Previous daf

1)

(a) Ben Teima gives the Chagigah of the fourteenth the same Din as the Korban Pesach, and it may only be eaten for the night of the fifteenth.

(b) In the Pasuk "ve'Lo Yalin la'Boker Zevach Chag ha'Pasach" - "Zevach Chag" refers to the Chagigah, and "ha'Pasach", to the Pesach, and the Torah writes "ve'Lo Yalin".

(c) It is only the Chagigah of the fourteenth of Nisan, which comes together with the Pesach, that is equivalent to the Korban Pesach. The Chagigos of Yom-Tov day, like regular Shelamim, may be eaten for two days and the intervening night.

(d) One may not use the Chagigah of the fourteenth for tomorrow's Chagigah, because this animal is already obligated to be brought, and one can only fulfill one's fresh obligation with *Chulin*, not with something that one is already obligated to bring.

(a) The Gemara proves that, according to Ben Teima, the Torah compares the Chagigah of the fourteenth to the Pesach, even as regards eating it roasted - from the Mah Nishtanah, which reads 'ha'Laylah ha'Zeh Kulo Tz'li' (which includes the Chagigah of the fourteenth).

(b) The Chagigah is also compared to the Pesach, according to him, with regard to bringing it specifically from the flock (and not from the herd), male and in its first year.

(c) "ve'Etzem Lo Sishberu *Bo*" - might come to teach us "Bo" 'the bones of the Korban Pesach, but not of the Chagigah'.

(d) Alternatively, we may Darshen "Bo" ' the bones of a Kasher Pesach, but not of a Pasul one'.

(a) One can be certain that, on the fourteenth of Nisan, the owner had Toveled the knife that one found then, already on the thirteenth (to allow nightfall to permit the knife to be used on the following day). On the thirteenth however, the possibility exists that the owner lost it before he had a chance to Tovel it.

(b) If the author of the Beraisa (which differentiates between a knife and a chopping-knife) was the Rabbanan of Ben Teima, who permit chopping the bones of the Chagigah, then why is the knife that one finds on the fourteenth permitted any more than the chopping-knife, which the owner would definitely have Toveled on the thirteenth, in order to chop the bones of the Chagigah? Consequently, the author must be Ben Teima, who, we must say, forbids breaking the bones of the Chagigah, just like those of the Pesach.

(a) We cannot establish the Beraisa even like the Rabbanan of Ben Teima, and the reason the owner did not Tovel the Kupitz is because Erev Pesach that year fell on Shabbos - since the Seifa of that Beraisa deals with the case of Erev Pesach that fell on Shabbos, it is clear that the Reisha does *not*.

(b) One may Shecht with the chopping-knife immediately, or on the following day (without having to Tovel it), if one found it on the fourteenth that fell on Shabbos - because even assuming that the owner had another knife for Shechitah, and the chopping-knife would not be required for the Chagigah of the fourteenth that year, he would still have had to Tovel it for the Shalmei Chagigah or Simchah of the fifteenth, which would in any case, have to be Toveled on the thirteenth.

(c) The chopping-knife is permitted immediately, even if it is found on the fourteenth which is a weekday - if it is found tied to the knife, since we then assume that they were Toveled together.

5)

(a) We cannot establish the Beraisa by a small group, in which case, the Chagigah is not brought - because how would the owner know already on the thirteenth, that he would have only have small group?

(b) The owner knew already on the thirteenth that it might be a Pesach ha'Ba be'Tum'ah - because it speaks when the King was critically ill on the thirteenth.

(c) We cannot however, explain that the King had already *died* on the thirteenth - because if so, seeing as everybody is obligated to assist in his burial and to become Tamei, it would b e a Pesach ha'Ba be'Tum'ah, in which case it would not be necessary to Tovel the knife.

(d) Seeing as the King was critically ill on the thirteenth, we assume that the owner Toveled the knife - because of the good chance that he would not die by the fourteenth; he would not however, have Toveled the chopping-knife yet, due to the double Safek against his being in need of it: 1. the King might die; 2. Even if he would not, his group might be a small group, and a Chagigah would not be required. And as for the Chagigah of the fifteenth, for that, he still had time to Tovel it on the fourteenth.

(a) Yehudah ben Dursai detached himself from the Chachamim to go and live in the south, far from Yerushalayim - because he disagreed with their ruling that the Chagigah is not brought on Shabbos. In fact, he considered the Chagigah to be an obligatiion no less than the Pesach.

(b) He explained the "Tzon u'Vakar" in the Pasuk "ve'Zavachta Pesach la'Hashem Elokecha Tzon u'Vakar" - to refer to the Chagigah of the fourteenth (otherwise, if it referred to the Pesach, how could the Torah write "Tzon *u'Vakar"*, seeing as the Pesach is not brought from cattle?)

(c) The Chachamim explain the Pasuk like Rav Nachman quoting Rabah Bar Avuha, who Darshened that the leftovers of the Pesach-offerings (i.e. those that were not brought as a Pesach), should be brought as a Korban that comes from sheep and cattle i.e. a Shelamim.

(a) We learn from the Pasuk (written in connection with Succos) "ve'Chagosem Oso Chag la'Hashem *Shiv'as Yamim* ba'Shanah"- that the Chagigah does not over-ride Shabbos. Otherwise, seeing as Succos consists of *eight* days (seven days of Succos plus Shemini Atzeres), why does the Torah write "*Shiv'as* Yamim ba'Shanah", and not "*Shemonas* Yamim"?

(b) The Chagigah will be brought for *six* days and not *seven* - when the first and the eighth days fall on Shabbos.

(c) Abaye rejected Ravin's Kashya (that, in that case, the Chagigah is sometimes brought for *six* days and not *seven* - so why does the Torah write *seven*) - on the grounds that the Torah is concerned with most years, and not the odd year when it is only six.

(d) He refered to him as 'Avin Tichla' (which means 'the bereaved') because he suffered the misfortune of burying his children.

Next daf