Why is hosting guests as great as coming early to the Beis Midrash?

Maharal: Hosting guests honors man, who was created b'Tzelem Elokim. This is a Divine matter, like coming early to the Beis Midrash to learn Divine Torah. Man is dear, for he was created b'Tzelem Elokim; Yisrael are dear, for they were given a coveted Kli (Torah) - these are equal. Rav DImi says that hosting guests is greater, for bringing man, who was created b'Tzelem Elokim, into his house and honoring him, is Kevod ha'Shechinah. It is greater than coming early to the Beis Midrash, for the Tana taught 'man is dear...' before 'Yisrael are dear, for they received Torah.' This is only for hosting guests - for Panim Chadashos came [but not to Stam cases of honoring man].

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): The Mishnah proves that hosting guests is as great as Talmud Torah. It does not discuss coming early to the Beis Midrash - perhaps that is less important, and we would not permit moving Muktzah for it, if there is no Bitul Torah! Do not say that if he will not come early, he will not be able to learn, e.g. due to danger. If so, how can Rav Dimi of Neharda'a say that hosting guests is greater than coming early to the Beis Midrash? Talmud Torah is equal to all the Mitzvos! We must say that in the Mishnah, 'Bitul Beis ha'Midrash' is not Bitul Torah. Rather, it is Bitul of coming early to the Beis Midrash.

Iyun Yakov: Surely Talmud Torah is equal to all the Mitzvos! Learning in a Beis Midrash amidst Chachamim is greater than learning alone - there is always Chidush in the Beis Midrash. Hosting guests is as great as, or greater than, the advantage of learning in the Beis Midrash over learning alone. How did Rav Dimi infer that hosting guests is greater, because it was taught first? Perhaps coming early to Beis Midrash is greater, but had it been taught first, one might have thought that the Seifa 'but one may not clear out a storehouse' applies only to hosting guests, which was taught last.

Rav Elyashiv: Coming early to the Beis Midrash is Mitzvas Talmud Torah - we learn from Bitul Beis ha'Midrash! It mentioned coming early, to teach that hosting guests is as great or greater than Talmud Torah, even if he also has the attribute of coming early. The Mishnah says that Talmud Torah is equal to all of them regarding reward; our Sugya teaches that hosting guests as [at least] as dear.

How did Rav Dimi infer that hosting guests is greater, because it was taught first? Even if they are equal, one of them must be taught first!

Rav Elyashiv citing Chasam Sofer: Rav Chisda holds that we may clear out four out of five boxes, but not more. Shmuel holds that four or five, and even more is permitted. This is common for Beis Midrash, for many learn there, but not for guests. Beis Midrash should have been taught first! Rav Dimi holds like Shmuel, and infers that it was taught last to teach that hosting guests is greater. R. Yochanan holds like Rav Chisda (Beitzah 35b). Hosting guests is more common - there is only one Beis Midrash in the city! Therefore, there is no source to infer that hosting guests is greater.

Rav Elyashiv: It should have sufficed to teach hosting guests, and we would know all the more so due to Bitul Beis ha'Midrash, for Talmud Torah is equal to all the Mitzvos! Rather, since the Tana listed both, he teaches that one is greater than the other, i.e. hosting guests, which he taught first. Hosting guests refers to one who came to the city and has no place to be. It is a Mitzvah to feed at one's table one who has a place, but it is not Hachnasas Orchim.

Why is hosting guests greater than receiving the Shechinah?

Maharal: It is because man was created b'Tzelem Elokim. Receiving the Shechinah is not honor of the Shechinah, for "Lo Yir'ani ha'Adam va'Chai"; one can connect to the Shechinah. It is unlike hosting guests, in which one connects to Tzelem Elokim.

Rav Elyashiv: How can anything in the world be greater than Kabalas Pnei ha'Shechinah? Since he hosts guests to fulfill a Torah law, this is Kevod Hash-m; there is no impingement on His honor. Even though really they were angels, who did not need anything, Avraham thought that they are guests, so he put them before Kabalas Pnei ha'Shechinah.

