Parallel
סוכה 28
Soncino English Talmud · Berean Standard Bible
— [No.] In the latter case it is [forbidden] since he destroys its identity, but in the former where he does not, the law is not so. Our Rabbis have taught: It happened that R. Eliezer passed the Sabbath in Upper Galilee, and they asked him for thirty decisions in the laws of Sukkah. Of twelve of these he said, ‘I heard them [from my teachers]’; of eighteen he said, ‘I have not heard’. R. Jose b. Judah said, Reverse the words: Of eighteen he said, ‘I have heard them’, of twelve he said, ‘I have not heard them’. They said to him,’Are all your words only reproductions of what you have heard?’ He answered them, ‘You wished to force me to say something which I have not heard from my teachers. During all my life [I may tell you] no man was earlier than myself in the college, I never slept or dozed in the college, nor did I ever leave a person in the college when I went out, nor did I ever utter profane speech, nor have I ever in my life said a thing which I did not hear from my teachers’. They said concerning R. Johanan b. Zakkai that during his whole life he never uttered profane talk, nor walked four cubits without [studying the] Torah or without tefillin, nor was any man earlier than he in the college, nor did he sleep or doze in the college, nor did he meditate in filthy alleyways, nor did he leave anyone in the college when he went out, nor did anyone ever find him sitting in silence, but only sitting and learning, and no one but himself ever opened the door to his disciples, he never in his life said anything which he had not heard from his teacher, and, except on the eve of Passover and on the eve of the Day of Atonement, he never said, ‘It is time to arise from the studies at the college’; and so did his disciple R. Eliezer conduct himself after him. Our Rabbis have taught: Hillel the Elder had eighty disciples, thirty of whom were worthy of the Divine Spirit resting upon them, as [it did upon] Moses our Master, thirty of whom were worthy that the sun should stand still for them [as it did for] Joshua the son of Nun, [and the remaining] twenty were ordinary. The greatest of them was Jonathan b. Uzziel, the smallest of them was Johanan b. Zakkai. They said of R. Johanan b. Zakkai that he did not leave [unstudied] Scripture, Mishnah, Gemara, Halachah, Aggada, details of the Torah, details of the Scribes, inferences a minori ad majus, analogies, calendrical computations gematrias, the speech of the Ministering Angels, the speech of spirits, and the speech of palm-trees, fullers’ parables and fox fables, great matters or small matters; ‘Great matters’ mean the Ma'aseh merkabah, ‘small matters’ the discussions of Abaye and Raba; in order to fulfil what is said, That I may cause those that love me to inherit substance, and that I may fill their treasuries. And if the smallest of them was so great, how much more so was the greatest? They said of Jonathan b. Uzziel that when he used to sit and occupy himself with the study of the Torah, every bird that flew above him was immediately burnt. MISHNAH. IF A MAN'S HEAD AND THE GREATER PART OF HIS BODY WERE WITHIN THE SUKKAH AND HIS TABLE WITHIN THE HOUSE, BETH SHAMMAI DECLARE IT INVALID AND BETH HILLEL DECLARE IT VALID. BETH HILLEL SAID TO BETH SHAMMAI, DID IT NOT IN FACT HAPPEN THAT THE ELDERS OF BETH SHAMMAI AND THE ELDERS OF BETH HILLEL WENT TO VISIT R. JOHANAN B. HA-HORONITH AND FOUND HIM SITTING WITH HIS HEAD AND THE GREATER PART OF HIS BODY WITHIN THE SUKKAH AND HIS TABLE WITHIN THE HOUSE, AND THEY SAID NAUGHT TO HIM? BETH SHAMMAI ANSWERED, IS THAT A PROOF? INDEED THEY SAID TO HIM, IF YOU HAVE SO CONDUCTED YOURSELF, YOU HAVE NEVER IN YOUR LIFE FULFILLED THE LAW OF THE SUKKAH. WOMEN, SLAVES AND MINORS ARE FREE FROM THE OBLIGATION OF SUKKAH, BUT A MINOR WHO IS NOT DEPENDENT ON HIS MOTHER IS BOUND BY THE LAW OF SUKKAH. IT ONCE HAPPENED THAT THE DAUGHTER-IN-LAW OF SHAMMAI THE ELDER GAVE BIRTH TO A CHILD, AND HE BROKE AWAY THE PLASTER OF THE ROOF AND PUT SUKKAH-COVERING OVER THE BED FOR THE SAKE OF THE CHIld. GEMARA. Whence do we know this? For our Rabbis taught: [If Scripture had said] ‘homeborn’ [it would have included] every homeborn, [but since it says] ‘the homeborn’ it excludes women. ‘Every’ includes minors. The Master has said: ‘The homeborn’ excludes women. Does that mean that ‘homeborn’ implies both men and women? But has it not been taught: ‘The homeborn’ includes the homeborn women that they must fulfil the law of afflicting themselves, which shows that ‘homeborn’ implies men [only]? — Rabbah answered, They are traditional laws but the Rabbis applied a Scriptural verse to them. Which is based on a Scriptural verse and which on a traditional law? And, moreover, what is the necessity for a Scriptural verse or for a traditional law? Is not a Sukkah a positive commandment dependent upon a fixed time [for its fulfilment], and are not women exempt from every positive commandment which depends upon a fixed time [for its fulfilment]? As to the Day of Atonement [also] can it not be derived from [the statement] Rab Judah made in the name of Rab, for Rab Judah citing Rab stated and so the school of R. Ishmael taught, As Scripture says, Man or woman39
