More Discussions for this daf
1. Sechar Mitzvos b'Hai Alma Leka 2. Reward in the World to Come?
DAF DISCUSSIONS - CHULIN 142

Aharon Levine asked:

Can you help with the following questions on the gemara on Chulin 142a dealing with the sugya of S'char Mitzvos B'hai Alma Leka:

Does the fact that the gemara says that the S'char for the mitzvos of Kibud Av V'Aim and Shiluach Ha'Ken is associated with Techiyas HaMaisim rather than Olam Ha'Ba serve as support to the opinion that the reward for mitzvos will be given after Techiyas HaMaisim when the body and neshama, that performed the mitzvos together as a single unit, will be reunited and receive the s'char together as a single unit, as opposed to opinion that says that S'char Mitzvos is intended primarily for the neshama in Olam Ha'Ba. What is the Hava Amina in the gemara to answer that Shiluchei Mitzvah Ainan Nizokin applies only to people going to perform a mitzvah but not to people returning from performing a mitzvah - while the mitzvah of Shiluach Ha'Ken is completed as soon as the bird was sent away, the mitzvah of Kibud Av V'Aim was not completed until the son brings back the birds to the father who requested that the son bring him some birds.

Even the travel back down with the birds to bring to the father should be considered part of the kiyum of the mitzvah or at least the travel necessary to complete fulfillment of the mitzvah? What was the Heter for the son to climb up and down a rickety ladder in the first place - he is not permitted to place himself in danger even if commanded to do so by his father?

Apparently it seems from this gemara that the concept, discussed in the gemara in Sotah, that kiyum ha'mitzvos protects one from coming to do an aveirah, is also considered an aspect of S'char Mitzvos and if we hold that S'char Mitzvos B'Hai Alma Leka, then even this protection benefit of mitzvos is not afforded to one who fulfills mitzvos in this world. Does that mean that the gemara in Sotah is not consistent with R' Yaakov's shita here?

Thanks,

Aharon Levine

The Kollel replies:

1) It is difficult to bring proofs from this sort of choice of words throughout Shas. Each opinion will always state that the term being used is not definite. This seems to be the case here as well, as Rashi in Kidushin (39b, DH "she'Ain") exchanges Techiyas ha'Meisim for (the word) Olam Haba.

2) The Tosfos Rid in Kidushin (39b) answers that when the son obtained the birds, he threw them down to his father. His Mitzva was therefore already completed, which is why the Gemara entertains the answer that people are not protected when returning from performing a Mitvza (see Pnei Yehoshua there for an alternate answer).

3) It is possible that the son did not realize that it was a rickety ladder, or that he simply ignored the fact.

4) Although R' Yakov apparently held this was included in Sechar Mitzvos, it is not clear that the Gemara in Sotah would have to agree. It might still hold Sechar Mitzvos b'Hai Alma Leka, and that this is not considered Sechar Mitzvah.

Kol Tuv,

Yaakov Montrose