Daf Al ha'Daf: How can we learn Halachah from a mistake? R' Yakov Yosef mi'Vilna said, the Ikar of hosting guests is honor. Honor applies to angels, even though they do not need anything. R. Yakov Kaminetsky supported this from Bava Metzi'a 86b. Everything that Avraham himself did for the guests, Hash-m Himself did for his seed in the Midbar. Everything that Avraham himself did for the guests via a Shali'ach, Hash-m did for his seed via a Shali'ach. Is it not better for the guests to do via many Sheluchim - they will be served more promptly! Rather, the primary Mitzvah is honoring the guest. It is more honor if the host himself does everything, even if it is not done so promptly.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Over Orach (69): Normally, Osek b'Mitzvah Patur Min ha'Mitzvah - one does not interrupt a Mitzvah to engage in another Mitzvah, even if the latter is a greater Mitzvah. Kabalas Pnei ha'Shechinah is different, for it has no limit - one never finishes. This also explains why we interrupt Talmud Torah for a Mitzvah that cannot be done via others. Perhaps R. Yochanan and Rav Dimi argue about whether Mitzvas [Hashkamas] Beis ha'Midrash has a limit. If it does not, hosting guests is greater than it. If It has a limit, perhaps the two Mitzvos are equal.

How do we learn from "Im Na Matzasi Chen b'Einecha Al Na Sa'avor me'Al Avdecha"?

Rashi: Avraham ceased talking with Hash-m, and went to host guests.

Tosfos: Rav Yehudah holds like the opinion in Shevu'os (35b) that Adon... in the verse refers to Hash-m. Another opinion holds that it is Chol - he addressed the angels, and invited them.

Maharsha: We can similarly explain "Le'echol Lechem Im Chosen Moshe Lifnei ha'Elokim" - they came to eat with Yisro, the guest, for this comes before (in time) Kabalas Pnei ha'Shechinah.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): How can we learn from Avraham? He already was Mekabel Pnei ha'Shechinah, and then went to do Hash-m's will. Also, perhaps Hash-m granted Avraham's request to go to host guests, so he would merit both of them, but if one can do only one, Kabalas Pnei ha'Shechinah is greater! It seems that the entire time that one stands in front of the Shechinah and does not divert his mind from this, this is Kabalas Pnei ha'Shechinah. Avraham did not request permission - he himself went to host the guests, just he requested that Hash-m not leave, and after hosting the guests, Avraham will be Mekabel Pnei ha'Shechinah.

Daf Al ha'Daf: R' A. of Strikov said, according to the opinion that Adon... is Chol, it was written like a Kodesh name. This is the first Chesed in the Torah. (i.e. the first Chesed that a Jew did. Hash-m adorned Chavah and brought her to Chupah, made clothes for her and Adam, Noach and his sons fed the animals in the ark, his sons covered him... - PF) Avraham, whose Midah was Chesed, hinted that Chesed, like all Mitzvos, must be done due to Hash-m's command, and not due to one's intellect and understanding, like etiquette.

Iyun Yakov: We learn even according to the opinion that Avraham addressed the angels. He beseeched more from them than from Hash-m. Since one may tell Hash-m to wait, surely this was to teach that hosting guests is greater than receiving the Shechinah.

Daf Al ha'Daf: How did Avraham know that hosting guests is greater than Kabalas Pnei ha'Shechinah? R. Yitzchak of Warka answered, Avraham was weak from Bris Milah. When Hash-m appeared to him, he asked Hash-m for strength to stand. Hash-m said, sit, and you will be a Siman for your seed. When he saw the guests, he received youthful strength to run. He inferred that it is a greater Mitzvah!

Vilna Gaon (Divrei Eliyahu): One who leaves his Rebbi, he faces his Rebbi and walks backwards. When the angels left Avraham, they walked backwards, so they would face the Shechinah, which was there. When Avraham went to greet them, he departed from the Shechinah. He should have gone backwards, facing the Shechinah, and not facing the guests! However, one should greet guests with a smile, facing them! Indeed, "va'Yaratz Likrasam" implies that he faced them, and his back was to the Shechinah, for hosting guests is greater than receiving the Shechinah.

One cannot tell a person more important person than himself 'wait for me' - why could Avraham say so to Hash-m?

Maharal: Hash-m wants that man will not have Chisaron. When man is far from Chisaron, this honors Hash-m. Chisaron is pursuing his Yetzer ha'Ra and bad desires. Other than this, what one does for his needs, so he will not have Chisaron, honors his Creator. Also, man desires that he himself will be honored. One may not tell him 'wait, while I do something else.' Hash-m decreed what he did, for He is proper to be honored, but not because He desires honor. Therefore, one may tell Hash-m to wait if it is proper to do something else.

