Ask A Question about the Daf

Previous daf

Pesachim 120

1) FALLING ASLEEP AT THE SEDER

QUESTION: The Mishnah states that if everyone in the Chaburah fell asleep during the meal, they may not continue eating from the Korban Pesach when they wake up. If only some of them fell asleep, then when they wake up they may continue eating the Korban Pesach. Rebbi Yosi says that if one merely dozed off, then he may continue eating, but if he fell into a deep slumber, then he may not continue eating.

The Gemara relates that Rabah was once dozing off, and Abaye asked him whether he was sleeping or not. Rabah responded that he was merely dozing, and the Mishnah says that if one merely dozes, he may still eat from the Korban when he wakes up, as long as he did not completely fall asleep.

What is the reason for this prohibition, that if everyone falls asleep they may not eat from the Korban Pesach? Also, how would this prohibition have applied to Rabah had he been sleeping deeply? Rabah lived after the times of the Beis ha'Mikdash when there was no Korban Pesach!

ANSWERS:

(a) The RASHBAM says that the Rabanan prohibited eating the Korban Pesach after one wakes up from sleeping, because it is similar to eating the Korban Pesach in two different places, which is prohibited mid'Oraisa.

The same applies to Matzah (the "Afikoman") nowadays, which is commemorative of the Korban Pesach. Since the Matzah represents the Korban Pesach, it may not be eaten in two places, and thus one who fell asleep may not continue to eat the Matzah when he wakes up. The incident of Rabah and Abaye involved Rabah dozing off at the Pesach Seder, after eating the Matzah. Rabah asserted that he was only dozing and therefore may continue eating Matzah.

This is also the approach of the RAMBAM, who discusses the Halachah of not eating after one fell asleep in both Hilchos Korban Pesach (8:15) and again in Hilchos Chametz u'Matzah (8:14), where he discusses the Halachos of the Seder that apply to *Matzah*.

(b) TOSFOS (119b, DH Amar Rav) explains (based on a "Yerushalmi") that the reason for the prohibition of eating after one fell asleep is, like the Rashbam explains, that one should not eat in two places. However, the prohibition of eating in two places does not apply to Matzah nowadays. Therefore, the incident of Rabah and Abaye could not have involved eating Matzah at the Seder. Rather, that incident occurred on a night before a fast day. If Rabah had fallen deeply asleep, then he would not be permitted to eat at night when we woke up even though the fast only begins in the morning, because he took his mind off of eating more and thus accepted upon himself the fast already. However, if he only dozed, then the fast would not have started yet.

The BA'AL HA'ME'OR (as explained by the LECHEM MISHNAH, end of Hilchos Chametz u'Matzah) presents a similar approach. The prohibition of eating in two places does not apply to Matzah. The incident of Rabah and Abaye did not occur at the Seder, but rather it occurred on a normal day in the Beis Midrash. Abaye asked Rabah whether his state of semi-consciousness was one of sleeping or one of dozing. He asked in order to learn how to define that state. Rabah answered that he was only dozing, and dozing is not considered sleeping.

(c) The RA'AVAD (Hilchos Chametz u'Matzah, loc. cit.) says that the reason one may not eat if he falls asleep is because of Hesech ha'Da'as (he took his attention off of the food), and we know that a food of Kodshim such as the Korban Pesach becomes Pasul with Hesech ha'Da'as (Pesachim 34a). This reason, though, should not apply to Matzah nowadays, because Matzah is not Kodshim and it does not become Pasul with Hesech ha'Da'as.

If so, what was Rabah concerned about if there was no Korban Pesach in his time? The Ra'avad understands that Rabah was eating a regular meal, not on Pesach, and the question was whether he was removed his attention from the cleanliness of his hands or not. If he had removed his attention from ensuring that his hands remain clean, then he must wash again before he continues to eat. Rabah replied that he was only dozing, and therefore he does not have to wash again. However, he certainly would have been permitted to continue *eating* (after re-washing hands) even if he had fallen asleep completely.

(The Ra'avad seems to be consistent with his opinion elsewhere, for the Ra'avad and the Rambam understand that Rebbi Yosi's opinion is a *leniency*. That is, when Rebbi Yosi states that if one was dozing (Misnamnem) he may continue to eat, he means that even if *all* of the people at the meal dozed off, they may continue to eat afterwards. Similarly, if *one* person completely fell asleep, and others were there and awake, he may continue to eat from the Korban when he wakes up. Since there are other people present, there cannot have been Hesech ha'Da'as, so the Korban may still be eaten from.)

120b

QUESTION: Rebbi Akiva and Rebbi Elazar ben Azaryah argue concerning the time for eating the Korban Pesach. Rebbi Akiva says that it may be eaten all night until dawn, and Rebbi Elazar ben Azaryah says that it may be eaten only until Chatzos, midnight. Rava says that according to Rebbi Elazar ben Azaryah, just like the Korban Pesach may not be eaten after Chatzos, if one eats Matzah after Chatzos he does not fulfill the Mitzvah.

The Gemara asks why Rava had to say this; it is obvious, for the verse (Bamidbar 9:11) links Matzah with the Korban Pesach! Why, then, would we have thought that the Halachos of when to eat Matzah differ from the Halachos of when to eat the Korban Pesach? The Gemara answers that a verse removes Matzah from the Hekesh, and therefore we might have thought that Matzah is not compared to the Korban Pesach and it may be eaten after Chatzos. Rava therefore teaches that when the verse returns the Hekesh to its place, Matzah has all of the Halachos of the Korban Pesach, including the time by when it must be eaten.

