## Pesachim Daf 78b

###### Pesachim 78b:1
[Pesachim 78b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/78b:1)

הָא אָמְרַתְּ, בְּצִיבּוּר אֲפִילּוּ רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ מוֹדֶה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Didn’t you say** that **with regard to** an offering involving **the public, even Rabbi Yehoshua concedes** that ritual impurity is permitted?


###### Pesachim 78b:2
[Pesachim 78b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/78b:2)

אֶלָּא: רוֹאֶה אֲנִי דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בְּדִיעֲבַד, וְדִבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ לְכַתְּחִלָּה. דִּיעֲבַד — אֲפִילּוּ רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ נָמֵי מוֹדֶה הוּא, דְּקָתָנֵי: מוֹדֶה רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ שֶׁאִם זָרַק — הוּרְצָה!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather,** Rabbi Yosei’s statement should be understood differently. When he said: **I see** as correct **the statement of Rabbi Eliezer,** he was referring to **after the fact.** When he said: I see as correct **the statement of Rabbi Yehoshua,** he meant ***ab initio*.** The Gemara asks: **After the fact Rabbi Yehoshua also concedes, as it teaches: Rabbi Yehoshua concedes that if one sprinkled** the blood, **it was accepted** and the offering is valid.


###### Pesachim 78b:3
[Pesachim 78b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/78b:3)

הָא בְּטוּמְאָה, הָא בְּאָבוּד וְשָׂרוּף. כִּי קָתָנֵי: מוֹדֶה רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ שֶׁאִם זָרַק הוּרְצָה — בְּנִטְמָא, אֲבָל בְּאָבוּד וְשָׂרוּף לָא. כִּי קָאָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי: רוֹאֶה אֲנִי אֶת דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בְּדִיעֲבַד — בְּאָבוּד וְשָׂרוּף.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara responds: **This** case is **with regard to ritual impurity,** and **that** case is **with regard to** an offering that was **lost or burned.** The Gemara explains: **When it teaches** that **Rabbi Yehoshua concedes that if one sprinkled** the blood **it is accepted,** that is **with regard to** a case in which the meat of the offering **became impure; but with regard to** a case where the meat of the offering was **lost or burned,** he does **not** agree, even after the fact. **When Rabbi Yosei said: I see** as correct **the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer after the fact,** that was **with regard to** cases in which the meat **was lost or burned,** with regard to which Rabbi Yehoshua did not concede to Rabbi Eliezer.


###### Pesachim 78b:4
[Pesachim 78b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/78b:4)

**מַתְנִי׳** נִטְמָא בָּשָׂר וְחֵלֶב קַיָּים — אֵינוֹ זוֹרֵק אֶת הַדָּם. נִטְמָא הַחֵלֶב וְהַבָּשָׂר קַיָּים — זוֹרֵק אֶת הַדָּם. וּבַמּוּקְדָּשִׁים אֵינוֹ כֵּן, אֶלָּא אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁנִּטְמָא הַבָּשָׂר וְהַחֵלֶב קַיָּים — זוֹרֵק אֶת הַדָּם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** If **the meat** of the Paschal lamb **became ritually impure, and the fat remains** pure and may be burned on the altar, **one** may **not sprinkle the blood.** On the other hand, if **the fat became impure and the meat remains** pure, **one** may **sprinkle the blood** because the meat remains fit to be eaten. This is the *halakha* with regard to a Paschal lamb, whose primary purpose is to be eaten by those who have registered for it. However, **with regard to** other **offerings it is not so. Rather, although the meat has become impure and the fat remains** pure, **one** may **sprinkle the blood,** because part of the offering still remains valid.


###### Pesachim 78b:5
[Pesachim 78b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/78b:5)

**גְּמָ׳** אָמַר רַב גִּידֵּל אָמַר רַב: אִם זָרַק — הוּרְצָה. וְהָא בָּעֵינַן אֲכִילָה! אֲכִילָה לָא מְעַכְּבָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** **Rav Giddel said** that **Rav said: If one sprinkled** the blood despite the fact that the meat was ritually impure, **it was** nonetheless **accepted;** one is not obligated to observe the second *Pesaḥ*. The Gemara asks: **Don’t we require** that the Paschal lamb be **eaten,** which could not occur in this case? The Gemara answers: Failure to engage in **eating** the offering **does not preclude** it from being accepted.


