Rambam - 3 Chapters a Day

The following rules apply when a person tells his servant: "Go and sacrifice a Paschal sacrifice for me." Even though his master usually slaughters a lamb every year and the servant slaughtered a goat - or his master would usually slaughter a goat and he went and slaughtered a lamb, the master may partake of it, since he did not explicitly say: "Slaughter this particular type."

If the servant went and slaughtered both a kid and a lamb, the master may not partake of either of them. Instead, they should be taken to the place where sacrifices are burnt, because one may not be enumerated on two Paschal sacrifices. If, however, it was a king or queen who told his servant to sacrifice an animal for him and the servant slaughtered a kid and a lamb, the king or queen may partake of the one slaughtered first. This leniency was granted to placate the king.

When one tells his agent: "Go out and slaughter a Paschal sacrifice for me" and establishes that he wants either a kid or a lamb slaughtered, but the agent forgot what the principal told him, the agent should slaughter both a kid and a lamb and say: "If the principal told me to slaughter a kid, the kid should be his and the lamb, mine. If he told me to slaughter a lamb, the lamb should be his and the kid, mine."

In such a situation, if the principal also forgot what he told the agent, both animals should be taken to the place where sacrifices are burnt. If the principal forgot before the blood was cast on the altar, they are obligated to bring a second Paschal sacrifice. If he forgot after the blood was cast on the altar, he is exempt from bring a second Paschal sacrifice.

The same also applies if one tells a Canaanite servant: "Go and slaughter a Paschal sacrifice for me," and he established the type of sacrifice he desired and the servant forgot what his master told him, provided the shepherd of his master gives him a kid and a lamb and tells him: "Slaughter both of them so that you will have slaughtered one according to the instructions of your master. And one shall be yours on the condition that your master has no portion in it." If the shepherd does this, it will be possible for the servant to make the stipulation described above.

The following rules apply if the members of a company tell a person: "Go and slaughter a Paschal sacrifice for us," and he tells them: "And you should slaughter for me." If they slaughtered an animal and he slaughtered an animal, they should eat from the animal slaughtered first and the one slaughtered last should be taken to the place where sacrifices are burnt.

The following laws apply when the animal designated as a Paschal sacrifice of a company is lost and they tell one of the members of the company: "Go, search for it, and slaughter it for us." He went, found the Paschal sacrifice that was lost, and slaughtered it and they took another animal for a Paschal sacrifice and slaughtered it. If his was slaughtered first, he partakes of his sacrifice and they partake of it with him and the second one should be burnt. If theirs was slaughtered first, they should partake of their sacrifice and he should partake of his own. If it is not known which was slaughtered first or they were both slaughtered at the same time, he should partake of his own, but they should not eat with him. Their sacrifice should be taken to the place where sacrifices are burnt, but they are exempt from bringing a second Paschal sacrifice.

The following laws apply when the agent told the members of the company who sent him to search for the Paschal sacrifice that was lost and to slaughter it: "If I come late, slaughter a Paschal sacrifice for me," and then he went and found the lost animal and slaughtered it, but they also took another animal for a Paschal sacrifice and slaughtered it. If theirs is slaughtered first, they should partake of their own and he should eat with them. The second one should be burnt. If his is slaughtered first, he should partake of his own and they should partake of their own. If it is not known which was slaughtered first or they were both slaughtered at the same time, they should partake of theirs, but he does not partake of it with them. His sacrifice should be taken to the place where sacrifices are burnt, but he is exempt from bringing a second Paschal sacrifice.

The following laws apply if the Paschal sacrifice of a company was lost and the Paschal sacrifice of an individual was lost. He told them: "Go, search for it, and slaughter for me" and they told him: "Go, search for it, and slaughter for us." If he went, found the lost animal, and slaughtered it and they went, found the lost animal, and slaughtered it, they should all eat from the first one slaughtered and the second should be burnt. If it is not known which was slaughtered first or they were both slaughtered at the same time, they should both be burnt and they are all exempt from bringing a second Paschal sacrifice.

