1. Hebrew Bible, Exodus, None (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Balberg (2017), Blood for Thought: The Reinvention of Sacrifice in Early Rabbinic Literature, 144; Dawson (2001), Christian Figural Reading and the Fashioning of Identity, 70, 71| 12.5. "וַיַּעֲשׂוּ כָּל־בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל כַּאֲשֶׁר צִוָּה יְהוָה אֶת־מֹשֶׁה וְאֶת־אַהֲרֹן כֵּן עָשׂוּ׃", 12.5. "שֶׂה תָמִים זָכָר בֶּן־שָׁנָה יִהְיֶה לָכֶם מִן־הַכְּבָשִׂים וּמִן־הָעִזִּים תִּקָּחוּ׃", | 12.5. "Your lamb shall be without blemish, a male of the first year; ye shall take it from the sheep, or from the goats;", |
|
2. Hebrew Bible, Numbers, 28.3 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •lamb, passover Found in books: Balberg (2017), Blood for Thought: The Reinvention of Sacrifice in Early Rabbinic Literature, 144| 28.3. "וְאָמַרְתָּ לָהֶם זֶה הָאִשֶּׁה אֲשֶׁר תַּקְרִיבוּ לַיהוָה כְּבָשִׂים בְּנֵי־שָׁנָה תְמִימִם שְׁנַיִם לַיּוֹם עֹלָה תָמִיד׃", 28.3. "שְׂעִיר עִזִּים אֶחָד לְכַפֵּר עֲלֵיכֶם׃", | 28.3. "And thou shalt say unto them: This is the offering made by fire which ye shall bring unto the LORD: he-lambs of the first year without blemish, two day by day, for a continual burnt-offering.", |
|
3. Hebrew Bible, Isaiah, 1.13-1.14 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •lambs, passover Found in books: Dawson (2001), Christian Figural Reading and the Fashioning of Identity, 66| 1.13. "לֹא תוֹסִיפוּ הָבִיא מִנְחַת־שָׁוְא קְטֹרֶת תּוֹעֵבָה הִיא לִי חֹדֶשׁ וְשַׁבָּת קְרֹא מִקְרָא לֹא־אוּכַל אָוֶן וַעֲצָרָה׃", 1.14. "חָדְשֵׁיכֶם וּמוֹעֲדֵיכֶם שָׂנְאָה נַפְשִׁי הָיוּ עָלַי לָטֹרַח נִלְאֵיתִי נְשֹׂא׃", | 1.13. "Bring no more vain oblations; It is an offering of abomination unto Me; New moon and sabbath, the holding of convocations— I cannot endure iniquity along with the solemn assembly.", 1.14. "Your new moons and your appointed seasons My soul hateth; They are a burden unto Me; I am weary to bear them.", |
|
4. Philo of Alexandria, On The Special Laws, 2.145-2.149 (1st cent. BCE - missingth cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •lambs, passover Found in books: Cosgrove (2022), Music at Social Meals in Greek and Roman Antiquity: From the Archaic Period to the Age of Augustine, 271 | 2.145. And after the feast of the new moon comes the fourth festival, that of the passover, which the Hebrews call pascha, on which the whole people offer sacrifice, beginning at noonday and continuing till evening. 2.146. And this festival is instituted in remembrance of, and as giving thanks for, their great migration which they made from Egypt, with many myriads of people, in accordance with the commands of God given to them; leaving then, as it seems, a country full of all inhumanity and practising every kind of inhospitality, and (what was worst of all 2.147. But those who are in the habit of turning plain stories into allegory, argue that the passover figuratively represents the purification of the soul; for they say that the lover of wisdom is never practising anything else except a passing over from the body and the passions. 2.148. And each house is at that time invested with the character and dignity of a temple, the victim being sacrificed so as to make a suitable feast for the man who has provided it and of those who are collected to share in the feast, being all duly purified with holy ablutions. And those who are to share in the feast come together not as they do to other entertainments, to gratify their bellies with wine and meat, but to fulfil their hereditary custom with prayer and songs of praise. 2.149. And this universal sacrifice of the whole people is celebrated on the fourteenth day of the month, which consists of two periods of seven, in order that nothing which is accounted worthy of honour may be separated from the number seven. But this number is the beginning of brilliancy and dignity to everything.THE FIFTH FESTIVALXXVIII. |
|
5. New Testament, Matthew, 26.17-26.30 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •lambs, passover Found in books: Cosgrove (2022), Music at Social Meals in Greek and Roman Antiquity: From the Archaic Period to the Age of Augustine, 271| 26.17. Τῇ δὲ πρώτῃ τῶν ἀζύμων προσῆλθον οἱ μαθηταὶ τῷ Ἰησοῦ λέγοντες Ποῦ θέλεις ἑτοιμάσωμέν σοι φαγεῖν τὸ πάσχα; 26.18. ὁ δὲ εἶπεν Ὑπάγετε εἰς τὴν πόλιν πρὸς τὸν δεῖνα καὶ εἴπατε αὐτῷ Ὁ διδάσκαλος λέγει Ὁ καιρός μου ἐγγύς ἐστιν· πρὸς σὲ ποιῶ τὸ πάσχα μετὰ τῶν μαθητῶν μου. 26.19. καὶ ἐποίησαν οἱ μαθηταὶ ὡς συνέταξεν αὐτοῖς ὁ Ἰησοῦς, καὶ ἡτοίμασαν τὸ πάσχα. 26.20. Ὀψίας δὲ γενομένης ἀνέκειτο μετὰ τῶν δώδεκα [μαθητῶν]. 26.21. καὶ ἐσθιόντων αὐτῶν εἶπεν Ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι εἷς ἐξ ὑμῶν παραδώσει με. 26.22. καὶ λυπούμενοι σφόδρα ἤρξαντο λέγειν αὐτῷ εἷς ἕκαστος Μήτι ἐγώ εἰμι, κύριε; 26.23. ὁ δὲ ἀποκριθεὶς εἶπεν Ὁ ἐμβάψας μετʼ ἐμοῦ τὴν χεῖρα ἐν τῷ τρυβλίῳ οὗτός με παραδώσει· 26.24. ὁ μὲν υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ὑπάγει καθὼς γέγραπται περὶ αὐτοῦ, οὐαὶ δὲ τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ ἐκείνῳ διʼ οὗ ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου παραδίδοται· καλὸν ἦν αὐτῷ εἰ οὐκ ἐγεννήθη ὁ ἄνθρωπος ἐκεῖνος. 26.25. ἀποκριθεὶς δὲ Ἰούδας ὁ παραδιδοὺς αὐτὸν εἶπεν Μήτι ἐγώ εἰμι, ῥαββεί; λέγει αὐτῷ Σὺ εἶπας. 26.26. Ἐσθιόντων δὲ αὐτῶν λαβὼν ὁ Ἰησοῦς ἄρτον καὶ εὐλογήσας ἔκλασεν καὶ δοὺς τοῖς μαθηταῖς εἶπεν Λάβετε φάγετε, τοῦτό ἐστιν τὸ σῶμά μου. 26.27. καὶ λαβὼν ποτήριον [καὶ] εὐχαριστήσας ἔδωκεν αὐτοῖς λέγων 26.28. Πίετε ἐξ αὐτοῦ πάντες, τοῦτο γάρ ἐστιν τὸ αἷμά μου τῆς διαθήκης τὸ περὶ πολλῶν ἐκχυννόμενον εἰς ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν· 26.29. λέγω δὲ ὑμῖν, οὐ μὴ πίω ἀπʼ ἄρτι ἐκ τούτου τοῦ γενήματος τῆς ἀμπέλου ἕως τῆς ἡμέρας ἐκείνης ὅταν αὐτὸ πίνω μεθʼ ὑμῶν καινὸν ἐν τῇ βασιλείᾳ τοῦ πατρός μου. 26.30. Καὶ ὑμνήσαντες ἐξῆλθον εἰς τὸ Ὄρος τῶν Ἐλαιῶν. | 26.17. Now on the first day of unleavened bread, the disciples came to Jesus, saying to him, "Where do you want us to prepare for you to eat the Passover?" 26.18. He said, "Go into the city to a certain person, and tell him, 'The Teacher says, "My time is at hand. I will keep the Passover at your house with my disciples."'" 26.19. The disciples did as Jesus commanded them, and they prepared the Passover. 26.20. Now when evening had come, he was reclining at the table with the twelve disciples. 26.21. As they were eating, he said, "Most assuredly I tell you that one of you will betray me." 26.22. They were exceedingly sorrowful, and each began to ask him, "It isn't me, is it, Lord?" 26.23. He answered, "He who dipped his hand with me in the dish, the same will betray me. 26.24. The Son of Man goes, even as it is written of him, but woe to that man through whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It would be better for that man if he had not been born." 26.25. Judas, who betrayed him, answered, "It isn't me, is it, Rabbi?"He said to him, "You said it." 26.26. As they were eating, Jesus took bread, gave thanks for it, and broke it. He gave to the disciples, and said, "Take, eat; this is my body." 26.27. He took the cup, gave thanks, and gave to them, saying, "All of you drink it, 26.28. for this is my blood of the new covet, which is poured out for many for the remission of sins. 26.29. But I tell you that I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on, until that day when I drink it anew with you in my Father's kingdom." 26.30. When they had sung a hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives. |
|
6. New Testament, Mark, 14.12-14.26 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •lambs, passover Found in books: Cosgrove (2022), Music at Social Meals in Greek and Roman Antiquity: From the Archaic Period to the Age of Augustine, 271| 14.12. Καὶ τῇ πρώτῃ ἡμέρᾳ τῶν ἀζύμων, ὅτε τὸ πάσχα ἔθυον, λέγουσιν αὐτῷ οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ Ποῦ θέλεις ἀπελθόντες ἑτοιμάσωμεν ἵνα φάγῃς τὸ πάσχα; 14.13. καὶ ἀποστέλλει δύο τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς Ὑπάγετε εἰς τὴν πόλιν, καὶ ἀπαντήσει ὑμῖν ἄνθρωπος κεράμιον ὕδατος βαστάζων· ἀκολουθήσατε αὐτῷ, 14.14. καὶ ὅπου ἐὰν εἰσέλθῃ εἴπατε τῷ οἰκοδεσπότῃ ὅτι Ὁ διδάσκαλος λέγει Ποῦ ἐστὶν τὸ κατάλυμά μου ὅπου τὸ πάσχα μετὰ τῶν μαθητῶν μου φάγω; 14.15. καὶ αὐτὸς ὑμῖν δείξει ἀνάγαιον μέγα ἐστρωμένον ἕτοιμον· καὶ ἐκεῖ ἑτοιμάσατε ἡμῖν. 14.16. καὶ ἐξῆλθον οἱ μαθηταὶ καὶ ἦλθον εἰς τὴν πόλιν καὶ εὗρον καθὼς εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, καὶ ἡτοίμασαν τὸ πάσχα. 14.17. Καὶ ὀψίας γενομένης ἔρχεται μετὰ τῶν δώδεκα. 14.18. καὶ ἀνακειμένων αὐτῶν καὶ ἐσθιόντων ὁ Ἰησοῦς εἶπεν Ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι εἷς ἐξ ὑμῶν παραδώσει με ὁ ἐσθίων μετʼ ἐμοῦ. 14.19. ἤρξαντο λυπεῖσθαι καὶ λέγειν αὐτῷ εἷς κατὰ εἷς Μήτι ἐγώ; 14.20. ὁ δὲ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς Εἷς τῶν δώδεκα, ὁ ἐμβαπτόμενος μετʼ ἐμοῦ εἰς τὸ [ἓν] τρύβλιον· 14.21. ὅτι ὁ μὲν υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ὑπάγει καθὼς γέγραπται περὶ αὐτοῦ, οὐαὶ δὲ τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ ἐκείνῳ διʼ οὗ ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου παραδίδοται· καλὸν αὐτῷ εἰ οὐκ ἐγεννήθη ὁ ἄνθρωπος ἐκεῖνος. 