Midrash su Esodo 12:5

R. Ami and R. Assi were sitting before R. Isaac Napcha. One was asking him to say some Halacha (traditional law) and the other to say some Agada (story). When he began to say some Halacha he was interrupted by the one [who desired Agada] and when he began Agada, he was interrupted by the other [who desired Halacha]. He then said: "I will tell you a parable: It is like unto a man who has two wives — an old one and a young one. The young one picks his gray hair and the old one, his black hair. The result is that he becomes bald-headed. I will tell you now, however, something which will be to the satisfaction of both of you, etc. (Agadah) It is written (Ex. 12, 5) If a fire breaks out and meet with thorns. This means, even if it should break out of itself. Yet he that kindled the fire shall surely make restitution. Said the Holy One, praised be He! I shall surely make restitution for the fire I kindled in Zion, as it is said (Lam. 4, 11) He kindled a fire in Zion, which had devoured her foundation; and, I shall also build it up again by fire, as it is said (Zech. 2, 9) For I, saith the Lord, will be unto her. ... a wall of fire round about, and will I be the glory in the midst of her. (Halacha) — why does the verse begin with the damage by one's property, etc?"

(Bamidbar 9:2) "And the children of Israel shall offer the Pesach in its appointed time": Why is this stated? (i.e., Isn't it obvious?) From (Shemot 12:6) "and the whole congregation of Israel shall slaughter it (the Paschal lamb)," I might think, either on a weekday or on Sabbath (as the case may be). And how would I satisfy (Ibid. 31:14) "Its (Sabbath's) desecrators shall be put to death"? With other labors, other than slaughtering the Paschal lamb. — Or, even with slaughtering the Paschal lamb. And how would I satisfy "and they shall slaughter it"? (If it falls out) on other days, other than Sabbath. It is, therefore, written "And the children of Israel shall offer the Pesach in its appointed time" (— even on the Sabbath). These are the words of R. Yoshiyah. R. Yonathan (to R. Yoshiyah): This is not sufficient (for the derivation [i.e., "in its appointed time" may mean if it does not fall out on a Sabbath.]) R. Yoshiyah (to R. Yonathan): Rather, it is written (Bamidbar 28:2) "Command the children of Israel and say to them … to offer (the tamid) offering to Me in its appointed time." If (the intent of this is) to teach that the tamid offering overrides Sabbath, this is not needed; for it is already written (Ibid. 9) "And on the Sabbath day, (there are to be sacrificed) two lambs of the first year … (10) the burnt-offering of the Sabbath in its Sabbath in addition to the daily burnt-offering, etc." What, then, is the intent (of "in its appointed time")? It is "extra," to signal the formulation of an identity, viz.: it is written here "in its appointed time," and elsewhere (re the Paschal lamb) "in its appointed time." Just as "its appointed time" here overrides Sabbath, so, "its appointed time" there overrides Sabbath. "On the fourteenth day of this month, towards evening shall you offer it, in its appointed time.": What is the intent of this? Is it not already written "The children of Israel shall offer it in its appointed time"? Why, again, "in its appointed time"? Scripture hereby comes to teach us that just as the first Pesach (as opposed to Pesach Sheni) overrides the Sabbath, so it overrides (communal) uncleanliness. For (without this verse,) it would follow otherwise, viz.: If (the slaughtering of) the red heifer, which does not override the Sabbath overrides (communal) uncleanliness, the first Pesach, which overrides the Sabbath, how much more so should it override uncleanliness? — This is refuted by the second Pesach, which even though it overrides the Sabbath, does not override uncleanliness. And this would indicate of the first Pesach that even though it overrides the Sabbath, it does not override uncleanliness. It is, therefore, written "in its appointed time," to teach concerning the first Pesach that just as it overrides the Sabbath it overrides uncleanliness. (Bamidbar, Ibid.) "According to all of its statutes": These are the mitzvoth (directly) pertaining to its body, viz. (Shemot 12:5) "an unblemished lamb, a male, of the first year." "its ordinances": These are the mitzvoth attendant upon its body, viz. (Devarim 16:3) "Seven days shall you eat matzoth 'upon' it." "according to all its ordinances": to include mitzvoth not attendant upon its body — the eating of matzoh for seven days and the burning of chametz.

"from a distant (rechokah) way": There is a (diacritical) dot above the heh in "rechokah" (to indicate that he observes Pesach Sheni) even if he were on a non-distant way and did not observe (the first) Pesach with them. Similarly, (Bereshit 16;5) "May the L-rd judge between me (Sarah) and between you (Abraham) (uvenecha)": There is a dot above (the yod in) "uvenecha" — She spoke of Hagar alone. Others say: (She spoke of Hagar) who engendered strife between him and her. Similarly, (Ibid. 18:9) "And they said to him (eilav): Where is Sarah, your wife?" There are dots above the aleph, yod and vav (in "eilav") — They knew where she was. Similarly (Ibid. 19:33) "and he did not know in her lying and in her rising (uvekumah)." There is a dot above (the vav in) "uvekumah" — He did not know in her lying and in her rising, but he knew in her rising. Similarly, (Ibid. 33:4) "And he (Esav) kissed (vayishakehu) him (Jacob)": There are dots above (all the letters in) "vayishakehu" — He did not kiss him with all his heart. R. Shimon b. Yochai says: It is a known halachah that Esav hates Jacob, but his mercy gained the ascendancy at that time and he kissed him with all his heart. (Ibid. 37:12) "And his brothers went to graze eth their father's flock in Shchem": There are dots above "eth" — They went only to graze themselves. Similarly, (Bamidbar 21:30) "We have laid it waste until Nofach which (asher) reaches unto Medva": There is a dot (above the resh in "asher") — They did so beyond that (Nofach) too, but here they destroyed the cities, too, whereas beyond that they destroyed only the people. Similarly, (Ibid. 3:39) "All the numbered of the Levites, whom Moses and Aaron numbered": There are dots above "Aaron" — Aaron was not of the numbered (of the Levites). Similarly, (Ibid. 3:29) "And issaron, issaron, for the one lamb,": There is a dot above the second vav in "And issaron" — There was one issaron alone. Similarly, (Devarim 29:28) "The hidden things are for the L-rd our G-d and the revealed ones are for us and our children (lanu ulevanenu) forever.": There are dots (above "lanu ulevanenu.") He said to them: If you have done (i.e., violated) what is revealed, I (the L-rd), likewise, will apprise you of what is concealed. Here, too, (in our instance,) there is a dot (above the heh in "rechokah" to indicate that he observes Pesach Sheni) even if he were on a non-distant way and did not observe (the first) Pesach with them. (Ibid. 10) "or to your generations": This provision (of Pesach Sheni) obtains for all of the generations. (Ibid. 11) "In the second month, on the fourteenth day, towards evening shall they offer it": These are the mitzvoth (directly) pertaining to its body, viz. (Shemot 12:5) "an unblemished lamb, a male, of the first year." "with matzoh and bitter herbs shall they eat it": These are mitzvoth attendant upon its body. (Devarim, Ibid. 12) "They shall not leave over of it until the morning, and a bone shall they not break in it": Scripture hereby superadds two mitzvoth concerning its body. This tells me only of these (as obtaining on Pesach Sheni). Whence do I derive (the same for) the other mitzvoth pertaining to its body? From (Ibid.) "According to all the statue of the Pesach shall they offer it." — But perhaps this would also include (the eating of) matzoth for seven days and the burning of chametz! It is, therefore, written "and a bone shall they not break in it." "a bone, etc." was included in the general category (viz. "According to all the statute of the Pesach"), and it departed from the category (for special mention) — to teach about the category, viz. Just as "a bone, etc." is a mitzvah (directly) pertaining to its body, so, "according to all the statute of the Pesach" speaks of mitzvoth (directly) pertaining to its body, (and not of the others). Issi b. Akavya says: "shall they offer it": Scripture speaks of mitzvoth pertaining to its body.