Maharsha: Telling a more important person 'wait for me' impinges on his honor. Hash-m's honor fills the entire world. Even if Hash-m waits for Avraham to return, His honor is not decreased! He is called ha'Makom, for He is the place of the world - the world is not His place!

How does he eat Peros in this world?

Tosfos: These Mitzvos can tip the scales if a person's merits (with that Mitzvah) equal his sins; reward for a Mitzvah cannot come in this world (Kidushin 39b).

Maharsha: All Mitzvos have reward also in this world - anyone who does a Mitzvah, they bestow good on him (ibid.). These Mitzvos also tip the scales.

Why do these Mitzvos have Peros in this world, and the principal is intact for the world to come?

Maharal: They benefit other people. The Mitzvah is from Hash-m - its reward is in the world to come. For benefiting people, he gets good in this world. This world is like a Pri of the world to come. Iyun Tefilah brings good to the world. Coming early to the Beis Midrash is to learn Torah, which is Tov. Raising one's children to learn Torah - it is good. Judging one's fellow man favorably - all of these are good. R. Yochanan taught six matters included in Chesed, for Chesed is the head of six. (NOTE: Perhaps he means that Chesed is the head of the seven Sefiros; six are below it. Maharal's text said 'these pertain to Chesed'; Rashi rejected this text. - PF) One who clings to good via a good Mitzvah (it benefits others), he receives an influence in this world - Peros (Kidushin 40a).

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): According to this text (all six are included in Chesed), also Torah is included - "Gomel Nafsho Ish Chased." The Mishnah mentioned Talmud Torah only to teach that it is equal to all of them.

Rav Elyashiv: Perush ha'Mishnayos (Pe'ah 1:1) explains that he conducts nicely among people, and causes them to act nicely. Since Kivud Av v'Em is among them, this implies that it is a Mitzvah Bein Adam l'Chavero. If so, intent is not needed. The Yerushalmi says that it is paying his debt of gratitude for bringing him to the world. Our custom is to say this Mishnah and R. Yochanan's additions after Birkas ha'Torah; we add 'morning and night' to include coming early to the Beis Midrash, and bringing a Kalah to Chupah and escorting a Mes, which he did not mention.

Daf Al ha'Daf: What is rising early at night? It is going to sleep on time to enable rising early in the morning.

What is Iyun Tefilah?

Rashi: It is having intent in prayer.

Rav Elyashiv: This is the ultimate Chesed - he prays properly, and this affects what Shamayim does!

How are Rav Yehudah's six matters included in those of the Mishnah?

Rashi: Hosting guests and Bikur Cholim are Chasadim, and also Iyun Tefilah - "Gomel Nafsho Ish Chased." Coming early to the Beis Midrash and raising one's children to learn Torah are included in learning Torah. Judging favorably is included in making Shalom - because he judges him favorably, and says 'he did not sin against me in this - he was forced, or intended for good' - there is Shalom between them.

Maharsha: R. Shimshon (Pe'ah 1:1) learns that Iyun Tefilah is included in Chesed from "Gomel Nafsho Ish Chased." Nefesh is Tefilah - "va'Eshpoch Es Nafshi Lifnei Hash-m." I say that it brings Shalom between Yisrael and their Father in Heaven. The Mishnah teaches that even Shalom Bein Adam l'Chavero merits Peros in this world and the principal for the world to come.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): Rav Yehudah omitted Kivud Av v'Em, bringing Shalom and Talmud Torah! Rashi answered this - Rav Yehudah comes to teach others matters included in Chesed, and perhaps also Shalom and Torah; he does not exclude other matters in the Mishnah.

If one judges his fellow man favorably, why is he judged favorably?

Maharal: Every Midah that a person conducts with, so is done to him. Din is the ultimate Midah. Judging favorably is a very straight Midah. Three episodes are brought, lest one say that this is only when there is not much benefit for the sinner - we should not say that he sinned without benefit. The first episode pertains to theft, which has great benefit and people often transgress it. The latter two pertain to Arayos. Do not say that we judge favorably only when it is close, but not when it is far-fetched. All three cases were very far-fetched; this is a Chazakah to judge favorably in every case. The first case shows that one must judge favorably even about several matters, the second shows about two matters (having her sleep near him, and immersing), and the last shows about three matters - seclusion with her, removing Tefilin and immersing.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): Where do we find that one who judge favorably, he is judged favorably? Even if the employer and Chasidim prayed so, perhaps it was not accepted! And even if it was accepted, what is the source if there is no Tefilah? If you will say that it was a promise, and not a Tefilah, what is the source? Perhaps in the merit of judging favorably, Chachamim found a Pesach to permit the vow.

