| 71b. מעת לעת,והתני לודאה יום הבראתו כיום הולדו מאי לאו מה יום הולדו לא בעינן מעת לעת אף יום הבראתו לא בעינן מעת לעת,לא עדיף יום הבראתו מיום הולדו דאילו יום הולדו לא בעינן מעת לעת ואילו יום הבראתו בעינן מעת לעת,רב פפא אמר כגון דכאיב ליה עיניה לינוקא ואיתפח ביני וביני,רבא אמר כגון שהיו אביו ואמו חבושין בבית האסורין,רב כהנא בריה דרב נחמיה אמר כגון טומטום שנקרע ונמצא זכר ביני וביני,רב שרביא אמר כגון שהוציא ראשו חוץ לפרוזדור,ומי חיי והתניא כיון שיצא לאויר העולם נפתח הסתום ונסתם הפתוח שאלמלא כן אין יכול לחיות אפילו שעה אחת,הכא במאי עסקינן כגון דזנתיה אישתא אישתא דמאן אילימא אישתא דידיה אי הכי כל שבעה בעי אלא דזנתיה אישתא דאימיה ואיבעית אימא ה"מ היכא דלא מעוי אבל היכא דמעוי מחייא חיי,אמר ר' יוחנן משום רבי בנאה ערל מקבל הזאה שכן מצינו באבותינו שקבלו הזאה כשהן ערלים שנאמר (יהושע ד, יט) והעם עלו מן הירדן בעשור לחדש הראשון,בעשרה לא מהילי משום חולשא דאורחא הזאה אימת עביד להו לאו כשהן ערלים,ודלמא לא עבוד פסח כלל לא ס"ד דכתיב (יהושע ה, י) ויעשו את הפסח,מתקיף לה מר זוטרא ודלמא פסח הבא בטומאה היה א"ל רב אשי תניא בהדיא מלו וטבלו ועשו פסחיהן בטהרה,אמר רבה בר יצחק אמר רב לא ניתנה פריעת מילה לאברהם אבינו שנאמר (יהושע ה, ב) בעת ההיא אמר ה' אל יהושע עשה לך חרבות צורים וגו',ודלמא הנך דלא מהול דכתיב (יהושע ה, ה) כי מולים היו כל העם היוצאים וכל העם הילודים וגו',א"כ מאי שוב אלא לאו לפריעה ומאי שנית,לאקושי סוף מילה לתחלת מילה מה תחלת מילה מעכבת אף סוף מילה מעכבין בו דתנן אלו הן ציצין המעכבין את המילה בשר החופה את [רוב] העטרה ואין אוכל בתרומה,אמר רבינא ואיתימא רב ירמיה בר אבא אמר רב בשר החופה את רוב גובהה של עטרה,ובמדבר מאי טעמא לא מהול איבעית אימא משום חולשא דאורחא | 71b. that during the recovery period one must wait b from /b the b time /b the seven days began b to /b the exact same b time /b seven days later, i.e., seven complete twenty-four-hour periods. Therefore, if the child recovered in the afternoon of a particular day, one is required to wait until that same time of day a week later, and only then is he circumcised.,The Gemara asks: b Didn’t /b the Sage b from Lod teach /b that b the day of his healing is like the day of his birth? What, is it not /b that b just as /b with regard to b the day of his birth we need not /b wait b from /b the b time /b he is born b to /b the same b time /b on the eighth day to circumcise him, b so too, /b with regard to b the day of his healing we need not /b wait b from /b the b time /b he heals b to /b the same b time /b seven days later?,The Gemara refutes this argument: b No, the day of his healing is superior to the day of his birth: While /b from b the day of his birth /b until circumcision b we need not /b wait b from /b the b time /b he is born b to /b the same b time /b on the eighth day to circumcise him, i.e., the child may be circumcised already at the start of the eighth day, from b the day of his healing we need /b to wait seven complete days b from /b the b time /b he heals b to /b the same b time /b seven days later.,The Gemara suggests other circumstances where a male child may be present at the time of the eating of the Paschal lamb but absent at the time of its preparation. b Rav Pappa said: /b This would take place, b for example, if the baby’s eye hurt him /b on the eighth day following his birth, which occurred on the eve of Passover, b and he recovered in the meantime /b between the time of the preparation of the Paschal lamb and the time of its eating. In the case of a minor ailment such as eye pain, circumcision is not performed as long as the pain persists, but it may be performed as soon as the child has recovered, without first waiting seven days., b Rava said: /b This would occur, b for example, if /b the infant’s b father and mother were incarcerated in a prison /b at the time of the preparation of the Paschal lamb, and they slaughtered their offering by way of an agent, and there was no one available to circumcise the infant, and the parents were released from prison before the time for eating the Paschal lamb arrived., b Rav Kahana, son of Rav Neḥemya, said: /b This would occur, b for example, /b if the infant was b a i tumtum /i , /b one whose external sexual organs are indeterminate and it is unclear whether the infant is male or female, and b in the meantime /b between the time of the preparation of the Paschal lamb and the time of its eating, b he was torn /b open, his gender was revealed, b and he was found /b to be b a male, /b so that the obligation to circumcise him went into effect., b Rav Sherevya said: /b This would occur, b for example, if /b seven days earlier the baby had already b extended his head, /b but not the rest of his body, b out of the corridor /b to his mother’s womb. In such a situation he is considered born, but he is fit for circumcision only after his entire body has emerged. If this occurs between the time of the preparation of the Paschal lamb and the time of its eating, the child’s father may not eat of the offering until he has circumcised his son.,The Gemara poses a question: b But /b in a case such as this, b can /b the child b live /b for such a long period with only his head outside? b Isn’t it taught /b in a i baraita /i : b Once /b a baby b emerges into the air of the world, /b that which had been b closed, /b the mouth and nostrils, b open, and /b that which had been b open, /b the umbilical cord, from which the child had previously received its sustece, b closes, as, if this /b did b not /b occur b it could not live for even an hour, /b as it has no other way to receive nutrition. If so, this child whose head alone emerged from his mother’s womb would certainly starve, as it cannot take in any sustece.,The Gemara answers: b With what /b case b are we dealing here? /b It is, b for example, /b a case b where he was sustained by /b the heat of b a fever /b and therefore did not need to eat. The Gemara asks: b Whose fever? If we say /b it is b his own fever, /b i.e., the baby himself