If he went to search for the lost animal and they went to search for the lost animal, but they did not tell each other anything, neither one has any responsibility to the other. Since they said nothing explicitly and did not tell each other anything, this applies even if, in their hearts, they had the intent that each one would slaughter for the other and there were gestures and other matters from which it could be assessed that they all agreed that whoever finds the lost animal should slaughter for the sake of the other.

The following rules apply when the Paschal sacrifices of two companies become intermingled before they are slaughtered. One company takes one lamb from the mixture and the other takes the second. One of the members of one company should go to the other and one of the members of the second company should go the first. Each of the companies say to the person who came to join them: "If this Paschal sacrifice is ours, you are removed from your Paschal sacrifice and enumerated on ours. If, however, this Paschal sacrifice is yours, we are removed from our Paschal sacrifice and enumerated on yours."

Similarly, if there were five groups with at least five persons in each or ten groups of at least ten, a member of every company is taken to each other company and such stipulations are made. Afterwards, they slaughter the sacrificial animals.

When the Paschal sacrifices of two individuals become intermingled, one should take one of the Paschal sacrifices that are intermingled and the other should take the other. One should add another outsider to his Paschal sacrifice and the other should add an outsider, so that there be two companies. Afterwards, one of the two will go to the others and one of the others will go to the one and each one will stipulate with the person who came to him from the other company. Each should say: "If this Paschal sacrifice is mine, you are removed from your Paschal sacrifice and enumerated on mine. If, however, this Paschal sacrifice is yours, I am removed from our Paschal sacrifice and enumerated on yours." Thus no one has lost anything.

When the hides of the Paschal sacrifices of five companies become intermingled and a disqualifying growth was discovered on the hide of one of them, all the sacrifices must be taken to the place where sacrifices are burnt. If they were intermingled before the blood was cast on the altar, they are all obligated to bring the second Paschal sacrifice.

If, however, the sacrificial animals became intermingled after the blood was cast, they are exempt from bringing the second Paschal sacrifice. For if they would offer a second Paschal sacrifice, the ones who offered an acceptable sacrifice on the first Pesach will be bringing non-sacrificial animals to the Temple Courtyard. If they would all be enumerated on one Paschal sacrifice, it would be slaughtered for those who are not obligated. That is equivalent to having it sacrificed for the sake of those who were not enumerated upon it. If each one of them brought a sacrifice for the second Paschal sacrifice and made a stipulation saying: "If it is not a Paschal sacrifice, it should be considered as a peace-offering," that is undesirable. For the blood of the Paschal sacrifice is poured on the altar, while the blood of a peace-offering is dashed and, as an initial preference, blood that should be dashed should not be poured. Hence they are exempt from a second Paschal sacrifice.

We already explained in Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim that a Paschal sacrifice is slaughtered only for the sake of a Paschal sacrifice and only for the sake of its owners. If it was slaughtered for the sake of another type of sacrifice, it is unacceptable.

When a person slaughters a Paschal sacrifice for the members of a company and, at a later time, told them: "That Paschal sacrifice that I slaughtered for you was not slaughtered with the proper intent," they should rely on his words if they consider him trustworthy. If not, according to the letter, his word is not accepted. If one desires to be stringent with himself and bring a second Paschal sacrifice, he is praiseworthy.

When the meat of the Paschal sacrifice becomes impure and one becomes aware of this before the blood is poured on the altar, it should not be poured on the altar even though the fats and organs are pure. The rationale is that the Paschal sacrifice is offered only with the intent that it be eaten. If the blood is poured on the altar, it is not acceptable.

If one does not become aware until the blood was poured, it is acceptable. For the High Priest's forehead plate generates appeasement for blood offered unintentionally when meat became impure, but it does not generate appeasement for intentional violation.

