Study Pesachim folio 72A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Talmud: When the Mishnah speaks of one who slaughtered a Paschal lamb on Shabbat for a different purpose, with what precisely are we dealing? If you say we are dealing with one who erred in that he actually thought this was a different offering and not a Paschal offering, learn from it, i.e., from
If so, say the latter clause of the Mishnah: As for all other offerings that one unwittingly slaughtered on Shabbat for the purpose of a Paschal offering, if they were not fit for the Paschal offering, he is liable to bring a sin-offering. And if they are fit, R' Eliezer deems him liable to bring a
Rather, it is obvious that we must be dealing with one who erred. But if so, we have a contradiction in the Mishnah, as the first clause is referring to one who intentionally uprooted the animal’s designation, whereas the latter clause is referring to one who erred about it. R' Avin said: Yes, we
The Talmud relates that Rav Yitzḥak bar Yosef once found R' Abbahu standing among a multitude [okhlosa] of people, and he said to him: What is the meaning of our Mishnah? R' Abbahu said to him: The first clause is referring to one who intentionally uprooted the animal’s status, whereas the latter
The Talmud raises a difficulty with this understanding of the Mishnah: We learned in the continuation of the Mishnah that R' Eliezer said to R' Yehoshua: If with regard to the Paschal lamb, which is permitted to be slaughtered on Shabbat for its own purpose, when one changed its purpose he is nevert