14.22. Καὶ ἐσθιόντων αὐτῶν λαβὼν ἄρτον εὐλογήσας ἔκλασεν καὶ ἔδωκεν αὐτοῖς καὶ εἶπεν Λάβετε, τοῦτό ἐστιν τὸ σῶμά μου. 14.23. καὶ λαβὼν ποτήριον εὐχαριστήσας ἔδωκεν αὐτοῖς, καὶ ἔπιον ἐξ αὐτοῦ πάντες. 14.24. καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς Τοῦτό ἐστιν τὸ αἷμά μου τῆς διαθήκης τὸ ἐκχυννόμενον ὑπὲρ πολλῶν· 14.25. ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι οὐκέτι οὐ μὴ πίω ἐκ τοῦ γενήματος τῆς ἀμπέλου ἕως τῆς ἡμέρας ἐκείνης ὅταν αὐτὸ πίνω καινὸν ἐν τῇ βασιλείᾳ τοῦ θεοῦ. 14.26. Καὶ ὑμνήσαντες ἐξῆλθον εἰς τὸ Ὄρος τῶν Ἐλαιῶν. | 14.12. On the first day of unleavened bread, when they sacrificed the Passover, his disciples asked him, "Where do you want us to go and make ready that you may eat the Passover?" 14.13. He sent two of his disciples, and said to them, "Go into the city, and there you will meet a man carrying a pitcher of water. Follow him, 14.14. and wherever he enters in, tell the master of the house, 'The Teacher says, "Where is the guest room, where I may eat the Passover with my disciples?"' 14.15. He will himself show you a large upper room furnished and ready. Make ready for us there." 14.16. His disciples went out, and came into the city, and found things as he had said to them, and they prepared the Passover. 14.17. When it was evening he came with the twelve. 14.18. As they sat and were eating, Jesus said, "Most assuredly I tell you, one of you will betray me -- he who eats with me." 14.19. They began to be sorrowful, and to ask him one by one, "Surely not I?" And another said, "Surely not I?" 14.20. He answered them, "It is one of the twelve, he who dips with me in the dish. 14.21. For the Son of Man goes, even as it is written about him, but woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It would be better for that man if he had not been born." 14.22. As they were eating, Jesus took bread, and when he had blessed, he broke it, and gave to them, and said, "Take, eat. This is my body." 14.23. He took the cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave to them. They all drank of it. 14.24. He said to them, "This is my blood of the new covet, which is poured out for many. 14.25. Most assuredly I tell you, I will no more drink of the fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it anew in the Kingdom of God." 14.26. When they had sung a hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives. |
|
7. New Testament, Luke, 22.15-22.16, 22.20 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •lambs, passover Found in books: Dawson (2001), Christian Figural Reading and the Fashioning of Identity, 66, 71| 22.15. καὶ εἶπεν πρὸς αὐτούς Ἐπιθυμίᾳ ἐπεθύμησα τοῦτο τὸ πάσχα φαγεῖν μεθʼ ὑμῶν πρὸ τοῦ με παθεῖν· 22.16. λέγω γὰρ ὑμῖν ὅτι οὐ μὴ φάγω αὐτὸ ἕως ὅτου πληρωθῇ ἐν τῇ βασιλείᾳ τοῦ θεοῦ. 22.20. καὶ τὸ ποτήριον ὡσαύτως μετὰ τὸ δειπνῆσαι, λέγων Τοῦτο τὸ ποτήριον ἡ καινὴ διαθήκη ἐν τῷ αἵματί μου, τὸ ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν ἐκχυννόμενον⟧. | 22.15. He said to them, "I have earnestly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer, 22.16. for I tell you, I will no longer by any means eat of it until it is fulfilled in the Kingdom of God." 22.20. Likewise, he took the cup after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covet in my blood, which is poured out for you. |
|
8. New Testament, John, 1.14, 1.29, 2.13, 6.48, 6.50-6.51, 6.53-6.56, 11.55-11.56 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •lambs, passover Found in books: Dawson (2001), Christian Figural Reading and the Fashioning of Identity, 65, 66, 70, 71, 72, 238| 1.14. Καὶ ὁ λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο καὶ ἐσκήνωσεν ἐν ἡμῖν, καὶ ἐθεασάμεθα τὴν δόξαν αὐτοῦ, δόξαν ὡς μονογενοῦς παρὰ πατρός, πλήρης χάριτος καὶ ἀληθείας·?̔ 1.29. Τῇ ἐπαύριον βλέπει τὸν Ἰησοῦν ἐρχόμενον πρὸς αὐτόν, καὶ λέγει Ἴδε ὁ ἀμνὸς τοῦ θεοῦ ὁ αἴρων τὴν ἁμαρτίαν τοῦ κόσμου. 2.13. Καὶ ἐγγὺς ἦν τὸ πάσχα τῶν Ἰουδαίων, καὶ ἀνέβη εἰς Ἰεροσόλυμα ὁ Ἰησοῦς. 6.48. ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ἄρτος τῆς ζωῆς· 6.50. οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ ἄρτος ὁ ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ καταβαίνων ἵνα τις ἐξ αὐτοῦ φάγῃ καὶ μὴ ἀποθάνῃ· 6.51. ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ἄρτος ὁ ζῶν ὁ ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ καταβάς· ἐάν τις φάγῃ ἐκ τούτου τοῦ ἄρτου ζήσει εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα, καὶ ὁ ἄρτος δὲ ὃν ἐγὼ δώσω ἡ σάρξ μου ἐστὶν ὑπὲρ τῆς τοῦ κόσμου ζωῆς. 6.53. εἶπεν οὖν αὐτοῖς [ὁ] Ἰησοῦς Ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ἐὰν μὴ φάγητε τὴν σάρκα τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου καὶ πίητε αὐτοῦ τὸ αἷμα, οὐκ ἔχετε ζωὴν ἐν ἑαυτοῖς. 6.54. ὁ τρώγων μου τὴν σάρκα καὶ πίνων μου τὸ αἷμα ἔχει ζωὴν αἰώνιον, κἀγὼ ἀναστήσω αὐτὸν τῇ ἐσχάτῃ ἡμέρᾳ· 6.55. ἡ γὰρ σάρξ μου ἀληθής ἐστι βρῶσις, καὶ τὸ αἷμά μου ἀληθής ἐστι πόσις. 6.56. ὁ τρώγων μου τὴν σάρκα καὶ πίνων μου τὸ αἷμα ἐν ἐμοὶ μένει κἀγὼ ἐν αὐτῷ. 11.55. Ἦν δὲ ἐγγὺς τὸ πάσχα τῶν Ἰουδαίων, καὶ ἀνέβησαν πολλοὶ εἰς Ἰεροσόλυμα ἐκ τῆς χώρας πρὸ τοῦ πάσχα ἵνα ἁγνίσωσιν ἑαυτούς. 11.56. ἐζήτουν οὖν τὸν Ἰησοῦν καὶ ἔλεγον μετʼ ἀλλήλων ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ ἑστηκότες Τί δοκεῖ ὑμῖν; ὅτι οὐ μὴ ἔλθῃ εἰς τὴν ἑορτήν; | 1.14. The Word became flesh, and lived among us. We saw his glory, such glory as of the one and only Son of the Father, full of grace and truth. 1.29. The next day, he saw Jesus coming to him, and said, "Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world! 2.13. The Passover of the Jews was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. 6.48. I am the bread of life. 6.50. This is the bread which comes down out of heaven, that anyone may eat of it and not die. 6.51. I am the living bread which came down out of heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. Yes, the bread which I will give for the life of the world is my flesh." 6.53. Jesus therefore said to them, "Most assuredly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you don't have life in yourselves. 6.54. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. 6.55. For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. 6.56. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood lives in me, and I in him. 11.55. Now the Passover of the Jews was at hand. Many went up from the country to Jerusalem before the Passover, to purify themselves. 11.56. Then they sought for Jesus and spoke one with another, as they stood in the temple, "What do you think -- that he isn't coming to the feast at all?" |
|
9. New Testament, 2 Corinthians, 13.3 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •lambs, passover Found in books: Dawson (2001), Christian Figural Reading and the Fashioning of Identity, 73| 13.3. ἐπεὶ δοκιμὴν ζητεῖτε τοῦ ἐν ἐμοὶ λαλοῦντος χριστοῦ· ὃς εἰς ὑμᾶς οὐκ ἀσθενεῖ ἀλλὰ δυνατεῖ ἐν ὑμῖν, | |
|
| 10. New Testament, 1 Timothy, 6.271-6.272, 10.67, 10.69-10.73, 10.75-10.80, 10.83, 10.85-10.87, 10.92-10.93, 10.96, 10.99, 10.102-10.104, 10.107-10.110, 28.224-28.225, 28.237, 28.241, 28.243 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •lambs, passover Found in books: Dawson (2001), Christian Figural Reading and the Fashioning of Identity, 66, 68, 70, 72, 73, 238 |
11. New Testament, 1 Corinthians, 5.7, 11.25, 12.12 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •lambs, passover Found in books: Dawson (2001), Christian Figural Reading and the Fashioning of Identity, 70, 71| 5.7. ἐκκαθάρατε τὴν παλαιὰν ζύμην, ἵνα ἦτε νέον φύραμα, καθώς ἐστε ἄζυμοι. καὶ γὰρτὸ πάσχαἡμῶνἐτύθηΧριστός· 11.25. Τοῦτο τὸ ποτήριον ἡ καινὴδιαθήκηἐστὶν ἐντῷἐμῷαἵματι·τοῦτο ποιεῖτε, ὁσάκις ἐὰν πίνητε, εἰς τὴν ἐμὴν ἀνάμνησιν. 12.12. Καθάπερ γὰρ τὸ σῶμα ἕν ἐστιν καὶ μέλη πολλὰ ἔχει, πάντα δὲ τὰ μέλη τοῦ σώματος πολλὰ ὄντα ἕν ἐστιν σῶμα, οὕτως καὶ ὁ χριστός· | 5.7. Purge out the old yeast, that you may bea new lump, even as you are unleavened. For indeed Christ, ourPassover, has been sacrificed in our place. 11.25. In the same way he also took the cup, after supper,saying, "This cup is the new covet in my blood. Do this, as often asyou drink, in memory of me." 12.12. For as the body is one, and has many members, and all themembers of the body, being many, are one body; so also is Christ. |
|
12. Mishnah, Menachot, 9.7 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •lamb, passover Found in books: Balberg (2017), Blood for Thought: The Reinvention of Sacrifice in Early Rabbinic Literature, 144| 9.7. "כָּל קָרְבְּנוֹת הַצִּבּוּר אֵין בָּהֶם סְמִיכָה, חוּץ מִן הַפַּר הַבָּא עַל כָּל הַמִּצְוֹת, וְשָׂעִיר הַמִּשְׁתַּלֵּחַ. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, אַף שְׂעִירֵי עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה. כָּל קָרְבְּנוֹת הַיָּחִיד טְעוּנִים סְמִיכָה, חוּץ מִן הַבְּכוֹר וְהַמַּעֲשֵׂר וְהַפָּסַח. וְהַיּוֹרֵשׁ סוֹמֵךְ וּמֵבִיא נְסָכִים וּמֵמִיר: \n", | 9.7. "None of the communal offerings require the laying on of hands except the bull that is offered for [the transgression by the congregation] of any of the commandments, and the scapegoat. Rabbi Shimon says: also the he-goat offered for [the sin] of idol worship. All the offerings of an individual require the laying on of hands except the first-born, the cattle tithe, and the pesah. And an heir may lay his hands [on his father’s offering], and he may bring the libations for it, and can substitute [another animal for it].", |
