Daf Ditty Pesachim 95

1
What are the differences between the first Passover and the second? The first has the prohibition
of 'no seeing and no possessing', whereas for the second one can have both matzah and ĥametz
in the home. The first requires Hallel when it is eaten, but the second does not
require Hallel when it is eaten. Both require Hallel when sacrificed, must be eaten as roast meat
together with matzah and maror, and override the Sabbath.

1:
There is very little new in our present mishnah. It starts with the introductory question as to the

2
differences between the eating the paschal lamb at the Seder service when this is observed in Nisan
as compared with that same observance when held in Iyyar. Two major differences are mentioned.

2:
Unlike the strict requirement for the complete elimination of all ĥametz from the possession and
vicinity of the celebrants when the Seder takes place in Nisan, when the Alternative Passover is
observed this is not the case. While, when observed in Iyyar, the paschal lamb must be eaten
together with matzah, this does not also require the elimination of all ĥametz. The elimination of
ĥametz under the usual circumstances when the festival is celebrated in Nisan was treated in great
detail in the first three chapters of this tractate. I have previously written:

The Torah is most insistent that no ĥametz be possessed by any Jew throughout the whole of the
festival of Pesaĥ. The phrase used by the Torah in this regard is open to more than one
interpretation. A literal translation of the phrase from the Torah quoted in our mishnah would be
'no ĥametz shall be seen by you'. The fact that a similar phrase occurs in Exodus 12:19 which reads
'no ĥametz shall be found in your homes' led the sages to the following exegesis: no ĥametz
belonging to a Jew may be seen by [any] Jew throughout Passover; furthermore, no Jew shall
possess any ĥametz for the whole of that period. These two contingencies are referred to as "bal
yera'eh" and "bal yimmatzeh" - 'no seeing and no possessing'.

This is the prohibition which, our present mishnah says, does not apply to the Alternative Passover.

3:
We have already learned what Hallel is [5:7], and I shall not repeat it here, since we shall return to
this subject again in the next chapter. All we need note is that it was not required to sing these
psalms while eating the paschal lamb if this is being observed during Iyyar.

4:
The requirement to sing the Hallel psalms while the paschal lamb was being slaughtered was the
subject of our study of Chapter 5, mishnah 7. This requirement also applies to the Alternative
Passover. That the sacrifice of the paschal lamb supercedes the restrictions of Shabbat was detailed
in Chapter 6; our present mishnah merely adds that this applies to both occasions, both to Nisan
and to Iyyar. Perhaps we should note that under the present arrangement of the Jewish calendar
Iyyar 14th can never fall on Shabbat. Nowadays Pesaĥ Sheni (the Alternative Passover) is marked
solely by the fact that we refrain from including the penitentiary passages called Taĥanun in the
daily service. (Though see a personal account in the discussion below.)

3
4
MISHNA: What is the difference between the Paschal lamb offered on the
first Pesaḥ and the Paschal lamb offered on the second Pesaḥ?

On the first Pesaḥ, at the time of slaughtering the Paschal lamb, it is prohibited to own
leavened bread due to the prohibitions: It shall not be seen, and: It shall not be found.
And on the second Pesaḥ it is permissible for one to have bothleavened bread
and matza with him in the house.

Another difference is that the Paschal lamb offered on the first Pesaḥ requires the
recitation of hallel as it is eaten and the second does not require the recitation
of hallel as it is eaten.

However, they are the same in that the Paschal lambs sacrificed on boththe first and
second Pesaḥ require the recitation of hallel as they are prepared,i.e., as they are
slaughtered, and they are both eaten roasted with matza and bitter herbs, and they
override Shabbat in that they may be slaughtered and their blood sprinkled even on
Shabbat.

5
6
GEMARA: The Sages taught a halakhic midrash pertaining to the Paschal lamb
offered on the second Pesaḥ. The verse states with regard to the second Pesaḥ:

,‫ יא ַבֹּחֶדשׁ ַהֵשּׁ ִני ְבַּא ְרָבָּﬠה ָﬠָשׂר יוֹם‬11 in the second month on the fourteenth day at dusk
‫ַמצּוֹת‬-‫ ַﬠל‬:‫ַיֲﬠשׂוּ ֹאתוֹ‬--‫ ֵבּין ָהַﬠ ְרַבּ ִים‬they shall keep it; they shall eat it with unleavened
.‫ י ֹאְכֻלהוּ‬,‫וְּמֹר ִרים‬ bread and bitter herbs;

‫ ְוֶﬠֶצם‬,‫ֹבֶּקר‬-‫ַיְשִׁאירוּ ִמֶמּנּוּ ַﬠד‬-‫ יב ל ֹא‬12 they shall leave none of it unto the morning, nor
,‫ֻחַקּת ַהֶפַּסח‬-‫בוֹ; ְכָּכל‬-‫ ל ֹא ִיְשְׁבּרוּ‬break a bone thereof; according to all the statute of
.‫ַיֲﬠשׂוּ ֹאתוֹ‬ the passover they shall keep it.
Num 9:12

“They shall leave none of it to the morning, nor break a bone in it; according to all the
entire statute of the Paschal lamb they shall offer it”

The fact that the verse says “it” indicates that the verse is speaking of a mitzva
applicable to the body of the Paschal lamb, meaning that halakhot pertaining to the
actual Paschal lamb on the first Pesaḥ apply equally to the Paschal lamb on the
second Pesaḥ.

