Mi vami - Graph Database of the Talmud 1.0
Previous | Next | Sukkah 16b


בית שמאי אומרים מלמעלה ובית הלל אומרים מלמטה אמר רבי יהודה לא תהא מחיצה גדולה מן הכותל שביניהן

Beit Shammai say: The partition that permits drawing water may be placed below; and Beit Hillel said it must be placed above. Rabbi Yehuda said: A partition for the cistern should be no more stringent than the wall serving as a partition between the two courtyards. Once there is a wall between courtyards, there is no need to erect an additional partition specifically for the cistern.

אמר רבה בר בר חנה אמר רבי יוחנן רבי יהודה בשיטת רבי יוסי אמרה דאמר מחיצה תלויה מתרת

Rabba bar bar Ḥana said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Rabbi Yehuda stated his opinion in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, who said that a suspended partition permits one to carry, and therefore the wall between the courtyards suffices to divide the cistern as well.

ולא היא לא רבי יהודה סבר לה כרבי יוסי ולא רבי יוסי סבר לה כרבי יהודה

The Gemara rejects this equation. And that is not so, as neither does Rabbi Yehuda hold in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, nor does Rabbi Yosei hold in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda.

לא רבי יהודה סבר לה כרבי יוסי עד כאן לא קאמר רבי יהודה התם אלא בעירובי חצירות דרבנן אבל הכא סוכה דאורייתא לא

The Gemara elaborates: Neither does Rabbi Yehuda hold in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, as Rabbi Yehuda states his opinion that a suspended partition suffices only there, with regard to the joining of the courtyards, which is an obligation by rabbinic law. However, here, with regard to sukka, which is by Torah law, a suspended partition does not suffice.

ולא רבי יוסי סבר לה כרבי יהודה עד כאן לא קאמר רבי יוסי הכא אלא בסוכה דמצות עשה אבל שבת דאיסור סקילה לא

Nor does Rabbi Yosei hold in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, as Rabbi Yosei states his opinion that a suspended partition suffices only here, with regard to a sukka, which is a positive mitzva. However, in the case of carrying between courtyards on Shabbat, which is a prohibition that is punishable by stoning, no, a suspended partition does not suffice.

ואם תאמר מעשה שנעשה בציפורי על פי מי נעשה לא על פי רבי יוסי אלא על פי רבי ישמעאל ברבי יוסי

The Gemara asks: And if you say: Since Rabbi Yosei does not hold in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda with regard to the laws of Shabbat, according to whose opinion was the action that was taken in Tzippori performed, where they relied on suspended partitions even on Shabbat? The Gemara answers: It was not performed according to the opinion of Rabbi Yosei but rather on the authority of Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei.

ומאי מעשה דכי אתא רב דימי אמר פעם אחת שכחו ולא הביאו ספר תורה מערב שבת למחר פירסו סדינין על גבי העמודים והביאו ספר תורה וקראו בו

And what was that incident? When Rav Dimi came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he said: One time they forgot and did not bring a Torah scroll to the synagogue on Shabbat eve prior to the onset of Shabbat. The next day, on Shabbat, to avoid violating the prohibition against carrying, they spread and suspended sheets on posts that were fixed along the path from the house in which the Torah scroll was stored to the synagogue, establishing partitions. And they brought a Torah scroll along that path and read from it.

פירסו סלקא דעתך מהיכן הביאום בשבת אלא מצאו סדינין פרוסין על גבי העמודים והביאו ספר תורה וקראו בו

The Gemara asks: Does it enter your mind that they spread the sheets on Shabbat? Carrying before the partitions were established was prohibited. From where did they bring these sheets on Shabbat? Rather, they found sheets already spread on the posts, and they brought a Torah scroll and read from it. They relied on a suspended partition even in this matter related to Torah law. They relied neither on the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda nor on the opinion of Rabbi Yosei; rather, they relied on the authority of a third tanna.


אמר רב חסדא אמר אבימי מחצלת ארבעה ומשהו מתרת בסוכה משום דופן היכי עביד תלי ליה באמצע פחות משלשה למטה ופחות משלשה למעלה וכל פחות משלשה כלבוד דמי

§ Rav Ḥisda said that Avimi said: A mat that is four handbreadths and a bit wide can permit the use of a sukka as a wall. The Gemara explains: How does one accomplish this? He suspends it in the middle of a space ten handbreadths high, with less than three handbreadths below it and less than three handbreadths above it. And the principle states: The legal status of any objects that have a gap of less than three handbreadths between them is as if they were joined [lavud]. Therefore, a mat four handbreadths and a bit wide can constitute a fit partition of ten handbreadths.

פשיטא מהו דתימא חד לבוד אמרינן תרי לבוד לא אמרינן קא משמע לן

The Gemara asks: This is obvious. The principle of joining with regard to a gap of less than three handbreadths is well known. There is no need to teach this halakha. The Gemara answers: Lest you say that we state the principle of lavud once with regard to a particular surface but we do not state the principle of lavud twice to consider it joined in different directions, Avimi teaches us that one may implement the principle twice.

מיתיבי מחצלת שבעה ומשהו מתרת בסוכה משום דופן כי תניא ההיא בסוכה גדולה ומאי קא משמע לן דמשלשלין דפנות מלמעלה למטה כרבי יוסי

The Gemara raises an objection to the opinion of Avimi from a baraita: A mat that is seven handbreadths and a bit wide can permit use of a sukka as a wall. Apparently, a mat can serve as the wall of a sukka only when the principle of joined objects is implemented once. The Gemara answers: When that baraita was taught, it was with regard to a large sukka, one considerably higher than ten handbreadths. One suspends the mat from a bit less than three handbreadths from the roofing, and it is considered a fit sukka wall although it is a significant distance off the ground. And what does it teach us? It teaches that one may lower walls from up downward, in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei.

אמר רבי אמי פס ארבעה ומשהו מתיר בסוכה משום דופן ומוקים ליה בפחות משלשה טפחים סמוך דופן וכל פחות משלשה סמוך לדופן כלבוד דמי

Apropos forming a sukka wall based on the principle of lavud, the Gemara cites that Rabbi Ami said: A board that measures four handbreadths and a bit can permit the use of a sukka, serving as a wall, and it is effective if one establishes it less than three handbreadths from the adjacent wall. And the principle states: The legal status of any objects with a gap of less than three handbreadths between them is as if they were joined.

מאי קא משמע לן הא קא משמע לן שיעור משך סוכה קטנה שבעה

The Gemara asks: What is he teaching us? The principle of lavud is well known. The Gemara answers: He comes to teach us that the minimum measure of the horizontal extension of the wall of a small sukka is seven handbreadths. Therefore, it is possible to establish a wall for the sukka using a board that measures four handbreadths and a bit.