Sukkah, Daf Mem, Part 1
Introduction
This week’s daf continues the discussion about sabbatical year produce. Last week we learned that if one wants to buy a lulav from an am haaretz on the sabbatical year, he can buy the lulav because the lulav of the sabbatical year blossomed in the sixth year. The implication is that if the lulav had blossomed during the seventh year, the sanctity of the sabbatical year would apply to it. Our daf begins by questioning this implication.
טעמא דלולב בר ששית הנכנס לשביעית הוא, הא דשביעית – קדוש, אמאי? עצים בעלמא הוא, ועצים אין בהן משום קדושת שביעית, (דתנן) +מסורת הש"ס: [דתניא]+ עלי קנים ועלי גפנים שגבבן לחובה על פני השדה, לקטן לאכילה – יש בהן משום קדושת שביעית, לקטן לעצים – אין בהן משום קדושת שביעית!
The reason then for the [permission to purchase a] lulav is that it is [the product of] the sixth year which entered the seventh, but if it were of the Sabbatical Year it would have been sacred? But why? Is it not just wood, and wood does not possess the sanctity of the Sabbatical Year, as it has been taught: Leaves of reeds and leaves of the vine which have been heaped up to store them upon a field: if they were gathered for [animal] food, they possess the sanctity of the Sabbatical Year, but if they were gathered for firewood, they do have not the sanctity of the Sabbatical Year.
The Talmud cites a baraita according to which leaves that were gathered for firewood are not subject to the laws of the sabbatical year. Only produce that is eaten, even by animals, is liable to these halakhot. So then, why would a lulav ever possess the sanctity of the sabbatical year, even if it blossomed on the seventh year itself?
שאני התם, דאמר קרא +ויקרא כה+ לכם לאכלה לכם דומיא דלאכלה – מי שהנאתו וביעורו שוה, יצאו עצים שהנאתן אחר ביעורן.
There the case is different, since Scripture says, "For you for food" (Leviticus 25:6) thus comparing for you to for food , [anything] whose benefit comes at the time of its consumption [has the sanctity of sabbatical produce]; this excludes firewood since the benefit from it comes after its consumption.
The Talmud cites a midrash on the verse concerning what type of produce is subject to the laws of sabbatical year sanctity anything whose benefit and consumption come at the same time. This is true of food when one eats food, one simultaneously benefits and consumes the product. But when it comes to something used for kindling, first it is consumed, the heat is produced and only then one benefits from it by cooking or heating up the house. Therefore, if he sets aside the leaves to burn them, they are not subject to the laws of sabbatical year produce.
Rashi explains that the normal use of a lulav is to sweep out the house it was the ancient broom. The benefit one derives from it comes at the same time it is used. Thus it gets ruined simultaneous to its use. Therefore the laws of sabbatical year produce do apply.
והאיכא עצים דמשחן דהנאתן וביעורן שוה!
אמר רבא: סתם עצים ולהסקה הן עומדין.
But is there not the wood of the oily tree, the benefit from which is derived at the same time as its consumption?
Rava said: Wood in general is used for heating.
The wood of the "oily tree" was used to light torches, not for cooking or heating. In this case it is consumed at the same time that one derives benefit from it. So why don’t the rules of the sabbatical year apply?
Rava answers that since wood is generally used for heating, all wood falls into this category. The sabbatical year rules never apply to wood, even if it is used for making torches.