פסחים ו׳Pesachim 6

Mishnah 1א׳

אֵלּוּ דְבָרִים בַּפֶּסַח דּוֹחִין אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת, שְׁחִיטָתוֹ וּזְרִיקַת דָּמוֹ וּמִחוּי קְרָבָיו וְהֶקְטֵר חֲלָבָיו. אֲבָל צְלִיָּתוֹ וַהֲדָחַת קְרָבָיו אֵינָן דּוֹחִין אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת. הַרְכָּבָתוֹ וַהֲבָאָתוֹ מִחוּץ לַתְּחוּם, וַחֲתִיכַת יַבַּלְתּוֹ, אֵין דּוֹחִין אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, דּוֹחִין:

These (the following) things in the Pesach (offering) override the Sabbath [The Pesach overrides the Sabbath, it being written "in its appointed time" in respect to the Pesach, viz. (Numbers 9:2): "Let the Children of Israel offer the Pesach in its appointed time"; and, in respect to the tamid, viz. (Ibid. 28:2): "…shall you observe to offer to Me in its appointed time." Just as "in its appointed time" of the tamid overrides the Sabbath, viz. (Ibid. 28:10): "The burnt-offering of the Sabbath in its Sabbath, in addition to the tamid, etc.", so, "in its appointed time" of the Pesach overrides the Sabbath]: its slaughtering, the sprinkling of its blood [These cannot be done at night, it being written in that regard (Leviticus 7:38): "…on the day that He commanded to present, etc." — on the day, and not at night.], michui of its entrails ["michui" - "cleaning out," as in (Proverbs 30:20): "She eats and wipes (machthah) her mouth." The cleaning out of the entrails (so that they not putrefy) overrides the Sabbath], and the smoking of its fats. But its roasting and the rinsing out of its innards do not override the Sabbath, [for these can be done after dark]. Carrying it (the Paschal lamb) [on his shoulders to bring it through the public domain to the azarah — Even though only a (rabbinical) shvuth ("resting") interdict obtains (for "a living thing carries itself"), it does not override the Sabbath, for it should have been done the day before.], and [similarly] bringing it from outside the tchum (the Sabbath boundary), and the cutting off of its wart — these do not override the Sabbath. [The cutting off of the wart of a Pesach offering, to remove its blemish, even if it be only a shvuth transgression (as when he removes it with his teeth or his hand) does not override the Sabbath. As to our having learned (Eruvin 103a): "A wart may be cut off in the Temple" (on the Sabbath), that applies to a dry wart, which is brittle, whereas our Mishnah speaks of a moist wart. And notwithstanding the fact that when he removes it with his teeth or his hand, he is doing it in an unusual manner (kilacher yad), still, with a wet wart it is forbidden, for it could have been done the day before.] R. Eliezer says: They override the Sabbath, [ R. Eliezer holding (Shabbath 19a) that the "enablers" of a mitzvah override the Sabbath. ]

Mishnah 2ב׳

אָמַר רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר, וַהֲלֹא דִין הוּא, מָה אִם שְׁחִיטָה שֶׁהִיא מִשּׁוּם מְלָאכָה דּוֹחָה אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת, אֵלּוּ שֶׁהֵן מִשּׁוּם שְׁבוּת לֹא יִדְחוּ אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת. אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, יוֹם טוֹב יוֹכִיחַ, שֶׁהִתִּירוּ בוֹ מִשּׁוּם מְלָאכָה, וְאָסוּר בּוֹ מִשּׁוּם שְׁבוּת. אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר, מַה זֶּה, יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, מָה רְאָיָה רְשׁוּת לְמִצְוָה. הֵשִׁיב רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא וְאָמַר, הַזָּאָה תוֹכִיחַ, שֶׁהִיא מִצְוָה וְהִיא מִשּׁוּם שְׁבוּת וְאֵינָהּ דּוֹחָה אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת, אַף אַתָּה אַל תִּתְמַהּ עַל אֵלּוּ, שֶׁאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהֵן מִצְוָה וְהֵן מִשּׁוּם שְׁבוּת, לֹא יִדְחוּ אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת. אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר, וְעָלֶיהָ אֲנִי דָן, וּמָה אִם שְׁחִיטָה שֶׁהִיא מִשּׁוּם מְלָאכָה, דּוֹחָה אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת, הַזָּאָה שֶׁהִיא מִשּׁוּם שְׁבוּת, אֵינוֹ דִּין שֶׁדּוֹחָה אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת. אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, אוֹ חִלּוּף, מָה אִם הַזָּאָה שֶׁהִיא מִשּׁוּם שְׁבוּת, אֵינָהּ דּוֹחָה אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת, שְׁחִיטָה שֶׁהִיא מִשּׁוּם מְלָאכָה, אֵינוֹ דִין שֶׁלֹּא תִדְחֶה אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת. אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר, עֲקִיבָא, עָקַרְתָּ מַה שֶּׁכָּתוּב בַּתּוֹרָה, בֵּין הָעַרְבַּיִם בְּמֹעֲדוֹ (במדבר ט), בֵּין בְּחֹל בֵּין בְּשַׁבָּת. אָמַר לוֹ, רַבִּי, הָבֵא לִי מוֹעֵד לָאֵלּוּ כַּמּוֹעֵד לַשְּׁחִיטָה. כְּלָל אָמַר רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, כָּל מְלָאכָה שֶׁאֶפְשָׁר לַעֲשׂוֹתָהּ מֵעֶרֶב שַׁבָּת, אֵינָהּ דּוֹחָה אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת. שְׁחִיטָה שֶׁאִי אֶפְשָׁר לַעֲשׂוֹתָהּ מֵעֶרֶב שַׁבָּת, דּוֹחָה אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת:

