מִי שֶׁהָיָה טָמֵא אוֹ בְדֶרֶךְ רְחוֹקָה וְלֹא עָשָׂה אֶת הָרִאשׁוֹן, יַעֲשֶׂה אֶת הַשֵּׁנִי. שָׁגַג אוֹ נֶאֱנַס וְלֹא עָשָׂה אֶת הָרִאשׁוֹן, יַעֲשֶׂה אֶת הַשֵּׁנִי. אִם כֵּן, לָמָּה נֶאֱמַר טָמֵא אוֹ שֶׁהָיָה בְדֶרֶךְ רְחוֹקָה, שֶׁאֵלּוּ פְּטוּרִין מֵהִכָּרֵת, וְאֵלּוּ חַיָּבִין בְּהִכָּרֵת:

One who was ritually impure or on a distant journey and did not observe the first Pesaḥ by participating in the offering of the Paschal lamb on the fourteenth of Nisan should observe the second Pesaḥ by participating in the offering on the fourteenth of Iyyar. If one unwittingly forgot or was prevented due to circumstances beyond his control and did not observe the first Pesaḥ, he too should observe the second Pesaḥ. If so, that the second Pesaḥ is observed even by someone who forgot or was prevented from observing the first Pesaḥ, why is it stated in the Torah that the second Pesaḥ is observed only by one who was ritually impure or on a distant journey? These cases were specified in order to teach that these two groups of people are exempt from karet if they do not observe the second Pesaḥ, but those who were not ritually impure or on a distant journey are liable to receive karet, as the Gemara will explain.

מַה בֵּין פֶּסַח רִאשׁוֹן לַשֵּׁנִי, הָרִאשׁוֹן אָסוּר בְּבַל יֵרָאֶה וּבַל יִמָּצֵא, וְהַשֵּׁנִי, מַצָּה וְחָמֵץ עִמּוֹ בַּבָּיִת. הָרִאשׁוֹן טָעוּן הַלֵּל בַּאֲכִילָתוֹ, וְהַשֵּׁנִי אֵינוֹ טָעוּן הַלֵּל בַּאֲכִילָתוֹ. זֶה וָזֶה טָעוּן הַלֵּל בַּעֲשִׂיָּתָן, וְנֶאֶכָלִין צָלִי עַל מַצּוֹת וּמְרוֹרִים, וְדוֹחִין אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת:

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 both leavened 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 both the 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.

הַפֶּסַח שֶׁבָּא בְטֻמְאָה, לֹא יֹאכְלוּ מִמֶּנּוּ זָבִין וְזָבוֹת נִדּוֹת וְיוֹלְדוֹת. וְאִם אָכְלוּ, פְּטוּרִים מִכָּרֵת. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר פּוֹטֵר אַף עַל בִּיאַת מִקְדָּשׁ:

When the Paschal lamb is sacrificed in a state of ritual impurity due to the fact that the majority of the Jewish people are ritually impure, zavim, and zavot, and menstruating women, and women after childbirth may not eat it, because the Paschal lamb overrides only ritual impurity imparted by a corpse, but it does not override other forms of ritual impurity. However, if they violated the halakha and ate from the offering, they are exempt from karet. One who eats sacrificial food in a state of ritual impurity is generally liable to receive karet; however, since in this case the offering is sacrificed in a state of ritual impurity, there is no punishment of karet even for ritually impure individuals who are not permitted to eat it. And Rabbi Eliezer exempts these individuals from karet even for entering the Temple in a state of ritual impurity, despite their not being permitted to enter, because people who are impure due to ritual impurity imparted by a corpse are permitted to enter the Temple in this situation despite their impurity.

