פסחים דף ע

לאו חובה היא. דאי סלקא דעתך חובה היא — תיתי בשבת, ותיתי במרובה, ותיתי בטומאה.

is not an obligation, meaning there is no Torah obligation to bring this offering. For if it should enter your mind to say that it is an obligation, it should come even on Shabbat, and it should come even when each member of the group will receive a large portion of the Paschal lamb, and it should come even in a state of ritual impurity.

ובמועט מיהו מאי טעמא אתיא? כדתניא: חגיגה הבאה עם הפסח נאכלת תחילה, כדי שיהא פסח נאכל על השבע.

The Gemara asks: If there is no obligation to bring this offering, what is the reason that it nevertheless comes when each person’s portion of the Paschal lamb is small? The Gemara explains that the reason is as it was taught in a baraita: The Festival peace-offering that comes with the Paschal lamb is eaten first; the reason for this is so that the Paschal lamb will be eaten when one is already satiated. The Paschal lamb should not be eaten in a needy manner, but rather in joy and when one is already filled to satisfaction.

ונאכלת לשני ימים וכו׳. מתניתין דלא כבן תימא. דתניא, בן תימא אומר: חגיגה הבאה עם הפסח הרי היא כפסח, ואינה נאכלת אלא ליום ולילה.

The mishna taught that the Festival peace-offering of the fourteenth is eaten for two days and the intervening night. The Gemara notes that the mishna is not in accordance with the opinion of ben Teima, for it was taught in a baraita that ben Teima says: The Festival peace-offering that comes with the Paschal lamb on the fourteenth of Nisan is like the Paschal lamb and is eaten for only a day and a night, whereas the Festival peace-offering of the fifteenth, i.e., the Festival peace-offering brought on the first day of Passover, just as it is brought on the first day of each of the other Festivals, is treated like a regular peace-offering and is eaten for two days and one, i.e., the intervening, night.

וחגיגת חמשה עשר — נאכלת לשני ימים ולילה אחד.

וחגיגת ארבעה עשר יוצא בה משום שמחה, ואין יוצא בה משום חגיגה.

And if one consecrated an animal to be used as a Festival peace-offering of the fourteenth, but it was not slaughtered on that day, on the next day he can fulfill with it his obligation to bring a peace-offering of rejoicing, as it is stated: “And you shall rejoice on your Festival,” but he cannot fulfill with it his obligation to bring a Festival peace-offering of the fifteenth.

מאי טעמא דבן תימא? כדמתני רב לחייא בריה: ״ולא ילין לבקר זבח חג הפסח״, ״זבח חג״ — זה חגיגה, ״הפסח״ — כמשמעו, ואמר רחמנא: ״לא ילין״.

The Gemara asks: What is the reason and scriptural basis for ben Teima’s opinion? The Gemara explains: As Rav taught his son Ḥiyya based on the following verse: “Neither shall the offering of the feast of the Passover be left to the morning” (Exodus 34:25). “The offering of the feast,” this is referring to the Festival peace-offering; “the Passover,” as per its plain meaning, i.e., this is referring to the Paschal lamb itself. And with regard to both sacrifices, the Merciful One states in the Torah: “It shall not be left to the morning.” This proves that the Festival peace-offering may be eaten for only a day and a night.

איבעיא להו: לבן תימא נאכלת צלי או אין נאכלת צלי? כי אקשיה רחמנא לפסח — ללינה, אבל לצלי — לא, או דילמא לא שנא?

A dilemma was raised before the Sages: According to the opinion of ben Teima, is the Festival peace-offering that is brought with the Paschal lamb eaten roasted like the Paschal lamb itself or is it not eaten roasted? The possible considerations are as follows: When the Merciful One compares the Festival peace-offering to the Paschal lamb in the Torah, was that only with regard to leaving it over until the morning, but with regard to the mitzva of roasting, no such comparison is made? Or perhaps there is no difference; the comparison was complete, and the Festival peace-offering is roasted just like the Paschal lamb.

תא שמע: הלילה הזה כולו צלי. ואמר רב חסדא: זו דברי בן תימא. שמע מינה.

