Pesachim 169

לא הכי קאמר אחד עצם שיש עליו כזית בשר מבחוץ ואחד עצם שאין עליו כזית בשר מבחוץ ויש עליו כזית בשר מבפנים במקום שבירה

No: it means this: Both a bone which has as much as an olive of flesh on the outside and a bone which has not as much as an olive of flesh on it on the outside, but contains as much as an olive of flesh [marrow] inside, [yet still] at the point of breaking. And it was taught [even so]: 'Neither shall ye break a bone thereo [this refers to] both a bone which contains marrow and a bone which does not contain marrow, while to what do I apply,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'and how do I fulfil?'');">¹</span>

והתניא (שמות יב, מו) ועצם לא תשברו בו אחד עצם שיש בו מוח ואחד עצם שאין בו מוח ומה אני מקיים (שמות יב, ח) ואכלו את הבשר בלילה הזה בבשר שעל גבי העצם

and they shall eat the flesh in that night?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ex. XII, 8.');">²</span> To the meat on the bone.

או אינו אלא בבשר שבתוך העצם ומה אני מקיים ועצם לא תשברו בו בעצם שאין בו מוח אבל בעצם שיש בו מוח שובר ואוכל ואל תתמה שהרי יבא עשה וידחה ל"ת

Yet perhaps it is not so , but [it applies] to the meat [marrow] inside the bone [too], while to what do I apply, 'neither shall ye break a bone thereof'? To a bone which does not contain marrow; but in the case of a bone which contains marrow he breaks [it] and eats [the marrow]; and do not wonder thereat, for the affirmative command comes and overrides the negative command!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra 83b, P. 439. n. 1.');">³</span>

כשהוא אומר (במדבר ט, יב) ועצם לא ישברו בו בפסח שני שאין ת"ל שהרי כבר נאמר (במדבר ט, יב) ככל חקת הפסח יעשו אותו הוי אומר אחד עצם שיש בו מוח ואחד עצם שאין בו מוח

When, [however,] 'they shall not break a bone thereof<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Num. IX, 12.');">⁴</span> is stated in connection with the second Passover, which need not have been taught, seeing that it has already been said, according to all the statute of the Passover they shall keep it,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Num. IX, 12.');">⁵</span>

מיתיבי אבר שיצא מקצתו חותך עד מקום שמגיע לעצם וקולף עד שמגיע לפרק וחותך

deduce from this [that it means] both a bone which, contains marrow and a bone which does not contain marrow. An objection is raised: [With regard to] a limb part of which went outside,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra 84b, p. 444, n. 2.');">⁶</span>

ואי אמרת אבר שאין עליו כזית בשר במקום זה ויש במקום אחר אין בו משום שבירת העצם למה לי דקולף עד שמגיע לפרק וחותך נקלוף ביה פורתא ונתבריה

he cuts [the flesh] as far as th bone, and pares it until he reaches the joint and then cuts it off.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' While the flesh which he cut on (i.e., which had not gone outside) is eaten.');">⁷</span> Now if you say [that] a limb upon which there is not as much as an olive at this point but there is as much as an olive on it elsewhere is not subject t the [prohibition of] breaking a bone, why does he pare it until he reaches the joint and [then] cut it off?

אביי אמר משום פקע רבינא אמר בקולית

Let us scrape a little away and break it? - Abaye said: [This cannot be done] because of a [possible] split.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' When he hits the bone to break it, it may split elsewhere, not just where it was scraped.');">⁸</span> Rabina said: This refers to the thigh bone.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which contains marrow; hence scraping the flesh off is of no avail.');">⁹</span>

תנן התם הפיגול והנותר (והטמא) מטמאין את הידים רב הונא ורב חסדא חד אמר מפני חשדי כהונה וחד אמר מפני עצלי כהונה

We learned elsewhere: Piggul and nothar<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Glos.');">¹⁰</span> defile the hands.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By Rabbinic law; v. infra 120b.');">¹¹</span>

מר מתני אפיגול ומר מתני אנותר מאן דמתני אפיגול משום חשדי כהונה ומאן דמתני אנותר משום עצלי כהונה

R'Huna and R'Hisda, - One maintained: It was on account of the suspects of the priesthood;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who were suspected of maliciously making the sacrifice piggul to hurt its owner, who would have to bring another; therefore the priest who handles it was declared unclean, since defilement was regarded as very serious even by the wicked (Rashi, and Tosaf. quoting Yoma 23a) . Another interpretation: so that he who touched it should not be suspected of intending to eat it, as it would be known that he could not do this in his unclean state.');">¹²</span> while the other maintained: It was on account of the lazy priests.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who were too indolent to consume the flesh within the permitted period and allowed it to become nothar.');">¹³</span>

מר מתני כזית ומר מתני כביצה מאן דמתני כזית כאיסורו ומאן דמתני כביצה כטומאתו

One recited [the reason] in reference to piggul, while the other recited it in reference to noth He who recited it in reference to piggul [gave the reason as being] on account of the suspects of the priesthood. While he who recited it in reference to nothar [stated that it was] on account of the lazy priests.

איבעיא להו יוצא גזרו רבנן טומאה או לא מי אמרינן נותר דגזרו טומאה דאתי לאיעצולי ביה אבל יוצא אפוקי בידים לא מפקי ליה בידים לא גזרו ביה רבנן טומאה או דילמא לא שנא

One recited: As much as an olive;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of these defiled the hands.');">¹⁴</span> while the other recited: As much as an egg.

ת"ש אבר שיצא מקצתו חותך עד שמגיע לעצם וקולף עד שמגיע לפרק וחותך וא"א גזרו ביה רבנן טומאה כי חתיך ליה מאי הוי הא קמטמא ליה

He who recited, as much as an olive [took the same standard] as its prohibition,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That quantity involves punishment if it is eaten.');">¹⁵</span> while he who recites, as much as an olive, [takes the same standard] as its uncleanness.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As much as an egg is the smallest quantity which defiles by Biblical law. Hence when the Rabbis enacted that this defiles the hands, they adopted the same standard.');">¹⁶</span>

טומאת סתרים היא וטומאת סתרים לא מטמיא

The scholars asked: Did the Rabbis enact uncleanness in respect of what goes outside<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Its appointed boundaries.');">¹⁷</span> or not?

ולרבינא דאמר חיבורי אוכלין לאו חיבור הוא וכמאן דמפרתי דמי מאי איכא למימר הא קנגע בהדדי וקא מטמא אלא למאן דמתני כזית דלית ביה כזית ומאן דמתני כביצה דלית ביה כביצה

Do we say, they imposed uncleanness on nothar because they [the priests] might come to be lazy about it; but [concerning] that which goes outside, they will [certainly] not carry it out with [their own] hands, [and so] the Rabbis did not decree uncleanness in connection therewith. Or perhaps there is no difference? - Come and hear: If part of a limb went outside, he cuts [the flesh] as far as the bone and pares it until he reaches t joint and then cuts it off.

ת"ש המוציא בשר פסח מחבורה לחבורה אע"פ שהוא בלא תעשה טהור מאי לאו טהור ואסור דיוצא מחבורה לחבורה כיוצא חוץ למחיצתו דמי ומפסיל ואפי' הכי קתני טהור אלמא לא גזרו רבנן טומאה

Now if you say that the Rabbis imposed uncleanness upon it, what if he does cut? Surely it defiles it?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The inner portion of the flesh is defiled by contact with the part which went outside.');">¹⁸</span>

לא טהור ומותר דיוצא מחבורה לחבורה לאו כיוצא חוץ למחיצתו דמי ולא מפסיל

- It is concealed uncleanness,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This is a technical term: the actual point of contact is not visible in the same way that the contact of two separate pieces of flesh is visible.');">¹⁹</span> and concealed uncleanness does not defile.

והא קא תני סיפא האוכלו הרי זה בל"ת בשלמא למאן דאמר כביצה דאית ביה כזית ולית ביה כביצה אלא למאן דאמר כזית מאי איכא למימר

But according to Rabina who maintained: The connection of foodstuffs is not a real connection, and they are as though separated,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since foodstuffs are intended to be cut up. In his view the law of concealed uncleanness is only applicable where the object is not intended to be cut, e.g., a piece of cloth, v. Hul. 72b.');">²⁰</span> what can be said: surely they<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The two parts.');">²¹</span>

אלא ביוצא בפסח לא מיבעיא לן דלא גזרו רבנן טומאה מאי טעמא בני חבורה זריזין הן ומזהר זהירי ביה אלא כי קמיבעיא לן ביוצא בקדשים מאי תיקו

touch each other and it [the inner portion] is defiled? - Hence according to him who recited, as much as an olive, [we must say here] that it<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The portion which went outside.');">²²</span> did not contain as much as an olive; while according to him who recited, as much as an egg, [we must say] that it did not contain as much as an egg.

ומוציא בשר פסח

Come and hear: If a man carries out flesh of a Passover-offering from one company to another,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. Mishnah infra 86a.');">²³</span> though he [has violated] a negative injunction, it [the flesh] is clean. Now does that not mean that it is clean yet forbidden, because that which goes out from one company to another company is like that which goes outside its boundary<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Within which it much be eaten. Viz., the walls of Jerusalem.');">²⁴</span> and is disqualified [for eating], yet even so it teaches [that] it is clean, which prov that the Rabbis did not decree uncleanness! - No: it is clean and permitted, because that which goes out from company to company is not like that which goes outside its boundary, and it is not disqualified. But surely the second clause teaches: He who eats it is subject to a negative injunction? As for him who says, as much as an egg, it is well: [this may refer to] where it contains as much as an olive<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which involves punishment.');">²⁵</span> but not as much as an egg. But according to him who says as much as an olive, what can be said? - Rather [say thus]: We do not ask in respect of what goes out in the case of a Passover-offering, for the Rabbis [certainly] did not decree uncleanness [there]. What is the reason? The members of a company<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who have registered for one paschal sacrifice.');">²⁶</span> are most scrupulous, and so are very careful with it.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Hence there is no need for a preventive measure.');">²⁷</span> But we do ask in respect of what goes out in the case of sacrifices [in general]: what [is the law]? The question stands over. Now he who carries out flesh of the Passover-offering