Pesachim 66a (סו.) — the Talmud in English

3.

Rabbi Akiva said to him

to Rabbi Eliezer: It is clear to me that I heard that sprinkling does not override Shabbat; rather, it prevents the impure person from offering the Passover offering.

If so, according to the reasoning of your kal va-homer:

or—

the reverse?

Perhaps the matter should be reasoned in the opposite manner.

Since it is clear to me that I heard—and Rabbi Akiva heard this tradition from Rabbi Eliezer himself, but did not state this explicitly to him and instead tried to remind him—that one does not sprinkle upon one impure through contact with the dead to purify him even on Shabbat that is Passover eve, it is possible to derive from sprinkling to slaughter, by a reverse kal va-homer, that even slaughtering the Passover offering does not override Shabbat.

And this is how the kal va-homer would be reasoned:

If sprinkling, which is

prohibited on Shabbat only

because of shevut, does not override Shabbat,

slaughter, which is

prohibited by Torah law

because of

a primary

labor—

should it not certainly fail to override Shabbat!?

Rabbi Eliezer said to him: Akiva!

How could you derive such a ruling?

For

you have uprooted

thereby

what is written in the Torah,

that the Passover offering is brought even on Shabbat!

For the Torah says [Numbers 9]: “The children of Israel shall make the Passover offering

at its appointed time.”

And we learned from “at its appointed time” that the Passover offering must be made at its appointed time, on the fourteenth of Nisan—

whether

it falls

on a weekday, whether

it falls

on Shabbat.

Rabbi Akiva said

to Rabbi Eliezer:

Rabbi,

you are indeed correct that one cannot reverse the reasoning and derive by a kal va-homer from sprinkling that slaughtering the Passover offering does not override Shabbat, since the Torah says “at its appointed time.”

Yet I can still challenge your statement, that carrying the Passover offering on one's shoulder and bringing it from outside the Shabbat limit override Shabbat, although they could have been performed the previous day:

How can you derive by a kal va-homer from slaughtering the Passover offering to these rabbinic acts, which are permitted on Shabbat even when it is possible to perform them before Shabbat?

Bring me

a verse concerning

“an appointed time”

that establishes a fixed time

for

these

acts,

to perform them even on Shabbat,

like the “appointed time”

that the Torah established

for slaughter!?

That is, since these acts have no fixed time and can be performed the previous day, how can they be derived by a kal va-homer from slaughter, whose time is fixed, so that they would be like it and override Shabbat!?

Likewise, you cannot derive by a kal va-homer from slaughter in order to permit sprinkling, since “at its appointed time” was not stated concerning it [and, as mentioned, Rabbi Akiva heard from Rabbi Eliezer that it is prohibited on Shabbat].

Although it cannot be performed before Shabbat [since the seventh day had not yet arrived], it nevertheless does not override Shabbat, because sprinkling is not among the acts constituting the body of the Passover offering, but only among its preparations; and “appointed time” was not written concerning it so that it would override Shabbat. “Appointed time” was written only concerning the offering itself, and not concerning its preparations [according to the Maharsha].

4.

Rabbi Akiva stated a principle: Any labor that can be performed before Shabbat—

does not override Shabbat.

But

slaughter

of the Passover offering,

which cannot be performed before Shabbat—

it

overrides Shabbat.

Gemara:

The Sages taught: This halakha,

that the Passover offering overrides Shabbat,

was forgotten by the sons of Beteira,

the leaders who lived in the time of Hillel.

Once, the fourteenth fell on Shabbat.

They forgot and did not know whether the Passover offering overrides Shabbat or not.

They said,

the sons of Beteira, the leaders, asked on Friday, Passover eve:

Is there anyone who knows whether the Passover offering overrides Shabbat or not?

They said to them: There is one man who came up from Babylonia, and his name is Hillel the Babylonian, who served

here, after ascending to Eretz Yisrael,

the two greatest men of the generation, Shemaya and Avtalyon, and

he

knows whether the Passover offering overrides Shabbat or not.

They sent for him and summoned him,

to Hillel.

They said to him: Do you know whether the Passover offering overrides Shabbat or not?

He said to them: Is it possible that

the law of

one Passover offering

alone

is all we have in the year that overrides Shabbat?

Are there not far more than two hundred

“Passover offerings” [

public offerings whose law is like that of the Passover offering—namely, the two daily offerings and the two lambs of the additional offering on the fifty Shabbatot of the year; and to these must be added the additional offerings of the Festivals that fall on Shabbat]

that we have during the year, which override Shabbat?

They said to him: From where do you know

that the law of the Passover offering is like that of these public offerings?

He said to them:

I learn this by

“it is stated”

“at its appointed time”

concerning the Passover offering, and it is stated

[Numbers 28]

“at its appointed time”

concerning

the

daily offering.

Just as

“at its appointed time”

stated concerning the daily offering—

overrides Shabbat [

as will be explained],

so too

“at its appointed time”

stated concerning the Passover offering—

overrides Shabbat.

Furthermore,

also

it is a kal va-homer:

If the

offering

daily

less stringent,

for failure to offer it is not punishable by karet

for failing to offer it,

overrides Shabbat,

the

offering

Passover, more stringent,

for failure to offer it is punishable by karet

for failing to offer it—

should it not certainly override Shabbat?