מַה בֵּין פֶּסַח מִצְרַיִם לְפֶסַח דּוֹרוֹת, פֶּסַח מִצְרַיִם מִקָּחוֹ מִבֶּעָשׂוֹר, וְטָעוּן הַזָּאָה בַאֲגֻדַּת אֵזוֹב עַל הַמַּשְׁקוֹף וְעַל שְׁתֵּי מְזוּזוֹת, וְנֶאֱכָל בְּחִפָּזוֹן בְּלַיְלָה אֶחָד, וּפֶסַח דּוֹרוֹת נוֹהֵג כָּל שִׁבְעָה:

What are the differences between the Paschal lamb that the Jewish people offered in Egypt and the Paschal lamb offered in all later generations? The Paschal lamb the Jewish people offered in Egypt had to be taken from the tenth of the month of Nisan and required the people to sprinkle its blood with a bundle of hyssop, unlike the Paschal lamb in all later years, and its blood was also sprinkled upon the lintel and the two doorposts, and it was eaten with haste; in addition, the Paschal lamb in Egypt was only on one night, whereas the Paschal lamb throughout the generations is observed for seven days.

אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, שָׁמַעְתִּי שֶׁתְּמוּרַת הַפֶּסַח קְרֵבָה, וּתְמוּרַת הַפֶּסַח אֵינָהּ קְרֵבָה, וְאֵין לִי לְפָרֵשׁ. אָמַר רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, אֲנִי אֲפָרֵשׁ. הַפֶּסַח שֶׁנִּמְצָא קֹדֶם שְׁחִיטַת הַפֶּסַח, יִרְעֶה עַד שֶׁיִּסְתָּאֵב, וְיִמָּכֵר, וְיִקַּח בְּדָמָיו שְׁלָמִים, וְכֵן תְּמוּרָתוֹ. אַחַר שְׁחִיטַת הַפֶּסַח, קָרֵב שְׁלָמִים, וְכֵן תְּמוּרָתוֹ:

Rabbi Yehoshua said: I heard two rulings from my teachers: One ruling was that the substitute of a Paschal lamb is sacrificed as a peace-offering after Passover, and another ruling was that the substitute of a Paschal lamb is not sacrificed as a peace-offering after Passover; and I cannot explain these two rulings, as I do not remember the circumstances to which each ruling applies. Rabbi Akiva said: I will explain: With regard to a lamb that is separated as a Paschal lamb and is then lost, leading the owner to separate another animal as its replacement, and is later found before the slaughter of the replacement Paschal lamb, it is left to graze until it becomes unfit [yista’ev] and disqualified for use as a sacrifice. It is then sold and becomes unconsecrated, and the owner must bring a peace-offering with its proceeds. And so too, the same is true with regard to its substitute: If one separates another lamb as a substitute for this replacement, the sanctity of the original lamb extends to the substitute as well. In the case outlined above, the substitute would graze, just like the replacement, until it developed a blemish and would then be sold. This is the circumstance in which the substitute of a Paschal lamb is not sacrificed. On the other hand, if the lost lamb is found after the slaughter of the replacement Paschal lamb, it itself is sacrificed as a peace-offering, and so too, its substitute is sacrificed, which explains the ruling that the substitute of a Paschal lamb is sacrificed as a peace-offering.

הַמַּפְרִישׁ נְקֵבָה לְפִסְחוֹ אוֹ זָכָר בֶּן שְׁתֵּי שָׁנִים, יִרְעֶה עַד שֶׁיִּסְתָּאֵב, וְיִמָּכֵר, וְיִפְּלוּ דָמָיו לִנְדָבָה. הַמַּפְרִישׁ פִּסְחוֹ וָמֵת, לֹא יְבִיאֶנּוּ בְנוֹ אַחֲרָיו לְשֵׁם פֶּסַח, אֶלָּא לְשֵׁם שְׁלָמִים:

In the case of one who separates a female animal for his Paschal lamb although the Torah requires a male, or a male that is in its second year although a Paschal lamb must be an animal that is in its first year, the animal is left to graze until it develops a blemish and becomes unfit, and it is then sold and its money is used for free-will offerings or peace-offerings. With regard to one who separates his Paschal lamb and then dies, his son may not bring it after him for the purpose of a Paschal lamb because it may no longer be used for that purpose after its owner has died. Rather, it is brought for the purpose of a peace-offering.