Iyun Yakov: Since three Chasidim prayed that Hash-m judge him favorably, surely this is a Chazakah; their Tefilah will not return empty. (NOTE: I question this. Surely three Chasidim Kohanim Gedolim prayed that there not be Shogeg murders, yet Kohanim Gedolim's mothers would feed the Shogeg murderers (Makos 11a)! - PF)

Rav Elyashiv: Here, because he judged favorably in far-fetched ways, surely in this merit Shamayim will judge him for Zechus. The employer did not tell him initially, for he was sure that he will judge favorably.

What is the significance that he hired himself out for three years?

Iyun Yakov: One may not hire himself for more than this (Rema CM 333:3. Our text of Rema forbids even three years; Shach (17) proves that the text should say more than three.)

Rav Elyashiv: Mordechai in Bava Metzi'a supports from here the Isur to hire for more than three years. This is why it mentioned three years! Until three is called a Sachir. An Eved Ivri works six years; this is called "Mishneh (double) Sechar Sachir." More than three is not a Sachir - we apply "Li Bnei Yisrael Avadim", and not slaves of slaves.

If an employer has no money, only Shaveh Kesef, must he give it?

Daf Al ha'Daf: In CM (339:10), it says that if the worker demands payment and the employer has no coins, he does not transgress. The Vilna Gaon asks, this implies even if he has Shaveh Kesef! Also the Rosh (Bava Metzi'a 9:43) implies like this. A Beraisa says ' if he does not have' - this implies that he does not have anything! Talmid ha'Rashba says, if he has Metaltelim or land, he must sell it to the pay the worker! The Chinuch (588) says that if he has, but he will lose much if he pays that day, he is exempt. The Ritva (Bava Metzi'a) says that he must pay if he has money, or Peros that are destined to be sold, but he need not sell his Kelim, which are not destined to be sold, for he would lose. Minchas Chinuch proves like the Rosh from our Gemara. Even though he had merchandise, he did not pay his worker. I infer oppositely. If he had Peros, pillows or blankets he would have been obligated to give them! A Chacham in Moriyah (20:10 p.111) says that if he has matters for sale, since there is no loss, he should sell them in order to pay in the day. Shulchan Aruch ha'Rav says that it is Midas Chasidus to borrow in order to pay on the day. Ahavas Chesed (9:7) holds like the Chinuch and Ritva, that he must sell [if there will be no loss].

Later, the employer brought the wages, and additionally three donkeys of food and drink. Was this not Ribis?

Rav Elyashiv (first version): This implies that Ribis does not apply to delayed wages. R. Eliezer mi'Tuch inferred so from Makos 3a - 'how much more would one pay for rights to have 1000 Zuz for 10 years, than to have it for 30 days?' Beis Yosef (YD 160, b'Sof) rejected this. Ya'avetz and Chasam Sofer support R. Eliezer mi'Tuch from here. I say, perhaps there was a custom to add to a Sachir's wage, similar to Ha'anakah to an Eved Ivri after he finishes working. It is not due to delaying the wages, so it is not Ribis. Also, he caused the worker a loss via not paying on time. One is Chayav bi'Ydei Shamayim to pay for Gerama (a loss that he caused), so it is not due to Ribis. (NOTE: When Chachamim lend to each other, the borrower may return a little more than he borrowed (Bava Metzi'a 75a). This did not apply here, for R. Akiva was not yet a Chacham. - PF)

Rav Elyashiv (latter version): It seems that he added due to the delay, and not due to the pain that the delay caused! Even without Zakfan Alav b'Milveh (calculating the amount owed), it is considered a loan due to "b'Yomo Titen Secharo." If he was an Am ha'Aretz, and did not know that it is forbidden, the Gemara should have said so! Our Sugya supports those who permit Ribis Me'ucheres (he pays extra afterwards, without any prior stipulation) for workers; some Rishonim disagree. We can say that the worker did not eat the extra food and drink, only his wife and children did. Ribis Me'ucheres is only from the borrower to the lender. His wife ate; she did not acquire it on behalf of her husband. However, the Gemara implies that also the worker ate.