Immediately they seated him

Hillel

at the head and appointed him as their nasi.

And

Hillel

sat and expounded all day long

before them

the laws of the Passover offering,

as the nasi would customarily do.

Hillel began

Hillel

to taunt them,

to provoke the sons of Beteira and distress them,

with the words

that he said to them.

He said to them,

Hillel:

What caused you to make me ascend from Babylonia and become your nasi—

the laziness that was in you, because you did not serve the two greatest men of the generation, Shemaya and Avtalyon.

Since Hillel's words contained an element of arrogance toward them, his wisdom immediately departed from him, and he did not know how to answer another question they asked him.

They said to him,

the sons of Beteira asked him:

Rabbi,

one who

forgot and did not bring a slaughtering knife

for slaughter

before Shabbat—

what is

the law regarding bringing it on Shabbat through the public domain?

He said to them: I heard this halakha,

how one should act in this matter,

but I forgot

what the halakha is.

Hillel added and said:

Rather, leave Israel alone.

Although they are not prophets—

they are the children of prophets,

and you will see what they will do on Shabbat tomorrow.

Tomorrow, one whose Passover offering is a lamb—

he inserts it

into the knife

through its wool; one whose Passover offering is a kid,

which has no wool—

he inserts it between its horns.

This does not violate the mitzva of allowing one's animal to rest, since this is not considered a burden for the animal on Shabbat, as carrying an object in this manner is not customary.

Hillel saw

Hillel

an act, remembered the halakha, and said:

Indeed,

this is what I received as a tradition from Shemaya and Avtalyon,

that they do so.

The Master said: “At its appointed time” was stated concerning the Passover offering, and “at its appointed time” was stated concerning the daily offering; just as “at its appointed time” stated concerning the daily offering overrides Shabbat—

so too, “at its appointed time” stated concerning the Passover offering overrides Shabbat.

We raised a question concerning this:

and

the

daily offering itself—

from where do we know that it overrides Shabbat?

If you say it is because it is written concerning it,

in the daily offering,

“at its appointed time”?

But concerning the

Passover offering too, is it not written concerning it

“at its appointed time,”

and nevertheless Hillel did not derive from it that it overrides Shabbat; rather, he learned this by a gzera shava from the daily offering.

Rather,

it is proven that

“at its appointed time”

stated concerning the Passover offering

does not appear to Hillel

to warrant deriving from it that the Passover offering overrides Shabbat, because one can say that the verse speaks only when no desecration of Shabbat is involved.

If so,

here too—

“at its appointed time”

stated concerning the daily offering

does not appear to him

to warrant deriving from it that it overrides Shabbat.

And we answer: Indeed, Hillel did not learn this from “at its appointed time.”

Rather,

Hillel learned from here that the daily offering overrides Shabbat:

The verse states

[Numbers 28], concerning the additional offering of Shabbat:

“The burnt offering of Shabbat on its Shabbat—

in addition to

[besides]

the daily burnt offering

[which is also offered on Shabbat].”

By implication,

you learn explicitly from here that also

the burnt offering

of the daily offering is offered on Shabbat.

The Master said: Furthermore,

Hillel also proved from a

kal va-homer: If the daily offering, for failure to offer which one is not punished by karet, overrides Shabbat, then the Passover offering, for failure to offer which one is punished by karet—

should it not certainly override Shabbat?

We raised a question concerning this: But

it can be refuted,

and this is not a kal va-homer, because one can say, on the contrary, that the daily offering is more stringent than the Passover offering, because:

What is there concerning the daily offering—

that

it is stringent in that it is

regular and

is burned

entirely

on the altar; can you say this concerning the Passover offering, which is brought only once a year, and only its fats are burned, while its flesh is eaten?

And we answer:

Hillel first stated a kal va-homer to them,

Hillel

and they refuted it,

as we have said.

Then

he returned and

said to them a gzera shava

of “appointed time” and “appointed time” from the daily offering [and the daily offering itself overrides Shabbat by virtue of the verse “the Shabbat burnt offering on its Shabbat, in addition to the daily offering”].

We raised a question concerning this:

And once Hillel had derived

Hillel

a gzera shava,

which a person may not derive independently, as it is a tradition received at Sinai through one's teachers, and it is as though it were explicitly written in the biblical text—if so,

why do we need

the

kal va-homer?

And we answer:

Rather,

Hillel

according to their position

of the sons of Beteira

was speaking to them:

Granted, regarding a gzera shava—

you have not learned it,

you did not learn it from your teacher; and rightly you do not derive the gzera shava independently, since

a person may not derive a gzera shava independently.

But a kal va-homer, which a person may derive independently—

you should have derived it,

you should have reasoned it out!

They said to him: The kal va-homer

that you reasoned

is refuted,

for the daily offering is more stringent than the Passover offering, since it is regular and is burned entirely on the altar.

The Master said: “Tomorrow, one whose Passover offering is a lamb”—

he inserts the knife into its wool; one whose offering is a kid—

he inserts it between its horns.