Study Pesachim folio 94A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
לרב יהודה לא קשיא: טמא שרץ רחמנא דחייה, דכתיב: ״איש איש כי יהיה טמא לנפש״, מי לא עסקינן שחל שביעי שלו להיות בערב הפסח, ואפילו הכי אמר רחמנא — לידחי.
According to Rav Yehuda’s opinion it is also not difficult, because in his opinion the Torah itself deferred the obligation of one who is ritually impure through contact with a dead creeping animal to the second Pesaḥ, as it is written: “If any man of you or of your generations should be ritually impure due to a dead body” (Numbers 9:10). Are we not dealing even with a situation in which his 7th day of purification occurs on Passover eve, such that he can be ritually pure by nightfall and therefore he has the same status on that 7th day as one who became impure due to contact with a dead creeping animal? And nonetheless the Torah stated that his obligation should be deferred. This teaches that anyone who is ritually impure at the time of the slaughtering has his obligation deferred to the second Pesaḥ, even if he would be able to immerse and become pure in time to eat the offering on the first Pesaḥ with the rest of the Jewish people.
תנו רבנן: היה עומד חוץ למודיעים, ויכול ליכנס בסוסים ובפרדים, יכול יהא חייב — תלמוד לומר: ״ובדרך לא היה״, והלה היה בדרך.
A baraita states: If one was standing outside the city of Modi’im and was able to enter Jerusalem on horses or mules but not by walking, I might have thought he would be liable to receive karet for failing to come to Jerusalem and offer the Paschal lamb; therefore, the verse states: “And is not on a journey” (Numbers 9:13). This person was on a distant journey and is therefore exempt.
היה עומד לפנים מן המודיעים, ואין יכול ליכנס מפני גמלים וקרונות המעכבות אותו, יכול לא יהא חייב — תלמוד לומר: ״ובדרך לא היה״, והרי לא היה בדרך.
On the other hand, if one was standing closer to Jerusalem than Modi’im but was not able to enter due to the camels and carriages that are carrying his family and delaying him, I might have thought he would not be liable for failing to offer the Paschal lamb because he is trying to enter; therefore, the verse states: “And was not on a journey,” and this person was not on a distant journey and is therefore liable. This person could have dismounted and come to Jerusalem on foot, but he wanted to bring his family with him in a carriage and was consequently delayed. One’s liability is determined based on his distance from Jerusalem.