Study Shabbat folio 133A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
is a dispute of tanna’im, as it was taught in a baraita: The term flesh comes to teach that even though there is a bright white spot there, one should circumcise; this is the statement of R' Yoshiya. R' Yonatan says: There is no need for this derivation from the word flesh in the verse. Rather, the
We earlier learned that the Master said: When the verse states the term flesh, it comes to teach that even though there is a bright white spot there, one should circumcise; this is the statement of R' Yoshiya. R' Yonatan agrees with this halakha, albeit for a different reason. The Talmud address
Abaye said: This derivation is only necessary according to the opinion of R' Yehuda, who said that an unintentional act is prohibited. Rava said: Even if you say that it is according to the opinion of R' Shimon, who holds that an unintentional act is permitted, as R' Shimon concedes to R' Yehuda i
Some teach that which Abaye and Rava said as referring to this baraita. The verse states: “Take heed with regard to the plague of tzara'at that you observe diligently and do in accordance with all that the priests, the Levites, instruct you; as I commanded them you shall take care to do” (Deuteronom
The Talmud asks: Why do I need a verse to address this? It is an unintentional act, and an unintentional act is permitted. Abaye said: This derivation is only necessary according to the opinion of R' Yehuda, who said that an unintentional act is prohibited. Rava said: Even if you say that it is acc