Shabbat 270:1

ונתחדשה הלכה

and then a new law was decreed.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Viz., that the two are interdependent. ');">¹</span>

איני והא איתמר יוצא דופן ומי שיש לו שתי ערלות רב הונא ורב חייא בר רב חד אמר מחללין עליו את השבת וחד אמר אין מחללין עד כאן לא פליגי אלא לחלל עליו את השבת אבל לשמנה ודאי מהלינן ליה הא בהא תליא

But that is not so? for it was stated: If one is extracted through the cesarean section, or has two foreskins,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Two skins on top of each other. Or, two separate membra. ');">²</span>

כתנאי יש יליד בית שנימול לאחד ויש יליד בית שנימול לשמנה יש מקנת כסף שנימול לאחד ויש מקנת כסף שנימול לשמנה יש מקנת כסף שנימול לא' ויש מקנת כסף שנימול לשמונה

— R. Huna and R. Hiyya b. Rab [differ thereon]: one maintains, We desecrate the Sabbath for them; whilst the other holds, We do not desecrate the Sabbath for them. Thus, they differ only concerning the desecration of the Sabbath for them, but we certainly circumcise them on the eighth day? — One is dependent on the other.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The infant who must be circumcised on the eighth day must be circumcised even on the Sabbath, since that is deduced from (eighth) day (supra 132a); but where the eighth day is necessary the Sabbath may not be desecrated. ');">³</span>

כיצד לקח שפחה מעוברת ואח"כ ילדה זהו מקנת כסף הנימול לשמונה לקח שפחה וולדה עמה זו היא מקנת כסף שנימול לאחד

This is a controversy of Tannaim: [For it was taught], There is [a slave] born in his [master's] house who is circumcised on the first [day], and there is one born in his [master's] house who is circumcised on the eighth [day]; there is [a slave] bought with money who is circumcised on the first [day], and there is [a slave] bought with money who is circumcised on the eighth day. 'There is [a slave] bought with money who is circumcised on the first [day], and there is [a slave] bought with money who is circumcised on the eighth day.' How so? If one purchases a pregnant female slave and then she gives birth, that [the infant] is an acquired slave who is circumcised at eight days — If one purchases a female slave together with her infant child, that is a slave bought with money who is circumcised on the first day.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of purchase, even if he is not eight days old yet. ');">⁴</span>

ויש יליד בית שנימול לשמנה כיצד לקח שפחה ונתעברה אצלו וילדה זהו יליד בית הנימול לשמנה רב חמא אומר ילדה ואח"כ הטבילה זהו יליד בית שנימול לאחד הטבילה ואחר כך ילדה זהו יליד בית הנימול לשמנה

'And there is [a slave] born in [his] master's house who is circumcised on the eighth day' — How so? If one purchases a female slave and she conceives in his house and gives birth, that is [a slave] born in his [master's] house who is circumcised at eight days. R — Hama said:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [Probably R. Hama the father of R. Oshaia, v. Hyman, Toledoth II p. 456]. ');">⁵</span>

ותנא קמא לא שני ליה בין הטבילה ואח"כ ילדה בין ילדה ואח"כ הטבילה דאע"ג דאין אמו טמאה לידה נימול לשמנה

If she gives birth and then has a ritual bath,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By this rite she enters the Jewish household as slave, becoming liable to all duties enjoined upon a Jewish woman. V. next note. ');">⁶</span>

(אמר רבא) בשלמא לר' חמא משכחת לה יליד בית נימול לא' יליד בית נימול לח' מקנת כסף נימול לא' ומקנת כסף נימול לח' ילדה ואח"כ הטבילה זהו יליד בית שנימול לאחד הטבילה ואח"כ ילדה זהו יליד בית שנימול לח'

