הָתָם הוּא דִּמְבַטֵּל, אֲבָל הָכָא דְּלָא מְבַטֵּל — לָא. The Gemara answers: There is a difference between the case of the shutter and the case of the sheet. There, in the case of the shutter, where he negates it by shuttering the window, it is considered part of the building and it is therefore prohibited. However, here, in the case of the sheet, where he does not negate it, as he plans on removing it, no, it is not necessarily prohibited.
תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: מַעֲשֶׂה בְּרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר שֶׁשָּׁבַת בַּגָּלִיל הָעֶלְיוֹן, וּשְׁאָלוּהוּ שְׁלֹשִׁים הֲלָכוֹת בְּהִלְכוֹת סוּכָּה, שְׁתֵּים עֶשְׂרֵה אָמַר לָהֶם: שָׁמַעְתִּי, שְׁמוֹנֶה עֶשְׂרֵה אָמַר לָהֶם: לֹא שָׁמַעְתִּי. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, חִילּוּף הַדְּבָרִים: שְׁמוֹנֶה עֶשְׂרֵה אָמַר לָהֶם: שָׁמַעְתִּי, שְׁתֵּים עֶשְׂרֵה אָמַר לָהֶם: לֹא שָׁמַעְתִּי. The Gemara relates a similar incident. The Sages taught: There was an incident involving Rabbi Eliezer, who stayed in the Upper Galilee, and the people there asked him thirty halakhot in the halakhot of sukka. In response to twelve, he said to them: I heard an answer from my teachers, and he related what he heard. In response to the other eighteen, he said to them: I did not hear an answer. Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, says: It was the reverse of these matters. In response to eighteen he said to them: I heard an answer; in response to the other twelve he said to them: I did not hear an answer.
אָמְרוּ לוֹ: כׇּל דְּבָרֶיךָ אֵינָן אֶלָּא מִפִּי הַשְּׁמוּעָה! אָמַר לָהֶם: הִזְקַקְתּוּנִי לוֹמַר דָּבָר שֶׁלֹּא שָׁמַעְתִּי מִפִּי רַבּוֹתַי. מִיָּמַי לֹא קְדָמַנִי אָדָם בְּבֵית הַמִּדְרָשׁ, וְלֹא יָשַׁנְתִּי בְּבֵית הַמִּדְרָשׁ לֹא שֵׁינַת קֶבַע וְלֹא שֵׁינַת עֲרַאי, וְלֹא הִנַּחְתִּי אָדָם בְּבֵית הַמִּדְרָשׁ וְיָצָאתִי, וְלֹא שַׂחְתִּי שִׂיחַת חוּלִּין, וְלֹא אָמַרְתִּי דָּבָר שֶׁלֹּא שָׁמַעְתִּי מִפִּי רַבִּי מֵעוֹלָם. They said to him: Are all the matters that you know only from what you heard? Don’t you say any matters on your own? He said to them: Now you forced me to say a matter that I did not hear from my teachers, as I must describe my character traits and the manner in which I conduct myself. In all my days, no person ever preceded me into the study hall, as I am always first to arrive; and I never slept in the study hall, neither substantial sleep nor a brief nap; and I never left anyone in the study hall and exited, as I was always last to leave; and I never engaged in idle conversation; rather, I discussed only necessary matters or matters of Torah; and I never said anything that I did not hear from my teacher. That is why he did not answer those questions that his teacher did not address.