had a fever, b if so, /b it should be b necessary /b to wait b a full seven /b days after his entire body exits the womb before he can be circumcised, in accordance with the i halakha /i governing an infant who was ill. b Rather, /b it must be b that he was sustained by his mother’s fever. And if you wish, say /b that b this /b principle that a child cannot survive in such conditions b applies only when he does not cry, but when he cries he /b can b live, /b as his crying indicates that he has already started to breathe.,§ b Rabbi Yoḥa said in the name of Rabbi Bena’a: An uncircumcised /b man b may receive /b the b sprinkling /b of the water mixed with the ashes of a red heifer in order to purify himself from ritual impurity imparted by a human corpse, as we do not say that this sprinkling is ineffective as long as he is uncircumcised. b As we found that our forefathers received /b the b sprinkling when they were uncircumcised, as it is stated: “And the people came up out of the Jordan on the tenth day of the first month” /b (Joshua 4:19), and the verses go on to relate that the men were all later circumcised before sacrificing the Paschal lamb on the fourteenth (see Joshua 5:10).,The Gemara clarifies: b On the tenth /b day itself b they did not circumcise /b themselves b due to the weariness /b caused by b their journey. When, /b then, b was /b the b sprinkling done to them /b in order to remove the ritual impurity resulting from contact with a corpse, so that they would be fit to bring the Paschal lamb on the fourteenth? The first sprinkling must have taken place no later than the tenth, as there is a four-day waiting period between the first and second sprinklings. In that case, b wasn’t /b the initial sprinkling performed b when they were /b still b uncircumcised? /b This proves that an one who is uncircumcised may receive the sprinkling of the purification waters.,The Gemara counters: b But perhaps they did not sacrifice /b the b Paschal lamb at all. /b The Gemara answers: b This cannot enter your mind, as it is written: “And they kept the Passover” /b (Joshua 5:10), meaning they brought the Paschal lamb., b Mar Zutra strongly objects to this: But perhaps it was a Paschal lamb that comes in /b a state of b impurity? /b If the majority of the community is ritually impure due to contact with a corpse, they may all sacrifice their Paschal lambs even though they are ritually impure, and there is no need for any sprinkling. b Rav Ashi said to him: It is taught explicitly /b in a i baraita /i that b they circumcised /b themselves, b immersed /b in a ritual bath, b and performed /b the ritual of b their Paschal lambs in /b a state of b purity. /b , b Rabba bar Yitzḥak said /b that b Rav said: The /b mitzva of b uncovering /b the corona during b circumcision was not given to our Patriarch Abraham. /b The command given to Avraham included only the mitzva of circumcision itself, i.e., the removal of the foreskin, but not the uncovering of the corona, i.e., the folding back of the thin membrane that lies under the foreskin. b As it is stated: “At that time the Lord said to Joshua: Make yourself knives of flint, /b and circumcise again the children of Israel a second time” (Joshua 5:2). Why was it necessary to circumcise them? Apparently, it is because before the Torah was given on Mount Sinai, some of them had been circumcised in the manner of Abraham, without uncovering the corona, and therefore they needed to be circumcised a second time in accordance with the Torah law that requires uncovering the corona.,The Gemara asks: How may it be inferred that those who were already circumcised required a second circumcision? b Perhaps /b the verse is referring to b those who had not been circumcised at all, as it is written: “For all the people who came out were circumcised; but all the people who were born /b in the wilderness…had not been circumcised” (Joshua 5:5)?,The Gemara responds: b If so, /b that it was only those who had never been circumcised who required circumcision, b what is /b the meaning of “circumcise b again,” /b which indicates that they had to be circumcised a second time? b Rather, is it not /b referring b to uncovering /b the corona? b And what is /b the meaning of b “a second time,” /b stated in the same verse? This phrase appears redundant, as the verse already stated: “Circumcise again.”,The Gemara explains: It comes b to equate the end of circumcision, /b when it is necessary to circumcise a second time in order to correct an improperly performed circumcision, b with the beginning of circumcision: Just as /b an incomplete performance at b the beginning of circumcision invalidates /b the circumcision, b so too, /b incomplete performance at b the end of circumcision, /b i.e., the foreskin not being fully removed, b invalidates /b the circumcision. b As we learned /b in a mishna ( i Shabbat /i 137a): b These are the shreds /b of flesh b that invalidate the circumcision /b if they are not cut. The essential element of circumcision is the removal of b the flesh that covers most of the corona, /b and a child who was not circumcised in this manner is considered uncircumcised, b and he does not partake of i teruma /i . /b ,With regard to this issue b Ravina said, and some say /b it was b Rav Yirmeya bar Abba /b who said that b Rav said: /b When the mishna mentioned most of the corona, it meant b the flesh that covers most of the height of the corona /b as well as most of its circumference.,The Gemara returns to the incident involving Joshua. b And what is the reason /b that b they did not circumcise /b themselves b in the wilderness /b after the Torah had already been given? The Gemara answers: b If you wish, say /b it was b due to the weariness /b caused by b their journey. /b Since they were traveling continuously, they were too weak to undergo circumcision. |
