## Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah Chapter 2

###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:1:1
[Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:1:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/2:1:1)

**משנה:** הַיָּשֵׁן תַּחַת הַמִּיטָּה לֹא יָצָא יְדֵי חוֹבָתוֹ. אָמַר רִבִּי יְהוּדָה נוֹהֲגִין הָיִינוּ יְשֵׁינִים תַּחַת הַמִּיטּוֹת בִּפְנֵי הַזְּקֵנִים וְלֹא אָמְרוּ לָנוּ דָבָר. אָמַר רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן מַעֲשֶׂה בְטָבִי עַבְדּוֹ שֶׁל רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל שֶׁהָיָה יָשֵׁן תַּחַת הַמִּיטָה. אָמַר רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל לַזְּקֵנִים רְאִיתֶם טָבִי עַבְדִּי שֶׁהוּא תַלְמִיד חָכָם וְיוֹדֵעַ שֶׁעֲבָדִים פְּטוּרִין מִן הַסּוּכָּה וְיָשֵׁן לוֹ תַּחַת הַמִּיטָּה. וּלְפִי דַרְכֵּינוּ לָמַדְנוּ שֶׁהַיָּשֵׁן תַּחַת הַמִּיטָּה לֹא יָצָא יְדֵי חוֹבָתוֹ:

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**MISHNAH:** One who sleeps under the bed did not fulfill his duty¹ for 7 days, since he does not sleep under the thatched roof.. Rebbi Jehudah said, we used to sleep under the beds in the presence of the Elders and they did not say a word. Rebbi Simeon said, it happened that Tabi²“boy”, and all female ones *Tabita*“girl”., Rabban Gamliel’s slave, slept under the bed. Rabban Gamliel said to the Elders, did you see my slave Tabi, who is learned and knows that slaves are free from the obligation of *sukkah*, and is sleeping under the bed³ is a positive commandment restricted in time it does not apply to women (Mishnah *Qiddušin*1:7) and therefore not to slaves since the obligations of male slaves cannot be greater that those of free women.. According to our method we infer that one who sleeps under the bed did not fulfill his duty⁴.

footnotes:
¹ The duty to dwell in the sukkah
² It seems that in Rabban Gamliel’s house all male slaves were called Tabi
³ Since the obligation of sukkah
⁴ Since R. Simeon and Rabban Gamliel form a majority against R. Jehudah.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:1:2
[Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:1:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/2:1:2)

**הלכה:** הַיָּשֵׁן תַּחַת הַמִּיטָּה כול׳. תַּמָּן תַּנִּינָן. אֲבָל פּוֹרֵס הוּא עַל גַּבֵּי נַקְלִיטֵי הַמִּיטָּה. וְכָא הוּא אוֹמֵר הָכֵין. אָמַר רִבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר. תַּמָּן הוּא וְטַלִּיתוֹ תַחַת הַסּוּכָּה. בְּרַם הָכָא הוּא (וּמִיטָּתוֹ) [וְטַלִּיתוֹ] תַחַת (הַסּוּכָּה) [הַמִּיטָּה]. מִחְלְפָה שִׁיטָּתֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי יוּדָה. תַּמָּן הוּא אָמַר. הַמַּעֲשֶׂה קוֹדֵם לַתַּלָמוּד. וָכָא הוּא אוֹמֵר הָכֵין. סָּבַר רִבִּי יוּדָה. הַיָּשֵׁן תַּחַת הַמִּיטָּה כְיָשֵׁן תַּחַת הַסּוּכָּה. כָּל שֶׁכֵּן מִחְלְפָה שִׁיטָּתֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי יוּדָה. דְּתַנִּינָן תַּמָּן. [רִבִּי יוּדָא אוֹמֵר]. אִם אֵין דִּיּוּרִין בָּעֶלְיוֹנָה הַתַּחְתּוֹנָה כְּשֵׁירָה. הָא אִם יֵשׁ דִּיּוּרִין בָּעֶלְיוֹנָה הַתַּחְתּוֹנָה פְסוּלָה. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵה. תַּמָּן יֵשׁ שָׁם חָָלָל אַחֵר. בְּרַם הָכָא אֵין כָּאן חָלָל אַחֵר.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**HALAKHAH:** “One who sleeps under the bed,” etc. There, we have stated:⁵ “But one may spread it over single posts of the bed.” And here he says so⁶? Rebbi Eliezer said, there he and his toga are under the *sukkah*, but here he and his (bed) [toga] are under the (*sukkah*) [bed]⁷, the corrector’s sentence is: but here he and his toga are under the bed. The scribe’s version notes that the mosquito net is no different from a nightgown, but the bed represents a flat roof of the space under it and therefore the person sleeping under the bed is under the bed which is under the *sukkah*, not under the *sukkah*. The corrector’s version expresses the same idea in a more complicated way.. The argument of Rebbi Jehudah seems inverted. There⁸3:7, Note 142, *Ḥagigah*1:7; Babli *Qiddušin*40b, *Bava Qamma*17a; *Sifry Deut*. 41, *Cant. rabba*2:14, *Mekhilta dR. Simeon ben Ioḥai*19:17 p. 100), a teacher of R. Jehudah. he said, action has precedence over study, and here he says so? Rebbi Jehudah thinks that one sleeping under the bed is like the one sleeping under the *sukkah*⁹ by staying there, even under the bed.. So much more is Rebbi Jehudah’s argument inverted, as we have stated there¹⁰., “[Rebbi Jehudah says,] if there are no dwellers in the upper one the lower is qualified.” Therefore if there are dwellers in the upper one the lower is disqualified. Rebbi Yose said, there is another space, but here there is no other space¹¹.

footnotes:
⁵ Mishnah 1:4.
⁶ What is the difference between sleepimg under a mosquito net and sleeping under a bed?
⁷ For R. Eliezer read R. Eleazar.There are two versions here. The scribe's sentence is: but here he and his bed are under the sukkah
⁸ We do not know where R. Jehudah said this explicitly but it is generally accepted as doctrine of R. Tarphon (Pesaḥim
⁹ The question presupposes that R. Jehudah agreed that one may not sleep under a bed, only he was taught that listening to the Elders in order to learn from them was so meritorious that it overrides the biblical obligation. This is wrong; R. Jehudah holds that one satisfies the obligation to live in the sukkah
¹⁰ Mishnah 1:3. The people sleeping on the bed are compared to those occupying the upper sukkah
¹¹ Since there is only one roofing, the argument of the preceding Note is invalid.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:1:3
[Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:1:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/2:1:3)

מִחְלְפָה שִׁיטָּתֵיהּ דְּרַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל. דְּתַנֵּי. טָבִי עַבְדּוֹ שֶׁלְּרַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל הָיָה נוֹתֵן תְּפִילִּין וְלֹא מִיחוּ בְיָדוֹ חֲכָמִים. וְכָא מִיחוּ בְיָדוֹ. שֶׁלֹּא לִדְחוֹק אֶת הַחֲכָמִים. אִם שֶׁלֹּא לִדְחוֹק אֶת הַחֲכָמִים יֵשֵׁב לוֹ חוּץ לַסּוּכָּה. רוֹצֶה הָיָה טָבִי עַבְדּוֹ שֶׁלְּרַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל לִשְׁמוֹעַ דִּבְרֵי חֲכָמִים.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
The argument of Rabban Gamliel is inverted. As it was stated¹² Chapter 10, Note 59., Tabi²“boy”, and all female ones *Tabita*“girl”., Rabban Gamliel’s slave, put on *tefillin* and the Sages did not object to him. And here they objected? In order not to push aside the Sages¹⁴ disqualified if made from a couch with 4 poles and a thatched roof as canopy is that usually the canopy is not 10 hand-breadths higher than the couch on which one rests. Therefore, if this distance is clearly larger than 10 hand-breadths, also R. Jehudah accepts it as qualified.. If in order not to push aside the Sages, he could sit outside the *sukkah*. Tabi, Rabban Gamliel’s slave, wanted to hear the words of the Sages.

footnotes:
¹² Eruvin
² It seems that in Rabban Gamliel’s house all male slaves were called Tabi
¹⁴ The reason that R. Jehudah declares a sukkah


###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:2:1
[Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:2:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/2:2:1)

**משנה:** הַסּוֹמֵךְ סוּכָּתוֹ לְכַרְעֵי הַמִּיטָּה כְּשֵׁירָה. רִבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר אִם אֵינָהּ יְְכוֹלָה לַעֲמוֹד בִּפְנֵי עַצְמָהּ פְּסוּלָה.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**MISHNAH:** If one supports his *sukkah* by the frame of the couch it is qualified. Rebbi Jehudah says, if it cannot stand by itself it is disqualified.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:2:2
[Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:2:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/2:2:2)

