משנה: רבי אליעזר אומר: ארבע עשרה סעודות חייב אדם לאכול בסכה: אחת ביום ואחת בלילה. וחכמים אומרים: אין לדבר קצבה, חוץ מלילי יום טוב הראשון שלחג בלבד. ועוד אמר רבי אליעזר: מי שלא אכל בלילי יום טוב הראשון, ישלים בלילי יום טוב האחרון. וחכמים אומרים: אין לדבר תשלומין. על זה נאמר: "מעות לא יוכל לתקן וחסרון לא יוכל להמנות" (קהלת א טו).
Mishnah: Rabbi Eli‘ezer said: A man is obligated to eat fourteen meals in the sukkah, one on each day and one on each night. The sages however say: There is no fixed number except on the first night of the festival alone. Rabbi Eli‘ezer said in addition: If a man did not eat in the sukkah on the first night of the festival, he may make up for it on the last night of the festival. While the sages say: There is no compensation for this. And of this it was said: “That which is crooked cannot be made straight, and that which is wanting cannot be numbered” (Eccl 1:15).
גמרא: שאל אפוטרופוס של אגריפס המלך את רבי אליעזר: כגון אני שאיני רגיל לאכול אלא סעודה אחת ביום, מהו שאוכל סעודה אחת ואפטר? אמר לו: בכל יום ויום אתה ממשיך כמה פרפראות לכבוד עצמך, ועכשיו אי אתה ממשיך פרפרת אחת לכבוד קונך? ועוד שאלו: כגון אני שיש לי שתי נשים, אחת בטבריה ואחת בציפורי, ויש לי שתי סוכות, אחת בטבריה ואחת בציפורי, מהו שאצא מסוכה לסוכה ואפטר? אמר לו: לא. שאני אומר כל היוצא מסוכה לסוכה בטל מצוותה של הראשונה.
Gemara: The epitropos of King Agrippa asked Rabbi Eli‘ezer: [A man] such as I am, who eats but one meal a day, may I eat one meal [in the sukkah] and be free [of my obligation]? He answered him: Every day you draw out [the meal] with all kinds of dainties for your own honor, and now you cannot add one dainty for the honor of your Creator? He also asked him: [A man] such as I am, who has two wives, one in Tiberias and one is Sepphoris, and two sukkot , one in Tiberias and one in Sepphoris, may I go from one sukkah to the other and thus be free of my obligation? He answered him: No. For I say that he who goes from one sukkah to another, annuls the commandment of the first.
@General observations
The mishnah presents two disputes between the sages and Rabbi Eli‘ezer concerning the number of meals one is obligated to eat in the sukkah. The gemara sees a contradiction between Rabbi Eli‘ezer’s position in his first ruling, that one must eat fourteen meals in the sukkah, and his position in the second, that one who did not eat the first festive evening meal in the sukkah may make it up on the last night – the Shemini Azeret.
This contradiction is resolved by the following testimony of a sage named Bira: “In the name of Rabbi Ammi: Rabbi Eli‘ezer recanted [his previous statement]” (bSuk 27a). Still, this testimony is rejected following the citation of another source, which relates a conversation between the epitropos (Greek for overseer) of Agrippa II (48–103 CE) and Rabbi Eli‘ezer, a Yavneh generation sage (1st–2nd century CE). The discussion encompasses two questions concerning a possible exemption from eating fourteen meals in the sukkah, and the possibility to fulfill the sukkah commandment in two sukkot, both of which are answered with an emphatic no. The stama of the gemara believes that this discussion confirms that Rabbi Eli‘ezer was adamant regarding the obligation to eat fourteen meals in the sukkah, two meals on each of the seven days of Sukkot.
@Feminist observations
Adiel Schremer cites the story of Agrippa’s overseer’s two wives, as well as several other talmudic sources, in order to prove the existence of polygamy during the Second Temple period and even following the destruction of the Temple. Likewise, he notes that several tannaitic sources relating to polygamy reflect the reality in which the sages lived, as opposed to theoretical discussions of the Temple that we find in the same sources.[1] Still Schremer accepts the prevalent scholarly opinion that the norm for the majority of Jewish society in the Land of Israel was monogamy.[2]
From a feminist perspective, the main significance of this story is the testimony that in the Land of Israel, close to the time of the destruction of the Second Temple, women possibly sat in the sukkah next to their husbands. If the epitropos of Agrippa was bothered about where he should celebrate the festival of Sukkot, since he had two wives in different cities, and each required his presence, this implies that they themselves sat in sukkot in these two locations. This sugya therefore supports the assumption, introduced in chapter 2 (Bavli 1/1), that the exemption of women from the obligation of sukkah was formulated following the destruction of the Temple or at the latest after the Bar Kokhba Revolt, and not beforehand. Nevertheless the hypothesis that the sugya reflects a tannaitic reality must be carefully weighed, since the only source for this story is the Bavli. The sugya may only reflect the amoraic perception of Second Temple Jewish society, which perhaps was influenced by the practice of polygamy in the surrounding Persian society.[3] Likewise, it may reflect the practice of Jews in Babylonia, also described above, according to which women sat in the sukkah even though they were halakhically exempt from doing so.