|
13. Mishnah, Pesahim, 5.3, 6.6, 7.13, 8.1-8.7 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •lamb, passover Found in books: Balberg (2017), Blood for Thought: The Reinvention of Sacrifice in Early Rabbinic Literature, 161| 5.3. "שְׁחָטוֹ שֶׁלֹּא לְאוֹכְלָיו וְשֶׁלֹּא לִמְנוּיָיו, לַעֲרֵלִים וְלִטְמֵאִים, פָּסוּל. לְאוֹכְלָיו וְשֶׁלֹּא לְאוֹכְלָיו, לִמְנוּיָיו וְשֶׁלֹּא לִמְנוּיָיו, לְמוּלִים וְלַעֲרֵלִים, לִטְמֵאִים וְלִטְהוֹרִים, כָּשֵׁר. שְׁחָטוֹ קֹדֶם חֲצוֹת, פָּסוּל, מִשּׁוּם שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שמות יב) בֵּין הָעַרְבָּיִם. שְׁחָטוֹ קֹדֶם לַתָּמִיד, כָּשֵׁר, וּבִלְבַד שֶׁיְּהֵא אֶחָד מְמָרֵס בְּדָמוֹ עַד שֶׁיִּזָּרֵק דַּם הַתָּמִיד. וְאִם נִזְרַק, כָּשֵׁר: \n", 6.6. "שְׁחָטוֹ שֶׁלֹּא לְאוֹכְלָיו וְשֶׁלֹּא לִמְנוּיָיו, לַעֲרֵלִין וְלִטְמֵאִין, חַיָּב. לְאוֹכְלָיו וְשֶׁלֹּא לְאוֹכְלָיו, לִמְנוּיָיו וְשֶׁלֹּא לִמְנוּיָיו, לְמוּלִין וְלַעֲרֵלִין, לִטְהוֹרִים וְלִטְמֵאִים, פָּטוּר. שְׁחָטוֹ וְנִמְצָא בַעַל מוּם, חַיָּב. שְׁחָטוֹ וְנִמְצָא טְרֵפָה בַסֵּתֶר, פָּטוּר. שְׁחָטוֹ וְנוֹדַע שֶׁמָּשְׁכוּ הַבְּעָלִים אֶת יָדָם, אוֹ שֶׁמֵּתוּ אוֹ שֶׁנִּטְמְאוּ, פָּטוּר, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁשָּׁחַט בִּרְשׁוּת: \n", 7.13. "שְׁתֵּי חֲבוּרוֹת שֶׁהָיוּ אוֹכְלוֹת בְּבַיִת אֶחָד, אֵלּוּ הוֹפְכִין אֶת פְּנֵיהֶם הֵילָךְ וְאוֹכְלִין, וְאֵלּוּ הוֹפְכִין אֶת פְּנֵיהֶם הֵילָךְ וְאוֹכְלִין, וְהַמֵּחַם בָּאֶמְצַע. וּכְשֶׁהַשַּׁמָּשׁ עוֹמֵד לִמְזֹג, קוֹפֵץ אֶת פִּיו וּמַחֲזִיר אֶת פָּנָיו עַד שֶׁמַּגִּיעַ אֵצֶל חֲבוּרָתוֹ וְאוֹכֵל. וְהַכַּלָּה, הוֹפֶכֶת פָּנֶיהָ וְאוֹכֶלֶת: \n", 8.1. "הָאִשָּׁה בִּזְמַן שֶׁהִיא בְּבֵית בַּעְלָהּ, שָׁחַט עָלֶיהָ בַּעְלָהּ וְשָׁחַט עָלֶיהָ אָבִיהָ, תֹּאכַל מִשֶּׁל בַּעְלָהּ. הָלְכָה רֶגֶל רִאשׁוֹן לַעֲשׂוֹת בְּבֵית אָבִיהָ, שָׁחַט עָלֶיהָ אָבִיהָ וְשָׁחַט עָלֶיהָ בַּעְלָהּ, תֹּאכַל בִּמְקוֹם שֶׁהִיא רוֹצָה. יָתוֹם שֶׁשָּׁחֲטוּ עָלָיו אַפֹּטְרוֹפְּסִין, יֹאכַל בִּמְקוֹם שֶׁהוּא רוֹצֶה. עֶבֶד שֶׁל שְׁנֵי שֻׁתָּפִין, לֹא יֹאכַל מִשֶּׁל שְׁנֵיהֶן. מִי שֶׁחֶצְיוֹ עֶבֶד וְחֶצְיוֹ בֶן חוֹרִין, לֹא יֹאכַל מִשֶּׁל רַבּוֹ: \n", 8.2. "הָאוֹמֵר לְעַבְדּוֹ, צֵא וּשְׁחֹט עָלַי אֶת הַפֶּסַח, שָׁחַט גְּדִי, יֹאכַל. שָׁחַט טָלֶה, יֹאכַל. שָׁחַט גְּדִי וְטָלֶה, יֹאכַל מִן הָרִאשׁוֹן. שָׁכַח מָה אָמַר לוֹ רַבּוֹ, כֵּיצַד יַעֲשֶׂה, יִשְׁחַט טָלֶה וּגְדִי וְיֹאמַר, אִם גְּדִי אָמַר לִי רַבִּי, גְּדִי שֶׁלּוֹ וְטָלֶה שֶׁלִּי. וְאִם טָלֶה אָמַר לִי רַבִּי, הַטָּלֶה שֶׁלּוֹ וּגְדִי שֶׁלִּי. שָׁכַח רַבּוֹ מָה אָמַר לוֹ, שְׁנֵיהֶם יֵצְאוּ לְבֵית הַשְּׂרֵפָה, וּפְטוּרִין מִלַּעֲשׂוֹת פֶּסַח שֵׁנִי: \n", 8.3. "הָאוֹמֵר לְבָנָיו, הֲרֵינִי שׁוֹחֵט אֶת הַפֶּסַח עַל מִי שֶׁיַּעֲלֶה מִכֶּם רִאשׁוֹן לִירוּשָׁלַיִם, כֵּיוָן שֶׁהִכְנִיס הָרִאשׁוֹן רֹאשׁוֹ וְרֻבּוֹ, זָכָה בְחֶלְקוֹ וּמְזַכֶּה אֶת אֶחָיו עִמּוֹ. לְעוֹלָם נִמְנִין עָלָיו עַד שֶׁיְּהֵא בוֹ כַזַּיִת לְכָל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד. נִמְנִין וּמוֹשְׁכִין אֶת יְדֵיהֶן מִמֶּנּוּ עַד שֶׁיִּשָּׁחֵט. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, עַד שֶׁיִּזְרֹק עָלָיו אֶת הַדָּם: \n", 8.4. "הַמַּמְנֶה עִמּוֹ אֲחֵרִים בְּחֶלְקוֹ, רַשָּׁאִין בְּנֵי חֲבוּרָה לִתֵּן לוֹ אֶת שֶׁלּוֹ, וְהוּא אוֹכֵל מִשֶּׁלּוֹ, וְהֵן אוֹכְלִין מִשֶּׁלָּהֶן: \n", 8.5. "זָב שֶׁרָאָה שְׁתֵּי רְאִיּוֹת, שׁוֹחֲטִין עָלָיו בַּשְּׁבִיעִי. רָאָה שָׁלֹשׁ, שׁוֹחֲטִין עָלָיו בַּשְּׁמִינִי שֶׁלּוֹ. שׁוֹמֶרֶת יוֹם כְּנֶגֶד יוֹם, שׁוֹחֲטִין עָלֶיהָ בַשֵּׁנִי שֶׁלָּהּ. רָאֲתָה שְׁנֵי יָמִים, שׁוֹחֲטִין עָלֶיהָ בַשְּׁלִישִׁי. וְהַזָּבָה, שׁוֹחֲטִין עָלֶיהָ בַשְּׁמִינִי: \n", 8.6. "הָאוֹנֵן, וְהַמְפַקֵּחַ אֶת הַגַּל, וְכֵן מִי שֶׁהִבְטִיחוּהוּ לְהוֹצִיאוֹ מִבֵּית הָאֲסוּרִים, וְהַחוֹלֶה וְהַזָּקֵן שֶׁהֵן יְכוֹלִין לֶאֱכֹל כַּזַּיִת, שׁוֹחֲטִין עֲלֵיהֶן. עַל כֻּלָּן אֵין שׁוֹחֲטִין עֲלֵיהֶן בִּפְנֵי עַצְמָן, שֶׁמָּא יָבִיאוּ אֶת הַפֶּסַח לִידֵי פְסוּל. לְפִיכָךְ אִם אֵרַע בָּהֶן פְּסוּל, פְּטוּרִין מִלַּעֲשׂוֹת פֶּסַח שֵׁנִי, חוּץ מִן הַמְפַקֵּחַ בַּגַּל, שֶׁהוּא טָמֵא מִתְּחִלָּתוֹ: \n", 8.7. "אֵין שׁוֹחֲטִין אֶת הַפֶּסַח עַל הַיָּחִיד, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוּדָה. וְרַבִּי יוֹסֵי מַתִּיר. אֲפִלּוּ חֲבוּרָה שֶׁל מֵאָה שֶׁאֵין יְכוֹלִין לֶאֱכֹל כַּזַּיִת, אֵין שׁוֹחֲטִין עֲלֵיהֶן. וְאֵין עוֹשִׂין חֲבוּרַת נָשִׁים וַעֲבָדִים וּקְטַנִּים: \n", | 5.3. "If he slaughtered it for those who cannot eat it or for those who are not registered for it, for uncircumcised persons or for unclean persons, it is unfit. [If he slaughtered it] for those who can eat it and for those who cannot eat it, for those who are registered for it and for those who are not registered for it, for circumcised and for uncircumcised persons, for unclean and for clean persons, it is fit. If he slaughtered it before midday, it is disqualified, because it is said, “[and all of the assembled congregation of Israelites shall slaughter it] at twilight” (Exodus 12:6). If he slaughtered it before the [evening] tamid, it is fit, providing that a person stirs its blood until [that of] the tamid is sprinkled. [Nevertheless] if it was sprinkled [before the tamid], it is fit.", 6.6. "If he slaughtered it for those who are not its eaters, or for those who were not registered for it, for uncircumcised or for unclean [persons], he is liable. [If he slaughtered it] for its eaters and for those who are not its eaters, for those who are registered for it and for those who are not registered for it, for circumcised and for uncircumcised, for unclean and for clean [persons], he is exempt. If he slaughtered it, and it was found to possess a blemish, he is liable. If he slaughtered it and it was found to be an internal terefah, he is exempt. If he slaughtered it, and [then] it became known that its owners had withdrawn their hands from it, or that they had died, or that they had become unclean, he is not culpable, because he slaughtered it with permission.", 7.13. "Two companies which are eating in one room, these turn their faces in one direction and eat and they turn their faces in another direction and eat, and the boiler is in the middle. When the servant rises to mix [the wine], he must shut his mouth and turn his face away [from the other company] until he reaches his own company and [there] he eats. But a bride may turn her face away and eat.", 8.1. "A wife, when she is in her husband’s home, and her husband slaughtered on her behalf and her father slaughtered on her behalf, she must eat of her husband's. If she went to spend the first festival in her father's home, and her father slaughtered on her behalf and her husband slaughtered on her behalf, she may eat wherever she pleases. An orphan on whose behalf his guardians slaughtered may eat wherever he pleases. A slave of two partners may not eat of either. He who is half slave and half free may not eat of his master's.", 8.2. "One who says to his slave, “Go out and slaughter the pesah on my behalf”, if he slaughtered a kid, he may eat it; if he slaughtered a lamb, he may eat it; if he slaughtered a kid and a lamb, he eats the first. If he forgot what his master told him, how should he act? He should slaughter a lamb and a kid and declare, “If my master told me [to slaughter] a kid, the kid is his and the lamb is mine; and if my master told me [to slaughter] a lamb, the lamb is his and the kid is mine.” If his master [also] forgot what he told him, both animals go to the place of burning, but they [the master and the slave] are exempt from sacrificing the second pesah.", 8.3. "If a man says to his children, “Behold, I am going to slaughter the pesah on behalf of whichever of you goes up first to Jerusalem,” as soon as the first has put his head and the greater part of his body [into Jerusalem] he has acquired his portion, and he acquires it on behalf of his brothers with him. One may always register for it as long as there is as much as an olive’s worth for each one [registered]. They may register and withdraw their hands from it until it has been slaughtered; Rabbi Shimon says: until the blood is sprinkled.", 8.4. "If one registers others with him [to share] in his portion, the members of the company are permitted to give him his [portion], and he eats his and they eat theirs.", 8.5. "If a zav saw two instances [of discharge], they slaughter [the pesah] on his behalf on his seventh [day]. If he saw three [instances of discharge], they slaughter on his behalf on his eighth [day]. If a woman observes a “day for a day”, they slaughter on her behalf on her second day. If she saw [a discharge] on two days, they slaughter on her behalf on the third [day]. And as for a zavah, they slaughter on her behalf on the eighth [day].", 8.6. "[As to] an onen, and one who is removing a heap [of stones], and likewise one whom they promised to take out of prison, and a sick or an old person who can eat as much as an olive, they slaughter on their behalf. [Yet in the case of] all these, they may not slaughter for them alone, lest they bring the pesah to disqualification. Therefore if a disqualification occurs to them, they are exempt from keeping the second pesah, except for one who was removing the heap, because he was unclean from the beginning.", 8.7. "They may not slaughter the pesah for a single person, the words of Rabbi Judah. But Rabbi Yose permits it. And even a company of a hundred who cannot eat as much as an olive, one may not slaughter [a pesah] for them. And one may not form a company of women and slaves and minors.", |
