Sukkah, Daf Lamed Vav, Part 4

 

Introduction

Today’s section deals with an etrog that was partly eaten by mice.

 

איתמר, אתרוג שנקבוהו עכברים. אמר רב: אין זה הדר.

איני? והא רבי חנינא מטביל בה ונפיק בה!

 

It was stated: An etrog which has been gnawed by mice: Rav said: It is not "goodly."

Is this so? Did not R. Hanina taste a part of it, and fulfilled his obligation [with the remainder]?

 

The section opens with Rav’s statement that one cannot use an etrog that has been gnawed at by mice because it is no longer "goodly."

However, this seems to be contradicted by the actions of R. Hanina, who ate a little bit of his etrog and then still used it to perform a mitzvah.

At this point, the Talmud seems to equate the two an etrog that has been partially eaten is either valid or invalid, it matters not who ate it, a human or mice.

ולרבי חנינא קשיא מתניתין; בשלמא מתניתין לרבי חנינא לא קשיא, כאן – ביום טוב ראשון, כאן – ביום טוב שני.

אלא לרב קשיא!

But isn’t our Mishnah a difficulty against R. Hanina?

It is well that our Mishnah is not a difficulty against R. Hanina since the former might refer to the first day of the Festival, while the latter might refer to the second day; but it is still a difficulty against Rav?

 

The Mishnah stated that if the etrog is missing any part of it, it is no longer valid. This seems to be a difficulty against R. Hanina who took a bite out of his and then used it on Sukkot. But this difficulty can be resolved by saying that the Mishnah refers to the first day of the Festival when the mitzvah to take an etrog is considered to be "deorayta" from the Torah "And you shall take on the first day ". On subsequent days, the mitzvah is only derabanan, of rabbinic origin, and therefore, R. Hanina could use an etrog from which he had already taken a bite.

But the problem with Rav still remains if R. Hanina could take a bite out of his, why then can’t an etrog gnawed at by mice be used on subsequent days?

אמר לך רב: שאני עכברים דמאיסי.

 

Rav could answer you: Mice are different, since they are repulsive.

 

The answer is that an etrog gnawed at by mice is disgusting, and therefore is not goodly. Think of it this way if I offered you a bite of my sandwich and you were hungry, you might take a bite. If I offered you a bite of a sandwich from which mice had gnawed, you’d probably have to be pretty hungry to eat it.

 

איכא דאמרי אמר רב: זה הדר, דהא רבי חנינא מטביל בה ונפיק בה. ולרבי חנינא קשיא מתניתין! לא קשיא: כאן – ביום טוב ראשון, כאן – ביום טוב שני.

 

There are those who say: Rav ruled that it is "goodly" since R. Hanina tasted a part [of an etrog] and fulfilled his obligation [with the remainder].

But is not our Mishnah a difficulty against R. Hanina?

There is no contradiction, since the former refers to the first day of the Festival, while the latter refers to the second day.

 

In this version of the sugya, Rav rules just like R. Hanina an etrog that has a bite taken out of it can be used, but not on the first day.