תלמוד על פסחים 6:1

Is bringing it from outside the Sabbath domain a matter of Sabbath rest⁵⁸Since the argument of R. Eliezer and R. Joshua is about rabbinic restrictions because of Sabbath rest, it is implied that the list of items in Mishnah 2 about which R. Eliezer dissents contains only rabbinic prohibitions. But bringing anything from outside the Sabbath domain is a biblical prohibition.? ⁵⁹The next sentences are from Eruvin 3, Notes 127–131. This supports what Rebbi Jonathan said before the Elder Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Rebbi Yose ben Laqonia: One whips because of Sabbath domains as word of the Torah. Rebbi Ḥiyya the Elder said to him, but for Sabbath there is only stoning or extirpation! He said to him, is there not written⁶⁰Ex. 12:9. This belongs to the discussion there whether all pentateuchal prohibitions are legally prosecutable, or only those formulated as לֹא whereas those introduced by the negation אַל are simply moral obligations. Since the latter then cannot be enforced in court by biblical standards, they are equal in rank to rabbinic prohibitions., do not eat from it raw? He said to him, is there written לֹא? No, it is written אַל! He said to him, is there not written⁶¹Ex. 16:28., stay everybody where he is, no person shall leave his place on the Seventh day? He said to him, is there written לֹא? No, it is written אַל. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, nevertheless each one kept to his tradition⁶²This is the end of the parallel in Eruvin3.. Is cutting its wart with an implement a matter of Sabbath rest⁶³This is making a wound, biblically forbidden under the category of slaughtering.? Rebbi Abbahu said, Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina stated only carrying it and bringing it; therefore not cutting its wart⁶⁴In Mishnah 1, he does not read “cutting its wart”.. That is because he thinks it⁶⁵Cutting the wart. Everybody agrees that biting off the wart is unprofessional, therefore does not create liability, and is only rabbinically forbidden. is with an implement. Therefore if he were not of the opinion that it was with an implement, would it be a matter of Sabbath rest? ⁶⁶Quoted from Eruvin 10(7), Note 64. It is stated there that cutting the wart creates liability only if done professionally with a surgeon’s knife. Did not Rebbi Abbahu say in the name of Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina, where do they disagree? If he removed it with an implement. But if another person removed it it is disgusting⁶⁷Therefore not causing biblical liability. Babli Šabbat 94b., and is not the sacrifice another? Rebbi Yose said, there is a difference because there is written “a sacrifice”. Rebbi Mana said, sprinkling⁶⁸Purifying a person impure by the impurity of the dead by sprinkling with water containing of the ashes of the Red Cow. In Second Temple times this was a public act (Mishnah Parah 11:4) not performed on the Sabbath. is a matter of Sabbath rest, and these are because of Sabbath rest. Sprinkling is pushed aside⁶⁹If the 14th of Nisan is a Sabbath and a person’s seventh day of impurity falls on that day, he may not be purified by sprinkling, but this is not biblically forbidden, and he has to celebrate his Pesaḥ on the 14th of Iyar. Cf. Mishnaiot 3,4. but these should not be pushed aside? Only that these are about the sacrifice and this is for the person who sacrifices. The word of Rebbi Zeˋira implies that there is no difference between sacrifice and sacrificer: Rebbi Jehudah bar Pazi stated Bar Qappara’s before Rebbi Zeˋira: I wonder how Rebbi Eliezer received Rebbi Joshua’s answer that these are about the sacrifice and this is for the person who sacrifices⁷⁰Since R. Joshua’s argument is about the slaughterer, not the animal being slaughtered.? He told him, Bar Qappara was wondering, Rebbi Eliezer was not wondering⁷¹Their discussion makes sense only if there is no difference whether one speaks about sacrifice or sacrificer. This confirms what R. Zeˋira said..

MISHNAH: If he slaughtered it for those who cannot not eat it⁹⁸For example a sick person who will not be able to eat a full olive-sized piece of meat., for those who did not subscribe to it⁹⁹The Pesaḥ may be eaten only by people who beforehand formed a group to this purpose, Ex. 12:4., for the uncircumcised,¹⁰⁰He is forbidden to participate even if he is a hemophiliac who may not be circumcised, Ex. 12:48. or for the impure¹⁰¹If he will be impure in the evening, such as a person impure in the impurity of the dead who is impure for seven days. For an impure person eating sancta is a deadly sin, Lev. 7:21., it is disqualified¹⁰²The meat of a simple sacrifice must be eaten; it may not be slaughtered in the absence of people who would consume it.. For those who eat it and those who will not eat it, for those who subscribed to it and those who did not subscribe to it, for the circumcised and the uncircumcised, or for the pure and the impure, it is qualified¹⁰³Since people may decide to join the group until the blood is poured on the walls of the altar, which is after slaughtering, the slaughter is qualified as long as there is at least one person for whom it is validly slaughtered.. If one slaughtered it before noon it is disqualified since it was said about it: between the evenings¹⁰⁴See Halakhah 1.. If one slaughtered it before the daily evening sacrifice it is qualified, on condition that somebody stir the blood until after the blood of the daily evening sacrifice was poured;¹⁰⁵Since any sacrifice may be slaughtered by a lay person and the sacral activities only start with the reception of the blood in a sacral vessel by a Cohen, the status of a Pesaḥ slaughtered before the daily sacrifice, whose blood was stirred to prevent jellying and which then was poured on the walls of the altar after the daily sacrifice, is identical with one which was slaughtered after the daily sacrifice. but if the blood was poured it is qualified¹⁰⁶Even if the pouring was done before the daily sacrifice. Cf. Note 20..

HALAKHAH: Paragraph¹³²Discussion of Mishnah 11.. “One ties strings²⁷Greek νῆμα, ἡ, “string” of musical instruments. Tying a new string would make an unusable instrument usable; this is biblically forbidden also in the Temple where biblically forbidden work on the Sabbath is only permitted for the explicitly required sacrifices. Making a permanent knot is also biblically forbidden (Mishnah Šabbat 7:2), only making a temporary loop is permitted. Since this leaves the violin unusable, the Mishnah is re-interpreted in the Halakhah. in the Temple but not in the countryside.” Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, this is Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar’s¹³⁸Differently Babli 102b., as Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar stated, if a broken violin string is tied it does not give a sound, but he strings from above and makes a loop below¹³⁹Babli Taanit 27a, a statement of Samuel.. It was stated¹⁴⁰The Cohanim officiate, the Levites sing, the Israel are the maˋamad, representatives of the people for whom the daily sacrifices are offered. Since the Sabbath sacrifice is a biblical obligation, and musical accompaniment of the Levite’s song is necessary, if there is no replacement violin (or guitar) available, R. Simeon ben Eleazar permits restringing the instrument on the Sabbath. The “one ties strings” in the Mishnah means tying with permanent knots; this contradicts the statement in the Mishnah that new strings are forbidden in the Temple. This latter statement cannot be R. Simeon ben Eleazar’s.: Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar said, Cohanim, Levites, Israel, and musical instruments obstruct the sacrifice¹⁴¹Mishnah Pesaḥim 6:1. This does not refer to a Cohen but to the Passover sacrifice; if the 14^th of Nisan falls on a Sabbath and the animal selected for the sacrifice unexpectedly develops a wart which makes it unfit as sacrifice, the wart cannot be cut on the Sabbath even if the animal already is in the Temple precinct.
The entire paragraph except for the introductory sentence is a slightly defective copy of a text in Pesaḥim 6:1, end (פ)..