The midrash continues: With regard to a mitzva related to the body of the Paschal
lamb but not actually performed on the body of the offering, from where is it derived
that it applies to the second Pesaḥ as well? The verse states:

7
 , ‫שׂ ר י וֹם‬
ָ ‫שּׁ ִני ְבַּא ְרָבָּﬠה ָﬠ‬
ֵ ‫ יא ַבֹּחֶדשׁ ַה‬11 in the second month on the fourteenth day at
‫ַמצּוֹת‬-‫ ַﬠל‬:‫ַיֲﬠשׂוּ ֹאתוֹ‬--‫ ֵבּין ָהַﬠ ְרַבּ ִים‬dusk they shall keep it; they shall eat it with
.‫ י ֹאְכֻלהוּ‬,‫וְּמֹר ִרים‬ unleavened bread and bitter herbs;
Num 9:11

“They shall eat it with matzot and bitter herbs”

One might have thought that one must fulfill all mitzvot related to the first Pesaḥ on
the second Pesaḥ, even mitzvot not at all related to the body of the Paschal lamb,
such as the requirement to destroy all one’s leaven. Therefore, the Torah states:

‫בוֹ‬-‫ ְוֶﬠֶצם ל ֹא ִיְשְׁבּרוּ‬,

“And they shall not break a bone in it”

which teaches that just as the prohibition of breaking a bone is notable among the
mitzvot related to the Paschal lamb in that it is a mitzva applicable to the Paschal
lambitself, so too, any mitzva applicable to the Paschal lamb itself must be fulfilled
on the second Pesaḥ. However, other mitzvot pertaining to the first Pesaḥ need not be
fulfilled on the second Pesaḥ.

8
The Sages taught in a different baraita: The verse states:

.‫ ַיֲﬠשׂוּ ֹאתוֹ‬,‫ֻחַקּת ַהֶפַּסח‬-‫ָכל‬

“According to the entire statute of the Paschal lamb they shall offer
it” (Numbers 9:12 ).

One might have thought that just as at the time of the sacrifice of the Paschal
lamb on the first Pesaḥ it is prohibited to own leaven due to the prohibitions
of: It shall not be seen, and: It shall not be found, so too, at the time of
the sacrifice of the Paschal lamb on the second Pesaḥ it is prohibited to

9
own leaven due to the prohibitions of: It shall not be seen, and: It shall not
be found. Therefore, the Torah states:

.‫ י ֹאְכֻלהוּ‬,‫ַמצּוֹת וְּמֹר ִרים‬-‫ַﬠל‬

“They shall eat it with matzot and bitter herbs” (Numbers 9:11 ),

which indicates that the other mitzvot pertaining to the first Pesaḥ do not apply
on the second.

The baraita continues: And from here I have derived only that positive
mitzvot related to the first Pesaḥ apply on the second Pesaḥ; from where do
I derive that the same is true of negative mitzvot? The verse states:

‫ֹבֶּקר‬-‫ַיְשִׁאירוּ ִמֶמּנּוּ ַﬠד‬-‫יב ל ֹא‬

“They shall leave none of it to the morning, nor break a bone in it”
(Numbers 9:12 ).

10
11
It was taught in the mishna that the Paschal lamb on the
first Pesaḥ requiresthe recitation of hallel as it is eaten, whereas on the
second Pesaḥ it does not. The Gemara asks: From where are these
matters derived? Rabbi Yoḥanansaid, citing Rabbi Shimon ben
Yehotzadak, that the verse states:

‫ ְכֵּליל‬,‫כט ַהִשּׁיר ִיְהֶיה ָלֶכם‬ 29 Ye shall have a song as in the night when
,‫ָחג; ְוִשְׂמַחת ֵלָבב‬-‫ִהְתַקֶדּשׁ‬ a feast is hallowed; and gladness of heart, as
-‫ ָלבוֹא ְבַהר‬,‫ ֶבָּחִליל‬s‫ַכּהוֵֹל‬ when one goeth with the pipe to come into
.‫צוּר ִיְשׂ ָרֵאל‬-‫ ֶאל‬,‫ְיהָוה‬ the mountain of the LORD, to the Rock of
Israel.
Isa 30:29

“You shall have a song as in the night when a Festival is sanctified”

From here it may be derived that a night sanctified as a Festival, on which

labor is prohibited, such as the first night of Passover, requires the recitation
of hallel; however, a night which is not sanctified as a Festival, such as
the night when the Paschal lamb is eaten following the second Pesaḥ, does not
require the recitation of hallel.

The Sages taught in a different baraita: The offering of the Paschal lamb on
the first Pesaḥ overrides Shabbat, and similarly, the offering of the
Paschal lamb on the second Pesaḥ overrides Shabbat.

The first Pesaḥ overrides ritual impurity, and similarly, the

second Pesaḥ overrides ritual impurity. The first Pesaḥ requires
remaining until morning, meaning that it is prohibited for people who have
participated in the Paschal lamb to return that night to their homes outside

12
Jerusalem, and similarly, the second Pesaḥ requires remaining until
morning.

Tosafos

TOSFOS DH MAH BEIN RISHON L'SHEINI

‫תוס 'ד"ה מה בין ראשון לשני‬

Tosfos reconciles the Mishnah with the Tosefta and resolves a problem with the
Tosefta.

