人宰逾越的羊羔,若为那受了割礼的人,而存心叫那未受割礼的人凭弹它的血得赎——就是说,未受割礼的人虽禁着不可吃逾越的羊羔,他却存心叫他们凭这祭的血得赎——拉夫希斯达 说:这祭不合式。拉巴 说:合式。革玛拉说明:拉夫希斯达 说不合式,是因「这祭要归未受割礼的人」这个心思,在弹血的时候也有力叫这祭作废。拉巴 说合式,是因「这祭要归未受割礼的人」这个心思,惟在宰的时候才叫这祭作废,弹血的时候便不然。
-
人宰逾越的羊羔,若为那受了割礼的人,而存心叫那未受割礼的人凭弹它的血得赎——就是说,未受割礼的人虽禁着不可吃逾越的羊羔,他却存心叫他们凭这祭的血得赎——拉夫希斯达 说:这祭不合式。
If one slaughtered the Paschal lamb for people who are circumcised on condition that uncircumcised people achieve atonement through the sprinkling of its blood, i.e., although the uncircumcised people are prohibited from eating the Paschal lamb, it was his intention that they achieve atonement through the blood of the offering, Rav Ḥisda said: The offering is disqualified.
-
拉巴 说:合式。
Rabba said: It is valid.
-
革玛拉说明:拉夫希斯达 说不合式,是因「这祭要归未受割礼的人」这个心思,在弹血的时候也有力叫这祭作废。
The Gemara explains: Rav Ḥisda said it is disqualified because intent that the offering should be for uncircumcised people has sufficient force to disqualify the offering at the time of the sprinkling.
-
拉巴 说合式,是因「这祭要归未受割礼的人」这个心思,惟在宰的时候才叫这祭作废,弹血的时候便不然。
Rabba said that it is valid because intent that the offering should be for uncircumcised people can only disqualify the offering during the slaughter and not during the sprinkling.