**הלכה:** אָמַר רִבִּי אִימִּי. מִשֵּׁם שֶׁאֵין מִמְּעֵי הַמִּיטָּה לִסְכָךְ עֲשָׂרָה טְפָחִים. אָמַר רִבִּי בָּא. מִשֵּׁם שֶׁאֵין מַעֲמִידִין עַל גַּבֵּי דָבָר טָמֵא. וְהָא תַנֵּי. מַעֲשֶׂה בְאַנְשֵׁי יְרוּשָׁלִַם שֶׁהָיוּ מְשַׁלְשְׁלִין מִיטּוֹתֵיהֶן לִפְנֵי חָלֹונוֹתֵיהֶן וְהָיוּ מְסַכְּכִין עַל גַּבֵּיהֶן. אִין תֵּימַר. מִשֵּׁם שֶׁאֵין מַעֲמִידִין עַל גַּבֵּי דָבָר טָמֵא. הֲרֵי מַעֲמִידִין עַל גַּבֵּי דָבָר טָמֵא. הֲוֵי. (לָא) [לֵית] טָעֲמָא (דִילָא) [אֶלָּא] מִשֵּׁם שֶׁאֵין מִמְּעֵי הַמִּיטָּה לִסְכָךְ עֲשָׂרָה טְפָחִים.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**HALAKHAH:** Rebbi Immi said, because¹⁴ disqualified if made from a couch with 4 poles and a thatched roof as canopy is that usually the canopy is not 10 hand-breadths higher than the couch on which one rests. Therefore, if this distance is clearly larger than 10 hand-breadths, also R. Jehudah accepts it as qualified. from the middle of the couch it is less than ten hand-breadths. Rebbi Abba said, because one does not base it on what is impure¹⁵. But was it not stated, it happened that the people of Jerusalem were lowering their couches through their windows and putting thatching over them¹⁶? If you are saying, because one does not base it on what is impure, here it is put on what is impure. Therefore the reason only is because from the middle of the couch it is less than ten hand-breadths.

footnotes:
¹⁴ The reason that R. Jehudah declares a sukkah
¹⁵ “Is impure” as always means “is susceptible to impurity”; in the case of a couch the severe impurity induced by people whose body is the source of their impurity.
¹⁶ Tosephta 2:3, Babli 21b. The Tosephta states explicitly that the roofing was fastened to the windows which were 10 hand-breadths high.In the last sentence the difference between (scribe) and [corrector] is between Galilean and Babylonian styles.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:3:1
[Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:3:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/2:3:1)

**משנה:** סוּכָּה הַמְדוּבְלֶלֶת שֶׁצִּילָּתָהּ מְרוּבָּה מֵחַמָּתָהּ כְּשֵׁירָה. הַמְעוּבָּה כְמִין בַּיִת אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין הַכּוֹכָבִים נִרְאִים מִתּוֹכָהּ כְּשֵׁירָה:

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**MISHNAH:** A wilted *sukkah* whose shade is more than its sunshine is qualified¹⁷. A stiff one like a house¹⁸, even though the stars are not visible from inside, is qualified.

footnotes:
¹⁷ Cf. Chapter 1, Notes 117–119.
¹⁸ The thatched roof is waterproof as one of a house is supposed to be; as long as it is from vegetal material impervious to impurity, it is qualified.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:3:2
[Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:3:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/2:3:2)

**הלכה:** רַב וּשְׁמוּאֵל. חַד אָמַר. מְדוּלֶּלֶת. וְחוֹרָנָה אָמַר. מְדוּבְלֶלֶת. מָאן דְּאָמַר. מְדוּלֶּלֶת. בְּשֶׁצִּילָּתָהּ מְרוּבָּה. וּמָאן דְּאָמַר. מְדוּבְלֶלֶת. בְּשֶׁאֵין צִילָּתָהּ מְרוּבָּה.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**HALAKHAH:** Rav and Samuel, one said “thinned out”, and one said “wilted”. He who said “thinned out”, if i6t had much shade¹⁹; but he who said “wilted,” if it does not have much shade²⁰.

footnotes:
¹⁹ If a thick thatched roof is thinned out, one has to be careful that shade should still be more than sunlight; it is not enough that sunlight should not be more than shade.
²⁰ If from the start one has to worry that the roof will not stay for 8 days but will wilt before that time, one has to add enough material that in all situations there is more shade than sunlight. Cf. Babli 22a,b.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:3:3
[Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:3:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/2:3:3)

הָדָא אָמְרָה. צְרִיכִין הַכּוֹכָבִים שֶׁיְּהוּ נִרָאִין מִתּוֹכָהּ. רִבִּי לֵוִי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי חָמָא בַּר חֲנִינָה. בְּכוֹכְבֵי חַמָּה שָׁנוּ.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
This implies²¹, that the stars should be seen from inside. Rebbi Levi in the name of Rebbi Ḥama bar Ḥanina, they stated this about the sun star²².

footnotes:
²¹ The statement in the Mishnah that a thatched roof is qualified even if the stars are not visible implies that usually they should be visible; a requirement for the House of Shammai, Babli 22b.
²² But in the night no stars need be seen for the most pious interpretation.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:4:1
[Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:4:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/2:4:1)

**משנה:** הָעוֹשֶׂה סוּכָּתוֹ בְּרֹאשׁ הָעֲגָלָה אוֹ בְּרֹאשׁ הַסְּפִינָה כְּשֵׁירָה וְעוֹלִין לָהּ בְּיוֹם טוֹב. בְּרֹאשׁ הָאִילָן אוֹ עַל גַּבֵּי גָמָל כְּשֵׁירָה וְאֵין עוֹלִין לָהּ בְּיוֹם טוֹב. שְׁתַּיִם בִּידֵי אָדָם וְאַחַת בָּאִילָן אוֹ שְׁתַּיִם בָּאִילָן וְאַחַת בִּידֵי אָדָם כְּשֵׁירָה וְאֵין עוֹלִין לָהּ בְּיוֹם טוֹב. שָׁלֹש בִּידֵי אָדָם וְאַחַת בָּאִילָן כְּשֵׁירָה וְעוֹלִין לָהּ בְּיוֹם טוֹב. זֶה הַכְּלָל כֹּל שֶׁיִינָּטֵל הָאִילָן וִיכוֹלָה לַעֲמוֹד בִּפְנֵי עַצְמָהּ כְּשֵׁירָה וְעוֹלִין לָהּ בְּיוֹם טוֹב:

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**MISHNAH:** One who made his *sukkah* on top of a cart or a ship²³ is qualified and one may enter it on the holiday; on top of a tree²⁴ or on a camel²⁵ is qualified but one may not enter it on the holiday. Two human-made {walls}and one a tree, or two by trees and one human-made are qualified but one may not enter it on the holiday. Three human-made and one a tree is qualified and one may enter it on the holiday²⁶ is qualified by three walls, the man-made walls make it qualified in all circumstances.. This is the principle: In any case where it can stand by itself when the tree is removed, it is qualified and one may enter it on the holiday.

footnotes:
²³ Even while these are movable there is no problem on the holiday.
²⁴ Since biblically one is forbidden to cut or pluck anything from a tree on a holiday, rabbinically one is forbidden to climb on it. The Mishnah permits the use of the trunks as walls on the intermediate days of Tabernacles but not on the holiday.
²⁵ To ride on a camel is biblically forbidden on the Sabbath and rabbinically on the holiday.
²⁶ Since a sukkah


###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:4:2
[Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:4:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/2:4:2)

**הלכה:** מָה אֲנָן קַיָימִין. אִם בִּנְתוּנָה בָאָרֶץ. דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל מוּתָּר. אִם בְּמַפְרֶשֶׂת. מַחְלוֹקֶת רִבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה וְרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה. אֶלָּא כֵן אֲנָן קַיָימִין. בִּנְתוּנָה בַאלִמֵין.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**HALAKHAH:** Where do we hold²⁷ on a ship be qualified?? If put on the ground, everybody agrees that it is permitted. If it sails, there is the disagreement between Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah and Rebbi Aqiba. But we must hold when it is in port²⁸.

footnotes:
²⁷ When may a sukkah
²⁸ Greek λιμήν.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:4:3
[Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:4:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/2:4:3)

רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בַּר כַּרְסָנָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי אָחָא. רִבִּי מֵאִיר וְרִבִּי יוֹסֵה וְרִבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה שְׁלָשְׁתָּן אָמְרוּ דָבָר אֶחָד. רִבִּי מֵאִיר דִּלְחָיַיִם. [דְתַנִּינָן.] מְטַמֵּא מִשֵּׁם גּוֹלֵל. רַבִּי מֵאִיר מְטַהֵר. וְרִבִּי יוֹסֵה דַאֲהִילוּת. דְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר. הַבַּיִת שֶׁבַּסְּפִינָה אֵינוֹ מֵבִיא אֶת הַטּוּמְאָה. רִבִּי לָעְזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה. דְּתַנֵּי. מַעֲשֶׂה בְּרִבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה וְרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה שֶׁהָיוּ בָאִין בִּסְפִינָּה. וְעָשָׂה לוֹ רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה סוּכָּה בְרֹאשׁ הַסְּפִינָּה וּבָאָת הָרוּחַ וְהִפְרִיחָתָהּ. אָמַר לוֹ רִבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה. עֲקִיבָה. אַיֶה סוּכָּתָךְ.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
²⁹ Chapter 1. Rebbi Simeon bar Carsana in the name of Rebbi Aḥa: Rebbi Meïr, and Rebbi Yose, and Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah, all three said the same. Rebbi Meïr of the laths, [as we have stated:]³⁰. “it makes impure because of a cover stone, but Rebbi Meïr declares it pure.³¹1:7. R. Meïr does not accept the use of an animal in place of a stone in any way, including as a gravestone, since an animal may run away and therefore is not possibly under the rules of a stone.” Rebbi Yose of *Ahilut*, “Rebbi Yose said, the house on a ship does not transmit impurity³²8:2. Since the house on a ship is moving all the time it does not qualify as “tent” and the rules of “tent impurity” do not apply to it..” Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah, as it was stated: It happened that Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah and Rebbi Aqiba came in a ship, and Rebbi Aqiba made himself a *sukkah* on the ship’s deck. There came a wind which blew it away. Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah said to him, Aqiba, where is your *sukkah*³³ on the ship since he holds that since such a *sukkah* is not guaranteed to stay for the 8 days of Tabernacles it is not qualified even if the wind does not blow it away. Babli 23a.?