הַפֶּסַח שֶׁנִּתְעָרֵב בִּזְבָחִים, כֻּלָּן יִרְעוּ עַד שֶׁיִּסְתָּאֲבוּ, וְיִמָּכְרוּ, וְיָבִיא בִדְמֵי הַיָּפֶה שֶׁבָּהֶן מִמִּין זֶה, וּבִדְמֵי הַיָּפֶה שֶׁבָּהֶן מִמִּין זֶה, וְיַפְסִיד הַמּוֹתָר מִבֵּיתוֹ. נִתְעָרֵב בִּבְכוֹרוֹת, רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, אִם חֲבוּרַת כֹּהֲנִים, יֹאכֵלוּ:

In the case of a Paschal lamb that was intermingled with other offerings, such as guilt-offerings and burnt-offerings, and it is not known which animal was separated for which offering, all of them are left to graze until they develop a blemish and become unfit; and they are then sold, and with the proceeds of the choicest of them he must bring this type of sacrifice, and with the proceeds of the choicest of them he must bring this other type of sacrifice, meaning that he must purchase one of each type of sacrifice that was intermingled at the value of the most expensive animal in the group. And he loses the difference from his own pocket. Not all the offerings were as expensive as the most valuable animal in the group, yet he must purchase an animal for each type of offering for the value of the most expensive animal in the group. If a Paschal lamb was intermingled with firstborn animals, Rabbi Shimon says: If those whose offerings became mixed together were groups of priests, they may eat all of the animals on Passover night. This is because priests are permitted to eat the meat of a firstborn animal, and the slaughter and other services for a firstborn animal are the same as those for a Paschal lamb. The attending priests should state that they intend to sacrifice as a Paschal lamb whichever animal is the Paschal lamb and to sacrifice as a firstborn animal whichever animal is a firstborn.

חֲבוּרָה שֶׁאָבַד פִּסְחָהּ, וְאָמְרָה לְאֶחָד, צֵא וּבַקֵּשׁ וּשְׁחֹט עָלֵינוּ, וְהָלַךְ וּמָצָא וְשָׁחַט, וְהֵם לָקְחוּ וְשָׁחֲטוּ, אִם שֶׁלּוֹ נִשְׁחַט רִאשׁוֹן, הוּא אוֹכֵל מִשֶּׁלּוֹ, וְהֵם אוֹכְלִים עִמּוֹ מִשֶּׁלּוֹ, וְאִם שֶׁלָּהֶן נִשְׁחַט רִאשׁוֹן, הֵם אוֹכְלִין מִשֶּׁלָּהֶן, וְהוּא אוֹכֵל מִשֶּׁלּוֹ. וְאִם אֵינוֹ יָדוּעַ אֵיזֶה מֵהֶן נִשְׁחַט רִאשׁוֹן, אוֹ שֶׁשָּׁחֲטוּ שְׁנֵיהֶן כְּאֶחָד, הוּא אוֹכֵל מִשֶּׁלּוֹ, וְהֵם אֵינָם אוֹכְלִים עִמּוֹ, וְשֶׁלָּהֶן יֵצֵא לְבֵית הַשְּׂרֵפָה, וּפְטוּרִין מִלַּעֲשׂוֹת פֶּסַח שֵׁנִי. אָמַר לָהֶן, אִם אֵחַרְתִּי, צְאוּ וְשַׁחֲטוּ עָלָי. הָלַךְ וּמְצָאוֹ, וְשָׁחַט, וְהֵן לָקְחוּ וְשָׁחֲטוּ, אִם שֶׁלָּהֶן נִשְׁחַט רִאשׁוֹן, הֵן אוֹכְלִין מִשֶּׁלָּהֶן, וְהוּא אוֹכֵל עִמָּהֶן. וְאִם שֶׁלּוֹ נִשְׁחַט רִאשׁוֹן, הוּא אוֹכֵל מִשֶּׁלּוֹ, וְהֵן אוֹכְלִין מִשֶּׁלָּהֶן. וְאִם אֵינוֹ יָדוּעַ אֵיזֶה מֵהֶם נִשְׁחַט רִאשׁוֹן, אוֹ שֶׁשָּׁחֲטוּ שְׁנֵיהֶם כְּאֶחָד, הֵן אוֹכְלִין מִשֶּׁלָּהֶן, וְהוּא אֵינוֹ אוֹכֵל עִמָּהֶן, וְשֶׁלּוֹ יֵצֵא לְבֵית הַשְּׂרֵפָה, וּפָטוּר מִלַּעֲשׂוֹת פֶּסַח שֵׁנִי. אָמַר לָהֶן וְאָמְרוּ לוֹ, אוֹכְלִין כֻּלָּם מִן הָרִאשׁוֹן. וְאִם אֵין יָדוּעַ אֵיזֶה מֵהֶן נִשְׁחַט רִאשׁוֹן, שְׁנֵיהֶם יוֹצְאִין לְבֵית הַשְּׂרֵפָה. לֹא אָמַר לָהֶן וְלֹא אָמְרוּ לוֹ, אֵינָן אַחֲרָאִין זֶה לָזֶה:

With regard to a group whose Paschal lamb was lost, and they said to one member of the group: Go and search for our Paschal lamb, and when you find it, slaughter it on our behalf; and he went and found the missing offering and slaughtered it on behalf of the entire group, but in the meantime they took a different animal and slaughtered it as a Paschal lamb, the halakha is as follows: If his Paschal lamb was slaughtered first, he eats from his offering, as he is considered to be registered specifically for that offering, and they eat with him from his offering, because he included them in his offering and it belongs to the entire group. The second animal does not have any registrants and is therefore burned. And if theirs was slaughtered first, they eat from theirs because they withdrew from the original offering through the act of slaughtering a replacement, and he eats from his because he was not registered for the replacement offering sacrificed by the remainder of his group. And if it is not known which of the offerings was slaughtered first, or if both the group and the individual slaughtered them together, he eats from his and they do not eat with him in case theirs was slaughtered first, and theirs must be taken out to the place designated for burning. The offering slaughtered by the group may not be eaten due to the concern that it was slaughtered second and the members of the group would therefore have been included in the first offering. However, they are exempt from performing the offering of the Paschal lamb on the second Pesaḥ, because they were included in the slaughter of whichever animal was slaughtered first. It is only due to external circumstances that they cannot complete the mitzva by eating the Paschal lamb, and this does not prevent them from fulfilling their obligation. A somewhat different case of a lost Paschal lamb would occur if the group had sent one member as an agent to search for the lost animal, and the agent said to the other members of the group before he left: If I am late, go and slaughter a Paschal lamb for me. He then went and found the lost Paschal lamb and slaughtered it, and they took another animal and slaughtered it as a Paschal lamb. In that case, if theirs was slaughtered first, they eat from theirs and he eats with them, because he requested to be included in their offering and they registered him for their Paschal lamb. And if his was slaughtered first, he eats from his and they eat from theirs, because the fact that they slaughtered a different animal indicates that they have withdrawn from the original offering. And if it is not known which of the animals was slaughtered first, or if both the group and the individual slaughtered them together, they eat from theirs because they definitely withdrew from the original offering by slaughtering a different one, and he does not eat with them because he also intended to be included in the animal he slaughtered and it is not clear which was slaughtered first. Therefore, his must be taken out to the place designated for burning; and he is exempt from performing the sacrifice of the Paschal lamb on the second Pesaḥ. If he said to them that if he is delayed they should include him in their Paschal lamb, and they said to him that if he finds the original offering he should slaughter it on their behalf, all of them eat from the first sacrifice that was slaughtered. And if it is not known which of them was slaughtered first, both of them must be taken out to the place designated for burning, and the entire group is exempt from participating in the Paschal lamb on the second Pesaḥ. If he did not say anything to them and they did not say anything to him, meaning that neither side granted the other authority to slaughter a Paschal lamb on its behalf, they are not responsible for each other, and the members of the group eat their Paschal lamb while the individual sent to find the lost animal eats from his own offering. The reason for this is that the individual is registered only for the original offering, while the other members of the group withdrew from that lost offering by sacrificing a different Paschal lamb.

