Yoma — Daf 10b

דילמא אתי לאפרושי מן החיוב על הפטור ומן הפטור על החיוב

אלא אמר אביי בשבעה דכולי עלמא לא פליגי דמיחייבא כי פליגי בשאר ימות השנה רבנן סברי גזרינן שאר ימות השנה אטו שבעה ור' יהודה סבר לא גזרינן

א"ל רבא והא סוכת החג בחג קתני

אלא אמר רבא בשאר ימות השנה כ"ע לא פליגי דפטורה כי פליגי בשבעה וסוכה טעמא לחוד ולשכה טעמא לחוד

סוכה טעמא לחוד רבי יהודה לטעמיה דאמר סוכה דירת קבע בעינן ומיחייבא במזוזה ורבנן לטעמייהו דאמרי סוכה דירת עראי בעינן ולא מיחייבא במזוזה

ולשכה טעמא לחוד רבנן סברי דירה בעל כרחה שמה דירה ורבי יהודה סבר דירה בעל כרחה לא שמה דירה ומדרבנן הוא דתקינו לה שלא יאמרו כהן גדול חבוש בבית האסורין

מאן תנא להא דתנו רבנן

that he may come to set aside tithe from where it is obligatory for where it is exempt and from where it is exempt for where it is obligatory?1 -Rather, said Abaye, there is no dispute concerning the seven days [of the separation], all agreeing that [the cell] is liable [to have a mezuzah];2 what the dispute is concerned with is the other days of the year; the Rabbis would institute it as a precautionary measure on account of the seven days, whilst R. Judah does not see the need for such a measure. Raba said to him: But the teaching [of the Mishnah]3 reads, ‘The sukkah of the Feast during the Feast’! Therefore says Raba: On all other days of the year they all agree that there is no obligation [for a mezuzah at the sukkah and cell], the dispute touches only the seven days, and there is a special ground in the case of the sukkah and there is a special reason in the case of the cell. There is a special reason in the case of the sukkah: R. Judah, holding in accordance with his own principle, that the sukkah must have the character of a permanent residence, hence considers [the sukkah] is liable to a mezuzah, whilst the Rabbis, following their own principle, hold that the sukkah must have the character of an incidental residence, and hence requires no mezuzah. There is also a special reason for the dispute in the case of the cell [of the counsellors]; the Rabbis hold that a dwelling not freely chosen is called a dwelling whilst R. Judah is of the opinion that such dwelling is not included in the term dwelling; only rabbinically it was arranged that a mezuzah be affixed at the cell lest the people say the high priest is being kept in prison.4 Who has taught the following which our Rabbis have taught: produce), which is liable by the law of the Torah, and vice versa, thus invalidating the former and the latter. to one view, there would be exemption from the duty.