footnotes:
²⁹ This paragraph also is in Eruvin
³⁰ Corrector’s addition, not in Eruvin
³¹ Mishnah Eruvin
³² Mishnah Ahilut
³³ R. Eleazar ben Azariah did not make a sukkah


###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:4:4
[Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:4:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/2:4:4)

נְתָנוֹ בָאִילָן. לְמַעְלָה מֵעֲשָׂרָה טְפָחִים אֵינוֹ עֵירוּב. לְמַטָּה מֵעֲשָׂרָה טְפָחִים עֵירוּבוֹ עֵירוּב וְאָסוּר לְטַלְטְלוֹ. לְמַטָּה מִשְּׁלֹשָׁה מוּתָּר. וְקַשְׁיָא. אִם עֵירוּבוֹ עֵירוּב יְהֵא מוּתָּר לְטַלְטְלוֹ. וְאִם אָסוּר לְטַלְטְלוֹ לֹא יְהֵא עֵירוּבוֹ עֵירוּב. רָאוּי הוּא לַעֲבוֹר עַל הַשְּׁבוּת וְלוֹכַל. מֵעַתָּה אֲפִילוּ לְמַעֲלָה מֵעֲשָׂרָה. רַב יְהוּדָה בְשֵׁם שְׁמוּאֵל. תִּיפְתָּר שֶׁהָיְתָה בְכֹרָתוֹ אַרְבָּעָה. אָמַר רִבִּי מָנָא. וְהִיא שֶׁתְּהֵא רְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים מַקִּפָתוֹ מִכָּל צַד. בָּאוֹמֵר. שְׁבִיתָתִי תַחְתָּיו. תַּנֵּי. נְתָנוֹ בַכַּלְכָּלָה וּתְלָייוֹ בָאִילָן. לְמַעְלָה מֵעֲשָׂרָה טְפָחִים אֵינוֹ עֵירוּב. לְמַטָּה מֵעֲשָׂרָה טְפָחִים עֵירוּבוֹ עֵירוּב וְאָסוּר לְטַלְטְלוֹ. לְמַטָּה מִשְּׁלֹשָׁה מוּתָּר. וְקַשְׁיָא. אִם עֵירוּבוֹ עֵירוּב יְהֵא מוּתָּר לְטַלְטְלוֹ. וְאִם אָסוּר לְטַלְטְלוֹ לֹא יְהֵא עֵירוּבוֹ עֵירוּב. רִבִּי אָחָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי חִינְנָא. רָאוּי הוּא לְהָפְכָהּ וּלְבַטֵּל רָשׁוּת הַיָּחִיד שֶׁבָּהּ. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵה. הָדָא אָמְרָה. סַפְסָל שֶׁהוּא נָתוּן בִּרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים גָּבוֹהַּ עֲשָׂרָה וְרָחַב אַרְבָּעָה. [מִכֵּיוָן] שֶׁהוּא רָאוּי לְהָפְכוֹ וּלְבַטֵּל רְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים שֶׁבּוֹ. הָדָא אָמְרָה שֶׁעֵירוּבוֹ עֵירוּב וּמוּתָּר לְטַלְטְלוֹ.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
³⁴ Chapter 2 (Notes 91–101).“If he deposited it in a tree higher than ten hand-breadths it is not an *eruv*; below ten hand-breadths it is an *eruv* but it is forbidden to move it; below three it is permitted.³⁵. Since there is a biblical prohibition, *nobody shall leave his place on the Seventh Day*(*Ex.* 16:29), “place” is rabbinically defined as a rectangle, oriented EW,NS, extending 2’000 cubits from the built-up area one is in on Friday evening. It is possible to move this boundary by depositing food at the limits reachable on the Sabbath as *eruv,* symbolic dwelling place, before the Sabbath; then one may walk 2’000 cubits from this place but loses the same amount in the opposite direction. The prohibitions to use a tree on the Sabbath here are rabbinic (“forbidden” but not “liable”); similarly those regarding the *sukkah* in the next paragraph.” This is difficult. If his *eruv* is a {valid} *eruv* one should be permitted to move it. If one is forbidden to move it his *eruv* should not be a {valid}*eruv*. He might transgress the rabbinic prohibition and eat. Then also higher than ten {hand-breadths}³⁶ placed higher than 10 hand-breadths be invalid since one could climb the tree in violation of the rabbinic prohibition.? Rav Jehudah in the name of Samuel, explain it if its stem was four {hand-breadths}³⁷ while standing in the public domain.. Rebbi Mana said, only if the public domain surrounds it on all sides; he says my Sabbath rest shall be below it³⁸ placed 10 hand-breadths high are invalid; only if the tree is in the public domain, the place of the *eruv* forms a separate private domain of 4-by-4 hand-breadths, and the person making the *eruv* does not intend to climb the tree at sundown (which would be permitted).. It was stated: If he put it in a basket and hung it on a tree, higher than ten hand-breadths high it is not an *eruv*; below ten hand-breadths it is an *eruv* but it is forbidden to move it; below three it is permitted. This is difficult. If his *eruv* is a {valid} *eruv* one should be permitted to move it. If one is forbidden to move it his *eruv* should not be a {valid} *eruv*. Rebbi Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Ḥinena: He might turn it upside down and annul the private domain created by it³⁹ valid. Babli *Eruvin*33a,b.. Rebbi Yose said, this implies that a bench in the public domain high ten and wide four {hand-breadths}, since one may tilt it and annul the public⁴⁰ read: “private”. domain of it, it implies that his *eruv* is a {valid}*eruv* and it is permitted to move it.

footnotes:
³⁴ This paragraph and the next also are in Eruvin
³⁵ The topic here is eruv teḥumim
³⁶ If one entertains the possibility that people would disregard rabbinic prohibitions, why would an eruv
³⁷ Then the top of the tree is a private domain and biblically one may not eat the eruv
³⁸ Not all eruvim
³⁹ Since the basket can be turned and emptied while hanging on the tree it is not moved from its place, the food is accessible, and the eruv
⁴⁰ With the text in Eruvin


###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:4:5
[Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:4:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/2:4:5)

[תַּמָּן תַּנִּינָן.] שְׁתַּיִם בִּידֵי אָדָם וְאַחַת בָּאִילָן אוֹ שְׁתַּיִם בָּאִילָן וְאַחַת בִּידֵי אָדָם. כְּשֵׁירָה וְאֵין עוֹלִין לָהּ בְּיוֹם טוֹב. הָכָא אַתְּ אָמַר. כְּשֵׁירָה וְאֵין עוֹלִין לָהּ בְּיוֹם טוֹב. וְהָכָא אַתְּ אָמַר. עֵירוּבוֹ עֵירוּב (וְאָסוּר) [וּמוּתָּר] לְטַלְטְלוֹ. אָמַר רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה. כָּאן מלְּמַעֲלָן כָּאן מִלְּמַטָּן. הָדָא יַלְפָה מִן הַהִיא וְהַהִיא יַלְפָה מִן הָדָא. הָדָא יַלְפָא מִן הַהִיא. שֶׁאִם הָיָה נָתוּן בְּצִידּוֹ שֶׁלְאִילָן שֶׁעֵירוּבוֹ עֵירוּב ומותָּר לְטַלְטְלוֹ. וְהַהִיא יַלְפָא מִן הָדָא. שֶׁאִם הָיוּ שְׁתֵּי יְתֵידוֹת יוֹצְאוֹת וְסִיכֵּךְ עַל גַּבֵּיהֶן שֶׁהִיא כְשֵׁירָה וְעוֹלִין לָהּ בְּיוֹם טוֹב. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵה. בֵּין הָכָא בֵין תַּמָּן. מִן הַצָּד הִיא. מַאי כְדוֹן. כְּהַהיא דְאָמַר רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אָחָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי זְעוּרָה. דְּרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר הִיא. דְּתַנֵּי. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר. מוּתָּר לְהִשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ עַל צִידָדֵי בְהֵמָה בַשַּׁבָּת. הִיא צִידָדֵי בְהֵמָה הִיא צִידָדֵי אִילָן.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
[There, we have stated]⁴¹; senseless here since the quote is from *Sukkah*.: “Two human-made and one a tree, or two as trees and one human-made is valid but one may not enter it on the holiday.” Here you are saying it is valid but one may not enter it on the holiday but there you are saying his *eruv* is a {valid} *eruv* and it is permitted to move it. Rebbi Jeremiah said, one from the top, the other from the bottom⁴² read: “from the side” (in the case of the *sukkah*.). This learns from that and that learns from this. This learns from that, if he put it on the side of a tree his *eruv* is a {valid} *eruv* and it is (prohibited) [permitted]⁴³ read: “prohibited.” to move it. That learns from this, if there were two pegs protruding and he thatched over them it is valid and one uses it on the holiday⁴⁴. Rebbi Yose said, in both cases it is at the side. How is that? As Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa said in the name of Rebbi Ze`ira: This is Rebbi Eleazar ben Simon’s, as Rebbi Eleazar ben Simon says, one is permitted to use the sides of an animal on the Sabbath. There is no difference between sides of an animal and sides of a tree⁴⁵ Chapter 5 Notes 39–43. Cf. Babli *Šabbat*154b..