‫ואין השני נשחט בג 'כיתות‬, ‫'בתוספ( 'פרק ח )קתני נמי 'הראשון נשחט בג 'כיתות‬.

The Tosefta (Perek 8) learns also that whereas Pesach Rishon is Shechted in three
groups, Pesach Sheini is not?

.)‫כדאמר בגמ( 'דף צו‬, ‫דליתיה בשני‬, ‫והכא תנא ושייר ;'דשייר נמי ביקור ד 'ימים‬.

Our Mishnah 'learns and omits'; it omits also 'examining it four days in advance,
which does not apply to Pesach Sheini, as the Gemara says (on Daf 96.).

‫ ובתוספתא דלא קתני ביקור‬...

The Tosefta on the other hand, does not mention 'examining' ...

‫וביקור נוהג נמי בתמיד‬, ‫דלא קחשיב אלא הנך שנוהגין בפסח לבדו‬.

Because it only mentions those issues that are confined to Pesach exclusively, and
that of examining apply also to the Tamid.

Summary
MISHNAH: The Mishnah lists the ways the Pesach Sheni differs from Pesach Rishon and the
ways they are similar.

Clarifying the Mishnah

A Baraisa is cited that presents the source for the rules that determine in what ways Pesach Sheni
differs from Pesach Rishon and the ways they are similar.

13
Two points regarding the Baraisa are explained.

A second Baraisa is cited that further develops the rules that indicate which halachos of the Pesach
Rishon will apply to the Pesach Sheni.

The Gemara applies and explains the application of these rules to determine which halachos apply
to the Korban of Pesach Sheni.

Hallel

The Gemara explains why Pesach Sheni does not require Hallel while it is eaten but does require
Hallel while it is offered.

Overriding Shabbos and tum’ah

The Gemara notes that our Mishnah that ruled that Pesach Sheni overrides Shabbos but not tum’ah
is inconsistent with R’ Yehudah who ruled that Pesach Sheni overrides even tum’ah.

14
CHAMETZ ON PESACH SHENI

Rav Mordechai Kornfeld writes:1

The Mishnah discusses the ways in which the Korban of Pesach Sheni differs from the Korban of
Pesach Rishon. One difference is that the Korban Pesach Sheni may be eaten while Chametz is in
one's house. Does this imply that there is no prohibition of Chametz at all on Pesach Sheni?

RASHI (Num 9:10) writes that on Pesach Sheni, "one may have Matzah and Chametz together in
one's house... and there is no prohibition of Chametz, except with him while he eats" ("Matzah
v'Chametz Imo ba'Bayis... v'Ein Isur Chametz Ela Imo ba'Achilaso"). The only prohibition of
Chametz on Pesach Sheni is to eat the Korban Pesach with Chametz. However, one is allowed to
have Chametz in his home.

MINCHAS CHINUCH (#381) challenges Rashi's explanation and leaves it unresolved. He asks
that there is no source at all to say that there is a prohibition of Chametz while one eats the Pesach
Sheni. The Torah commands only a Mitzvas Aseh to eat a k'Zayis of Matzah with the Korban
Pesach Sheni, but it does not forbid Chametz to be eaten with it.

MESHECH CHOCHMAH defends Rashi's opinion and says that Rashi understands the verse,
"With Matzah and Maror they shall eat it" (Num 9:11), as a "Lav ha'Ba Michlal Aseh" -- a Lav
implied from an Aseh. The Torah's command to eat the Korban Pesach Sheni specifically with
Matzah implies a prohibition to eat it with Chametz.

Support for the Meshech Chochmah's assertion (that the Korban Pesach Sheni may not be eaten
with Chametz) can be found in the words of RASHI in Sukah (47b, DH u'Fanisa): "On Pesach
Sheni one is not prohibited from Chametz; rather, one must eat Matzah to fulfill the Mitzvah and
he may eat Chametz immediately." Rashi's words imply that one may eat Chametz "immediately"
after he eats the Korban, but not together with it.

1
https://www.dafyomi.co.il/pesachim/insites/ps-dt-095.htm

15
RAV SHACH zt'l (in AVI EZRI, Hilchos Chametz u'Matzah) writes that this might not be what
Rashi means at all. Rashi does not mean that there is no prohibition of Chametz except with the
Korban itself. Rashi says that "there is no prohibition of Chametz, but rather [the Chametz may
be] with him while he eats" ("v'Ein Isur Chametz, Ela Imo ba'Achilaso"). Rashi maintains that not
only is there no Isur of Chametz, but it may even be with him as he eats the Korban Pesach Sheni.

Reciting Hallel on Pesach Sheni

Steinzaltz (OBM) writes:2

The Torah teaches (see Num 9:10-14) that someone who was unable to sacrifice the korban
Pesach at the proper time because he was ritually defiled or because he was far from Jerusalem, is
obligated to come to the Temple one month later, on the 14th of Iyyar and bring a Pesach sheni –
a “second Pesach.” One of the basic questions associated with this sacrifice is whether it is merely
a replacement for the first, or if Pesach sheni is a separate holiday, albeit one that is only obligatory
on those people who did not succeed in bringing the sacrifice the first time.

