Sukkah 9a — the Talmud in English

Mishna:

In the Mishna before us, the tannaim disagreed whether the sukka must be made for the sake of the festival, or whether a sukka that one made for the sake of shade is sufficient.

An old sukka,

which one made to protect against the sun during the summer days, and did not make for the sake of the festival,

Beit Shammai deem invalid,

since according to their view one must make the sukka with initial intention for the sake of the festival.

And Beit Hillel deem valid,

and they did not require that he make his sukka specifically for the sake of the festival; rather, whenever he made it for the sake of shade, it is valid, and below their reasoning will be explained. And the Mishna discusses:

And which is an old sukka,

concerning which Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel disagreed?

the Ran, all the words of the Jerusalem Talmud apply only ideally. But from the words of the Tosafot and the Rosh it appears that this law is indispensable for fulfilling the mitzva, and if he does not renew something in it, he has not fulfilled his obligation. For they wrote that even according to Beit Hillel there is a practical difference in that if he made it at the beginning of the year for the sake of the festival, it is valid, as he need not renew anything in it. And it appears that this law is indispensable for fulfilling the mitzva. [And see what we wrote about this in the notes on the Tosafot]. But the Magen Avraham there disagrees with the words of the Beit Yosef and wrote that according to all the early authorities this law was not stated as indispensable, but only as a mitzva. Whenever he made it thirty days before the festival.

Then certainly, at the time of making the sukka, it was not his intention to sit in it during the festival of Sukkot. But if he made it within thirty days of the festival, it is valid, since Israel customarily expounds and occupies itself with the laws of the festival thirty days before the festival, and certainly one who makes a sukka at this time remembers that he must make a sukka, and it was his intention to make it also for the sake of the festival.

But if he made it

explicitly

for the sake of the festival, even if he made it

he made it

at the beginning of the year,

it is

valid

even according to Beit Shammai.

Gemara:

Now the Gemara discusses: What is the source for the ruling of Beit Shammai, who require a sukka made for the sake of the festival?

What is the reason of Beit Shammai,

who deem an old sukka invalid?

The verse says: “The festival of Sukkot, seven days, for the Lord.”

And from the wording of the verse, “Sukkot for the Lord,” the Sages expounded:

We require a sukka made for the sake of the festival.

That is, one must make it for the sake of the mitzva of the King.

And the Gemara discusses:

And Beit Hillel,

how do they interpret the verse? And the Gemara explains:

That

verse,

is needed for him

according to Beit Hillel

for that of Rav Sheshet.

For Rav Sheshet said in the name of Rabbi Akiva: From where is it derived concerning the wood of the sukka that it is forbidden

to derive benefit from

all seven

days of Sukkot?

The verse says, “The festival of Sukkot, seven days, for the Lord.”

And it was taught in a beraita: Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira says: Just as the Name of Heaven

that is, sanctity applies

to

the peace-offerings of

the festival-offering,

to prohibit them in eating and benefit until after the burning of the fats, and even afterward they are merely as those who receive from the table on high, like a servant who receives a portion from his master.

so the Name of Heaven applies to the sukka,

and it is forbidden to derive benefit from its wood all seven days of Sukkot.

As it is stated, “The festival of Sukkot, seven days, for the Lord,”

and the Sages expounded:

Just as a “festival-offering,”

just as a festival-offering is sacred,

for the Lord, so too a sukka

is sacred

for the Lord.

Just as “the festival,” like the festival offering, is sacred for the Lord, so too the sukka

And the Gemara raises an objection:

And Beit Shammai too, requires

this verse

for this?

And the Gemara answers:

Indeed, so it is!

Indeed, Beit Shammai too learn from this verse that the wood of the sukka is forbidden for benefit throughout all seven days of the festival.

And the Gemara explains:

Rather, what is the reason of Beit Shammai,

who require a sukka made for the sake of the festival?

Another verse is written: “The festival of Sukkot you shall make for yourself seven days,”

invert the verse and expound it as follows: “You shall make sukkot for the festival.” And from here Beit Shammai learned that

we require a sukka made for the sake of the festival.

Now the Gemara discusses:

And Beit Hillel,

what did they learn from this verse?

