Previous daf

1)

(a) From the Pasuk "u'va'Yom ha'Shemini, Yimol Besar *Orlaso*" ('Orlaso Vaday, ve'Lo Orlaso Safek') - we preclude a baby who is born at dusk on Friday evening, and one who is born already circumcised, from having his Milah performed on Shabbos.

(b) The reason that a Nolad Mahul requires Hatafas Dam B'ris is because of a Safek 'Orlah Kevushah' (perhaps there is an Orlah quashed under the skin and hidden from view. This will not of course, apply to a Ger whose Orlah has definitely been removed. Consequently, even those who say that a Nolad Mahul requires Hatafas Dam B'ris, will agree that a Ger does not.

(c) According to Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar, they argue by a Ger: Beis Shamai hold that a Ger does require Hatafas Dam Bris (presumably because of the Pasuk "Gam es be'Dam Berischa" (see 134a. 5d.).; whereas Beis Hillel maintain that a Ger does not require Hatafas Dam B'ris. Both opinions agree however, that a Nolad Mahul requires Hatafas Dam B'ris.

(d) The Safek included by the Tana by the word 'Safek' is that of a Safek seventh-month, Safek eighth-month baby.

(a) By 'ben Shemoneh, Harei Hu ke'Even' - the Beraisa means that an eighth-month baby is Muktzah like a stone, and therefore, his mother is not even permitted to move him.

(b) His mother may, however, feed him - by leaning over him, without actually handling him. She is permitted to extract her milk (even if the baby would not be there) because of the pain that it causes her, which could make her ill.

(c) Rav Ada bar Ahavah ruled like Shmuel (who ruled like Raban Shimon ben Elazar). Consequently, when his wife gave birth to a Nolad Mahul, he tried to find a Mohel who would perform the Hatafas Dam B'ris on Shabbos - like Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar according to Beis Hillel. When all the Mohalim refused (on the grounds that, even according to Beis Shamai, it was no more than a Safek Orlah Kevushah, which does not over-ride Shabbos), he performed the Milah himself, and ended up by cutting off a part of the Gid and making his son a Kerus Shafchah. He then declared that it served him right for transgressing the words of Rav, who rules like the Tana Kama, in whose opinion, Beis Hillel does not require Hatafas Dam B'ris by a Nolad Mahul.

(d) Rav Ada bar Ahavah holds like Rav Yosef, in whose opinion Shmuel holds that a Nolad Mahul is a *Vaday* Orlah Kevushah; whereas Rav Nachman holds like Rabah, in whose opinion, it is only a Safek Orlah Kevushah.

(a) Rebbi Elazar ha'Kapor maintains that according to both Beis Shamai and Beis Hillel, a Nolad Mahul requires Hatafas Dam B'ris; they argue about whether or not, one may break Shabbos to perform the B'ris. Does this not mean, deduces Rav Yosef, that according to the Tana Kama, one may even break Shabbos too, and perform the Milah - in which case, a Nolad Mahul must be a *Vaday* Orlah Kevushah, and not just a Safek?

(b) Who said that? retorts the Gemara. Maybe, according to the Tana Kama, both Beis Shamai and Beis Hillel will agree that one does *not* circumcise a Nolad Mahul on Shabbos (because he is certainly no more than a *Safek* Orlah Kevushah).

(c) Perhaps, answers the Gemara (to the Kashya that Rebbi Elazar ha'Kapor's Chidush is according to Beis Shamai), Rebbi Elazar ha'Kapor is telling us that, in fact, Beis Shamai and Beis Hillel do not argue in this matter.

(d) The Chidush of Rebbi Elazar ha'Kapor is - that a Nolad Mahul requires Hatafas Dam B'ris, even according to Beis Hillel, unlike the Tana Kama, in whose opinion Beis Hillel does not require Hatafas Dam B'ris even during the week.

(a) Rav Asi learns from "Ishah Ki Sazri'a ... ve'Tam'ah ... u'va'Yom ha'Shemini Yimol Besar Orlaso" - that whenever the mother is not Temei'ah Leidah, the baby is not circumcised on the eighth day (but on the first).

(b) This would include a baby born be caserian section, or the baby of a non-Jewish woman who gave birth and who converted after the birth.

(c) The generations from the time of Avraham till that of Moshe, (whose mothers were not Metamei Leidah, yet they performed the Bris on the eighth day) are different, argues Rav Asi, because that was before Matan-Torah. Once the Torah was given, and Tumah and Milah applied concurrently, the Halachah changed accordingly.

(d) 'Ha be'Ha Talya' says the Gemara: the one who holds that one performs the Milah (of a baby born by cesarean section, or one who was born with two Orlos) on Shabbos, also holds that one always performs it on the eighth day; whereas the one who holds that their Milah does not over-ride Shabbos, also holds that it falls due immediately, and not specifically on the eighth day.

5)

(a) The criterion for circumcising a slave on the eighth day is that he should be similar to 'you' (because the Torah writes in Lech Lecha "Lachem").

(b) If one bought a pregnant slave - that is a Miknas Kesef, who is circumcised on the eighth day; whereas if one bought a slave together with her baby, that is a Miknas Kesef who is circumcised immediately. Alternatively, if one person bought the slave, and the other, the fetus.

(c) One performs the Milah on a 'Yelid Bayis' on the eighth day, if he bought a slave, who then became pregnant and gave birth; on the first day, according to Rav Chama, if the slave Toveled only after she gave birth - like the opinion of Rav Asi, who said earlier that whenever the woman is not Temei'ah Leidah, the baby is not circumcised on the eighth day.

(a) To establish the case of 'Yelid Bayis she'Nimol le'Echad', according to the Tana Kama, when he acquired a pregnant slave only for her unborn fetus - is not adequate according to those who hold 'Kinyan Peiros ke'Kinyan ha'Guf', because, since he acquires the fetus (the Peiros) he automatically acquires the slave too - and why should the baby not then be circumcised on the eighth day?

(b) According to those who hold 'Kinyan Peiros ke'Kinyan ha'Guf', we therefore need to establish the case by a man who purchased a slave intending not to Tovel her, in which case he is permitted to keep her indefinitly. Should she then become pregnant, the baby is circumcised the day he is born.

(c) According to Rav Chama, if a woman is not Temei'ah Leidah, there is no obligation to circumcise her baby on the eighth day (like Rav Asi); according to the Tana Kama, there *is* - which is why the baby of a slave who gave birth and then Toveled must nevertheless be circumcised on the eighth day (and they need to find another case of Yelid Bayis which is Nimol le'Echad).

(a) Raban Shimon ben Gamliel learns from ...

1. ... "u'Feduyav mi'Ben Chodesh Tifdeh" - that until a first-born has reached thirty (one) days (see Tosfos DH 'Kol'), he is a Safek Nefel (This Din, of course, is not confined to a Bechor, but will apply to *all* human babies - as will the following Din to *all* animals).
2. ... "u'mi'Yom ha'Shemini Vahal'ah, Yeratzeh le'Korban" - that a first-born animal is a Safek Nefel until the beginning of the eighth day.

(b) It is possible to circumcise a baby when the eighth-day falls on Shabbos, because even if the baby is a Nefel, why should one not circumcise him, it is like cutting a piece of flesh, which does not constitute the Melachah of drawing blood (which it does by a live person).

(c) Consequently, we are forced to explain that the Beraisa, which rules that a baby who is a Safek seventh, Safek eighth month baby, may not circumcise on Shabbos - is speaking about Machshirei Milah, according to Rebbi Eliezer; but the Milah itself, is permitted according to everybody.