—
, the Writ [thereby] makes man and woman equal as regards all punishable acts in the Torah? Abaye answered, Indeed Sukkah is a traditional law, and still it is necessary. For I would have said, since ‘Ye shall dwell’ implies, in the same manner as you ordinarily live; as one's permanent abode is for husband and wife, so the Sukkah must be for husband and wife, therefore he informs us that it is not so. Raba said, It is necessary, since I might have said, Deduce the fifteenth from the fifteenth of the Festival of Unleavened Bread: just as in the latter case women are bound by the obligation so in the former also women are bound, hence we were informed [that it is not so]. And now that you say that Sukkah is a traditional law, why is the Scriptural verse necessary? — To include converts. I would have said ‘the homeborn in Israel’, said the Divine Law, but not converts, therefore it informs us that it is not so. [That women must fast on] the Day of Atonement is deduced, is it not, from [the statement of] Rab Judah in the name of Rab? — [The verse] is necessary [to include] the additional affliction. As I might have said that, since the Divine Law excluded the additional affliction from punishment and warning, women are entirely exempt therefrom, therefore he informs us that they are subject to the obligation. The Master said, [The word] ‘every’ comes to include minors. But have we not learnt: WOMEN, SLAVES AND MINORS ARE FREE FROM THE OBLIGATION OF THE SUKKAH? — There is no difficulty. The former refers to a minor who has reached the age of being trained, the latter where he has not yet reached the age of being trained. But is not the obligation of a minor who has reached the age of being trained a Rabbinical injunction? — It is indeed a Rabbinical injunction, but the Scriptural verse is merely a support to it. A MINOR WHO IS NOT DEPENDENT ON HIS MOTHER etc. What is meant by a minor who is not dependent on his mother? — The school of R. Jannai said, Whomever, when he relieves himself, his mother need not clean. R. Simeon b. Lakish said, He who awakes from his sleep and does not call his mother. ‘His mother’! But do not grown-ups also call their mother? Say, rather, he who awakes from his sleep and does not call ‘Mother! Mother!’ IT ONCE HAPPENED THAT THE DAUGHTER-IN-LAW OF . . . GAVE BIRTH TO A CHILD etc. The incident contradicts [the Mishnah], does it not? — There is a lacuna, and thus it should be taught: But Shammai takes a strict view, and [indeed] IT ONCE HAPPENED THAT THE DAUGHTER-IN-LAW OF SHAMMAI THE ELDER GAVE BIRTH TO A CHILD AND HE BROKE AWAY THE PLASTER OF THE ROOF, AND PUT SUKKAH-COVERING OVER THE BED FOR THE SAKE OF THE CHILD. MISHNAH. ALL THE SEVEN DAYS [OF THE FESTIVAL] A MAN MUST MAKE THE SUKKAH HIS PERMANENT ABODE AND HIS HOUSE HIS TEMPORARY ABODE. IF RAIN FELL, WHEN MAY ONE BE PERMITTED TO LEAVE IT? WHEN THE PORRIDGE WOULD BECOME SPOILT. THEY PROPOUNDED A PARABLE. TO WHAT CAN THIS BE COMPARED? TO A SLAVE WHO COMES TO FILL THE CUP FOR HIS MASTER, AND HE POURED A PITCHER OVER HIS FACE. GEMARA. Our Rabbis have taught, All the seven days, one should make the Sukkah, his permanent abode and his house his temporary abode. In what manner? If he had beautiful vessels, he should bring them up into the Sukkah, beautiful divans, he should bring them up into the Sukkah; he should eat and drink and pass his leisure in the Sukkah. Whence do we know this? — From what our Rabbis have taught: Ye shall dwell implies, in the same manner as you ordinarily live. Hence they said, All the seven days one should make his Sukkah his permanent abode, and his house his temporary abode. In what manner? If he has beautiful vessels, he should bring them up into the Sukkah, beautiful divans, he should bring them up into the Sukkah,’ he should eat and drink and pass his leisure in the Sukkah; he should also engage in profound study in the Sukkah. But it is not so? For did not Raba say, Scripture and Mishnah [should be studied] in the Sukkah, but Gemara outside the Sukkah? — There is no difficulty, The former [statement refers to] revising, the latter to profound study.
—