- המשתחוה לדקל לולבו מהו למצוה (דחוי אצל מצות)
Reish Lakish asked: המשתחוה לדקל לולבו מהו למצוה – if one bows to a palm tree, can its branch be used for the mitzvah of lulav? The question is where the tree was planted, and was only later worshipped, and follows the Rabbonon’s opinion that such a tree remains permitted in benefit. Assuming it is disqualified for an offering, מי מאיס כלפי גבוה או לא – is it repulsive to be used for the Most High, i.e., for mitzvos as well, or not? Rav Dimi reported that Reish Lakish’s question was about an אשירה which was nullified, which was initially prohibited in all benefit, and subsequently became permitted. Do we say יש דחוי אצל מצות – there is rejection regarding mitzvos (i.e., it remains disqualified even after becoming permitted in benefit), or not? A Mishnah teaches that if blood of a shechted חיה or bird was covered by wind, he must cover it (but only if it later became uncovered). Rav Pappa says this proves אין דיחוי אצל מצות, since the mitzvah was inapplicable while it was covered. The Gemara responds that Reish Lakish’s question was whether the Tanna is certain that אין דיחוי אצל מצות, and would say so even leniently, or only stringently requires covering the blood because of the possibility that אין דיחוי אצל מצות. The question remains unresolved.
- Rebuilding a fallen wall shared by an idolatrous building
The next Mishnah states: מי שהיה ביתו סמוך לעבודת כוכבים ונפל – if one’s house adjoined a building worshipped for idolatry, and [the shared wall] fell, אסור לבנותו – it is forbidden to rebuild it, which would be building a structure for idolatry. Rather, כונס בתוך שלו ארבע אמות – he draws back four amos into his own property and builds the wall there. If half the original wall stood in the idolator’s property, the four amos are calculated from the halfway point. Tannaim argue if the components of the original wall transmit tumah (Rabbinically) like a שרץ (through contact), or even like a niddah (by being carried). The Gemara asks that by withdrawing into his property, he provides benefit to the idolatrous property!? Rebbe Chanina of Sura said that he makes the area a בית הכסא. The Gemara objects that he must act modestly in a בית הכסא, whereas this one is exposed, and answers that it is only for nighttime use. The Gemara persists that modesty is required even at night, and answers that the בית הכסא is for children. Alternatively, he fences it in with thorns, which provide privacy, but no structural benefit to the idol.
- שלשה בתים הן, שלש אבנים הן
The next Mishnah states: שלשה בתים הן – there are three types of idolatrous houses regarding their nullification laws: (1) if a house was initially built to be worshipped, the entire house is forbidden (and must be nullified). (2) סיידו וכיידו לעבודת כוכבים וחידש – if he plastered it and decorated it (with images) for idolatry and thereby added to it, נוטל מה שחידש – he removes what he added, and the house is permitted. (3) If one brought an idol into his house and removed it, the house is permitted. Rav adds that if one bows down to the house, it becomes forbidden even if it was not built for worship (while the Mishnah taught that if it was built for idolatry, it is forbidden without being worshipped. The next Mishnah teaches a parallel list of three types of idolatrous stones.