מַתְנִיתִין בִּזְבִינָא מִיצְעָא וְדִשְׁמוּאֵל בִּזְבִינָא חֲרִיפָא it must be that the mishna is dealing with an average sale, which is neither of particularly low quality and difficult to sell nor of particularly high quality and in high demand. Therefore, when it is sold at the fixed price, it cannot be said that either the buyer or seller benefits. Consequently, the one taking the vow must lower the price when selling to those forbidden by the vow and add to the price when buying from them. And by contrast, the case of Shmuel is referring to a keen sale, in which a sale at the fixed price is considered to be primarily beneficial to the buyer.
תַּנְיָא כְּוָתֵיהּ דִּשְׁמוּאֵל הַלּוֹקֵחַ כֵּלִים מִן הַתַּגָּר לְשַׁגְּרָן לְבֵית חָמִיו וְאָמַר לוֹ אִם מְקַבְּלִין אוֹתָן מִמֶּנִּי אֲנִי נוֹתֵן לְךָ דְּמֵיהֶם וְאִם לָאו אֲנִי נוֹתֵן לְךָ לְפִי טוֹבַת הֲנָאָה שֶׁבָּהֶן נֶאֶנְסוּ בַּהֲלִיכָה חַיָּיב The Gemara comments: It is taught in a baraita in accordance with the opinion of Shmuel that taking an item from the seller to inspect it before purchase is considered like borrowing it. In the case of one who takes utensils from a merchant in order to send them to his father-in-law’s house as a gift and says to the merchant: If they accept them from me I will give you their value, and if they do not want them, I will give you a sum of money according to the value of the financial benefit that I received from them, i.e., I will pay something for the benefit that I received from showing my father-in-law that I want to honor him, then if an accident occurs to the utensils on the way to the house of the father-in-law and they are broken, the buyer is liable to pay because he has the status of a borrower.
בַּחֲזָרָה פָּטוּר מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא כְּנוֹשֵׂא שָׂכָר But if the father-in-law did not want them and returned them to the seller, and an accident occurred on the return trip, the buyer is exempt because he is like a paid bailee. Since the father-in-law decided not to accept them, and the prospective buyer no longer benefits from them, he is not considered to be a borrower, but rather, a paid bailee of these utensils, and a paid bailee is exempt in the case of an accident.
הָהוּא סַפְסִירָא דִּשְׁקַל חֲמָרָא לְזַבּוֹנֵי וְלָא אִיזַּבַּן בַּהֲדֵי דַּהֲדַר אִיתְּנִיס חַמְרָא חַיְּיבֵיהּ רַב נַחְמָן לְשַׁלּוֹמֵי אֵיתִיבֵיהּ רָבָא לְרַב נַחְמָן נֶאֶנְסוּ בַּהֲלִיכָה חַיָּיב בַּחֲזָרָה פָּטוּר The Gemara relates: There was a certain middleman [safseira] who took a donkey to sell but it was not sold, i.e., he was unsuccessful in finding a buyer. While he was in the midst of returning the donkey to its owner, an accident occurred to the donkey. Rav Naḥman then obligated him to pay for it. Rava raised an objection to Rav Naḥman from this baraita: If an accident occurred while on the way, he is liable to pay; if it occurred on the return trip he is exempt. Since the case involving Rav Naḥman occurred on the return trip, why did Rav Naḥman obligate him to pay?
אֲמַר לֵיהּ חֲזָרָה דְסַפְסִירָא הוֹלָכָה הִיא דְּאִילּוּ מַשְׁכַּח לְזַבּוֹנֵי אֲפִילּוּ אַבָּבָא דְבֵיתֵיהּ מִי לָא מְזַבֵּין לֵיהּ Rav Naḥman said to him: The return trip of a middleman is like the trip there, and an item is not considered returned until he actually gives it to its owner. This is because were he to find someone to sell the donkey to even at the door of his house, would he not sell it? Therefore, he retains the status of a borrower. However, in the case of bringing a gift to a particular person who does not accept it, the sale is nullified, and the prospective buyer has only to take care of the item until it is returned to its owner, which gives him the status of a paid bailee.
מַתְנִי׳ קוּנָּם שֶׁאֲנִי נֶהֱנֶה לָעֲרֵלִים מוּתָּר בְּעַרְלֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְאָסוּר בְּמוּלֵי אוּמּוֹת הָעוֹלָם MISHNA: If one says: Benefiting from those who are uncircumcised is konam for me, he is permitted to derive benefit from uncircumcised Jews because they are not regarded as uncircumcised, but he is prohibited from deriving benefit from the circumcised of the nations of the world.
שֶׁאֲנִי נֶהֱנֶה לַמּוּלִים אָסוּר בְּעַרְלֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וּמוּתָּר בְּמוּלֵי אוּמּוֹת הָעוֹלָם שֶׁאֵין הָעׇרְלָה קְרוּיָה אֶלָּא לְשֵׁם אוּמּוֹת הָעוֹלָם שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר כִּי כׇל הַגּוֹיִם עֲרֵלִים וְכׇל בֵּית יִשְׂרָאֵל עַרְלֵי לֵב וְאוֹמֵר וְהָיָה הַפְּלִשְׁתִּי הֶעָרֵל הַזֶּה וְאוֹמֵר פֶּן תִּשְׂמַחְנָה בְּנוֹת פְּלִשְׁתִּים פֶּן תַּעֲלֹזְנָה בְּנוֹת הָעֲרֵלִים Conversely, if he said: Benefiting from those who are circumcised is konam for me, he is prohibited from deriving benefit even from uncircumcised Jews and he is permitted to derive benefit from the circumcised of the nations of the world, as the term uncircumcised is used only to name the nations of the world, as it is stated: “For all the nations are uncircumcised, but all the house of Israel are uncircumcised in the heart” (Jeremiah 9:25), and it says: “And this uncircumcised Philistine shall be” (I Samuel 17:36), and it says: “Lest the daughters of the Philistines rejoice, lest the daughters of the uncircumcised triumph” (II Samuel 1:20). These verses indicate that ordinary gentiles are referred to as uncircumcised, regardless of whether they are actually circumcised.
רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה אוֹמֵר מְאוּסָה הִיא הָעׇרְלָה שֶׁנִּתְגַּנּוּ בָּהּ רְשָׁעִים שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר כִּי כׇל הַגּוֹיִם עֲרֵלִים רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל אוֹמֵר גְּדוֹלָה מִילָה שֶׁנִּכְרְתוּ עָלֶיהָ שְׁלֹשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה בְּרִיתוֹת Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya says: The foreskin is repulsive, as is evident from the fact that the wicked are disgraced through it, as it is stated: “Behold, the days come, says the Lord, that I will punish all them that are circumcised in their uncircumcision: Egypt, and Judah, and Edom, and the children of Ammon, and Moab, and all that have the corners of their hair polled, that dwell in the wilderness; for all the nations are uncircumcised, but all the house of Israel are uncircumcised in the heart” (Jeremiah 9:25), which indicates that there is an element of disgrace associated with the foreskin. Rabbi Yishmael says: So great is the mitzva of circumcision that thirteen covenants were sealed with regard to it, for the word covenant appears thirteen times in the biblical passage that discusses circumcision (Genesis, chapter 17).
רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר גְּדוֹלָה מִילָה שֶׁדּוֹחָה אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת חֲמוּרָה Rabbi Yosei says: So great is the mitzva of circumcision that it overrides the strict halakhot of Shabbat, as circumcision is performed even if the eighth day following the birth of a son occurs on Shabbat, despite the fact that circumcision violates the prohibition of labor on Shabbat.
רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן קׇרְחָה אוֹמֵר גְּדוֹלָה מִילָה שֶׁלֹּא נִתְלָה לוֹ לְמֹשֶׁה הַצַּדִּיק עָלֶיהָ מְלֹא שָׁעָה Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korḥa says: Great is the mitzva of circumcision, as is evident from the fact that the punishment of Moses the righteous for not circumcising his son when he was capable of doing so was not postponed for even a full hour (see Exodus 4:24–26).