###### Pesachim 78b:6
[Pesachim 78b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/78b:6)

וְהָא כְּתִיב: ״אִישׁ לְפִי אׇכְלוֹ״?! לְמִצְוָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **Isn’t it written:** “And if the household be too little for a lamb, then he and his neighbor who is close to his house shall take one according to the number of the souls; **according to every man’s eating** you shall make your count for the lamb” (Exodus 12:4)? This indicates that the Torah requires one to eat the Paschal lamb. The Gemara responds: This verse is stated **as a mitzva** only. It should be fulfilled, but it does not preclude acceptance of the offering.


###### Pesachim 78b:7
[Pesachim 78b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/78b:7)

וּלְעַכֵּב לָא? וְהָתַנְיָא: ״בְּמִכְסַת״, מְלַמֵּד שֶׁאֵין הַפֶּסַח נִשְׁחָט אֶלָּא לִמְנוּיָו. יָכוֹל שְׁחָטוֹ שֶׁלֹּא לִמְנוּיָו יְהֵא כְּעוֹבֵר עַל הַמִּצְוָה וְכָשֵׁר — תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״אִישׁ לְפִי אׇכְלוֹ תָּכֹסּוּ״, הַכָּתוּב שָׁנָה עָלָיו לְעַכֵּב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And** was it **not** stated **to preclude** acceptance of the offering if it cannot be eaten? **Wasn’t it taught** in a *baraita*: **“According to the number of** the souls”; this **teaches that the Paschal lamb is slaughtered only for those who have registered for it** and have thereby included themselves in advance in the number of the souls? I **might** have thought that if **one slaughtered it for those who have not registered for it, he is** merely **like one who violates a mitzva,** but the offering is still **valid** after the fact. Therefore, **the verse states: “According to every man’s eating you shall make your count”; the verse repeated** that the Paschal lamb is eaten only by those registered in order **to** underscore that failure to register **precludes** the offering from being valid.


###### Pesachim 78b:8
[Pesachim 78b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/78b:8)

וְאִיתַּקַּשׁ אוֹכְלִין לִמְנוּיִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And those who** are able to **eat** the offering, as opposed to the sick or elderly who are unable to eat it, **are juxtaposed** in the verse **to those who registered.** Therefore, just as a Paschal lamb is disqualified if it is slaughtered for those who did not register for it, it is disqualified if it cannot be eaten. This poses a difficulty for the opinion of Rav.


###### Pesachim 78b:9
[Pesachim 78b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/78b:9)

אֶלָּא רַב דְּאָמַר כְּרַבִּי נָתָן, דְּאָמַר: אֲכִילַת פְּסָחִים לָא מְעַכְּבָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **Rather, Rav said** his statement **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Natan, who said** that failure to engage in **eating the Paschal lamb does not preclude** one from fulfilling one’s obligation to bring the offering, as the eating is a separate mitzva.


###### Pesachim 78b:10
[Pesachim 78b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/78b:10)

הֵי רַבִּי נָתָן? אִילֵּימָא הָא רַבִּי נָתָן דְּתַנְיָא, רַבִּי נָתָן אוֹמֵר: מִנַּיִן שֶׁכׇּל יִשְׂרָאֵל יוֹצְאִין בְּפֶסַח אֶחָד — תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״וְשָׁחֲטוּ אֹתוֹ כֹּל קְהַל עֲדַת יִשְׂרָאֵל בֵּין הָעַרְבָּיִם״, וְכִי כָּל הַקָּהָל שׁוֹחֲטִין? וַהֲלֹא אֵין שׁוֹחֵט אֶלָּא אֶחָד! אֶלָּא מְלַמֵּד שֶׁכׇּל יִשְׂרָאֵל יוֹצְאִין בְּפֶסַח אֶחָד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **Which** statement of **Rabbi Natan** is this referring to? **If we say** it is **this** statement of **Rabbi Natan, as it was taught** in a *baraita* that **Rabbi Natan says: From where** is it derived **that all Jews** may **fulfill** their obligation after the fact **with one Paschal lamb? The verse states: “And the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel shall slaughter it in the afternoon”** (Exodus 12:6). He asked: **And does the entire assembly slaughter** it? Is it a mitzva for each individual to slaughter his own Paschal lamb? **Is it not** true that **only one** person **slaughters** for the entire group? **Rather,** this formulation of the verse **teaches that all Jews** may **fulfill their obligation with one Paschal lamb.** It is considered as though they all slaughtered it and fulfilled their obligation, although they cannot all eat an olive-bulk of the offering.