The Mishna on our daf teaches that for all that the Torah commands that the same rules apply to
the Pesach sheni that applied to the first Pesach, nevertheless there are significant differences
between the two. For example, the commandment to rid oneself of hametz before the sacrifice is
brought only applies on the regular Pesach, and not on Pesach sheni.

Similarly, Hallel is recited while eating the sacrifice on Pesach rishon (first), but not onPesach
sheni. The Mishna mentions other laws that apply to both, like the recitation of Hallel while
the korban is being sacrificed, that the meat is eaten roasted together with matza and marror, and
that both “push aside” Shabbat should the day that the sacrifice needs to be brought fall
on Shabbat.

Tosafot above, point out that the Mishna is only giving examples, and that there are other laws that
are unique to Pesach rishon. As a case in point, the Jerusalem Talmud notes that the korban

2
https://steinsaltz.org/daf/Pesachim95/

16
Pesach is accompanied by a korban hagiga (see Pesachim daf 70) only on Pesach rishon and not
on Pesach sheni.

The Gemara asks: What is the reason that hallel must be recited while one prepares the Paschal
lamb on the second Pesach? The Gemara answers…if you wish, say that this halakha simply
makes logical sense: Is it possible that the Jewish people are slaughtering their Paschal
lambs or taking their lulavim on Sukkot and not reciting hallel? It is inconceivable that they
would not be reciting hallel and there is no need for an explicit biblical source for this halakha.

This argument, which can be applied to every one of the Jewish holidays, indicates that the
tradition of reciting Hallel is an ancient one. Nevertheless, once we establish the centrality of the
recitation of Hallel to the celebration of the holidays, why is it not said while the korban Pesach is
eaten on Pesach sheni? One answer that is suggested points to the fact that Hallel is usually recited
only during the day, and we need a special pasuk to introduce the idea of reciting it at night
on Pesach. The passage brought by the Gemara to suggest saying Hallel at night appears
in Isa (30:29) “the song should be for you as the night of the celebration of the holiday” which is
understood to teach that a song – the Hallel – is appropriate only when there is a holiday being
celebrated. For all the importance of Pesach sheni, it is not a Yom Tov, as work is permitted, etc.

Sefas Emes explains that not only is Hallel not required while partaking of the Pesach Sheni, but
performing the mitzvah of ‫ מצרים יציאת סיפור‬is also not necessary.3 This is not only the case where
a person fulfilled this mitzvah while eating matzah during the regular Pesach celebration on the
fifteenth of Nisan (although he did not partake in the Pesach offering itself), but even if he did not
relate the story of the exodus at all during Pesach, he still has no obligation to tell about it now at
Pesach Sheni.

The reason for this is that, as Rambam records (Hilchos Korban Pesach 7:1),

the source to tell about the exodus is derived from the verse (Ex 13:3): “Remember this day on
which you departed from Egypt, the land of slavery.” This is only an obligation on the precise date
of the anniversary of the departure from Egypt, and it has no relevance to Pesach Sheni.

3
https://dafdigest.org/masechtos/Pesachim%20095.pdf

17
Maharal (Gevuros Hashem Ch. 2) argues against Rambam, and he identifies the source of the
mitzvah of ‫ סיפור מצרים יציאת‬from the verse in Deut 6:20,

‫ ָמה‬:‫ ֵלאֹמר‬,‫ ָמָחר‬Ä‫ ִב ְנ‬Ä‫ ִיְשָׁאְל‬-‫כ ִכּי‬ 20 When thy son asketh thee in time to come, saying: 'What
‫ ֲאֶשׁר ִצָוּה‬,‫ ְוַהֻחִקּים ְוַהִמְּשָׁפִּטים‬,‫ָהֵﬠֹדת‬ mean the testimonies, and the statutes, and the ordinances,
.‫ ֶאְתֶכם‬,‫ֵהינוּ‬ì‫ְיהָוה ֱא‬ which the LORD our God hath commanded you?
Deut 6:20

“In the future, your child may ask you, ‘What are the rituals, rules and laws that God, our
Lord, has commanded you?’”

The Mechilta (Bo, #18) learns that this dialogue does not only pertain to a child and his father, but
it also applies to any group, even one of established and qualified scholars, who gather together to
reflect upon the exodus. This might apply, therefore, to any group that assembles to partake in the
Pesach, whether it be the first Pesach in Nisan or whether it be in Iyar for the Pesach Sheni.

The first Pesach offering requires Hallel to be recited as it is eaten. Rashi explains that it is “the
custom to sing” on the first night of the Yom Tov.

It is apparent from here that the recital of Hallel at the seder is not an official Mitzvah of Hallel
recitation (as it is during the rest of the holiday), rather it is a “minhag of shira.”

Based on this, the Rishonim (1) in the name of R. Hai Gaon (2) write that one should not say a
berachah on the Hallel of seder night. In truth, this point is contested among the Rishonim (3) .

The Tur (4) writes that there are places that have a custom to say the Hallel in shul in order not to
say a berachah during the Haggadah.

