Sukkah, Daf Tet Vav, Part 3

 

Introduction

Yesterday’s section ended with a difficulty if we interpret the previous mishnah to be dealing with planed planks and Rabbi Meir doesn’t allows them lest one come to use a regular ceiling, then why doesn’t he forbid one from using regular arrow shafts lest one come to use bored arrow shafts.

This returns us to our original difficulty does the mishnah about a non-plastered ceiling teach the same thing as the previous mishnah about the planks?

אלא, על כרחך רישא פליגי בגזרת תקרה וסיפא פליגי בגזרת תקרה, ואפליגי בתרתי זימני למה לי? –

Rather to say that the dispute in the former [mishnah] is on the question whether a we decree against something [that might lead to] the possible use of an ordinary roofing and that the dispute in the latter mishnah is also on the same question; but why should they dispute the same question twice?

 

Both mishnayot, the previous mishnah in which Rabbi Judah and Rabbi Meir argued over whether one can use planks as skhakh and this mishnah, where Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Judah argue over whether Bet Hillel allows one to merely loosen the planks of an already existent sukkah, are over the same issue: do we disallow planks lest one come to use regular roofing including plaster? If this same dispute occurs in both mishnayot, then why did it need to be taught twice?

 

סיפא רבי יהודה (היא) דקא אמר ליה לרבי מאיר. אמאי קא אסרת בנסרים – משום גזרת תקרה, האי סברא לבית שמאי הוא דאית להו, ובית הלל לא גזרי! ואמר רבי מאיר: לא נחלקו בית שמאי ובית הלל בדבר זה.

 

The latter [mishnah] is what R. Judah said to R. Meir: Why do you forbid planks? As a decree against [the possible use of] an ordinary roofing? But it is Beth Shammai only who hold this opinion while Beth Hillel do not decree [against planks].

To this R. Meir said that Bet Shammai and Bet Hillel do not dispute this point at all.

 

The answer is that the second mishnah is in a sense a continuation of the conversation between the two that began in the first. Rabbi Judah who allows these planks tells Rabbi Meir that his opinion matches that of Bet Shammai. Since we know that the halakhah is like Bet Hillel (or so the Talmud assumes) Rabbi Meir must be wrong.

Rabbi Meir then responds that the two houses do not disagree upon this matter. Both agree that if the ceiling already exists, what he must do is remove one out of every two planks. That is not Bet Shammai’s opinion that is everyone’s opinion.