tithe, Deut. 26:14. states that the mourner is disqualified, so “from it” which was said in the laws of Passover25This word indicates an oversight by editor or copyist since (1) from the laws of Passover nothing can be inferred for other sacrifices and (2) the mourner (whose relative died outside of Jerusalem so that he could not defile himself) is admitted to the Passover sacrifice. It most probably should read “sacrifices” (Note 22). must imply that the mourner is disqualified.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy