Pesachim 193

יכול אף לפני הפסח כן תלמוד לומר הוא הוא קרב ואין תמורת הפסח קריבה

You might think that it is also thus before Passover,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That the substitute of a Passover which is found before Passover is offered as a peace-offering.');">¹</span> therefore it is stated, 'it':<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' He seems to translate, If it (hu) is a lamb (which) he brings etc. , and treats the 'it' as a limitation.');">²</span> 'it' is offered [as a peace-offering], but the substitute of a Passover-offering is not offered [as such] -<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' this does not mean that where the Passover itself is offered as a peace-offering its substitute is not, but that there is a substitute of the Passover which is not offered as a peace-offering.');">³</span>

היכי דמי אילימא שנמצא קודם שחיטה והמיר בו קודם שחיטה פשיטא למה לי קרא אלא לאו שנמצא קודם שחיטה והמיר בו אחר שחיטה תיובתא דרבא תיובתא

How is it meant? If we say that it was found before slaughtering and he substituted [another] for it before slaughtering, then it is obvious!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' that it cannot be offered itself', having been rejected as explained in n. 6 on the MISHNAH:');">⁴</span> Why do I require a verse?

אמר שמואל כל שבחטאת מתה בפסח קרב שלמים וכל שבחטאת רועה בפסח נמי רועה ורבי יוחנן אמר אין הפסח קרב שלמים אלא שנמצא אחר שחיטה אבל קודם שחיטה לא

Hence it must surely apply to where it was found before the slaughtering, 'while he substituted [another] for it after the slaughtering. Thus the refutation of Raba is indeed a refutation.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Here we cannot answer that the verse is a mere support, as above, for in that case what is the purpose of the verse?');">⁵</span> Samuel said: Whatever must be left to perish in the case of a sin-offering, is brought as a peace-offering i the case of a Passover,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' There are five cases of the former: (i) the offspring of a sin-offering; (ii) the substitute of a sin-offering; (iii) a sin-offering whose owner died;');">⁶</span>

מתקיף לה רב יוסף וכללא הוא והרי חטאת שעברה שנתה דלרעיה אזלא דא"ר שמעון בן לקיש חטאת שעברה שנתה רואין אותה כאילו היא עומדת בבית הקברות ורועה

and whatever must be left to graze in the case of a sin-offering,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' until it receives a blemish, when it can be redeemed.-It is discussed anon which these are.');">⁷</span> must also be left to graze in the case of a Passover. While R'Johanan said: No Passover is brought as a peace-offering save that which is found after the slaughtering, but not [if it is found] before the slaughtering.

ואילו בפסח כי האי גוונא קרב שלמים דתניא כשב לרבות את הפסח לאליה כשהוא אומר אם כשב לרבות את הפסח שעברה שנתו ושלמים הבאין מחמת פסח לכל מצות שלמים שטעונים סמיכה ונסכים ותנופת חזה ושוק כשהוא אומר אם עז הפסיק הענין לימד על העז שאין טעון אליה

To this R'Joseph demurred: Now is this a general rule? Surely there is the sin-offering more than a year old, which goes forth to pasture,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Until it receives a blemish.');">⁸</span> for R'Simeon B'Lakish said: A sin-offering more than a year old, we regard as though it stood in a cemetery,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Thus inaccessible to the priest for sacrifice-i.e., it cannot be sacrificed.');">⁹</span>

א"ל כי קאמר שמואל באבודין בדחויין לא אמר

and it must be left to graze; whereas a Passover in such a case is brought as a peace-offering, for it was taught: '[If he bring] a lamb [etc.]': this is to include the Passover-offering, in respect of its fa When it is stated, 'If [he bring] a lamb,' this is to include [an animal] more than a year old [dedicated for] a Passover and a peace-offering which comes In virtue of a Passover-offering in respect of all the regulations of a peace-offering,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This is the point of the objection.');">¹⁰</span> [viz. ,] that they require laying [of the hands], libations, and the waving of the breast and shoulder. Again, when it [Scripture] states, 'and if [his offering be] a goat', it breaks across the subject and teaches of a goat that it does not require [the burning of its] fat tail [on the altar]!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra ');">¹¹</span>

ואבוד מי משכחת לה והרי אבודה בשעת הפרשה לרבנן דלרעיה אזלא דתנן הפריש חטאתו ואבדה והפריש אחרת תחתיה ונמצאת הראשונה והרי שתיהן עומדות אחת מהן תקרב ושניה תמות דברי רבי וחכמים אומרים אין חטאת מתה אלא שנמצאת לאחר שנתכפרו בעלים הא קודם שנתכפרו בעלים רועה

- Said he to him, Samuel spoke only of lost [sacrifices],<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e,, iv in p. 521, n. 7.');">¹²</span> but he did not say it of rejected [animals]. Yet is [this principle] possible [in the case of] a lost [sacrifice]?

ואילו בפסח היכא דאבד ונמצא אחר חצות קודם שחיטה קרב שלמים שמואל כר' סבירא ליה דאמר אבודה למיתה אזלא

Surely an [animal which was] lost at the time of separating [another],<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If a sin-offering was lost and another consecrated, and then the first was found again before the second was sacrificed, so that the first was a lost animal only when the second was set apart, but not when it was sacrificed.');">¹³</span> in the view of the Rabbis goes to pasture [until it receives a blemish], for we learned: If he set apart [an animal as] his sinoffering and it was lost, and he [then] set apart another in its stead, and [then] t first was found again, and behold! both stand [before us], [any] one of them may be sacrificed, while the other must die: this is Rabbi's ruling. But the Sages maintain: No sin-offering must die except one found after its owner has been atoned for.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By another offering.');">¹⁴</span>

והא כל אבודה לרבי מתה ואילו בפסח היכא דאבד קודם חצות ונמצא קודם חצות רועה קודם חצות לאו אבוד הוא כדרבא דאמר רבא אבידת לילה לאו שמה אבידה

Hence [if found again] before its owner was atoned for, it must graze. Whereas in the case of a Passover-offering, if it was lost and found again after midday [but] before the slaughtering [of the second], it is brought as a peace-offering? - Samuel agrees with Rabbi, who maintained: A lost animal goes forth to perish. But every lost [sin-offering], according to Rabbi, is left to di whereas in the case of a Passover-offering, if it was lost before midday and found again before midday it must be left to graze? - [If found] before midday it is not [regarded as lost],<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Even if another had been separated in its place.');">¹⁵</span>

אלא רועה לרבי היכי משכחת לה

in accordance with Raba. For Raba said: A loss at night is not designated a loss.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If a sin-offering was lost at night, and another was separated in its stead, and the first was found by the morning, even on Rabbi's view It is not regarded as having been lost, since it could not have been sacrificed at night in any case, and therefore it goes forth to pasture. By the same reasoning, if the lost Passover-offering is found before midday, it is not regarded as having been lost, since it could not have been sacrificed before midday.');">¹⁶</span> Then according to Rabbi, how is it possible that [a sin. offering] should be left to graze?