הֲרֵי זֶה צַדִּיק גָּמוּר! דִּילְמָא בָּתַר דְּבָדֵק אָתֵי לְעַיּוֹנֵי בָּתְרַהּ.
this person is a full-fledged righteous person as far as that mitzva is concerned? These ulterior motives, e.g., seeking a reward, do not detract from the value of the mitzva. The Gemara answers: There is still concern lest he look for the needle after he searched for leaven and completed the search. There is danger that since he already completed the mitzva, its merit will not protect him when he is searching for the needle.
רַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק אָמַר: מִשּׁוּם סַכָּנַת הַגּוֹיִם, וּפְלֵימוֹ הִיא. דְּתַנְיָא: חוֹר שֶׁבֵּין יְהוּדִי לְאַרְמַאי — בּוֹדֵק עַד מְקוֹם שֶׁיָּדוֹ מַגַּעַת, וְהַשְּׁאָר מְבַטְּלוֹ בְּלִבּוֹ. פְּלֵימוֹ אָמַר: כׇּל עַצְמוֹ אֵינוֹ בּוֹדֵק מִפְּנֵי הַסַּכָּנָה.
Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: The danger referred to by the Tosefta is the danger posed by gentiles. And this ruling is in accordance with the opinion of the tanna Pelimu. As it was taught in a baraita: With regard to a hole in a wall located between the residences of a Jew and a gentile, one searches in the hole as far as his hand reaches, and the rest he renders null and void in his heart. Pelimu said: One does not search the entire hole at all, due to the danger involved.
מַאי סַכָּנָה, אִי נֵימָא סַכָּנַת כְּשָׁפִים, כִּי אִישְׁתַּמַּישׁ הֵיכִי אִישְׁתַּמַּישׁ? הָתָם כִּי אִישְׁתַּמַּישׁ — יְמָמָא וּנְהוֹרָא, וְלָא מַסִּיק אַדַּעְתֵּיהּ. הָכָא — לֵילְיָא וּשְׁרָגָא הוּא, וּמַסֵּיק אַדַּעְתֵּיהּ.
The Gemara asks: Due to what danger? If we say it is due to the danger of sorcery, i.e., the gentile will suspect the Jew of casting spells on him and will come to hate him and threaten him, if so, when he made use of the hole in the first place, how did he make use of it without arousing the enmity of his gentile neighbor? If the hole is never used there is no need to search it in any case. The Gemara answers: There, when he made use of the hole, it was during the day and there was light, and the gentile would not raise the suspicion that the Jew was casting spells in his mind. Here, it is during the night and the search is performed with a lamp, and the gentile would raise the suspicion that the Jew was casting spells in his mind.
וְהָאָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: שְׁלוּחֵי מִצְוָה אֵינָן נִיזּוֹקִין! הֵיכָא דִּשְׁכִיחַ הֶיזֵּיקָא שָׁאנֵי. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וַיֹּאמֶר שְׁמוּאֵל אֵיךְ אֵלֵךְ וְשָׁמַע שָׁאוּל וַהֲרָגָנִי וַיֹּאמֶר ה׳ עֶגְלַת בָּקָר תִּקַּח בְּיָדֶךָ וְגוֹ׳״.
The Gemara raises a difficulty: But didn’t Rabbi Elazar say that those on the path to perform a mitzva are not susceptible to harm throughout the process of performing the mitzva? The Gemara responds: In a place where danger is commonplace it is different, as one should not rely on a miracle, as it is stated with regard to God’s command to Samuel to anoint David as king in place of Saul: “And Samuel said: How will I go, and Saul will hear and kill me; and God said: Take in your hand a calf and say: I have come to offer a sacrifice to God” (I Samuel 16:2). Even when God Himself issued the command, there is concern with regard to commonplace dangers.
בְּעוֹ מִינֵּיהּ מֵרַב: הָנֵי בְּנֵי בֵּי רַב דְּדָיְירִי בְּבָאגָא, מַהוּ לְמֵיתֵי קַדְמָא וַחֲשׁוֹכָא לְבֵי רַב? אֲמַר לְהוּ: נֵיתוֹ עֲלַי וְעַל צַוָּארִי. נֵיזִיל מַאי? אֲמַר לְהוּ: לָא יָדַעְנָא.
