Pesach Sheni – The People's Petition/2/en

Pesach Sheni – The People's Petition

Exegetical Approaches

This topic has not yet undergone editorial review

Request for Special Dispensation

The petitioners were requesting a special dispensation due to extenuating circumstances of either a personal or national nature.

Sources:SefornoBemidbar 9:7About R. Ovadyah Seforno, Or HaChayyim #1Bemidbar 9:7About R. Chayyim b. Atar, Meshekh ChokhmahBemidbar 9About R. Meir Simcha of Dvinsk

Who were the petitioners? According to this position the petitioners were people whose impurity stemmed from dealing with a dead body for the purposes of fulfilling a mitzvah.¹ They question why it is fair that the performance of a good deed should have negative consequences² and thus request a special dispensation: that their impure status be ignored.

What part of the rite did they want to participate in? The impure were requesting that they be able to participate in the entire rite (both the sacrifice and the eating)  just like the rest of the nation.³

Why is Moshe unaware of the law? According to this position, it is understandable why Moshe did not know how to respond to the petition.  The people were not asking him to clarify a matter of law but rather to override the law and so he needed Divine permission to acquiesce.

Hashem's response: is the request granted? Though Hashem does not allow the people to override the laws of impurity, Hashem recognizes the justice of the complaint and finds a different way that the people can still offer the Pesach.  In addition, Hashem widens the special dispensation to include not only those who missed out due to involvement in a mitzvah, but also others who had a valid reason (distance/ impurity) not to bring the Pesach in Nisan.

Uniqueness of Pesach – It is possible that Hashem grants a second chance specifically for the Pesach due both to its great importance in commemorating the Exodus and the fact that it is a rite that can only be performed once a year.

Halakhic precedents – Or HaCHayyim points out that since impurity can be nullified  in a case where the majority of the community is impure, there is a precedent for ignoring a person's true status and simply considering them pure for the purposes of the sacrifice.  However, it is not clear that the petitioners would have been aware of this law and there is no evidence that they were making any such comparison.

"בְּמֹעֲדוֹ" – According to this position it is not clear why the people emphasize that they desire to bring the sacrifice in "is proper time" specifically rather than simply asking to be a part of it.

"בְּתוֹךְ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל" – The petitioners might add this phrase to highlight how they are hoping to be considered part of the nation, and not those who must be kept outside in an impure state.

Comparison to request of Benot Zelaphchod – It is possible that in the case of Benot Zelophchad, too, the women's claim did not stem from halakhic considerations but rather humanitarian/emotional ones.  They were requesting, that due to their unique circumstances, the regular law be overridden since otherwise their father's name will be lost.  Their questioning "לָמָּה יִגָּרַע שֵׁם אָבִינוּ מִתּוֹךְ מִשְׁפַּחְתּוֹ" thus echoes the similar language of the petitioners here "לָמָּה נִגָּרַע לְבִלְתִּי הַקְרִיב".  As they too are asking to circumvent a given law, it is understandable why there, too, Moshe is not able to determine the law on his own.

When were laws of impurity given?

When is the request being made?

Focal point of Pesach: sacrifice or eating?

Claim that Impurity was Not an Impediment

The petitioners believed that their impure status was a not a good reason to prevent them from participating in the Paschal rite, and that there was a legal basis for such a claim.  The sources disagree regarding the specific reasoning given:

Purified in Time for Leil Pesach

The people were requesting that they be able to participate in the Pesach rite since by nightfall, when the Pesach was to be eaten, they would already be pure.

Sources:R. Yitzchak in Sifre Bemidbar9:6-8About Sifre Bemidbar and Bavli SukkahSukkah 25a-bAbout the Bavli, R. Yosef Bekhor ShorBemidbar 9:1,6-7,10About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor, RambamHilkhot Korban Pesach 6:2Hilkhot Korban Pesach 7:1About R. Moshe b. Maimon, RitvaSukkah 25aAbout R. Yom Tov b. Ashbel, RalbagBemidbar 9:6-8About R. Levi b. Gershom, Or HaChayyim #3Bemidbar 9:7About R. Chayyim b. Atar

Who were the petitioners? The questioners were people who had become impure on the eighth of Nissan.  The seventh day of their impurity fell on the fourteenth, so that they were still impure at the hour that the sacrifice was brought, but by nightfall, when the Pesach was eaten, they would have been purified.

"וְלֹא יָכְלוּ לַעֲשֹׂת הַפֶּסַח בַּיּוֹם הַהוּא" – R. Yitzchak learns from the phrase "וְלֹא יָכְלוּ לַעֲשֹׂת הַפֶּסַח בַּיּוֹם הַהוּא" that it was specifically on that day (the fourteenth) that they could not bring the Pesach.  The following day, however, they would have been able to.

What part of the rite did they want to participate in? The people did not expect to be able to actually offer the sacrifice (as they were clearly impure at that point), but were hoping that they could be counted with someone else's offering, and that they would eat of it themselves at nightfall.

Focal point of Pesach: sacrifice or eating? It is possible that the petitioners assumed that the focal point of the Peach was the act of eating,⁴ and therefore thought that if they were pure for that aspect of the rite, it should not be problematic if they had not yet been purified when the Pesach was sacrificed.  Hashem's negative response might be an indication that the sacrifice itself is a crucial part of the ceremony.⁵

Uniqueness of Pesach – The Pesach is unique in that it is sacrificed in the afternoon of one day (14th), but only eaten at night, which is the next day (15th).  This is what allowed the petitioners to suggest that there might be some halakhic leniency to allow them to participate.

Halakhic precedents – Or HaChayyim suggests that the people compared themselves to those who have touched an insect (שרץ) whose impurity only lasts for a day. In such a case, the impure are allowed to immerse on the fourteenth and then be included with someone else's sacrifice and eat at nightfall.  The petitioners believed that the law might be the same for them.

When were laws of impurity given? This position might assume that only some of the laws of impurity had been given prior to our story.  Thus, the petitioners might have been familiar with the laws of insects, but not all of those which related to touching a dead body.⁶  As the full discussion of the red heifer and purification from the dead first appears in Bemidbar 20, it is possible that many details of the rite were first taught then.

Why wait until the 14th to ask Moshe? According to this approach, it is not clear why the people would wait until the last day to ask Moshe the law, given that they knew their status in advance.  The Ritva suggests that the parallel to other laws made them overly confident that there would not be a problem.⁷

Why is Moshe unaware of the law? As the people found themselves in a unique situation (there is no other sacrifice where it would be possible to be pure for part of the rite and not for a different part) it is not surprising that Moshe might not have been aware of the law.

Hashem's response: is the request granted? Hashem's response is somewhat difficult for this position.  If the people's legal reasoning was wrong, why does Hashem not simply say so and refuse the request?   The offer of an alternative date seems to have nothing to do with the specific arguments of the people and  thus should have been announced regardless of this specific case (and not, as the text implies, as a reaction to it).

Could Partake Via Agent

The people requested that they be allowed to partake in the sacrifice via an agent, since there was no need for them to individually perform the ritual and their impurity did not necessitate them to disassociate from the rest of the nation.

Sources:AbarbanelBemidbar 9:1About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel

Who were the petitioners? According to Abarbanel the people making the request had come in contact with a dead body at some point in the week before the Pesach was to be sacrificed and would only be fully purified at some point after the fourteenth.  It is even possible that they had first become impure on the very day of the offering (which would explain why they first asked about the law on that day.)

What part of the rite did they want to participate in? They were asking to be counted with someone else's sacrifice, but had no expectations of actually eating of it, recognizing that their impurity precluded doing so.

Legal reasoning – In contrast to other forms of impurity such as a metzora or zav whose impurity entails being sent out of the camp , one who is impure due to the dead is only excluded from the vicinity of the Mishkan itself.  As such, the people thought that there should be no impediment in their joining the rest of Israel as they sacrificed.