###### Pesachim 78b:11
[Pesachim 78b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/78b:11)

דִּילְמָא שָׁאנֵי הָתָם, דְּאִי מִמַּשְׁכִי הָנֵי חֲזֵי לְהָנֵי, וְאִי מִמַּשְׁכִי הָנֵי חֲזֵי לְהָנֵי!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara responds that this is not comparable to the case at hand: **Perhaps it is different there, as, if these withdraw** from the offering, **it is fit for those, and if those withdraw it is fit for these.** Although it is impossible for all Jews to partake of the same offering, the offering is fit for each individual, who could eat an olive-bulk of it if enough other people would withdraw.


###### Pesachim 78b:12
[Pesachim 78b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/78b:12)

אֶלָּא, הָא רַבִּי נָתָן דְּתַנְיָא: נִמְנוּ עָלָיו חֲבוּרָה אַחַת, וְחָזְרוּ וְנִמְנוּ עָלָיו חֲבוּרָה אַחֶרֶת, רִאשׁוֹנִים שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהֶן כְּזַיִת, אוֹכְלִין — וּפְטוּרִין מִלַּעֲשׂוֹת פֶּסַח שֵׁנִי, אַחֲרוֹנִים שֶׁאֵין לָהֶם כַּזַּיִת, אֵין אוֹכְלִין — וְחַיָּיבִין לַעֲשׂוֹת פֶּסַח שֵׁנִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather,** it is **this** statement of **Rabbi Natan, as it was taught** in a *baraita*: If **one group registered for** a Paschal lamb **and then another group registered for it,** and there was not enough meat to allow each person to eat an olive-bulk, **the first ones, who have an olive-bulk** of the Paschal lamb for each person, **eat and are exempt from performing** the ritual of the Paschal lamb on **the second *Pesaḥ*; the latter ones, who do not have an olive-bulk** available from the Paschal lamb for each person, **do not eat and are obligated to perform** the ritual of the Paschal lamb on **the second *Pesaḥ*.**


###### Pesachim 78b:13
[Pesachim 78b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/78b:13)

רַבִּי נָתָן אוֹמֵר: אֵלּוּ וְאֵלּוּ פְּטוּרִין מִלַּעֲשׂוֹת פֶּסַח שֵׁנִי, שֶׁכְּבָר נִזְרַק הַדָּם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Natan says:** Both **these and those are exempt from performing** the ritual of the Paschal lamb on **the second *Pesaḥ*, as the blood has already been sprinkled.** Therefore, they have all fulfilled their obligation. This indicates that, according to the opinion of Rabbi Natan, eating is not essential.


###### Pesachim 78b:14
[Pesachim 78b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/78b:14)

אַכַּתִּי: דִּילְמָא שָׁאנֵי הָתָם, דְּאִי מִמַּשְׁכִי הָנֵי חֲזֵי לְהוּ. אִם כֵּן, לִיתְנֵי: הוֹאִיל וּרְאוּיִים לִימָּשֵׁךְ, מַאי ״שֶׁכְּבָר נִזְרַק הַדָּם״? שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ בְּדָם תַּלְיָא מִילְּתָא, אֲבָל אֲכִילָה לָא מְעַכְּבָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara responds that one can **still** ask: **Perhaps it is different there, as, if these** members of the first group **withdraw, it is fit for** the members of the second group. The Gemara rejects the question: **If so, let it teach** that the second group is exempt from the second *Pesaḥ* **since** the members of the first group **are fit to withdraw. What** is the reason for the statement of the *baraita* that **the blood has already been sprinkled? Learn from this that the matter depends on the blood, but** failure to engage in **eating** the Paschal lamb **does not preclude** one from fulfilling his obligation.


