Sukkah 56

תלמוד לומר חלק כחלק יאכלו כחלק עבודה כך חלק אכילה ומאי אכילה אילימא קרבנות מהתם נפקא לכהן המקריב אותה לו תהיה אלא לחם הפנים

The verse states: “They shall have like portions to eat” (Deuteronomy 18:8); just as all the watches receive an equal portion of the service, so too all the watches receive an equal portion in the eating. The Gemara asks: What is the eating mentioned in this verse? If you say it is the eating of offerings, the verse is superfluous, as it is derived from there: “And every meal-offering…shall be the priest’s that offers it” (Leviticus 7:9), which, although it was written with regard to meal-offerings, applies to all offerings. Moreover, it teaches that a priest who participates in the sacrifice of the offering shares in eating the offering. Rather, the verse is referring to the shewbread that was not part of the service this Shabbat, as it was baked the previous Shabbat.

יכול אף בחובות הבאות שלא מחמת הרגל ברגל תלמוד לומר לבד ממכריו על האבות מה מכרו האבות זה לזה אני בשבתי ואתה בשבתך:

One might have thought that all the watches should be equal even with regard to obligations that come not due to the Festival but are brought on the Festival nevertheless, as there were many vow-offerings and free-will offerings brought to the Temple that were not part of the Festival rite, but simply the result of people taking advantage of their presence in Jerusalem to fulfill their outstanding obligations. Therefore, the verse states: “Besides the transactions of their fathers’ houses” (Deuteronomy 18:8). What did the forefathers of each watch sell each other? They agreed with regard to the service of the watches: I will serve during my week, and you will serve during your week. Each watch has the right to perform the Temple service during its appointed weeks and to receive all priestly gifts offered during those weeks.

בעצרת אומר לו הילך וכו׳: איתמר רב אמר סוכה ואחר כך זמן רבה בר בר חנה אמר זמן ואחר כך סוכה

§ The mishna continues: On Shavuot that coincides with Shabbat the priest charged with the distribution says to each priest: Here is matza from the shewbread for you, and here is leavened bread from the two loaves for you. It was stated that there is a dispute between the amora’im, and Rav said: When one enters the sukka, he recites the blessing of the sukka: Who has made us holy through His mitzvot and has commanded us to sit in the sukka, and then the blessing of time: Who has given us life, sustained us, and brought us to this time. Rabba bar bar Ḥana said: One recites the blessing of time, and then the blessing of the sukka.

רב אמר סוכה ואחר כך זמן חיובא דיומא עדיף רבה בר בר חנה אמר זמן ואחר כך סוכה תדיר ושאינו תדיר תדיר קודם

The Gemara elaborates: Rav said that one recites the blessing of sukka and then the blessing of time because the obligation of the day takes precedence. Rabba bar bar Ḥana said that one recites the blessing of time and then the blessing of the sukka because when a frequent practice and an infrequent practice clash, the frequent practice takes precedence over the infrequent practice, and the blessing of time is recited more frequently.

לימא רב ורבה בר בר חנה בפלוגתא דבית שמאי ובית הלל קמיפלגי דתנו רבנן דברים שבין בית שמאי ובית הלל בסעודה בית שמאי אומרים מברך על היום ואחר כך מברך על היין ובית הלל אומרים מברך על היין ואחר כך מברך על היום

The Gemara suggests: Let us say that Rav and Rabba bar bar Ḥana disagree in the dispute of Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel. As the Sages taught in a baraita: These are the matters of dispute between Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel with regard to the halakhot of a meal. Beit Shammai say: When one recites kiddush over wine, he recites a blessing over the sanctification of the day and then recites a blessing over the wine. And Beit Hillel say: One recites a blessing over the wine and then recites a blessing over the day.

בית שמאי אומרים מברך על היום ואחר כך מברך על היין שהיום גורם ליין שיבא וכבר קידש היום ועדיין יין לא בא ובית הלל אומרים מברך על היין ואחר כך מברך על היום שהיין גורם לקידושא שתאמר דבר אחר ברכת היין תדירה וברכת היום אינה תדירה תדיר ושאינו תדיר תדיר קודם

The Gemara elaborates: Beit Shammai say: One recites a blessing over the sanctification of the day and then recites a blessing over the wine, as the day causes the wine to come before the meal. And Beit Shammai offer an additional reason: The day has already been sanctified and the wine has not yet come. Since Shabbat was sanctified first, it should likewise be mentioned first. And Beit Hillel say: One recites a blessing over the wine and then recites a blessing over the day, as the wine causes the kiddush to be recited. Were there no wine, kiddush would not be recited. Alternatively, Beit Hillel say: The blessing over wine is recited frequently, and the blessing over the day is not recited frequently, and when a frequent practice and an infrequent practice clash, the frequent practice takes precedence over the infrequent practice.

לימא רב דאמר כבית שמאי ורבה בר בר חנה דאמר כבית הלל

The Gemara suggests: Let us say that it was Rav who stated his opinion in accordance with the opinion of Beit Shammai that the blessing over the sanctification of the day takes precedence over the blessing over the wine, and it was Rabba bar bar Ḥana who stated his opinion in accordance with Beit Hillel, i.e., that the frequent blessing takes precedence.

אמר לך רב אנא דאמרי אפילו לבית הלל עד כאן לא קאמרי בית הלל התם אלא שהיין גורם לקידושא שתאמר אבל הכא אי לאו זמן מי לא אמרינן סוכה

The Gemara rejects this suggestion. Rav could have said to you: It is I who stated my opinion even in accordance with the opinion of Beit Hillel, as Beit Hillel stated their opinion there in the case of kiddush only due to the additional reason that the wine causes the kiddush to be recited. But here there is no similar connection between the two blessings, and if there was no blessing on time, wouldn’t we recite the blessing of the sukka anyway? The fact is that the blessing on the sukka is recited throughout the week of the Festival, when no blessing on time is recited.