footnotes:
⁴¹ Corrector’s addition from Eruvin
⁴² With the text of Eruvin
⁴³ With the scribe and the text of Eruvin
⁴⁴ Since the roof must be on top of the walls, in the case of the Mishnah it must rest on the top of the trees (or top of branches) which is rabbinically forbidden. But the basket is on the side of the trunk and the statement follows the opinion that the sides of tree trunks may be used on Sabbaths and holidays.
⁴⁵ Šabbat


###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:5:1
[Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:5:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/2:5:1)

**משנה:** הָעוֹשֶׂה סוּכָּתוֹ בֵין הָאִילָנוֹת כְּשֵׁירָה. שְׁלוּחֵי מִצְוָה פְּטוּרִין מִן הַסּוּכָּה. חוֹלִין וּמְשַׁמְּשֵׁיהֶן פְּטוּרִין מִן הַסּוּכָּה. אוֹכְלִין וְשׁוֹתִין עֲרַאי חוּץ לַסּוּכָּה:

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**MISHNAH:** If one makes his *sukkah* between trees it is qualified⁴⁶ but the roofing must lie on a frame supported by separate poles, not on the trees.. Agents for meritorious deeds⁴⁷ are not liable in matters of *sukkah*. Sick persons and their caregivers are not liable in matters of *sukkah.* One eats and drinks casually outside the *sukkah*.

footnotes:
⁴⁶ One may use the tree trunks as walls of the sukkah
⁴⁷ However, it is forbidden to leave one’s family on a holiday even for religious reasons, Tosephta 2:1.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:5:2
[Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:5:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/2:5:2)

**הלכה:** רַב חוּנָה אֲזַל לְעֵייניטַב לְסִימָנָה. מִי אֲתִי צְהָא גַּו אִיסְרָטָא וְלָא קְבִיל עֲלוֹי מִיטְעוֹם כְּלוּם עַד דְּעָל לֵיהּ לִמְטַלַּלְתֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן סַפְרָא דְגוּפְתָּא.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**HALAKHAH:** Rav⁴⁸ Ḥuna went to Eintab for the indication⁴⁹. While coming he became thirsty but did not accept tasting anything before he went to the *sukkah* of Rebbi Joḥanan the scribe of Gufta⁵⁰.

footnotes:
⁴⁸ Read “Rebbi”.
⁴⁹ The indication is the proclamation of the New Moon, held at Eintab (Ḥammat Gader) when the Academies were in Galilee.
⁵⁰ While he was going to fulfill a religious obligation, and drinking water falls under the exemption of casual consumption, he did not want to take advantage of either dispensation. Since the text is formulated in Galilean Aramaic, it is a popular tradition about holy men and not practice to be obligatory.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:5:3
[Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:5:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/2:5:3)

אָמַר רִבִּי מָנָא. לֹא סוֹף דָּבָר חוֹלִין שֶׁלְסַכָּנָה אֶלָּא אֲפִילוּ חוֹלִין שֶׁאֵינָן שֶׁלְסַכָּנָה. תַּנֵּי אָמַר רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל. מַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁהָיִיתִי חוֹשֶׁשׁ עֵינַיי בְקַיְסָרִין וְהִתִּיר לִי רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בִּירְבִּי לִי וּלְכָל מְשַׁמְּשַׁיי לִישָׁן חוּץ לַסּוּכָּה. רִבִּי בַּא בַּר זָבְדָא אָמַר. שׁוּשְׁבִּינִין וְכָל בְּנֵי חוּפָּה פְטוּרִין מִן הַסּוּכָּה.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
Rebbi Mana said, not only persons dangerously sick⁵¹ but even sick persons not dangerously sick. It was stated:⁵² “Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel said, it happened that my eye was hurting in Caesarea and the great Rebbi Yose⁵³ permitted me and all my caregivers to sleep outside the *sukkah*.” Rebbi Abba bar Zavda said, the best men at a wedding and all participants in the wedding are not liable for *sukkah*⁵⁴.

footnotes:
⁵¹ The sick persons referred to in the Mishnah. Babli 26a.
⁵² Tosephta 2:2, Babli 26a.
⁵³ He seems to by R. Yose ben Ḥalafta.
⁵⁴ Disputed in the Halakhah and the Babli, 26a.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:5:4
[Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:5:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/2:5:4)

תַּנֵּי. שׁוֹמְרֵי הָעִיר בַּיּוֹם פְּטוּרִין מִן הַסּוּכָּה בַיּוֹם וְחַיָיבִין בַּלַּיְלָה. שׁוֹמְרֵי הָעִיר בַּלַּיְלָה פְּטוּרִין מִן הַסּוּכָּה בַלַּיְלָה וְחַיָיבִין בַּיּוֹם. שׁוֹמְרֵי הָעִיר בַּיּוֹם וּבַלַּיְלָה פְּטוּרִין מִן הַסּוּכָּה בֵּין בַּיּוֹם וּבֵין בַּלַּיְלָה. הָדָא דְאַתְּ אָמַר. בְּשׁוֹמְרֵי גַּיְיסוֹת. אֲבָל בְשׁוֹמְרֵי מָמוֹן עָשׂוּ אוֹתָן כְּשׁוֹמְרֵי גַנּוֹת וּפַרְדֵיסִין.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
It was stated:⁵⁵ “Daytime watchmen of a city are not liable for the *sukkah* during daytime but are liable during nighttime. Nighttime watchmen of a city are not liable for the *sukkah* during nighttime but are liable during daytime. Watchmen during day and night are not liable for *sukkah* day and night.” This you are saying, about watchmen about troops⁵⁶. But watchmen about money they treated like watchmen of gardens and orchards.

footnotes:
⁵⁵ Tosephta 2:3.
⁵⁶ Gangs of robbers. Regular police who watch against nonviolent thieves are not freed.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:5:5
[Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:5:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/2:5:5)

אֶבְדַומָא מִלְחָא הֲוָה דְמַךְ קוֹמֵי חָנוּתֵיהּ. עֲבַר רִבִּי חִיָיה בַּר בָּא אֲמַר לֵיהּ. אַיְזִיל דְּמוֹךְ גַּו מְטַלַּלְתָּךְ. רִבִּי מָנָא הֲוָה שׁוּשְׁבִינֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר יַפְלִיטִי. אֲתַא שְׁאִיל לְרִבִּי יוֹסֵי. אֲמַר לֵיהּ. אַיזִיל דְּמוֹךְ גַּו מְטַלַּלְתָּךְ. רִבִּי יִצְחָק בַּר מַרְיוֹן הֲוָה שׁוּשְׁבִינֵיהּ דְּחַד בַּר נַשׁ. שְׁאִיל לְרִבִּי לָעְזָר. אֲמַר לֵיהּ. אַיזִיל דְּמוֹךְ גַּו מְטַלַּלְתָּךְ.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
Eudaimon the salt-dealer slept in front of his store. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba passed by and told him, go and sleep in your *sukkah*. Rebbi Mana was best man for Rebbi Jacob bar Yafliti. He went and asked Rebbi Yose, who told him, go and sleep in your *sukkah*. Rebbi Isaac bar Marion was best man for somebody. He asked Rebbi Eleazar who told him, go and sleep in your *sukkah*⁵⁴.

footnotes:
⁵⁴ Disputed in the Halakhah and the Babli, 26a.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:5:6
[Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:5:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/2:5:6)

מַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁהָלַךְ רִבִּי אִילָעְאִי אֶצֶל רִבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בְּלוֹד. אָמַר לֵיהּ. אַף אַתְּ מִשּׁוֹבְתֵי הָרֶגֶל. וַהֲלֹא אָמְרוּ שֶׁאֵין שִׁבְחוֹ שֶׁלְתַּלְמִיד חֲכָמִים לִהְיוֹת מַנִּיחַ אֶת בֵּיתוֹ בָרֶגֶל וְהוֹלֵךְ לוֹ. כְּהָדָא. רִבִּי זְעוּרָה סְלִיק לִגְזוּרָה דְרִבִּי אִילָא וְלָא קְבִיל עֲלוֹי מִיטְעוּם כְּלוּם. אִין מִשּׁוּם דְלָא הֲוָה עִיסְקֵיהּ טְעַם כְּלוּם עַד יַפְנֵי מוּסָף. וְלָא יָדְעִין אִין מִשֵּׁם שֶׁאֵין שִׁבְחוֹ שֶׁלְתַּלְמִיד חֲכָמִים לִהְיוֹת מַנִּיחַ אֶת בֵּיתוֹ בָרֶגֶל [וְהוֹלֵךְ לוֹ. בָהָדֵין] לָא יָדְעִין.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
⁵⁷“It happened that Rebbi Ilai went to Rebbi Eliezer in Lydda. He said to him, are you not one of those who rest on the holiday? Did they not say that it is not praiseworthy for a scholar to abandon his house⁵⁸ on the holiday and go somewhere else.” As the following: Rebbi Ze`ira went to a circumcision of Rebbi Ila⁵⁹ and did not accept any food. If it was because he never ate anything before the end of *musaf* prayers⁶⁰ prayers. Then R. Ze`ira went home and ate with his wife. The Babli *Berakhot*28b rejects the rule not to eat before *musaf*., or we do not know whether it was because it is not praiseworthy for a scholar to abandon his house on the holiday [and go somewhere else; this]⁶¹ we do not know.

footnotes:
⁵⁷ Tosephta 2:1.
⁵⁸ His wife.
⁵⁹ The circumcision of a son of R. Ilai.
⁶⁰ This remark is the source of the common usage that a circumcision on a holiday is performed after the Torah reading but before the musaf
⁶¹ Corrector’s addition, problematic since R. Ze`ira did not leave town and therefore could not be said to have “gone somewhere else.”


###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:5:7
[Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:5:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/2:5:7)

אָמַר רִבִּי לָעְזָר. אֲכִילָה עֲרַאי. אֵין שֵׁינָה עֲרַאי. חֲבֵרַיָיא אָמְרִין. שֶׁכֵּן אָדָם מִשְׁתַּקֵּעַ בְּתוֹךְ שְִׁנָתוֹ. אָמַר רִבִּי אִילָא. שֶׁכֵּן אָדָם יָשֵׁן קִימְאָה וְדַייוֹ. מַה נְפַק מִן בֵּינֵיהוֹן. מָסַר שְׁנָתוֹ לְאַחֵר. עַל דַּעְתְּהוֹן (דְּרַבָּנִן) [דַּחֲבֵרַיָּא] מוּתָּר. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי אִילָא אָסוּר.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
Rebbi Eleazar said, eating may be casual, sleep cannot be casual⁶³.. The colleagues say, because a person is enveloped in his sleep⁶⁴. Rebbi Ila said, because a person may sleep a little and it is enough. What is the difference between them? If he let another person control his sleep. In the opinion of the (rabbis) [colleagues]⁶⁵ it is permitted, in Rebbi Ila’s opinion forbidden⁶⁶.

footnotes:
⁶³ On Tabernacles, even a short nap has to be done in the sukkah
⁶⁴ Once a person sleeps he lost control over the length of his sleep.
⁶⁵ The texts of the (scribe) and the [corrector] mean the same.
⁶⁶ Even if another person is charged with waking the sleeper after a short time, it may have been enough for the whole day.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:6:1
[Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:6:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/2:6:1)

**משנה:** מַעֲשֶׂה וְהֵבִיאוּ לְרַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי לִטְעוֹם אֶת הַתַּבְשִׁיל וּלְרַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל שְׁתֵּי כוֹתָבוֹת וּדְלִי שֶׁל מַיִם וְאָמְרוּ הַעֲלוּם לַסּוּכָּה. וּכְשֶׁנָּתְנוּ לוֹ לְרַבִּי צָדוֹק אֹכֶל פָּחוּת מִכַּבֵּיצָה נְטָלוֹ בַמַּפָּה וַאֲכָלוֹ חוּץ לַסּוּכָּה וְלֹא בֵירַךְ אַחֲרָיו:

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**MISHNAH:** It happened that one brought Rabban Joḥanan ben Zakkai a dish to taste, and Rabban Gamliel two dates and a pail of water and they said, bring them to the *sukkah*⁶⁷. But when one gave Rebbi Ṣadoq food⁶⁸ in the volume of less than an egg he took it with a napkin⁶⁹, ate it outside of the *sukkah*, and did not recite a benediction⁷⁰ afterwards.

footnotes:
⁶⁷ They did not want to avail themselves of the leniency of Mishnah 5.
⁶⁸ Including bread.
⁶⁹ He covered his hands with the towel so he did not have to wash them before touching the bread.
⁷⁰ He did not say Grace for volumes less than a chicken egg.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:6:2
[Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:6:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/2:6:2)

**הלכה:** הֲוִינָן סָבְרִין מֵימַר. שֶׁלֹּא בֵירַךְ אַחֲרָיו שָׁלֹשׁ בְּרָכוֹת. הָא בְרָכָה אַחַת בֵּירַךְ. אַשְׁכַּח תַּנֵּי. לֹא בְרָכָה אַחַת וְלֹא שָׁלֹשׁ בְּרָכוֹת. תַּנֵּי. כָּל שֶׁאוֹמְרִין עָלָיו שָׁלֹשׁ בְּרָכוֹת אוֹמְרִים לְפָנָיו. הַמּוֹצִיא לֶחֶם מִן הָאָרֶץ. כָּל שֶׁאֵין אוֹמְרִין אַחֲרָיו שָׁלֹשׁ בְּרָכוֹת אֵין אוֹמְרִים לְפָנָיו. הַמּוֹצִיא לֶחֶם מִן הָאָרֶץ. הָתִיבוֹן. הֲרֵי פָחוּת מִכְּזַיִת אֵין אוֹמְרִין עָלָיו שָׁלֹשׁ בְּרָכוֹת. מֵעַתָּה לֹא יֹאמְרוּ לְפָנָיו. הַמּוֹצִיא לֶחֶם מִן הָאָרֶץ. רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּא אָחָא אָמַר. לְשְׁאָר הַמִּינִין נִצְרְכָה.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**HALAKHAH:** We were thinking to say that he did not say three benedictions but one benediction he did say⁷¹. It was found stated, neither one benediction nor three benedictions⁷². ⁷³6:1, Notes 61–62. It was stated⁷⁴4:7.: “On everything that needs three benedictions at the end one says ‘Who produces bread from the earth’ at the start, but on everything that does not need three benedictions at the end one does not say ‘Who produces bread from the earth’ at the start.” They objected: But if it is less than the size of an olive, one does not say three benedictions at the end. Does this mean that one should not say “Who produces bread from the earth” at the start? Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa said, it is needed for other kinds⁷⁵.

footnotes:
⁷¹ Three benedictions are the full text of Grace, used after the consumption of bread. A single benediction is the short form of Grace, after consumption of cereal in forms other than bread.
⁷² Since he holds that these benedictions are appropriate only after a satisfying meal, of a volume greater than a chicken egg.
⁷³ This text is from Berakhot
⁷⁴ The first half of this statement is Tosephta Berakhot
⁷⁵ The statement does not refer to volume, but to kinds of food; if it is not bread it does not receive the benediction for bread. Hence, no conclusion as to the correct practice can be drawn.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:7:1
[Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:7:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/2:7:1)

**משנה:** רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר אַרְבַּע עֶשְׂרֵה סְעוּדוֹת חַיָיב אָדָם לוֹכַל בַּסּוּכָּה אַחַת בַּיּוֹם וְאַחַת בַּלַּיְלָה. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים אֵין לַדָּבָר קִיצְבָה חוּץ מִלֵּילֵי יוֹם טוֹב הָרִאשׁוֹן בִּלְבָד. וְעוֹד אָמַר רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר מִי שֶׁלֹּא אָכַל לֵילֵי יוֹם טוֹב הָרִאשׁוֹן מַשְׁלִים בְּלֵילֵי יוֹם טוֹב הָאַחֲרוֹן. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים אֵין לַדָּבָר תַּשְׁלוּמִין וְעַל זֶה נֶאֱמַר מְעוּוָת לֹא יוּכַל לִתְקוֹן וְחֶסְרוֹן לֹא יוּכַל לְהִימָּנוֹת:

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**MISHNAH:** Rebbi Eliezer said, a person is obligated to eat fourteen meals in the *sukkah*, one during daytime and one in the night. But the Sages are saying, there is no fixed amount except only for the night of the first day of the holiday⁷⁶ have to be recited. At all other times one may not eat a meal outside the *sukkah*, but no meals are prescribed.. In addition, Rebbi Eliezer said, one who did not eat on the first day of the holiday makes it up in the night of the last day of the holiday⁷⁷ is seven days (*Lev.* 23:34,42). The eighth day is a separate holiday (*Lev.* 23:36, *Num*. 29:35). R. Eliezer counts the meal in the evening of the Eighth Day as making up for the missed one on the First day even though it cannot be valid in the *sukkah*.. But the Sages are saying, this cannot be made up, and on this it was said⁷⁸1:15., *what is distorted cannot be fixed, and a deficiency cannot be filled*.