###### Pesachim 78b:15
[Pesachim 78b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/78b:15)

מַאי דּוּחְקֵיהּ דְּרַב דְּמוֹקֵים לַהּ מַתְנִיתִין לְכַתְּחִלָּה, וְרַבִּי נָתָן? נוֹקְמַהּ כְּרַבָּנַן, וַאֲפִילּוּ דִּיעֲבַד נָמֵי לָא! רַב מַתְנִיתִין קְשִׁיתֵיהּ: אַמַּאי (תָּנֵי) ״אֵין זוֹרֵק אֶת הַדָּם״? לִיתְנֵי ״פָּסוּל״. אֶלָּא שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ: ״אֵין זוֹרֵק״ — לְכַתְּחִלָּה, אֲבָל דִּיעֲבַד שַׁפִּיר דָּמֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **What compelled Rav to establish the mishna** as teaching that the blood may not be sprinkled on the altar ***ab initio*,** in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Natan? Let us establish** the mishna in accordance with the view of **the Rabbis and** say that **even after the fact, no,** one does not fulfill his obligation. The Gemara answers: **Rav had difficulty with the mishna: Why does it teach** that **one** may **not sprinkle the blood? It should teach that** the offering **is disqualified. Rather, learn from this** use of language that **one** may **not sprinkle** the blood on the altar ***ab initio*, but after the fact it seems well.**


###### Pesachim 78b:16
[Pesachim 78b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/78b:16)

וּלְרַבִּי נָתָן, ״אִישׁ לְפִי אׇכְלוֹ״ לְמָה לִי? דְּבָעֵינַן גַּבְרָא דַּחֲזֵי לַאֲכִילָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And according to** the opinion of **Rabbi Natan, why do I** need the phrase **“according to every man’s eating,”** if it does not teach that the eating is essential? The Gemara answers: It is necessary, even according to the opinion of Rabbi Natan, to teach **that we require a person who is fit for eating.** Although it is possible to fulfill one’s obligation without actually eating the Paschal lamb, if one is physically unable to eat some of it, e.g., one who is sick or elderly, he does not fulfill his obligation.


###### Pesachim 78b:17
[Pesachim 78b:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/78b:17)

מַאן תְּנָא לְהָא דְּתָנוּ רַבָּנַן: שָׁחֲטוּ לְאוֹכְלָיו וְזָרְקוּ דָּמוֹ שֶׁלֹּא לְאוֹכְלָיו — הַפֶּסַח עַצְמוֹ כָּשֵׁר, וְאָדָם יוֹצֵא בּוֹ יְדֵי חוֹבָתוֹ. כְּמַאן? נֵימָא רַבִּי נָתָן הִיא, וְלָא רַבָּנַן?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara raises a discussion based on the views cited above. **Who** is the *tanna* that **taught this** *baraita*? **As the Sages taught:** If **one slaughtered it for** individuals who are **able to eat it and sprinkled its blood for** individuals **who cannot eat it, the Paschal lamb itself is valid, and one fulfills his obligation with it. In accordance with whose** opinion is this *baraita*? **Let us say it is in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Natan,** who holds that eating is not essential, **and not** in accordance with **the** opinion of the **Rabbis?**


###### Pesachim 78b:18
[Pesachim 78b:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/78b:18)

אֲפִילּוּ תֵּימָא רַבָּנַן, אֵין מַחְשְׁבֶת אוֹכְלִין בִּזְרִיקָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this suggestion: The *baraita* can be understood **even** if **you say** it is in accordance with the opinion of **the Rabbis.** Everyone agrees that improper **intent** pertaining to **those who will eat** the offering disqualifies the offering only if it occurs during the slaughter; it does not disqualify the offering if it occurs during the **sprinkling** of the blood.


