Korban Pesach - Chapter 6

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.