Pesachim 80a — the Talmud in English

“You shall not be able to slaughter the Passover-offering in one of your gates”,

and we expound: “You shall not be able to slaughter the Passover-offering in one.” This teaches you: on account of an individual, you shall not slaughter it, so that that individual should cause and effect through his slaughter any side of inclination [Rashi].

Rabbi Shimon says:

It is not necessary that the majority of Israel be impure in order to perform it in impurity, but

even one tribe

of Israel

is impure, and

if

all the other tribes are pure,

even though this tribe is not the majority of Israel, nevertheless we judge each tribe as a community.

And therefore:

these—

the impure tribe—

perform it for themselves

in impurity, according to the law of a community that is not deferred to the Second Passover.

And these—

the other tribes—

perform it for themselves

in purity.

What is the reason of Rabbi Shimon? He holds that one tribe is called

“a congregation,”

and therefore one tribe is considered like a community that is not deferred to the Second Passover.

Rabbi Judah

adds to the words of Rabbi Shimon, and

says: Even if one tribe is impure and all the other tribes are pure, let all Israel perform it

all Israel

in impurity

on account of this tribe that performs it in impurity, because

a communal offering is not divided.

And we explain his reason:

Rabbi Judah holds: one tribe is called a congregation,

and there you have an “impure community,” while all the rest of the community, which is pure, there you have a “pure community,”

and they become half and half,

meaning: as though they were half and half,

and a communal offering is not divided

even in a case of half and half,

and

therefore

they all perform it in impurity.

But Rabbi Shimon holds that the reasoning “a communal offering is not divided” is not effective in a case of half and half, [see below in the notes].

It was stated: If Israel were half impure and half pure:

Rav said: We render one of them

[of the pure ones]

impure through a creeping creature,

and the majority become impure, and all Israel can perform the Passover-offering in impurity.

And we raise an objection:

But why

render one impure?!

Let these perform

the impure ones

by themselves

[let the impure ones perform in their impurity alone]

and these

the pure ones

by themselves

in purity,

for Rav said

above:

“These perform it for themselves, and these perform it for themselves.”

That is, the half who are impure are not deferred to the Second Passover, so that there should be a need to perform a stratagem in order to permit them through the offering of the First Passover, and this accords with Rav himself, who disagreed with Rav Kahana above and holds: even the impure perform the First Passover, only the pure do not follow them to perform it in impurity.

And since this is so, what difference does it make if these perform separately and those separately, since, in the end, all Israel perform the First Passover?!

They said

the students of the academy, to explain:

What are we dealing with here? For example, the impure outnumbered the pure by one

only, [and the answer is not understood, and the Gemara immediately challenges it].

And we raise an objection to it:

If so,

all the more so the difficulty arises: for

they are a majority impure, and

and

let them all perform it in impurity,

and why do we need to render one impure through a creeping creature?!

And we explain:

He holds

Rav

like Rabbi Elazar ben Matya, who said

in the beraita above:

an individual does not cause the community to

perform the Passover-offering in

impurity, [and the answer is not understood, and the Gemara immediately raises an objection to it].

And we are still astonished:

If so,

we have accomplished nothing through our answer, and

our difficulty returns to its place,

for according to Rabbi Elazar ben Matya, when one impure person outnumbers the pure, they are like half and half; and if so:

Let these perform by themselves and those by themselves?!

And we explain Rav’s words:

Rather,

Rav is indeed speaking when they were half and half without an excess, and

this is what he said:

If there is a tanna

[if you find a tanna]

who holds like the First Tanna

[Rabbi Shimon in the beraita above], who says that half impure and half pure do not all perform it in impurity, but these perform it for themselves and those perform it for themselves.

And

you also find that that tanna

holds

also

like Rabbi Judah

in the beraita above,

who says: A communal offering is not divided,

and it is forbidden to divide Israel, so that these should perform it in purity and those in impurity, because the matter is disgraceful, as it is apparent that these are taking care to avoid the others.

What should they do?

They render one of them impure through a creeping creature,

and all perform it in impurity, [see the explanation in the sugya, in the note ].

And Ulla said:

And we raise an objection: Why did Ulla disagree with Rav

and render him impure through a creeping creature,

as Rav said?! And we explain:

He holds,

Ulla:

one slaughters and sprinkles

the blood of the Passover-offering even

for one impure through a creeping creature,

and since this is so, he is like a pure person concerning the Passover-offering, and they are found to be half pure and half impure, and the communal offering is divided.

