Sukkah Daf Tet Vav, Part 2

 

Introduction

Today’s section is a direct continuation of yesterday’s section. It relates back to the mishnah, where R. Judah said that Bet Hillel allowed one to either loosen or remove one plank out of every two from a wooden roof and thereby make a valid sukkah. R. Meir said one had to remove one out of every two. Loosening wasn’t sufficient.

 

מאי קא משמע לן – דרבי מאיר אית ליה גזרת תקרה, ורבי יהודה לית ליה גזרת תקרה? והא אפליגו בה חדא זימנא! דתנן: מסככין בנסרים, דברי רבי יהודה, ורבי מאיר אוסר.

 

What [then] does [the Mishnah] teach us? That R. Meir holds that there is decree lest the sukkah look like ordinary roofing, while R. Judah holds that there is no such decree? But have they not already disputed this, as we have learned: Planks may be used for skhakh, the words of R. Judah; R. Meir forbids them.

 

In essence, this mishnah relates that R. Judah does not worry lest one’s skhakh looks like an ordinary roof. That is why he allows one to simply loosen and put back every plank. R. Meir is concerned lest the skhakh look like an ordinary roof and therefore makes him remove one out of every two. But this is the same debate that we had in the previous mishnah. R. Judah allows one to use planks and R. Meir does not. So why would we need another mishnah to teach the exact same thing.

אמר רבי חייא בר אבא אמר רבי יוחנן: רישא בנסרים משופין עסקינן, ומשום גזרת כלים נגעו בה.

 

R. Hiyya b. Abba answered in the name of R. Yohanan, The former mishnah deals with planed boards and they forbade them as a decree lest he comes to use vessels.

 

R. Hiyya b. Abba says that only our mishnah actually talks about the use of regular planks. The previous mishnah had nothing to do with regular planks that might look like a ceiling. Rather, the planks being referred to there have already been planed. These may not be used because they look too much like vessels, which are susceptible to impurity and therefore may never be used.

 

 

ולרב יהודה אמר רב, דאמר: סככה בחיצין זכרים – כשרה, בנקבות – פסולה, ולא גזר זכרים אטו נקבות. הכא נמי, לא נגזר נסרים משופין אטו כלים!

 

But according to Rav Judah who said in the name of Rav: If he covered the sukkah with plain arrowshafts, it is valid; with bored arrow-shafts, it is invalid , and he does not decree against plain shafts on account of [the possible use of] bored ones; here also we should not restrict planed boards on account of [the possible use of] vessels?

 

The Talmud now says that R. Hiyya’s statement could be used as a difficulty on R. Judah’s statement from a few pages ago. R. Judah said one can use plain arrowshafts as skhakh because these shafts are not susceptible to impurity. He doesn’t disallow plain shafts lest one come to use bored shafts that have a receptacle, which are susceptible to impurity. Anything susceptible to impurity is never valid as skhakh.

So if R. Hiyya says that one may not use something that even looks like a vessel lest someone use something that is a vessel, why would R. Judah allow one to do so.

Stay tuned for the exciting resolution to this difficulty in tomorrow’s section!