If a portion of the limbs of the Paschal sacrifice become impure, he should burn those which became impure and partake of those which are pure. If the fats and organs become impure while the meat is intact, the blood should be poured and the meat eaten in the evening.

If the owners become impure after the Paschal sacrifice was slaughtered, the blood should not be poured. If it is poured, it is not acceptable. Therefore they are obligated to bring a second Paschal sacrifice. For the High Priest's forehead plate does not generate appeasement for bodily impurity unless the person became impure due to "impurity likened to the depths," as we explained in Hilchot Bi'at HaMikdash.

When a Paschal sacrifice was taken out of Jerusalem or it became impure on the fourteenth of Nisan, it should be burnt immediately. When the owners became impure, died, or remove themselves - even if they became impure or died before the blood was poured on the altar - it should be left overnight and burnt afterwards.

This is the general principle: Whenever there is a disqualifying factor involving the actual body of the sacrifice, it should be burnt immediately. If the disqualifying factor involves the blood or the owners, it should be left overnight and then burnt. Therefore if it was slaughtered after it was known that the owners removed themselves from the sacrifice, died, or became impure and thus their obligation was postponed until the second Pesach, their first Paschal sacrifice should be burnt immediately.

When does the statement that the Paschal sacrifice should be burnt if the owners become impure apply? When all of the members of the company become impure. If, however, only some of them become impure, those who remain pure acquire the portions of those who became impure. Even if those who became impure incurred their impurity after they began eating, those who were pure who did not begin eating as of yet, acquire their portion.

If, however, all of them began eating and some of them became impure, those who remain pure do not acquire the portions of those who became impure. Instead, those who remain pure should partake of their portions and the portions of those who became impure should be burnt. This also applies if a portion of the owners died.

If the Paschal sacrifice became impure after those impure began eating, those who remained pure acquire their portions. If, however, they all had begun to eat and some of them became impure, those who remained pure do not acquire the portions of those who became impure. Instead, those who remained pure should eat their own portion and the portions of those who became impure should be burnt. These same laws apply if some of those enumerated on the sacrifice died.

If the entire Paschal sacrifice or its majority becomes impure, it should be burnt in front of the Temple in the presence of everyone to embarrass its owners, so that in the future they will show greater care. It should be burnt with wood designated for the altar so that suspicion about them will not be aroused and it be said: "They stole wood designated for the altar." Therefore if they burn it with straw and reeds and desire to burn it with their own straw, they may.

If less than half of it became impure, and similarly, any meat left over from the Paschal sacrifice, should be burnt in their own courtyards from their own wood. Wood designated for the altar should not be used, so that it will not remain in their possession and they misappropriate it.

If one set aside a female animal for his Paschal sacrifice or a male animal in its second or third year of life, it should be allowed to pasture until it contracts a disqualifying blemish. Then it should be sold and a Paschal sacrifice brought with the proceeds of the sale. If it did not contract a blemish until after he offered his Paschal sacrifice, he should bring a peace-offering with the proceeds of the sale.

When a person sets aside a Paschal sacrifice and dies, his son should not bring it afterwards as a Paschal sacrifice, but as a peace-offering. If the son was enumerated on the Paschal sacrifice together with his father, he may bring it as a Paschal sacrifice.

When does the above apply? When his father dies after midday on the fourteenth of Nisan. If, however, he died before midday on the fourteenth, the son is deferred to the second Pesach, because he is in the acute state of onain mourning, as will be explained. He should bring this animal as a Paschal sacrifice on the second Pesach.

The following laws apply if a person's Paschal sacrifice was lost and then he found it after he set aside another Paschal sacrifice and they are both standing before him. He should sacrifice whichever one he desires for the sake of a Paschal sacrifice and the other should be offered as a peace-offering.