רַבִּי נְחֶמְיָה אוֹמֵר גְּדוֹלָה מִילָה שֶׁדּוֹחָה אֶת הַנְּגָעִים רַבִּי אוֹמֵר גְּדוֹלָה מִילָה שֶׁכׇּל הַמִּצְוֹת שֶׁעָשָׂה אַבְרָהָם אָבִינוּ לֹא נִקְרָא שָׁלֵם עַד שֶׁמָּל שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר הִתְהַלֵּךְ לְפָנַי וֶהְיֵה תָמִים Rabbi Neḥemya says: So great is the mitzva of circumcision that it overrides the prohibitions associated with leprosy. If leprosy is found on the foreskin of an infant, although it is generally prohibited to cut the afflicted area, it is permitted to do so to perform the mitzva of circumcision. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: So great is the mitzva of circumcision that despite all the mitzvot that Abraham our Patriarch did, he was not called wholehearted until he circumcised himself, as it is stated at the time that the mitzva was given to him: “Walk before Me and you should be wholehearted” (Genesis 17:1).
דָּבָר אַחֵר גְּדוֹלָה מִילָה שֶׁאִלְמָלֵא הִיא לֹא בָּרָא הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא אֶת עוֹלָמוֹ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר כֹּה אָמַר ה׳ אִם לֹא בְרִיתִי יוֹמָם וָלָיְלָה חֻקּוֹת שָׁמַיִם וָאָרֶץ לֹא שָׂמְתִּי Alternatively, so great is the mitzva of circumcision that if not for it the Holy One, Blessed be He, would not have created His world, as it is stated: “Thus says the Lord: If My covenant be not with day and night, I would not have appointed the ordinances of heaven and earth” (Jeremiah 33:25), and the covenant that exists day and night is the covenant of circumcision, as it is always found on the person’s body.
גְּמָ׳ תַּנְיָא רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן קׇרְחָה אוֹמֵר גְּדוֹלָה מִילָה שֶׁכׇּל זְכִיּוֹת שֶׁעָשָׂה מֹשֶׁה רַבֵּינוּ לֹא עָמְדוּ לוֹ כְּשֶׁנִּתְרַשֵּׁל מִן הַמִּילָה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר וַיִּפְגְּשֵׁהוּ ה׳ וַיְבַקֵּשׁ הֲמִיתוֹ GEMARA: It is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korḥa says: So great is the mitzva of circumcision that all the merits that Moses our teacher accrued when he performed mitzvot did not protect him when he was negligent about performing the mitzva of circumcision, as it is stated: “And the Lord met him and sought to kill him” (Exodus 4:24).
אָמַר רַבִּי חַס וְשָׁלוֹם שֶׁמּשֶׁה רַבֵּינוּ נִתְרַשֵּׁל מִן הַמִּילָה אֶלָּא כָּךְ אָמַר אָמוּל וְאֵצֵא סַכָּנָה הִיא שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר וַיְהִי בַיּוֹם הַשְּׁלִישִׁי בִּהְיוֹתָם כֹּאֲבִים וְגוֹ׳ אָמוּל וְאֶשְׁהֶא שְׁלֹשָׁה יָמִים הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא אָמַר לִי לֵךְ שֻׁב מִצְרָיִם אֶלָּא מִפְּנֵי מָה נֶעֱנַשׁ מֹשֶׁה Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said: Heaven forbid that Moses our teacher was neglectful of the mitzva of circumcision. Rather, this is what he said: If I circumcise the child now and depart to begin my journey, it is a danger for the child, as it is stated: “And it came to pass on the third day, when they were in pain” (Genesis 34:25), which indicates that the pain of circumcision lasts for several days and the child may be in danger while in pain. If I circumcise him immediately and wait three days and only then embark on the journey, this is problematic, as the Holy One, Blessed be He, said to me: “Go, return into Egypt” (Exodus 4:19), i.e., go immediately. For these reasons Moses did not circumcise the child immediately, but no neglect existed on his part. But according to this explanation, for what reason was Moses punished?