|
14. Tosefta, Pesahim, 4.2, 6.3-6.4, 6.10, 7.3-7.13 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •lamb, passover Found in books: Balberg (2017), Blood for Thought: The Reinvention of Sacrifice in Early Rabbinic Literature, 161| 4.2. "כל הקדשים שהקריבן קודם תמיד של שחר או שעכבן אחר תמיד של בין הערבים [הרי אלו] פסולין שאין לך קודם תמיד של שחר אלא קטורת [ואין לך מתעכב] אחר תמיד של בין הערבים אלא קטורת ופסח בערבי פסחים ומחוסרי כפרה כדי [שיאכלו בפסחים לערב ר' ישמעאל ב\"ר] יוחנן בן ברוקה אומר מחוסרי כפרה [מביאין קרבנותיהן עם תמיד של בין הערבים כדי שיאכלו בקדשים לערב].", 6.3. "ר' יהושע אומר כל הזבחים שבתורה שנשתייר [מהן] כזית בשר [וכזית] חלב זורק את הדם [עליו כחצי] זית בשר [וכחצי] זית חלב אין זורק [הדם עליו בעולה אפילו לא נשתייר ממנה אלא כחצי] זית בשר [וכחצי] זית חלב זורק את הדם [עליה] מפני שכולה [ראויה להקטרה] ובמנחה אפי' [כל המנחה קיימת ולא נשתייר מן הזבח כזית בשר וכזית חלב אין זורק את הדם עליה] ובפסח אם יש כזית לכל אחד ואחד זורק ואם לאו לא יזרוק.", 6.4. "רבי יהושע אומר כל הזבחים שבתורה שנטמא [בשר] וחלבים קיימין זורק את הדם על החלבים נטמאו [חלבים] והבשר קיים זורק את הדם על הבשר אבל [פסח] אינו כן אע\"פ שנטמא [בשר] וחלבין קיימין אין זורק את הדם על החלבים שלא בא מתחלתו אלא לאכילה נטמאו [חלבים] והבשר קיים אם יש כזית לכל אחד ואחד יזרוק ואם לאו לא יזרוק.", 7.3. "יתום ששחטו עליו [אפטרופין] יאכל [ממקום] שהוא רוצה הומנה על אחד מהן אוכל [ממקום] שהומנה הומנה על שני פסחים [אוכל] מאיזה מהן [שנשחט בו] ראשון רבי שמעון אומר לעולם ממנין על הפסח עד שישחט ומושכין ידיהן ממנו עד שיזרוק עליו הדם.", 7.4. "לא ישחוט אדם על [ידי] בנו ובתו הגדולים [וע\"י] עבדו ושפחתו העברים ועל [ידי] אשתו אלא מדעתן אבל שוחט הוא על [ידי] בנו ובתו הקטנים ועל [ידי] עבדו ושפחתו הכנענים בין מדעתן ובין שלא מדעתן וכולן ששחטו לעצמן [או ששחט] רבן עליהן [אוכלין משל עצמן חוץ מן העבד שאוכל משל רבו] עבד עברי ומי שחציו עבד וחציו בן חורין אוכלין משל עצמן עבד של שני שותפין אוכל משל שניהן הומנה על אחד מהן אוכל ממקום שהומנה הומנה על שני פסחים אוכל מאיזה [מהן] שנשחט ראשון [או ששחטו] שניהם כאחד אוכל משל [רבו] שכח רבו מה אמר לו שניהם יצאו לבית השריפה וצריכין לעשות פסח שני רבי נתן אומר אין צריכין לעשות פסח שני שכבר נזרק הדם עליהן.", 7.5. "בני חבורה שנמנו על הפסח אם יש כזית לכל אחד ואחד יאכלו ואם לאו לא יאכלו נמנו עליו זה אחר זה הראשונים שיש להם יאכלו והאחרונים לא יאכלו וצריכין לעשות פסח שני דברי רבי רבי נתן אומר אין צריכין לעשות פסח שני שכבר נזרק עליהן הדם בני חבורה שרצו [להמנות] אחרים על [פסחן] הרשות בידן רצו [להמשך ולהמנות אחרים על פסחן הרשות בידם רצה] להמשך ולהמנות אחרים על חלקו הרשות בידו לעולם נמשכין והולכין ובלבד שנשתייר אחד מחבורה ראשונה דברי רבי יהודה רבי יוסי אומר בין מחבורה ראשונה בין מחבורה אחרונה ובלבד שלא יניחו את פסחו כמות שהוא בני חבורה [רצו] להמנות אחרים על חלקן הרשות בידם [המעות] חולין רצו להמשך להמנות אחרים על חלקן הרשות בידם [המעות] חולין.", 7.6. "[הממנה אחרים על חלקו הרשות בידו המעות חולין רצה להמשך להמנות אחרים על חלקו הרשות בידו המעות חולין] הממנה אחרים על חגיגתו המעות חולין רצה להמשך ולמנות אחרים על חגיגתו המעות חולין.", 7.7. "המוכר עולתו ושלמיו לא עשה כלום [המעות גזל ביד בעלים] ואצ\"ל בחטאת ואשם בני חבורה שמתו מקצתן או שנטמאו מקצתן השאר אוכלין ואין חוששין בני חבורה שהיה [אחד בהן שהיו] ידיו [רפות] רשאין לומר לו טול חלקך [שלך] ולא מפני שהוא פסח אלא [אף בני חבורה שעשו חבול והיה בהן אחד שהיו ידיו רפות] רשאין לומר לו טול חלקך [שלך] רצו לעשות עמו טובה בא ואוכל [מהן] מצורע מוסגר שוחטין עליו בשביעי מוחלט שוחטין עליו בח' יולדת שוחטין עליה ביום מ' לזכר [ויום] פ' לנקבה וכולן שנטמאו בין לפני זריקת דמים בין לאחר זריקת דמים הרי הן כמפקח הגל וצריכין לעשות פסח שני רבי [ישמעאל ב\"ר] יוחנן בן ברוקה אומר [פעמים שהן כמפקח הגל ופעמים שאין מפקח הגל כיוצא בהן כיצד היה גל ארוך בדק בצד זה ונמצאת טומאה בצד השני הרי הן כיוצא בו וצריכין לעשות פסח שני וכולן שנטמאו לפני זריקת דמים הרי הן כיוצא בהן וצריכין לעשות פסח שני].", 7.8. "היה טמא בשעת שחיטה וטהור בשעת זריקה טהור בשעת שחיטה וטמא בשעת זריקה הרי זה אינו אוכל וצריך לעשות פסח שני חולה בשעת שחיטה ואינו יכול לאכול כזית [חלים בשעת זריקה ויכול לוכל כזית] חלים בשעת שחיטה ויכול [לוכל כזית חולה] בשעת זריקה ואינו יכול [לוכל] כזית הרי זה אינו אוכל וצריך לעשות פסח שני לעולם אינו יוצא ידי חובתו עד שיהא חלים בשעת שחיטה ובשעת זריקה וכולן ספק נזרק עליהם דם ספק לא נזרק עליהן דם ספק יש [בהן] כזית לכל אחד ואחד ספק אין [בהן] ספק טמאין ספק טהורין פטורין מלעשות פסח שני זה הכלל כל הספיקות פטורין מלעשות פסח שני רבי יוסי בר' יהודה אומר שומרת יום כנגד יום שנזרק עליה דם ואח\"כ ראתה הרי זה אינה אוכלת ופטורה מלעשות פסח שני שכבר יצתה בזריקה אבל ערל שנזרק עליו דם ואח\"כ מל ה\"ז אינו אוכל וחייב לעשות פסח שני.", 7.9. "אמר [ר\"א בר צדוק מודים בית שמאי ובית הלל בערל זר שמקבל הזאה ואוכל] על מה נחלקו על ערל נכרי שבית שמאי אומרים טובל ואוכל פסחו לערב ובה\"א הפורש מן הערלה כפורש מן הקבר אחד נכרי שמל ואחד שפחה שטבלה רבי אליעזר בר צדוק אומר [שטרדיוטות ושומרי] צירין [היו] בירושלים שטובלין ואוכלין פסחיהן לערב.", | |
|
| 15. Anon., Mekhilta Derabbi Shimeon Ben Yohai, None (2nd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •lamb, passover Found in books: Balberg (2017), Blood for Thought: The Reinvention of Sacrifice in Early Rabbinic Literature, 161 |
| 16. Tosefta, Temurah, 1.17 (2nd cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •lamb, passover Found in books: Balberg (2017), Blood for Thought: The Reinvention of Sacrifice in Early Rabbinic Literature, 144 |
| 17. Anon., Sifre Deuteronomy, 132 (2nd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •lamb, passover Found in books: Balberg (2017), Blood for Thought: The Reinvention of Sacrifice in Early Rabbinic Literature, 161 |
| 18. Anon., Mekhilta Derabbi Yishmael, None (2nd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Balberg (2017), Blood for Thought: The Reinvention of Sacrifice in Early Rabbinic Literature, 134, 144, 161 |
19. Tertullian, Against Marcion, 4.40 (2nd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •lambs, passover Found in books: Dawson (2001), Christian Figural Reading and the Fashioning of Identity, 65, 66 | 4.40. In like manner does He also know the very time it behooved Him to suffer, since the law prefigures His passion. Accordingly, of all the festal days of the Jews He chose the passover. Luke 22:i In this Moses had declared that there was a sacred mystery: It is the Lord's passover. Leviticus 23:5 How earnestly, therefore, does He manifest the bent of His soul: With desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer. Luke 22:15 What a destroyer of the law was this, who actually longed to keep its passover! Could it be that He was so fond of Jewish lamb? But was it not because He had to be led like a lamb to the slaughter; and because, as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so was He not to open His mouth, Isaiah 53:7 that He so profoundly wished to accomplish the symbol of His own redeeming blood? He might also have been betrayed by any stranger, did I not find that even here too He fulfilled a Psalm: He who ate bread with me has lifted up his heel against me. And without a price might He have been betrayed. For what need of a traitor was there in the case of one who offered Himself to the people openly, and might quite as easily have been captured by force as taken by treachery? This might no doubt have been well enough for another Christ, but would not have been suitable in One who was accomplishing prophecies. For it was written, The righteous one did they sell for silver. Amos 2:6 The very amount and the destination of the money, which on Judas' remorse was recalled from its first purpose of a fee, and appropriated to the purchase of a potter's field, as narrated in the Gospel of Matthew, were clearly foretold by Jeremiah: And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of Him who was valued and gave them for the potter's field. When He so earnestly expressed His desire to eat the passover, He considered it His own feast; for it would have been unworthy of God to desire to partake of what was not His own. Then, having taken the bread and given it to His disciples, He made it His own body, by saying, This is my body, that is, the figure of my body. A figure, however, there could not have been, unless there were first a veritable body. An empty thing, or phantom, is incapable of a figure. If, however, (as Marcion might say,) He pretended the bread was His body, because He lacked the truth of bodily substance, it follows that He must have