Sukkah — Daf 12a

אי מה חגיגה בעלי חיים אף סוכה נמי בעלי חיים

כי אתא רבין אמר ר' יוחנן אמר קרא (דברים טז, יג) באספך מגרנך ומיקבך בפסולת גורן ויקב הכתוב מדבר

ואימא גורן עצמו ויקב עצמו א"ר זירא יקב כתיב כאן ואי אפשר לסכך בו

מתקיף לה רבי ירמיה ואימא יין קרוש הבא משניר שהוא דומה לעיגולי דבילה אמר רבי זירא הא מלתא הוה בידן ואתא ר' ירמיה ושדא ביה נרגא

רב אשי אמר מגרנך ולא גורן עצמו מיקבך ולא יקב עצמו

רב חסדא אמר מהכא (נחמיה ח, טו) צאו ההר והביאו עלי זית ועלי עץ שמן ועלי הדס ועלי תמרים ועלי עץ עבות

היינו הדס היינו עץ עבות אמר רב חסדא הדס שוטה לסוכה ועץ עבות ללולב:

מתני׳ חבילי קש וחבילי עצים וחבילי זרדין אין מסככין בהן וכולן שהתירן כשרות וכולן כשרות לדפנות:

גמ׳ א"ר יעקב שמעית מיניה דרבי יוחנן תרתי חדא הא ואידך החוטט בגדיש לעשות לו סוכה אינה סוכה

חדא משום גזרת אוצר וחדא משום תעשה ולא מן העשוי ולא ידענא הי מינייהו משום אוצר והי מינייהו משום תעשה ולא מן העשוי

א"ר ירמיה ניחזי אנן דאמר רבי חייא בר אבא אמר ר' יוחנן מפני מה אמרו חבילי קש וחבילי עצים וחבילי זרדין אין מסככין בהן פעמים שאדם בא מן השדה בערב וחבילתו על כתפו ומעלה ומניחה על גבי סוכתו כדי ליבשה ונמלך עליה לסיכוך והתורה אמרה תעשה ולא מן העשוי מדהא משום גזרת אוצר הא משום תעשה ולא מן העשוי

ורבי יעקב הך דרבי חייא בר אבא לא שמיע ליה

אמר רב אשי אטו חבילי קש וחבילי עצים משום גזרת אוצר איכא משום תעשה ולא מן העשוי ליכא והחוטט בגדיש משום תעשה ולא מן העשוי איכא משום גזרת אוצר ליכא

ור' יוחנן אמר לך הכא דקתני אין מסככין בהן לכתחלה הוא

And if [you will suggest]: Just as the Festival offering was a live animal so the Sukkah must be [of something which is] alive, [it may be replied that] when Rabin came, he said in the name of R. Johanan, Scripture says, After that thou hast gathered in from thy threshing-floor and thy winepress. The verse thus speaks of the leavings of the threshing-floor and the leas of the wine-press.1 But perhaps it means the actual threshing-floor and the actual wine-press?2 - Zera answered, It is written winepress’, and3 it is impossible to cover the Sukkah with this!3 R. Jeremiah demurred: But perhaps it means the solidified wine that comes from Senir, which resembles fig-cakes?4 R. Zera observed, We had something in our hands, and R. Jeremiah came and cast an axe at it.5 R. Ashi replied, ‘From thy threshing-floor’,6 [implies] but not the threshing-floor itself,7 from thy wine-press’,6 [implies] but not the wine-press itself.8 R. Hisda replied,9 The deduction is made from this verse, Go forth unto the mount and fetch olive-branches, and branches of wild olive, and myrtle-branches and palm-branches, and branches of thick trees.10 Are not myrtle-branches, the same as branches of thick trees?11 — R. Hisda answered: The wild myrtle12 [were to be fetched] for the Sukkah, while the branches of thick trees,13 for the lulab. MISHNAH. BUNDLES OF STRAW, BUNDLES OF WOOD, AND BUNDLES OF BRUSHWOOD MAY NOT SERVE AS SUKKAH-COVERING, BUT ALL OF THEM,14 IF THEY ARE UNTIED, ARE VALID. ALL MATERIALS, HOWEVER,15 ARE VALID FOR THE WALLS. GEMARA. R. Jacob said, I heard from R. Johanan [the explanation of] two things,16 this one,17 and the following:18 If one hollows out a haystack to make of it a Sukkah, [the hollow] is no [valid] Sukkah.19 The reason for one of them he attributed to a Rabbinical enactment lest [a man use his] store-house as a Sukkah,20 and as a reason for the other he gave, because ‘thou shalt make’, [implies] but not from that which is made; but I do not remember which of them is on account of a ‘store-house’, and which on account of ‘"thou shalt make" but not from that which is made’. R. Jeremiah said, Let us see:21 R. Hiyya b. Abba said in the name of R. Johanan, Why did they say that bundles of straw, bundles of wood, and bundles of brushwood may not serve as sukkah-covering? Because it may happen22 that a man returns in the evening from the field with his bundle on his shoulder, and raising it up he places it on his hut to dry it,23 and then24 he might decide to leave it there as a sukkah-covering, but the Torah said, ‘Thou shalt make’, [which implies], but not from that which is made.25 Now since this is forbidden as a restrictive measure against the possibility of the use of a store-house26 [as a Sukkah]27 the other28 must have been forbidden on the ground of ‘thou shalt make’ [which implies], but not from that which is made.29 And R. Jacob?30 -He had not heard that [statement] of R. Hiyya b. Abba. R. Ashi said:31 Are then bundles of straw, bundles of wood and bundles of brushwood forbidden only because of the possible use of a store-house32 and not because of the injunction ‘thou shalt make’ [which implies], but not from that which is made,33 and is the hollowing out of a haystack forbidden only because of the injunction ‘thou shalt make’ which implies but not from that which is made, and not because of the possible use of a store-house?34 And R. Johanan?35 — He can answer you that here where it states, MAY NOT SERVE AS A SUKKAH-COVERING, it means that only at the outset UNCLEANLINESS etc. same thing be mentioned twice? invalid for the lulab. V. infra 32b. year, as a valid Sukkah. Sukkah, a Rabbinical prohibition was imposed even in the case where bundles were used expressly for the festival Sukkah. Sukkah (forbidden only Rabbinically as a preventive measure) but also to such as were stored there during the year (forbidden Pentateuchally), and since the Mishnah cited might refer not only to the usual haystack (forbidden Pentateuchally) but also to one whose sheaves that are to serve as the Sukkah roof were duly shaken and shifted with the specific intention of using them as a roof for the Festival Sukkah (forbidden only Rabbinically as a preventive measure), how could R. Jacob maintain in the name of R. Johanan that only a Pentateuchal, or only a Rabbinical prohibition applied to either Mishnah?