If he finds it after he slaughtered another animal as a Paschal sacrifice, the one that he found should be offered as a peace-offering. Similarly, if he transferred the holiness of the animal he found after the slaughter of its replacement, the animal unto which the holiness was transferred should be sacrificed as a peace-offering. If, however, he found it before the other he set aside was slaughtered, different rules apply. Since the animal that was found is fit to be offered as a Paschal sacrifice and it is fit to be offered as a peace-offering, as explained above, if he transferred the holiness of the animal that was found whether before the slaughter of the one designated in its place or afterwards, the animal to which its holiness is transferred is not sacrificed. Instead, it is left to pasture until it contracts a blemish. Then a peace-offering is brought with the proceeds of its sale.

An animal designated as a Paschal sacrifice that becomes more than a year old or a peace-offering brought from an animal that was originally designated as Paschal sacrifice is considered as a peace-offering in all contexts. It requires semichah, accompanying offerings, and the waving of the breast and thigh. These requirements do not apply with regard to the Paschal sacrifice.

When an animal designated as a Paschal sacrifice becomes intermingled with animals designated as peace-offerings, they should all be brought as peace-offerings. If it became intermingled with an animal designated as another type of offering, the two should be allowed to pasture until they contract disqualifying physical blemishes. An animal equivalent to the value of the more expensive of the two should be brought for each type of sacrifice and the owner should forfeit the remainder from his resources, as explained in Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim.

If a Paschal sacrifice becomes intermingled with firstborn animals, they should be allowed to pasture until they contract disqualifying physical blemishes and then they should be eaten according to the laws pertaining to a blemished firstborn animal. And he should bring an animal equivalent to the most valuable one in the mixture and say: "Wherever the Paschal sacrifice is, its holiness should be transferred to this animal." That animal should be brought as a peace-offering if his Paschal sacrifice was already offered.

When one sets aside an animal for a Paschal sacrifice before he converts and then converts or a Canaanite servant sets one aside before he is freed and then he is freed, or a child sets one aside before he manifests signs of physical maturity and then he manifests them, he may offer it for the sake of a Paschal sacrifice. The rationale is that living animals are not deemed unacceptable forever, as explained in Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim.

If one set aside money for his Paschal sacrifice and there was some left over, he should use the remainder for a peace-offering. If someone enumerates others on his Paschal sacrifice and festive offering, the money he takes from them for their portion is considered as ordinary funds. Even though this one set aside a lamb for his Paschal sacrifice and this one set aside money, and then one took that money and enumerated the other on his Paschal sacrifice, the money is considered as ordinary funds. For the Jews consecrated their Paschal sacrifices and festive offerings and the money for their Paschal sacrifices and festive offerings with this stipulation.

The wood used for roasting the Paschal sacrifice is equivalent to the Paschal sacrifice. Similarly, the matzah and bitter herbs, since they are necessary elements for the Paschal sacrifice, are equivalent to the Paschal sacrifice. If one took money from the money for the Paschal sacrifice from someone who was enumerated with him to enumerate him on the matzah and the bitter herbs or so that he will own a portion of the wood used to roast it, the money is considered as ordinary funds.

When someone was impure at the time of the slaughter of the Paschal sacrifice and the Paschal sacrifice could not be slaughtered for him, was "on a distant way," he was prevented because of other reasons, or inadvertently failed to offer the first Paschal sacrifice, he should bring a Paschal sacrifice on the fourteenth of the second month in the afternoon. Slaughtering this Paschal sacrifice is an independent positive commandment and supersedes the Sabbath prohibitions. For the second Pesach is not compensation for the first, but an independent festival. Therefore one is liable for karet for failing to bring the sacrifice.

What is implied? If a person inadvertently or because of forces beyond his control failed to offer the first Paschal sacrifice, if he intentionally refrained from offering the second, he is liable for karet. If he inadvertently did not offer the second Paschal sacrifice or was held back due to forces beyond his control, he is exempt from karet. If he intentionally did not offer the first Paschal sacrifice, he may offer the second. If he did not offer the second Paschal sacrifice, even if his lapse was unintentional, he is liable for karet. The rationale is that he did not offer God's sacrifice at the appointed time and was willful in his omission. If, however, he was impure or "on a distant way" and did not offer the first Paschal sacrifice, he is not liable for karet even though he willfully did not bring the second. The rationale is that on the first Pesach, he was already exempt from karet.