אָמְרוּ עָלָיו עַל רַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי: מִיָּמָיו לֹא שָׂח שִׂיחַת חוּלִּין, וְלֹא הָלַךְ אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת בְּלָא תּוֹרָה וּבְלֹא תְּפִילִּין, וְלֹא קְדָמוֹ אָדָם בְּבֵית הַמִּדְרָשׁ, וְלֹא יָשַׁן בְּבֵית הַמִּדְרָשׁ לֹא שֵׁינַת קֶבַע וְלֹא שֵׁינַת עֲרַאי, וְלֹא הִרְהֵר בִּמְבוֹאוֹת הַמְטוּנָּפוֹת, וְלֹא הִנִּיחַ אָדָם בְּבֵית הַמִּדְרָשׁ וְיָצָא, וְלֹא מְצָאוֹ אָדָם יוֹשֵׁב וְדוֹמֵם אֶלָּא יוֹשֵׁב וְשׁוֹנֶה, וְלֹא פָּתַח אָדָם דֶּלֶת לְתַלְמִידָיו, אֶלָּא הוּא בְּעַצְמוֹ, וְלֹא אָמַר דָּבָר שֶׁלֹּא שָׁמַע מִפִּי רַבּוֹ מֵעוֹלָם, וְלֹא אָמַר: הִגִּיעַ עֵת לַעֲמוֹד מִבֵּית הַמִּדְרָשׁ, חוּץ מֵעַרְבֵי פְסָחִים, וְעַרְבֵי יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים. וְכֵן הָיָה רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר תַּלְמִידוֹ נוֹהֵג אַחֲרָיו. Apropos the character traits of Rabbi Eliezer, the Gemara cites character traits of his teacher. The Sages said about Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai, the teacher of Rabbi Eliezer: In all his days he never engaged in idle conversation; and he never walked four cubits without engaging in Torah study and without donning phylacteries; and no person ever preceded him into the study hall; and he never slept in the study hall, neither substantial sleep nor a brief nap; and he never contemplated matters of Torah in alleyways filthy with human excrement, as doing so is a display of contempt for the Torah; and he never left anyone in the study hall and exited; and no person ever found him sitting and silent, i.e., inactive; rather, he was always sitting and studying; and only he opened the door for his students, disregarding his own eminent standing; and he never said anything that he did not hear from his teacher; and he never said to his students that the time has arrived to arise and leave the study hall except on Passover eves, when they were obligated to sacrifice the Paschal lamb, and Yom Kippur eves, when there is a mitzva to eat and drink abundantly. And Rabbi Eliezer, his student, accustomed himself to model his conduct after his example.
תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: שְׁמוֹנִים תַּלְמִידִים הָיוּ לוֹ לְהִלֵּל הַזָּקֵן. שְׁלֹשִׁים מֵהֶן רְאוּיִם שֶׁתִּשְׁרֶה עֲלֵיהֶן שְׁכִינָה כְּמֹשֶׁה רַבֵּינוּ, וּשְׁלֹשִׁים מֵהֶן רְאוּיִם שֶׁתַּעֲמוֹד לָהֶם חַמָּה כִּיהוֹשֻׁעַ בִּן נוּן. עֶשְׂרִים בֵּינוֹנִים. גָּדוֹל שֶׁבְּכוּלָּן — יוֹנָתָן בֶּן עוּזִּיאֵל, קָטָן שֶׁבְּכוּלָּן — רַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי. The Gemara continues to praise the Sages. The Sages taught: Hillel the Elder had eighty students. Thirty of them were sufficiently worthy that the Divine Presence should rest upon them as it did upon Moses our teacher, and thirty of them were sufficiently worthy that the sun should stand still for them as it did for Joshua bin Nun, and twenty were on an intermediate level between the other two. The greatest of all the students was Yonatan ben Uzziel, and the youngest of them was Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai.
אָמְרוּ עָלָיו עַל רַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי שֶׁלֹּא הִנִּיחַ מִקְרָא וּמִשְׁנָה, גְּמָרָא הֲלָכוֹת וְאַגָּדוֹת; דִּקְדּוּקֵי תוֹרָה וְדִקְִדּוּקֵי סוֹפְרִים; קַלִּים וַחֲמוּרִים וּגְזֵרוֹת שָׁווֹת; תְּקוּפוֹת וְגִימַטְרִיָּאוֹת; שִׂיחַת מַלְאֲכֵי הַשָּׁרֵת וְשִׂיחַת שֵׁדִים וְשִׂיחַת דְּקָלִים; מִשְׁלוֹת כּוֹבְסִין, מִשְׁלוֹת שׁוּעָלִים; דָּבָר גָּדוֹל וְדָבָר קָטָן. The Gemara relates: The Sages said about Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai that he did not neglect Bible; Mishna; Gemara; halakhot and aggadot; minutiae of the Torah and minutiae of the scribes; the hermeneutical principles of the Torah with regard to a fortiori inferences and verbal analogies; the calculation of the calendrical seasons; and numerology [gimmatreyaot]. In addition, he did not neglect esoteric matters, including the conversation of ministering angels; the conversation of demons, and the conversation of palm trees; parables of launderers, which are folk tales that can be used to explain the Torah; parables of foxes; and more generally, a great matter and a small matter.
