Sukkah 25a — the Talmud in English

And therefore Rav Huna son of Rav Yehoshua said: One may not carry within it

unless

if the circumference of the tree does not exceed

a beit se'atayim [שטח שזורעין בו סאתיים זרע, וגודלו מאה על חמשים אמה כחצר המשכן]?! [an area in which two se'ah of seed are sown, whose size is one hundred by fifty cubits, like the courtyard of the Tabernacle]?!

And we answer:

because it is a dwelling whose use is for the air

that is outside it. That is to say, the dwelling beneath the tree is made only for the sake of the air outside it, to guard the fields.

Any dwelling whose use is for the air

that is outside it—the enclosure is not considered an enclosure for a dwelling.

And an enclosure that is not for a dwelling

one may carry within it only

a

beit se'atayim.

Come and hear

from a beraita concerning the Shabbat boundary:

A. One who was standing, when the day of Shabbat was sanctified, outside the city, in a place that was not enclosed by partitions, has four cubits as his “place of residence,” which are considered “a person’s place.” For the Torah said: “Let every man remain under himself; let no man leave his place on the day of Shabbat.” And from those four cubits he measures the Shabbat boundary, two thousand cubits.

B. One who spends Shabbat in a place enclosed by partitions—the entire enclosed place is considered for him as four cubits, and he measures the Shabbat boundary of two thousand cubits from the boundary of the enclosure onward.

C. An enclosure that is not made for a dwelling is not considered an “enclosure” unless the enclosure was smaller than a beit se'atayim, as was explained.

D. A mound ten handbreadths high is considered as enclosed by partitions, because we say: “Extend and raise the partition.”

A person who

spent Shabbat

at the onset of Shabbat

on a mound that is ten

handbreadths high,

and it is [שטחו] [its area] more

area was larger

than four cubits

up to a beit se'atayim.

And

similarly

one who spends Shabbat

in a depression,

a depression in the earth that was made during the six days of Creation,

which is ten

handbreadths deep,

and

its area

is from four cubits up to a beit se'atayim.

And similarly

one who spends Shabbat within

a harvested standing crop,

in a clearing formed within a standing crop, after the crop in the middle was harvested,

and ears of grain surround it,

and the size of the clearing was from four cubits to a beit se'atayim [Rashi].

This person

may walk

on Shabbat

through all of it [את כל שטח ההיקף] [the entire area of the enclosure] כדין שובת באויר מחיצות, שאינו מונה תחום שבת אלא מהמחיצות ואילךas one who spends Shabbat in the air within partitions, who measures the Shabbat boundary only from the partitions onward,

[through the entire enclosed area], according to the law governing one who observes Shabbat in an area surrounded by partitions: he measures the Shabbat boundary only from the partitions onward,

and outside it

another

two thousand cubits,

the measure of the Shabbat boundary.

We have thus learned that the ears of grain are considered a partition,

even though they move back and forth [הולכים ובאים ומתנועעים ברוח מצויה], ותיקשי לרב אחא בר יעקבand this is difficult for Rav Aḥa bar Yaakov?!

[moving and swaying in an ordinary wind]. This poses a difficulty to the opinion of Rav Aḥa bar Yaakov?!

And we reject this:

there, too, he reinforced it with palm branches and reeds,

he strengthened the ears of grain with them so that they would not move in the wind.

Mishna:

A.

Those sent on a mitzva,

who are traveling on a mitzva journey—for example, one who goes to study Torah, or to greet his teacher, or to redeem captives [Rashi]—these

are exempt from the sukka

even at the time of their encampment, because anyone occupied with a mitzva is exempt from the mitzva if he cannot fulfill both of them [Rashi and Tosafot]].

B.

The ill and those attending them are exempt from the sukka—

The ill are exempt because they suffer through sitting in the sukka, and it is written: “In sukkot you shall dwell” for seven days, and we require: “You shall dwell as you dwell [in your home],” and there is no dwelling in a place where one suffers [Ritva].

And those attending them are exempt because one occupied with a mitzva is exempt from the mitzva [Mishna Berura].

C.

One eats and drinks casually outside the sukka,

because a person eats a casual meal outside his home [Ritva].

Gemara:

And we raise an objection concerning this:

From where are these words

that one occupied with a mitzva is exempt from the mitzva?

For the Sages taught:

It is written: “And these words that I command you today shall be upon your heart. You shall teach them diligently to your children and speak of them, when you sit in your house, when you walk on the way, when you lie down, and when you rise.” There is an apparent superfluity here, for it should have said only: “You shall speak of them when you lie down and when you rise” [Ritva]. Rather, the verse comes to teach: "

And when you walk on the way”—

"When you sit in your house”—

excluding one occupied with a mitzva,

who is exempt from reciting the Shema. "

From here they said: One who marries a virgin, who has not yet had marital relations [Shulḥan Arukh], because he is preoccupied with the mitzva, thinking about the matter of the virginity, [Mishna Berura], he is exempt from reciting the Shema. And if he marries a widow, who is not preoccupied with thoughts of marital relations, he is

"And when you walk on the way”—

excluding a groom,

who is exempt from reciting the Shema, since he is preoccupied with the thought of the mitzva intercourse.

