Sukkah, Daf Yod Daled, Part 4

 

Introduction

Today’s section contains another difficulty from the Mishnah on Rav’s opinion that R. Meir and R. Judah dispute boards that are four handbreadths.

 

לישנא אחרינא: בשלמא לשמואל, דאמר בשאין בהן ארבעה מחלוקת, אבל יש בהן ארבעה דברי הכל פסולה, מאי מצטרפין – מצטרפין לארבע אמות מן הצד.

 

Another version: It goes well according to Shmuel, who says that the dispute is where there are not four [handbreadths], but where there are four, all agree that it is invalid. What is meant by combine ? That they combine to form four cubits at the side.

 

Shmuel can explain the baraita that said that two sheets or boards combine together to invalidate a sukkah as combining together on the side to invalidate a sukkah because there would be more than four cubits between the walls and the valid skhakh. This is the same explanation that Rav gave to this baraita above in yesterday’s section.

 

אלא לרב, בשלמא לרבי מאיר, מאי מצטרפין – מצטרפין לארבע אמות מן הצד, אלא לרבי יהודה, דאמר אפילו יש בהן ארבעה כשרה, מאי אין מצטרפין? קנים בעלמא נינהו!

 

But according to Rav it goes well according to R. Meir, since what is meant by combine may be that they combine to form four cubits at the side, but according to R. Judah, who says that even if there are four [handbreadths] the Sukkah is valid, what could be the meaning of they do not combine ? Are they not like mere sticks?

 

However, the baraita is a difficulty upon Rav who said that there is a dispute only about four handbreadth wood planks, less than that and the planks are valid. He can explain the baraita according to R. Meir who invalidates four handbreadth planks. R. Meir would say that the baraita refers to planks on the side (see above). They combine when they are on the side, but when they are in the middle, they invalidate.

But to R. Judah who allows any planks (according to Rav), why would the baraita say that they do not "combine?" After all, to R. Judah, planks are nothing more than mere sticks and can be used for skhakh. Obviously they don’t combine.

 

איידי דקאמר רבי מאיר מצטרפין אמר רבי יהודה אין מצטרפין.

 

Since R. Meir said they do combine , R. Judah said they do not combine .

 

The answer is that the language in the first half of the baraita "two boards do not combine" is only there to disagree with R. Meir who says they "do combine." To R. Judah they obviously don’t combine. Boards are always usable for skhakh (according to Rav’s interpretation of him). But R. Meir needed to say that they do combine so the baraita taught that according to R. Judah they do not. The attempt to preserve parallelism within a tannaitic source is very common.