Sukkah, Daf Kaf Gimmel, Part 3

 

Introduction

Today’s section begins a relatively long and complex discussion about building a sukkah on the back of an animal.

 

או על גבי גמל כו’. מתניתין מני – רבי מאיר היא. דתניא: העושה סוכתו על גבי בהמה, רבי מאיר מכשיר ורבי יהודה פוסל.

 

Or on the back of a camel etc.

According to whom is [this part of] our Mishnah? According to R. Meir, as it has been taught, If he makes his Sukkah upon the back of an animal, R. Meir declares it valid and R. Judah invalid.

 

The Talmud begins by citing a baraita which demonstrates that the mishnah, which allows one to make a sukkah on the back of a camel, accords with R. Meir. R. Judah declares that such a sukkah is invalid.

 

מאי טעמא דרבי יהודה – אמר קרא +דברים טז+ חג הסכת תעשה לך שבעת ימים – סוכה הראויה לשבעה – שמה סוכה, סוכה שאינה ראויה לשבעה – לא שמה סוכה.

 

What is the reasoning of R. Judah? Scripture says, "You shall keep the festival of Sukkot for seven days:" a Sukkah which is suitable for seven days is called a Sukkah; if it is unsuitable for seven days it is not called a Sukkah.

 

The Torah says that one should dwell in a sukkah for seven days. To R. Judah this means that the sukkah one uses must be able to be used for seven days. Since on Yom Tov or Shabbat one cannot get on a sukkah that was built on an animal (this was stated in the mishnah at the end of Daf 22), this sukkah cannot be used for seven days.

 

ורבי מאיר: הא נמי מדאורייתא מחזא חזיא, ורבנן הוא דגזרו בה.

 

And R. Meir?

According to Torah law this [Sukkah] is also suitable [for seven days], and it is only the rabbis who decreed against it.

 

R. Meir validates this sukkah because according to Torah law it is okay to get onto an animal on Shabbat and Yom Tov. Thus according to Torah law this sukkah is valid for all seven days. The rabbis prohibited using it on Yom Tov or Shabbat because it is on the back of an animal, but this does not detract from its general validity.

 

עשאה לבהמה דופן לסוכה. רבי מאיר פוסל ורבי יהודה מכשיר. שהיה רבי מאיר אומר: כל דבר שיש בו רוח חיים אין עושין אותו לא דופן לסוכה, ולא לחי למבוי, ולא פסין לביראות, ולא גולל לקבר. משום רבי יוסי הגלילי אמרו: אף אין כותבין עליו גיטי נשים.

 

If he used an animal as a wall of the Sukkah: R. Meir declares it invalid and R. Judah valid, for R. Meir used to say, Whatever contains the breath of life cannot be used as a wall for a Sukkah, nor a side-post for an alley nor boards around wells, nor a covering stone for a grave.

In the name of R. Yose the Galilean they said, Nor may a get be written upon it.

 

In this baraita the person doesn’t make a sukkah on an animal. Rather, he uses the animal as a wall for a sukkah. R. Meir, who allowed one to make a sukkah on an animal, does not allow one to use the animal as a wall. R. Judah does allow one to use the animal as a wall.

The baraita precedes by listing other cases in which R. Meir doesn’t allow one to use something that has "the breath of life." There are four such cases. 1) The wall of a sukkah. 2) A side-post for an alley. This is the post that is requited as part of the eruv system. It allows one to carry from one courtyard to another courtyard within a common alley. 3) Boards around wells. These are four "corner-boards" placed around a well to allow one to draw water from the well on Shabbat. They fictitiously create a private domain even though there are not four real walls around the well. According to the Talmud, this was a leniency for people who were making a pilgrimage to Jerusalem.

4) The covering of a grave. This covering prevents the impurity from the grave from escaping. The covering itself, however, is impure and defiles one who touches it.

R. Yose the Galilean adds that one can also not use something that is alive to write a get, a divorce document. The Talmud shall deal with this at greater length on the next daf.