Reference for Shabbat 262:18

(אמר מר) מילה וכל מכשיריה דוחין את השבת דברי רבי אליעזר מנא ליה לר"א הא אי מכולהו גמר כדאמרינן ועוד מה להנך

— Because one could refute [the analogy]: as for lulab, [its preliminaries supersede the Sabbath] because it requires four species.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Vis., those enumerated in Lev. XXIII, 40. Hence it is important that even its preliminaries supersede the Sabbath. ');">¹⁸</span> 'The <i>sukkah</i> and all its preliminaries supersede the Sabbath: this is R. Eliezer's view.' Whence does R. Eliezer learn this? If from the <i>'omer</i> and the two loaves, — [there it may be] because they are requirements of the Most High; if from lulab, — [that may be] because it requires four species! Rather [the scope of] seven days' is deduced from the 'seven days' of lulab: just as there its preliminaries supersede the Sabbath, so here too its preliminaries supersede the Sabbath.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since this analogy is based on a gezerah shawah, it cannot be refuted as before, when the suggested analogy was based purely on logical grounds. (Rashi). ');">¹⁹</span> Then let the Divine Law write it in connection with <i>sukkah</i>, and these [others] could be adduced and learnt therefrom? — Because one could refute [the analogy]: as for <i>sukkah</i>, that is because it [the precept] is binding by night just as by day. 'Unleavened bread and all its preliminaries supersede the Sabbath: this is R. Eliezer's view.' Whence does R. Eliezer know this? If from the <i>'omer</i> and the two loaves, — [there it may be] because they are requirements of the Most High? If from lulab, because it requires four species? If from <i>sukkah</i>, — because it is binding by night just as by day? Rather the meaning of 'the fifteenth [day]' is learnt from the Festival of Tabernacles:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXIII, vv. 6 and 39. ');">²⁰</span> just as there its preliminaries supersede the Sabbath, so here too its preliminaries supersede the Sabbath. Then let the Divine Law State it in connection with unleavened bread, and these [others] could be adduced and learnt therefrom? — Because one could refute [the analogy]: as for unleavened bread, that is because it is obligatory upon women just as upon men.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' They too must partake thereof; v. Pes. 43b. But the precepts of lulab and sukkah are not incumbent upon women. ');">²¹</span> 'The <i>shofar</i> and all its preliminaries supersede the Sabbath: this is R. Eliezer's view., Whence does R. Eliezer know this? If from the <i>'omer</i> and the two loaves, — because they are requirements of the Most-High? If from lulab, — because it requires four species? If from <i>sukkah</i>, — because it is binding by night just as by day? if from unleavened bread, — because it is obligatory upon women just as upon men? — Rather Scripture saith, It is in day of blowing of trumpets unto you:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Num. XXIX, 1. ');">²²</span> [it must be blown] by day, even on the Sabbath. And in respect of what?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Does 'day' extend the law even to the Sabbath. ');">²³</span> Shall we say in respect of blowing [the <i>shofar</i>], — but the School of Samuel<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This is rather unusual. Generally we have 'the School of R. Ishmael', and the present passage is so quoted supra 117b in cur. edd. R. Han. however, reads 'the School of Samuel' there too, and it is likewise so in R.H. 29b in cur. edd. Weiss, Dor, III, p. 169 maintains that the reference is to a collection of Baraithas compiled by Samuel. It may also be observed that the verse quoted here is not the same as that quoted supra in cur. edd., though Tosaf.'s reading is identical in both places. It is barely possible that two different Baraithas are referred to, both making the same deduction but from different verses. ');">²⁴</span> taught: Ye shall do no servile work:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXIII, 25. ');">²⁵</span> the blowing of the shofar' and the removal of bread [from an oven] are excluded as being an art, not work. Hence [it must be] in respect of [its] preliminaries. And the<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Hence no verse is required to teach that it is permitted. ');">²⁶</span> Rabbis? — That is required [to teach], by day but not by night. Then R. Eliezer, whence does he learn, by day but not by night? — He deduces it from, in the day of atonement shall ye send abroad the trumpet throughout all your land,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. XXV, 9. ');">²⁷</span> and these<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. the blowing of the shofar on New Year and on the day of atonement. ');">²⁸</span> are learnt from each other.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As shown in R.H. 33b. ');">²⁹</span> Now, let the Divine Law state it in connection with <i>shofar</i>, and these [others] can come and be learnt therefrom? One cannot learn from the blowing of the <i>shofar</i> on New Year, because it brings the remembrance of Israel to their Father in Heaven.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Hence it is so important that even its preliminaries supersede the Sabbath. But the same may not apply to other precepts. ');">³⁰</span> One cannot learn from the blowing of the <i>shofar</i> on the day of atonement [either], because a Master said: When the <i>Beth din</i> blew the <i>shofar</i>, slaves departed to their homes and estates reverted to their [original] owners.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In accordance with Lev. XXV, 10. Hence this too was of particularly great importance. ');">³¹</span> Circumcision and all its preliminaries supersede the Sabbath: this is R. Eliezer's view. Whence does R. Eliezer learn this? If he learns [it] from all [the others, the objection is] as we stated.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Each differs in some respect. ');">³²</span> Moreover, as for those,

Jastrow

Jastrow

Jastrow

Jastrow