The Shulchan Aruch (5) concurs with this view, and this is the custom of the Sefardim, Chasidim
and the custom in Eretz Yisroel (6) based on the opinion of the Gra.

However, the minhag of the Rema (7) , the Shulchan Aruch HaRav, and the Aruch HaShulchan is
not to say Hallel in shul whatsoever since this concept is not found anywhere in Shas (8).

Nonetheless, the Poskim write that someone who does not have the custom to recite Hallel on the
night of Pesach in shul, and finds himself in a place that does recite it, may not leave the shul while
the congregation is reciting Hallel.

18
Rather, he should recite Hallel with them. And in a circumstance where it would be noticeable if
he doesn’t recite the berachah, i.e. he is the ‫ ץ”ש‬,he must even say the berachah with them.

Sefer HaChinukh 380:3

From the laws of the commandment is that which they, may their memory be blessed, taught in
our daf in the chapter [entitled] Mi Shehaya Tamei:

"What [are the differences] between first and second? On the first all leaven is forbidden to be
seen or kept in one's possession; on the second both leaven and matsa are with him in the house.
The second is only observed one day, and there is no holiday or prohibition of labor. The first
requires Hallel while eating it; the second does not require Hallel while eating it - though this and
that require Hallel during the offering. Both are eaten roasted with matsa and marror," as it is
explicitly stated like that in the verse. "Both supersede the Shabbat, and neither may be left over

19
or have bones broken in them," as the verse explicitly warns about this too, with "do not leave
over" and "they shall not break a bone in it."

RAMBAM Paschal Offering 10:15

What are the differences between the first Paschal sacrifice and the second Paschal sacrifice? At
the time of the first, chametz is forbidden to be seen or possessed in one's domain. It may not be
slaughtered while one is in possession of chametz. Its meat may not be removed from the company
in which it was designated to be eaten. TheHallel must be recited when it is eaten. A festive offering

20
is brought with it. It may be brought in a state of impurity if the majority of the people are impure
because of contact with a human corpse, as we explained.

With regard to the second Paschal sacrifice, by contrast, both chametzand matzah may be
possessed by the person at home. Hallel is not recited while partaking of it. It may be taken out of
the company in which it was designated to be eaten. A festive offering is not brought with it and it
may not be brought in a state of impurity.

Both are alike in that offering them supersedes the Sabbath prohibitions.Hallel is recited when
they are offered. They are eaten roastedin one house together with matzah and bitter herbs. In
neither instance may their meat be left over until the next morning, nor may their bones may be
broken.

Why does the second Paschal sacrifice not resemble the first in all matters, as might be expected
since Numbers 9:12 states with regard to the second Paschal sacrifice: "It shall be offered
according to all the statutes of the Paschal sacrifice"? Because some of the statutes of the Paschal
sacrifice are explicitly mentioned with regard to it. This teaches that it is analogous to the first
only in those matters which are stated explicitly regarding it. They are the mitzvot that concern
the body of the sacrifice. They are "the statutes of the Paschal sacrifice" included in the general
category.

The statements regarding the offering of the Paschal sacrifice in Egypt: that it should be set aside
on the tenth of the month, that its blood should be applied to the lintel and the two doorposts with
a bunch of hyssop, and that it should be eaten with haste, are not practices that are followed in
future generations. They were observed only with regard to the Paschal sacrifice offered in Egypt.

21
Pesach in the Wilderness

Rav Yoel Bin Nun writes:4

The "Pesach in the wilderness" is not part of the story of the setting up of the Mishkan or of its
dismantling in anticipation of Israel's journey in the wilderness. The passage concerning the Pesach
observed in the wilderness seems to reflect an independent beginning of God's word "to Moshe in
the wilderness of Sinai," exactly a year after the command regarding the Pesach observed in Egypt.
"The Pesach in the wilderness" is still not "the Pesach for all generations," because the latter's time
will come only "when you come to the land…" (Ex 12:25; 13:5-10).

Therefore, in the passage dealing with "Pesach in the wilderness" there is also no mention of the
Feast of Matzot. The seven day prohibition of chametz is meaningless with respect to manna,
which is bread from heaven; only in the Land of Israel, where there is wheat and a harvest, will
there bechametz and matza. It is true that the matza and maror associated with the Pesach offering
applied even to the "Pesach in the wilderness," as in Egypt, but not the seven day prohibition
of chametz, which in the Torah is an inseparable part of the mitzva of entering the Land of Israel.

In addition, from among the laws of the Pesach offering, there is no mention here of the obligation
to undergo circumcision or of the prohibition: "No uncircumcised person shall eat
thereof" (Ex12:48). This point connects with what is written in the passage dealing with the
"Pesach in Gilgal" in the book of Josh (5:3-7); the people of Israel did not undergo circumcision
while they were traveling in the wilderness.[7]

What is so special about the Pesach offering that obligated the observance of "Pesach in the
wilderness" and Pesach Sheni, the “Second Pesach”?

Pesach is an assembly of belonging and identification of every house and family as part of the
people of Israel that left Egypt. This is the way many Jews understand Pesach to this very day,

4
https://www.etzion.org.il/en/princes-priests-levites-pesach-sheni-and-trumpets

22
even "secular" Jews! This is also the meaning of the punishment of karet that awaits anybody who
does not keep "the Pesach in its appointed season" (9:2-3, 13).

