רבי יוסי אומר נתנמנמו יאכלו נרדמו לא יאכלו הפסח אחר חצות מטמא את הידים הפגול והנותר מטמאין את הידים:
Rabbi Yosei says: If they dozed they may eat from the Paschal lamb when they awake, but if they fell fast asleep they may not eat from it. The Sages further said: The Paschal lamb after midnight renders one’s hands ritually impure, as it becomes notar, an offering that remained after the time when they may be eaten has expired; and the Sages ruled that both piggul, offerings that were invalidated due to inappropriate intent while being sacrificed, and notar render one’s hands ritually impure.
גמ׳ רבי יוסי אומר נתנמנמו יאכלו נרדמו לא יאכלו היכי דמי נתנמנם אמר רב אשי נים ולא נים תיר ולא תיר כגון דקרי ליה ועני ולא ידע לאהדורי סברא וכי מדכרו ליה מדכר
GEMARA: We learned in the mishna that Rabbi Yosei says: If they dozed they may eat from the Paschal lamb, but if they fell asleep they may not eat from it.The Gemara asks: What are the circumstances of dozing? Rav Ashi said: One is asleep but not asleep, awake but not awake, when, if they call him, he will answer, but he is unable to provide a reasonable answer. And when they later inform him of what happened, he remembers it.
אביי הוה יתיב קמיה דרבה חזא דקא נמנם אמר ליה מינם קא נאים מר אמר ליה מינומי קא מנמנם ותנן נתנמנמו יאכלו נרדמו לא יאכלו:
The Gemara cites a related episode: Abaye was sitting before Rabba, and he saw that Rabba was dozing off after he had begun to eat the final obligatory piece of matza. He said to him: Is the Master sleeping? Rabba said to him: I am dozing, and we learned in the mishna: If they dozed, they may eat from the Paschal lamb, but if they fell fast asleep they may not eat from it.
הפסח אחר חצות מטמא את הידים וכו׳: אלמא מחצות הוה ליה נותר מאן תנא
We learned in the mishna that the Paschal lamb after midnight renders one’s hands ritually impure. The Gemara infers: Apparently, from midnight and onward the Paschal lamb is classified as notar. The Gemara asks: Who is the tanna who maintains this opinion?
אמר רב יוסף רבי אלעזר בן עזריה הוא דתניא ואכלו את הבשר בלילה הזה רבי אלעזר בן עזריה אומר נאמר כאן בלילה הזה ונאמר להלן ועברתי בארץ מצרים בלילה הזה
Rav Yosef said: It is Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya, as it was taught in a baraita: With regard to the verse “And they shall eat of the meat on that night” (Exodus 12:8), Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya says: Here it is stated “on that night,” from which it cannot be determined when the night ends. And below it is stated: “And I will pass through the land of Egypt on that night and I will strike every firstborn in the land of Egypt” (Exodus 12:12). The Torah states with regard to the death of the firstborns: “Thus said the Lord: At about midnight, I will go out into the midst of Egypt and every firstborn in Egypt shall die” (Exodus 11:4–5).
מה להלן עד חצות אף כאן עד חצות
The baraita continues: Just as in the verse below, the striking of the firstborns took place until midnight, as stated explicitly in the verse, so too, in the verse here, the mitzva to eat the Paschal lamb continues until midnight but not beyond. Evidently, the Paschal lamb may not be eaten after midnight.
אמר לו רבי עקיבא והלא נאמר חפזון עד שעת חפזון
Rabbi Akiva said to Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya: But wasn’t it already stated: “Thus you shall eat it, with your loins girded, your shoes on your feet, your staffs in your hands, and you will eat it in haste, for it is the Paschal offering for the Lord” (Exodus 12:11)? This verse indicates that the Paschal lamb may be eaten until the time of haste, i.e., until dawn, as the Jewish people left Egypt the next day.
אם כן מה תלמוד לומר בלילה יכול יהא נאכל כקדשים ביום תלמוד לומר בלילה בלילה הוא נאכל ואינו נאכל ביום
Rabbi Akiva continues: If that is so, what is the meaning when the verse states: “On that night,” with regard to eating the Paschal lamb? The Gemara explains that this phrase is necessary, as I might have thought that the Paschal lamb is eaten during the day, like all other offerings, which must be slaughtered and eaten during the day. Therefore, the verse states: “On that night,” to underscore that this particular offering is eaten at night, and it is not eaten during the day.
