פסחים 97 — Soncino English Talmud

¹You might think that it is also thus before Passover, therefore it is stated, ‘it’: ‘it’ is offered [as a peace-offering], but the substitute of a Passover-offering is not offered [as such] — How is it meant? If we say that it was found before slaughtering and he substituted [another] for it before slaughtering, then it is obvious! Why do I require a verse? Hence it must surely apply to where it was found before the slaughtering, ‘while he substituted [another] for it after the slaughtering. Thus the refutation of Raba is indeed a refutation. Samuel said: Whatever must be left to perish in the case of a sin-offering, is brought as a peace-offering in the case of a Passover, and whatever must be left to graze in the case of a sin-offering, must also be left to graze in the case of a Passover. While R. Johanan said: No Passover is brought as a peace-offering save that which is found after the slaughtering, but not [if it is found] before the slaughtering. To this R. Joseph demurred: Now is this a general rule? Surely there is the sin-offering more than a year old, which goes forth to pasture, for R. Simeon b. Lakish said: A sin-offering more than a year old, we regard as though it stood in a cemetery, and it must be left to graze; whereas a Passover in such a case is brought as a peace-offering, for it was taught: ‘[If he bring] a lamb [etc.]’: this is to include the Passover-offering, in respect of its fat tail. When it is stated, ‘If [he bring] a lamb,’ this is to include [an animal] more than a year old [dedicated for] a Passover and a peace-offering which comes In virtue of a Passover-offering in respect of all the regulations of a peace-offering, [viz.,] that they require laying [of the hands], libations, and the waving of the breast and shoulder. Again, when it [Scripture] states, ‘and if [his offering be] a goat’, it breaks across the subject and teaches of a goat that it does not require [the burning of its] fat tail [on the altar]! — Said he to him, Samuel spoke only of lost [sacrifices], but he did not say it of rejected [animals]. Yet is [this principle] possible [in the case of] a lost [sacrifice]? Surely an [animal which was] lost at the time of separating [another], in the view of the Rabbis goes to pasture [until it receives a blemish], for we learned: If he set apart [an animal as] his sinoffering and it was lost, and he [then] set apart another in its stead, and [then] the first was found again, and behold! both stand [before us], [any] one of them may be sacrificed, while the other must die: this is Rabbi's ruling. But the Sages maintain: No sin-offering must die except one found after its owner has been atoned for. Hence [if found again] before its owner was atoned for, it must graze. Whereas in the case of a Passover-offering, if it was lost and found again after midday [but] before the slaughtering [of the second], it is brought as a peace-offering? — Samuel agrees with Rabbi, who maintained: A lost animal goes forth to perish. But every lost [sin-offering], according to Rabbi, is left to die, whereas in the case of a Passover-offering, if it was lost before midday and found again before midday it must be left to graze?- [If found] before midday it is not [regarded as lost], in accordance with Raba. For Raba said: A loss at night is not designated a loss . Then according to Rabbi, how is it possible that [a sin.offering] should be left to graze?^ᵃ^ᵇ^ᶜ^ᵈ^ᵉ^ᶠ^ᵍ^ʰ^ⁱ^ʲ^ᵏ^ˡ^ᵐ^ⁿ^ᵒ^ᵖ

^ᵃnote:That the substitute of a Passover which is found before Passover is offered as a peace-offering.
^ᵇnote:He seems to translate, If it (hu) is a lamb (which) he brings etc. , and treats the ‘it’ as a limitation.
^ᶜnote:this does not mean that where the Passover itself is offered as a peace-offering its substitute is not, but that there is a substitute of the Passover which is not offered as a peace-offering.
^ᵈnote:that it cannot be offered itself’, having been rejected as explained in n. 6 on the Mishnah.
^ᵉnote:Here we cannot answer that the verse is a mere support, as above, for in that case what is the purpose of the verse?
^ᶠnote:There are five cases of the former: (i) the offspring of a sin-offering; (ii) the substitute of a sin-offering; (iii) a sin-offering whose owner died; (iv) a sin-offering which was lost, and refound after its owner had made atonement with another; and (v) a sin-offering more than a year old. All these must be allowed to perish. It is now assumed that all these, in the case of a Passover (the first of course is excluded, the Passover being a male), are brought as a peace-offering.
^ᵍnote:until it receives a blemish, when it can be redeemed.-It is discussed anon which these are.
^ʰnote:Until it receives a blemish.
^ⁱnote:Thus inaccessible to the priest for sacrifice-i.e., it cannot be sacrificed.
^ʲnote:This is the point of the objection.
^ᵏnote:V. supra 96b for notes.
^ˡnote:I.e,, iv in p. 521, n. 7.
^ᵐnote:If a sin-offering was lost and another consecrated, and then the first was found again before the second was sacrificed, so that the first was a lost animal only when the second was set apart, but not when it was sacrificed.
^ⁿnote:By another offering.
^ᵒnote:Even if another had been separated in its place.
^ᵖnote:If a sin-offering was lost at night, and another was separated in its stead, and the first was found by the morning, even on Rabbi's view It is not regarded as having been lost, since it could not have been sacrificed at night in any case, and therefore it goes forth to pasture. By the same reasoning, if the lost Passover-offering is found before midday, it is not regarded as having been lost, since it could not have been sacrificed before midday.

