פסחים 120:2 — Soncino English Talmud

R. JOSE SAID: IF THEY FELL, INTO A LIGHT SLEEP, THEY MAY EAT; IF THEY FELL FAST ASLEEP, THEY MUST NOT EAT. THE PASSOVER-OFFERING DEFILES ONE'S HANDS AFTER MIDNIGHT; PIGGUL AND NOTHAR DEFILE ONE'S HANDS. GEMARA. R. JOSE SAID: IF THEY FELL INTO A LIGHT SLEEP, THEY MAY EAT; IF THEY FELL FAST ASLEEP, THEY MUST NOT EAT. What condition is meant by ‘A LIGHT SLEEP’? Said R. Ashi: A sleep which is not sleep, a wakefulness which is not wakefulness. E.g., if he answers when called, cannot make a reasoned statement, yet recollects when reminded. Abaye was sitting [at the Passover meal] before Rabbah. Seeing him dozing he remarked to him, ‘You, sir, are sleeping.’ ‘I was merely dozing.’ replied he, ‘and we have learnt: ‘IF THEY FELL INTO A LIGHT SLEEP, THEY MAY EAT; IF THEY FELL, FAST ASLEEP’, THEY MUST NOT EAT.’ THE PASSOVER-OFFERING DEFILES ONE'S HANDS AFTER MIDNIGHT etc. This proves that from midnight it is nothar. Which Tanna [holds thus]? — Said R. Joseph. It is R. Eleazar b. ‘Azariah. For it was taught: And they shall eat the flesh in that night.’ R. Eleazar b. ‘Azariah said: ‘In that night’ is stated here, while elsewhere it is stated, For I will go through the land of Egypt in that night: just as there it means midnight, so here too [they may eat the Passover-offering] until midnight. Said R. Akiba to him: Yet surely it is already stated, [and ye shall eat it] in haste, [implying] until the time of haste. If so, what is taught by ‘in [that] night?’ You might think that it can be eaten like [other] sacrifices, [viz.,] by day: therefore it is stated, ‘in [that] night’: it is eaten by night, but it may not be eaten by day. Now how does R. Akiba employ ‘that [night]’? He utilizes it as excluding a second night. For I might argue. Since the Passover-offering is a sacrifice of lesser sanctity, and the peace-offering is a sacrifice of lesser sanctity, the just as the peace-offering is to be eaten two days and one night, so in the case of the Passover-offering, I will substitute nights for days, and it may be eaten two nights and one day. Therefore the Divine Law wrote ‘that [night]’. And R. Eleazar b. ‘Azariah? — He can answer you: That is deduced from, and ye shall let nothing of it remain until the morning. And R. Akiba? — He can answer you: Had not the Divine Law written ‘that [night]’. I would have said, what does ‘morning’ mean? the second morning. Then what of R. Eleazar b. ‘Azariah? — He can answer you: Wherever ‘morning’ is written, It means the first morning. Raba said: If a man eats unleavened bread after midnight nowadays, according to R. Eleazar b. ‘Azariah he does not discharge his duty. That is obvious, [for] since it is assimilated to the Passover-offering, it is like the Passover-offering? — You might say, surely the Writ excluded it from the analogy; hence he informs us that when the Writ restores it, it restores it to its original state. PIGGUL AND NOTHAR DEFILE ONE'S HANDS. R. Huna and R. Hisda — one maintains: It is on account of suspected priests; while the other said: It is on account of the lazy priests. One maintained: As much as an olive [defiles]; while the other said: [At least] as much as an egg.^ᵃ^ᵇ^ᶜ^ᵈ^ᵉ^ᶠ^ᵍ^ʰ^ⁱ^ʲ^ᵏ^ˡ^ᵐ^ⁿ^ᵒ^ᵖ^ᵠ^ʳ

^ᵃnote:This distinction refers to the first clause, when only some of them fell asleep.
^ᵇnote:Because it is then nothar, q.v. Glos.
^ᶜnote:This happened while he was eating the unleavened bread at the end of the meal, and Abaye meant that he might not continue now.
^ᵈnote:Ex. XII, 8.
^ᵉnote:Ibid. 12.
^ᶠnote:After which it is nothar.
^ᵍnote:Ibid. 11.
^ʰnote:I.e., when they had to make haste to leave Egypt, which was in the morning.
^ⁱnote:V. p. 108, n. 2.
^ʲnote:This is necessary, since its main eating is at night.
^ᵏnote:How does he refute this argument?
^ˡnote:Ex. XII, 10.
^ᵐnote:Does he not admit this?
^ⁿnote:Cf. supra 71a and b.
^ᵒnote:Since he holds that the Passover-offering may not be eaten after midnight, while as stated supra 120a unleavened bread is assimilated to the Passover-offering.
^ᵖnote:I.e., the verse ‘at even ye shall eat unleavened bread’.
^ᵠnote:In that unleavened bread is declared obligatory nowadays despite the absence of the paschal lamb, v. supra 120a.
^ʳnote:V. supra 120a. I.e., once the Writ teaches that unleavened bread nowadays is obligatory, notwithstanding the analogy, it becomes assimilated to the paschal-offering in respect of the hours during which the obligation can he discharged.