Rambam - 3 Chapters a Day

Which impure individuals are prevented from offering until the second Pesach? Anyone who cannot partake of the Paschal sacrifice on the fifteenth of Nisan because of his impurity, e.g., zavim, zavot, niddot, women impure because of childbirth, and those who were intimate with a women in the niddah state. By contrast, those who are impure because they touched an animal corpse, a dead crawling animal, and the like on the day of the fourteenth of Nisan, should immerse themselves and the Paschal sacrifice should be sacrificed on their behalf after they immerse themselves. In the evening, when the day of their impurity is concluded, they may partake of the Paschal sacrifice.

When the seventh day of the purification process of one who is impure because of contact with a human corpse falls on the fourteenth of Nisan - even though he has immersed himself and had the ashes of the red heifer sprinkled upon him and thus he is fit to partake of sacrificial foods in the evening - the Paschal sacrifice should not be slaughtered for him. His offering is postponed until the second Pesach. This is derived from Numbers 9:6 "And the men who were impure because of a human corpse and were not able to offer the Paschal sacrifice on that day." According to the Oral Tradition, it was taught that this occurred on the seventh day of their purification process. This is what they were asking: Should the Paschal sacrifice be slaughtered for them and they would partake of it in the evening? Moses explained to them that it should not be slaughtered for them.

When does the above apply? When one became impure because of one of the types of impurity for which a Nazirite would be required to shave. If, however, one became impure because of other types of impurity resulting from contact with a corpse for which a Nazirite is not required to shave, the Paschal sacrifice may be slaughtered for him on the seventh day of his purification process after he immersed himself and had the ashes of the red heifer sprinkled upon him. In the evening, when the day of his impurity is concluded, he may partake of the Paschal sacrifice.

When a zav experiences two discharges and then counts seven clean days and immerses on the seventh day, the Paschal sacrifice may be sacrificed on his behalf and he may partake of it in the evening. If he experienced a zav discharge after the blood was cast on the altar, he is exempt from bringing the second Paschal sacrifice.

Similarly, a woman who is watching a day because of a discharge on the previous day may immerse on the day she is watching, as explained in the laws of forbidden relations. The Paschal sacrifice may be slaughtered on her behalf and she may partake of it in the evening. If she experiences uterine bleeding after the blood of the Paschal sacrifice was cast on the altar, she is exempt from bringing the second Paschal sacrifice.

A Paschal sacrifice is not slaughtered on behalf of a woman who is impure because of menstrual bleeding on her seventh day of impurity. For she may not immerse herself until the night of the eighth day and she is not fit to partake of sacrificial meat until the night of the ninth day.

When the day when one of those requiring atonement may bring his sacrifice falls on the fourteenth of Nisan, one may slaughter the Paschal sacrifice on their behalf. Their sacrifices may be offered on the fourteenth of Nisan, whether before the Paschal sacrifice is slaughtered or afterwards. They may partake of their Paschal sacrifices in the evening.

We do not slaughter the Paschal sacrifice on their behalf until they entrust their sacrifices required to regain purity to the court, lest they be negligent and fail to offer them.

When the eighth day of the purification process of a person suffering from tzara'at falls on the fourteenth of Nissan, but he experiences a seminal emission that day, he may immerse himself, enter the Women's Courtyard, and bring his sacrifices. Although a person who immersed on a particular day is forbidden from entering the Temple Courtyard that day, as was explained in Hilchot Bi'at HaMikdash, since this is the day that the Paschal sacrifice is to be offered at its appointed time, a positive commandment whose omission is punishable by karet comes and supersedes a Rabbinic commandment.

When the seventh day of the purification process of one who became impure due to contact with a human corpse falls on the Sabbath, the ashes of the Red Heifer are not sprinkled upon him until the following day. Even if his seventh day falls on the thirteenth of Nisan which is a Sabbath, the sprinkling of the ashes should be postponed until the fourteenth. The ashes should be sprinkled upon him, but the Paschal sacrifice should not be slaughtered on his behalf, as we explained. Instead, his offering is postponed and he brings the second Paschal sacrifice.