²— In accordance with R. Oshaia. For R. Oshaia said: If he set apart two sin-offerings as security, he is atoned for by one of them, while the second must be left to graze. Yet surely a Passover-offering in such a case is brought as a peace-offering? — Rather, Samuel holds as R. Simeon, who maintained: The five sin-offerings are left to die. But surely R. Simeon does not hold at all that [any sin-offering] must be left to graze? Samuel too stated one rule [only]: Whatever must be left to perish in the case of a sin-offering must be left to graze in the case of a Passover-offering. Then what does he inform us? — [His purpose is] to rebut R. Johanan, who said: No Passover is brought as a peace-offering except if it is found after the slaughtering, but not [if it is found] before the slaughtering, which proves that [in his opinion] the slaughtering stamps [it as a rejected animal]; hence he [Samuel] informs us that midday stamps [it]. Another version: Whereas in the case of the Passover, where it is lost and found after midday [but] before the slaughtering [of the second], it is brought as a peace-offering? — Samuel agrees with Rabbah, who maintained: The slaughtering stamps [it]. But surely, since R. Johanan said thereon: ‘No Passover-offering is brought as a peace-offering save when it is found after the slaughtering, but not [if it is found] before the slaughtering,’ which proves that [in his opinion] the slaughtering stamps [it], it follows that Samuel holds [that] midday stamps it?- Rather Samuel agrees with Rabbi, who ruled: A lost [sacrifice] goes forth to perish — But all lost [sacrifices] are left to perish, in Rabbi's opinion, whereas in the case of the Passover-offering, where it is lost before midday and found before midday it must be left to graze? — He holds that [if it is found] before midday it is not [regarded as] lost, and he also holds: Midday stamps [it]. M I S H N A H. IF A MAN SETS ASIDE A FEMALE OR A TWO-YEAR OLD MALE FOR HIS PASSOVER-OFFERING, IT MUST BE LEFT TO GRAZE UNTIL IT BECOMES UNFIT, THEN BE SOLD, AND ITS MONEY IS SPENT ON A VOLUNTARY SACRIFICE, ON A PEACE-OFFERING.11^ᵠ^ʳ^ˢ^ᵗ^ᵘ^ᵛ^ʷ^ˣ^ʸ^ᶻ^ᵃᵃ

^ᵠnote:Each as security for the other, in case the other is lost.
^ʳnote:For this is definitely a case where one is a remainder’, not a rejected sacrifice.
^ˢnote:v. supra 97a. Those die in all cases, this holding good of iv whether it was refound before atonement was made with the second or after. Similarly, if two are set aside as a security for each other, the unsacrificed one must die.
^ᵗnote:How then can Samuel say’, whatever must be left to graze in the case of a sin-offering’?
^ᵘnote:Since all sin-offerings must be left to die, it follows that Samuel teaches that all lost Passover-offerings are brought as peace-offerings. But this is already taught in the Mishnah, viz., IF THE PASSOVER-OFFERING IS FOUND AFTER THE SLAUGHTERING, IT IS BROUGHT AS A PEACE-OFFERING; this is explained supra as meaning after the time for slaughtering, i.e., after midday, which proves that if it is still lost at midday it is brought as a peace-offering.
^ᵛnote:This is another version of the difficulty raised supra 97a: ‘But surely an animal which was lost at the time of separating another, in the view of the Rabbis goes to pasture, whereas in the case etc. (continuing as in the text).
^ʷnote:V. supra 96b. Hence if found before the second is slaughtered it goes to pasture.
^ˣnote:Both are ineligible; v. Ex. XII, 5. ‘A two-year old’ means in its second year.
^ʸnote:Through a blemish.
^ᶻnote:Lit., ‘falls’.
^ᵃᵃnote:In the separate edition of the Mishnah ‘On a peace-offering’ is omitted, while Tosaf. in Zeb. 9b s.v. sj gives the reading as, ‘and he brings a peace-offering with its money’. — By separating it for a Passover-offering he has stamped it as such, and since it is unfit, it is regarded as a rejected sacrifice, which cannot be offered itself but must be redeemed and the money expended on a sacrifice. Cf. Mishnah on 96b and n. 6 a.l.