Therefore, it was necessary for Israel to observe Pesach in the wilderness before setting out on
their grand journey, just as in the case of "the Pesach in Egypt" before the exodus. It was now that
they encountered the problem of impure people, which was created by the laws of impurity in the
law of Moshe. Those who "were unclean by the dead body of a man" and could not purify
themselves and keep the Pesach "on that day" (9:6) feared that they would not be counted as part
of the Jewish People, who were united in the memory of Pesach:

Why are we to be kept back, so as not to bring the offering of the Lord in its appointed season
among the children of Israel? (9:7)

God's response with the possibility of Pesach Sheni came to include them among the children of
Israel, without prejudice to the laws of purity. In this way, no man in Israel would be kept back.

The Evolution and Innovation of Pesach Sheni

Dr. Rabbi Stephen Garfinkel writes:5

Offering the Pesach Sacrifice at its Proper Time

Numbers chapter 9 opens with God’s telling Moses that the Children of Israel must properly
observe “the Pesaḥ” in the second year, i.e., the year after the Israelites left Egypt. The text
emphasizes, at least three times within two verses, that the ritual is to be performed precisely at its
prescribed time: at twilight on the 14th day of the first month of the year.

…‫ג ְבַּא ְרָבָּ֣ﬠה ָﬠ ָ ֽשׂר־ ֠יוֹם ַבֹּ֨חֶדשׁ ַהֶ֜זּה ֵ֧בּין ָ ֽהֲﬠ ְרַ֛בּ ִים ַתֲּﬠ֥שׂוּ ֹא֖תוֹ ְבּמוֲֹﬠ ֑דוֹ‬:‫ְוַיֲﬠ֧שׂוּ ְבֵני־ ִיְשָׂרֵ֛אל ֶאת־ַהָ֖פַּסח ְבּמוֲֹﬠ ֽדוֹ׃ ט‬ ‫ב‬: ‫ב מ ד ב ר ט‬

5
https://www.thetorah.com/author/stephen-garfinkel

23
Num 9:2
Let the Israelite people offer the Pesaḥ sacrifice at its set time: 9:3 you shall offer it on the
fourteenth day of this month, at twilight, at its set time;
To hammer home the point, verses 4 and 5 go on to report that the Israelites followed these
instructions and that they offered the Pesaḥ sacrifice at the right time.[1]Considering this emphasis
on proper timing, the next part of the story is quite a surprise.

The Unexpected Response to the People Who Were Impure

Some men happened to be ritually impure by virtue of having come in contact with a corpse, and
they realized (or simply assumed – there is no explicit mention of a purity requirement in Exodus)
that their ritual status would prevent them from offering the Pesaḥ sacrifice along with the rest of
their “fellow citizens.” The possibility of missing out on this important ritual disturbs them, and
they approach Moses and Aaron (v. 7) wanting to know why (or if) their impurity would really
preclude them from it.

:‫ֲא ַ֥נְחנוּ ְטֵמ ִ֖אים ְל ֶ֣נֶפשׁ ָא ָ֑דם ָ֣לָמּה ִנָגּ ַ ֗רע ְלִבְל ִ ֙תּי ַהְק ִ֜רב ֶאת־ָק ְרַ֤בּן ְיהָו֙ה ְבֹּ֣מֲﬠ֔דוֹ ְבּ֖תוֹ≥ ְבּ ֵ֥ני ִיְשָׂר ֵ ֽאל‬... ‫ז‬:‫ט‬

9:7
...Although we are unclean by reason of a corpse, why must we be debarred from presenting the
Lord’s offering at its set time with the rest of the Israelites?
Moses responds by telling them to “stand (by)!” so he can find out from God the answer to their
query. At this point in the narrative, what does the reader expect to hear? On one hand, sacrifices
may not be offered by the impure (see Lev 22:3), so the men may be correct, and God may require
their exclusion from the ritual. On the other hand, since the Pesaḥ seems to be a particularly central
ritual for God and the Israelites, perhaps, due to its importance, God will allow them to participate
anyway. Either of these responses seems possible, but, in fact, God offers a third and entirely
unexpected response.

Unwilling either to allow the impure men to participate in the sacrifice or to exclude them entirely,
God ordains an entirely new law by allowing these men to offer the Pesaḥ sacrifice exactly one
month later than the original date. The unexpected nature of this solution can hardly be over-

24
emphasized. Pesaḥ commemorates an event—the original Pesaḥ which was offered on the night
of the Exodus from Egypt—and is meant to be offered on the anniversary of that event. What sense
does it make to offer it a month later? Furthermore, and most importantly for our purposes, this
section opened with a thrice repeated emphasis that the Pesaḥ must be offered at its proper time.
Why, according to the Torah, does God suddenly create this unexpected make-up day for the
offering?

The Long Journey… to Where?

It gets worse. In a perplexing extrapolation, God not only responds to the men suffering from
impurity, granting them a delay, but God adds another unrelated circumstance, allowing the
delayed date for those who were on a long journey as well. “A long journey” during the desert
march? A long journey where? What inspires God to deal with this case or be lenient regarding
long trips?