One might argue: The prohibition against sprinkling the ashes on the Sabbath was instituted as a shvut and the failure to bring the Paschal sacrifice is punishable by karet. How then could the Sages uphold their prohibition in the face of a prohibition punishable by karet? In resolution, it can be explained that the day on which he is forbidden to have the ashes sprinkled upon him is not the time when the sacrifice punishable by karet is obligated to be brought. Therefore they upheld their words as instituted, even though this matter will lead to it having to stand in a place punishable by karet.

When an uncircumcised Jew circumcises himself on the day before Pesach, the Paschal sacrifice may be slaughtered on his behalf after his circumcision. The Paschal sacrifice should not, by contrast, be slaughtered on behalf of a convert who converted on the fourteenth of Nisan and circumcised himself and immersed in a mikveh, for he may not partake of the sacrifice in the evening. He is like one who departs from a grave who requires seven days of purification and then can he become pure. This is a decree lest this convert become impure due to contact with a corpse in the following year on the fourteenth of Nisan and immerse himself and seek to partake of the Paschal sacrifice in the evening, saying: "Last year, the Jews did this for me, when I circumcised myself and immersed, and partook of the Paschal sacrifice in the evening."

Behold, this decree is of Rabbinic origin and the failure to bring the Paschal sacrifice is punishable by karet. How then could the Sages uphold their prohibition in the face of a prohibition punishable by karet on the day of the sacrifice which is the fourteenth of Nisan? The rationale is that the convert is not obligated in the observance of mitzvot until he circumcises himself and immerses himself in a mikveh. He should not immerse himself until he becomes healed from the circumcision, as we explained with regard to the concept of conversion. Therefore they upheld their words in this instance, because this person who circumcised himself should not have immersed until he was healed. Thus he would not have incurred an obligation to bring the Paschal sacrifice at all.

If a person came through a beit hapras, he should proceed and sift, proceed and sift. If he did not find a bone and did not contract impurity, he should slaughter and partake of his Paschal sacrifice, even though he walked in a beit hapras. The rationale is that the impurity of a beit hapras is a Rabbinic institution, as will be explained in Hilchot Tum'at Meit, and the Sages did not uphold their decree in the face of an obligation punishable by karet, as we explained. Similarly, a beit hapras that was trod upon is pure with regard to bringing a Paschal sacrifice.

A person in the acute state of onein mourning is fit to partake of the Paschal sacrifice in the evening. The rationale is that the restrictions of aninut at night are Rabbinic in origin and our Sages did not uphold their decree in the face of an obligation punishable by karet. Instead, the Paschal sacrifice should be slaughtered on his behalf. He must immerse and afterwards partake of it. The immersion is necessary so that he makes a distinction from the state of aninut and does not divert his attention.

When does the above apply? When the deceased for whom he must mourn passes away after midday on the fourteenth of Nisan and thus he was already obligated to bring the Paschal sacrifice. If, however, the deceased passed away before midday, the Paschal sacrifice should not be slaughtered on his behalf. Instead, his offering is postponed until the second Pesach. If, however, the Paschal sacrifice was slaughtered on his behalf and the blood poured on the altar, he should immerse himself and partake of it in the evening.

If the deceased relative passed away on the thirteenth of Nisan and was buried on the fourteenth, on the day of the burial, he must observe aninut according to Rabbinic decree and that decree does not encompass the night following the fourteenth. Therefore one may slaughter the Paschal sacrifice on his behalf. He should immerse and partake of it and other sacrifices in the evening. The day when one hears of a close relative's death and the day when one gathers the bones of one's dead is equivalent to the day of burial. Therefore if one had the bones of his dead gathered on the fourteenth of Nisan or heard that a close relative died, the Paschal sacrifice may be slaughtered on his behalf. He immerses himself and may partake of sacrificial food in the evening.

When a person is digging in a mound from an avalanche in search of the body of a deceased person, the Paschal sacrifice should not be slaughtered on his behalf, lest he find a corpse in the mound and he be impure at the time of slaughter. If the Paschal sacrifice was slaughtered on his behalf and a corpse was not found, he may partake of the sacrifice in the evening.

The following rules apply if the corpse was discovered after the blood was poured on the altar. If it became known to him that he was certainly impure at the time the blood was poured, e.g., the mound was round, he is obligated in the second Paschal sacrifice. If the matter is in doubt, i.e., maybe he was not standing over the impurity at the time the blood was poured and did not become impure until afterwards, he is exempt from the second Paschal sacrifice.