given bread for us. It would contribute very well to the support of Marcion's theory of a phantom body, that bread should have been crucified! But why call His body bread, and not rather (some other edible thing, say) a melon, which Marcion must have had in lieu of a heart! He did not understand how ancient was this figure of the body of Christ, who said Himself by Jeremiah: I was like a lamb or an ox that is brought to the slaughter, and I knew not that they devised a device against me, saying, Let us cast the tree upon His bread, which means, of course, the cross upon His body. And thus, casting light, as He always did, upon the ancient prophecies, He declared plainly enough what He meant by the bread, when He called the bread His own body. He likewise, when mentioning the cup and making the new testament to be sealed in His blood, Luke 22:20 affirms the reality of His body. For no blood can belong to a body which is not a body of flesh. If any sort of body were presented to our view, which is not one of flesh, not being fleshly, it would not possess blood. Thus, from the evidence of the flesh, we get a proof of the body, and a proof of the flesh from the evidence of the blood. In order, however, that you may discover how anciently wine is used as a figure for blood, turn to Isaiah, who asks, Who is this that comes from Edom, from Bosor with garments dyed in red, so glorious in His apparel, in the greatness of his might? Why are your garments red, and your raiment as his who comes from the treading of the full winepress? The prophetic Spirit contemplates the Lord as if He were already on His way to His passion, clad in His fleshly nature; and as He was to suffer therein, He represents the bleeding condition of His flesh under the metaphor of garments dyed in red, as if reddened in the treading and crushing process of the wine-press, from which the labourers descend reddened with the wine-juice, like men stained in blood. Much more clearly still does the book of Genesis foretell this, when (in the blessing of Judah, out of whose tribe Christ was to come according to the flesh) it even then delineated Christ in the person of that patriarch, saying, He washed His garments in wine, and His clothes in the blood of grapes Genesis 49:11 - in His garments and clothes the prophecy pointed out his flesh, and His blood in the wine. Thus did He now consecrate His blood in wine, who then (by the patriarch) used the figure of wine to describe His blood. |
|
| 20. Palestinian Talmud, Pesahim, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Balberg (2017), Blood for Thought: The Reinvention of Sacrifice in Early Rabbinic Literature, 134 |
21. Babylonian Talmud, Yoma, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •lamb, passover Found in books: Balberg (2017), Blood for Thought: The Reinvention of Sacrifice in Early Rabbinic Literature, 144| 51a. בכור ומעשר דחלין על בעל מום קבוע ואין יוצאין לחולין ליגזז וליעבד אלא שם זבח לא קתני,ומאי שנא תמורה שם תמורה אחת היא זבח איכא בכור ואיכא מעשר,ולרב ששת אדמוקים לה באילו של אהרן לוקמה בפסח דדוחה את השבת ואת הטומאה ועושה תמורה דקרבן יחיד הוא קסבר אין שוחטין הפסח על היחיד,ונוקמיה בפסח שני מי דחי טומאה,אמר ליה רב הונא בריה דרב יהושע לרבא ותנא מ"ש פסח דקרי ליה קרבן יחיד ומ"ש חגיגה דקרי לה קרבן ציבור אי משום דאתי בכנופיא פסח נמי אתי בכנופיא איכא פסח שני דלא אתי בכנופיא,אמר ליה אם כן יהא דוחה את השבת ואת הטומאה אמר ליה אין כמאן דאמר דחי דתניא פסח שני דוחה את השבת ואינו דוחה את הטומאה ר' יהודה אומר אף דוחה את הטומאה מ"ט דתנא קמא אמר לך מפני טומאה דחיתו ויעשה בטומאה,ורבי יהודה אמר לך אמר קרא (במדבר ט, יב) ככל חקת הפסח יעשו אותו ואפילו בטומאה התורה החזירה עליו לעשותו בטהרה לא זכה יעשנו בטומאה | 51a. e.g., b a firstborn or /b an animal b tithe, /b the sanctity of which b takes effect /b even b on a permanently blemished animal, and /b this offering b cannot vacate /b its sanctified status and assume b non-sacred /b status for its wool b to be sheared and to be worked. Rather, /b you must say that the i baraita /i is b not teaching /b a general b category of sacrifices, /b but when it states: offering, it is referring to a particular one.,The Gemara asks: b And what is different /b about the two statements, i.e., why does the i tanna /i deal with a specific case in one area, but a general category in the other? The Gemara explains: b Substitution is one category, /b as there is no difference between one case of substitution and another. By contrast, with regard to b sacrifices, there is a firstborn and there is /b the animal b tithe, /b whose i halakhot /i differ from other offerings, and therefore one cannot establish a single general principle. Consequently, the i tanna /i certainly is referring to a specific offering.,The Gemara continues the previous discussion: b And /b according to the opinion of b Rav Sheshet, /b who explains that the offering in question is not the bull of the High Priest but his ram, b rather than establishing /b and interpreting this i baraita /i b as /b referring to b the ram of Aaron, let him establish /b that it deals b with the Paschal offering, which overrides Shabbat and ritual impurity and /b one can b perform substitution /b for it, b as /b according to all opinions, it b is the offering of an individual. /b The Gemara answers: Rav Sheshet b maintains /b that one may b not slaughter the Paschal lamb on behalf of an individual, /b but only for a group. This means that it is not an offering of an individual but, at the very least, that of partners. For this reason, one cannot perform substitution for a Paschal lamb.,The Gemara asks: b And let /b Rav Sheshet b establish /b the i baraita /i as referring b to the second i Pesaḥ /i , /b which is slaughtered by an individual. The Gemara answers: b Does /b the second i Pesaḥ /i b override ritual impurity? /b Since this offering does not override ritual impurity, it cannot be the offering referred to in the i baraita /i .,§ b Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, said to Rava: And /b according to the b i tanna /i /b of the aforementioned i baraita /i , concerning the dispute between Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Ya’akov, b what is different /b with regard to b the Paschal offering, that he calls it the offering /b of b an individual? And what is different /b with regard to the b Festival peace-offering, /b which is eaten with the Paschal offering, b that he calls it a communal offering? If /b this distinction is b because /b the Festival peace-offering b is brought by a multitude, /b i.e., the entire nation brings it, b the Paschal offering is also brought by a multitude, /b not as an individual offering. Rava replied: b There is the second i Pesaḥ /i , which is not brought by a multitude, /b and therefore the i tanna /i does not call the Paschal offering a communal offering., b He said to him: If so, /b that the second i Pesaḥ /i is a communal offering, b it should override Shabbat and ritual impurity. He said to him: Yes, /b as the opinion of this i tanna /i is b in accordance with the one who said /b that the second i Pesaḥ /i b overrides /b ritual impurity. b As it was taught /b in a i baraita /i : b The second i Pesaḥ /i overrides Shabbat, but it does not override ritual impurity. Rabbi Yehuda says: /b It b even overrides ritual impurity. /b The Gemara asks: b What is the reason of the first i tanna /i ? /b The first i tanna /i could have b said to you /b that one brings a second i Pesaḥ /i solely b because ritual impurity overrode his /b obligation to sacrifice the first i Pesaḥ /i , i.e., he did not sacrifice the first i Pesaḥ /i because he was impure at that time. b And /b should b he /b now b perform /b the b second i Pesaḥ /i in /b a state of b ritual impurity? /b , b And Rabbi Yehuda /b could have b said to you /b that, with regard to the second i Pesaḥ /i , b the verse states: “According to all the statute of the Paschal offering they shall keep it” /b (Numbers 9:12), which indicates that it should b even /b be brought b in /b a state of b ritual impurity, /b unlike the first i Pesaḥ /i . As for the claim of the first i tanna /i , that the whole reason for the second i Pesaḥ /i is due to ritual impurity, Rabbi Yehuda could respond: b The Torah sought /b an opportunity b for /b one who was impure at the time of the first i Pesaḥ /i b to perform it in /b a state of b ritual purity; /b if b he did not merit /b to perform it in purity, b he should /b nevertheless b perform it /b even b in /b a state of b ritual impurity. /b |
|
