הַפֶּסַח שֶׁשְּׁחָטוֹ שֶׁלֹּא לִשְׁמוֹ, וְקִבֵּל וְהִלֵּךְ וְזָרַק שֶׁלֹּא לִשְׁמוֹ, אוֹ לִשְׁמוֹ וְשֶׁלֹּא לִשְׁמוֹ, אוֹ שֶׁלֹּא לִשְׁמוֹ וְלִשְׁמוֹ, פָּסוּל. כֵּיצַד לִשְׁמוֹ וְשֶׁלֹּא לִשְׁמוֹ, לְשֵׁם פֶּסַח וּלְשֵׁם שְׁלָמִים. שֶׁלֹּא לִשְׁמוֹ וְלִשְׁמוֹ, לְשֵׁם שְׁלָמִים וּלְשֵׁם פָּסַח:
Si uno no sacrificó el lishmo de Pesaj (como tal, por su propio bien) [como cuando lo sacrificó como una ofrenda de paz], o si recibió [su sangre en el recipiente de riego], o trajo [la sangre al altar] o rociado [la sangre en el altar] no lishmo; o lishmo y no lishmo [como cuando lo mató lishmo y recibió la sangre no lishmo]; o no lishmo y lishmo, está invalidado. [Por la presente, se nos informa que el pensamiento se obtiene de una función (sacrificio) a otra (es decir, si pensó mientras realizaba una función para realizar otra con un pensamiento no apto, por ejemplo, si pensaba: "Lo mataré para rociar su sangre lo lishmo "), la oferta se invalida inmediatamente, incluso si no realizó la segunda función con ese pensamiento inadecuado. Y así es como debe entenderse nuestra Mishná, a saber: "O [si él pensó, mientras mataba, rociar la sangre lo lishmo] y [la roció] lishmo, no es apto. El hecho de que lo lishmo hace que el La oferta de Pesaj no apta se deriva de (Éxodo 12:27): "Y dirás: 'Es un sacrificio pascual'"—Debe ser sacrificado como una ofrenda pascual. Y "it" ("hu") connota un requisito categórico (que, si no se observa, invalida la oferta)]. "Lishmo y no lishmo": ¿Cómo es eso? Leshem Pesach y leshem shelamim (ofrenda de paz). "Shelo lishmo y lishmo". ¿Cómo es eso? Leshem Shelamim y Leshem Pesach. (Véase más arriba).
Tosefta Pesachim
One who slaughtered [the Passover offering] for its purpose but completed [the rituals associated with the sacrifice] for a different purpose -- it is valid because [a sacrifice] is rendered valid through the slaughter. How is it "slaughtered for those who cannot eat it" (Pes. 5:3)? [This applies where] he slaughtered for a sick person or for an elderly person who cannot eat an olive's-bulk. How is it [slaughtered] for "those who are not registered" (ibid.)? [This applies where] he slaughtered it for members of a different collective. [If] he slaughtered for [both] circumcised and uncircumcised, or for [both] impure persons and for pure persons, it is valid. Abba Shaul disqualifies it, and it is logical that it should be disqualified, since [a person's unfit status] at the time [of the sacrifice] disqualifies [a sacrifice], and an uncircumcised person is disqualified *and an impure person is disqualified (following the GR"A). Just as "the time" (i.e., where the butcher both intends that sacrifice be eaten in its proper time and not at its proper time, see Minchat Bikkurim) makes it [disqualified under the principle of] "the part is like the whole," so too an uncircumcised person makes it [disqualified under] "the part is like the whole." Or perhaps look at it this way: Since an impure person and an uncircumcised person are disqualified, just as [partial] impurity does not cause [application of the principle] "the part is like the whole," thus so too a [partially] uncircumcised person does not cause [application of the principle] "the part is like the whole." Let us see to what case it is similar: We derive a matter that does not apply to every offering (i.e., lack of circumcision), from a [different] matter that does not apply to every offering (i.e., impurity), and it is proven from "time," which [also] does not apply to all offerings. Or perhaps look at it this way: We derive a matter which does not permit exception to a general prohibition, from a [different] matter which does not permit an exception to a general prohibition, and it is not proven from impurity, which does permit an exception to a general prohibition.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
