More Discussions for this daf
1. Miktzas ha'Yom k'Kulo on Shabbos 2. Bris on Yom Tov she'Lo b'Zmano 3. Stirah in Tosfos DH Lav Meshum?
4. Chametz on the 14th of Nisan, according to Abayei 5. Bedikas Chametz vs. Learning Torah 6. Rashi: Baal Yairaeh and Baal Yimatzeh from Sheish Shaot
7. Difference between two answers 8. Ne'emanus 9. Proof for Zerizus
10. Chezkaso Baduk 11. Burning Chametz On Pesach 12. רש״י ד״ה ואור הנר יפה לבדיקה
13. מקור דין זריזין מקדימין למצוות 14. מקור דין זריזין מקדימין למצוות
DAF DISCUSSIONS - PESACHIM 4

Menachem Zaman asks:

Dear Rav Bloom/The Staff @ Daf Yomi

On 4b in two different sections Tosfos discusses the concept of women and neemanis bedikas chametz (if it serves the function of a doraisa).

I was wondering why would women not be neeman? (Assuming it's not a gezeiras hakasuv). So I thought it could be because of one of two reasons:

1) Women can lie about the truth of whether bedika was done

2) Women don't have the capacity to do bedika

In תוס' ד"ה לאו משום דחזקתו בדוק, he brings up that through a migu women could be believed (when bedikas chametz is d'Rabbanan.

He says:

ועוד פירש ר"י, דס"ד דאיירי דאמרי הני 'לא היה בדוק' ואנן בדקנו; דאי חזקתו בדוק, מהימני מגו דאי בעי שתקי. אבל אי אין חזקתו בדוק, אמאי מהימני?

To say that women can be believed in bedikas chametz with a migu means that we are choshesh they would lie and their migu shows us otherwise.

But then in תוס' ד"ה הימנוהו רבנן בדרבנן he says the reason why women can't be believed in bedika doraisa is because they are lazy. This implies that women don't have the capacity to do bedika and that's why they are not believed.

Is that a stira or am I missing something?

Menachem Zaman, Jerusalem, Israel

The Kollel replies:

1. There is a Gezeiras Hakasuv that women are not neeman for edus. This is cited in Shevuos 30a which derives this from Dvarim 19:17 "And the 2 men will stand up...in front of Hash-m" which teaches that men are able to give edus, and women may not.

2. I have a proof, bs'd, that the reason they are not accepted is not because we are afraid that they lie. My proof is from Shevuos 45a where the Mishnah states that if the wife produces her kesubah and admits that she has received part of the payment she can only receive the remainder if she takes an oath. This shows that we believe her when she takes an oath, and we are not choshesh she is lying.

3. It seems to me that there is not a stira between the 2 paragraphs in Tosfos Pesachim 4b. The first Tosfos on the amud in the name of Ri goes in the stage of the Gemara where we still thought that bedikas chametz is deoraisa. If not for the migo we would not rely on them for the bedika because in regards to a bedika deoraisa we are concerned they might be lazy. The 3rd paragraph of Tosfos on the page is going on the Gemara where we have decided that bedika is only derabanan. Tosfos writes that if it would have been deoraisa we would be afraid they are lazy. Both paragraphs in Tosfos can be explained by saying they are lazy; not that they lie.

4. The 3rd paragraph of Tosfos writes that for matters of Kashrut we rely on women, even in matters of deoraisa. She is believed to say she slaughtered the animal, or bought kosher food. The only reason bedikas chametz would have been different if it would have been deoraisa is because it is so tedious.

Chodesh Tov.

May we see peace soon in Eretz Yisrael, with the missile attack stopping quickly!

Dovid Bloom

Menachem Zaman asks:

Thank you Rav Bloom. I really appreciate your response.

This is kind of a side question based on the point you made that women not being believed is a gezeiras hakasuv. But we do say that if an action is b'yado, we do believe her. Is that not a svara? So how can we apply a svara to a gzeiras hakasuv that defies svaras?

The Kollel replies:

I think that the answer is that the gezeiras Hakasuv only applies to women giving testimony in Beis Din. There is no such gezeiras hakasuv about them telling us about what food etc. is permitted or not, If the latter is b'yado we rely upon them even for a deoraisa.