דָּבָר גָּדוֹל — מַעֲשֵׂה מֶרְכָּבָה. דָּבָר קָטָן — הֲוָיוֹת דְּאַבָּיֵי וְרָבָא. לְקַיֵּים מַה שֶּׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״לְהַנְחִיל אוֹהֲבַי יֵשׁ וְאוֹצְרוֹתֵיהֶם אֲמַלֵּא״. וְכִי מֵאַחַר שֶׁקָּטָן שֶׁבְּכוּלָּן כָּךְ, גָּדוֹל שֶׁבְּכוּלָּן עַל אַחַת כַּמָּה וְכַמָּה. אָמְרוּ עָלָיו עַל יוֹנָתָן בֶּן עוּזִּיאֵל, בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁיּוֹשֵׁב וְעוֹסֵק בַּתּוֹרָה — כׇּל עוֹף שֶׁפּוֹרֵחַ עָלָיו מִיָּד נִשְׂרָף. The Gemara elaborates: A great matter is referring to the secrets of the Design of the Divine Chariot, the conduct of the transcendent universe. A small matter is, for example, halakhot that were ultimately formulated in the framework of the disputes of Abaye and Rava. He did not neglect any of these disciplines so as to fulfill that which is stated: “That I may cause those that love me to inherit substance and that I may fill their treasuries” (Proverbs 8:21), as Rabban Yoḥanan was filled with the disciplines of Torah and wisdom. And if the youngest of them was so prolific, the greatest of them was all the more so prolific. The Gemara relates that the Sages said of Yonatan ben Uzziel, the greatest of Hillel’s students, that when he sat and was engaged in Torah study, the sanctity that he generated was so intense that any bird that flew over him was immediately incinerated.
מַתְנִי׳ מִי שֶׁהָיָה רֹאשׁוֹ וְרוּבּוֹ בַּסּוּכָּה וְשׁוּלְחָנוֹ בְּתוֹךְ הַבַּיִת — בֵּית שַׁמַּאי פּוֹסְלִין וּבֵית הִלֵּל מַכְשִׁירִין. אָמְרוּ לָהֶם בֵּית הִלֵּל לְבֵית שַׁמַּאי: לֹא כָּךְ הָיָה מַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁהָלְכוּ זִקְנֵי בֵּית שַׁמַּאי וְזִקְנֵי בֵּית הִלֵּל לְבַקֵּר אֶת רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן הַחוֹרָנִית, וּמְצָאוּהוּ שֶׁהָיָה יוֹשֵׁב רֹאשׁוֹ וְרוּבּוֹ בַּסּוּכָּה וְשׁוּלְחָנוֹ בְּתוֹךְ הַבַּיִת, וְלֹא אָמְרוּ לוֹ דָּבָר. אָמְרוּ לָהֶם בֵּית שַׁמַּאי: מִשָּׁם רְאָיָה?! אַף הֵם אָמְרוּ לוֹ: אִם כֵּן הָיִיתָ נוֹהֵג, לֹא קִיַּימְתָּ מִצְוַת סוּכָּה מִיָּמֶיךָ. MISHNA: In the case of one whose head and most of his body were in the sukka and his table was in the house, Beit Shammai deem it unfit, and Beit Hillel deem it fit. Beit Hillel said to Beit Shammai: And wasn’t there an incident where the Elders of Beit Shammai and the Elders of Beit Hillel went to visit Rabbi Yoḥanan ben HaḤoranit and they found him such that he was sitting with his head and most of his body in the sukka and his table in the house, and they said nothing to him? Even Beit Shammai did not object. Beit Shammai said to them: Is there proof from there? That is not what happened; rather, they said to him: If you were accustomed to act in this manner, you have never fulfilled the mitzva of sukka in your life.
נָשִׁים וַעֲבָדִים וּקְטַנִּים פְּטוּרִין מִן הַסּוּכָּה. קָטָן שֶׁאֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ לְאִמּוֹ — חַיָּיב בְּסוּכָּה. מַעֲשֶׂה וְיָלְדָה כַּלָּתוֹ שֶׁל שַׁמַּאי הַזָּקֵן, וּפִיחֵת אֶת הַמַּעֲזִיבָה וְסִיכֵּךְ עַל גַּבֵּי הַמִּטָּה בִּשְׁבִיל קָטָן. The mishna continues: Women, slaves, and minors are exempt from the mitzva of sukka. A minor who does not need his mother any longer is obligated in the mitzva. There was an incident where the daughter-in-law of Shammai the Elder gave birth just before Sukkot, and Shammai removed the coat of plaster from the roof, leaving the beams, and roofed with the beams over the bed for the newborn minor.
