Sukkah 6b — the Talmud in English

a.

Po slovu Tory,

nam peredano kak ustanovlenie: eto zakon, peredannyi Moshe na Sinaye, chto tolko togda prepyatstvie schitaetsya prepyatstviem,

kogda ono pokryvaet bolshuyu chast tela i chelovek khochet ego ubrat, —

ono prepyatstvuet.

For example, if the majority of his hair was soiled with mud, or if the majority of his hairs were tied individually.

b.

I

gryaz,

kotoruyu chelovek ne khochet ubrat,

ne prepyatstvuet,

poskolku ona schitaetsya chastyu ego tela, raz on ne nameren ee otuda ubrat.

v.

I Mudrecy vveli zapret

na sluchai, kogda gryaz pokryvaet

bolshuyu chast tela, no chelovek ne khochet ego ubrat,

poskolku eto neskolko podobno zapretu po Tora, raz prepyatstvie pokryvaet bolshuyu chast tela,

iz-za sluchaya, kogda bolshaya chast pokryta tem, chto chelovek khochet ubrat,

a togda prepyatstvie zapreshcheno po Tora.

d.

I

po etoi zhe prichine vveli zapret

na nebolshuyu chast tela, pokrytuyu tem, chto chelovek khochet ubrat,

poskolku po priznaku zhelaniya ubrat eto ona neskolko podobna zapretu po Tora,

iz-za sluchaya, kogda bolshaya chast pokryta tem, chto chelovek khochet ubrat.

Gemara vozrazhaet:

I pochemu by takzhe ne vvesti zapret na nebolshuyu chast, k kotoroi chelovek ne privyk, iz-za nebolshoi chasti, k kotoroi on privyk?!

Inache mozhno skazat:

vvedem na eto zapret

iz-za bolshoi chasti, k kotoroi chelovek ne privyk?!

Gemara otvechaet:

sama eta norma yavlyaetsya zapretom,

to est to, chto bolshaya chast, k kotoroi chelovek ne privyk, i nebolshaya chast, k kotoroi on privyk, prepyatstvuyut, yavlyaetsya tolko zapretom Mudrecov, ved po Tora prepyatstvuet tolko bolshaya chast, k kotoroi chelovek privyk.

I

razve

my stanem vvodit zapret

iz-za drugogo zapreta?!

Takim obrazom, vyvod Gemary zaklyuchaetsya v tom, chto osnovnoi zakon o prepyatstvii my uznali iz yavno skazannogo stikha, no vse eti chastnye zakony byli peredany Moshe na Sinaye.

Gemara vozvrashchaetsya k razyasneniyu:

«peregorodki» —

eto to, o chem my skazali.

It is a halakha given to Moses at Sinai that a sukka must be ten handbreadths high.

Gemara vozrazhaet:

This works well according to Rabbi Yehuda

kotoryi ne vyvodit razmer vysoty sukki iz stikhey, i poetomu nuzhen zakon, peredannyi Moshe na Sinaye.

No dlya Rabbi Meira,

kotoryi vyvodit vysotu sukki iz keruvim,

chto togda skazat?

Zachem nuzhen zakon o peregorodke?!

Gemara otvechaet:

kogda byl peredan zakon —

chtoby

my uznali sleduyushchie zakony:

«Gor» —

When the wall does not reach the roofing, we regard it as though the wall continues upward until the roofing, and the sukka is thereby fit. This is called “extend and raise” [extend and raise it].

I obratno: esli stena ne dokhodit do zemli sukki, my schitaem, budto stena opuskaetsya vniz do pola sukki. Eto nazyvaetsya «gor akhit» — «vtyani i opusti».

b.

«Lavud» —

lyuboi promezhutok men'she trekh tefakhov schitaetsya kak budto on zadelan i soedinen, ili kak budto ego ne schitayut prepyatstviem.

v.

«Izognutaya stena» —

If at the edge of the sukka, adjacent to the wall, there is invalid roofing extending less than four cubits from the wall, we validate the sukka by means of a crooked wall. We regard the invalid roofing adjacent to the wall as though it were part of the wall, except that it has bent.

My uchili v Mishne:

i

sukka,

u kotoroi net trekh sten,

nekasherna.

Tan­nae uchili:

steny sukki dolzhny byt kak minimum

dvumya po zakonu,

tsel'nymi i stoyashchimi pod pryamym uglom drug k drugu,

a

tretei

stene

dostatochno

only even one handbreadth.

Rabbi Shimon govorit:

nuzhny

tri

steny

po zakonu, a

chetvertoi

stene

dostatochno

only even one handbreadth.

Gemara razyasnyaet:

v chem oni sporyat?

Mudrecy schitayut: tekst Torah opredelyaetsya napisaniem.

Reshayushchim yavlyaetsya sposob, kotorym Torah byla zapisana i peredana Moshe synam Izrailya, a ne sposob ee chteniya. Inogda napisannoe i proiznosimoe imeyut raznyi smysl.

A Rabbi Shimon schitaet: tekst Torah opredelyaetsya chteniem.

Reshayushchim yavlyaetsya smysl chteniya, a ne smysl napisannogo, kogda eti dva smysla protivorechat drug drugu.

Poetomu

Mudrecy schitayut: tekst Torah opredelyaetsya napisaniem,

i v razdele o sukke skazany tri stikha: «

V sukkat

budete sidet», «budut sidet

v sukkat», i «potomu chto

in sukkot

v sukkot

ya poselil». —

Vot poluchaetsya chetyre

steny po napisaniyu teksta.