The Gemara suggests: Come and hear a solution from what was taught in a mishna: In the time of the Temple, one of the questions that the children would ask on the night of Passover was: How is this night different from all other nights? For on all other nights we eat meat that is roasted, stewed, or boiled, whereas on this night it is all roasted. And Rav Ḥisda said: This is the statement of ben Teima, indicating that even the Festival peace-offering of the fourteenth must be roasted. The Gemara concludes: Learn from this that the Festival peace-offering must be roasted just like the Paschal lamb.

איבעיא להו לבן תימא: באה מן הבקר או אינה באה מן הבקר, באה מן הנקבות או אינה באה מן הנקבות, באה בת שתי שנים או אינה באה

Another dilemma was raised before the Sages: According to the opinion of ben Teima, does the Festival peace-offering of the fourteenth come from the herd or does it not come from the herd, like the Paschal offering, which must be brought from the flock? Does it come even from females or does it not come from females, just like the Paschal offering comes only from males? Does it come even from a two-year-old animal or does it not come from a two-year-old animal, but rather only from a one-year-old animal, like the Paschal offering itself?

בת שתי שנים?

כי אקשיה רחמנא לפסח — למידי דאכילה, אבל לכל מילי — לא, או דילמא לא שנא.

The Gemara explains that this dilemma is based on a fundamental question similar to the one raised earlier: When the Merciful One compares the Festival peace-offering to the Paschal lamb in the Torah, was that only with regard to matters pertaining to eating and the time during which the Paschal lamb must be eaten, but for everything else there is no comparison? Or perhaps there is no difference and the Torah compared these two offerings in every way.

תא שמע: חגיגה הבאה עם הפסח הרי היא כפסח, באה מן הצאן ואינה באה מן הבקר, באה מן הזכרים ואינה באה מן הנקבות,

Come and hear an answer to these questions from what was taught in a baraita: The Festival peace-offering that comes with the Paschal offering on the fourteenth of Nisan is like the Paschal offering in every respect. It comes from the flock and does not come from the herd, it comes from males and does not come from females, it comes from an animal that is a year old and does not come from an animal that is two years old, and it is eaten for only a day and a night, and it is eaten only roasted, and it is eaten only by those who registered for it in advance.

באה בת שנתה ואינה באה בת שתי שנים, ואינה נאכלת אלא ליום ולילה, ואינה נאכלת אלא צלי, ואינה נאכלת אלא למנויו.

מאן שמעת ליה דאית ליה האי סברא — בן תימא, שמע מינה כולהו מילתא בעינן, שמע מינה.

The Gemara explains how this baraita answers the questions raised above: Who have you heard adopts this reasoning, comparing the Paschal offering and the Festival peace-offering of the fourteenth? Surely it is ben Teima. Learn from this that we require everything, that the Festival peace-offering of the fourteenth must parallel the Paschal offering in all its details. The Gemara concludes: Indeed, learn from this that they are comparable in every way.

איבעיא להו לבן תימא: יש בה משום שבירת עצם, או אין בה משום שבירת העצם? אף על גב דכי אקשיה רחמנא לפסח, אמר קרא: ״בו״.

Yet another dilemma was raised before the Sages: According to the opinion of ben Teima, is the Festival peace-offering of the fourteenth subject to the prohibition against breaking a bone, as is the Paschal lamb, with regard to which the Torah explicitly states: “And you shall not break a bone in it” (Exodus 12:46), or is it not subject to the prohibition against breaking a bone? The possible considerations are as follows: Do we say that even though the Merciful One compares the Festival peace-offering to the Paschal lamb, the verse that teaches the prohibition against breaking a bone says “in it,” and these words serve as a qualifying statement, indicating that the prohibition applies only in it, the Paschal lamb, and not in the Festival peace-offering that comes with it? Or perhaps this term, “in it,” teaches that the prohibition applies only to a fit Paschal lamb but not to a disqualified one.

״בו״ — ולא בחגיגה. או דילמא, האי ״בו״ — בכשר ולא בפסול הוא דאתא.

תא שמע: סכין שנמצאת בארבעה עשר — שוחט בה מיד. בשלשה עשר — שונה ומטביל. קופיץ בין בזה ובין בזה — שונה ומטביל.