שְׁתֵּי חֲבוּרוֹת שֶׁנִּתְעָרְבוּ פִסְחֵיהֶן, אֵלּוּ מוֹשְׁכִין לָהֶן אֶחָד וְאֵלּוּ מוֹשְׁכִין לָהֶן אֶחָד, אֶחָד מֵאֵלּוּ בָא לוֹ אֵצֶל אֵלּוּ, וְאֶחָד מֵאֵלּוּ בָא לוֹ אֵצֶל אֵלּוּ, וְכָךְ הֵם אוֹמְרִים, אִם שֶׁלָּנוּ הוּא הַפֶּסַח הַזֶּה, יָדֶיךָ מְשׁוּכוֹת מִשֶּׁלְּךָ וְנִמְנֵיתָ עַל שֶׁלָּנוּ, וְאִם שֶׁלְּךָ הוּא הַפֶּסַח הַזֶּה, יָדֵינוּ מְשׁוּכוֹת מִשֶּׁלָּנוּ וְנִמְנֵינוּ עַל שֶׁלָּךְ. וְכֵן חָמֵשׁ חֲבוּרוֹת שֶׁל חֲמִשָּׁה חֲמִשָּׁה, וְשֶׁל עֲשָׂרָה עֲשָׂרָה, מוֹשְׁכִין לָהֶן אֶחָד מִכָּל חֲבוּרָה וַחֲבוּרָה, וְכֵן הֵם אוֹמְרִים:

Two groups whose Paschal lambs have become intermingled and they do not know which one belongs to which group should act in the following manner: These members of the first group draw one of the animals separated as a Paschal lamb for themselves, and those members of the second group draw one for themselves. One of these, a member of one group, comes to those, the members of the other group, and one of those members of the second group comes to these members of the first group. And this is what each group says to the member of the other group who has come to join them: If this Paschal lamb that is now in our possession is ours, you are withdrawn from the Paschal lamb that was yours, and you are registered for our Paschal lamb and you may eat from it. And if this Paschal lamb is yours, meaning that it actually belongs to the other group, including this individual, we are hereby withdrawn from ours and we are registered for your Paschal lamb, which you agree to share with us. The other group makes the same statement. And similarly, if there were five groups of five people each or of ten people each, they draw one person from each and every group, and they say this statement mentioned in the case of two groups. The remaining member or members of each group will grant the representatives of the other groups that have come to join them a share in the Paschal lamb, and they will acquire a share in it for themselves in case the animal they have chosen belonged originally to one of the other groups.

שְׁנַיִם שֶׁנִּתְעָרְבוּ פִסְחֵיהֶם, זֶה מוֹשֵׁךְ לוֹ אֶחָד, וְזֶה מוֹשֵׁךְ לוֹ אֶחָד, זֶה מַמְנֶה עִמּוֹ אֶחָד מִן הַשּׁוּק, וְזֶה מַמְנֶה עִמּוֹ אֶחָד מִן הַשּׁוּק, זֶה בָא אֵצֶל זֶה, וְזֶה בָא אֵצֶל זֶה, וְכָךְ הֵם אוֹמְרִים, אִם שֶׁלִּי הוּא פֶסַח זֶה, יָדֶיךָ מְשׁוּכוֹת מִשֶּׁלְּךָ וְנִמְנֵיתָ עַל שֶׁלִּי. וְאִם שֶׁלְּךָ הוּא פֶסַח זֶה, יָדַי מְשׁוּכוֹת מִשֶּׁלִּי וְנִמְנֵיתִי עַל שֶׁלָּךָ:

In the case of two individuals whose Paschal lambs became intermingled and each person was the only one registered for his offering, what should they do? This person draws one of the Paschal lambs for himself and that person draws one for himself; this person registers someone from the marketplace with him on his Paschal lamb and that person registers someone from the marketplace with him on his Paschal lamb. Once this has been done, this one comes to that person from the marketplace who has been added to the other person’s sacrifice, and that one comes to this person from the marketplace who has been added to the first person’s sacrifice, and this is what they say: If this Paschal lamb is mine, you are withdrawn from yours and you are registered for mine, and if this is your Paschal lamb, I am withdrawn from mine and I am hereby registered for yours, as described previously. The reason it is necessary for each individual to add an additional person to his Paschal lamb, is to ensure that when each person withdraws from his original Paschal lamb and registers for the other, no Paschal lamb will be left ownerless for any amount of time.