Whereas Rav holds that one may not slaughter and sprinkle the blood of the Pesaḥ on behalf of one impure from contact with a creeping creature, as one does on behalf of one impure through contact with the dead; thus, the person impure through contact with a creeping creature joins the count of the impure, and they all perform it in impurity.

But Rav holds: one does not slaughter and sprinkle the Passover-offering for one impure through a creeping creature as for one impure through a corpse, and the one impure through a creeping creature joins the count of the impure, and they all perform it in impurity.

And we raise an objection to Ulla:

And let us render him impure through a corpse?!

And we answer: If so, if you render him impure through a corpse, whose impurity lasts seven days,

you defer him

from his festival-offering, which he is obligated to offer on the following day, and he cannot offer a festival-offering in impurity. And in order not to cause him to lose the mitzva of the festival-offering, we render him impure through a creeping creature, whose impurity lasts only until evening, and he will immerse and perform his festival-offering on the following day.

And we raise an objection: But

now too,

when you render him impure through a creeping creature,

you defer him from his Passover-offering,

and what difference is there whether you defer him from the Passover-offering or whether you defer him from the festival-offering?!

We raise a difficulty: But now too, when you render him impure through contact with a creeping creature,

And we answer: You do not defer him completely from his Passover-offering, because

it is possible that he will perform

his Passover-offering

on the Second.

And we are still astonished: Let us render him impure through a corpse; and if it is because you defer him from his festival-offering, when he becomes impure

through a corpse, it is also possible that he will perform

his festival-offering

on the seventh

which would be his eighth day

from the day of his becoming impure, and he has already become permitted with regard to sacred offerings?!

And we answer:

It is stated in the Torah, in the section of the festival of Sukkot, and it is brought in tractate Hagiga 9a:

“And you shall celebrate it as a festival to the Lord for seven days.”

One might have thought that he celebrates and continues celebrating all seven days; therefore the verse says, “it.”

You celebrate that, but you do not celebrate all seven days.

If so, why was “seven” stated? For completion.

What is completion [how are they completion, Rashi]?

Rabbi Yohanan said: Completion of the first [for Scripture made one day primary among all of them, as it is written “it,” and made those after it its completion, Rashi].

And Rabbi Oshaya said: They are completion for one another. [There is no day among them whose obligation is not dependent upon itself, for one who was not fit to bring a festival-offering on the days before it: for him, the first day on which he becomes fit to bring it is primary, and the days after it are its completion].

What is the difference between them? Rabbi Zeira said: One who was lame on the first day and became healed on the second day—there is a difference between them.

Rabbi Yohanan said that they are completion of the first: since he was not fit on the first day [to bring a festival-offering, since he was not fit to appear], he is not fit on the second.

And Rabbi Oshaya said that they are completion for one another: although he was not fit on the first, he is fit on the second.

Ulla holds: All of them

the seven days during which one completes bringing the festival-offering

are completion of the first,

and are not completion for one another.

And if so, whoever

was fit on the first

[was fit to bring his festival-offering on the first day on which he became obligated] is

fit on all of them,

the seven days [fit to complete the festival-offering during the seven days]; but

wherever he was not fit on the first,

for example, he was impure, he is

not fit on all of them,

and he has no completion.

And it follows that if we render him impure through a corpse, he will no longer have completion. Therefore we render him impure through a creeping creature, and he will bring his festival-offering on the following day, whereas his Passover-offering he can complete on the Second.

Rav Nahman said to them

to those who had stated before him Ulla’s words, who said that one of them is sent to a distant road:

Go and say to Ulla

[go and tell Ulla]:

Who will listen, so as to uproot his tent-pole and his belongings and run

[who will listen to us to uproot his tent and its stakes from here, and run to a distant road]? Therefore Rav’s counsel is preferable: to render one of the pure impure through a creeping creature.

It was stated:

It was stated:

The impurity of a person with a flux is not overridden even for a community, [and even though the impurity has already been overridden on account of those impure through corpses, who were the majority of Israel, nevertheless those with a flux do not perform it in impurity].

And therefore:

If those with a flux were a minority of Israel, they are deferred to the Second Passover.

