Sukkah, Daf Yod Aleph, Part 6

 

Introduction

The Talmud now proceeds to analyze the next section of the mishnah which taught that anything that is susceptible to impurity cannot be used as skhakh. Generally speaking this means that while the skhakh must come from the land, it cannot have been processed by human hands. Only objects rendered useful to human beings are susceptible to impurity. For instance cotton is not susceptible but cotton clothing is. A piece of wood is not, but a table is.

 

זה הכלל כל דבר שמקבל טומאה כו’.

מנא הני מילי? אמר ריש לקיש: אמר קרא +בראשית ב+ ואד יעלה מן הארץ, מה אד דבר שאינו מקבל טומאה וגידולו מן הארץ – אף סוכה דבר שאין מקבל טומאה וגידולו מן הארץ.

 

This is the general rule: whatever is susceptible to [ritual] uncleanliness etc.

How do we know this? Resh Lakish said: Scripture says, "And there went up a mist from the earth" (Genesis 2:6) just as a mist is a thing that is not susceptible to [ritual] uncleanliness and originates from the soil, so must [the covering of] the Sukkah [consist of] a thing that is not susceptible to [ritual] uncleanliness, and grow from the soil.

 

Resh Lakish provides a fascinating midrash for why one cannot use something that is susceptible to impurity as skhakh. Below we shall see that some sages believed that the sukkot that the Israelites dwelled in in the desert were not real sukkot. Rather they were "clouds of glory." God surrounded the Israelites with clouds to protect them from the elements, the wind, the rain and the hot sun. From the verse in Genesis, Resh Lakish derives that clouds grow from the land. Thus skhakh , like the clouds it commemorates, must be something that grows from the ground and is not susceptible to impurity.

 

הניחא למאן דאמר ענני כבוד היו, אלא למאן דאמר סוכות ממש עשו להם, מאי איכא למימר? דתניא: +ויקרא כג+ כי בסכות הושבתי את בני ישראל – ענני כבוד היו, דברי רבי אליעזר. רבי עקיבא אומר סוכות ממש עשו להם. הניחא לרבי אליעזר, אלא לרבי עקיבא מאי איכא למימר?

 

That is satisfactory according to the one who says that [the sukkot of the wilderness were] clouds of glory, but according to the one who says [the Israelites] made for themselves real sukkot, what can one say? For it has been taught: "For I made the children of Israel to dwell in booths" (Leviticus 23:43): These were clouds of glory, the words of R. Eliezer. R. Akiva says: They made for themselves real sukkot.

Now this is satisfactory according to R. Eliezer, but according to R. Akiva, what can one say?

 

The Talmud now notes that two tannaim, Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Akiva actually dispute whether the sukkot in which God caused the people of Israel to dwell were real sukkot, like the ones we actually built today, or whether they were in fact clouds. Resh Lakish’s midrash works only for the one who says that they were clouds, Rabbi Eliezer.

כי אתא רב דימי אמר רבי יוחנן: אמר קרא +דברים טז+ חג הסכות תעשה לך – מקיש סוכה לחגיגה, מה חגיגה – דבר שאינו מקבל טומאה, וגידולו מן הארץ, אף סוכה – דבר שאינו מקבל טומאה וגידולו מן הארץ.

 

When R. Dimi came he said in the name of R. Yohanan, Scripture says, "The Festival [hag] of Sukkoth you shall make for yourselves. The Sukkah is thus compared to the Festival [offering]. Just as the Festival offering is a thing which is not susceptible to [ritual] uncleanliness and grows from the soil, so the Sukkah must be unsusceptible to [ritual] uncleanliness and grow from the soil.

 

R. Yohanan (quoted by R. Dimi) offers an alternative midrash to support the idea that the skhakh must not be susceptible to impurity. The Torah says "The festival of Sukkot." R. Yohanan compares the festival, which is read as being synonymous with the festival offering, with the skhakh (sukkah). Just as the animal used for the offering is not susceptible to impurity and grows from the land (this seems to be what R. Yohanan holds, perhaps because animals are nourished from the land) so too the skhakh must grow from the land and not be susceptible to impurity.