Pesachim 99a — the Talmud in English

From here,

because of a matter similar to what we learned here,

the Sages said: Silence is beautiful for the wise, all the more so for fools, as it is stated:

in Proverbs 17,

“A fool who is silent will be considered wise.”

For had the members of the group and the agent remained silent and not said to one another to slaughter on their behalf, each one could have eaten from his own. But once they said to one another to slaughter, if it is not known which was slaughtered first, both go out to the place of burning.

We learned in the Mishna:

Two

(Reuben and Joseph)

whose Pesachim became intermingled,

this one (Reuben) draws one to himself, and that one (Joseph) draws one to himself; this one (Reuben) appoints with him one from the marketplace (Simeon his brother), and that one (Joseph) appoints with him one from the marketplace (Benjamin his brother). “

This one comes to that one, and that one comes to this one.” Reuben, who had initially been appointed for his Pesach, goes and stands by Benjamin. And he says to him: If this Pesach is yours—[for when Joseph your brother drew one lamb for himself, he drew his own, and you were appointed with him]—then my hands are withdrawn from mine, and I am appointed for yours.

It follows that now Reuben withdrew his hand from his Pesach that was in the possession of his brother Simeon. And now Joseph is appointed together with Simeon for the Pesach that at the time of designation belonged to Reuben. You have thereby learned that even though the one who designated the Pesach is not appointed for it, the Pesach is still valid.

And we raised an objection to this:

Shall we say

should it be said

that our Mishna is not in accordance with Rabbi Judah?

And it explains:

For it was taught:

It is stated [in Exodus 12] concerning appointment for the Pesach offering:

“And if the household be too few for a lamb

then he and his neighbor next to his house shall take it, according to the number of persons.”

And Rabbi Judah expounded from the word “too few”:

It teaches that they become fewer

the members of the group

and go away,

and the Pesach is still valid.

Provided that one of the members of the group

the first group [who were appointed for the Pesach at the time of its taking]

remains,

for “too few” implies that a small remnant of the first group still remains,

the words of Rabbi Judah.

Rabbi Yose says:

Even if none of the members of the first group remains, they become fewer and go away,

provided that they do not leave the Pesach

for a short time

as it is

alone, without owners at all.

And in the Mishna it is explained that Joseph and Simeon slaughter the Pesach that initially belonged to Reuben, and this is not in accordance with Rabbi Judah’s words. For according to Rabbi Judah, one of the members of the first group must remain, and Joseph and Simeon are not members of the first group.

Rabbi Yohanan said: Even if you say

even if you say that our Mishna is according to the view of

Rabbi Judah,

it is understandable.

For

since Rabbi Judah said [above, 91a]

above, on 91a,

one may not slaughter the Pesach for an individual,

therefore

from the outset,

when Reuben purchased a Pesach by himself, he could not slaughter it unless another person joined him; therefore, with the intention

of appointing another with him

the offering stands.

And since the offering stands with the intention of appointing another person with him, when Reuben came

and

appointed his brother Simeon with him, he is

like one of the members of the group

at the time of taking,

comparable

(similar).

Rav Ashi said

a proof for Rabbi Yohanan’s words:

Our Mishna too is precise

one may infer from our Mishna that it holds in accordance with Rabbi Judah.

For it teaches: And likewise, five groups of five each,

people in each group, whose Pesachim became intermingled; each group is separate. [Each member of the group goes to another group.] And in each group there are five people, each of whom came from another group.

And it follows from the Mishna:

Five, yes,

if there were five in each group, they have a remedy,

but one of five and four,

if there were four groups of five and one group of four,

no!

they have no remedy!

And why do they have no remedy? They can bring one from the marketplace and join him to the group of four, and it is then like a group of five!

Is it not

that this is the reason:

because one does not remain of the members of the group with him.

Because one of the members of the first group did not remain with any of the Pesachim. [For the person whom they brought from the marketplace is not a member of the first group.]

And if we say that the Mishna is in accordance with Rabbi Yose, it is difficult: What difference does it make to me that one of the members of the first group did not remain? For according to Rabbi Yose, it is sufficient that the Pesach have any owner!

Rather, it is necessarily the case that our Mishna is in accordance with Rabbi Judah. Specifically when two Pesachim became intermingled do they have a remedy through a person from the marketplace, because one may not slaughter the Pesach for an individual, and from the outset the Pesach stands with the intention of appointing an additional person for it; therefore, it is as though he had been appointed for the Pesach from the beginning, at the time of its taking,

but in the case of a group of four people, they have no remedy through a person from the marketplace, because the Pesach was valid from the outset without an additional person. And it is impossible to appoint him alone for one Pesach without the original owners.

And we conclude:

Conclude from this

that indeed our Mishna is in accordance with Rabbi Judah.

We have returned to you, chapter “One Who Was Impure,” and Pesach Sheni is concluded