The Gemara proposes: Come and hear a solution based on the following mishna: If a slaughtering knife was found on the fourteenth day of Nisan in Jerusalem, one may slaughter with it immediately without concern that perhaps it is ritually impure, for presumably any knife that is valid for slaughtering had already been immersed on the previous day so that it could be used for slaughtering the Paschal lamb. But if it was found on the thirteenth day of Nisan, he must immerse it again due to the possibility that it had not yet been immersed and purified.As for a cleaver [kofitz], a large knife that is used primarily for chopping bones, whether it was found on this day, the fourteenth, or on the other day, the thirteenth, he must immerse it again.

מני? אילימא רבנן, מאי שנא סכין דמטביל — דחזיא לפסח, קופיץ נמי — הא חזי לחגיגה.

The Gemara clarifies: Whose opinion is taught in this mishna? If you say it is the opinion of the Rabbis, who permit breaking the bones of the Festival peace-offering of the fourteenth, what is different about a slaughtering knife found on the fourteenth that we say its owner presumably immersed it on the previous day? Is it because it is fit for slaughtering the Paschal lamb? If so, a cleaver found on the fourteenth should also not require immersion before being used, for presumably its owner already immersed it, as it is fit for chopping the bones of the Festival peace-offering.

אלא לאו, דבן תימא היא, ושמע מינה יש בה משום שבירת העצם.

Rather, is it not the opinion of ben Teima, and learn from this that even the Festival peace-offering of the fourteenth is subject to the prohibition against breaking a bone, and therefore a cleaver must be immersed again even if it was found on the fourteenth. Since no bones may be broken on the fourteenth of Nisan, neither those of the Paschal lamb nor those of the Festival peace-offering, it is possible that the knife was not immersed in preparation for the Festival.

לא, לעולם רבנן, וכגון שבא בשבת.

The Gemara rejects this proof: No, actually one can explain that the mishna reflects the opinion of the Rabbis, and it is referring to a case where the time to slaughter the Paschal lamb comes on Shabbat. In this circumstance, all agree that the Festival peace-offering of the fourteenth is not sacrificed. Since there is no need for a cleaver, there is no reason to assume that the knife had been immersed in preparation for the Festival.

והא מדקתני סיפא: חל ארבעה עשר להיות בשבת — שוחט בה מיד, ובחמשה עשר — שוחט בה מיד. נמצאת קופיץ קשורה לסכין — הרי היא כסכין.

The Gemara asks: But from the fact that the latter clause of that same mishna teaches that if the fourteenth of Nisan occurred on Shabbat he may slaughter with the knife immediately, without immersing it, and similarly, if he found it on the fifteenth, i.e., on the first day of the Festival, he may slaughter with it immediately, as it was certainly immersed the day before, and if a cleaver was found tied to a slaughtering knife, then even if it was found on the fourteenth on a weekday, it is like the slaughtering knife, as they were certainly immersed together, it follows by inference that in the first clause of the mishna we are not dealing with a case where the fourteenth of Nisan occurred on Shabbat.

מכלל דרישא לאו בשבת עסקינן.

ואלא שבא

Rather, this understanding must be rejected and instead we should say that the mishna is talking about a case where the Paschal lamb came

במרובה. מנא ידעי?

with few people registered for it, so that each person receives a large portion of the offering. Therefore, there is no need for a Festival peace-offering or for a cleaver. The Gemara questions this answer: How do the owners know already on the thirteenth that only a small number of people will be registered for the Paschal lamb? Perhaps more people will register for the offering before it is slaughtered, in which case we should assume that the cleaver was immersed, as it might be necessary to bring a Festival peace-offering together with the Paschal lamb.

ואלא שבא בטומאה. סוף סוף, מנא ידעי?

Rather, we must say that we are talking about a Paschal lamb that came in a state of ritual impurity, in which case a Festival peace-offering is not brought, and consequently there is no need for a cleaver. The Gemara asks: Ultimately, how do the owners know already on the thirteenth when they are immersing their knives that the Paschal lamb will be brought in ritual impurity, so that they need not immerse their chopping knives? Perhaps it will turn out that most of the community is ritually pure.

דמית נשיא. דמית נשיא אימת? אילימא דמית בשלשה עשר — סכין למה לי דמטבליה? ואלא דמית בארבעה עשר. מאי שנא סכין דמטביל, ומאי שנא קופיץ דלא מטביל לה?

