Mishnah Commentary: Mishnah 4. mSukkah 3:10

A Feminist Commentary on the Babylonian Talmud

מי שהיה עבד או אישה או קטן מקרין אותו, עונה אחריהן מה שהן אומרין, ותהי לו מאירה. אם היה גדול מקרא אותו, עונה אחריו: הללויה.

Mishnah Sukkah 3:10

If a slave, a woman, or a minor[1] recited [the Hallel] to him, he must repeat after them what they say and a curse be upon him. If an adult recited for him, he repeats after him [only]: Halleluyah.

[1] FOX, Tractate Succah 2, 110 notes the unusual order of the wording in the mishnah, as opposed to the usual “women, slaves, and minor” which exists in other mishnaic groupings of the three, see above Mishnah 2. I believe that this uncommon order can be explained through a grammatical analysis of the Hebrew. The verb היה , which is used in the opening sentence, מי שהיה , is in the male singular form since it relates to מי and not to מקרין . The order of the readers relates to the verb היה (masculine) and therefore the word אישה was deferred to the second place on the list.

General observations

The following dispute between Bet Shammai and Bet Hillel is connected to the ancient custom of waving or shaking the lulav during the recitation of the Hallel prayer and helps explain the Mishnah under discussion here:

משנה סוכה ג׳:ט׳

והיכן היו מנענעים? ב"הודו ל- ה'" (תהלים קיח א, כט) תחילה וסוף וב"אנא ה' הושיע נא" (שם כה), דברי בית הלל. ובית שמאי אומרים: אף ב"אנא ה' הצליחה נא" (שם).

Mishnah Sukkah 3:9

And where is [the lulav] waved? At the commencement and conclusion of [the Psalm]: “O give thanks unto ' ה” (Ps 118:1, 29) and at: “Save now, we beseech You, ה' ” (ibid. 25). These are the words of Bet Hillel. Bet Shammai say: Also at “'ה, we

beseech You, send now prosperity” (ibid.)

In the continuation of the mishnah, Rabbi Aqiva testifies to how this dispute developed:

משנה סוכה ג׳:ט׳

צופה הייתי ברבן גמליאל וברבי יהושע, שכל העם היו מנענעין את לולביהן, והן לא נענעו אלא ב"אנא ה' הושיעה נא" (תהלים קיח כה).

Mishnah Sukkah 3:9

I watched Rabban Gamali’el and Rabbi Yehoshu‘a, and all the people were waving their lulavim (at other verses). They waved them only at ‘Save now, we beseech You, ה'” (Ps. 118:25).

From these texts, we learn how the Hallel was recited and celebrated during the Sukkot festivities. mSuk 3:10 states that if a slave, a woman, or a minor recited the Hallel for a man, he had to repeat every word they said, since they are not required to recite the Hallel, and one who is not obligated cannot fulfill the commandment on behalf of others.[1] On the other hand, since an adult male is required to recite the Hallel, he can fulfill the commandment for another – even if that person can read and recite the prayer by himself. Consequently, if an adult male recited the Hallel prayer then anyone listening does not have to repeat every word but merely to respond Halleluyah at the end.

[1] See discussion above to Mishnah 1 (mSuk 2:8).

Feminist observations

The mishnah here also determines that if a slave, a woman, or a minor recited Hallel for another (that is, a male adult), then that person will be cursed. Rashi interprets this as meaning that if a man did not learn to read, or knew how to read but did not take the trouble to recite the Hallel, then he will be cursed since he has desecrated the sacred by using emissaries who are not obligated to fulfill this commandment. Judith Hauptman, however, believes that the explanation for the “curse” is that the person using emissaries has debased himself.[1] She relates this to a baraita in cited in the Bavli:

[1] HAUPTMAN, Rereading the Rabbis, 223.

ברכות כ׳ ב

בן מברך לאביו ועבד מברך לרבו ואישה מברכת לבעלה. אבל אמרו חכמים: תבוא מארה לאדם שאשתו ובניו מברכים לו.

Berakhot 20b

A [minor] son recites [grace after meals] on behalf of his father, a slave recites [Grace] for his master, and a wife recites [grace] for her husband. But the sages said: May a curse come upon him whose wife and [minor] sons recite [the grace after meals] for him.[1]

[1] And see also tBer 5:17 cited above in the discussion of Mishnah 2 (mSuk 2:8).

Hauptman further cites a sugya in the Yerushalmi condemning the use of a minor for ritual tasks, in support of her hypothesis:

תלמוד ירושלמי סוכה ג׳:ט׳:ב׳

ועוד אמרו: תבוא מאירה לבן עשרים שהוא צריך לבן עשר.

Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:9:2

And they further say: A curse be upon one who is twenty years old, who requires [the services of] one who is ten years old.

Thus, Hauptman deduces that the sages condemned or cursed those who used people of a lower status for fulfilling ritual tasks, since such an act represented self-denigration. In her opinion, women had such a low social status in antiquity that even if they were obligated to observe several commandments they could not assist men in fulfilling their ritual obligations without the men being censured for this.
Hauptman views the realia in antiquity as responsible for the sages’ attitude towards men who were assisted by women in fulfilling ritual commandments. Other scholars also took these sources to task. Judith Wegner accuses the sages of ridiculing women’s humanity by not valuing their ability to fulfill religious commandments and by defining these commandments as men’s sole responsibility.[1] Bernadette Brooten’s conclusion from our mishnah is more favorable to the sages.[2] She believes that it proves that the sages only allowed women to read from the Torah in private and not in public as is evinced by their exclusion from reading the megillah (tMeg 2:7).[3]

[1] WEGNER, Chattel or Person, 154.

[2] BROOTEN, Women Leaders in the Ancient Synagogue, 95.

[3] For my view of the issue see above, Mishnah 2 (mSuk 2:8).