And the Gemara explains:

That

verse,

is needed for

learning from it that

one makes a sukka during the intermediate days of the festival, [if he did not make it before the festival]. And this is the intention of the verse, “You shall make the festival of Sukkot”: that is, during the festival of Sukkot, you shall make it.

That

And the Gemara explains:

And Beit Shammai,

who did not learn this law from the verse, it is because

they hold

like Rabbi Eliezer, who says: One does not make a sukka during the intermediate days of the festival.

Since he expounds the verse, “The festival of Sukkot you shall make for yourself seven days,” as: Make a sukka fit for seven days. And if he makes his sukka during the festival, it will not be fit to serve him for seven days.

And the Gemara assumed that Beit Hillel, who do not require a sukka made for the sake of the festival, stated their ruling also concerning the making of tzitzit and the like, and do not require the making of the tzitzit to be for the sake of a mitzva.

And the Gemara raises an objection:

And Beit Hillel,

is it so that

they do not hold of what Rav Yehuda said in the name of Rav?

For Rav Yehuda said in the name of Rav:

If he did not hang tzitzit on the four corners of his garment, but rather

made it

for tzitzit

from the kotzin,

the knots made at the ends of the warp threads are called kotzin, because they protrude like thorns; and if he made from them, while they were attached to the garment, a braid of tzitzit,

or made the tzitzit

from the nimin,

such as a tallit that they sewed, or in which they made a hem with a needle, and the ends of the sewing threads hang from it, and from these threads he made a braid of tzitzit,

or made it

from the gardin,

from the threads hanging at the end of the tallit, which are the surplus of the weaving, if he made from them, while they were still attached, windings and knots,

it is invalid

the tzitzit, since these threads had been hanging from the garment from the time of weaving, and were not hung on it for the sake of tzitzit, and there is no making for its own sake.

But if he made the tzitzit

from the sisin,

from bundles of thread, it is

valid.

For when the threads were hung on the garment, they were hung for the sake of the mitzva of tzitzit. And although the spinning of the threads was not for the sake of the mitzva of tzitzit, it is considered making for its own sake, since spinning is not part of making the tzitzit, and the Torah was particular only that the hanging of the threads on the garment be done for the sake of the mitzva of tzitzit.

And Rav Yehuda added and said:

When I stated it,

when I stated this teaching of Rav, that one need not spin the threads for the sake of the mitzva of tzitzit,

before Shmuel,

Shmuel disagreed with this, and

said to me: Even if he made it

he made it

from the sisin, it is also invalid,

since

we require spinning for its own sake.

And in any event it is explained that both according to Rav and according to Shmuel, one must hang the threads of the tzitzit for the sake of the mitzva of tzitzit. If so,

here too, should we require a sukka made for its own sake?!

And the Gemara answers:

There it is different,

concerning tzitzit,

for the verse says, “You shall make twisted threads for yourself,”

and the Sages expounded,

“for yourself,” for the sake of your obligation,

but concerning making a sukka, the Torah did not introduce a requirement that one make it specifically for the sake of the festival.

And the Gemara raises an objection:

Here too,

let it be stated concerning a sukka:

“The festival of Sukkot you shall make for yourself,”

and it implies,

“for yourself,” for the sake of your obligation?!

And the Gemara answers:

That “for yourself,”

which is stated concerning the mitzva of sukka,

is needed

to learn

to exclude

a sukka

that was stolen.

And so the Sages learned: “The festival of Sukkot you shall make for yourself”—from your own, excluding a stolen sukka.

And the Gemara raises an objection:

There too,

concerning the mitzva of tzitzit, also

it is needed

the verse, “You shall make twisted threads for yourself,”

to exclude

tzitzit

that was stolen?!

And the Gemara answers:

There,

concerning tzitzit,

another verse is written, “

and they shall make for themselves

tzitzit on the corners of their garments,” and the Sages expounded: “for themselves”—

from their own,

so that the tzitzit should not be stolen. Therefore, the verse “You shall make twisted threads for yourself” is superfluous, and it can be expounded as above: “You shall make twisted threads for yourself”—for the sake of your obligation, so that the making be for its own sake.