22. Babylonian Talmud, Pesahim, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •lamb, passover Found in books: Balberg (2017), Blood for Thought: The Reinvention of Sacrifice in Early Rabbinic Literature, 134| 78b. הא אמרת בציבור אפילו רבי יהושע מודה,אלא רואה אני דברי ר"א בדיעבד ודברי ר' יהושע לכתחלה דיעבד אפילו רבי יהושע נמי מודה הוא דקתני מודה רבי יהושע שאם זרק הורצה,הא בטומאה הא באבוד ושרוף כי קתני מודה רבי יהושע שאם זרק הורצה בנטמא אבל באבוד ושרוף לא כי קאמר ר' יוסי רואה אני את דברי ר"א בדיעבד באבוד ושרוף:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big נטמא בשר וחלב קיים אינו זורק את הדם נטמא החלב והבשר קיים זורק את הדם ובמוקדשים אינו כן אלא אע"פ שנטמא הבשר והחלב קיים זורק את הדם:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big אמר רב גידל אמר רב אם זרק הורצה והא בעינן אכילה אכילה לא מעכבא,והא כתיב (שמות יב, ד) איש לפי אכלו למצוה,ולעכב לא והתניא (שמות יב, ד) במכסת מלמד שאין הפסח נשחט אלא למנויו יכול שחטו שלא למנויו יהא כעובר על המצוה וכשר ת"ל איש לפי אכלו תכוסו הכתוב שנה עליו לעכב,ואיתקש אוכלין למנויין,אלא רב דאמר כרבי נתן דאמר אכילת פסחים לא מעכבא,הי רבי נתן אילימא הא רבי נתן דתניא רבי נתן אומר מנין שכל ישראל יוצאין בפסח אחד ת"ל (שמות יב, ו) ושחטו אותו כל קהל עדת ישראל בין הערבים וכי כל הקהל שוחטין והלא אין שוחט אלא אחד אלא מלמד שכל ישראל יוצאין בפסח אחד,דילמא שאני התם דאי ממשכי הני חזי להני ואי ממשכי הני חזי להני,אלא הא ר' נתן דתניא נמנו עליו חבורה אחת וחזרו ונמנו עליו חבורה אחרת ראשונים שיש להן כזית אוכלין ופטורין מלעשות פסח שני אחרונים שאין להם כזית אין אוכלין וחייבין לעשות פסח שני,רבי נתן אומר אלו ואלו פטורין מלעשות פסח שני שכבר נזרק הדם,אכתי דילמא שאני התם דאי ממשכי הני חזי להו א"כ ליתני הואיל וראויים לימשך מאי שכבר נזרק הדם ש"מ בדם תליא מילתא אבל אכילה לא מעכבא,מאי דוחקיה דרב דמוקים לה מתני' לכתחלה ור' נתן נוקמה כרבנן ואפילו דיעבד נמי לא רב מתני' קשיתיה אמאי (תני) אין זורק את הדם ליתני פסול אלא שמע מינה אין זורק לכתחלה אבל דיעבד שפיר דמי,ולר' נתן איש לפי אכלו למה לי דבעינן גברא דחזי לאכילה,מאן תנא להא דתנו רבנן שחטו לאוכליו וזרקו דמו שלא לאוכליו הפסח עצמו כשר ואדם יוצא בו ידי חובתו כמאן נימא רבי נתן היא ולא רבנן,אפילו תימא רבנן אין מחשבת אוכלין בזריקה,מאן תנא להא דתנו רבנן הרי שהיה חולה בשעת שחיטה וחלים בשעת זריקה חלים בשעת שחיטה וחולה בשעת זריקה אין שוחטין וזורקין עליו עד שיהא חלים משעת שחיטה עד שעת זריקה כמאן נימא רבנן היא ולא רבי נתן אפילו תימא רבי נתן גברא דחזי לאכילה בעינן,מאן תנא להא דתנו רבנן שחטו בטהרה ואחר כך נטמאו הבעלים יזרק הדם בטהרה ואל יאכל בשר בטומאה כמאן,אמר רבי (אליעזר) במחלוקת שנויה ורבי נתן היא ורבי יוחנן אמר אפילו תימא רבנן היא הכא במאי עסקינן בציבור דאפילו בטומאה נמי עבדי,אי בציבור אמאי אין הבשר נאכל בטומאה גזירה שמא יטמאו הבעלים לאחר זריקה ויאמרו אשתקד לא נטמאנו ואכלנו השתא נמי ניכול ולא ידעי דאשתקד כי איזדריק דם בעלים טמאים הוו השתא בעלים טהורין הוו | 78b. b Didn’t you say /b that b with regard to /b an offering involving b the public, even Rabbi Yehoshua concedes /b that ritual impurity is permitted?, b Rather, /b Rabbi Yosei’s statement should be understood differently. When he said: b I see /b as correct b the statement of Rabbi Eliezer, /b he was referring to b after the fact. /b When he said: I see as correct b the statement of Rabbi Yehoshua, /b he meant b i ab initio /i . /b The Gemara asks: b After the fact Rabbi Yehoshua also concedes, as it teaches: Rabbi Yehoshua concedes that if one sprinkled /b the blood, b it was accepted /b and the offering is valid.,The Gemara responds: b This /b case is b with regard to ritual impurity, /b and b that /b case is b with regard to /b an offering that was b lost or burned. /b The Gemara explains: b When it teaches /b that b Rabbi Yehoshua concedes that if one sprinkled /b the blood b it is accepted, /b that is b with regard to /b a case in which the meat of the offering b became impure; but with regard to /b a case where the meat of the offering was b lost or burned, /b he does b not /b agree, even after the fact. b When Rabbi Yosei said: I see /b as correct b the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer after the fact, /b that was b with regard to /b cases in which the meat b was lost or burned, /b with regard to which Rabbi Yehoshua did not concede to Rabbi Eliezer., strong MISHNA: /strong If b the meat /b of the Paschal lamb b became ritually impure, and the fat remains /b pure and may be burned on the altar, b one /b may b not sprinkle the blood. /b On the other hand, if b the fat became impure and the meat remains /b pure, b one /b may b sprinkle the blood /b because the meat remains fit to be eaten. This is the i halakha /i with regard to a Paschal lamb, whose primary purpose is to be eaten by those who have registered for it. However, b with regard to /b other b offerings it is not so. Rather, although the meat has become impure and the fat remains /b pure, b one /b may b sprinkle the blood, /b because part of the offering still remains valid., strong GEMARA: /strong b Rav Giddel said /b that b Rav said: If one sprinkled /b the blood despite the fact that the meat was ritually impure, b it was /b nonetheless b accepted; /b one is not obligated to observe the second i Pesaḥ /i . The Gemara asks: b Don’t we require /b that the Paschal lamb be b eaten, /b which could not occur in this case? The Gemara answers: Failure to engage in b eating /b the offering b does not preclude /b it from being accepted.,The Gemara asks: b Isn’t it written: /b “And if the household be too little for a lamb, then he and his neighbor who is close to his house shall take one according to the number of the souls; b according to every man’s eating /b you shall make your count for the lamb” (Exodus 12:4)? This indicates that the Torah requires one to eat the Paschal lamb. The Gemara responds: This verse is stated b as a mitzva /b only. It should be fulfilled, but it does not preclude acceptance of the offering.,The Gemara asks: b And /b was it b not /b stated b to preclude /b acceptance of the offering if it cannot be eaten? b Wasn’t it taught /b in a i baraita /i : b “According to the number of /b the souls”; this b teaches that the Paschal lamb is slaughtered only for those who have registered for it /b and have thereby included themselves in advance in the number of the souls? I b might /b have thought that if b one slaughtered it for those who have not registered for it, he is /b merely b like one who violates a mitzva, /b but the offering is still b valid /b after the fact. Therefore, b the verse states: “According to every man’s eating you shall make your count”; the verse repeated /b that the Paschal lamb is eaten only by those registered in order b to /b underscore that failure to register b precludes /b the offering from being valid., b And those who /b are able to b eat /b the offering, as opposed to the sick or elderly who are unable to eat it, b are juxtaposed /b in the verse b to those who registered. /b Therefore, just as a Paschal lamb is disqualified if it is slaughtered for those who did not register for it, it is disqualified if it cannot be eaten. This poses a difficulty for the opinion of Rav.,The Gemara answers: b Rather, Rav said /b his statement b in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Natan, who said /b that failure to engage in b eating the Paschal lamb does not preclude /b one from fulfilling one’s obligation to bring the offering, as the eating is a separate mitzva.,The Gemara asks: b Which /b statement of b Rabbi Natan /b is this referring to? b If we say /b it is b this /b statement of b Rabbi Natan, as it was taught /b in a i baraita /i that b Rabbi Natan says: From where /b is it derived b that all Jews /b may b fulfill /b their obligation after the fact b with one Paschal lamb? The verse states: “And the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel shall slaughter it in the afternoon” /b (Exodus 12:6). He asked: b And does the entire assembly slaughter /b it? Is it a mitzva for each individual to slaughter his own Paschal lamb? b Is it not /b true that b only one /b person b slaughters /b for the entire group? b Rather, /b this formulation of the verse b teaches that all Jews /b may b fulfill their obligation with one Paschal lamb. /b It is considered as though they all slaughtered it and fulfilled their obligation, although they cannot all eat an olive-bulk of the offering.,The Gemara responds that this is not comparable to the case at hand: b Perhaps it is different there, as, if these withdraw /b from the offering, b it is fit for those, and if those withdraw it is fit for these. /b Although it is impossible for all Jews to partake of the same offering, the offering is fit for each individual, who could eat an olive-bulk of it if enough other people would withdraw., b Rather, /b it is b this /b statement of b Rabbi Natan, as it was taught /b in a i baraita /i : If b one group registered for /b a Paschal lamb b and then another group registered for it, /b and there was not enough meat to allow each person to eat an olive-bulk, b the first ones, who have an olive-bulk /b of the Paschal lamb for each person, b eat and are exempt from performing /b the ritual of the Paschal lamb on b the second i Pesaḥ /i ; the latter ones, who do not have an olive-bulk /b available from the Paschal lamb for each person, b do not eat and are obligated to perform /b the ritual of the Paschal lamb on b the second i Pesaḥ /i . /b , b Rabbi Natan says: /b Both b these and those are exempt from performing /b the ritual of the Paschal lamb on b the second i Pesaḥ /i , as the blood has already been sprinkled. /b Therefore, they have all fulfilled their obligation. This indicates that, according to the