Kiddushin, Daf Lammed Daled, Part 3

 

Introduction

Today s section explains how we derive that women are exempt from positive time-bound commandments and it also discusses a few exceptions.

 

ומצות עשה שהזמן גרמא נשים פטורות: מנלן גמר מתפילין מה תפילין נשים פטורות אף כל מצות עשה שהזמן גרמא נשים פטורות

ותפילין גמר לה מתלמוד תורה מה תלמוד תורה נשים פטורות אף תפילין נשים פטורות

 

And positive time-bound commandments, women are exempt. From where do we know this? It is derived from tefillin: just as women are exempt from tefillin, so they are exempt from all positive time-bound commandments.

And tefillin are derived from the study of the Torah: just as women are exempt from the study of the Torah, so are they exempt from tefillin.

 

To find out why women are exempt from time-bound commandments, the Talmud seeks a paradigm and finds it in tefillin. Women are exempt from tefillin, because tefillin is compared to the study of Torah in Deuteronomy 6:7-8 (the first paragraph of Shema). And from Deuteronomy 11:19 we derive that women are exempt from Talmud Torah.

 

ונקיש תפילין למזוזה תפילין לתלמוד תורה איתקיש בין בפרשה ראשונה בין בפרשה שניה תפילין למזוזה בפרשה שניה לא איתקיש

 

But let us [rather] compare tefillin to mezuzah? Tefillin are compared to the study of the Torah in both the first section and the second sections of Shema; whereas they are not compared to mezuzah in the second section.

 

The Shema also mentions the mezuzah, and women are obligated in mezuzah. So why not say that tefillin are compared to mezuzah and that women should be obligated to wear them.

The answer is that tefillin is immediately juxtaposed to the study of Torah in both the first and second paragraphs of the Shema, but it is juxtaposed to mezuzah only in the first. Therefore tefillin is more like Talmud Torah than mezuzah.

 

ונקיש מזוזה לתלמוד תורה

לא סלקא דעתך דכתיב (דברים יא, כא) למען ירבו ימיכם גברי בעי חיי נשי לא בעי חיי

 

Then let mezuzah be compared to the study of the Torah? You cannot think this, because it is written, [And you shall write them upon the mezuzah of your house . . .] that your days may be multiplied (Deuteronomy 11:21): do then men need life, but women not need life!

 

If the second chapter of Shema compares mezuzah to Talmud Torah, then maybe women should not be obligated in the mitzvah of mezuzah. So why are they obligated?

The answer is that immediately after the mitzvah of mezuzah, the Torah says that your days be multiplied that you live a long life. Since women want and need life as much as men, they too are obligated in mezuzah.

 

והרי סוכה דמצות עשה שהזמן גרמא דכתיב (ויקרא כג, מב) בסוכות תשבו שבעת ימים טעמא דכתב רחמנא האזרח להוציא את הנשים הא לאו הכי נשים חייבות

 

But what of sukkah, which is a positive time-bound commandment, as it is written, You shall dwell in booths seven days, (Leviticus 23:42) but the reason women are exempt is that Scripture wrote ha ezrah, to exclude women, but otherwise women would be liable?

 

Sukkah is a positive time-bound commandment. Women are exempt but not because of a general rule. Rather, there is a special midrash on the word ha ezrah often translated as the citizen that exempts them. Were this word not written there, it would seem that, contrary to the rule, they would be obligated.

 

אמר אביי איצטריך סלקא דעתך אמינא הואיל דכתיב בסוכות תשבו תשבו כעין תדורו מה דירה איש ואשתו אף סוכה איש ואשתו

 

Abaye said: It is necessary: I would have thought, since it is written: You shall dwell in booths seven days You shall dwell as you [normally] dwell [in your house]: just as [normal] dwelling [implies] a husband and wife [together], so must the sukkah be a husband and wife!

 

Abaye explains why we need a separate teaching to exempt women from dwelling in the sukkah. There is a midrash on the words You shall dwell which are generally interpreted to mean that you shall dwell in the sukkah as you dwell in your house. Since husbands and wives live together in their house, perhaps they should also live together in the sukkah. Therefore, the word ha-ezrah comes to teach that women are exempt from the mitzvah of sukkah.

 

ורבא אמר איצטריך סד"א נילף חמשה עשר חמשה עשר מחג המצות מה להלן נשים חייבות אף כאן נשים חייבות צריכא

But Rava said: It is necessary [for another reason]: I might have thought, we derive fifteen fifteen from the Festival of Matzot: just as there, women are liable, so too here.

Hence it is necessary.

 

Rava points out another reason we might have thought women were liable for the sukkah it falls on the fifteenth of the month, as does Pesah. Since women are obligated to eat matzah on Pesah which falls on the fifteenth of the month, so too they would be liable for sukkah which falls on the fifteenth of the month. This is why we need the midrash to teach that they are exempt.