R. Eliezer said: Should this not follow a fortiori, viz.: Now if slaughtering, which [though it is forbidden on Shabbath with chullin (i.e., for secular purposes)] being an absolute labor, [notwithstanding this,] it overrides the Sabbath [with the Pesach offering], — these ("enablers"), which are (forbidden by reason of) shvuth, should they not certainly override the Sabbath! R. Yehoshua said to him: This argument is overturned by (what obtains on) a festival, absolute labor [(like slaughtering and cooking) being permitted to all men], and shvuth activities being forbidden [e.g., They forbade the bringing of something from outside the tchum to be eaten, in that this could have been done the day before, even though tchum is a rabbinic ordinance]. R. Eliezer rejoined: What is this, Yehoshua? How can you compare reshuth (what is merely permitted) to mitzvah? [A man's eating is reshuth, but the requirement of the Most High is mitzvah. And if the sages established their shvuth interdict with reshuth, should they do so also with mitzvah! (And R. Yehoshua holds that all "festival joy" is mitzvah, in spite of which it does not override the Sabbath)]. R. Akiva answered and said: Haza'ah (the sprinkling of the purifying waters) will overturn (R. Eliezer's argument), viz.: Haza'ah is a mitzvah [in the instance of one who has become unclean through a dead body, whose seventh day (in the process of purification) falls out on Sabbath on Pesach eve. If he is not sprinkled upon he cannot bring his Pesach offering, in spite of which haza'ah does not override the Sabbath, this being the ruling espoused by R. Akiva], and haza'ah is shvuth, [a man seeming to be "amended" thereby], and it does not override the Sabbath! Therefore, you, too, should not wonder about these ("enablers"). Even though they (the "enablers" of the Pesach offering) are mitzvah, and they are shvuth factors, they do not override the Sabbath. R. Eliezer rejoined: But I question that, too [i.e., I differ on haza'ah, too, and I contend that it should override the Sabbath so that it not keep him from the Pesach — from this a fortiori argument itself], viz.: Now if slaughtering, which is an absolute labor, overrides the Sabbath, haza'ah which is (only) a shvuth interdict, should it not certainly override the Sabbath! R. Akiva rejoined: Or turn it around [i.e., I can turn the argument around. (For it was axiomatic to R. Akiva that haza'ah kept one back from the Pesach offering, so that it could be reasoned a fortiori that slaughtering should also keep him back)], viz.: Now if haza'ah, which is (only) a shvuth interdict, does not override the Sabbath, slaughtering, which is an (absolute) labor — how much more so should it not override the Sabbath! R. Eliezer rejoined: Akiva, you have uprooted what is written in the Torah, viz. (Numbers 9:3): "towards evening, in its appointed time" [(Ibid. 2)): "Let the children of Israel offer the Pesach in its appointed time"], whether on a weekday or on the Sabbath. R. Akiva answered: My master, bring me "an appointed time" for these ("enablers")! [i.e., Show me that they have an appointed time as slaughtering does. Therefore, since they have no appointed time, and they could have been performed the day before, they do not override. (And haza'ah, too, is not a function of the Pesach offering itself, and "an appointed time" is not written in respect to it.) The halachah is in accordance with R. Akiva.] R. Akiva stated a rule: Any labor which could have been done Sabbath eve does not override the Sabbath. Slaughtering (of the Pesach), which could not have been done Sabbath eve, overrides the Sabbath.