Shabbat Shalom and Chag Sameach

Dovid Bloom

Menachem Zaman asks:

Rav Bloom I want to make a comment on your third point:

3) It seems to me that there is no contradiction between the two paragraphs in Tosfos in Pesachim 4b. The first Tosfos on the Amud in the name of the Ri refers to the stage of the Gemara where we still thought that Bedikas Chametz is d'Oraisa. If not for the Migo, we would not rely on them for the Bedikah, because in regards to a Bedikah d'Oraisa we are concerned they might be lazy. The third paragraph of Tosfos on the page is referring to the Gemara which has decided that Bedikah is only mid'Rabanan. Tosfos writes that if it would have been d'Oraisa, we would need to be concerned that they are lazy. Both paragraphs in Tosfos can be explained by saying they are lazy, and not that they lie.

When Tosfos says that we can't believe women m'doraisa because they are lazy what does he mean by that? Does he mean:

1. Women are not capable of doing the bedika because of tircha yeseira so even though we trust them when they did the bedika, we don't think they did a good job.

2. Women are capable of doing a bedika but we don't think they will because it's so hard.

However you want to look at what Tosfos means, Tosfo's migo (according to how the Rav explained it) either doesn't really work or is very dochek.

In the first pshat of what Tosfos means when he says lazy, the migo doesn't seem to work. Because all the migo does is it tells us that they did the bedika but it can't assure us they did a good job. By the way I do the first pshat is the pashtus of Tosfos.

In the second pshat, it's still difficult to fit it in the migu. Because to the extent that the bedika is hard and is a tircha yeseira, I understand women can do the bedika, but why should be believe them??

The Kollel replies:

1.The source that women are lazy is the Talmud Yerushalmi cited by Tosfos here DH Hemnuhu. The Rosh here #3 adds on another few words in the name of the Yerushalmi; "veHein Bodkot Kol She-Hu". This means that they do a very minimal bedikah. The Chidushei Rashba in Chulin 10b DH veNashim veAvadim writes that women are believed concerning matters of what is permitted and what is forbidden. He then asks on this from our Gemara that implies that if bedikas chametz would be deoraisa we would not rely on them. He explains that bedikas chametz requires an extra amount of work, and in addition one has to check in all the holes and cracks. Women do not take checking in holes and cracks seriously enough and rely on their belief that it is unnecessary. I think we can say that it is all in the mind. Women are not really lazy, but when it comes to bedikas chametz they think that it is an exaggeration to require checking in the holes and cracks.

[ Just to add a personal note; it is possible that with many woman nowadays the situation has changed. Many clean the house for weeks before Pesach and are very particular to find chametz wherever it may be - DB].

2.The migo mentioned by Tosfos 4b DH Lav, in the name of the Ri, goes as follows. If the chazaka would be that we can assume that every house has been checked by the 14th Nisan, then if a woman would say that this particular house had not been checked; but she then checked it; we would believe her. This is because she possesses a migo. She could have kept quiet and said nothing, and we would have said that we can rely on the chazaka that all houses have been checked.

Yasher Koach

Dovid Bloom

Menachem asks:

Shalom Rav Bloom,

Doesn't your evolved pshat on what Tosfos meant when he said women are lazy actually make Tosfos less intelligible?

You explained that Tosfos meant: "Women are not really lazy, but when it comes to Bedikas Chametz they think that it is an exaggeration to require checking in the holes and cracks."

How can a migu address a women's inability to appreciate the requirement to check holes and cracks? That's an intellectual failing which presumably can only be addressed through talmud Torah. What good does the migu do for us?

I'm not stubborn about this point, but your evolved pshat required you to make the following note:

"(To add a personal note: it seems that with many women nowadays, the situation has changed. Many clean the house for weeks before Pesach and are very particular to search for and find Chametz wherever it may be.)"

My understanding is that Chazal give eternal principles in the makeup of the human consciousness. To say that doesn't apply anymore, which we have to say based on the Rav's evolved pshat, means Chazal was giving us an ephemeral character trait that applied to its time. That's difficult for me to digest but that can only be because I'm ignorant. But it's just something to think about.

The Kollel replies:

1. I was basing my pshat in Tosfos on the Chidushei Rashba Chulin 10b DH veNashim veAvadim, who I think is saying essentially the same principle as Tosfos, but elaborates slightly more. The Rashba writes that it seems from our Gemara that if bedikas chametz would have been deoraisa we would have not believed ladies. The Rashba writes that this is because bedikas chametz involves an extra effort and in addition one has to check in the holes and cracks and ladies and servants are lazy and rely on saying that there is no chametz to be found in the holes and cracks.

