## Sukkah Daf 36b

###### Sukkah 36b:1
[Sukkah 36b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sukkah/r/36b:1)

וְתוּ לָא מִידֵּי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara notes: **And** there is **nothing more** to discuss here. Clearly, the opinions of Rabbi Akiva and Rabbi Shimon do not necessarily coincide.


###### Sukkah 36b:2
[Sukkah 36b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sukkah/r/36b:2)

גִּדְּלוֹ בִּדְפוּס וַעֲשָׂאוֹ כְּמִין בְּרִיָּה אַחֶרֶת — פָּסוּל. אָמַר רָבָא: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא כְּמִין בְּרִיָּה אַחֶרֶת, אֲבָל כִּבְרִיָּיתוֹ — כָּשֵׁר. פְּשִׁיטָא! כְּמִין בְּרִיָּה אַחֶרֶת (תְּנַן)! לָא צְרִיכָא, דַּעֲבִידָא דַּפֵּי דַּפֵּי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* continues: **If he grew** the *etrog* **in a mold and shaped it** to appear **like a different species,** it is **unfit. Rava said:** The Sages **taught** that it is unfit **only** if he shaped it to appear **like a different species; however,** if he shaped the *etrog* so it still appears **like its own species, it is fit.** The Gemara asks: That is **obvious;** the phrase: **Like a different species, is** explicitly **taught** in the *baraita*. If it shaped like its own species, it is fit. The Gemara answers: **No,** Rava’s statement **is necessary** to deem fit an *etrog* **that is shaped** into the shape of **many planks,** i.e., pieces of wood attached to each other. Although its shape is not precisely that of a regular *etrog*, it sufficiently resembles a regular *etrog* and is fit.


###### Sukkah 36b:3
[Sukkah 36b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sukkah/r/36b:3)

אִיתְּמַר אֶתְרוֹג שֶׁנְּקָבוּהוּ עַכְבָּרִים, אָמַר רַב: אֵין זֶה הָדָר. אִינִי? וְהָא רַבִּי חֲנִינָא מְטַבֵּיל בֵּהּ וְנָפֵיק בֵּהּ! וּלְרַבִּי חֲנִינָא קַשְׁיָא מַתְנִיתִין!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **It was stated** that the *amora’im* disagree with regard to **an *etrog* that mice pierced. Rav said: That is not beautiful. Is that so? But wouldn’t Rabbi Ḥanina dip** his *etrog*, eat part of it, **and fulfill his obligation with** what remained of **it?** The Gemara asks: **And for Rabbi Ḥanina, the mishna is difficult,** as it states that an incomplete *etrog* is unfit.


###### Sukkah 36b:4
[Sukkah 36b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sukkah/r/36b:4)

בִּשְׁלָמָא מַתְנִיתִין לְרַבִּי חֲנִינָא לָא קַשְׁיָא: כָּאן בְּיוֹם טוֹב רִאשׁוֹן, כָּאן בְּיוֹם טוֹב שֵׁנִי. אֶלָּא לְרַב קַשְׁיָא! אָמַר לְךָ רַב: שָׁאנֵי עַכְבָּרִים דִּמְאִיסִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara explains: **Granted, for Rabbi Ḥanina, the mishna is not difficult,** as it can be explained that **here,** when the mishna prohibits one from using an incomplete *etrog*, it is referring to performing the mitzva **on the first day of the festival** of *Sukkot*, when a complete taking of the species is required; and **there,** when Rabbi Ḥanina’s conduct leads to the conclusion that an incomplete *etrog* is fit, it is referring to performing the mitzva on **the second day of the Festival** or thereafter. **However,** according **to Rav,** who said an *etrog* that was pierced by mice is unfit, Rabbi Ḥanina’s conduct is **difficult,** as the requirement of beauty applies on all seven days. The Gemara answers: This is not difficult, as **Rav** could have **said to you: Mice are different, as they are repulsive.** When mice pierce an *etrog*, what remains is antithetical to beauty. When a person bites an *etrog*, what remains can still be considered beautiful.