When someone was "on a distant way" on the fourteenth of Nisan, but the Paschal sacrifice was nevertheless sacrificed on his behalf and the blood was poured on the altar for him, it is not accepted and he is obligated to offer a second Paschal sacrifice even though he came in the evening.

When a person is impure, but could purify himself to partake of the first Paschal sacrifice, and yet refrains from immersing himself and instead, remains in a state of impurity until the time for offering the sacrifices passes, he is considered as having intentionally failed to sacrifice the first Paschal sacrifice. This ruling also applies to an uncircumcised person who does not circumcise himself until the time for the sacrifice passes. Therefore if these individuals do not offer the second Paschal sacrifice - even if their failure to do so is inadvertent - they are liable for karet.

Just as the failure to circumcise oneself holds a person back from offering the Paschal sacrifice, so too, the failure to circumcise one's children below the age of majority and the failure to circumcise all of one's Canaanite servants, whether above majority or below majority, holds him back, as Exodus 12:48 states: "He shall circumcise all males, then he will draw close to offer it." If one offered the Paschal sacrifice before circumcising the above individuals, the Paschal sacrifice is invalidated.

Similarly, the immersion of one's Canaanite maidservants in a mikveh for the sake of servitude holds one back from offering the Paschal sacrifice. This matter is part of the received tradition: immersion for maidservants is equivalent to circumcision for servants.

The circumcision of his servants and the immersion of his maidservants does not prevent a minor from being enumerated on a Paschal sacrifice, as indicated by ibid.:44: "Any servant of a man." This excludes a minor.

A convert who converts between the first Pesach and the second Pesach and similarly, a child who comes of age between these two holidays are obligated to offer the second Paschal sacrifice. If one slaughtered the first Paschal sacrifice for the sake of the minor, the minor is exempt from bringing the second sacrifice.

When the obligation of women is postponed until the second Pesach, whether because of forces beyond their control, inadvertent omission, impurity, or because they were "on a distant way," offering the second Paschal sacrifice is optional for them. If they desire, they may have the offering slaughtered; if they do not desire, they don't. Therefore one should not slaughter a Paschal sacrifice only for women when the second Pesach falls on the Sabbath. If, however, a woman is part of the company offering a second Paschal sacrifice, it is permitted.

What is meant by the term "on a distant way" which exempts a person from bringing a Paschal sacrifice? Fifteen mil outside the walls of Jerusalem.

If one was fifteen mil or more outside of Jerusalem at the appearance of the sun on the fourteenth of Nisan, he is considered to be "on a distant way." If he was closer than this, he is not considered to be "on a distant way," because he could reach Jerusalem after midday while walking comfortably by foot.

If he journeyed and did not reach Jerusalem in time, because he was held back by a press of animals or he was in Jerusalem, but was infirm in his legs and did not reach the Temple Courtyard until the time for the offering of the sacrifice passed, he is considered as having been held back by forces beyond his control, but not "on a distant way."

If someone was imprisoned outside the walls of Jerusalem and was promised to be released in the evening, the offering may be slaughtered on his behalf and when he is released in the evening, he may partake of it.

When does the above apply? When he was imprisoned by Jews. If, by contrast, he was imprisoned by gentiles, the Paschal sacrifice should not be slaughtered on his behalf until he is released. If, however, it was slaughtered on his behalf and he was released, he may partake of it. If he was not released, he is exempt from bringing a second Paschal sacrifice, since the sacrifice was slaughtered on his behalf.

Similar laws apply when a Paschal sacrifice was slaughtered for a person in the acute state of onain mourning, for an invalid, or for an elderly person who could have partaken of the sacrifice who became impure after the blood was poured on the altar and thus they are no longer able to partake of it. They are exempt from offering the second Paschal sacrifice.