And the Gemara explains how these laws are derived from the verses.

From here they said: One who marries a virgin

and has not yet performed the act [Shulḥan Arukh], for he is preoccupied with a mitzva preoccupation, thinking about the matter of virginity [Mishna Berura], behold, he is

exempt

from reciting the Shema.

And

if one who marries

a widow,

who is not preoccupied with the thought of intercourse with her, he is

obligated

in reciting the Shema!

How is it implied,

how is it implied from these verses that one occupied with a mitzva is exempt?

Rav Huna said:

Since it is stated, “when you sit and when you walk,” they were compared to “the way” [Rashi, Berakhot], to tell you: The Torah obligated only

like “

way”

of one who travels for business:

Just as the way is optional, so everything [in the verse] is optional.

To exclude this one,

one occupied with a mitzva, and a groom who is preoccupied with a mitzva preoccupation,

for he is occupied with a mitzva.

And we wonder:

Are we not dealing with one who is going [הולך]

“when sitting and when walking.”

for a mitzva matter?

Can you not include a mitzva way together with an optional way in the verse? After all, the Torah wrote “way” without qualification,

and

even so

the Merciful One says: Let him recite

the Shema?!

And we explain:

If so,

that the verse also speaks of a mitzva way,

let the verse say [יאמר הכתוב]:

that one engaged in a mitzva is exempt from another mitzva,

“When sitting and when walking.”

What is “

“when you sit and when you walk”?

To teach you:

when you walk for yourself—

an optional way that is yours and for your needs—

that is when you are obligated; but when you walk for a mitzva—

which is not yours and for your needs, but for the needs of the Omnipresent—

you are exempt.

And we wonder:

If so,

that one occupied with a mitzva is exempt from the mitzva,

even one who marries a widow as well

should be exempt from reciting the Shema, for although he is not preoccupied, he is occupied with a mitzva!

And we explain:

One who marries a virgin

is exempt because his heart is

preoccupied

with the thought of intercourse, and he cannot fulfill both. But

one who marries a widow

is

not preoccupied

with this, and can fulfill both.

And it entered our mind to explain that a groom is exempt not because of the law that one occupied with a mitzva is exempt from the mitzva, but because through the preoccupation he cannot direct his mind and recite; therefore we wonder:

And wherever one is preoccupied,

is it

also so that he is exempt?!

If so,

if

his ship sank in the sea, and he is preoccupied

with his distress,

is it also so

that we should say

that he is exempt?!

And if you would say, “It is also so,”

perhaps you will say: Indeed, one preoccupied with his distress is exempt from reciting the Shema—

But Rabbi Abba bar Zavda said in the name of Rav: A mourner is obligated in all the mitzvot stated in the Torah, except for tefillin, for it is said concerning them “

“glory.”

as it is written in Ezekiel: “Your glory shall be bound upon you,” and a mourner is not one for whom there is glory, and when he adorns himself, he presents himself as not being a mourner [Rashi].

We have thus learned that even a mourner who is preoccupied with his distress is obligated in reciting the Shema, for he is exempt only from tefillin?!

And we answer: The fact that a groom is exempt from reciting the Shema is not because he cannot direct his heart, but:

Here,

in the case of a groom preoccupied with the thought of intercourse,

he is preoccupied in

it is derived from there,

a mitzva preoccupation,

and therefore he is exempt. And the verse comes to teach you that he is not required to remove his mind from the thought of the first mitzva because of this mitzva that comes upon him; rather, he should attend to the first one and give his heart to be proficient in the matter—

But

there,

in the case of a mourner [or one whose ship sank in the sea],

he is preoccupied with an optional preoccupation.

For although he is obligated to observe the mourning practices of locking [shoes], washing, and anointing, in order to show honor to his dead, he is not obligated to suffer; and since this is so, he is obligated to remove his thoughts and direct himself.

And we wonder:

And

the law of

one occupied with a mitzva is exempt from the mitzva—is it from here

from “when you sit in your house” that it

emerges?

But

it emerges from there,

for from another verse it is possible to learn that one occupied with a mitzva is exempt from the mitzva?!

For it was taught:

It is written concerning the Paschal offering that Israel made in the second year after their departure from the land of Egypt:

“And there were men who were impure through contact with a human corpse

and they could not make the Paschal offering on that day.”

And the beraita explains:

Who were those men?

They were the bearers of Joseph’s coffin,

those men—

the words of Rabbi Yosei the Galilean.