(a)What three things do we learn (with regard to Dichuy - rejection) from the fact that the female lamb (in our Mishnah) and the lamb in its second year, cannot be brought directly as a Shelamim?
(a)From the fact that the female lamb (in our Mishnah) and the lamb in its second year, cannot be brought directly as a Shelamim (even though a female animal is eligible as a Shelamim) we learn - 1. that animals are subject to Dichuy (rejection); 2. that even if it was rejected initially (not like others, who accept initial Dichuy, and only rejects something that was initially Kosher and became rejected afterwards); 3. that Dichuy applies even to something whose Kedushah is not intrinsic to begin with (since a female lamb or a one year old male lamb are not fit to be brought as a Pesach), only for its value (Kedushas Damim).
(a)The Beraisa states that if the owner of the Pesach died, then, if his son is a joint-owner, he may bring the Pesach; if not, then he brings it as a Shelamim, but only on the sixteenth of Nisan. Why not on the fifteenth?
(b)Assuming that his father died on the fourteenth, what would be the problem with explaining that he died before mid-day (two explanations)?
(c)Why would establishing the Beraisa when he died after mid-day eliminate this problem?
(d)What is the problem with establishing the Beraisa after mid-day?
(a)If the owner of the Pesach died, his son may bring it as a Shelamim only on the sixteenth of Nisan and not on the fifteenth - because one may not bring any voluntary offerings on Yom-Tov.
(b)Assuming that his father died on the fourteenth, the problem with explaining that he died before mid-day - would be that his son would then be an Onan. So, having already learned that one cannot bring a Pesach for Onenim only (because they may, in their grief, become Tamei Mes, rendering the Pesach ownerless), how can the Tana say that he brings it as a Pesach? (Alternatively, since he was an Onan before he became obligated to bring the Pesach, the Aninus prevents the obligation to bring a Pesach from taking effect in the first place!)
(c)If he died after mid-day, then, since the obligation to bring the Pesach came before he became an Onan, he will be careful not to render the Pesach Tamei, and the decree of not bringing a Pesach exclusively for an Onan, will not apply.
(d)On the other hand, by establishing the Beraisa after mid-day, we will be left with the Kashya - why does the Tana say that if his son is not a joint owner, he brings it as a Shelamim? Did we not just learn that mid-day fixes the status of the Pesach? In that case, should the owner die after that, the lamb ought to first be sent to graze until it becomes blemished!?
(a)Rabah answers that the Beraisa speaks when the father died before mid-day, and 'Im Bno Memunah Imo, Yevi'enu Leshum Pesach' means his son brings it as a Pesach Sheni. Abaye learns 'Litzedadin ka'Tani' (the Reisha and the Seifa speak in different cases - one after mid-day, and the other before mid-day). How does Abaye now learn the Beraisa?
(a)Abaye learns the Beraisa like this: 'ha'Mafrish es Pischo u'Mes Achar Chatzos - Im Bno Memuneh Imo, Yevi'enu Leshum Pesach. Ein Bno Memuneh Imo u'Mes* Lifnei Chatzos* - Yevi'enu Leshum Shelamim'.
(a)Each of the following Amora'im establish the Beraisa when the father died after mid-day. How does each one explain our Mishnah? According to ...
1. ... Rav Sheravyah establishes the Beraisa when he was a Goses at mid-day?
2. ... Rav Ashi establishes the Beraisa like Rebbi Shimon. What does Rebbi Shimon say?
3. ... Ravina establishes the Beraisa when the father both designated the lamb and died after mid-day?
(a)The following Amora'im all establish the Beraisa after mid-day:
1. ... According to Rav Sheravyah - if the father was a Goses at mid-day - then mid-day does not fix the Pesach, since the majority of Gosesim tend to die. Consequently, if the father then dies, it can be brought directly as a Shelamim, without having to first send it to graze.
2. ... Rav Ashi also establishes the Beraisa when the father died after mid-day. But according to him, the author of the Beraisa is Rebbi Shimon, who says that live animals cannot be rejected. Consequently, it is not sent to graze, but may be offered immediately as a Shelamim.
3. ... Ravina answers the Kashya by establishing the Beraisa when the father both designated the lamb and died, after mid-day - only this Tana holds that the second of mid-day only, fixes the animal. Consequently, since at mid-day, it was not yet designated, it could not be rejected, and could therefore be brought as a Shelamim.
(a)What does one do if a lamb of a Pesach, a lamb of an Olah and a lamb of an Asham got mixed up?
(b)What does 've'Yafsid ha'Mosar mi'Beiso' mean?
(c)What does Rebbi Shimon say about a Pesach that got mixed up with Bechoros?
(a)If a lamb of a Pesach, a lamb of an Olah and a lamb of an Asham got mixed up - all three are sent to graze until they become blemished. One takes the proceeds, and buys with the equivalent of the most expensive of the three, one Pesach, one Olah, and one Asham.
(b)'ve'Yafsid ha'Mosar mi'Beiso' means that the difference (between the most expensive and the other two) must come out of his own pocket.
(c)Rebbi Shimon says that if a Pesach that got mixed up with Bechoros - should all three groups comprise only Kohanim, then they bring all three animals, the Pesach (whichever one it is) as a Pesach and the Bechoros (whichever ones they are) as Bechoros, and then eat them in Yerushalayim, applying all the stringencies of both a Pesach and a Bechor.