###### Sukkah 36b:5
[Sukkah 36b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sukkah/r/36b:5)

אִיכָּא דְּאָמְרִי, אָמַר רַב: זֶה הָדָר, דְּהָא רַבִּי חֲנִינָא מְטַבֵּיל בֵּהּ וְנָפֵיק בֵּהּ. וּלְרַבִּי חֲנִינָא קַשְׁיָא מַתְנִיתִין! לָא קַשְׁיָא: כָּאן בְּיוֹם טוֹב רִאשׁוֹן, כָּאן בְּיוֹם טוֹב שֵׁנִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **Some say** this exchange differently. **Rav said** with regard to an *etrog* that mice pierced: **That is beautiful, as Rabbi Ḥanina would dip** his *etrog*, eat part of it, **and fulfill his obligation with** what remained of **it,** indicating that an incomplete *etrog* is fit. The Gemara asks: **And for Rabbi Ḥanina, the mishna is difficult,** as it states that an incomplete *etrog* is unfit. The Gemara answers: **The mishna is not difficult; here,** it is referring to performing the mitzva **on the first day of the festival** of *Sukkot*; **there,** it is referring to performing the mitzva on **the second day of the Festival** or thereafter.


###### Sukkah 36b:6
[Sukkah 36b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sukkah/r/36b:6)

אֶתְרוֹג קָטָן וְכוּ׳. אָמַר רַפְרָם בַּר פָּפָּא: כְּמַחְלוֹקֶת כָּאן, כָּךְ מַחְלוֹקֶת בַּאֲבָנִים מְקוּרְזָלוֹת. דְּתַנְיָא: בְּשַׁבָּת שָׁלֹשׁ אֲבָנִים מְקוּרְזָלוֹת מוּתָּר לְהַכְנִיס לְבֵית הַכִּסֵּא, וְכַמָּה שִׁיעוּרָן? רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר: כֶּאֱגוֹז, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: כְּבֵיצָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
A dispute between Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yehuda is cited in a mishna with regard to the minimum measure **of a small *etrog*. Rafram bar Pappa said: Like the dispute here, so is the dispute with regard to** the matter of **rounded stones, as it was taught** in a *baraita*: **On Shabbat three rounded stones may be taken into the bathroom** in order to clean oneself with them. Although generally one may not move stones on Shabbat because they are set aside from use, the Sages permitted doing so in the interest of human dignity. However, they disagreed, with regard to the size of these stones. **And what is their measure? Rabbi Meir says: A walnut-bulk; Rabbi Yehuda says: An egg-bulk.** Clearly the rationales for these disputes are different; however, since the respective measures are identical, the analogy can serve as a mnemonic.


###### Sukkah 36b:7
[Sukkah 36b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sukkah/r/36b:7)

וּבַגָּדוֹל כְּדֵי שֶׁיֹּאחַז כּוּ׳. תַּנְיָא, אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי: מַעֲשֶׂה בְּרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא שֶׁבָּא לְבֵית הַכְּנֶסֶת וְאֶתְרוֹגוֹ עַל כְּתֵפוֹ! אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי יְהוּדָה: מִשָּׁם רְאָיָה? אַף הֵם אָמְרוּ לוֹ: אֵין זֶה הָדָר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The mishna continues: **And in a large** *etrog*, the maximum measure is **so that one could hold** two in his one hand; this is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Yosei says: It is fit even if it is so large that he can hold only one in his two hands. **It is taught** in a *baraita* that **Rabbi Yosei said:** There was **an incident involving Rabbi Akiva, who came to the synagogue, and his *etrog*** was so large that he carried it **on his shoulder.** Apparently, one can fulfill his obligation with a large *etrog*. **Rabbi Yehuda said to him:** Is there **proof from there?** In that case, **too,** the Sages **said to him: That is not beauty.**


###### Sukkah 36b:8
[Sukkah 36b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sukkah/r/36b:8)

**מַתְנִי׳** אֵין אוֹגְדִין אֶת הַלּוּלָב אֶלָּא בְּמִינוֹ, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוּדָה. רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר: אֲפִילּוּ (בְּחוּט) בִּמְשִׁיחָה. אָמַר רַבִּי מֵאִיר: מַעֲשֶׂה בְּאַנְשֵׁי יְרוּשָׁלַיִם שֶׁהָיוּ אוֹגְדִין אֶת לוּלְבֵיהֶן בְּגִימוֹנִיּוֹת שֶׁל זָהָב. אָמְרוּ לוֹ: בְּמִינוֹ הָיוּ אוֹגְדִין אוֹתוֹ מִלְּמַטָּה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** **One may bind the *lulav* only with its own species;** i.e., one of the four species taken with the *lulav*. This is **the statement of Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Meir says:** One may do so **even with a string** or **with a cord. Rabbi Meir said:** There was **an incident involving the men of Jerusalem who would bind their *lulavim* with gold rings.** The Sages **said to him: They would bind it with its own species beneath** the rings, which serve a merely decorative purpose and not a halakhic one.