The Gemara answers that we are talking about a situation where the Nasi died, in which case all of Israel must defile themselves in order to participate in his burial. The Gemara asks: When did the Nasi die? If you say that he died on the thirteenth and everyone became ritually impure as a result, why do I need to immerse the slaughtering knife to begin with? It will become ritually impure again in any event. Rather, he died on the fourteenth and they did not know in advance that the Paschal lamb would be brought in a state of impurity. But if so, what is different about the slaughtering knife that he immerses it and what is different about the cleaver that he does not immerse it?

לא צריכא, דנשיא גוסס בשלשה עשר. סכין, דחד ספיקא — מטביל לה. קופיץ, דתרי ספיקי — לא מטביל לה.

The Gemara answers: It was necessary to teach this halakha only in a case where the Nasi was in a dying state on the thirteenth. With regard to a slaughtering knife, about which there is only one doubt, that perhaps the Nasi will die before the Festival and the Paschal lamb will be brought in a state of ritual impurity, he immerses it, for if the Nasi does not die he will need a ritually pure knife to slaughter his Paschal lamb. With regard to a cleaver, about which there are two doubts, that perhaps the Nasi will die and a ritually pure knife will not be needed, and that even if he does not die, perhaps the meat of the Paschal lamb will be plentiful and the Festival peace-offering will not be brought, he does not immerse it.

תניא, יהודה בן דורתאי פירש הוא ודורתאי בנו, והלך וישב לו בדרום. אמר: אם יבוא אליהו ויאמר להם לישראל: מפני מה לא חגגתם חגיגה בשבת,

It was taught in a baraita: Yehuda ben Dortai separated himself from the other Rabbis, he and Dortai his son, and went and settled in the south so that he would not be obligated to bring the Paschal lamb, seeing that he was at a great distance from Jerusalem. He did this because he disagreed with the Rabbis with regard to the Festival peace-offering of the fourteenth, which in their view does not override Shabbat. He said: If Elijah will come and say to the Jewish people: For what reason did you not sacrifice the Festival peace-offering on Shabbat, what will they say to him? I am astounded at the two most eminent scholars of the generation, Shemaya and Avtalyon, who are great sages and great expositors of the Torah, and yet they did not tell the Jewish people that even the Festival peace-offering of the fourteenth overrides Shabbat.

מה הן אומרים לו? תמהני על שני גדולי הדור שמעיה ואבטליון שהן חכמים גדולים ודרשנין גדולים, ולא אמרו להן לישראל חגיגה דוחה את השבת.

אמר רב: מאי טעמא דבן דורתאי, דכתיב: ״וזבחת פסח לה׳ אלהיך צאן ובקר״, והלא אין פסח אלא מן הכבשים ומן העזים! אלא: ״צאן״ — זה פסח,

Rav said: What is ben Dortai’s reason? As it is written: “And you shall slaughter the Paschal offering to the Lord your God from the flock and from the herd, in the place which the Lord shall choose to rest His name there” (Deuteronomy 16:2). A question must be asked: Does the Paschal offering come from the herd, i.e., from cattle? Doesn’t the Paschal offering come from only the sheep and from the goats, as commanded in the book of Exodus (12:5)? Rather, the verse should be understood as follows. “Flock”; this is referring to the Paschal offering. “Herd”; this is referring to the Festival peace-offering that is brought along with it. And the Merciful One says: “And you shall slaughter the Paschal offering,” thus teaching that the two offerings are sacrificed together. From here ben Dortai derived that the Festival peace-offering of the fourteenth is like the Paschal offering in every way, and so it too overrides Shabbat.

״בקר״ — זו חגיגה, ואמר רחמנא ״וזבחת פסח״!