footnotes:
⁷⁶ The start of the holiday of Tabernacles, when the benedictions for the sukkah
⁷⁷ The holiday is seven days, with a full holiday at the beginning; also the obligation of sukkah
⁷⁸ Eccl


###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:7:2
[Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:7:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/2:7:2)

**הלכה:** מַה טַעֲמָא דְרִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר. נֶאֱמַר כָּאן תֵּשְׁבוּ וְנֶאֱמַר לְהַלָּן וּפֶתַח אוֹהֶל מוֹעֵד יֵשְׁבוּ יוֹמָם וָלַיְלָה. מַה יְשִׁיבָה שֶׁנֶּאֱמְרָה לְהַלָּן עָשָׂה בָהּ אֶת הַלֵּילוֹת כַּיָּמִים אַף יְשִׁיבָה שֶׁנֶּאֱמְרָה כָאן נַעֲשֶׂה בָהּ אֶת הַלֵּילוֹת כַּיָּמִים. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל. נֶאֱמַר חֲמִשָּׁה עָשָׂר בַּפֶּסַח וְנֶאֱמַר חֲמִשָּׁה עָשָׂר בְּחַג. מַה חֲמִשָּׁה עָשָׂר שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר בַּפֶּסַח לַיְלָה הָרִאשׁוֹן חוֹבָה וּשְׁאָר כָּל הַיָּמִים רְשׁוּת אַף חֲמִשָּׁה עָשָׂר שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר בְּחַג לַיְלָה הָרִאשׁוֹן חוֹבָה וּשְׁאָר כָּל הַיָּמִים רְשׁוּת. חֲבֵרַיָיא בָעֵיי. [אִי] מַה לְהַלָּן עַד שֶׁיִּיכָּנְסוּ לַמַּצָּה בְתַאֲוָה וָכָא עַד שֶׁיִּיכָּנְסוּ לַסּוּכָּה בְתַאֲוָה. רִבִּי זְעוּרָה בָעֵי. אִי מַה לְהַלָּן עַד שֶׁיֹּאכַל כְּזַיִת מַצָּה. וָכָא עַד שֶׁיֹּאכַל כְּזַיִת דָּגָן [בַּסּוּכָּה]. רִבִּי הוֹשַׁעְיָה אָמַר. כָּל שִׁבְעָה חוֹבָה. רִבִּי בֶרֶכְיָה אָמַר. פְּלִיגִין. רִבִּי אָבוּנָא אָמַר. לֹא פְלִיגִין. מַה דְאָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. בְּשֶׁנָּתַן דַּעְתּוֹ. מַה דְאָמַר רִבִּי הוֹשַׁעְיָה. בְּשֶׁלֹּא נָתַן דַּעְתּוֹ.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**HALAKHAH:** What is Rebbi Eliezer’s reason? It says here⁷⁹ 23:42., *you shall sit*, and it says there⁸⁰ 8:35, misquoted., *at the door of the Tent of Meeting they shall sit day and night*. Since for the sitting mentioned there He made nights like days⁸¹, so also for the sitting mentioned here we shall make nights like days. Rebbi Joḥanan in the name of Rebbi Ismael⁸²: It is said *fifteenth* for Passover and it is said *fifteenth* for Tabernacles. Since for *fifteenth* said for Passover the first night is obligatory and the remaining days are optional⁸³ 13:6) *seven days you shall eat mazzot*, and (*Deut*. 16:8) *six days you shall eat mazzot*. R. Ismael’s rule reads: Anything that was in a set and was taken out from the set implies the same for the whole set.” Since the last mentioned verse implies that on the seventh day one need not eat unleavened bread (one may not eat leavened bread, however), the same is true for all seven days of Passover with the only exception of the first night of which it is said explicitly (*Ex.* 12:18): *In the evening you shall eat mazzot*., so also for *fifteenth* said for Tabernacles the first night is obligatory and the remaining days are optional. The colleagues asked, since there only that one comes to eat *mazzah* with an appetite⁸⁴10:1: “On Passover eve, starting close to afternoon prayers, a person may not eat until nightfall” (so he shall eat the first *mazzah* with a good appetite.) There is no similar rule spelled out for Tabernacles; R. Joḥanan’s argument is homiletic but cannot be legal., so also here only they come to eat in the *sukkah* with appetite? Rebbi Ze`ira asked: Since there only one has to eat *mazzah* in the volume of an olive⁸⁵ 12:18 can only be fulfilled by eating a *mazzah* in an amount that triggers a biblical obligation to say Grace. But for the *sukkah*, sitting is prescribed but not eating; the same standards cannot apply., so also here only one has to eat grain [in the *sukkah*] in the volume of an olive? Rebbi Hoshaia said, the *sukkah* is obligatory all seven days. Rebbi Berekhiah said, they⁸⁶ disagree. Rebbi Abuna said, they do not disagree. What Rebbi Joḥanan said, if he put his mind to it; what Rebbi Hoshaia said, if he did not put his mind to it⁸⁷ for 7 days; he is more lenient than R. Joḥanan and requires that once one must come to the *sukkah* to recite the appropriate benedictions (Halakhah 1:1, Notes 123–126) but this does not necessarily be the first night..

footnotes:
⁷⁹ Lev.
⁸⁰ Lev.
⁸¹ “Day and night” is interpreted as “some time during the day and some time during the night” (Yoma 1:1, Note 81); the same applies here.
⁸² In the Babli 27a: in the name of R. Simeon ben Yoṣadaq (R. Joḥanan’s teacher); in the Munich ms. of the Babli R. Ṣadoq.
⁸³ This is an application of one of R. Ismael’s hermeneutical rules. It is written (Ex.
⁸⁴ Mishnah Pesaḥim
⁸⁵ The biblical obligation contained in Ex.
⁸⁶ R. Joḥanan, who requires a meal only the first night, and R. Hoshaia, who requires it for 7 days.
⁸⁷ R. Hoshaia really does not require to eat in the sukkah


###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:7:3
[Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:7:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/2:7:3)

תַּנֵּי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר. מִי שֶׁלֹּא עָשָׂה סוּכָּתוֹ בְעֶרֶב הָרֶגֶל אַל יַעֲשֶׂנָּה בָרֶגֶל. וְהָתַנֵּי בַּר קַפָּרָא. נָפְלָה סוּכָּתוֹ בָרֶגֶל יְקִימֶינָּה בָרֶגֶל. רִבִּי אָחָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי חִינְנָא. קְנַס קְנָסוֹ רִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר שֶׁלֹּא עָשָׂה סוּכָּתוֹ מֵעֶרֶב הָרֶגֶל. מִחְלְפָה שִׁיטָּתֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר. תַּמָּן הוּא אָמַר אַרְבַּע עֶשְׂרֵה סְעוּדוֹת חַיָיב אָדָם לוֹכַל בַּסּוּכָּה. וָכָא אָמַר הָכֵין. אָמַר רִבִּי אָחָא. לְמִצְוָה הוּשְׁווּהָ.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
It was stated in Rebbi Eliezer’s name: He who did not make his *sukkah* before the holiday may not make it on the holiday⁸⁸. But did not Bar Qappara state, if his *sukkah* collapsed on the holiday, he shall rebuild it on the holiday. Rebbi Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Ḥinena: Rebbi Eliezer punished him because he did not make his *sukkah* before the holiday⁸⁹ on the intermediary days of the holiday week.. Rebbi Eliezer’s opinion seems inverted. There, he says, a person is obligated to eat fourteen meals in the *sukkah*, and here he says so⁹⁰? Rebbi Aḥa said, they were compared as commandments⁹¹ and at the consecration of Tent of Meeting the commandment is to sit; while in both cases eating there is implied, it is not spelled out as biblical commandment..

footnotes:
⁸⁸ Babli 27a/b.
⁸⁹ But he agrees with Bar Qappara to rebuild a sukkah
⁹⁰ He seems to contradict himself in the Mishnah since he requires a make-up only for the meal in the first night but not for the remaining 13 meals.
⁹¹ In the sukkah


###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:8:1
[Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:8:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/2:8:1)

**משנה:** מִי שֶׁהָיָה רֹאשׁוֹ וְרוֹבּוֹ בַסּוּכָּה וְשׁוּלְחָנוֹ בְתוֹךְ הַבַּיִת בֵּית שַׁמַּאי פּוֹסְלִין וּבֵית הִלֵּל מַכְשִׁירִין. אָמְרוּ בֵית הִלֵּל לְבֵית שַׁמַּאי מַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁהָלְכוּ זִקְנֵי בֵית שַׁמַּאי וְזִקְנֵי בֵית הִלֵּל לְבַקֵּר אֶת יוֹחָנָן בֶּן הַחוֹרוֹנִי וּמְצָאוּהוּ רֹאשׁוֹ וְרוּבּוֹ בַסּוּכָּה וְשׁוּלְחָנוֹ בְתוֹךְ הַבַּיִת. אָמְרוּ לָהֶן בֵּית שַׁמַּאי מִשָּׁם רְאָיָיה. אַף הֵן אָמְרוּ לוֹ אִם כֵּן הָיִיתָ נוֹהֵג לֹא קִיַימְתָּ מִצְוַת סוּכָּה מִיָּמֶיךָ:

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**MISHNAH:** If a person’s head and most of his body was in the *sukkah* but his table inside the house, the House of Shammai declare it disqualified but the House of Hillel qualified. The House of Hillel said to the House of Shammai, it happened that the elders of the House of Shammai and the House of Hillel went to visit Joḥanan from Hauran and found him with his head and most of his body in the *sukkah* but his table inside the house. The House of Shammai answered them, is this a proof? They said to him, if you are used to do this, you never in your life did fulfill the obligation of *sukkah*.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:8:2
[Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:8:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/2:8:2)

**הלכה:** לֹא סוֹף דָּבָר שׁוּלְחָנוֹ. אֶלָּא אֲפִילוּ כְדֵי שׁוּלְחָנוֹ. כַּמָּה הוּא כְדֵי שׁוּלְחָנוֹ. טֶפַח.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**HALAKHAH:** Not only his table, but even a place for his table⁹² which accommodates most of a person’s body and a table. This does not imply that a table must actually be put into the *sukkah*; all that is needed is space for a table.. How much is a place for his table? A hand-breadth⁹³.

footnotes:
⁹² It is implied by the Mishnah that the House of Shammai require a sukkah
⁹³ A hand-breadth square. It is one of the peculiarities of the idioms of both Talmudim that linear and volume measures are clearly named, but area measures (other than agricultural ones determined by the amount of seeds used for a unit) are subsumed under the names of the corresponding linear measures.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:8:3
[Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:8:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/2:8:3)

רִבִּי יוּדָה בַּר פָּזִי וְרִבִּי אַיְיבוֹ בַּר נַגָּרִי הֲווֹן יִתִיבִין. אָמְרִין. תַּנִּינָן. אַחַר שֶׁהוֹדוּ. מִי הוֹדֶה לְמִי. בֵּית שַׁמַּי לְבֵית הִלֵּל [אוֹ] בֵית הִלֵּל לְבֵית שַׁמַּי. אָמְרִין. נֵצֵא לַחוּץ וְנִלְמוֹד. וְנָפְקִין וְשָׁמְעוּן. רִבִּי חִזְקִיָּה רִבִּי אָחָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוּדָה בֶּן לֵוִי. לֹא מָצָאנוּ שֶׁהוֹדוּ בֵית (הִלֵּל) [שַׁמַּי] לְבֵית (שַׁמַּי) [הִלֵּל] אֶלָּא בְדָבָר זֶה בִלְבַד. רִבִּי חוּנָה בְשֵׁם רַב אַבַּיָיא. מַתְנִיתָא אָמְרָה כֵן. הַמְעָרֶה מִכְּלִי לִכְלִי וְנָגַע טְבוּל יוֹם בַּקִּילּוּחַ. אִם יֶשׁ בּוֹ יַעֲלֶה בְּאֶחָד וּמֵאָה. אִין תֵּימַר. בֵּית הִלֵּל הוֹדוּ לְבֵית שַׁמַּי שֶׁלֹּא תַעֲלֶה. מָאן תַּנָּא הָכָא תַעֲלֶה. לֹא בֵית הִלֵּל [וַלֹא] (לְ)בֵית שַׁמַּי. אָמַר רִבִּי אִידִי. נֹאמַר. בֵּית הִלֵּל שָׁנוּ אוֹתָהּ עַד שֶׁלֹּא הוֹדוּ לָהֶם בֵּית שַׁמַּי. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵה. מַתְנִיתָא אָמְרָה כֵן. אַחַר שֶׁהוֹדוּ. רַבִּי לִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר. תֵּירוֹם וְתִישָּרֵף. וְרִבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר לָאו שַׁמּוּתִי הוּא. אָמַר רִבִּי חִינָנָא. מַתְנִיתָא אָמְרָה כֵן. אַחַר שֶׁהוֹדוּ אֵילּוּ לָאֵילּוּ תַעֲלֶה. בֵּית שַׁמַּי מְסַלְּקִין לוֹן. וְאִינּוּן מוֹדֵיי לוֹן. אָמַר רִבִּי אָבוּן. תָּשׁוּבָה אֲחֶרֶת יֵשׂ כָּאן. כְּהָדָא דְתַנֵּי רִבִּי הוֹשַׁעְיָה. מָה אִם טְהוֹרָה שֶׁהִיא בְעָוֹן מִיתָה אֶצֶל זָרִים הֲרֵי הִיא עוֹלָה. טְמֵאָה שֶׁהִיא בַעֲשֵׂה אֶצֶל כֹהֲנִים לֹא כָל שֶׁכֵּן.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
⁹⁴5:4 (Notes 65–71). Mishnah *Terumot*5:1 states that impure heave which was mixed with other produce must be destroyed (burned) as long as the impure heave constitutes at least 1% of the total. If the amount of impure heave is 1%, an amount equal to that of the impure heave can be removed from the total, “lifted”, with the impurity transferred to the lifted amount, and the remainder used for its original purpose. Mishnah 4 reports a dispute between the Houses of Hillel and Shammai about impure heave which fell into 100 times its volume of pure heave, where the House of Shammai forbid everything but the House of Hillel permit. At the conclusion of the argument, R. Eliezer holds that 1 part of 101 has to be lifted and burned, but the Sages say that the impure was lost in its minority, i. e., since everything is heave all 101 parts may be eaten by a Cohen as pure heave. Rebbi Yudan bar Pazi and Rebbi Ayvo bar Naggari were sitting and saying: We did state “after they conceded“; who conceded to whom? The House of Shammai to the House of Hillel or the House of Hillel to the House of Shammai? They said, let us go out and study. The went out and heard Rebbi Ḥizqiah, Rebbi Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Jehudah ben Levi. We never find the House of (Hillel) [Shammai] conceding to the House of (Shammai) [Hillel] except in this matter. Rebbi Ḥunah in the name of Rav Abbaia: The Mishnah⁹⁵2:7. A *Ṭevul Yom* is a person who had been impure, is no longer impure after immersion in a *miqweh*, but is prevented from touching or consuming *sancta* until be becomes pure at the following nightfall (*Lev.*22:7). If in the period between his immersion and sundown he touches heave, it becomes unusable; this is classified as “impure in the third degree”. If the *ṭevul yom* touches a stream of heave fluid (wine or oil) poured from one vessel to the other, in the opinion of the Sadducees the entire fluid in both vessels becomes unusable (MMT lines 55–58). In rabbinic tradition, only the part touched by the *ṭevul yom* becomes unusable; the fluid cannot be used because unusable heave is contained in it, but it can be repaired by the usual lifting of one out of 101. says so. “If someone pours from vessel to vessel and a *ṭevul yom* touches it, it should be lifted by 101.” If you say that the House of Hillel conceded to the House of Shammai that it cannot be lifted, who is the Tanna here, neither the House of Shammai nor the House of Hillel! Rebbi Idi said, we might say that the House of Hillel stated this before they conceded. Rebbi Yose said, the Mishnah said so⁹⁶5:4.: “After they conceded, Rebbi Eliezer said it should be lifted and burned,” and is Rebbi Eliezer not a follower of Shammai? Rebbi Ḥinena said, the Mishnah said so, after they conceded one to another that it should be lifted, the House of Shammai recused themselves and the others agree with us. Rebbi Abun says, there is another answer⁹⁷, following what Rebbi Hoshaia stated: Since pure {heave}, which for outsiders is forbidden as deadly sin, can be lifted, certainly also impure {heave} which is {prohibited} as positive commandment⁹⁸ for Cohanim.

footnotes:
⁹⁴ This paragraph, introductory to the discussion why practice in this case follows the Hose of Shammai, essentially is from Terumot
⁹⁵ Mishnah Ṭevul Yom
⁹⁶ Mishnah Terumot
⁹⁷ Which the House of Hillel could have given to the House of Shammai, in addition to the argument presented in the Mishnah.
⁹⁸ Which is classified as a misdemeanor, rather than a felony.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:8:4
[Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:8:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/2:8:4)