If he thought that his employer bought merchandise, he should have asked for some of it! He requested even land! R. Tam said that if an employer lacks cash, we force him to sell and pay money to his worker (Bava Kama 46b). He should have sold to pay his worker!

Maharsha: It was Erev Yom Kipur. He would not find someone to buy then. We must say similarly about Peros - they were not tithed, and there was no time to tithe them on Erev Yom Kipur. The worker needed to return home that day. (NOTE: It is a 40 day journey from the north of Eretz Yisrael to the south (Rashi Bamidbar 13:25; Megilah 3a implies like this). The worker was from the north, and the employer was from the south. Perhaps the Gemara mentioned this, to teach that one could not traverse it in one day! - PF)

Rav Elyashiv: The worker was an Am ha'Aretz, so the employer could not give to him Tevel and tell him to tithe them himself. Perhaps the employer should have toiled to tithe, even on Erev Yom Kipur! Perhaps he need not do more than the custom [to tithe when the Peros enter the house].

He could have said about all these matters 'perhaps you were Makdish all your possessions.' Why did he say so only at the end?

Maharsha: When there was something else to attribute to, he did not want to say that he was Makdish everything. Regarding pillows and blankets, he saw them in his employer's house, so there was nothing else to attribute to.

Rav Elyashiv: She'altos (NOTE: and Tana d'Vei Eliyahu Zuta 16 - PF) says that everything that he requested, he saw in the employer's hand! He had coins, but they belonged to the seller, even though he did not yet hand over the merchandise. (NOTE: In a normal sale, the buyer owes money; the seller did not acquire particular coins. Coins are not acquired via Chalipin! However, if Reuven held up money and said 'sell me your item for this', and Shimon agreed, since Shimon was not adamant to see the amount paid, the coins are acquired via Chalipin (Bava Metzi'a 47a). - PF) Perhaps the employer thought that he will get [the merchandise] before his worker's wage is due.

Even if he was able to be Makdish all his possessions, because Hekdesh uproots a lien [to pay his worker], it was improper to do so!

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): Perhaps he was Makdish only his Metaltelim, but he still had land and animals from which to pay, after the rental will finish. Via Heter of his vow, he was able to pay before the rental finished. (NOTE: Why did he not tell him immediately that he will be able to pay after the rental finishes? The question assumes that the employer was a Tzadik. Indeed, She'altos says that it was R. Eliezer. - PF)

Chasam Sofer: Teshuvas Rama mi'Pi'ano (63) brought from She'altos says that R. Akiva worked for R. Eliezer. R. Akiva was an Am ha'Aretz then, but he had good Midos. Rama asked, the Hekdesh was to Bedek ha'Bayis. The creditor adds a Dinar and takes the property! I answer that R. Eliezer forbids to be Makdish all one's property (Erchin 28a). Since he still had property rented to others, the creditor may not take from Hekdesh.

Rav Elyashiv: Even though R. Akiva had good Midos even when he was ignorant, he hated Chachamim. This shows that even an Am ha'Aretz with good Midos hates Chachamim; he does not judge them favorably.

The She'altos says that R. Akiva worked for R. Eliezer. How could he permit his Hekdesh? R. Eliezer holds like Beis Shamai, that mistaken Hekdesh is Hekdesh (Erchin 23a)!

Chasam Sofer #1: Some say that they hold that She'elah does not help for mistaken Hekdesh, but one can permit it via a Pesach.

Chasam Sofer #2: R. Eliezer vowed to Hekdesh together with other vows. He was able to permit the other vows, and a vow that is partially permitted is totally permitted. This is why he said 'they permitted all my vows.'

Rav Elyashiv: Our text does not say that R. Eliezer was Makdish his property, rather, vowed to give it to Hekdesh. All agree that one can permit this.

Do we know who the Chasid was?

Rashi: Every episode with a Chasid is R. Yehudah ben Bava or R. Yehudah b'Ribi Ilai (Stam R. Yehudah).

Birkas ha'Zevach (Temurah 15b, cited in Gilyon ha'Shas): Why did Rashi explain so here, and not regarding earlier episodes with a Chasid, e.g. Berachos 18b? He was bothered - why did he need to immerse before teaching his Talmidim? We hold that a Ba'al Keri may say Divrei Torah! Rashi explains, this could be R. Yehudah, who forbids Divrei Torah for a Ba'al Keri. Rav Elyashiv - Rashash rejected this. Also R. Yehoshua immersed. He was not a Ba'al Keri, just he bore a Nochris' spit (she is like a Zav) - even a Zav may say Divrei Torah! Rather, he immersed due to Tum'ah. However, since it says 'he immersed and taught', this implies that he was adamant to immerse before teaching. By the way, we infer from here that early Chasidim did not immerse every day.