The Sages noted the problem of the “long trip” reference in a wilderness period account and
attempt a number of solutions (m. Pesaḥim 9:2).

?‫איזו היא דרך רחוקה‬

What is ‘a far distance’?

.‫ דברי רבי עקיבא‬,‫ וכמדתה לכל רוח‬,‫מן המודיעים ולחוץ‬

“From Modiʿim and beyond, and the same distance in all directions [from Jerusalem]” – these are
the words of Rabbi Akiva.

".‫ "מאיסקופת העזרה ולחוץ‬:‫רבי אליעזר אומר‬

Rabbi Eliezer says: “From the threshold [of the Temple court/cult site] and beyond.”

25
 ".‫ אלא מאיסקופת העזרה ולחוץ‬,‫ לומר לא מפני שרחוק ודאי‬,'‫ "לפיכך נקוד על ה‬:‫אמר ליה רבי יוסי‬

Rabbi Yossi said to him: “This is the reason for the special pointing over [the letter] “heh,” to
teach that [the verse] does not mean distance in an objective sense, rather it refers to [the area]
from the threshold [of the Temple/cult site] and beyond.”
Nevertheless, despite the attempt by traditional commentators to find practical relevance for the
passage in its wilderness context, most modern biblical scholars assume that the notion of being
on a “long journey” would be more appropriate only after the Israelites had settled in the Land.

During the wilderness experience, the Torah describes a people together in one camp, surrounding
one tabernacle, and supported by miraculous food gifts. There was really nowhere for them to go.
However, once in a settled land, the problem of travel and being away from local cult-sites with
proper cultic personnel would become a real one. The ideal picture of all of Israel being available
for the Pesaḥ offering at one time was confronted by reality, whether the reality of impurity or the
reality of travel. Therefore, it makes sense that only after the time of the settlement in Canaan
someone could have been away on a “long journey,” too far from the sacrificial site.

Where Was the Proper Place for Offering the Pesach?

It is worth pausing for a moment to reflect: Where must the Pesaḥ be offered according to the
Torah? There seems to be more than one answer. Exodus 12, discussing the first Pesaḥ sacrifice
(what the Sages call ‫מצרים פסח‬, the Pesaḥ of Egypt), states that the offering was to be roasted and
eaten by the members of each household where they lived. As there is no mention of an official
local mizbeaḥ (altar), presumably each household made the offering on its own and near its own
home. Numbers makes no specific reference for where the offering should be made, but one might
reasonably assume that it was meant to be offered at the Tabernacle. The equivalent in Israel may
have been the local cult site—something most towns of sufficient size probably would have had.

26
Only the book of Deuteronomy (16:2) includes a requirement to offer the Pesaḥ in “the place where
the Lord will choose to have the divine name dwell”—presumably a reference to Jerusalem. With
its general insistence on cult centralization for all sacrifices of any kind, it is hardly surprising that
Deuteronomy would be the one book in the Torah to contain this requirement. In the Exodus text,
there is nowhere specific to sacrifice, so that traveling could not possibly be a problem. However,
considering the various possibilities for where the sacrifice should be offered in Numbers
(Tabernacle) and Deuteronomy (Temple in Jerusalem), which one is intended here in Numbers 9?

An Academic Solution to the Long Journey and the Pesach Sheni

The rabbinic interpretations assume a unified text and suggest that God is simply thinking ahead
to a future time. Modern scholarship approaches this question from a different angle. It seems
reasonable to suggest that since the original narrative referenced only men who were impure,
God’s answer originally addressed only this question. The phrase “or on a long trip” may have
been added later. Why? One might suggest that as the Pesaḥ developed from the Exodus model (a
sacrifice offered by the head of a household near his home) to the Numbers or Deuteronomy
models (local cult site or the Temple in Jerusalem), the possibility that a person would be too far
from the cult site to offer the Pesaḥ became a realistic one. Finding precedent in the story of the
impure men, a later editor added the words “or on a long trip” into God’s response so that the
make-up ritual of the Second Pesaḥ would apply to such people as well.

This explains the addition of the travel, but what about the original legislation itself? In this case,
modern scholarship may actually make the problem more poignant. The idea of an approved delay
of a ritual is unusual, if not unique, in the ancient Near East. An excerpt from the Hittite
“Instructions to Priests and Temple Officials” (column ii) is instructive. In that text, the priests are
warned that they must perform the festivals “at the time of the festivals,” not at another time, and
that they not be intimidated by anyone who asks them to delay the festival because of the harvest,
or to delay the festival “for a journey some other matter.”[2]

27
Given the surprising nature of the legislation of a second-chance ritual it is likely that the
legislation of a delayed Passover reflects the central importance of this ritual and God’s desire to
include as many Israelites as possible in its yearly observance. This suggestion can be supported
by the legislation in Exodus (12:48) as well as the end of the Second Pesaḥ section (Num 9:14),
which explain that even a ger (non-Israelite sojourner in the Torah, but interpreted by the rabbis
to mean a convert) may participate in the ritual. The harsh punishment administered to one who
skips out on doing the Pesaḥ without an excuse—being cut off from the people of Israel—also
points to the Pesaḥ’s fundamental importance.