###### Pesachim 78b:19
[Pesachim 78b:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/78b:19)

מַאן תְּנָא לְהָא דְּתָנוּ רַבָּנַן: הֲרֵי שֶׁהָיָה חוֹלֶה בִּשְׁעַת שְׁחִיטָה וְחָלִים בִּשְׁעַת זְרִיקָה, חָלִים בִּשְׁעַת שְׁחִיטָה וְחוֹלֶה בִּשְׁעַת זְרִיקָה. אֵין שׁוֹחֲטִין וְזוֹרְקִין עָלָיו, עַד שֶׁיְּהֵא חָלִים מִשְּׁעַת שְׁחִיטָה עַד שְׁעַת זְרִיקָה. כְּמַאן? נֵימָא רַבָּנַן הִיא, וְלָא רַבִּי נָתָן? אֲפִילּוּ תֵּימָא רַבִּי נָתָן, גַּבְרָא דַּחֲזֵי לַאֲכִילָה בָּעֵינַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **Who** is the *tanna* that **taught this** *baraita*? **As the Sages taught:** With regard to **one who was sick** and not able to eat meat **at the time of** the **slaughter and** was **healthy at the time of** the **sprinkling** of the blood, or one who was **healthy at the time of** the **slaughter and sick at the time of** the **sprinkling** of the blood, **one** may **not slaughter or sprinkle** blood **for him until he is healthy from the time of slaughter until** the **time of** the **sprinkling** of the blood. **In accordance with whose** opinion is this? **Let us say it is** in accordance with the opinion of **the Rabbis,** who hold that eating the Paschal lamb is essential, **and not** in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Natan.** The Gemara rejects this suggestion: The *baraita* can be understood **even** if **you say** it is in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Natan,** because even Rabbi Natan holds that **we require a person who is fit for eating.**


###### Pesachim 78b:20
[Pesachim 78b:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/78b:20)

מַאן תְּנָא לְהָא דְּתָנוּ רַבָּנַן: שְׁחָטוֹ בְּטׇהֳרָה, וְאַחַר כָּךְ נִטְמְאוּ הַבְּעָלִים — יִזָּרֵק הַדָּם בְּטׇהֳרָה, וְאַל יֵאָכֵל בָּשָׂר בְּטוּמְאָה. כְּמַאן?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara records a further discussion: **Who** is the *tanna* that **taught this** *baraita*? **As the Sages taught:** If **one slaughtered** the Paschal lamb **in ritual purity, and after that the owners became ritually impure, the blood** should **be sprinkled in purity and the meat** should **not be eaten in impurity. In accordance with whose** opinion is this *baraita*?


###### Pesachim 78b:21
[Pesachim 78b:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/78b:21)

אָמַר רַבִּי (אֱלִיעֶזֶר): בְּמַחְלוֹקֶת שְׁנוּיָה, וְרַבִּי נָתָן הִיא. וְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: אֲפִילּוּ תֵּימָא רַבָּנַן הִיא. הָכָא בְּמַאי עָסְקִינַן — בְּצִיבּוּר, דַּאֲפִילּוּ בְּטוּמְאָה נָמֵי עָבְדִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Eliezer said:** This *halakha* is **subject to dispute, and it is** taught in this *baraita* in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Natan,** who holds that eating is not essential, and not in accordance with the opinion of the Rabbis. **And Rabbi Yoḥanan said:** The *baraita* can be understood **even** if **you say** that **it is** in accordance with the opinion of **the Rabbis. With what are we dealing here? With** a situation in which the majority of **the public** is ritually impure, in which case everyone agrees that **they perform** the ritual of the Paschal lamb **even in** a state of **impurity.**


###### Pesachim 78b:22
[Pesachim 78b:22](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/78b:22)

אִי בְּצִיבּוּר, אַמַּאי אֵין הַבָּשָׂר נֶאֱכָל בְּטוּמְאָה? גְּזֵירָה שֶׁמָּא יִטָּמְאוּ הַבְּעָלִים לְאַחַר זְרִיקָה, וְיֹאמְרוּ: אֶשְׁתָּקַד לֹא נִטְמֵאנוּ וְאָכַלְנוּ? הַשְׁתָּא נָמֵי נֵיכוֹל. וְלָא יָדְעִי דְּאֶשְׁתָּקַד כִּי אִיזְדְּרִיק דָּם, בְּעָלִים טְמֵאִים הֲווֹ, הַשְׁתָּא בְּעָלִים טְהוֹרִין הָווּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **If it is in** a case involving **the public, why is the meat not eaten in** a state of **impurity?** When the majority of the public is impure, they may sacrifice and even consume the Paschal lamb. The Gemara answers that this prohibition is due to a rabbinic **decree lest the owners become impure after the sprinkling** of the blood, **and they will say: Last year, didn’t we become impure, and** nevertheless **we ate** the Paschal lamb? **Now too, we will eat. And they will not know that last year, when the blood was sprinkled the owners were** already **impure,** and therefore the offering could be consumed in a state of impurity. **Now, the owners were pure** when the blood was sprinkled and became impure only afterward, and a Paschal lamb sacrificed in a state of purity cannot be eaten in a state of impurity, even if everyone is impure.