On the evening of the fourteenth, we check for chamets by candlelight, not by sunlight, not by moonlight, but rather only by candlelight (since the candlelight is greater). Even though there's no explicit proof for this, it's a remembrance for that which is discussed (Tzefaniah 1) "And in that time I will look through Jerusalem by candle" and that which it says (Proverbs 20) "The candle of God is a human soul".

Bet Shamai say: "Two rows on the entire cellar -- the outer row which faces the door, and the uppermost which faces the ceiling. [but the lower rows and the inner rows don't need checking]." Bet Hillel say: "[The outer row is] the uppermost which faces the door and those under it. However the rows that are more inwards from it don't need checking".

Holes in the upper and lower [walls of] the house, the mattress, and the cellar, and the roof of the house, and the roof of a closet, [and] the grain storage, [and] the cowshed, and the woodshed, and the storerooms -- [specifically,] the wine storeroom and the oil storeroom and the produce storeroom -- there is no need to check. Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says, [if] a couch is separated from the house* and there was wood or stones under it, one checks the outer side but there is no need to check the inner side.

One who departs with a caravan or sets sail on a ship more than thirty days [before Passover] does not need to search [for chametz], [but one who departs or sets sail] within thirty days searches, and removes them (i.e., the pieces of chametz), and [then] goes on his way.

Rabbi Yehuda says in the name of Rabban Gamaliel, two disqualified loaves of thanksgiving offering (see Lev. 7:12-14) were placed on top of the Temple portico. As long as they were placed [on top of the portico], everyone could eat unconsecrated food [containing leaven]. When one was removed, everyone (i.e., the Kohanim) could eat Terumah [containing leaven]. When both were taken away, they burned this one and that one (i.e., unconsecrated food and Terumah). They burned uncertain Terumah (i.e., Terumah whose purity status is uncertain), impure [Terumah], and pure [Terumah] all together, the words of Rabbi Meir. And the Sages say, uncertain [Terumah was burned] by itself, and pure by itself, and impure by itself. Said Rabbi Shimon, Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua did not disagree about the pure or about the impure [Terumah], whether we burn this one by itself and that one by itself. About what did they disagree? About uncertain [Terumah] and about impure [Terumah], for Rabbi Eliezer says, this one is burned by itself and that one is burned by itself, and Rabbi Yehoshua says, both [are burned] together. Said Rabbi Yosei, the conclusion does not follow from the proof. [What is the proof?] Meat that was rendered impure by a secondary source of impurity [and then made contact] with meat that was rendered impure by a primary source of impurity, both of them are impure, only that this one is possesses a higher degree of impurity, and that one possesses a lower degree of impurity. And so too with oil that became disqualified [through contact with] a tevul yom* or [by contact] with a candlestick that was rendered impure through death-impurity -- both of them are impure, only that this one is possesses a higher degree of impurity, and that one possesses a lower degree of impurity. And I say that Terumah that became impure through a secondary source of impurity is burned along with Terumah that became impure through a primary source of impurity, even though we are adding impurity onto impurity. And [with respect to] uncertain [Terumah] and impure [Terumah], I say that if the uncertain is burned along with the impure, its impurity is removed from it. Beit Shammai say, we do not burn pure meat with impure meat, but Beit Hilel permit it.

At first they (i.e., the Sages) would say, we may not sell our chametz to a Gentile, nor may we give it to him as a gift; rather, we may [only] give it to him as food before the time for removal arrives. Until Rabbi Akiva came along and taught that we may sell it or give it as a gift [to a Gentile], and even after the time for removal [arrives]. Said Rabbi Yosei, those were the words of Beit Shammai, and these are the words of Beit Hillel, and Rabbi Akiva established [the halacha] according to the words of Beit Hillel.

One who eats chametz after midnight or chametz which remained with him during Passover -- behold, he has violated a negative commandment, but he is not excommunicated, the words of Rabbi Yehuda. And the Sages say, whatever does not result in excommunication does not involve [the violation of] a negative commandment. One who eats an olive's-bulk of chametz on Passover [intentionally] is liable for the punishment of excommunication, but [if he did so] unintentionally, [he is liable for] a sin offering, and [if he did so] without knowing, [he is liable for] a dependent sin offering.

One who eats Terumah [containing] chametz on Passover does not pay its monetary value in wood to a Kohen. Said Rabbi Yochanan ben Nuri, "I said to Rabbi Akiva, for what reason does one who eats Terumah [containing] chametz on Passover not pay its monetary value in wood to a Kohen? What is the difference between this and the other days of the year? For on the other days of the year, one pays the monetary value in wood to a Kohen." He said to me, "No. If you say that on the other days of the year that [a Kohen] is not permitted to eat [impure Terumah] but is permitted to burn it, you must also say the same regarding [eating Terumah with chametz on Passover], for it is neither permitted to be eaten nor burned." How is this similar to the case of Terumah of strawberries and watermelons and cucumbers that became impure? Because these neither are permitted to eat nor permitted to be burned [as they are unfit for firewood]. To what case does this apply? To Terumah as to which one separated chametz before Passover, it is designated as Terumah, but one who separated Terumah [containing] chametz on Passover, it is not Terumah.

One who eats consecrated chametz on Passover, it is not Terumah. One who eats consecrated chametz on Passover inadvertently, he pays the principal and a fifth, and [brings] a certain guilt offering and a dependent guilt offering. [If he does so] intentionally, he is exempt [from bringing an offering; rather, he is excommunicated]. To what case does this apply? To consecrated [foods] from which chametz was separated before Passover, it is [indeed] consecrated, but one who consecrates chametz on Passover, it is not consecrated.

One who ears [chametz] and one who anoints with or drinks [chametz]: The one who eats [chametz], if from the time he started eating until the time he finished eating, he ate the quantity of a loaf [even if he paused in between], then the acts of eating combine [to render him liable], and if not then they don't combine. The one who drinks, if from the start of his drinking to the end of his drinking he drank a quarter-log [of liquid containing chametz], the acts of drinking combine together, and if not they do not combine. Just as eating requires an olive's-bulk [to render one liable], so too does drinking require an olive's-bulk, and eating and drinking do not combine. If he ate an olive's-bulk [of chametz], even if it was from five different foods [which he ate at one sitting, even if none of them contained an olive's- bulk on its own], they combine together. But if he ate half an olive's-bulk and then [stopped eating and later] came back and ate another half, then even if both acts of eating were from the same type of food, they do not combine [and he is exempt from liability].

The chametz of Gentiles is permitted immediately after Passover. Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel and Rabbi Yishmael bar Rabbi Yochanan ben Berokah say, even consecrated [chametz] is permitted immediately after Passover.