Mesorat%20hashas for Pesachim 122:11

מתקיף לה רב אשי ממאי דהאי וכל ערל כולה משמע דילמא האי וכל ערל משמע כל דהו ערלה כתב רחמנא זאת דעד דאיכא כולה ערלה לא פסלה לא שנא בשחיטה ולא שנא בזריקה אלא אמר רב אשי רב חסדא ורבה

And should you say, the same law applies to sprinkling, viz. , that unless there is entire uncircumcision it does not disqualify it, therefore 'this' is stat [teaching,] only at the slaughtering does part thereof not disqualify it, but at the sprinkling even part thereo disqualifies it. And should you ask, What is the stringency of sprinkling?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' What other stringency do you find in sprinkling, that you assume that the limitation of 'this' teaches a further stringency in respect to uncircumcision.');">²⁰</span> [It is] that [the prohibition of piggul cannot be imposed save at the sprinkling.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' An illegitimate intention to partake of the sacrifice after the permitted time, expressed at one of the four services (v. Mishnah supra 59b) renders it piggul, and he who eats it even within the permitted time, incurs kareth, only if the subsequent services are performed without any intention at all or with a legitimate intention or with the same illegitimate intention. But if any one of the subsequent services is performed with a different illegitimate intention, e.g.. to eat it without the permitted boundaries, it ceases to be piggul and does not involve kareth, v. Zeb. 28b. Hence the only service in which it can definitely be fixed as piggul without possibility of revocation is sprinkling, because that is the last service. That is regarded as a stringency of sprinkling.');">²¹</span> To this R'Ashi demurred: Whence [do you know] that this [verse] 'and all uncircumcised person[s],' implies in its entirety; perhaps this [verse], 'and all uncircumcised person[s]' implies whatever there is of uncircumcision,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., on the contrary it may imply that even if a single person of those who are registered for the sacrifice is uncircumcised, it is disqualified.');">²²</span> [and] therefore the Merciful One wrote 'this' to teach that unless there is an entire [company in a state of] uncircumcision, it does not disqualify it, there being no difference whether [it is] at the slaughtering or at the sprinkling?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For on the present exegesis there is no verse to intimate a distinction.');">²³</span> Rather, said R'Ashi, R'Hisda and Rabbah

Explore mesorat%20hashas for Pesachim 122:11. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.