THE EXILE AND THE REDEMPTION
(Ula): Hash-m exiled Yisrael to Bavel in order that they will eat dates and be able to engage in Torah.
Ula visited Pumbedisa [in Bavel] - they brought to him a basket of dates. He was told that three baskets sell for one Zuz. Ula was astounded - one can get a jar of honey so cheaply, and people here do not [find more time to] learn Torah?! (Dates give sustenance - if one blessed Birkas ha'Mazon after eating them, he was Yotzei - Shulchan Aruch 208:17.)
At night, Ula had intestinal pain on account of the dates. He was astounded - a lethal poison like this costs a Zuz [surely, proper food costs much more], nevertheless people here [find some time to] learn Torah?!
(R. Elazar) Question: "...Lechu v'Na'aleh El Har Hash-m El Beis Elokei Yakov" - He is also Elokei Avraham and Elokei Yitzchak!
Answer: The Beis ha'Mikdash is not attributed to Avraham, for he called its place a mountain - "B'Har Hash-m Yera'eh;"
It is not attributed to Yitzchak, for he called it a field - "Va'Yetzei Yitzchak Lasu'ach ba'Sadeh" (Yitzchak did not say these words, but surely the Torah calls it a field because Yitzchak considered it a field);
It is attributed to Yakov, for he called it a house (a settled place) - "Va'Yikra Es Shem ha'Makom ha'Hu Beis Kel."
(R. Yochanan): The gathering of exiles is as great as the day Heaven and earth were created - it says "V'Nikbetzu Benei Yehudah u'Venei Yisrael Yachdav...v'Alu Min ha'Aretz Ki Gadol Yom Yizre'el" , like "Va'Yhi Erev va'Yhi Voker Yom Echad."
WHOSE CONSENT IS REQUIRED FOR MINUY?
(Mishnah): If overseers of an orphan slaughtered for him [he eats from whichever he wants].
Inference: This teaches that Yesh Breirah (it is as if he was Manuy retroactively at the time of slaughter on the one he chooses now! Tosfos - regarding a wife, we rejected this, perhaps she decided at the time of slaughter - but if the same applies here, what is the Chidush of this clause?!)
Rejection (R. Zeira): "Seh l'Veis" (a man is Moneh his household on his Pesach) in any case [even without their consent - see note in Appendix].
(Beraisa #1): "Seh l'Veis" - this teaches that a man brings and slaughters Pesach for his minor children and Kena'ani slaves with or without their consent;
One may not slaughter for his adult children, Ivri slaves or wife without their consent.
(Beraisa #2): One may not slaughter for his adult children, Ivri slaves or wife without their consent;
One may slaughter for his minor children and Kena'ani slaves with or without their consent;
If anyone slaughtered his own Pesach, and his master [or father or husband] slaughtered for him, he is Yotzei with his master's, except for a wife, who can protest.
Question: What is different about a wife [from others whose consent is required]?
Answer (Rava): It means, a wife and those like her [can protest].
Question: [If one slaughtered his own....he is Yotzei with his master's [or husband's,] except for a wife, who can protest - this implies that if she does not protest, she is Yotzei with his Pesach;
But the Reisha says that he may not slaughter for her without her consent - this implies that Stam (if she was silent), she is Yotzei with his Pesach!
Answer: 'With her consent' does not mean that she expressed consent - rather, it means Stam, and it excludes when she protests.
Question: 'If anyone slaughtered and his master slaughtered...' connotes Stam - still, it says except for a wife, who can protest!
Answer (Rava): This does not connote Stam - slaughtering one's own Pesach is the ultimate protest!
FROM WHOSE PESACH CAN A HALF-SLAVE EAT?
(Mishnah): If a slave had two masters...
Question (Rav Eina Sava - Mishnah): If a slave had two masters [and both slaughtered for him], he may not eat from either one;
Contradiction (Beraisa): He may eat from whichever he wants.
Resolution (Rav Nachman): The Mishnah is when each master is Makpid [that he or his property not benefit from the other master]; the Beraisa is when neither is Makpid.
(Mishnah): A half-slave may not eat from his master's Pesach.
Inference: He may not eat from his master's Pesach [because his master did not intend to Memaneh the free half], but he may eat from his own.
Contradiction (Beraisa): He may not eat from his master's Pesach, nor from his own.
Resolution: At first, the Halachah was like the Beraisa (the master does not want his half to benefit from the free half); later (after Beis Hillel retracted), the Halachah follows the Mishnah:
(Mishnah - Beis Hillel): A half-slave alternates - he serves his master for one day, and works for himself for one day;
Beis Shamai: That is good for the master, but not for the slave - he cannot marry!
He cannot marry a slave [since he is half-free]; he cannot marry a Bas Yisrael [since he is partially a slave].
Suggestion: Perhaps he will not marry!
Rejection: The world was created for the sake of reproduction - "Lasheves Yetzarah!"
Rather, we force the master to free the slave; the slave writes a document obligating himself to pay the master half of his value.