The following rules apply when a person journeyed on a road and later a corpse was discovered lying across the width of the road. If the corpse could be deemed as the impurity likened to the depths, even though the person is considered as impure with regard to terumah, he is considered as pure with regard to the Paschal sacrifice. He may slaughter and partake of the Paschal sacrifice even though it is possible that he touched the corpse. Since the impurity is likened to the depths, he is pure with regard to the Paschal sacrifice. Even though the corpse is intact and extends from one end of the path to the other, he may offer his Paschal sacrifice unless he knows with certainty that he became impure because of it.

When does the above apply? When he was walking on foot, for it is possible that he did not touch it. If, however, he was riding on a beast or carrying a burden, he is impure even though it is impurity likened to the depths, for it is impossible that he will not have touched, moved, or stood over the corpse. We have already explained impurity likened to the depths in Hilchot Nizirut.

When a person offered the Paschal sacrifice under the presumption that he was pure and afterwards, it was discovered that he was impure due to impurity likened to the depths, he is not obligated in the second Paschal sacrifice. This is a law conveyed by the Oral Tradition. If, however, it becomes known to him that he was impure due to impurity that was known, he is obligated in the second Paschal sacrifice.

When a person contracted impurity from a human corpse and had the ashes of the red heifer sprinkled upon him on the third and seventh day [as required], but on his seventh day he unknowingly became impure because of a grave "likened to the depths" and brought a Paschal sacrifice under the presumption that he was pure and afterwards, he discovered that he had contracted the impurity "likened to the depths," he is not obligated in the second Paschal sacrifice, for once he immersed himself on the seventh day, his initial impurity ceased. If, however, he had contracted the impurity "likened to the depths" on the sixth day of his impurity and without knowing, he brought a Paschal sacrifice, he is obligated in the second Paschal sacrifice. The rationale is that a person who is impure must operate under the presumption that he is impure until he has definitely become pure, because there is a basis for the presumption of his impurity.

The following rules apply when there were many individuals who were ritually impure due to contact with a human corpse on the first Pesach. If they were the lesser portion of the Jewish people, their offering is postponed to the second Pesach like other impure individuals. If, however, the majority of the Jewish people were impure due to contact with a human corpse or the priests or the sacred utensils were impure due to contact with a human corpse, their offering is not postponed. Instead, they should all offer the Paschal sacrifice in a state of ritual impurity, those ritually impure together with those who are pure.

This is derived from Numbers 9:6 which states: "And the men who were impure because of contact with the corpse of a human soul." Implied is that the offerings of individuals are postponed until the second Pesach, but those of the community are not postponed. This concept applies only with regard to the ritual impurity associated with a human corpse, as explained in Hilchot Bi'at HaMikdash.

If the Jewish people were half ritually pure and half impure, they should all offer the sacrifice on the first Pesach. Those who are pure offer the sacrifice by themselves in a state of ritual purity and those who are impure offer it by themselves in a state of impurity and partake of it in impurity. If the impure outnumbered the pure even by one, they should all offer it in impurity.

If the men were half impure due to contact with a human corpse and half pure and when you count the women together with the men, the majority will be pure, those who are pure should offer the first Paschal sacrifice. Those who are impure do not bring neither the first Paschal sacrifice nor the second. They do not bring the first, because they are the lesser portion of the people. And they do not bring the second, because the women's offering of the second Paschal sacrifice is a matter of choice. Thus the impure persons are merely half the people and half the people do not bring the second Paschal sacrifice.

If the majority of the Jewish people were zavim, afflicted by tzara'at, or had relationships with niddot and the lesser portion were impure due to contact with a human corpse, those impure because of contact with a corpse should not offer the first Paschal sacrifice, because they are the lesser portion of the people. Nor do they offer the second, because individuals do not bring the second except at the time the majority of the people offered the first Paschal sacrifice. In this instance, since the majority of the Jewish people did not offer the first Paschal sacrifice, the lesser portion who are impure because of contact with a corpse should not bring the second Paschal sacrifice.