How could she sleep by him? This is seclusion!

Rav Elyashiv: There was an opening to Reshus ha'Rabim.

What was the answer 'perhaps you are unsure about one of us'?

Rashi: You do not know his Midos, to rely on him and leave her by us.

What is the meaning of 'ha'Avodah'?

Maharsha: It does not refer to Avodas ha'Mikdash. The Chasid was R. Yehudah ben Bava or R. Yehudah b'Ribi Ilai - they were after the Churban! Rather, so they used to swear - ha'Avodah la'Shamayim. The word Avodah hints to Shem Aleph Dalet - the vowels are the same.

How could he lock the door? Chachamim decreed against Yichud (seclusion) with a Nochris (Avodah Zarah 36b)!

R E.M. Horowitz: This was before they decreed against Yichud with a Nochris, but after they decreed that adult Nochrim [of bathhouse genders] are like Zavim.

Rav Elyashiv: Tosfos (14b) says that they decreed against Yichud in the days of Hillel, before R. Yehoshua!

Ya'avetz: Do not say that some of her servants were in the house. Yichud is forbidden even with many men, unless two are Kesherim! Perhaps Chachamim did not decree in such a case.

Chashukei Chemed: i.e. they did not decree in a case of Piku'ach Nefesh for Klal Yisrael. If the administrator of a hospital wants to speak privately with a patient or parent of the opposite gender, and refusal could cause harm, it seems that Ya'avetz would permit, but R E.M. Horowitz would not. Davar Halachah says, once, a patient refused to speak with the administrator, and became dangerously ill. People think that Yichud is forbidden due to sin. Really, it is lest they come to feel affection. (NOTE: Sotah 4a gives opinions of the Shi'ur of Yichud with an Eshes Ish, i.e. the time for Bi'ah. All Meforshim and Poskim apply the same Shi'ur for all Isurei Yichud! Is it due to affection? Also, we permit if people can see them, or might enter. Does this prevent affectionate talk?! To be stringent, the administrator and patient could talk, with others there who cannot hear (e.g. they wear earphones playing loud music) or understand the language they speak in. Or, they talk in a room where they can be seen via a window or surveillance camera, or in a [e.g. supply] room to which someone could enter at any moment. - PF)

Daf Al ha'Daf: Surely with a Nochris nurse, one may join Ya'avetz' opinion with concern for Piku'ach Nefesh.

Rav Elyashiv: Perhaps it was Piku'ach Nefesh. Even though Yichud is an offshoot of Arayos, for which Yehareg v'Al Ya'avor, we can say that a Nochris is not Arayos.

Why was her house considered a place of Tum'ah?

Rav Elyashiv: Perhaps there were idols there.

Daf Al ha'Daf: One should don (Rema - Talis and) Tefilin in his house, before going to Beis ha'Keneses (Shulchan Aruch 25:2). Minhag Yisrael Torah says, nowadays we do not do so, for Nochrim are found in the streets. This spread even to places where they are not found. Where there is lewdness in the streets, one should not don them at home. Magen Avraham (43:11) says so if he passes by odorous places - even in a Nochris' house is improper! (NOTE: He also cited Emek ha'Berachah's counsel to don them in the house, and cover them in odorous places. - PF) However, he should don them in Chatzer Beis ha'Keneses, before entering.

What was the answer 'perhaps you must discuss with her something about the kingdom'?

Rashi: It must be concealed.

What is the consequence if spit from a Nochris' mouth came on one's clothing?

Rashi: Chachamim decreed that a Nochri is like a Zav. (One who carries his spit becomes Tamei.)

It seems that they were happy that they were judged favorably. R. Yosi wanted a portion among those who are falsely suspected (118b)!

Maharsha #1: Even though he merits a great portion, one does not want to be falsely suspected.

Rav Elyashiv: It is very painful to be suspected falsely, but it is a great Kaparah. However, there would have been Chilul Hash-m. Therefore, he rejoiced to hear that they judged him favorably.

Maharsha #2: Here, they brought themselves to suspicion. R. Yosi wanted a portion among those who are falsely suspected when they did not bring themselves to suspicion.