Pesachim 12b (יב:) — the Talmud in English

Rather

that

people do not err between daytime and nighttime. And they also give him the fourth, fifth, and sixth hours [as he can claim that he intended the end of the third hour].

And this one, who said “at five,” is given the second, third, and fourth hours [lest he intended the beginning of the fifth], as well as the sixth hour.

And in principle, he should be given

it

earlier still,

that is, we should have given him two more hours earlier,

rather

since Rabbi Yehuda himself said in the beraita that one does not err between the fifth and seventh hours, because

at five, the sun

stands

in the east

of the sky,

whereas

if

at seven, the sun

stands

in the west

of the sky. [

Everything stated above concerning the range of time granted to the witnesses is only in order to save them from the punishment of “as he plotted.” But with regard to the validity of the testimony itself, a smaller discrepancy suffices to invalidate the testimony. For example, if the witness who said “at three” was refuted concerning the third, fourth, and fifth hours, the testimony is immediately invalidated. For if he claims that he erred backward, and that the incident took place before the third hour, we cannot combine his testimony with that of the other witness, who said “at five,” because there is a difference of more than three hours between them, since even according to Rabbi Yehuda a person does not err to such an extent. Rashi ].

Everything stated above concerning the amount of time granted to the witnesses is only in order to save them from the punishment of “as he plotted.” But with regard to the validity of the testimony itself, an even smaller discrepancy is enough to invalidate it. For example, if the witness who said “at three” was contradicted by witnesses who established that the time was the third, fourth, or fifth hour, the testimony immediately becomes invalid. For if he claims that he made an error backward and that the event occurred before the third hour, we cannot combine his testimony with that of the second witness, who said “at five,” because there is a difference of more than three hours between their statements, since even according to Rabbi Yehuda a person does not make an error of that extent. Rashi.

The Gemara now discusses how to reconcile our Mishna with the opinions stated above concerning the amount of time in which a person may err.

We learned in the Mishna: Rabbi Meir says: One may eat throughout the entire fifth hour, and one burns the leaven at the beginning of the sixth hour.

Rabbi Yehuda says: One may eat throughout the entire fourth hour, one suspends the leaven throughout the fifth hour, and one burns it at the beginning of the sixth hour.

And we challenge this:

According to Abaye, in accordance with Rabbi Meir, who says that a person does not err at all, he should eat throughout the entire sixth hour!

It should be permitted to eat leaven during the entire sixth hour. For by Torah law, leaven is prohibited only from the beginning of the seventh hour. Why, then, did the Sages institute a decree distancing a person from eating it beforehand, since there is no concern whatsoever that people will err concerning the time? And according to this latter formulation

of Abaye,

too, who says

that

Rabbi Meir holds that

a person errs

by

a small amount,

the difficulty arises:

he should eat until the end of the sixth hour,

and distance him only by a small amount at the end of the sixth hour. Why did they prohibit the entire sixth hour?

And

this is likewise difficult for

Abaye according to Rabbi Yehuda, who says that a person errs

by

half an hour: He should eat until half of the sixth hour

[until five and a half hours], and it would suffice to institute a distancing of half an hour, the amount of time in which a person may err!

And according to this latter formulation

of Abaye,

too, as you say

in accordance with Rabbi Yehuda,

a person errs by an hour and a little; he should eat until the end of the fifth hour, and distance him from the entire sixth hour and from part of the fifth hour. Why did Rabbi Yehuda decree that the entire fifth hour is prohibited?

and the entire sixth hour, together with a little of the fifth hour, should be prohibited. Why, then, did Rabbi Yehuda prohibit the entire fifth hour?

Abaye said: Testimony is entrusted to the diligent.

A person does not come to testify in capital cases unless he is expert in the hours, since he knows that ultimately he will be examined through detailed and probing inquiries. Therefore, he errs only by a small amount.

But the law concerning eating

leaven is entrusted to everyone.

It applies even to people who are not expert in the hours. Therefore, it was necessary to institute a decree covering a greater amount of time.

And we further challenge this:

And according to Rava, in accordance with Rabbi Meir,

who says that a person errs by two hours less a small amount, he should not eat from the beginning of the fifth hour

and should distance him by two hours from the time of the Torah prohibition. Why did Rabbi Meir decree only concerning the sixth hour?