opinion of Rabbi Natan, eating is not essential.,The Gemara responds that one can b still /b ask: b Perhaps it is different there, as, if these /b members of the first group b withdraw, it is fit for /b the members of the second group. The Gemara rejects the question: b If so, let it teach /b that the second group is exempt from the second i Pesaḥ /i b since /b the members of the first group b are fit to withdraw. What /b is the reason for the statement of the i baraita /i that b the blood has already been sprinkled? Learn from this that the matter depends on the blood, but /b failure to engage in b eating /b the Paschal lamb b does not preclude /b one from fulfilling his obligation.,The Gemara asks: b What compelled Rav to establish the mishna /b as teaching that the blood may not be sprinkled on the altar b i ab initio /i , /b in accordance with the opinion of b Rabbi Natan? Let us establish /b the mishna in accordance with the view of b the Rabbis and /b say that b even after the fact, no, /b one does not fulfill his obligation. The Gemara answers: b Rav had difficulty with the mishna: Why does it teach /b that b one /b may b not sprinkle the blood? It should teach that /b the offering b is disqualified. Rather, learn from this /b use of language that b one /b may b not sprinkle /b the blood on the altar b i ab initio /i , but after the fact it seems well. /b ,The Gemara asks: b And according to /b the opinion of b Rabbi Natan, why do I /b need the phrase b “according to every man’s eating,” /b if it does not teach that the eating is essential? The Gemara answers: It is necessary, even according to the opinion of Rabbi Natan, to teach b that we require a person who is fit for eating. /b Although it is possible to fulfill one’s obligation without actually eating the Paschal lamb, if one is physically unable to eat some of it, e.g., one who is sick or elderly, he does not fulfill his obligation.,The Gemara raises a discussion based on the views cited above. b Who /b is the i tanna /i that b taught this /b i baraita /i ? b As the Sages taught: /b If b one slaughtered it for /b individuals who are b able to eat it and sprinkled its blood for /b individuals b who cannot eat it, the Paschal lamb itself is valid, and one fulfills his obligation with it. In accordance with whose /b opinion is this i baraita /i ? b Let us say it is in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Natan, /b who holds that eating is not essential, b and not /b in accordance with b the /b opinion of the b Rabbis? /b ,The Gemara rejects this suggestion: The i baraita /i can be understood b even /b if b you say /b it is in accordance with the opinion of b the Rabbis. /b Everyone agrees that improper b intent /b pertaining to b those who will eat /b the offering disqualifies the offering only if it occurs during the slaughter; it does not disqualify the offering if it occurs during the b sprinkling /b of the blood.,The Gemara asks: b Who /b is the i tanna /i that b taught this /b i baraita /i ? b As the Sages taught: /b With regard to b one who was sick /b and not able to eat meat b at the time of /b the b slaughter and /b was b healthy at the time of /b the b sprinkling /b of the blood, or one who was b healthy at the time of /b the b slaughter and sick at the time of /b the b sprinkling /b of the blood, b one /b may b not slaughter or sprinkle /b blood b for him until he is healthy from the time of slaughter until /b the b time of /b the b sprinkling /b of the blood. b In accordance with whose /b opinion is this? b Let us say it is /b in accordance with the opinion of b the Rabbis, /b who hold that eating the Paschal lamb is essential, b and not /b in accordance with the opinion of b Rabbi Natan. /b The Gemara rejects this suggestion: The i baraita /i can be understood b even /b if b you say /b it is in accordance with the opinion of b Rabbi Natan, /b because even Rabbi Natan holds that b we require a person who is fit for eating. /b ,The Gemara records a further discussion: b Who /b is the i tanna /i that b taught this /b i baraita /i ? b As the Sages taught: /b If b one slaughtered /b the Paschal lamb b in ritual purity, and after that the owners became ritually impure, the blood /b should b be sprinkled in purity and the meat /b should b not be eaten in impurity. In accordance with whose /b opinion is this i baraita /i ?, b Rabbi Eliezer said: /b This i halakha /i is b subject to dispute, and it is /b taught in this i baraita /i in accordance with the opinion of b Rabbi Natan, /b who holds that eating is not essential, and not in accordance with the opinion of the Rabbis. b And Rabbi Yoḥa said: /b The i baraita /i can be understood b even /b if b you say /b that b it is /b in accordance with the opinion of b the Rabbis. With what are we dealing here? With /b a situation in which the majority of b the public /b is ritually impure, in which case everyone agrees that b they perform /b the ritual of the Paschal lamb b even in /b a state of b impurity. /b ,The Gemara asks: b If it is in /b a case involving b the public, why is the meat not eaten in /b a state of b impurity? /b When the majority of the public is impure, they may sacrifice and even consume the Paschal lamb. The Gemara answers that this prohibition is due to a rabbinic b decree lest the owners become impure after the sprinkling /b of the blood, b and they will say: Last year, didn’t we become impure, and /b nevertheless b we ate /b the Paschal lamb? b Now too, we will eat. And they will not know that last year, when the blood was sprinkled the owners were /b already b impure, /b and therefore the offering could be consumed in a state of impurity. b Now, the owners were pure /b when the blood was sprinkled and became impure only afterward, and a Paschal lamb sacrificed in a state of purity cannot be eaten in a state of impurity, even if everyone is impure. |
|
| 23. Origen, On Pascha, 3.27-3.30, 26.5-26.8, 33.20-33.32 (3rd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Dawson (2001), Christian Figural Reading and the Fashioning of Identity, 71, 73, 238 |
| 24. Origen, On First Principles, 4.2.2 (3rd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •lambs, passover Found in books: Dawson (2001), Christian Figural Reading and the Fashioning of Identity, 238 |
| 25. Origen, On Jeremiah (Homilies 1-11), 20 (3rd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •lambs, passover Found in books: Dawson (2001), Christian Figural Reading and the Fashioning of Identity, 71 |
| 26. Origen, Philocalia, 15.19 (3rd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •lambs, passover Found in books: Dawson (2001), Christian Figural Reading and the Fashioning of Identity, 71 |
| 27. Origen, Philocalia, 15.19 (3rd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •lambs, passover Found in books: Dawson (2001), Christian Figural Reading and the Fashioning of Identity, 71 |
28. Babylonian Talmud, Qiddushin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •lamb, passover Found in books: Balberg (2017), Blood for Thought: The Reinvention of Sacrifice in Early Rabbinic Literature, 134| 42a. בפסח אחד שנא' (שמות יב, ו) ושחטו אותו כל קהל עדת ישראל בין הערבים וכי כל הקהל כולם שוחטים והלא אינו שוחט אלא אחד אלא מכאן שכל ישראל יוצאים בפסח אחד שליח בקדשים מנא ליה,מיניה ודילמא שאני התם דאית ליה שותפות בגוייהו,אלא מהכא (שמות יב, ג) ויקחו להם איש שה לבית אבות שה לבית ודילמא התם נמי דאית ליה שותפות בגוייהו א"כ תרי קראי למה לי אם אינו ענין להיכא דשייך תניהו ענין להיכא דלא שייך,האי מיבעי ליה לכדרבי יצחק דא"ר יצחק איש זוכה ולא הקטן זוכה ההוא (שמות יב, ד) מאיש לפי אכלו נפקא,ואכתי מיבעי ליה דשוחטין את הפסח על היחיד סבר לה כמ"ד אין שוחטין את הפסח על היחיד,ואלא הא דאמר רב גידל אמר רב מנין ששלוחו של אדם כמותו שנאמר (במדבר לד, יח) ונשיא אחד נשיא אחד ממטה תיפוק ליה שליחות מהכא ותיסברא דהא שליחות הוא והא קטנים לאו בני שליחות נינהו,אלא כי הא דרבא בר רב הונא דאמר רבא בר רב הונא אמר רב גידל אמר רב מנין שזכין לאדם שלא בפניו שנאמר ונשיא אחד נשיא אחד ותיסברא זכות היא הא חובה נמי איכא דאיכא דניחא ליה בהר ולא ניחא ליה בבקעה ואיכא דניחא ליה בבקעה ולא ניחא ליה בהר,ואלא כדרבא בר רב הונא דאמר רבא בר רב הונא אמר רב גידל א"ר מנין ליתומים שבאו לחלוק בנכסי אביהן שבית דין מעמידין להם אפוטרופוס לחוב ולזכות לחוב אמאי אלא לחוב ע"מ לזכות ת"ל ונשיא אחד נשיא אחד ממטה תקחו,א"ר נחמן אמר שמואל יתומים שבאו לחלוק בנכסי אביהם בית דין מעמידים להם אפוטרופוס ובוררים להם חלק יפה ואם הגדילו יכולים למחות ורב נחמן דידיה אמר אם הגדילו אינם יכולים למחות דא"כ מה כח בית דין יפה,ומי אית ליה לרב נחמן אם כן מה כח בית דין יפה והתנן שום הדיינים שפיחתו שתות או הותירו שתות מכרן בטל רבן שמעון בן גמליאל אומר מכרן קיים (ואמר רבן שמעון בן גמליאל) א"כ מה כח ב"ד יפה ואמר רב הונא בר חיננא אמר רב נחמן הלכה כדברי חכמים,לא קשיא | 42a. b with one Paschal offering? /b Although it is impossible for all of the Jewish people to each eat an olive-bulk from one offering, they nevertheless fulfill their obligation to sacrifice the Paschal offering by sacrificing one animal, b as it is stated /b with regard to the Paschal offering: b “And