And the Sages expounded as follows: In the verses listed above, “in a sukka” is written twice defectively, without the letter vav, and according to the written text each is as though it were written in the singular. And once “in sukkot” is written plene, and the minimum of a plural is two. Therefore, this “in sukkot,” together with the two defective instances of “sukka,” yields four walls.

Ubrav odin,

to est ubrav odin stikһ, chtoby tolkovat ego

dlya ego pryamogo smysla,

chtoby uchit osnovnuyu obyazannost zapovedi sukki,

ostayutsya,

iz chetyrekh ostalis

tri.

Stikh uchit zakon o trekh peregorodkakh.

No

dve

iz nikh dolzhny byt tsel'nymi

po zakonu, i byl peredan zakon

Moshe na Sinaye,

i sokratil on

tretyu

peregorodku do tefakha,

tak chto ee ne nuzhno delat dlinnoi po vsemu dlinu sukki: dostatochno tefakha.

No

Rabbi Shimon schitaet: tekst Torah opredelyaetsya chteniem,

i poetomu tri stikha

«v sukkot», «v sukkot», «v sukkot»

are all expounded in the plural, since according to the manner of reading they are all plural forms, and the minimum of a plural is two.

Vot poluchaetsya

vozmozhnost vyvesti

shest

peregorodok.

Ubrav odin,

subtract one

stikh dlya ego pryamogo smysla,

i ne tolkuya pervyi stikh voobshe, —

ostayutsya

dva stikha, iz kotorykh uznaem, chto nuzhny

chetyre

peregorodki, i iz nikh nuzhny

tri po zakonu,

tsel'nye po vsey dline sukki,

byl peredan zakon

Moshe na Sinaye

i sokratil on

chetvertuyu peregorodku

do tefakha.

Inache mozhno skazat: vse

schitayut, chto

tekst Torah opredelyaetsya chteniem,

i ostayutsya chetyre.

A sporyat oni vot o chem:

odin schitaet,

to est Mudrecy:

pokrytie

sukki takzhe

nuzhno

vyvesti iz

stikha,

i odin stikh nuzhno otlozhit, chtoby uchit, chto sukku nuzhno pokryvat skhakhom; poetomu ostayutsya tolko tri peregorodki, a peredannyi zakon sokrashchaet tret'yu peregorodku i delaet ee ravnoi tefakhu.

A drugoi schitaet,

Rabbi Shimon:

dlya pokrytiya ne nuzhen stikh.

Dazhe iz samogo smysla pervogo stikha my uzhe znali zakon o pokrytii, ved bez pokrytiya eto ne sukka. Poetomu peregorodok chetyre, a peredannyi zakon sokrashchaet tret'yu peregorodku i delaet ee ravnoi tefakhu.

Inache mozhno skazat: vse

schitayut, chto

tekst Torah opredelyaetsya napisaniem,

i dlya peregorodok ostayutsya tri,

a sporyat oni vot o chem:

odin schitaet,

Mudrecy:

kogda byl peredan zakon

Moshe na Sinaye,

chtoby sokratit

tret'yu peregorodku do tefakha.

A drugoi schitaet,

Rabbi Shimon: zakon byl peredan ne dlya sokrashcheniya, a

kogda byl peredan zakon —

chtoby dobavit

eshche odin tefakh k trem peregorodkam, obyazannym po osnovnomu zakonu. Ved zakon o trekh peregorodkakh byl skazan tolko dlya bezvkhodnogo sluchaya, a iz zakona, peredannogo Moshe na Sinaye, my uznaem, chto iznachalno sleduet dobavit chast chetvertoi peregorodki.

Inache mozhno skazat: vse

schitayut, chto

kogda byl peredan zakon —

chtoby sokratit,

i takzhe schitayut, chto tekst Torah opredelyaetsya

napisaniem, a sporyat oni o tom, nuzhno li tolkovat pervye upominaniya;

kak budet obyasneno:

odin schitaet,

Rabbi Shimon:

nuzhno tolkovat pervye upominaniya,

tolkuya dazhe pervyi stikh, kotoryi uchit osnovnoi zakon, i togda peregorodok chetyre, a peredannyi zakon sokrashchaet chetvertuyu, tak chto dostatochno sdelat ee tefakhom.

A drugoi schitaet,

Mudrecy:

ne nuzhno tolkovat pervye upominaniya,

i poetomu tolko tri stikha uchat zakon o peregorodkakh, a peredannyi zakon sokrashchaet tret'yu peregorodku do tefakha

. Rav Matana skazal: prichina mneniya Rabbi Shimona zdes: «I pokrytie budet tenyu dnem ot znoi, ukrytiem i ubezhishchem ot livenya i dozhdya»,

and without four partitions it is not shelter from storm, since the wind blows through the open side. The Gemara now discusses:

a etot tefakh,

o kotorom govoryat Mudrecy, chto dve steny dolzhny byt po zakonu, a tret'ya mozhet byt dazhe tefakhom,

gde ego ustanovit?

Rav skazal: ego ustanavlivayut naprotiv vykhoda,

to est kogda dve steny stoyat pod pryamym uglom, tefakh ustanavlivayut u kraya odnoi iz sten paralelno vtoroi stene.

Rav Kahana and Rav Asi said to Rav: