(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem

Previous daf

Pesachim 98


1) From the fact that the female lamb (in our Mishnah) and the lamb in its second year, cannot be brought directly as a Shelamim (even though a female animal is eligible as a Shelamim) we learn - 1. that animals are subject to Dichuy (rejection); 2. that even if it was rejected initially (not like others, who accept initial Dichuy, and only rejects something that was initially Kosher and became rejected afterwards); 3. that Dichuy applies even to something whose Kedushah is not intrinsic to begin with (since a female lamb or a one year old male lamb are not fit to be brought as a Pesach), only for its value (Kedushas Damim).


(a) If the owner of the Pesach died, his son may bring it as a Shelamim only on the *sixteenth* of Nisan and not on the fifteenth - because one may not bring any voluntary offerings on Yom-Tov.

(b) Assuming that his father died on the fourteenth, the problem with explaining that he died before mid-day - would be that his son would then be an Onan. So, having already learned that one cannot bring a Pesach for Onenim only (because they may, in their grief, become Tamei Mes, rendering the Pesach ownerless), how can the Tana say that he brings it as a Pesach? (Alternatively, since he was an Onan before he became obligated to bring the Pesach, the Aninus prevents the obligation to bring a Pesach from taking effect in the first place?)

(c) If he died *after* mid-day, then, since the obligation to bring the Pesach came before he became an Onan, he will be careful not to render the Pesach Tamei, and the decree of not bringing a Pesach exclusively for an Onan, will not apply.

(d) On the other hand, by establishing the Beraisa *after* mid-day, we will be left with the Kashya - why does the Tana say that if his son is not a joint owner, he brings it as a Shelamim? Did we not just learn that mid-day fixes the status of the Pesach? In that case, should the owner die after that, the lamb ought to first be sent to graze until it becomes blemished?

3) Abaye learns the Beraisa like this: 'ha'Mafrish es Pischo u'Mes *Achar Chatzos* - Im Be'no Memuneh Imo, Yevi'enu Leshum Pesach. Ein Be'no Memuneh Imou'Mes* Lifnei Chatzos* - Yevi'enu Leshum Shelamim'.

4) The following Amora'im all establish the Beraisa *after* mid-day:

1. ... According to Rav Sheravyah - if the father was a Goses at mid-day - then mid-day does not fix the Pesach, since the majority of Gosesim tend to die. Consequently, if the father then dies, it can be brought directly as a Shelamim, without having to first send it to graze.
2. ... Rav Ashi also establishes the Beraisa when the father died *after* mid-day. But according to him, the author of the Beraisa is Rebbi Shimon, who says that live animals cannot be rejected. Consequently, it is not sent to graze, but may be offered immediately as a Shelamim.
3. ... Ravina answers the Kashya by establishing the Beraisa when the father both designated the lamb and died, after mid-day - only this Tana holds that the second of mid-day only, fixes the animal. Consequently, since at mid- day, it was not yet designated, it could not be rejected, and could therefore be brought as a Shelamim.
(a) If a lamb of a Pesach, a lamb of an Olah and a lamb of an Asham got mixed up - all three are sent to graze until they become blemished. One takes the proceeds, and buys with the equivalent of the most expensive of the three, one Pesach, one Olah, and one Asham.

(b) 've'Yafsid ha'Mosar mi'Beiso' means that the difference (between the most expensive and the other two) must come out of his own pocket.

(c) Rebbi Shimon says that if a Pesach that got mixed up with Bechoros - should all three groups comprise only Kohanim, then they bring all three animals, the Pesach (whichever one it is) as a Pesach and the Bechoros (whichever ones they are) as Bechoros, and then eat them in Yerushalayim, applying all the stringencies of both a Pesach and a Bechor.




(a) According to Rebbi Shimon, if an Asham that got mixed up with a Shelamim, both must be brought as if they were Ashamos - i.e. Shechted on the north side of the Azarah, and eaten by male Kohanim exclusively in the Azarah, for only one day and a night.

(b) The Rabbanan disagree - because that would mean curtailing the eating- time of the Shelamim (from *two* days down to *one*), which, in turn, will possibly result in causing the Bechoros to be burnt prematurely. (c) They therefore propose that all three animals be sent into the field to graze until they receive a blemish, and are then sold to purchase with the proceeds two Ashamos and a Shelamim.

(d) According to the Rabbanan, if a Pesach got mixed up with a Bechor, they are both sent to graze until they receive a blemish. Then they transfer the Kedushah of the Pesach (whichever one it is) on to a nice juicy lamb, and eat the two blemished ones as if they were blemished Bechoros (which may not be weighed or sold in a butchery, nor be weighed on scales).

(a) If the member of the group found and Shechted the lost lamb, and the other members of the group gave up waiting and Shechted a second one, then (should they *know* which lamb was Shechted first) ...
1. ... if the *Shali'ach's* lamb was the one to be Shechted first - they all eat from *his*.
2. ... if *theirs* was Shechted first - then they all eat from *theirs*. Either way, the Shali'ach eats from his own lamb.
(b) If they do *not* know which one was Shechted first, then the other members of the group cannot eat from either Pesach.

(c) They do not however, need to bring a Pesach Sheini, since either way, they have fulfilled their obligation (seeing as their Pesach was Shechted b'Kashrus and *they* themselves were fit to eat it when it was Shechted).

(a) If they both asked each other ...
1. ... and subsequently *know* which one was Shechted first - then they all eat from the first one to be Shechted.
2. ... but do *not* know which one was Shechted first - then both lambs must be burned, though they do not need to bring a Pesach Sheini.
(b) If neither asked the other to Shecht on his/their behalf, and they both Shechted a lamb - then neither needs contend with the other, and each one eats from his own Pesach.
(a) If the Pesachim of two groups got mixed up, each takes one of the lambs, and one member of each group goes across to the other. The members of the group then say to their *new* member: 'If the Pesach that we picked is *ous, then *you* will withdraw from your original group and join us; whereas if it is *yours* that we took, then you will remain with it and *we* will withdraw from *our* original Pesach and join you.

(b) They cannot make the relevant declaration without one person from each group joining the other one - because of the fifty per cent chance that they are leaving their Pesach without an owner, which is forbidden.

(c) If the Pesachim of five groups got mixed up - they follow the same procedure as in the previous case, only four people from each group must leave their original group, and one must go and join each of the four other groups.

(a) If the Pesachim of two individuals got mixed up, they each take one of the lambs; then they designate a new member from outside, after which each original owner goes across to the other lamb, and says very much like in the previous case: 'If this Pesach is my original one' etc.

(b) Each one cannot just make the relevant declaration and say that in the event of his having taken the lamb that was *not* originally his ...

1. ... he withdraws from his own lamb and now designates this one - because, as we said earlier, one may not leave a Pesach without an owner.
2. ... he first designates the other lamb as his own, and then withdraws from his original one - because one cannot subscribe to two Pesachim.
Next daf


For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,