Sukkhot, Daf Vav, Part 6

 

Introduction

The Talmud now continues with some other ways of explaining the dispute between the sages and R. Shimon as to whether the sukkah requires 3 or 4 walls.

 

ואי בעית אימא: דכולי עלמא יש אם למקרא, והכא בהא קמיפלגי; מר סבר: סככה בעיא קרא, ומר סבר: סככה לא בעיא קרא.

And if you wish you can say that they all agree that the traditional reading is authoritative but they differ on this; one Master holds that the skhakh needs a Scriptural reference, while the other Master holds that it does not.

 

It is possible that both the sages and R. Shimon agree that the way we pronounce the Torah is authoritative. This leaves us with 6 sukkot 3 mentions and each is worth 2 because they are all plural. All agree that one mention is needed to teach the law itself. That leaves 4. R. Shimon holds that one more mention is needed to teach that the sukkah needs skhakh. That leaves 3. The sages hold that the skhakh does not need its own mention.

 

ואיבעית אימא: דכולי עלמא יש אם למסורת, והכא בהא קמיפלגי: מר סבר: כי אתאי הלכתא – לגרע, ומר סבר: כי אתאי הלכתא – להוסיף.

 

And if you wish you can say that they are unanimous that the traditional Scriptural text is authoritative, but they differ on this principle; one Master holds that the tradition comes to diminish while the other holds that tradition comes and adds to it.

 

The next possibility is that all agree that the way we write the Torah is authoritative. This leaves 4 mentions. One is required to introduce the law of sukkah itself. This leaves 3 mentions. Rabbi Shimon holds that the tradition comes to say that there needs to be another wall that is at least a handbreadth long. The tradition adds. The other sages say that the tradition reduces the size of the third wall to a handbreadth.

ואיבעית אימא: דכולי עלמא כי אתאי הלכתא – לגרע, ויש אם למסורת, והכא בדורשין תחילות קמיפלגי; מר סבר: דורשין תחילות, ומר סבר: אין דורשין תחילות.

And if you wish you can say that both agree that tradition comes to diminish and that the traditional Scriptural text is authoritative, but they differ as to whether one uses first [references] for exegesis: one Master holds that we do expound upon first references, and the other Master holds that we do not.

 

It is also possible that all agree that the way the text is written is authoritative (4 mentions) and that the tradition comes to reduce and not to add. But they disagree whether one can expound midrashically upon the first reference. The rabbis hold that one cannot. This leaves us with three references two full walls and one handbreadth wall. Rabbi Shimon says that you can use even the first mention of sukkah as a midrash. So that leaves four mentions 3 full walls and one handbreadth wall.

 

רב מתנה אמר: טעמיה דרבי שמעון מהכא +ישעיהו ד+ וסכה תהיה לצל יומם מחרב ולמחסה ולמסתור מזרם וממטר.

 

R. Matanah said: The reason of R. Shimon is a derivation from the following verse: "And there shall be a Sukkah for shade during the day from the heat, and for a refuge and for a cover from storm and from rain" (Isaiah 4:6).

 

 

R. Matanah offers a completely different understanding of why R. Shimon requires 4 walls. According to the verse in Isaiah, the sukkah is to be for shelter from the elements. Only a four walled sukkah can truly offer shelter. Therefore, the sukkah must have four walls.