Beis Hillel retracted, and agreed with Beis Shamai. (Since we force the master to free him, the slave is considered free, and eats from his own Korban.)
ONE WHO DID NOT SPECIFY WHICH IS HIS PESACH
(Mishnah): If Reuven told his slave 'slaughter Pesach for me' [without specifying which species], whether he slaughtered a goat or lamb, Reuven eats it;
If he slaughtered a goat and lamb, Reuven eats from the first one slaughtered;
Question: If [Reuven specified and] the slave forgot which one, what should he do?
Answer: He should slaughter one of each and stipulate [beforehand]:
If my master specified a goat, it is for him and the lamb is my Pesach; if he specified a lamb, it is for him and the goat is for me.
If Reuven forgot what he specified, both of them are burned; Reuven and his slave are exempt from Pesach Sheni. (It sounds like no one else was Nimneh on either Korban, i.e. like the opinion that we slaughter Pesach for an individual (91A). However, we can say that Reuven told two slaves 'slaughter for me and my family' - indeed, the Gemara will establish the Reisha like this, for another reason.)
(Gemara) Objection: Obviously, if he slaughtered a goat Reuven eats it!
Answer: The Chidush is, even if Reuven usually offers one species and the slave offered the other, Reuven eats it.
(Mishnah): If he slaughtered a goat and lamb, Reuven eats from the first one slaughtered.
Question (Beraisa): One may not be Nimneh on two Pesachim at the same time (the slave was Memaneh Reuven on two)!
Answer: The Mishnah discusses a king and queen:
(Beraisa): One may not be Nimneh on two Pesachim at the same time; a case occurred, the king and queen told their slaves to slaughter for them, and they slaughtered a goat and lamb.
The king told them to ask the queen [from which they will eat]; she told them to ask R. Gamliel.
R. Gamliel: A king and queen are easygoing (they always eat whatever they desire, so they are not Makpid about the species or its fatness), so they eat from the first (surely, they are pleased to be Menuyim on it);
If this happened to someone else, he would not eat from either (we are unsure on which he wanted to be Manuy).
On another occasion, a [dead] Sheretz was found in the kitchen; people thought that the whole [royal] feast was Tamei.
The king told them to ask the queen; she told them to ask R. Gamliel. He asked where it was found, and was told that it was in a boiling pot. He told them to put cold water on it - it quivered (it was not dead). R. Gamliel was Metaher the entire feast.
(Mishnah): If the slave forgot...
Question: How can the slave stipulate 'the other is for me'? Reuven automatically acquires whatever his slave acquires!
Answer (Abaye): He goes to Reuven's shepherd [who wants to help Reuven]; the shepherd gives him a kid and lamb, and stipulates that Reuven has no rights to the one that is for the slave.
Version #1 (Mishnah): If Reuven forgot...[they are exempt from Pesach Sheni].
(Abaye): This is only if he forgot after Zerikah, for at the time of Zerikah it was possible for him to eat from it - but if he forgot before Zerikah, they must bring Pesach Sheni, for at the time of Zerikah it was impossible to eat from it.
Version #2 (Beraisa): If the skins of the Pesachim of five Chaburos became mixed, and a wart was found on one of them (surely the blemish was there at the time of slaughter), all of the Pesachim are burned, and the Chaburos are exempt from Pesach Sheni.
(Abaye): This is only if the skins became mixed after Zerikah, for at the time of Zerikah it was possible [to identify the Pasul Korban, and for the other four Chaburos] to eat from it (we will explain why all are exempt from Pesach Sheni);
But if they became mixed before Zerikah, they must bring Pesach Sheni [for at the time of Zerikah no Chaburah could eat from it].
Version #1 holds that Abaye requires that the person remembered at the time of Zerikah [even though both Korbanos are Kesherim, we require clarity which is which] - all the more so, he requires that the skins were not mixed before Zerikah;
Version #2 holds that he does not allow that the skins were mixed before Zerikah - but he would allow if the person forgot before Zerikah;
Since both Korbanos are Kesherim, and if he will remember later they may be eaten, and it is clear to Hash-m (i.e. there is no intrinsic Pesul), they are Yotzei.
CAN PESACH SHENI BE BROUGHT MI'SAFEK?
(Beraisa): They are exempt from Pesach Sheni.
Question: But one of the Chaburos (the one whose Korban has a wart) was not Yotzei!
Answer: They are exempt because there is no way to bring Pesach Sheni [in a way that they could eat from it. The entire coming discussion also shows why they cannot offer another Pesach Rishon even if they would have time.]
If every Chaburah offers Pesach [Sheni], four (the ones that were already Yotzei) offer Chulin b'Azarah!
If they offer one Pesach [and all of them will eat it], this is Lo li'Mnuyav (the Minuy is valid only for those who were not Yotzei before)!
Question: Each could stipulate - if ours had the Mum, this is Pesach; if not, this is a Shelamim!