that is [a slave] born in his [master's] house who is circumcised on the first day; if she has a ritual bath and then gives birth, that is [a slave] born in his [master's] house who is circumcised at eight days. But the first Tanna allows no distinction between one who [first] has a ritual bath and then gives birth and one who gives birth and then has a ritual bath, so that though his mother is not defiled through her confinement he is circumcised on the eighth day.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' These laws centre on Gen. XVII, 12, 13: And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every male throughout your generations, he that is born in the house, or bought with money of any stranger, which is not of thy seed (v. 12). He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised (v. 13). Whereas v. 12 specifies circumcision for the eighth day, v. 13 does not, which implies at the earliest possible moment. Now it is logical that v. 12 refers to a slave who is as like as possible to a full Jew, that being the implication of 'among you', intimating those that are similar to you. viz., one born in his master's house after he was purchased. i.e., his mother was bearing him when she was bought; whilst v. 13 applies to a slave who is unlike a full Jew, vi., he was already born before he was bought. R. Hama draws this distinction: If his mother has a ritual bath, whereby she formally becomes a Jewish-owned slave in that she is bound to observe all the laws incumbent upon Jewesses in general, so that her confinement renders her unclean just like a Jewess, and then she gives birth, the infant is circumcised on the eighth day. But otherwise the infant is not like a Jewish-born child, and is circumcised on the first day. But the first Tanna ignores this distinction: thus R. Assi's ruling is a matter of controversy between the first Tanna and R. Hama. ');">⁷</span>

מקנת כסף נימול לשמנה כגון שלקח שפחה מעוברת והטבילה ואח"כ ילדה מקנת כסף נימול לאחד כגון שלקח זה שפחה וזה עוברה

Raba said:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Maharam deletes this. ');">⁸</span>

אלא לת"ק בשלמא כולהו משכחת להו אלא יליד בית נימול לאחד היכי משכחת לה

As for R. Hama, it is well: we find [a slave] born in his [master's] house who is circumcised on the first day, and one who is circumcised on the eighth day; one bought with money who is circumcised on the first day, and one bought with money who is circumcised on the eighth day. [Thus:] if she gives birth and then has a ritual bath, that is [a slave] born in his [master's] house who is circumcised on the first day; if she has a ritual bath and then gives birth, that is [a slave] born in the house who is circumcised on the eighth [day].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Both of these refer to a slave who conceived in her master's house, so that the infant is not 'bought with money'. ');">⁹</span>

א"ר ירמיה בלוקח שפחה לעוברה

'One bought with money who is circumcised on the eighth [day]': e.g., if one purchases a pregnant female slave and she has a ritual bath and then gives birth; 'one bought with money who is circumcised on the first day': e.g., where one buys a [pregnant] female slave and another buys her unborn child.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since the latter does not own the mother, the child is not like a Jewish-born infant, and therefore he is circumcised on the first day. ');">¹⁰</span>

הניחא למ"ד קנין פירות לאו כקנין הגוף דמי אלא למ"ד קנין פירות כקנין הגוף דמי מאי איכא למימר

But according to the first Tanna, as for all [others] it is well: they are conceivable.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As already stated supra. ');">¹¹</span>

אמר רב משרשיא בלוקח שפחה ע"מ שלא להטבילה

But how can [a slave] born in the house be found who is circumcised on the first day?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since he rejects the distinction based on when the mother had her ritual bath, one born in the house is certainly similar to a Jew. ');">¹²</span>

תניא ר"ש בן גמליאל אומר כל ששהה ל' יום באדם אינו נפל שנאמר (במדבר יח, טז) ופדויו מבן חדש תפדה שמנת ימים בבהמה אינו נפל שנאמר (ויקרא כב, כז) ומיום השמיני והלאה ירצה לקרבן וגו'

— Said R. Jeremiah: In the case of one who buys a female slave for her unborn child.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Even if he buys her from a Jew, and she has already had her ritual bath and is subject to the uncleanness of confinement, the child is nevertheless unlike a Jewish child, since his owner has no share in the mother. ');">¹³</span>

הא לא שהה ספיקא הוי

This is satisfactory on the view that a title to the usufruct is not as a title to the principal; but on the view that a title to the usufruct is as a title to the principal, what can be said?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. B.B. 136a; the mother is the principal, while the child is the usufruct. On the latter view he is like a Jewish-born child ');">¹⁴</span> — Said R. Mesharsheya: [It is possible] where one buys a female slave on condition that he will not subject her to a ritual bath.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' There her child is certainly unlike a Jewish-born one. ');">¹⁵</span> It was taught, R. Simeon b. Gamaliel said: Any human being who lives<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'tarries'. ');">¹⁶</span> thirty days is not a nefel,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A nonviable, premature birth. ');">¹⁷</span> because it is said, And those that are to be redeemed of them from a month old shalt thou redeem.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Num. XVIII, 16. Since he must then be redeemed, it follows that he is viable. ');">¹⁸</span> An animal [which lives] eight days is not a nefel, for it is said, and from the eighth day and henceforth it shall be accepted for an oblation, etc.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXII, 27. ');">¹⁹</span> This implies that if it [an infant] does not last [so long], it is doubtful;