Gevia Kesef Chapter 16
Can copy this into an AI, or connect the whole library to your assistant. For deeper learning, you can directly use the original seforim, sites, and apps.
אמנם התיר השאלה היט׳ הנה כבר קדם לנו התיר הספק הראשון. אמנם התיר השני כבר כתבנוהו בספרי מצרף | לכסף, כי שם כתבנו ענין הכרת. ואמנם שאר התריים על הספקות האחרות די במה שכתבנו לפנים בביאור המראה ההיא עם מה שכתבנו פירוש מילותיה ותכליותיה בספר כסף וטירת כסף.
As for the answer to the nineteenth question, I have already stated the answer to the first doubt, while the answer of the second (doubt) was answered in my Maṣref | La-Kesef, for it was there that I discussed the issue of excision.¹ (MK II 53-54), in commenting on “the uncircumcised male shall be cut off from his people” (Gen. 17:14), as told to Abraham in the second vision, we can reconstruct the second doubt mentioned here. In his comments there he refers to the Christians, who argue against the punishment of a baby for not being circumcised, as a baby is not in a position to do anything about it. Kaspi’s answer is that the punishment is directed only at one who permits himself to continue uncircumcised even having reached adulthood. Consequently the doubt here is: Why punish an uncircumcised baby for something beyond his control? As for the rest of the answers to the remaining doubts, what I wrote earlier in explaining that vision suffices, when put together with the explanation of its terms and general purposes as written in (Maṣref) La-Kesef and Ṭirat Kesef.
footnotes: ¹ 1. From Kaspi’s statements in Maṣref La-Kesef