The Torah’s Innovation

In sum, we learn two important messages from the account of the Second Pesaḥ. First, we can see
how the law developed over time in order to accommodate new realities. As the Pesaḥ changed
from a home-based offering to one based in a cult site, a solution needed to be found for those who
were out of town. The solution was found in the older legislation about a make-up day for the
Passover offering, originally created for people who were impure after having come in contact
with a corpse.

Second, we learn that the Torah, wishing to include all Israelites in the significant ritual of the
Pesaḥ, understands the need to assess circumstances in the application of law and, sometimes, to
give humans a second chance. The Torah weighs the exclusion of Israelites from a “perfect” ritual
against the accommodation of less than ideal circumstances by adapting the ritual in a somewhat
inelegant manner—commemorating the Exodus on a day other than the actual anniversary—and
chooses the latter.

In other words, in the Second Pesaḥ account, the Torah shows a preference for the acceptance and
understanding of human reality over and above the perfect and pristine performance of ritual
duties. The God of the Second Pesaḥ is a compassionate and understanding God. The Torah tells
us that we are all made in the image of God—a compassionate God crafting divine rituals around

28
the realities of human life and ensuring the inclusion of all. That is certainly an example we should
try to emulate.

Footnotes

1. To this day, Pesaḥ always begins on the evening of Nisan 14; it is never postponed or

advanced in the calendar, as sometimes happens with other ritual events.

2. While several exegetes have referred to the Hittite text, Simeon Chavel included the Hittite

comparison as part of a comprehensive analysis of the second Passover in his fine article

“The Second Passover, Pilgrimage, and the Centralized Cult,” Harvard Theological

Review 102 (2009): 1-24.

Pesach Sheni: The Holiday of Second Chances

Karen Wolfers Rapaport writes:6

It’s never too late to come home.

Sometimes we have to experience missteps before we can travel in the right direction.

We make a left when we should take the road on the right; we say yes when we should say no; we
stay when we should leave, and we withdraw when we should engage.

A step forward, a step back, a side step, and an inching forward slightly once again. This is the
dance of life and embedded within this dance are second chances.

6
https://www.aish.com/sp/pg/Pesach-Sheni-The-Holiday-of-Second-Chances.html

29
On the 14th day of the Jewish month of Iyar, one month after the holiday of Passover, Pesach
Sheni, a second Passover makes its appearance. It’s time for a second chance.

On the day before Passover, the Paschal Lamb was brought to the Holy Temple to be offered as a
sacrifice. Anyone who came into contact with a dead body and became ritually impure could not
bring this sacrifice to the Holy Temple. Nor could someone who was stuck too far away to make
it to the Temple in time.

But there was an issue. These citizens also wanted to participate in this pivotal holy service. They
wanted to be part of something bigger than themselves, something that would connect them to
their community and to God. So they approached Moses and Aaron and declared,”Why should we
be deprived, and not be able to present God’s offering in its time, amongst the children of Israel?”

Moses asked God what to do, and God replied, “Speak to the children of Israel, saying: Any person
who is contaminated by death, or is on a distant road, whether among you now or in future
generations, shall prepare a Passover offering to Gd. They shall prepare it on the afternoon of the
14th day of the second month, and shall eat it with matzahs and bitter herbs...." (See Numbers, 9:6-
12)

God said I will give you a second chance despite your status, despite your present state. When you
do what you need to do to change, I will change the rules. I will wait for you until you are ready.

What does being “contaminated by death,” and a traveling on a “distant road” have to do with us?

These terms point to deeper concepts. A state of disconnection from God is a type of death. A
distant road is place where we are far away from who we really are supposed to be. This is
something most of us can identify with.

When we are influenced by “death”, when we are traversing along a distant road, cut off from our
truth and our source, we have the power to change directions and come home.

How? By accessing this unbelievable gift of second chances.

Life gives us many second chances.

How do we know when we are far away from our homestead, when we are wandering and cut off?

30
A sense of disconnection is a place where we have lost touch with our essential self. On this road
there is a chasm between what we really are and what we are becoming.

When we are not the person, partner, or parent we should be, often, somewhere deep inside, we
know we are far from home. Maybe it’s a vague feeling, detached and blurred. Perhaps it’s an
explicit feeling, weighty and robust. In all cases it often leads to confusion and a robotic way of
life.

Disconnection is often a byproduct of unconscious living. When we let our conditioning be our
compass so that our paths never change, neither will our landscape. Whether it’s in relation to
ourselves or to others we will feel disconnected from the inroads that lead to our essential self.

But life gives us many second chances. And each time we choose to live consciously and move
from judgment to compassion, apathy to care, idleness to activity, we begin to reconnect and travel
towards home.

Pesach Sheni, the Second Passover, thus represents the power of rerouting to our core, to our
Divine connection. This is the essence of teshuvah – the power of return. Teshuvah is defined as
repentance but it encompasses something far greater. It is the power to embrace comprehensive
change, the power to shift from one state to another. It is the power to change our dance.

Changing our waltz, samba, or freestyle is not easy. But it can be done. No matter how distant, no
matter how disconnected, God gives us the power to repair and rebound. Our brush with “death”
can give us life. Our “distance” can lead to greater closeness to both ourselves and to God.

Pesach Sheni, the holiday of second chances, reminds us that we can always change our steps and
return home.

31