מַה זָכוּ בֵית הִלֵּל שֶׁתִּיקָּבַע הֲלָכָה כְדִבְרֵיהֶן. אָמַר רִבִּי יוּדָה בַּר פָּזִי. שֶׁהָיוּ מַקְדִּימִין דִּבְרֵי בֵית שַׁמַּי לְדִבְרֵיהֶן. וְלֹא עוֹד אֶלָּא שֶׁהָיוּ רוֹאֵין דִּבְרֵי בֵית שַׁמַּי וְחוֹזְרִין בָהֶן. הָתִיב רִבִּי סִימוֹן בַּר זֶבֶד קוֹמֵי רִבִּי אִילָא. אוֹ נֹאמַר. תְּנָיָיה חַמְתּוֹן סַבִּין מִינּוֹן וְאַקְדְּמוֹן. וְהָא תַנֵּי. מַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁהָלְכוּ זִקְנֵי בֵית שַׁמַּי וְזִקְנֵי בֵית הִלֵּל לְבַקֵּר אֶת יוֹחָנָן בֶּן הַחוֹרוֹנִי. נֹאמַר. זְקֵינֵינוּ וְזִקְנֵיכֶם. אָמַר רִבִּי זְעוּרָה רַב חוּנָה בְשֶׁם רַב. הֲלָכָה כְבֵית שַׁמַּי. רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה רִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר רַב יִצְחָק בְשֶׁם רַב. מִמַּה שֶׁסִּילְּקוּ בֵית שַׁמַּי לְבֵית הִלֵּל. הָדָא אָמְרָה. הֲלָכָה כְדִבְרֵיהֶן.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
From where did the House of Hillel merit that practice should be fixed following their words? Rebbi Jehudah bar Pazi said, because they quoted the words of the House of Shammai before their own words⁹⁹13b. Historically one has to note that no renowned scholar of the House of Shammai is known born after the destruction of the Temple.. Not only that, but if they were convinced by the words of the House of Shammai they changed their opinions. Rebbi Simon bar Zeved objected before Rebbi Ila: Or could we say that the Tanna saw that they were older and quoted them first? But did we not state, “it happened that the elders of the House of Shammai and the House of Hillel went to visit Joḥanan from Hauran”? We could have said, our elders and your elders¹⁰⁰. Rebbi Ze`ira said, Rav Ḥuna in the name of Rav: Practice follows the House of Shammai¹⁰¹. Rebbi Jeremiah, Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac in the name of Rav: Since the House of Shammai dismissed the House of Hillel¹⁰², this implies that practice follows their words.

footnotes:
⁹⁹ Babli Eruvin
¹⁰⁰ The formulation “elders of the House of Shammai and elders of the House of Hillel” is original, not a formulation of the editor of the Mishnah.
¹⁰¹ In the case of Mishnah 2:8. Babli 3a.
¹⁰² No answer from the House of Hillel is noted.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:9:1
[Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:9:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/2:9:1)

**משנה:** נָשִׁים עֲבָדִים וּקְטַנִּים פְּטוּרִין מִן הַסּוּכָּה. כָּל קָטָן שֶׁאֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ לְאִמּוֹ חַיָיב בַּסּוּכָּה. מַעֲשֶׂה וְיָלְדָה כַלָּתוֹ שֶׁל שַׁמַּי הַזָּקֵן וּפִיחֵת אֶת הַמַּעֲזִיבָה וְסִיכֵּךְ עַל גַּבֵּי הַמִּיטָּה בִּשְׁבִיל הַקָּטָן:

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**MISHNAH:** Women, slaves, and minors are not obligated for the *sukkah*. Any minor who does not need his mother is obligated¹⁰³ as part of his religious training. for the *sukkah*. It happened that the Elder Shammai’s daughter-in-law gave birth and he removed the roof insulation and thatched the roof over the bed for the minor.

footnotes:
¹⁰³ As a minor he cannot be responsible for anything. His parents are obligated to bring him to the sukkah


###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:9:2
[Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:9:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/2:9:2)

**הלכה:** אֵי זֶהוּ קָטָן. דְּבֵית רִבִּי יַנַּאי אָמְרֵי. כָּל שֶׁהוּא צָרִיךְ לְאִמּוֹ שֶׁתְּקַנְּחֶנּוּ. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר. כָּל שֶׁהוּא נֵיעוֹר מִשְּׁנָתוֹ וְקוֹרֵא. אִימָּא. תַּנֵּי רִבִּי הוֹשַׁעְיָה. קָטָן שֶׁאֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ לְאִמּוֹ חַיָיב בַּסּוּכָּה וְיוֹצֵא בְּעֵירוּבָהּ שֶׁלְאִמּוֹ.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**HALAKHAH:** What is a minor¹⁰⁴.? In the house of Rebbi Yannai they said, any who needs his mother to cleanse him. Rebbi Joḥanan said, any who awakes from his sleep and cries “Mamma”¹⁰⁵. Rebbi Hoshaia stated: Any minor who does not need his mother is obligated for the *sukkah* but goes out with his mother’s *eruv*¹⁰⁶ to move her Sabbath boundary on a Sabbath or holiday, it is not necessary to make a separate *eruv* for the child. Since the mother is not obligated in matters of *sukkah*, her status there cannot influence his status in matters of *eruv teḥumim*..

footnotes:
¹⁰⁴ Whose parents do not have to bring him to the sukkah
¹⁰⁵ Babli 28b.
¹⁰⁶ If his mother made an eruv


###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:10:1
[Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:10:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/2:10:1)

**משנה:** כָּל שִׁבְעַת הַיָּמִים עוֹשֶׂה אָדָם סוּכָּתוֹ קֶבַע וְאֶת בֵּיתוֹ עֲרַאי . יָרְדוּ גְשָׁמִים מֵאֵימָתַי מוּתָּר לְפַנּוֹת מִשֶּׁתִּסְרַח הַמִּקְפָּה. מוֹשְׁלִין אוֹתוֹ מָשָׁל לְמָה הַדָּבָר דּוֹמֶה לְעֶבֶד שֶׁבָּא לִמְזוֹג כּוֹס לְקוֹנוֹ וְשָׁפַךְ הַקִּיתוֹן עַל פָּנָיו:

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**MISHNAH:** All seven days a person makes his *sukkah* permanent and his house casual. If it started to rain when is one permitted to leave? When the cereal becomes smelly. One has for this a parable, to what does this compare? To a slave who comes to mix a cup for his owner and the latter throws the pitcher in his face.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:10:2
[Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:10:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/2:10:2)

**הלכה:** כָּתוּב בַּסּוּכּוֹת תֵּשְׁבוּ. וְאֵין תֵּשְׁבוּ אֶלָּא תָדוּרוּ. כְּמַה דְאַתְּ אָמַר וִירִשְׁתֶּם אוֹתָהּ וִישַׁבְתֶּם בָּהּ. שֶׁיְּהֵא אוֹכֵל בַּסּוּכָּה וּמְטַיֵיל בַּסּוּכָּה וּמַעֲלֶה כֵלָיו לַסּוּכָּה.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**HALAKHAH:** It is written¹⁰⁷ 23:42., *in sukkot you shall sit*. But sitting means dwelling¹⁰⁸, as you are saying, *you shall inherit it and sit in it*¹⁰⁹. 11:31.*;* that he eats in the *sukkah*, and rests in the *sukkah*, and brings his utensils to the *sukkah*.

footnotes:
¹⁰⁷ Lev.
¹⁰⁸ Babli 28b.
¹⁰⁹ Deut


###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:10:3
[Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 2:10:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/2:10:3)

[יָרְדוּ גְשָׁמִים מֵאֵימָתַי מוּתָּר לְפַנּוֹת וכו׳.] לֹא סוֹף דָּבָר שֶׁתִּסְרַח אֶלָּא אֲפִילוּ כְדֵי שֶׁתִּסְרַח. לֹא סוֹף דָּבָר מִקְפָּת גְּרִיסִין אֶלָּא אֲפִילוּ מִקְפָּה שֶׁלְכָּל דָּבָר. תַּנֵּי. כְּשֵׁם שֶׁמְפַנִּין מִפְּנֵי הַגְּשָׁמִים כָּךְ מְפַנִּין מִפְּנֵי הַשָּׁרָב וּמִפְּנֵי הַיְּתוּשִׁין. רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל נִכְנַס וְיוֹצֵא כָּל הַלָּיְלָה. רִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר נִכְנַס וְיוֹצֵא כָּל הַלָּיְלָה. חַד תַּלְמִיד מִן דְּרִבִּי מָנָא הוֹרֵי לְחַד מִן קְרֵיבוֹי דִּנְשִׂיָיא. יָצָא אֵין מַטְרִיחִין עָלָיו שֶׁיַּחְזוֹר. וְלָא שְׁמִיעַ. רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל נִכְנַס וְיוֹצֵא כָּל הַלָּיְלָה. רִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר נִכְנַס וְיוֹצֵא כָּל הַלָּיְלָה.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
[“If it started to rain when is one permitted to leave,: etc,] Not only if it gets smelly but even if it could get smelly. Not only a cereal of groats but any dish¹¹⁰. Just as one evacuates because of rain one evacuates because of a hot wind and because of mosquitoes. Rabban Gamliel entered and left the entire night; Rebbi Eliezer entered and left the entire night. One of Rebbi Mana’s students instructed a relative of the Patriarch: If he left, one does not importune him to return¹¹⁰. He had not heard that Rabban Gamliel entered and left the entire night; Rebbi Eliezer entered and left the entire night.

footnotes:
¹¹⁰ Babli 29a.
¹¹⁰ Babli 29a.