Sukkah, Daf Lamed Daled, Part 5

 

Introduction

Today’s section deals with the halakhic ruling stemming from the mishnah concerning how many of each species one must take.

 

אמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל: הלכה כרבי טרפון. ואזדא שמואל לטעמיה, דאמר להו שמואל להנהו דמזבני אסא: אשוו וזבינו, ואי לא – דרישנא לכו כרבי טרפון. – מאי טעמא? אילימא משום דמיקל – ולידרוש להו כרבי עקיבא דמיקל טפי! – תלתא קטומי – שכיחי, חד ולא קטום – לא שכיח.

 

R. Judah said in the name of Shmuel: The halakhah is according to R. Tarfon.

And Shmuel is consistent with his own opinion, for Shmuel said to those who sold hadasim, "Sell at the normal price, for if not, I will expound to you as R. Tarfon."

What is his reason? If you say that it is because he is lenient, why did he not expound to them as R. Akiva who is even more lenient?

Three with broken tips are common, one with an unbroken tip is uncommon.

 

R. Judah rules in the name of Shmuel according to R. Tarfon in the Mishnah, who held that one has to take three hadasim, but that they can all have their tops broken off.

This, the Talmud points out, is consistent with a story in which Shmuel tries to keep the price of hadasim down by threatening to tell the merchants that if they don’t, he will let everyone know that they can use hadasim whose tips have been broken off, which are cheaper.

This story proves that Shmuel really holds like R. Tarfon for if he was just trying to be lenient, he could have ruled like R. Akiva who requires only one.

The Talmud rejects the proof, noting that Shmuel is indeed threatening to rule in the most lenient manner, for it is easier to find three hadasim with broken tips than one complete one.

In any case, this section seems to rule like R. Tarfon. One has to use three hadasim, but their tips can be broken. I should note that many rishonim do not rule according to this sugya, so please do not assume from here that you can use a hadas whose tip has been broken off. You’ve been tipped!