###### Sukkah 36b:9
[Sukkah 36b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sukkah/r/36b:9)

**גְּמָ׳** אָמַר רָבָא: אֲפִילּוּ בְּסִיב, אֲפִילּוּ בְּעִיקָּרָא דְּדִיקְלָא. וְאָמַר רָבָא: מַאי טַעְמֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה, קָסָבַר: לוּלָב צָרִיךְ אֶגֶד, וְאִי מַיְיתֵי מִינָא אַחֲרִינָא — הָוֵה חַמְשָׁה מִינֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** **Rava said:** One may bind the *lulav* **even with fibers** that grow around the trunk of the date palm, **and even with** a piece of **the trunk of the date palm. And Rava said: What is the rationale** for the opinion **of Rabbi Yehuda? He holds that a *lulav* requires binding, and if one brings another species** to bind the *lulav*, **there will be five species** and he will violate the prohibition against adding to the mitzvot.


###### Sukkah 36b:10
[Sukkah 36b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sukkah/r/36b:10)

וְאָמַר רָבָא: מְנָא אָמֵינָא לַהּ דְּסִיב וְעִיקָּרָא דְּדִיקְלָא מִינָא דְלוּלַבָּא הוּא — דְּתַנְיָא: ״בַּסּוּכּוֹת תֵּשְׁבוּ״, סוּכָּה שֶׁל כׇּל דָּבָר, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: אֵין סוּכָּה נוֹהֶגֶת אֶלָּא בְּאַרְבָּעָה מִינִים שֶׁבַּלּוּלָב. וְהַדִּין נוֹתֵן: וּמָה לוּלָב שֶׁאֵין נוֹהֵג בַּלֵּילוֹת כְּבַיָּמִים, אֵינוֹ נוֹהֵג אֶלָּא בְּאַרְבַּעַת מִינִין, סוּכָּה שֶׁנּוֹהֶגֶת בַּלֵּילוֹת כְּבַיָּמִים — אֵינוֹ דִּין שֶׁלֹּא תְּהֵא אֶלָּא בְּאַרְבַּעַת מִינִין!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And Rava** further **said: From where do I say** this *halakha* **that fibers and the trunk of the date palm are the species of the *lulav*?** It is **as it is taught** in a *baraita* that it is written: **“You shall reside in *sukkot*** for seven days” (Leviticus 23:42), which means **a *sukka* of any material,** as the Torah was not particular about the material to be used for the roofing; any species may be used as long as it grew from the ground and it is not susceptible to impurity. This is **the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehuda says:** The mitzva of ***sukka* is practiced only with the four species of the *lulav*** as roofing. **And,** he claims, **logic dictates** that it is so, as it is derived by means of an *a fortiori* inference: **Just as** the mitzva of ***lulav*, which is not practiced at night as it is during the day, is practiced only with the four species,** with regard to the mitzva of ***sukka*, which is practiced at night as it is during the day, is it not right that its** roofing **should be only from the four species?**


###### Sukkah 36b:11
[Sukkah 36b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sukkah/r/36b:11)

אָמְרוּ לוֹ: כׇּל דִּין שֶׁאַתָּה דָּן תְּחִלָּתוֹ לְהַחְמִיר וְסוֹפוֹ לְהָקֵל — אֵינוֹ דִּין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Rabbis **said to him:** That is not an *a fortiori* inference, as **any** *a fortiori* **inference that you infer initially to be stringent, but ultimately** it is **to be lenient, is not a** legitimate *a fortiori* **inference.** If ultimately the stringency leads to a leniency, the entire basis of the inference is undermined.