Reference for Pesachim 240:15
הפיגול והנותר מטמא את הידים וכו: רב הונא ורב חסדא חד אמר משום חשדי כהונה וחד אמר משום עצלי כהונה חד אמר כזית וחד אמר כביצה
And R'Akiba?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Does he not admit this?');"><sup>13</sup></span> - He can answer you: Had not the Divine Law written 'that [night]'. I would have said, what does 'morning' mean? the second morning. Then what of R'Eleazar B''Azariah? - He can answer you: Wherever 'morning' is written, It means the first morning.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. supra ');"><sup>14</sup></span> Raba said: If a man eats unleavened bread after midnight nowadays, according to R'Eleazar B''Azariah he does not discharge his duty.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since he holds that the Passover-offering may not be eaten after midnight, while as stated supra ');"><sup>15</sup></span> That is obvious, [for] since it is assimilated to the Passover-offering, it like the Passover-offering? - You might say, surely the Writ<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the verse 'at even ye shall eat unleavened bread'.');"><sup>16</sup></span> excluded it from the analogy;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In that unleavened bread is declared obligatory nowadays despite the absence of the paschal lamb, v. supra 120a.');"><sup>17</sup></span> hence he informs us that when the Writ restores it, it restores it to its original state.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra 120a. I.e., once the Writ teaches that unleavened bread nowadays is obligatory, notwithstanding the analogy, it becomes assimilated to the paschal-offering in respect of the hours during which the obligation can he discharged.');"><sup>18</sup></span> PIGGUL AND NOTHAR DEFILE ONE'S HANDS. R'Huna and R'Hisda - one maintains: It is on account of suspected priests; while the other said: It is on account of the lazy priests. One maintained: As much as an olive [defiles]; while the other said: [At least] as much as an egg.