(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf of Har Nof
Rosh Kollel: Rav Mordecai Kornfeld

Ask A Question about the Daf

Previous daf

Pesachim 13


QUESTION: The Gemara says that if Erev Pesach, the fourteenth of Nisan, occurs on Shabbos, a person should burn all of his Chametz, even Terumah, before Shabbos, leaving over just two meals' worth of food for the Shabbos Se'udos. RASHI explains that the two meals' worth of food will be used for the meal on Shabbos night and the meal on Shabbos morning. There is no need to save Chametz for the afternoon meal, though, since Chametz is forbidden in the afternoon on Erev Pesach.

It seems from Rashi that a person is allowed to eat only two Se'udos on this Shabbos and not three. Why not? After all, since there is a Mitzvah to eat three meals on Shabbos, everyone should arrange to eat a third meal *earlier* in the day, by eating two meals instead of one in the morning, so that altogether he eats three meals on this Shabbos! Consequently, the Gemara should say that he should leave over *three* meals' worth of Chametz to eat on Shabbos and not just two meals' worth, so that he will have three meals on Shabbos!


(a) TOSFOS HA'ROSH here and TOSFOS in Shabbos (118a) explain that perhaps one must indeed make two meals in the morning so that he will have a total of three meals on Shabbos. When the Gemara says that one should only leave over two meals' worth of Chametz, it means that one should leave over the *amount of food* that he eats in two meals, since a person does not consume any more food than usual when he makes an "extra" morning meal. Rather, he simply splits the morning meal in half, eating the first half, reciting Birkas ha'Mazon and then eating the second half. The Gemara, therefore, is correct in saying that he should leave over the amount of food necessary for two meals, even though he will make out of that food three meals.

(b) TOSFOS RABEINU PERETZ argues, pointing out that it is not proper to split one meal into two by reciting Birkas ha'Mazon in the middle, because by doing so one recites extra blessings unnecessarily. Therefore, if a person wants to fulfill the Mitzvah of eating three meals on Shabbos, he may not do as Tosfos suggests, but rather he must get up early on Shabbos morning, Daven, and eat much earlier than usual. He should eat a full Se'udah at that time, and then later on in the morning, he should eat another full Se'udah, which will be his third Shabbos meal. Why, then, does the Gemara not say that one should leave over enough food for three meals? It must be that a person is *not* allowed to eat the third Shabbos meal before the afternoon. If he eats it in the morning, it does not count as his third Shabbos meal and he does not fulfill the Mitzvah of eating three meals on Shabbos.

HALACHAH: The SHULCHAN ARUCH (OC 291:2) rules that one does not fulfill the Mitzvah of eating the third Shabbos meal if he eats it before the afternoon (prior to six and a half Halachic hours into the day). The MISHNAH BERURAH (291:7) cites the MAGEN AVRAHAM and others who rule that if one began the third Se'udah before the afternoon and it continued on into the afternoon, one has fulfilled his obligation.

Similarly, in Hilchos Pesach the SHULCHAN ARUCH (OC 444:1) rules that when Erev Pesach falls on Shabbos, one cannot eat Chametz at the third Shabbos meal.


QUESTION: The Gemara says that two loaves of Lachmei Todah, the bread that was brought with every Korban Todah, were placed out on the roof of the portico of the Azarah as a sign that the time of the prohibition of Chametz had arrived.

The Gemara asks how these Chalos became Pasul. Rebbi Chanina says that they became Pasul through "Linah" -- they were left overnight without being eaten. Since so many Korbenos Todah were brought on the thirteenth of Nisan, there were not enough people to eat all of the Chalos brought with the Korbanos, and therefore every year there were some Chalos left over which became Pasul b'Linah. Rebbi Yanai aruges, saying that the Chalos were not really Pasul, but they just could not be eaten for another reason. The blood of the Korban to which these Chalos belonged was spilled before the Korban was brought, and therefore the Chalos could no longer be eaten because their Korban could not be brought.

What is Rebbi Yanai gaining by insisting that these Chalos were not Pasul, but could not be eaten for another reason? What was wrong with Rebbi Chanina's explanation, that the Chalos were Pasul because they were left over? Why should Rebbi Yanai argue with Rebbi Chanina's reasoning?


(a) RASHI (DH Kesheros Hayu) explains that Rebbi Yanai is adding a new point that could not be understood from Rebbi Chanina's explanation. According to Rebbi Chanina, one is not allowed to shame Kodshim, such as the Chalos Todah, by putting them on the roof of the portico unless they already have a very invalidating Pesul -- the Pesul of Linah, having been left over a full night after the time that they were supposed to be eaten, and they must now be burned. Rebbi Yanai adds that even if there is no Chiyuv to burn the Chalos yet, since they have not been left overnight, nevertheless we still allow placing them on top of the portico.

(b) MAHARAM CHALAVAH suggests that Rebbi Yanai rejected Rebbi Chanina's reasoning because after the Lachmei Todah were left over a full night after the time they were supposed to be eaten, they must be burned. Since there is a Mitzvah to burn them, they should have been burned immediately in the morning. They should not be left until the afternoon, until the time that we want to make a sign for the Isur of Chametz. Therefore, it must be that they became Pasul today, on the 14th of Nisan, and the Pesul is that they cannot be brought upon the Mizbe'ach since the blood of their Korban Todah was spilled.

(c) TOSFOS (DH Ela) and other Rishonim explain that Rebbi Yanai, according to the conclusion of the Gemara, must also be talking about Lachmei Todah which became Pasul b'Linah. Since the Korban Todah cannot be brought on the fourteenth of Nisan, but only on the thirteenth, as the Gemara said earlier, and the Todah of these Lachmei Todah was already slaughtered and its blood spilled, it must have been slaughtered on the thirteenth, since we do not bring Korbanos Todah at all on the fourteenth. Apparently, even according to Rebbi Yanai the Lachmei Todah are from a Korban that was brought the day before, and the Chalos of that Korban were left over night until today.

Why, then, does Rebbi Yanai argue with Rebbi Chanina? What is he gaining by his explanation; what difference does it make *how* the Todah became invalidated? Tosfos answers that Rebbi Yanai argues that it is not logical to assume that there were always left-over breads every year, because Lachmei Todah may be eaten even by non-Kohanim. If so, there certainly were enough people available to eat all of the Lachmei Todah. In addition, the MAHARAM CHALAVAH adds that the Kohanim are Zerizim and they would make sure that the people who brought the Korbenos Todah would eat their Chalos Todah or else they would find someone else to eat them.

Therefore, Rebbi Yanai says that it must be that the Chalos become Pasul because the blood of the Korban was spilled when the Kohanim were bringing it the day before. This has support in the Yerushalmi which says that since everyone in the nation who was obligated to bring a Korban Todah had to bring it on the thirteenth of Nisan when they went up to Yerushalayim for the festival, there would be an exceedingly large load of Korbanos for the Kohanim to bring, and they would have to work especially fast to bring all the Korbanos. While they were speeding about it was common for some of the blood to spill out, and thus every year there would be some Korbanos whose blood spilled. It was not common, though, for there to be Lachmei Todah that were not eaten.

Next daf


For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,