And we answer: One does not err between the fifth and seventh hours, because

at five the sun is in the east, and

at seven the sun is in the west.

And we challenge this:

If so, he should also eat during the sixth hour!

For one cannot err between six and seven either, because at six the sun has not yet inclined toward the west; rather, it stands in the middle of the sky, and the shadow does not incline in either direction but remains directly beneath it, whereas at seven the sun has already inclined toward the west.

And we answer:

Rav Adda bar Ahava said:

At

six, the day stands at the corners,

the sun stands in the middle of the sky, and it is close to inclining toward the east and close to inclining toward the west. It is impossible to determine precisely in which direction it is inclining; therefore, one can err between six and seven.

And we further challenge:

And according to Rava, in accordance with Rabbi Yehuda, who says that a person errs by three hours less a small amount, from the beginning of four hours

he should not eat,

in order to distance him by three hours from the time when it is prohibited by Torah law. Why, then, does he permit eating during the fourth hour?

the sun stands in the middle of the sky, close to turning toward the east and close to turning toward the west. It is impossible to determine precisely toward which direction it is turning, and therefore one can err between the sixth and seventh hours. We raise another difficulty:

And

for

Rava according to Rabbi Yehuda, who says that a person errs by slightly less than three hours, from the beginning of the fourth

And we answer: We have heard Rabbi Yehuda himself maintain that a person does not err between five and seven, because

at five the sun is in the east and at seven the sun is in the west; and all the more so

he does not err between

four and seven. And we challenge again: If so, at five hours he should also eat

leaven, since, as stated, a person does not err between five and seven.

He

explained [and answered]

Abaye in accordance with Rava:

Rabbi Yehuda maintains that only with regard to testimony the witnesses do not err between five and seven, because

testimony is entrusted to the diligent.

But with regard to

leaven,

which is

entrusted

to

everyone,

a person does err even in this respect.

In any event, he does not err between four and seven [as he does between the beginning of three and the end of five, in which, according to Rabbi Yehuda, a person can err]. For he nevertheless has an indication from the sun that prevents him from erring to such an extent, since at four the sun is still far from the western side, and he may err only between five and seven.

And Rava

himself

said [to reconcile his position]: The matter is always as follows: even with regard to leaven, although it is entrusted to everyone, Rabbi Yehuda maintains that there is no concern that a person will err between five and seven, because at five the sun is in the east and at seven the sun is in the west. And the reason he prohibits eating during the fifth hour

is not the reason of Rabbi Yehuda

as we had thought, namely, that a person may err concerning the time.

Rather, Rabbi Yehuda follows his own reasoning, for he says

below [21a]:

The removal of leaven is only by burning,

and he disagrees with the Sages, who maintain: “Its removal may be performed in any manner.”

And

therefore the Sages prohibited eating leaven during the fifth hour, because

the Sages gave him [provided him with]

one

hour

in which he would be free

to gather wood

for the burning that would take place during the sixth hour. Had he been permitted to eat leaven then, he would not have remembered to prepare wood; but now that he is prohibited from eating leaven, he takes note of this.

Ravina raised an objection to Rava

from that which is taught

in a beraita:

Rabbi Yehuda said: When

do I say that the removal of leaven is only by burning? It is specifically

when it is not the time of its removal

—that is, throughout the sixth hour,

when it is not yet prohibited by Torah law.

But when it is the time of its removal,

from the beginning of the seventh hour, when it is already prohibited by Torah law,

its removal may be performed in any manner,

and not only by burning.

If so, why does he need to trouble himself to gather wood? If he has no wood prepared, let him wait until the seventh hour, at which point he will not need to burn it, but will be able to remove it by any means?

from the following source, which was taught in a beraita:

Rabbi Yehuda said: When

do I say that the removal of leavened bread is only by burning? Only

when it is not the time for its removal,

namely, throughout the sixth hour, when it is still not prohibited by Torah law.

But when it is the time for its removal,

from the beginning of the seventh hour, when it is already prohibited by Torah law,

its removal may be accomplished in any manner,

and not only by burning.

If so, why must he trouble himself to gather wood? If he has no wood prepared, let him wait until the seventh hour; then he will not need to burn it, but will be able to remove it in any manner.

