מי שהיה ראשו ורובו בסוכה ושלחנו בתוך הבית, ב"ש פוסלין וב"ה מכשירין. אמרו להם ב"ה לב"ש: לא כך היה מעשה שהלכו זקני ב"ש וזקני ב"ה לבקר את רבי יוחנן בן החורני ומצאוהו שהיה יושב ראשו ורובו בסוכה ושולחנו בתוך הבית ולא אמרו לו דבר? אמרו להם ב"ש: משם ראיה? אף הם אמרו לו: אם כך היית נוהג, לא קיימת מצות סוכה מימיך.
One who had his head and the greater part of his body inside the sukkah and his table inside the house, Bet Shammai rules this invalid but Bet Hillel declares it valid. Bet Hillel said to Bet Shammai: Did it not happen so, that the elders of Bet Shammai and the elders of Bet Hillel went to visit Rabbi Yohanan ben Hahoroni and found him sitting with his head and the greater part of his body in the sukkah, while his table was inside the house, and they said nothing to him? Bet Shammai said to then: [Your] proof is [derived] from there? They actually said to him: If you have conducted yourself thus, you have never in your life fulfilled the commandment of sukkah.
General observations
This tradition discusses the legal status of a sukkah that is adjacent to a house and is so small that only the body of the person performing the commandment can fit into it, but his table, on which he eats, is inside his house. Bet Shammai considered such a sukkah invalid, and a person who dwells in it as not having fulfilled the sukkah commandment. Bet Hillel, however, disagreed. The statement about this halakhic dispute is followed by a dialogue between members of the two houses, in which a story is told, of a certain man by the name of Yohanan ben Hahoroni who acted in this way. The members of Bet Hillel claim that Bet Shammai had not reprimanded him. The members of Bet Shammai, however, claim that it had.
This Yohanan is, in general, an unknown person. He does not bear the title rabbi and his association with the world of the sages remains unclear. The Tosefta at this point relates a completely different story about him, in order to prove that he was a disciple of Bet Shammai, who, nevertheless, followed the dicta of Bet Hillel:
אמ' ר' לעזר בי ר' צדוק: כשהייתי למד אצל יוחנן בן החרנית ראיתיו שהוא אוכל פת חריבה, שהיו שני בצורת. באתי ואמרתי לאבא, ואמ' לי: הילך זיתים לו. הולכתי לו זיתים. נטלן והסתכל בהן, וראן שהן לחין. אמ': איני אוכל זיתים. באתי ואמרתי לאבא. אמ' לי: לך אמור לו: מנוקבת היתה כדברי בית הלל, אלא שסתמוה שמרים. להודיעך שהיה אוכל חולין בטהרה. שאע"פ שהוא מתלמידי בית שמיי, לא היה נוהג אלא כדברי בית הלל.
Said Rabbi Ele‘azar bar Rabbi Tsadoq: When I studied with Yohanan ben Hahornit I saw him eating dry bread, because it was during years of drought. I came and told my father, and he said to me: Bring him olives. I brought him olives. He took them and looked at them, and saw that they were damp. He said: I do not eat olives. I came and told my father. He said to me: Go tell him: [The barrel in which they were pickled] was perforated, according to the words of Bet Hillel, but it was sealed by yeast. This shows that he used to eat unconsecrated food in a state of purity, [and] that although he was a disciple of Bet Shammai, he practiced only according to the ruling of Bet Hillel.
@Feminist observations
In the mishnah Yohanan is designated בן החורוני (ben Hahoroni) suggesting that he is called after a man, his father, whose nickname probably points to his place of origin – the Hauran (Auranitis) east of the Sea of Galilee, or Bet Horon, on the highway to Jerusalem, north west of the city. This version is also supported by the Yerushalmi, where the same story is told (ySuk 2:8, 53b). However, in both Tosefta MSS (Erfurt and Vienna) we find the version בן החרנית (ben Hahornit),[1] indicating a feminine suffix. The old printed edition of the Tosefta has the faulty version החרבית (Hahorvit), but maintains the feminine suffix. This version is substantiated by a parallel text in the Tosefta (tEd 2:2) where the text reads בן החרנית (ben Hahornit), and by the mention of this person in the Bavli (bBer 11a; bEruv 13b and of course bSuk 28a) always as ben Hahornit, with the feminine suffix.
Menachem Fox concluded from the fact that the majority of the Mishnah MSS identify Yohanan of this mishnah as Ben Hahoroni, while those of the Tosefta and the Bavli identify him as Ben Hahornit, that the sources that post-date the Mishnah altered the man’s name because they wished to denigrate him. They named him after his mother, because of the criticism associated with his action at the end of the mishnah.[2] Fox assumes that Yohanan’s mother was designated Hahornit, probably after her place of origin. Tal Ilan[3] however, doubts this assumption and presents two conclusive arguments to substantiate her reservations:
1. The definite article, he, before the word Horoni and Horonit shows that this is a nickname, not a personal name. She compares this to the case of Rabbi Yosi ben Hadormasqit (יוסי בן הדורמסקית) who is often mentioned in tannaitic sources and in the Bavli and whose name has nothing to do with his mother’s name. Rabbi Yosi himself testifies that he was born in Damascus (SifDeut 1).
2. In bYev 15b Yohanan himself (rather than his father) is identified as Horoni (of Horon). These versions cast doubt on the suggestion that the man’s mother was known to the later sources as Hahoronit. In light of Ilan’s argument, one should reject Fox’s assertion that the Tosefta and the Bavli intentionally altered Yohanan’s lineage, for there is no way to prove that they knew, or even assumed that they were naming him after his mother.
[1] The London MS has the version .בן החורוני
[2] FOX, Tractate Sukkah, 64.
[3] ILAN, “Man Born of Woman …”
Menachem Fox concluded from the fact that the majority of the Mishnah MSS identify Yohanan of this mishnah as Ben Hahoroni, while those of the Tosefta and the Bavli identify him as Ben Hahornit, that the sources that post-date the Mishnah altered the man’s name because they wished to denigrate him. They named him after his mother, because of the criticism associated with his action at the end of the mishnah.[2] Fox assumes that Yohanan’s mother was designated Hahornit, probably after her place of origin. Tal Ilan[3] however, doubts this assumption and presents two conclusive arguments to substantiate her reservations:
1. The definite article, he, before the word Horoni and Horonit shows that this is a nickname, not a personal name. She compares this to the case of Rabbi Yosi ben Hadormasqit (יוסי בן הדורמסקית) who is often mentioned in tannaitic sources and in the Bavli and whose name has nothing to do with his mother’s name. Rabbi Yosi himself testifies that he was born in Damascus (SifDeut 1).
2. In bYev 15b Yohanan himself (rather than his father) is identified as Horoni (of Horon). These versions cast doubt on the suggestion that the man’s mother was known to the later sources as Hahoronit. In light of Ilan’s argument, one should reject Fox’s assertion that the Tosefta and the Bavli intentionally altered Yohanan’s lineage, for there is no way to prove that they knew, or even assumed that they were naming him after his mother.
[2] FOX, Tractate Sukkah, 64.
[3] ILAN, “Man Born of Woman …”