(a)What does Rebbi Shimon say with regard to an Asham that got mixed up with a Shelamim?
(b)On what grounds do the Rabanan disagree with Rebbi Shimon?
(c)What do the Rabanan propose that one does with Asham that got mixed up with a Shelamim?
(d)Seeing as a Bechor cannot be redeemed (even if it is blemished), what do the Rabanan rule with regard to a Pesach that got mixed up with a Bechor?
(a)According to Rebbi Shimon, if an Asham that got mixed up with a Shelamim, both must be brought as if they were Ashamos - i.e. Shechted on the north side of the Azarah, and eaten by male Kohanim exclusively in the Azarah, for only one day and a night.
(b)The Rabanan disagree - because that would mean curtailing the eating-time of the Shelamim (from two days down to one), which, in turn, will possibly result in causing the Bechoros to be burnt prematurely.
(c)They therefore propose that all three animals be sent into the field to graze until they receive a blemish, and are then sold to purchase with the proceeds two Ashamos and a Shelamim.
(d)According to the Rabanan, if a Pesach got mixed up with a Bechor, they are both sent to graze until they receive a blemish. Then they transfer the Kedushah of the Pesach (whichever one it is) on to a nice juicy lamb, and eat the two blemished ones as if they were blemished Bechoros (which may not be weighed or sold in a butchery, nor be weighed on scales).
(a)One member of a group who was sent to find the group's lost Pesach lamb and Shecht it on their behalf, did indeed find and Shecht it. In the meantime, the other members gave up waiting and Shechted a second one. Assuming that they knew which lamb was Shechted first, from which one will they all eat ...
1. ... if the Sheli'ach's lamb was Shechted first?
2. ... if theirs was Shechted first?
(b)If they do not know which one was Shechted first, then the Sheli'ach eats from his in any event. What do the other members of the group do?
(c)Are they obligated to bring a Pesach Sheni?
(a)If the member of the group found and Shechted the lost lamb, and the other members of the group gave up waiting and Shechted a second one, then (should they know which lamb was Shechted first) ...
1. ... if the Shali'ach's lamb was the one to be Shechted first - they all eat from his.
2. ... if theirs was Shechted first - then they all eat from theirs. Either way, the Shali'ach eats from his own lamb.
(b)If they do not know which one was Shechted first, then the other members of the group cannot eat from either Pesach.
(c)They do not however, need to bring a Pesach Sheni, since either way, they have fulfilled their obligation (seeing as their Pesach was Shechted b'Kashrus and they themselves were fit to eat it when it was Shechted).
(a)Exactly the same will apply in the reverse, if the Sheli'ach asked the members of his group to Shecht on his behalf should he delay (but they did not ask him), and both he and they Shechted. What will be the Din when they both asked each other, if ...
1. ... they know which one was Shechted first?
2. ... they do not know which one was Shechted first?
(b)What will be the Din if neither asked the other to Shecht on his/their behalf, and they both Shechted a lamb?
(a)If they both asked each other ...
1. ... and subsequently know which one was Shechted first - then they all eat from the first one to be Shechted.
2. ... but do not know which one was Shechted first - then both lambs must be burned, though they do not need to bring a Pesach Sheni.
(b)If neither asked the other to Shecht on his/their behalf, and they both Shechted a lamb - then neither needs contend with the other, and each one eats from his own Pesach.
(a)If the Pesachim of two groups got mixed up, each takes one of the lambs. What is then the procedure?
(b)Why can they not make the relevant declaration without one person from each group joining the other group?
(c)What do they do if the Pesachim of five groups got mixed up?
(a)If the Pesachim of two groups got mixed up, each takes one of the lambs, and one member of each group goes across to the other. The members of the group then say to their new member: 'If the Pesach that we picked is ours, then you will withdraw from your original group and join us; whereas if it is yours that we took, then you will remain with it and we will withdraw from our original Pesach and join you.
(b)They cannot make the relevant declaration without one person from each group joining the other one - because of the fifty per cent chance that they are leaving their Pesach without an owner, which is forbidden.
(c)If the Pesachim of five groups got mixed up - they follow the same procedure as in the previous case, only four people from each group must leave their original group, and one must go and join each of the four other groups.
(a)If the Pesachim of two individuals got mixed up, what do they then do?
(b)Why do they need to designate a new member? Why can each one not make the relevant declaration and say that in the event of his having taken the lamb that was not originally his ...
1. ... he withdraws from his own lamb and now designates this one?
2. ... he first designates the other lamb as his own, and then withdraws from his original one?
(a)If the Pesachim of two individuals got mixed up, they each take one of the lambs; then they designate a new member from outside, after which each original owner goes across to the other lamb, and says very much like in the previous case: 'If this Pesach is my original one' etc.
(b)Each one cannot just make the relevant declaration and say that in the event of his having taken the lamb that was not originally his ...
1. ... he withdraws from his own lamb and now designates this one - because, as we said earlier, one may not leave a Pesach without an owner.
2. ... he first designates the other lamb as his own, and then withdraws from his original one - because one cannot subscribe to two Pesachim.