Sukkah 20b — the Talmud in English

Rabbi Hiyya and his sons said: Rabbi Dosa and the Sages did not differ concerning the mats of Usha, that they are impure

The impurity of a surface upon which one lies, since they are designated for lying and not for another use.

And

They did not disagree concerning the mats

of Tiberias, that they are pure

from the impurity of a surface upon which one lies, since they are hard and it is not customary to lie upon them.

Over what did they disagree? —

Over

mats of

other places.

One master holds: Since there is no one who sits upon them,

that is, since most people are not accustomed to designate these mats for lying, therefore

like

mats of

Tiberias they are considered.

And one master holds: Since it happens that people sit upon them,

there is a minority of people who sit upon them,

like

mats

of Usha they are considered,

which are made for lying.

The master said: All the mats become impure with corpse impurity; these are the words of Rabbi Dosa.

And the Gemara raises an objection:

And

behold,

it was taught:

we learned in a beraita brought above:

And so Rabbi Dosa would also say in accordance with his words

of Rabbi Ishmael son of Rabbi Yosei, who holds that a mat of reeds and hilat does not become impure and one may use it for roofing, since it is not customary to lie upon it. If so, it is proven that a mat that is not designated for lying, even though some people lie upon it, is not like a vessel to receive impurity.

And the Gemara answers:

It is not difficult:

This

statement, that Rabbi Dosa said that all the mats become impure with corpse impurity, refers to a mat

that has a raised rim.

It has an edge around it that is slightly raised and is made like a receptacle made to receive fruits; therefore its status is like that of a complete vessel for receiving impurity.

And

this

statement, that Rabbi Dosa said that one may use a mat for roofing, refers to one

that does not have a raised rim,

and therefore it is not considered a vessel to receive impurity unless it is actually made for lying, in which case it is considered a vessel also with regard to corpse impurity.

The Gemara raises an objection:

It was objected

to Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish, who explains that hutzalot means mats, from what we learned:

Mats of rushes

a species of reeds,

and of reeds and of sackcloth

goat hair,

and of sapira

horsehair that they cut from its neck and tail,

become impure with corpse impurity; these are the words of Rabbi Dosa.

And the Sages say: Also with the impurity of a surface upon which one lies.

Granted, according to the one who says that

hutzalot means

marzovlei,

shepherds’ bags made as receptacles, and when the shepherds are not lying upon them they serve as actual receptacles, therefore the mats

of rushes and of reeds

become impure with corpse impurity, for although they are not finely woven and there is space between one reed and the next, nevertheless

they are suitable for large fruits,

they are suitable for receiving large fruits.

And likewise it is understandable that a mat

of sackcloth and of sapira

becomes impure with corpse impurity, since

they are suitable for gulkei and tzanei.

They are suitable for serving as sacks for legumes and small fruits.

But according to the one who says

that hutzalot means

actual mats,

if so,

granted

mats

of sackcloth and of sapira are suitable for spreading out

they are suitable for spreading them like a curtain opposite the entrance, for it is explained in tractate Beitza, page 14b, that a curtain is deemed a vessel to receive impurity and is not considered part of the walls of the house,

and

likewise they are suitable to serve as

nafvata

sieves with which to sift flour.

But

mats

of rushes and of reeds—for what are they suitable?

And the Gemara answers:

They are suitable for nezayata.

They are suitable for covering the vat in which beer is made.

There are those who say

there is a difficulty in the opposite direction:

Granted, according to the one who says

that hutzalot means

actual mats,

those of rushes and of reeds —

they are suitable for nezayata. Those of sackcloth and of sapira —

they are suitable for parsei and nafvata.

But according to the one who says

what are hutzalot?

Marzovlei. Granted, those of sackcloth and of sapira —

they are suitable for gulkei and tzanei. But those of rushes and of reeds—for what are they suitable?

And the Gemara answers:

They are suitable for large fruits.

It was taught: Rabbi Hanania said: When I went down to the Diaspora

to Babylonia,

I found one elderly man, and he said to me: One may use

a budeia

a mat, since it is designated for roofing and not for lying and is not considered a vessel to receive impurity.

And when I came before Rabbi Yehoshua, my father’s brother, he acknowledged his words.

Rav Hisda said: And this is provided that it does not have

that mat

a raised rim,

for if it has an edge around it, it is like all other vessels made to place fruits and the like inside them, which become impure through contact with the dead.

Ulla said: These budyata

mats

of the people of Mehoza, were it not for the rim

the raised rim

of theirs —

one could use them for roofing.

It was also taught so: One may use a budeia for roofing, but if they have a rim —

one may not use them for roofing.

We return to you, chapter “Sukka.”

Mishna:

One who sleeps under the bed in the sukkah has not fulfilled his obligation,

since a tent separates between him and the sukkah, and it is found that he is not sitting in the sukkah [Rashi and Ritva].

Rabbi Judah said: We used to practice that we would sleep under the bed in the presence of the elders, and they said nothing to us,

and in the Gemara the reason for Rabbi Judah will be explained.

Rabbi Shimon said: There was an incident involving Tavi, the slave of Rabban Gamliel, who was sleeping under the bed

in the sukkah,

and Rabban Gamliel said to the elders: Have you seen my slave Tavi, who is a Torah scholar and knows that slaves are exempt from the sukkah

like women, since it is a positive time-bound mitzva,

and therefore he is sleeping under the bed.

And from our path we have learned,

that is: Even though he did not tell us this for the sake of teaching, but merely as casual conversation, that he was praising his slave only as a joke, we learned from the manner of his joking

that one who sleeps under the bed has not fulfilled his obligation.

Gemara:

We learned in the Mishna: One who sleeps under the bed in the sukkah has not fulfilled his obligation:

And we raise an objection:

But

an ordinary bed

does not have ten

handbreadths beneath it, so why is it forbidden to sleep beneath it ?!

Shmuel explained

our Mishna:

With a bed

that is high

ten [handbreadths].

We learned there

concerning a tent that conveys ritual impurity:

Whether a hole that water hollowed out,

for example, where there was a high bank beside the river, and the water entered and made a long opening—

or

a hole that

vermin

[such as rats and the barn owl] hollowed out—

or salt destroyed it,

the salty earth cracks on its own—

and likewise a pile

of

stones,

large stones arranged one upon another, and sometimes one is laid upon two stones separated from one another, and an empty space is made there—

and likewise a stack of beams,

beams arranged on the ground, one upon another, and intended for building, with many openings between them—

if in one of these there is a handbreadth by a handbreadth with a height of a handbreadth, or more, according to the measure of a tent for ritual impurity, and there is an olive-sized portion of a corpse and utensils on the other side beneath it, then it

forms a tent over the ritual impurity

to render the utensils impure under the law of a tent [Ritva].

Rabbi Judah says: Any tent that was not made by human hands

with the intention of making it a tent

is not a tent;

it does not form a tent over the utensils at all, and the ritual impurity breaks through and rises opposite it up to the firmament [Ritva].

And we explain:

What is Rabbi Judah’s reason?