2. My argument is that the Tosfos and the Rashba are saying the same thing, and that the Rashba is merely explaining Tosfos. At any rate what the Rashba does say clearly is that when the Yerushalmi states that ladies are lazy these means that they rely on their reasoning that there is no chametz in the holes and cracks and as a result do not check sufficiently.

3.I think that this means that laziness can persuade a person that it is not necessary to do this "chumra". The Yetzer Hara says to a person "is it really necessary to check for chametz in every hole and crack?! You are crazy! You will not find any chametz there!".(see also Mesilat Yesharim chapter 6 who explains how laziness can take hold of a person).

4. I also claim support for my argument that sometimes ladies can be quite the opposite of lazy, from what Rav Yonatan Eibishitz writes in Kreiti uPleiti Yoreh Deah 84:19 when he discusses relying on ladies for checking food for worms. He writes that presently one can rely on women more than men. Men do the checking too quickly and are busy with other things, and do not pay sufficient attention to the job of searching for the תולעים

5. He writes that sometimes one's senses testify that women do a better job than men.

Reb Menachem, there is more to write about this, but I will close for the moment.

Many thanks for your very important and perceptive comments.

Yasher Koach Gadol

Dovid Bloom

Follow-up reply:

1. I am not sure what you mean by the migu, since Tosfos 4b DH Lav mentions a migu, whilst we are discussing Tosfos DH Hemnuhu who does not mention a migu.

2.The Rema Orach Chaim 432:2 writes that before Bedikas Chametz the custom is to place 10 pieces of chametz in a place where the searcher will find them, so that the beracha he makes on Biur Chametz should not be a beracha leVatala. The Mishneh Berurah #13 cites the Taz that there is in fact no problem of a beracha leVatala involved. However Sha'ar Hatziyon #12 cites Pitchei Teshuva in the name of Emek Halacha [these appear to be sefarim written close to the time of the Mishneh Berurah] that nowadays since the minhag is to sweep and clean the house from any possibility of chametz before the night of 14th, the custom of 10 pieces of chametz may be necessary according to the Din and not merely a question of Minhag. In other words, in former times they did not clean the houses so thoroughly from chametz before the night of 14th Nisan. Therefore even if one did not place down 10 pieces it will not be a beracha LeVatala that is made on the bedika since one expects to find real chametz. Nowadays it is different because people clean the houses so well [ presumably it is the ladies who are so particular about the cleaning - DB] that if one does not place down 10 pieces one does not expect to find chametz so the beracha on the bedika is leVatala.

KOL TUV

Dovid Bl

Menachem asks:

Shalom Rav Bloom do you remember this shaila I asked? I think I might have stumbled on something or I'm just confused . . .

I asked on daf 4b Pesachim, Tosfos DH: Lav uses a migu to tell us we can believe women that they did a good bedika because of migu. But I asked how can that be because Tosfos on that amud DH: Hemnuhu tells us that there is an umdena that women are lazy. How can a migu tell us that a women is not lazy. So you answered it for me.

But I just saw Bava Basra daf 5b. The Gemara clares a shaila:

אִיבַּעְיָא לְהוּ תְּבָעוֹ לְאַחַר זְמַן וְאָמַר לוֹ פְּרַעְתִּיךָ בְּתוֹךְ זְמַנִּי מַהוּ מִי אָמְרִינַן בִּמְקוֹם חֲזָקָה אָמְרִינַן מַה לִּי לְשַׁקֵּר

The Gemara is asking when you have an umdena up against a chazakah, which one wins? The Gemara leaves it as a safeik. So then my question is how can Tosfos bring an umdena that women are lazy and yet a migu can help us believe that women would be a good bedika?? Is that not a case of migu against a chazakah??

The Kollel replies:

Menachem, the Gemara Bava Basra 5b is in fact the source of Tosfos!

1)

This is what the RI writes; that if there is a Chazakah that the house has been checked it follows that those people (who say that it had not been checked but then we checked it) are believed with a migo that they could have kept quiet and said nothing. Tosfos is hinting at the Gemara Bava Basra; that the conclusion of the Gemara there is that a chazaka is stronger than a migo. Therefore one only believes these people with a migo if the house has a chazakah that it has been checked.

2)

Tosfos continues and writes that if the house does not have a Chezkat Baduk, then why should we believe them?! This is because the conclusion in Bava Basra is that a chazakah is stronger than a migo, so since the chazakah is that the house was not checked, the migo is not powerful enough to overcome that chazakah.

Tosfos does not mention Bava Basra 5b explicitly but he certainly hints at it.

KOL TUV

Dovid Bloom