אמר רב אשי: ואנן טעמא דפרושים ניקו ונפרוש? אלא קרא לכדרב נחמן הוא דאתא, דאמר רב נחמן אמר רבה בר אבוה: מניין למותר הפסח שקרב שלמים —

Rav Ashi said: Need we arise and explain the reason of those who separated themselves from the other Rabbis? Ben Dortai and his son broke away from all the other sages of the Jewish people, and we need not occupy ourselves with the opinions of such people. Rather, the verse comes to explain the opinion of Rav Naḥman, for Rav Naḥman said that Rabba bar Avuh said: From where is it derived that a leftover Paschal offering is sacrificed as a peace-offering? A leftover Paschal offering is an animal that had been consecrated as a Paschal offering but was subsequently lost and later found after a different animal had already been sacrificed in its place. Alternatively, if one set aside and consecrated money for the purchase of a Paschal lamb and then the price of livestock dropped so that there was money left over after the purchase was made, the extra money has the status of a leftover Paschal lamb.

שנאמר: ״וזבחת פסח לה׳ אלהיך צאן ובקר״. וכי פסח מן הבקר בא? והלא אין פסח בא אלא מן הכבשים ומן העזים! אלא מותר הפסח יהא לדבר הבא מן

As it is stated: “And you shall slaughter the Paschal offering to the Lord your God from the flock and from the herd.” Does the Paschal offering come from the herd? Doesn’t it come from only the sheep and from the goats? Rather, the verse comes to teach that a leftover Paschal offering shall be brought as something that comes from the flock and from the herd, that is, as a peace-offering, which may be brought from all types of flock and cattle, including both males and females.

הצאן ומן הבקר.

ורבנן, מאי טעמא לא דחי שבת? הא ודאי קרבן ציבור הוא!

The Gemara asks about the crux of the matter: And according to the opinion of the Rabbis, what is the reason that the Festival peace-offering does not override Shabbat? It is certainly a communal offering, and all communal offerings override Shabbat.

אמר רבי אילעא משום רבי יהודה בן ספרא, אמר קרא: ״וחגתם אתו חג לה׳ שבעת ימים בשנה״. שבעה? שמונה הוו! אלא מכאן לחגיגה שאינה דוחה את השבת.

Rabbi Ile’a said in the name of Rabbi Yehuda ben Safra: The verse said with regard to the festival of Sukkot: “And you shall celebrate it as a Festival for the Lord, seven days in the year; it shall be a statute forever in your generations; you shall celebrate it in the seventh month” (Leviticus 23:41). Now is the festival of Sukkot seven days? They are eight days, as the Eighth Day of Assembly is always celebrated at the conclusion of Sukkot. Rather, from here we derive that the Festival peace-offering [ḥagiga], about which the verse states: “And you shall celebrate [veḥagotem] it,” does not override Shabbat. Since every eight-day period contains a Shabbat, the Torah said that the Festival [ḥag] is celebrated, i.e., the Festival peace-offering [ḥagiga] can be brought the entire seven days of the Festival.

כי אתא רבין אמר: אמרתי לפני רבותי: פעמים שאי אתה מוצא אלא ששה, כגון שחל יום טוב הראשון של חג בשבת! אמר אביי:

When Ravin came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he said: I said before my teachers, pointing out the following difficulty with regard to this source: There are times when you find only six days on which the Festival peace-offering can be brought, for example, when the first day of the Festival occurs on Shabbat, in which case the Eighth Day of Assembly also falls on Shabbat, and so there are only six days on which the Festival peace-offering may be brought. Abaye said: Would the bereaved Avin, another name for Ravin, say such a thing and be so careless as to ask an unfounded question? There is a big difference: Eight you do not find at all; the eight days of the Festival cannot possibly pass without a Shabbat. But seven days on which the Festival peace-offering can be brought are in fact found in most years.

אבין תכלא לימא כי הא מילתא? שמנה לא משכחת לה כלל, שבעה איתא ברוב שנים.

אמר עולא אמר רבי אלעזר: שלמים ששחטן מערב יום טוב, אינו יוצא בהן לא משום שמחה ולא משום חגיגה. משום שמחה, דכתיב: ״וזבחת ... ושמחת״ — בעינן זביחה

Ulla said that Rabbi Elazar said: With regard to peace-offerings that one slaughtered on the eve of the Festival, one fulfills with them neither the mitzva to bring peace-offerings of rejoicing nor the mitzva to bring a Festival peace-offering. The mitzva of bringing peace-offerings of rejoicing is not fulfilled, as it is written: “And you shall slaughter peace-offerings and eat there, and you shall rejoice before the Lord your God” (Deuteronomy 27:7). Based on this verse, we require that the slaughter be