the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel shall slaughter it in the afternoon” /b (Exodus 12:6). b Is it so that the whole assembly slaughters /b it? b But only one /b person from each group b slaughters. Rather, /b it can be derived b from here that all of the Jews can fulfill /b their obligations b with one Paschal /b offering, despite the fact that not everyone will be able to eat from it. Since Rabbi Yonatan derives from this verse that one offering suffices, b from where does he /b derive the i halakha /i of b agency with regard to offerings? /b ,The Gemara answers: He derives it b from that /b very same verse, as it can be seen that one person slaughters the animal on behalf of the rest of the assembly. The Gemara rejects this: b But perhaps it is different there, since /b the one slaughtering the animal b has partnership with them /b in the offering. This does not prove that there is agency when the agent has no share in the offering., b Rather, /b he derives agency with regard to offerings b from here: “And they shall take to them every man a lamb, according to their fathers’ houses, a lamb for a household” /b (Exodus 12:3). This demonstrates that one person takes a lamb and slaughters it on behalf of the entire family. The Gemara asks: b But perhaps there too /b there is agency b since /b the one slaughtering the animal b has partnership with them? /b The Gemara rejects this: b If so, why do I /b need b two verses /b to teach the same i halakha /i ? b If /b the i halakha /i stated in this verse b is not applicable for where it belongs, /b i.e., with regard to an agent who is a partner in the offering, b apply it to where it does not belong, /b so that even one who does not have a share in the offering can act as an agent.,The Gemara rejects this: b This /b verse b is required for him to /b teach another i halakha /i , b that of Rabbi Yitzḥak, as Rabbi Yitzḥak says: /b This verse is the source for the i halakha /i that b a man, /b i.e., an adult, b can acquire /b an item on behalf of others, b but /b that b a minor cannot acquire /b an item on behalf of others. The Gemara answers: b That /b i halakha /i , that only an adult can acquire an item on behalf of others, b is derived from /b the verse: b “According to every man’s eating /b you shall make your count for the lamb” (Exodus 12:4). By employing the term “man,” which indicates an adult, the verse teaches that only an adult can acquire an item on behalf of others.,The Gemara asks another question: b And still /b the verse “according to every man’s eating” b is required for him /b to teach the i halakha /i b that one may slaughter a Paschal offering for an individual. /b It does not have to be “a lamb, according to their fathers’ houses,” as implied by the previous verse. A lamb may be slaughtered even by one person, i.e., “every man” for himself. The Gemara answers: Rabbi Yonatan b holds in accordance with /b the opinion of b the one who says /b that b one may not slaughter a Paschal offering for an individual. /b ,The Gemara asks a question from a different source: b But /b consider b that /b which b Rav Giddel says /b that b Rav says: From where /b is it derived b that /b the legal status of b a person’s agent is like /b that of b himself? /b It is b as it is stated /b with regard to the division of Eretz Yisrael among the Jewish people: b “And you shall take one prince of every tribe, /b to take possession of the land” (Numbers 34:18). This indicates that the prince of each tribe acted as the agent to claim the land for each member of his tribe. b Let /b the i halakha /i of b agency be derived from here; /b why is there a need to have the sources quoted above? The Gemara answers: b And /b how can b you understand that this /b process of the princes claiming the land b was /b due to b agency? But minors cannot be /b involved in b agency, /b and the princes claimed the land for all members of their tribe, adults and minors alike., b Rather, /b the distribution of the land by the princes follows a different principle, b like that /b statement b of Rava bar Rav Huna, as Rava bar Rav Huna says /b that b Rav Giddel says /b that b Rav says: From where /b is it derived b that one can act in a person’s interest in his absence? /b It is b as /b it b is stated: “And /b you shall take b one prince.” /b The princes were not appointed as agents and could act for the benefit of the minors. The Gemara asks: b And /b how can b you understand /b that b it is a benefit? But it was also /b to their b disadvantage, as there is /b one person b for whom it is preferable to him /b to receive a portion b on a hill and it is not preferable to him /b to receive a portion b in a valley, and there is /b one person b for whom it is preferable to him /b to receive a portion b in a valley and it is not preferable to him /b to receive a portion b on a hill. /b The prince might claim land for members of his tribe that they do not want, and one cannot act to another’s disadvantage in his absence., b Rather, /b the verse is required to teach a different i halakha /i , b like that /b statement b of Rava bar Rav Huna, as Rava bar Rav Huna says /b that b Rav Giddel says /b that b Rav says: From where /b is it derived b that /b if b orphans came to divide their father’s property, that the court appoints a steward for them, /b both b to /b their b disadvantage and to /b their b benefit? /b Before the Gemara completes the quote, it analyzes the statement: b Why /b would the court appoint a steward b to /b their b disadvantage? Rather, /b it means b to /b their b disadvantage in order to /b achieve their eventual b benefit. /b Once a steward has been appointed to control the orphans’ estate, he has the authority to act to their temporary disadvantage if they are ultimately likely to benefit from the action. And the source of this i halakha /i is as b the verse states: “And you shall take one prince of every tribe” /b (Numbers 34:18).,§ With regard to the i halakhot /i of stewardship, b Rav Naḥman says /b that b Shmuel says: /b If b orphans came to divide their father’s property, the court appoints /b a steward b for them, and they select for them, /b i.e., for each of the orphans, b a fine portion. And when they have grown up, /b the orphans b can protest /b the division and demand redistribution of the property. b And Rav Naḥman said his own /b statement: b When they have grown up, they cannot protest, as if so, what advantage /b is there to b the power of the court /b over an ordinary person? In other words, to strengthen the authority of the court, it is required that its decisions not be questioned later on.,The Gemara asks: b And is Rav Naḥman of /b the opinion that there is a consideration of: b If so, what advantage /b does b the court have /b over an ordinary person? b But didn’t we learn /b in a mishna ( i Ketubot /i 99b): The i halakha /i with regard to b the appraisal by the judges /b of the value of a piece of property in order to sell it is as follows: b Where they decreased /b the price by b one-sixth /b of its market value b or added one-sixth /b to its market value, b their sale is void. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: Their sale is valid. And Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said: If so, /b if the sale is void, then b what advantage /b is there to b the power of the court /b over an ordinary person? b And Rav Huna bar Ḥina says /b that b Rav Naḥman says: /b The b i halakha /i /b is b in accordance with the statement of the Rabbis. /b This indicates that Rav Naḥman does not accept the consideration of: What advantage is there to the power of the court over an ordinary person?,The Gemara answers: This is b not difficult. /b |
|
| 29. Tosefta, T. Pesah. (Pish.), 10.8-10.9 Tagged with subjects: •lambs, passover Found in books: Cosgrove (2022), Music at Social Meals in Greek and Roman Antiquity: From the Archaic Period to the Age of Augustine, 272, 274 |
| 30. Mishnah, M. Pesah., None Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Cosgrove (2022), Music at Social Meals in Greek and Roman Antiquity: From the Archaic Period to the Age of Augustine, 273 |
| 31. Dionysius Chalcus, Fragments, None Tagged with subjects: •lambs, passover Found in books: Cosgrove (2022), Music at Social Meals in Greek and Roman Antiquity: From the Archaic Period to the Age of Augustine, 273 |
| 32. Babylonian Talmud, B. Keth., None Tagged with subjects: •lambs, passover Found in books: Cosgrove (2022), Music at Social Meals in Greek and Roman Antiquity: From the Archaic Period to the Age of Augustine, 270 |
| 33. Epigraphy, Ig Ii², 7.2712 Tagged with subjects: •lambs, passover Found in books: Cosgrove (2022), Music at Social Meals in Greek and Roman Antiquity: From the Archaic Period to the Age of Augustine, 270, 271, 272, 273, 274 |
| 34. Jerusalem Talmud, Y. Pe., None Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Cosgrove (2022), Music at Social Meals in Greek and Roman Antiquity: From the Archaic Period to the Age of Augustine, 270 |