They raised a dilemma before Rav: With regard to those members of the school of Rav who live in the fields [baga] far away from the city, what is the halakha as to whether they may come early before dawn and in the evening after dark to Rav’s school, or should they be concerned about robbers? He said to them: Let them come, and responsibility for their safety is upon me and my neck. They asked him: What is your opinion about returning home? He said to them: I do not know if it is possible to rely on the protection of the mitzva when returning home.
אִיתְּמַר, אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: שְׁלוּחֵי מִצְוָה אֵינָן נִיזּוֹקִין לֹא בַּהֲלִיכָתָן וְלֹא בַּחֲזִירָתָן. כְּמַאן?
On a related note, it was stated that Rabbi Elazar said: Those on the path to perform a mitzva are not susceptible to harm; neither when they go nor when they return. The Gemara asks: In accordance with whose opinion did he say this?
כִּי הַאי תַּנָּא דְּתַנְיָא, אִיסִי בֶּן יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: כְּלַפֵּי שֶׁאָמְרָה תּוֹרָה ״וְלֹא יַחְמֹד אִישׁ אֶת אַרְצְךָ״, מְלַמֵּד שֶׁתְּהֵא פָּרָתְךָ רוֹעָה בָּאֲפָר וְאֵין חַיָּה מַזִּיקָתָהּ, תַּרְנְגוֹלְתְּךָ מְנַקֶּרֶת בָּאַשְׁפָּה וְאֵין חוּלְדָּה מַזִּיקָתָהּ.
The Gemara answers: It is in accordance with the opinion of this tanna, as it was taught in a baraita that Isi ben Yehuda says: With regard to that which the Torah said: “And no man shall covet your land, when you go up to appear before God your Lord three times in the year” (Exodus 34:24), this teaches that your cow shall graze in the meadow and no beast will harm it, and your rooster shall peck in the garbage dump and no marten [ḥulda] shall harm it. In other words, your property will be protected while everyone ascends to Jerusalem for the Festival, despite the fact that the farm will not be defended.
וַהֲלֹא דְּבָרִים קַל וָחוֹמֶר: וּמָה אֵלּוּ שֶׁדַּרְכָּן לִזּוֹק — אֵינָן נִיזּוֹקִין, בְּנֵי אָדָם שֶׁאֵין דַּרְכָּן לִזּוֹק — עַל אַחַת כַּמָּה וְכַמָּה. אֵין לִי אֶלָּא בַּהֲלִיכָה, בַּחֲזָרָה מִנַּיִן? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״וּפָנִיתָ בַבֹּקֶר וְהָלַכְתָּ לְאֹהָלֶיךָ״, מְלַמֵּד שֶׁתֵּלֵךְ וְתִמְצָא אָהָלְךָ בְּשָׁלוֹם.
And are these matters not inferred a fortiori? And if those animals that typically are harmed by other animals are not harmed, due to the protection provided by the mitzva, people who typically are not harmed, as they are capable of protecting themselves, all the more so, will not be harmed due to the protection provided by the mitzva of ascending to Jerusalem for the Festival. I have only derived that one is protected when going to Jerusalem; from where is it derived that one is protected even when returning from the Temple? The verse states: “You shall roast and eat the Paschal lamb in the place which God your Lord shall choose; and you shall turn in the morning and go to your tents” (Deuteronomy 16:7). This teaches that you shall go and upon your return find your tent in peace, unharmed.
וְכִי מֵאַחַר דַּאֲפִילּוּ בַּחֲזִירָה, בַּהֲלִיכָה לְמָה לִי? לְכִדְרַבִּי אַמֵּי. דְּאָמַר רַבִּי אַמֵּי: כׇּל אָדָם שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ קַרְקַע — עוֹלֶה לָרֶגֶל, וְשֶׁאֵין לוֹ קַרְקַע — אֵין עוֹלֶה לָרֶגֶל.
The Gemara asks: And once we derived that the merit of a mitzva protects a person even when returning, why do I need a source to teach that he is protected when he goes? This teaching could also be derived by means of an a fortiori inference. The Gemara answers: Actually, the first verse is interpreted in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Ami, as Rabbi Ami said: Any person who has land in his possession is obligated to ascend to the Temple for the three pilgrim Festivals. And one who does not have land in his possession is not obligated to ascend for the Festivals, as the verse states: Your land, in the context of the obligation to ascend to Jerusalem for the three Pilgrim Festivals.