And if those with a flux were the majority of Israel, they perform neither the First Passover nor the Second Passover.

For they do not perform the First, since they are people with a flux, and their impurity was not permitted for them in a community.

And they do not perform the Second either, since they are a community, and a community is not deferred to the Second Passover.

If the majority

of Israel

were people with a flux, and the minority were impure through corpses:

Rav said: Those impure through corpses do not perform

the Passover-offering

neither on the First nor on the Second,

as he proceeds to explain.

They do not perform the first,

On the First they do not perform,

since

they were

the impure through corpses

a minority

of Israel—for those with a flux do not join them, since they were not permitted to perform in impurity even as a community—and

a minority

therefore

do not perform

the Passover-offering

on the First.

On the Second also they do not perform,

because:

wherever a community performs

the Passover-offering

on the First,

an individual performs on the Second, but

wherever a community does not perform on the First, an individual does not perform on the Second.

Shmuel said to them

Samuel said to them

to those who had stated Rav’s words before him:

Go and say to Abba

[go and say to Abba],

that is, Rav, for that was his name:

According to your words,

“And the children of Israel performed the Passover-offering at its appointed time,”

what will you do with it, meaning: Is it possible that all “the children of Israel” should be prevented from performing the Passover-offering at its appointed time?!

Rather, certainly impure people are not prevented from performing the Passover-offering on the First, unless the majority of the children of Israel were performing the Passover-offering on the First. And since there is no majority from Israel who perform on the First, those impure through corpses should perform it in impurity. [Explained according to Tosafot on the facing page, s.v. “On the First,” and according to the words of the Maharshal there; see the Maharsha there.] when they came and told Rav Shmuel’s words, he returned and

said to them

Rav:

Go, tell him

to Shmuel:

But behold,

when all

Israel

are zavin—for you too admit that they do not perform it on the first [day]—and

what will you do with

what will you do with the verse that you brought, and behold, you have nullified all “the Children of Israel” from performing the Pesach at its appointed time?!

Rather—

you too admit—

since it is impossible

to fulfill the verse,

it is impossible; here too

behold,

it is impossible, and Israel will be nullified from performing the Pesach on the first [day].

It was stated:

If the majority

of Israel were

impure through contact with the dead

and performed the Pesach in impurity,

and their minority were zavin

and did not perform the first Pesach, even though the Pesach came in the impurity of the community through corpse-impurity:

Rav Huna said:

the zavin do not bring the second Pesach, because

there is no make-up

of the second Pesach

for the

first [Pesach] of the majority of the community

that comes in impurity

of the community, and the Gemara explains it as it proceeds.

And Rav Adda bar Ahava said:

the zavin bring the second Pesach, because

there is a make-up for a Pesach that comes in impurity,

as it explains and proceeds.

Let us say that they disagree about this:

that everyone agrees, since it is written in the section of the offering of the second Pesach: “If a person will become impure through a dead person, etc., and he shall perform a Pesach for the Lord. In the second month, etc.,” which implies: only that person was impure, whereas the rest of the community were pure. Therefore we must learn: it is the “purity” of the rest of the community that “pushes off” the individual to the second Pesach, but “impurity” does not push off the individual to the second Pesach. Rather, Rav Huna and Rav Adda bar Ahava disagree in this:

For the one who says—

Rav Huna—

there is no make-up for a Pesach that comes in impurity holds: impurity is merely overridden in the community,

and since it was only with difficulty that the Torah “pushed aside” the impurity for them, they are still considered impure, and behold, impurity is not pushed aside.

And the one who says—

Rav Adda bar Ahava—

there is

a make-up for a Pesach that comes in impurity holds: impurity is permitted in the community,

and since this is so, they are considered like pure people, and purity is indeed pushed aside. [This was explained according to Tosafot; see the commentary of Rabbenu Hananel.]

They said

the members of the academy, to refute:

No,

as you said, that everyone agrees that impurity is not pushed aside, and therefore you had to say that according to Rav Adda bar Ahava impurity is permitted in the community; rather,

everyone agrees that impurity is overridden

it is

in the community

and they are considered like impure people; rather,

in this—

in the substance of the law, “impurity is not pushed aside”

they disagree.

—

they disagree. One master—

Rav Huna—

held: