Pesachim 41b

פסחים מ״א ע״ב

Learn Pesachim 41b step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Pesachim 41b in Gemara Clarity

Topic

Lashes for improperly cooked קרבן פסח and לאו שבכללות; the timing of the לאוין of נא, מבושל, and eating the פסח by day

Overview

The amud opens by counting the מלקות for eating the קרבן פסח undercooked (נא) or boiled (מבושל). Each counts as two sets, and both together count as three, because 'כי אם צלי אש' is treated as an extra לאו. אביי disagrees: there are no מלקות for a לאו שבכללות. One version of his view gives one set of lashes for it, and another version gives none, since only a specific לאו like חסימה brings מלקות. The same dispute is repeated for a נזיר who eats grape skins and pits. Next, ברייתות teach that the לאו of נא applies only at night, when the מצוה of eating צלי applies. This is learned from the extra words 'כי אם צלי אש'. רבי learns from the doubled phrase 'בשל מבשל' that meat boiled by day is also forbidden when eaten at night. Finally, a ברייתא makes eating roasted פסח meat by day a לאו like נא. The גמרא finds a source in 'בלילה הזה' but objects that a לאו הבא מכלל עשה is only an עשה. רב חסדא begins his answer by asking whose view the ברייתא follows, and the answer continues on the next amud.

Opening lines

The steps (23)

1. StatementCounting the lashes for eating the פסח undercooked or boiled
2. Statementאביי: no lashes for a general prohibition
3. StatementFirst version of אביי: no double lashes, but one set
4. StatementSecond version of אביי: no lashes at all, unlike muzzling
5. Statementרבא: a נזיר who eats grape skins or pits gets extra lashes
6. Statementאביי: no lashes for the נזיר's general prohibition
7. StatementFirst version: only the extra lashes are cancelled
8. StatementSecond version: the general prohibition brings no lashes at all
9. StatementEating partially roasted meat: exempt by day, liable at night
10. StatementEating roasted meat by day does not bind one to a group
11. ProofAnother ברייתא proposes that eating partially roasted meat by day should be forbidden
12. RejectionThe opposite logic: maybe נא is forbidden only when צלי is not commanded
13. ProofSupport for the reversal: the meat already became permitted when roasted
14. ConclusionThe פסוק decides: נא is forbidden only when the מצוה of צלי applies
15. Statementרבי: the double word בשל מבשל includes meat boiled by day
16. Challengeרבי already used this phrase for something else
17. ResolutionThe unusual wording teaches two laws
18. StatementA ברייתא: eating roasted meat by day and נא at night
19. ProofRoasted meat by day is a לאו, just like נא
20. QuestionWhere is the source for the prohibition on roasted meat by day?
21. ResponseThe source is 'they shall eat the meat on this night'
22. ChallengeA prohibition inferred from a positive command is only an עשה
23. Resolutionרב חסדא asks whose opinion the ברייתא follows