אָמַר רַבִּי אָבִין בַּר רַב אַדָּא אָמַר רַבִּי יִצְחָק: מִפְּנֵי מָה אֵין פֵּרוֹת גִּינּוֹסַר בִּירוּשָׁלַיִם? כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יְהוּ עוֹלֵי רְגָלִים אוֹמְרִים: אִלְמָלֵא לֹא עָלִינוּ אֶלָּא לֶאֱכוֹל פֵּרוֹת גִּינּוֹסַר בִּירוּשָׁלַיִם — דַּיֵּינוּ. נִמְצֵאת עֲלִיָּיה שֶׁלֹּא לִשְׁמָהּ.
Apropos the ascent to Jerusalem for a Festival and the performance of a mitzva with ulterior motives, the Gemara cites that which Rabbi Avin bar Rav Adda said that Rabbi Yitzḥak said: Due to what reason are there no fruits of Ginnosar, which were of the highest quality, growing in Jerusalem? Why is Jerusalem not graced with this produce? The reason is so that the pilgrims would not say: If we had ascended only to eat the fruit of Ginnosar, it would have been sufficient for us. The ascent to Jerusalem would then be performed not for its own sake.
כַּיּוֹצֵא בּוֹ, אָמַר רַבִּי דּוֹסְתַּאי בְּרַבִּי יַנַּאי: מִפְּנֵי מָה אֵין חַמֵּי טְבֶרְיָא בִּירוּשָׁלַיִם? כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יְהוּ עוֹלֵי רְגָלִים אוֹמְרִים: אִלְמָלֵא לֹא עָלִינוּ אֶלָּא לִרְחֹץ בְּחַמֵּי טְבֶרְיָא — דַּיֵּינוּ, וְנִמְצֵאת עֲלִיָּיה שֶׁלֹּא לִשְׁמָהּ.
On a similar note, Rabbi Dostai, son of Rabbi Yannai, said: Due to what reason are the hot springs of Tiberias not located in Jerusalem? It is so that the pilgrims would not say: If we had only ascended to bathe in the hot springs of Tiberias, it would have been sufficient for us. The ascent to Jerusalem would then be performed not for its own sake.
וּבַמָּה אָמְרוּ שְׁתֵּי שׁוּרוֹת וְכוּ׳. מַרְתֵּף מַאן דְּכַר שְׁמֵיהּ?
We learned in the mishna: And with regard to what did the Sages of previous generations say that one must search two rows of wine barrels in a cellar, etc. The Gemara asks: A cellar, who mentioned anything about that? What led the tanna to begin a discussion of a wine cellar?
הָכִי קָאָמַר: כׇּל מָקוֹם שֶׁאֵין מַכְנִיסִין בּוֹ חָמֵץ — אֵין צָרִיךְ בְּדִיקָה, וְאוֹצְרוֹת יַיִן וְאוֹצְרוֹת שֶׁמֶן נָמֵי אֵין צָרִיךְ בְּדִיקָה, וּבַמָּה אָמְרוּ שְׁתֵּי שׁוּרוֹת בַּמַּרְתֵּף — מָקוֹם שֶׁמַּכְנִיסִין בּוֹ חָמֵץ, וּבְמִסְתַּפֵּק.
The Gemara answers that this is what the tanna is saying: Any place into which one does not take leaven does not require searching, and wine storages and oil storages also do not require searching. And with regard to what did the Sages say that one must search two rows in a cellar? This statement is referring to a place into which one brings leavened bread, and where one supplies wine from the storage during the meal.
בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים שְׁתֵּי שׁוּרוֹת וְכוּ׳. אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה: שְׁתֵּי שׁוּרוֹת שֶׁאָמְרוּ, מִן הָאָרֶץ וְעַד שְׁמֵי קוֹרָה. וְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: שׁוּרָה אַחַת כְּמִין גַּאם.
We learned in the mishna that Beit Shammai say that one must search the first two rows across the entire cellar. Rav Yehuda said: The two rows that they stated are two full rows in the front, from the ground up to the ceiling. And Rabbi Yoḥanan said: These two rows are one row at a right angle, like the shape of the letter gamma [gam], i.e., the entire length and height of the front row and the entire top row of the barrels along the length and width of the cellar.