What is the verse that removes Matzah from the Hekesh, and what is the verse that reinstates it?

The RASHBAM explains that these are the verses mentioned in the Beraisa earlier (120a). The Beraisa learns from the verse, "Sheshes Yamim Tochal Matzos" (Devarim 16:8), that just like on the seventh day of Pesach eating Matzah is optional and not obligatory, so, too, on the first six days of Pesach, eating Matzah is optional. This is the verse which removes Matzah from the Hekesh in the verse, "Al Matzos u'Merorim Yochluhu" (Bamidbar 9:11). That is, from the verse of "Sheshes Yamim" we would have learned that there is no obligation to eat Matzah at all; it just means that if a person *wants* to eat a grain dish with his Korban Pesach, then it has to be Matzah and not Chametz. What verse returns Matzah to the Hekesh to make it obligatory the first night? The Rashbam says that it is the verse "b'Erev Tochlu Matzos" (Shemos 12:18).

1. What does the Rashbam mean? The Beraisa earlier (120a), which discussed these verses and what we learn from them, never suggested that Matzah be taken out of the Hekesh to make it optional on the first night of Pesach. Rather, the Beraisa said the very opposite -- we know that there is an obligation to eat Matzah the first night *because of the Hekesh* ("Al Matzos u'Merorim Yochluhu")! *Without* that Hekesh, Matzah on the first night would have been optional because of the verse, "Sheshes Yamim." The Beraisa, though, never thought that "Sheshes Yamim" serves to *block* the Hekesh of "Al Matzos u'Merorim Yochluhu!" Thus, the verse never removed Matzah from the Hekesh!

2. Furthermore, it is clear from the Beraisa there that the verse "b'Erev Tochlu Matzos" was necessary only to teach that *nowadays* Matzah is a Chiyuv d'Oraisa. That verse teaches nothing about Matzah during the times of the Beis ha'Mikdash. How, then, can the Rashbam say that we need that verse to teach that in the times of the Beis ha'Mikdash, eating Matzah was an obligation? (see DEVAR SHMUEL)

ANSWERS:

(a) There are actually two elements involved with the Mitzvah of eating Matzah the first night. On one hand, Matzah must be eaten along with and in combination with the Korban Pesach. On the other hand, there is an independent Chiyuv to eat Matzah, apart from the Chiyuv to eat the Korban Pesach.

1. The first element, that Matzah must be eaten together with the Korban Pesach, is certainly an *obligation*, as the Beraisa (120a) states, based on the verse "Al Matzos u'Merorim...." It is not just optional, just like eating the Korban Pesach itself is certainly not optional. When the Rashbam here says that we might have thought that Matzah on the first night is optional because the verse "Sheshes Yamim" removes it from the Hekesh, he meant that if a person cannot eat the meat of the Korban on the first night (he is a Zaken, Choleh, etc.), *only then* he also has no obligation to eat Matzah on the first night. That is, there is no independent Mitzvah to eat Matzah without the Korban Pesach (i.e. the second element mentioned above), for the verse removes *that obligation* from the Hekesh. That is, we would have learned that the obligation to eat Matzah applies only when the person is also eating the Korban Pesach with it, because the verse of "Sheshes Yamim" taught us that there is no Chiyuv to eat Matzah in its *own* right. That is the verse that removed Matzah from the Hekesh.

2. Rava therefore teaches that Matzah is put back into the Hekesh by another verse, and once Matzah is back in the Hekesh, we can learn that there is a Chiyuv to eat Matzah independent of the Chiyuv to eat the Korban Pesach. What verse returns it to the Hekesh? It is the verse "b'Erev Tochlu Matzos." That verse, the Beraisa told us, teaches that *nowadays* there is a Chiyuv to eat Matzah, even though nowadays there is no Korban Pesach. Just like there is a Chiyuv to eat Matzah nowadays even though there is no Korban Pesach, so, too, in the time of the Beis ha'Mikdash when there *was* a Korban Pesach, if for some reason a person could not eat the Korban, nevertheless there was still an independent Chiyuv to eat Matzah!

(b) RABEINU CHANANEL approaches the Sugya differently:

1. When the Gemara says that Matzah was removed from the Hekesh, it means that the verse "b'Erev Tochlu Matzos" removes Matzah from the Hekesh to teach that it *applies even nowadays*, unlike the Pesach. Once Matzah is not included in the Hekesh, we might have thought that Matzah also does not share the Halachos of the Korban Pesach and may be eaten even after Chatzos. Therefore, Rava teaches that Matzah was returned to the Hekesh, and thus it *is* compared to the Korban Pesach and may *not* be eaten after Chatzos.

2. However, what verse returns Matzah to the Hekesh? According to Rabeinu Chananel, we must say that the same verse which removed it from the Hekesh, returns it to the Hekesh -- "b'Erev Tochlu Matzos!" That verse teaches that not only is Matzah a Chiyuv nowadays, but it retains the same Halachos as when the Korban Pesach is around, and may be eaten only before Chatzos. (This is also the approach of Rashi according to the original Girsa of Rashi, as the RASHASH explains.)