ורבי עקיבא האי הזה מאי עביד ליה מיבעי ליה למעוטי לילה אחר הוא דאתא סלקא דעתך אמינא הואיל ופסח קדשים קלים ושלמים קדשים קלים מה שלמים נאכלים לשני ימים ולילה אחד אף פסח
The Gemara asks: And Rabbi Akiva, what does he do with the word “that”? As he doesn’t use it for a verbal analogy, what does Rabbi Akiva learn from this word? The Gemara answers: He needs it to exclude another night. It could enter your mind to say that since the Paschal lamb falls into the category of offerings of lesser sanctity, and peace-offerings are also offerings of lesser sanctity, just as peace-offerings may be eaten for two days and one night, i.e., the day they are sacrificed through the following day, as stated in the Torah, so too, the same halakha should apply to the Paschal lamb.
אוקים לילות במקום ימים ויהא נאכל לשני לילות ויום אחד כתב רחמנא הזה
The Gemara explains the previous statement. How could the Paschal lamb be eaten for two days and one night if one starts eating it at night? The Gemara explains: One may say: I will substitute the nights that the Paschal lamb may be eaten instead of the days that a peace-offering is eaten. And accordingly, the Paschal lamb may be eaten for two nights and one day. Therefore, the Torah wrote the word “that,” to teach that the Paschal lamb may be eaten only on that one night.
ורבי אלעזר בן עזריה אמר לך מלא תותירו עד בקר נפקא הא
And Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya, from where might he derive the halakha that the Paschal lamb may not be eaten for two nights? Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya could have said to you: This halakha is derived from the verse: “You shall let nothing of it remain until the morning; and that of it which remains until the morning you shall burn with fire” (Exodus 12:10). If it is prohibited to leave any part of the Paschal lamb until the morning, it is certainly prohibited to leave any of it until the following night. Therefore, it is unnecessary to cite an additional source to teach that the Paschal lamb may be eaten only on the first night.
ורבי עקיבא אמר לך אי לא כתב רחמנא הזה הוה אמינא מאי בקר בקר שני ורבי אלעזר אמר לך כל היכא דכתב בקר בקר ראשון הוא
And Rabbi Akiva could have said to you, in response to this argument: If the Torah hadn’t written “on that night,” I would have said: What is indicated by the word “morning” in that verse? It means the second morning after the Festival, the day of the sixteenth of Nisan. Therefore, it was necessary for the Torah to write that one may eat the Paschal lamb only on that night and no other. And Rabbi Elazar could have said to you in response: Anywhere that the Torah writes “morning,” it is referring to the first, i.e., the next morning. If that were not the case, no biblical text could have any definitive meaning.
אמר רבא אכל מצה בזמן הזה אחר חצות לרבי אלעזר בן עזריה לא יצא ידי חובתו פשיטא דכיון דאיתקש לפסח כפסח דמי
Rava said: Nowadays, if one ate matza after midnight, according to the opinion of Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya, he has not fulfilled his obligation. The Gemara expresses surprise at this statement: It is obvious that this is the case, for since the verse juxtaposes matza to the Paschal lamb, it is considered like the Paschal lamb, and therefore matza may also be eaten only until midnight.
מהו דתימא הא אפקיה קרא מהיקישא קמשמע לן דכי אהדריה קרא למילתא קמייתא אהדריה:
The Gemara answers: Rava’s statement is necessary, lest you say that the verse has removed the halakha of matza from this juxtaposition, as Rava maintains that eating matza is a distinct mitzva that applies even nowadays. One might therefore have thought that the halakhot of eating matza differ entirely from those of the Paschal lamb. Rava therefore teaches us that when the verse repeats the mitzva to eat matza on the first night, it restores this mitzva to its original status, which means that one may eat matza only at a time when he may also eat the Paschal lamb.
הפיגול והנותר מטמא את הידים וכו׳: רב הונא ורב חסדא חד אמר משום חשדי כהונה וחד אמר משום עצלי כהונה חד אמר כזית וחד אמר כביצה
The mishna taught that piggul and notar render one’s hands ritually impure. This issue is subject to a dispute between Rav Huna and Rav Ḥisda. One of them said: The reason for this enactment is due to suspected priests, i.e., priests who were suspected of invalidating offerings; and the other one said the reason is due to lazy priests. Rav Huna and Rav Ḥisda also disagree about another matter: One of them said that the ritual impurity of notar and piggul applies even to an olive-bulk of the meat; and one of them said it applies only to an egg-bulk.