תַּנְיָא כְּוָתֵיהּ דְּרַב יְהוּדָה, תַּנְיָא כְּווֹתֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן. תַּנְיָא כְּווֹתֵיהּ דְּרַב יְהוּדָה, בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים: שְׁתֵּי שׁוּרוֹת עַל פְּנֵי כׇּל הַמַּרְתֵּף, וּשְׁתֵּי שׁוּרוֹת שֶׁאָמְרוּ — מִן הָאָרֶץ וְעַד שְׁמֵי קוֹרָה. תַּנְיָא כְּווֹתֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: שְׁתֵּי שׁוּרוֹת עַל פְּנֵי כׇּל הַמַּרְתֵּף — חִיצוֹנָה רוֹאָה אֶת הַפֶּתַח, וְעֶלְיוֹנָה רוֹאָה אֶת הַקּוֹרָה. שֶׁלִּפְנִים הֵימֶנָּה, וְשֶׁלְּמַטָּה הֵימֶנָּה — אֵין צָרִיךְ בְּדִיקָה.
The Gemara comments: One baraita was taught in accordance with the opinion of Rav Yehuda, and one baraita was taught in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan. One baraita was taught in accordance with the opinion of Rav Yehuda: Beit Shammai say that one must search two rows across the entire front of the cellar, and the two rows that were stated are from the ground up to the ceiling. One baraita was taught in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan: One must search two rows across the entire cellar, i.e., the outer row that faces the door, and the upper row that faces the ceiling. The rows inward from the outermost one and the rows lower than the uppermost one do not require searching.
בֵּית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים שְׁתֵּי שׁוּרוֹת הַחִיצוֹנוֹת שֶׁהֵן הָעֶלְיוֹנוֹת. אָמַר רַב: עֶלְיוֹנָה וְשֶׁלְּמַטָּה הֵימֶנָּה, וּשְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר: עֶלְיוֹנָה וְשֶׁלִּפְנִים הֵימֶנָּה. מַאי טַעְמָא דְּרַב — דָּיֵיק ״חִיצוֹנוֹת״. וְהָא עֶלְיוֹנוֹת קָתָנֵי! לְמַעוֹטֵי תַּתָּאֵי דְתַתָּיָיתָא.
We further learned in the mishna that Beit Hillel say: It is sufficient to search the two external rows, which are the upper ones. There is an amoraic dispute with regard to this statement. Rav said it is referring to the uppermost row of barrels and the row that is beneath it. And Shmuel said it means the uppermost front row and the next one that is inward into the cellar. What is the reason for the opinion of Rav? He infers from the term: Outer rows, that Beit Hillel mean that both rows face outward. The Gemara raises a difficulty: But doesn’t the mishna also teach: Upper rows, indicating that both rows are adjacent to the ceiling? The Gemara answers: This term comes to exclude the lowest of the lower rows. One must search only the top two rows.
וּשְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר: עֶלְיוֹנָה וְשֶׁלִּפְנִים הֵימֶנָּה. מַאי טַעְמָא — דָּיֵיק ״עֶלְיוֹנוֹת״. וְהָא חִיצוֹנָה קָתָנֵי! לְמַעוֹטֵי גַּוָיָיאתָא דְגַוָיָיאתָא. רַבִּי חִיָּיא תָּנֵי כְּווֹתֵיהּ דְּרַב, וְכוּלְּהוּ תַּנָּאֵי תָּנוּ כְּווֹתֵיהּ דִּשְׁמוּאֵל, וְהִלְכְתָא כְּווֹתֵיהּ דִּשְׁמוּאֵל.
And Shmuel said the mishna is referring to the uppermost front row and the next one that is inward into the cellar. What is the reason for the opinion of Shmuel? He infers from the term: Upper rows, that one must search the first two rows on the top level of barrels. The Gemara raises a difficulty: But doesn’t the mishna also teach: Outer row? The Gemara answers that this word comes to exclude the innermost of the inner rows. One must search only the two outermost rows. The Gemara comments: Rabbi Ḥiyya teaches a baraita in accordance with the opinion of Rav, and all the other tanna’im, who recite the mishnayot and baraitot by heart, teach in accordance with the opinion of Shmuel. The Gemara concludes: And the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Shmuel.