Uniqueness of Pesach – Every Pesach sacrifice is brought by a group of people of whom just one acted as the representative to sacrifice.  As such, there was room to believe that the impure could be part of the group as long as they personally did not actively sacrifice nor eat. This might explain the petitioner's emphasis on wanting to sacrifice "בְּתוֹךְ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל", as part of a group of pure Israelites.

Focal point of Pesach: sacrifice or eating? The petitioners might have assumed that the sacrificial aspect of the rite was the most important, and therefore concluded that the fact they would not eat was not particularly problematic.  Hashem's response might suggest that eating is just as  important as sacrificing and therefore anyone who is excluded from the meal, cannot be included in the sacrifice either.

Why wait until the 14th to ask Moshe? According to this approach, it is possible that the people first became impure on that day.

Why was Moshe unaware of the law?

Sacrifice Supersedes Impurity

The petitioners claimed that a sacrifice which has a set time supersedes and pushes off the laws of impurity.  Therefore they should be allowed to participate in the rite.

Sources:NetzivBemidbar 9:3,10About R. Naftali Tzvi Yehuda Berlin

Who were the petitioners? Netziv does not specify and would likely say that they could have been anyone who had become impure via contact with the dead.

Legal reasoning – Since a sacrifice which has  a set time is allowed to be brought even on Shabbat or in a state of impurity, the petitioners assumed that the Pesach fell into such a category and that their impurity would be deemed irrelevant.

"בְּמֹעֲדוֹ" – The people emphasize this since it was specifically because the sacrifice had a set time that they felt that they should be allowed to offer it even while impure.

"בְּתוֹךְ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל"

Plea for Make-up Date

Sources:Akeidat Yitzchak74About R. Yitzchak Arama, Or HaChayyim #2Bemidbar 9:7About R. Chayyim b. Atar

¹ They could have become impure from burying a "מת מצוה", caring for the bodies of Nadav and Avihu or carrying Yosef's casket, as per the opinions in Bavli Sukkah 25a-b.  Meshekh Chokhmah assumes that the petitioners were specifically those who carried Yosef's bones.  As this act should have been especially meritorious (and relevant to the nation as a whole), the people were bothered why it should lead to their losing out on the possibility of sacrificing the Pesach.

² Seforno alludes to the idea that performing a mitzvah is supposed to lead to more mitzvot (מצוה גוררת מצוה).  In this case, though, it leads to a transgression.

³ Due to their special circumstances they ask to be viewed as totally pure, and thus no different than anyone else.  This might be what they mean when they ask t bring the offering "בְּתוֹךְ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל".

⁴ They might have viewed the offering as similar to other Shelamim offerings, where the sacrificial component comes mainly to enable the eating of the meat.  Moreover, compared to other Shelamim, the Pesach had a significantly larger portion which was to be eaten by the owners, supporting the possibility that the meal itself was the focal point.

⁵ In the original Pesach the blood played an important role, suggesting that the sacrificial component was crucial.  Moreover, according to some opinions, the entire purpose of the sacrifice was that the nation kill a lamb as a demonstration of their rejection of Egyptian gods. If so, in commemorating the event, too, it is logical that the slaughtering itself is integral to the ritual.  See Purpose of the Pesach for elaboration.

⁶ Vayikra 7 warns against eating sacrifices when defiled, and Vayikra 11 speaks of the purification process for one who has become impure through an insect, but not of the purification rite for one who has come in contact  with the dead.  Thus, it is possible that the petitioners only had partial knowledge of the laws.

⁷ He even suggests that had they immersed and been sprinkled with blood before the time of the slaughtering they would have in fact been able to be included in the sacrifice.  However, they first asked Moshe when there was no more time to do so.  See RaavadHilkhot Korban Pesach 6:2About R. Avraham b. David similarly.