...there was a Jewish ritual " Week of the Son, or, as some call it, Jesus the Son," in connection with the circumcision and redemption of the first-born child.
And from the day that a Government has come into power which issues cruel decrees against us and forbids to us the observance of the Torah and the precepts and does not allow us to enter into the 'week of the son' (according to another version, 'the salvation of the son'), we ought by rights to bind ourselves not to marry and beget children, and the seed of Abraham our father would come to an end of itself.
...there was a Jewish ritual " Week of the Son, or, as some call it, Jesus the Son," in connection with the circumcision and redemption of the first-born child.
I have been unable to get that site to open for me.
"Jesus the Son" is probably someone's interpretation of the alternative translation of the passage in Baba Bathra 60b, which Andrew has already noted says "(according to another version, 'the salvation of the son')."
1) "The week of the son" is a reference to the week one waits before circumcising a newborn son 'on the eighth day.'
2) The performance of the circumcision ritual itself on that 8th day corresponds to "saving the son," because the ritual of circumcision formally includes the boy as part of the people of Israel. Where did "Jesus" come from? Jesus is supposed to mean "Save we pray."
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
רב ושמואל ורב אסי איקלעו לבי שבוע הבן ואמרי לה לבי ישוע הבן רב לא עייל קמיה דשמואל
§ Rav and Shmuel and Rav Asi once happened to be present at a house where a celebration was being held marking the passage of a week of a newborn son, i.e., a circumcision. And some say it was a house where a celebration was being held marking the redemption of a firstborn son. Rav would not enter before Shmuel, for reasons the Gemara will explain;
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Medieval commentaries say that this refers to the festive meal that is held to thank God for saving the child from the perils of childbirth
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
For those who care the actual story of what went on at the party for the newborn is pretty wild
80b
שמואל לא עייל קמיה דרב אסי רב אסי לא עייל קמיה דרב אמרי מאן נתרח נתרח שמואל וניתי רב ורב אסי
Shmuel would not enter before Rav Asi, as he considered Rav Asi to be greater than he; and Rav Asi would not enter before Rav, as Rav was his teacher. They said: Which of us should stay behind and let the other two come in before him? They decided: Let Shmuel stay behind, and let Rav and Rav Asi come inside in that order. Afterward, Shmuel himself would enter.
ונתרח רב או רב אסי רב מילתא בעלמא הוא דעבד ליה לשמואל משום ההוא מעשה דלטייה אדבריה רב עליה
The Gemara asks: And why didn’t they decide to let Rav or Rav Asi stay behind? The Gemara explains: It was a mere gesture that Rav performed for Shmuel in initially stating that Shmuel should precede him, as Rav did not really feel that Shmuel was superior to him. Rather, on account of that incident in which he inadvertently cursed Shmuel, Rav took upon himself to treat Shmuel with deference.
אדהכי והכי אתא שונרא קטעיה לידא דינוקא נפק רב ודרש חתול מותר להורגו ואסור לקיימו ואין בו משום גזל ואין בו משום השב אבידה לבעלים
In the meantime, while all this was going on, a cat [shunara] came and severed the hand of the baby. Rav emerged from the house and taught: With regard to a cat, it is permitted to kill it even if it is privately owned; and it is prohibited to maintain it in one’s possession; and it is not subject to the prohibition against theft if one takes it from its owner; and, in the case of a lost cat, it is not subject to the obligation of returning a lost item to its owner.
וכיון דאמרת מותר להורגו מאי ניהו תו אסור לקיימו מהו דתימא מותר להורגו איסורא ליכא קמ"ל
The Gemara asks a question with regard to Rav’s statement: And since you said that it is permitted to kill it, what is the need to state further that it is prohibited to maintain it in one’s possession? If a cat is considered such a dangerous animal that it is permitted to kill it, of course one cannot keep it in his possession. The Gemara answers: Lest you say that although Rav ruled that it is permitted to kill it, he concedes that there is no prohibition in keeping it, Rav therefore teaches us that it is also prohibited to keep it in one’s possession.
אמרי וכיון דאמרת אין בו משום גזל מאי ניהו תו אין בו משום השב אבידה לבעלים אמר רבינא לעורו
The Sages say, further questioning Rav’s statement: And since you said that it is not subject to the prohibition against theft if one takes it from its owner, what is the need to state further that it is not subject to the obligation of returning a lost item to its owner in the case of a lost cat? If one may actively steal a cat, certainly there is no obligation to return it when found. Ravina said in response: Rav was referring to its hide.
מיתיבי רבי שמעון בן אלעזר אומר מגדלין כלבים כופרין וחתולין וקופין וחולדות סנאים מפני שעשויין לנקר את הבית לא קשיא הא באוכמא הא בחיורא
The Gemara raises an objection from a baraita against Rav’s ruling that it is prohibited to keep a cat. Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: One may raise village dogs, cats, monkeys, and genets, because they serve to clean the house of mice and other vermin. The Gemara resolves the apparent contradiction: It is not difficult. This ruling in the baraita is stated with regard to a black cat, which is harmless, whereas that ruling of Rav is stated with regard to a white cat, which is dangerous.
והא מעשה דרב אוכמא הוה התם אוכמא בר חיורא הוה והא מבעיא בעיא ליה רבינא
The Gemara raises a difficulty against this answer: But in the incident of Rav it was a black cat. Since this cat severed the baby’s hand, it was obviously a vicious, dangerous animal. The Gemara answers: There it was a black cat, but it was the offspring of a white one. The offspring of a white cat is dangerous, even if it itself is black. The Gemara further objects: But didn’t Ravina raise this very issue as a dilemma?
דבעי רבינא אוכמא בר חיורא מהו כי קמבעיא ליה לרבינא באוכמא בר חיורא בר אוכמא מעשה דרב באוכמא בר חיורא בר חיורא הוה
As Ravina raised a dilemma: What is the halakha with regard to a black cat that is the offspring of a white one? Is it also dangerous like its parent? The Gemara answers: When Ravina raised the dilemma, it was with regard to a black cat that is the offspring of a white cat that itself is the offspring of a black cat. By contrast, in the incident with Rav it was a black cat that was the offspring of a white one, which was itself the offspring of a white cat. That animal is definitely dangerous.
(חב"ד בי"ח בח"ן סימן) אמר רבי אחא בר פפא משום רבי אבא בר פפא משום רבי אדא בר פפא ואמרי לה אמר ר' אבא בר פפא משום רבי חייא בר פפא משום רבי אחא בר פפא ואמרי לה אמר ר' אבא בר פפא משום רבי אחא בר פפא משום רבי חנינא בר פפא
§ The Gemara provides a mnemonic device for the distinguishing letters in the various names of the sons of Rav Pappa in the ensuing list: Ḥet beit dalet, beit yod ḥet, beit ḥet nun. Rabbi Aḥa bar Pappa says the following three statements in the name of Rabbi Abba bar Pappa, who said them in the name of Rabbi Adda bar Pappa. And some say Rabbi Abba bar Pappa says them in the name of Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Pappa, who said them in the name of Rabbi Aḥa bar Pappa. And some say Rabbi Abba bar Pappa says them in the name of Rabbi Aḥa bar Pappa, who said them in the name of Rabbi Ḥanina bar Pappa.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Idel says there was an eschatological aspect to the event
It is worth mentioning that the redemption of the son already has eschatological significance in the Talmud , Bava Kamma fol. 80a; it is referred to there as yesu'at ha-ben; the remarks of the Tosaphistic authors on this passage allude to an eschatological aspect
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Much as it troubles me to say this Giuseppe has found something important. The rite is well known. I didn't know the alternative name
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