Rather, said Rava:

the reason for Rabbi Yehuda’s opinion is

a decree due to an overcast day

when the sun does not shine, and it is impossible to determine the time by the sun. At such a time, people might err even between the fifth and seventh hours. Therefore, on every Passover eve they decreed that one may not eat chametz during the fifth hour.

And we challenge this:

If so, one should not eat even during the fourth hour either!?

For according to Rabbi Yehuda, a person might err even by three hours, in a manner in which there is no indication from the sun to distinguish the time?

And we answer:

Rav Pappa said:

The

fourth

hour is known to everyone as to when it is, because

the meal time

is common to all. There is therefore no concern that people will mistake the seventh hour for the fourth hour.

The Sages taught: The first hour

is the time for

the meal of the Ludians

a nation of cannibalistic eaters, as they are hungry and hurry to eat.

The

second

hour is the time for

the meal of bandits.

They too are hungry, but since they remain awake all night, they are still sleeping during the first hour and eat only during the second hour.

The

third

hour is the time for

the meal of heirs.

These are people who inherited great wealth and do not need to worry about their livelihood; therefore, they eat early.

The

fourth

hour is the time for

the meal of laborers.

The

fifth

hour is the time for the meal of

Torah scholars.

The

sixth

hour is the time for

the meal of every person.

And we challenge this:

But didn’t Rav Pappa say

above that the

fourth hour is the meal time common to all? Yet the beraita states that the sixth hour is the time for the meal of every person?

And we answer:

Rather,

reverse it

[reverse it] and read the beraita as follows:

The fourth hour is the meal of every person; the fifth hour is the meal of laborers; the sixth hour is the meal of Torah scholars.

The beraita concludes: Anyone who eats

from then onward

is

like one who throws a stone into a wineskin.

That is, eating at that time harms the human body.

Abaye said: We said

that he is like one who throws a stone into a wineskin

only when he has not tasted anything in the morning,

when he has eaten nothing in the morning.

But

if he

has tasted something in the morning, it is of no concern,

for even if he delays his meal until after the sixth hour, it still benefits the body.

Rav Ashi said: Just as the dispute applies to testimony

—just as Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yehuda disagreed with regard to testimony, with a person being more likely to err in the time according to Rabbi Yehuda than according to Rabbi Meir—

so too, the dispute applies to chametz.

Therefore, Rabbi Yehuda places the time for the prohibition against eating chametz one hour earlier than Rabbi Meir, because in his view a person is more likely to err in the time than according to Rabbi Meir.

And we wonder:

Isn’t this obvious?

For

this is precisely what we said

above to resolve the contradiction between the dispute concerning testimony and the dispute concerning chametz?

And we answer:

This teaches us

that

the resolutions that we offered are themselves valid resolutions.

All the answers that we stated above are correct as a matter of halakha.

And do not say

that, in resolving the contradiction between Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yehuda’s statements concerning testimony and their statements concerning chametz,

it is a tannaitic dispute,

that the tannaim disagreed in their opinions. According to the tanna of our Mishna, Rabbi Meir holds that a person errs by only one hour, while Rabbi Yehuda holds that a person errs by two hours. But the tanna of the Mishna in Sanhedrin holds that according to Rabbi Meir a person errs by two hours, and according to Rabbi Yehuda by three hours [according to Rava].

Rav Ashi therefore teaches us that there is no dispute here; rather, there is a difference between chametz and testimony, as explained above.

Rav Shimi bar Ashi said: We learned

with regard to testimony that even when the witnesses contradict one another concerning the time, sometimes the matter is attributed to an error and the testimony is upheld,

only

when they testify

by hours,

for example, one says that it was at two and the other says that it was at three.

But

if

one says

that the act took place

before sunrise, and one says

that it took place

after sunrise, their testimony is invalid,

because a person does not err between before sunrise and after sunrise.

And we challenge this: What does Rav Shimi teach us? Surely

it is obvious

?

And we answer:

Rather,

this is what Rav Shimi said:

One

says, “Before sunrise,” and one says, “During sunrise,”

at the beginning of sunrise;

their testimony is invalid.

And we still challenge this:

This too is obvious,

for it is likewise impossible to err in this matter?