If the majority of the Jewish people were impure because of contact with a human corpse and a lesser portion were zavim and the like, those who are impure because of contact with a corpse offer the first Paschal sacrifice, and those who are zavim and the like do not offer either the first Paschal sacrifice or the second. They do not offer the first, because the restrictions against offering in a state of impurity were suspended with regard to communal offerings only for those impure due to contact with a human corpse. Nor do they bring the second, because a second Paschal sacrifice is brought only when the first was brought in a state of ritual purity. If the first was brought in a state of impurity, there is no second offering.

The following laws apply when a third of the Jewish people were pure, a third were zavim and the like, and a third were impure because of contact with a human corpse. Those who were impure because of contact with a corpse should not offer the first Paschal sacrifice, nor the second. They do not offer the first, because they are the lesser portion when compared to the aggregate of those who are pure and the zavvim. They should not offer the second, because the lesser portion of the people offered the first, as we explained.

How do we calculate whether the majority of the people are impure or pure? We do not make a calculation of all those who seek to partake of it, because it is possible that 20 people will be enumerated on one Paschal sacrifice and they will send it with one person to slaughter it on their behalf. Instead, we calculate all of those who seek to enter the Temple Courtyard while they are outside. Before the first group enters the Temple Courtyard, the calculation is made.

When an individual becomes impure because of a questionable situation regarding ritual impurity in a private domain, as will be explained in the appropriate place, his offering is postponed until the second Pesach. When the majority of the Jewish people become impure because of a questionable situation in a private domain, they should all offer it in a state of impurity.

When the Paschal sacrifice was offered in a state of impurity, it should also be eaten in a state of impurity, for from the outset, it was brought only to be eaten. It may not be eaten by all those who are impure, only by those impure because of contact with a human corpse. For them, this impurity is suspended. This also applies to those impure because of contact with other sources of impurity.

Those who are impure because of an impurity that results from a physical condition, e.g., zavvim, zavot, niddot, women after childbirth, those afflicted by tzara'at, should not partake of it. If, however, they do partake of it, they are exempt. According to the Oral Tradition, we learned that when a sacrifice is eaten by those who are pure, those who are impure are liable for partaking of it in impurity. When it is eaten by those who are impure, there is no liability for partaking of it in impurity. Even if those who are impure because of contact with a human corpse partook of the fats and organs to be offered on the altar, they are exempt.

When does the statement that a Paschal sacrifice may be eaten while ritually impure apply? When the people became impure before the blood was poured on the altar. If, however, they became impure after the blood was poured, it should not be eaten.

If the Paschal sacrifice was slaughtered in a state of ritual purity and the majority of the Jewish people became impure before its blood was poured on the altar, the blood should be poured on the altar, but the Paschal sacrifice should not be eaten. This is a Rabbinical decree lest the majority of the people become impure after the blood was poured in a following year and it be eaten in a state of impurity.

The following rules apply if the sacred utensils were impure because of [contact with a dead crawling animal or the like. Although the sacred utensils do not cause the persons to become impure, as will be explained in the appropriate place, since they cause the meat to become impure, the Paschal sacrifice should only be brought by those who are pure and it should be eaten, even though it is impure. It is preferable that it be eaten when the meat is impure thus superseding only an ordinary negative prohibition than it be eaten by individuals whose bodies are impure. That would be a prohibition punishable by karet, as explained in Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim.

Partaking of the meat of the Paschal sacrifice on the night of the fifteenth of Nisan is a positive commandment, as Exodus 12:8 states: "And you shall eat the meat on this night, roasted on the fire. With matzot and bitter herbs shall you eat it."

Matzah and bitter herbs are not indispensable elements of the mitzvah. If one did not find matzah or bitter herbs, he fulfills his obligation by eating the meat of the Paschal sacrifice alone. There is no mitzvah to partake of bitter herbs without the Paschal sacrifice, as implied by Numbers 9:11: "Eat it with matzot and bitter herbs."

The optimum manner of performing the mitzvah is to partake of the Paschal sacrifice in a manner leading to satiation. Therefore if one sacrificed festive peace-offerings on the fourteenth of Nisan, one should partake of them first and then partake of the meat of the Paschal sacrifice to be satiated from the festive offering. Even if one does not eat more than an olive-size portion, he fulfills his obligation.

Similarly, partaking of the second Paschal sacrifice on the fifteenth of the month of Iyar is a positive commandment, as stated: "Eat it with matzot and bitter herbs."