גְּמָ׳ מְנָא הָנֵי מִילֵּי? דְּתָנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״אֶזְרָח״ — זֶה אֶזְרָח, ״הָאֶזְרָח״ — לְהוֹצִיא אֶת הַנָּשִׁים, ״כׇּל״ — לְרַבּוֹת אֶת הַקְּטַנִּים. GEMARA: With regard to the halakha that women, slaves, and minors are exempt from the mitzva of sukka, the Gemara asks: From where are these matters derived? The Gemara answers that it is as the Sages taught in a baraita that it is stated: “All the homeborn in Israel shall reside in sukkot” (Leviticus 23:42). Had the verse stated only: Homeborn, it would have been derived that any homeborn member of the Jewish people is obligated to observe this mitzva. However, the term with the addition of the definite article: “The homeborn,” indicates that only certain homeborn members are obligated, i.e., men, to the exclusion of the women. The word “all” in the phrase: “All the homeborn,” comes to include the minors capable of performing this mitzva.
אָמַר מָר: ״הָאֶזְרָח״ — לְהוֹצִיא אֶת הַנָּשִׁים. לְמֵימְרָא דְּ״אֶזְרָח״, בֵּין נָשִׁים בֵּין גַּבְרֵי מַשְׁמַע? וְהָתַנְיָא: ״הָאֶזְרָח״ — לְרַבּוֹת אֶת הַנָּשִׁים הָאֶזְרָחִיּוֹת, שֶׁחַיָּיבוֹת בְּעִינּוּי. אַלְמָא ״אֶזְרָח״ — גַּבְרֵי מַשְׁמַע! אָמַר רַבָּה: הִלְכְתָא נִינְהוּ וְאַסְמְכִינְהוּ רַבָּנַן אַקְּרָאֵי. § The Gemara analyzes the baraita. The Master said: “The homeborn” is to the exclusion of women. Is that to say that the term homeborn without the definite article indicates both men and women? Isn’t it taught in a baraita with regard to Yom Kippur that it is stated: “And it shall be a statute forever unto you: In the seventh month, on the tenth day of the month, you shall afflict your souls and shall do no manner of work, the homeborn, or the stranger that sojourns among you” (Leviticus 16:29). And the term “the homeborn” in that verse comes to include homeborn women, who are obligated in the mitzva of affliction on Yom Kippur. In that case, the definite article comes to include women. Therefore, apparently, the term homeborn, without the definite article, indicates only men. Rabba said: They are each a halakha transmitted to Moses from Sinai, and the Sages merely supported them with verses as a mnemonic device. Therefore, it is not surprising that the derivations are contradictory.
הֵי קְרָא וְהֵי הִלְכְתָא? וְתוּ: קְרָא לְמָה לִי, הִלְכְתָא לְמָה לִי? הָא סוּכָּה מִצְוַת עֲשֵׂה שֶׁהַזְּמַן גְּרָמָא, וְכׇל מִצְוַת עֲשֵׂה שֶׁהַזְּמַן גְּרָמָא נָשִׁים פְּטוּרוֹת. The Gemara asks: Which of them is derived from the verse and which is a halakha transmitted to Moses from Sinai and merely supported by a verse? And furthermore, why do I need the verse and why do I need the halakha? Isn’t sukka a positive, time-bound mitzva, and the principle is that women are exempt from all positive, time-bound mitzvot? There is no need for a special derivation to exempt women from the mitzva of sukka.
יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים, מִדְּרַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר רַב נָפְקָא. דְּאָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר רַב, וְכֵן תָּנָא דְּבֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל אָמַר קְרָא: ״אִישׁ אוֹ אִשָּׁה״, And there is no need for a derivation with regard to their obligation to fast on Yom Kippur, as that can be derived from that which Rav Yehuda said that Rav said, as Rav Yehuda said that Rav said, and it was likewise taught in the school of Rabbi Yishmael: The verse says: “When a man or woman shall commit any sin that a person commits, to commit a trespass against the Lord, and that soul be guilty” (Numbers 5:6).