[Die Amoraim unterscheiden sich in der Gemara hinsichtlich der korrekten Version dieser Mischna. Die von meinen Rabbinern abonnierte Version ist die wesentliche, nämlich:] Wenn man zwei Kinder zum Beschneiden hätte: eines nach dem Schabbat; der andere am Schabbat, und er vergaß und beschnitt den ersten am Schabbat, und der zweite nach dem Schabbat haftet (für ein Sündopfer). (Wenn er es getan hätte) einer am Sabbatabend und der andere am Schabbat zu beschneiden, und er beschnitt den ersten am Schabbat, R. Eliezer entscheidet, dass er für ein Sündopfer haftet, und R. Yehoshua befreit ihn. [Dies ist die Interpretation: Wenn er das Kind nach dem Schabbat am Schabbat vergessen und beschnitten hat, sind alle der Ansicht, dass er haftbar ist. Denn er hat sich bei der Ausführung einer Mizwa geirrt und keine Mizwa durchgeführt, als er das Kind nach dem Schabbat am Schabbat beschnitten hat. Darin stimmt sogar R. Yehoshua überein. ("Einer, der am Schabbat beschneidet, und einer, der am Sabbatabend beschneidet, und er vergaß und beschnitt das Kind am Sabbatabend am Schabbat, R. Eliezer entscheidet, dass er für ein Sündopfer haftet" :) Für Milah jenseits seiner Zeit Schabbat nicht außer Kraft setzen. Und obwohl er sich bei der Ausführung einer Mizwa geirrt hatte, wurde er mit der Schabbatbeschneidung aufgenommen, weshalb er sich mit der anderen irrte— und obwohl er schon mit der ersten eine Mizwa durchführte, war er für die Beschneidung geeignet, wenn auch nicht für die Beschneidung, die den Schabbat außer Kraft setzte —R. Eliezer ist der Ansicht, dass jemand, der sich bei der Ausführung einer Mizwa geirrt und eine Mizwa durchgeführt hat, die den Schabbat nicht außer Kraft setzt, haftbar ist. ("und R. Yehoshua befreit ihn" :) Er ist der Ansicht, dass jemand, der sich bei der Ausführung einer Mizwa geirrt und eine Mizwa durchgeführt hat, die den Schabbat nicht außer Kraft setzt, befreit ist; denn er fühlte, dass er unter der Sanktion von Beth-Din operierte. Die Halacha entspricht R. Yehoshua.]
Bartenura on Mishnah Shabbat
מי שהיו לו שתי תינוקות וכו' - The Amoraim dispute in the Babylonian Talmud (Tractate Shabbat 137a) concerning the textual reading of this Mishnah but the textual reading that that my teachers grabbed hold of as essential is this: He who had two baby boys, one to circumcise [the day] after the Sabbath (i.e., on Sunday) and one to circumcise on the Sabbath but he forgot and circumcised the one of the day after the Sabbath on the Sabbath is liable [for a sin-offering]. If one was to be circumcised on the Eve of the Sabbath (i.e., on Friday), and one (i.e., the other) to be circumcised on the Sabbath, but he forgot and circumcised the one for the Eve of the Sabbath on the Sabbath, Rabbi Eliezer obligates him to bring a sin-offering and Rabbi Yehoshua [says] that he is exempt. And this its explanation: If he forgot and circumcised the one [who was to be circumcised] after the Sabbath (i.e., on Sunday) on the Sabbath, , according to everyone he is liable [for a sin-offering] for he has erred in the matter of the Commandment and did not perform the Mitzvah when he advanced [the circumcision] and circumcised the one for Sunday on the Sabbath, and in this, even Rabbi Yehoshua admits [that he is liable a sin-offering].
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Shabbat
Introduction
This mishnah discusses a case where there are two infants, one who should be circumcised on Shabbat and the other who should not be circumcised on Shabbat. The question is what happens if the babies get switched and someone circumcises on Shabbat the one who should have been circumcised on a different day.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Shabbat
אחד למול בשבת ואחד למול בערב שבת ושכח ומל את של ערב שבת בשבת ר' אליעזר מחייב חטאת – for it is a ritual circumcision that was not at the its [appropriate] time and does not supersede the Sabbath, and even though he erred in the matter of [the performance of] a commandment for he was preoccupied with that Sabbath and because of it, erred in it, and even with this, he performed a Mitzvah for it was appropriate to circumcise [his son] but it does not supersede the Sabbath, for Rabbi Eleazar holds that he erred in the matter of a Mitzvah and performed a Mitzvah which does not supersede the Sabbath and he is liable [for a sin-offering].
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Shabbat
If a man has two infants, one to circumcise after Shabbat and the other to circumcise on Shabbat, and he forgets and circumcises the one who should be circumcised after Shabbat on the Shabbat, he is liable. In the first case the mohel (the circumciser) ends up circumcising a baby on Shabbat who should have been circumcised after Shabbat. In other words, he desecrated Shabbat to circumcise a boy who had not yet reached his eighth day. This child was not yet obligated to be circumcised. Hence the circumciser is liable to bring a sin-offering for accidentally desecrating Shabbat.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Shabbat
[If he has] one to circumcise on the eve of Shabbat and another to circumcise on Shabbat, and he forgets and circumcises the one who should be circumcised on the eve of Shabbat on Shabbat: Rabbi Eliezer holds [him] liable to a sin-offering, but Rabbi Joshua exempts [him]. In this case it turns out that he circumcised a boy on Shabbat who should have been circumcised on Friday. Rabbi Eliezer maintains that he is still liable since he did, after all, circumcise on Shabbat in a case where he should not have done so. Only circumcision on the eighth day overrides Shabbat (this we learned in yesterday’s mishnah and we will learn again in tomorrow’s mishnah). Rabbi Joshua holds that since the child had already passed his eighth day and had therefore become obligated to be circumcised, the circumciser has fulfilled the commandment and is not liable. Note that Rabbi Joshua agrees that it is forbidden to circumcise a child on Shabbat on any other day but the eighth day. He only holds that if someone mistakenly did so to a child who was already obligated for circumcision, he is not liable.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Shabbat
ור"י פוטר – for he holds that he erred in the matter of a Mitzvah and performed a commandment that does not supersede the Sabbath=, he exempt [from having to bring a sin-offering] because he holds/thought that it was with the permission of the Jewish court that he did it, and the Halakha is according to Rabbi Yehuda.
