Quoting%20commentary for Shabbat 273:14
ור' יהושע התם לא טריד מצוה הכא טריד מצוה
R. Hiyya taught, R. Meir used to say: R. Eliezer and R. Joshua did not differ concerning him who has two infants, one for circumcision on the eve of the Sabbath and one for circumcision on the Sabbath, and he errs and circumcises the one belonging to the eve of the Sabbath on the Sabbath, that he is culpable. About what, do they disagree? About a man who has two infants, one for circumcision after the Sabbath and another for circumcision on the Sabbath, and he errs and circumcises the one belonging to after the Sabbath on the Sabbath, R. Eliezer declaring [him] liable to a sin-offering, while R. Joshua exempts him. Now if R. Joshua exempts him, in the second clause, though he does not fulfil a precept, shall he declare him culpable in the first clause, where he does fulfil a Precept!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Surely not, v. p. 688, n. 4. ');"><sup>13</sup></span>
Explore quoting%20commentary for Shabbat 273:14. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.