Both of them are eaten only roasted with fire. One who partakes of an olive-sized portion from their meat lightly-roasted or cooked in liquid on the nights of Pesach is liable for lashes, as Exodus 12:9 states: "Do not partake of it lightly-roasted or cooked in water." If one partook of a Paschal sacrifice that was both lightly-roasted and cooked, he is liable for only one set of lashes, because both these forbidden activities are included in one prohibition.

If, before nightfall, one partakes of a Paschal sacrifice that was lightly-roasted or cooked, he is not liable for lashes, as can be inferred from the continuation of the above verse: "except roasted in fire." Implied is that at the time it is a mitzvah to partake of the sacrifice roasted, one is liable for partaking of it lightly-roasted or cooked. If one partook of a sacrifice prepared in this manner while it was still day, he is exempt.

If one partook of an olive-sized portion of a roasted Paschal sacrifice while it is still day, he violates a positive commandment, as Exodus 12:8 states: "And they shall eat the meat on that night," i.e., at night and not during the day. A prohibition resulting from a positive commandment is considered as a positive commandment.

The term na which the Torah mentioned in its prohibition refers to meat which began to be subjected to fire. It became roasted slightly, but was not yet fit for human consumption. If, however, one partakes of the meat of the Paschal sacrifice while raw, he is not liable for lashes, but he did nullify a positive commandment, for it is written: "roasted with fire." Implied is that if it is not roasted, it is prohibited.

If one roasted it to the full extent until it became charred, he is exempt.

The term "cooked" which the Torah mentioned in its prohibition refers to cooking the meat in water, other liquids, or fruit juice. The use of the phrase bashail mevushal by Exodus 12:9 includes all types of cooking.

If one roasted it and afterwards cooked it, cooked it and afterwards, roasted it, or pot-roasted it, and partook of it, he is liable. It is, however, permitted to baste it with wine, oil, honey, all other liquids, and fruit juice — except water. After it is roasted, it is permitted to dip the meat in liquids and in fruit juice.

One may not roast the Paschal sacrifice on a stoneware utensil or a metal utensil, for it is written: "roasted with fire," i.e., and not roasted by anything else. Therefore if the utensil was perforated so that the fire could affect the meat, one may roast with it. One may not roast it with a metal spit, because the entire spit will be hot and will roast the meat where it touches it.

When one kindles an oven, removes all the fire, and then hangs the Paschal sacrifice in the oven and roasts it, it is forbidden to partake of it, because this is not "roasted with fire." If the sacrificial animal was cut up and hung over coals, it is considered "roasted with fire." If he roasted it over lime, clay, or the hot springs of Tiberias, it is forbidden, because this is not "roasted with fire."

How is the animal offered as a Paschal sacrifice roasted? One pierces it from its mouth until its anus with a wooden spit and hangs it in an oven with the fire beneath it. One hangs its legs and its intestines in the oven, outside of it. One should not place them inside of its body cavity, for this is comparable to cooking. They would choose a pomegranate spit to roast it so that it will not cast its sap into the meat and cook it.

If the meat touches the earthenware sides or floor of the oven, one should skin off that place, because it is roasted because of the earthenware.

If its juices drip on the earthenware and then return to it, that place should be cut off. For any juice and liquid which it emits while being roasted is forbidden, for it is not roasted meat.

If its juices drip on flour, he should take a handful from the place the juice fell and discard it.

The following laws apply if one applied oil that is terumah to the Paschal sacrifice. If the company was made up of priests, they should partake of it. If the company was made up of Israelites and the meat is still raw, it should be washed and dried and then it may be roasted. If it has been roasted, the outer portion should be skinned off.

If oil from the second tithe was applied to it, one should not charge the other members of the company for its value, for the second tithe should not be redeemed in Jerusalem, as explained in the appropriate place.

We do not roast two Paschal sacrifices together lest they become intermingled. This applies even to a goat and a lamb.

We already stated in several places that the Paschal sacrifice should be eaten only until midnight to distance a person from transgression. According to Scriptural Law, one may partake of it throughout the entire night until dawn.

We already explained in Hilchot Chametz UMatzah that the Paschal sacrifice requires the recitation of Hallel during the time that it is being eaten and that the members of the company do not partake of the meat after they fell asleep, even if they did so at the beginning of the night.