ורבה בר בר חנה אמר לך אנא דאמרי אפילו לבית שמאי עד כאן לא אמרי בית שמאי התם אלא שהיום גורם ליין שיבא אבל הכא אי לאו סוכה מי לא אמרינן זמן

And Rabba bar bar Ḥana could have said to you: It is I who stated my opinion even in accordance with the opinion of Beit Shammai, as Beit Shammai only stated their opinion there in the case of kiddush, and only due to the additional reason that the day causes the wine to come before the meal. However, here, if there was no blessing of sukka, wouldn’t we recite the blessing of time even without sitting in the sukka, simply due to the onset of the Festival?

תנן בעצרת אומר לו הילך מצה הילך חמץ והא הכא דחמץ עיקר ומצה טפל וקתני הילך מצה והילך חמץ תיובתא דרב

The Gemara cites proof from that which we learned in the mishna: On Shavuot the priest charged with the distribution of the shewbread and the two loaves says to each priest: Here is matza for you, here is leavened bread for you. But here, where the ḥametz is primary and the matza is subordinate to it, as it is the festival of Shavuot when the two loaves of leavened bread are the offering of the day, and yet the mishna teaches: Here is matza for you, and here is leavened bread for you, it accords precedence to the frequent shewbread over the obligation of the day. This is a conclusive refutation of the opinion of Rav.

אמר לך רב תנאי היא דתניא הילך מצה הילך חמץ אבא שאול אומר הילך חמץ הילך מצה

The Gemara responds that Rav could have said to you: This matter is a dispute between tanna’im, as it is taught in a baraita that the priest charged with distribution says: Here is matza for you, here is leavened bread for you. Abba Shaul says that he would say: Here is leavened bread for you, here is matza for you.

דרש רב נחמן בר רב חסדא לא כדברי רב דאמר סוכה ואחר כך זמן אלא זמן ואחר כך סוכה ורב ששת בריה דרב אידי אמר סוכה ואחר כך זמן והלכתא סוכה ואחר כך זמן:

With regard to the final halakhic decision: Rav Naḥman bar Rav Ḥisda taught: The halakha is not in accordance with the statement of Rav, who said: One recites the blessing of sukka and then the blessing of time; rather, one recites the blessing of time and then the blessing of sukka. Rav Sheshet, son of Rav Idi, said: One recites the blessing of sukka and then the blessing of time, in accordance with the opinion of Rav. And the Gemara concludes that the halakha is: One recites the blessing of sukka and then the blessing of time.

משמר שזמנו קבוע [וכו׳] ושאר קרבנות צבור: לאתויי מאי לאתויי פר העלם דבר של צבור ושעירי עבודה זרה:

§ The mishna continues: The priestly watch whose time is scheduled during the Festival, sacrifices the daily offerings during the Festival, as well as vow-offerings, free-will offerings, and all other communal offerings. The Gemara asks: What additional communal offerings does the mishna come to include? The Gemara answers: It comes to include a bull brought for an unwitting communal sin, which is brought by the community due to a transgression committed by the community as a whole as a result of an erroneous halakhic decision issued by the Great Sanhedrin, although it has no fixed time and need not be brought during the Festival; and it includes goats brought for the unwitting transgression of the prohibition against idol worship. If these offerings are brought during the Festival, they are sacrificed by members of the watch whose shift is scheduled for that week.

והוא מקריב את הכל לאתויי מאי לאתויי קייץ המזבח:

The mishna concludes: And that watch sacrifices all of them. The Gemara asks: What does this phrase come to include? The Gemara explains: It comes to include the summer fruits of the altar. Whenever the altar was inactive, special burnt-offerings were sacrificed as communal donations in deference to the Divine Presence so that the altar would not remain empty. These offerings were sacrificed by the scheduled watch.

מתני׳ יום טוב הסמוך לשבת בין מלפניה בין לאחריה היו כל המשמרות שוות בחילוק לחם הפנים חל להיות יום אחד [להפסיק] בינתים משמר שזמנו קבוע היה נוטל עשר חלות והמתעכב נוטל שתים ובשאר ימות השנה הנכנס נוטל שש והיוצא נוטל שש רבי יהודה אומר הנכנס נוטל שבע והיוצא נוטל חמש

MISHNA: In the case of a Festival that occurs adjacent to Shabbat, both when it occurs preceding it and when it occurs following it, all the watches that arrived early or remained late to serve in the Temple were of equal status in the distribution of the shewbread on that Shabbat. If one day happened to separate between the Festival and Shabbat, the watch whose time was scheduled would take ten of the twelve loaves of shewbread, and the watch that was detained after the Festival because there was insufficient time to get home before Shabbat takes two loaves. And during the rest of the days of the year, when the changing of the watches takes place on Shabbat, the incoming watch takes six loaves and the outgoing watch takes six loaves. Rabbi Yehuda says: The incoming watch takes seven loaves and the outgoing takes five.

הנכנסין חולקין בצפון והיוצאין בדרום בילגה לעולם חולקת בדרום וטבעתה קבועה וחלונה סתומה:

The standard procedure was that the members of the incoming watch divide the shewbread in the north section of the courtyard, and the outgoing watch in the south. However, there was one exception: The watch of Bilga, due to a penalty imposed upon it, always divides the shewbread to its members in the south, even when it is the incoming watch. And its ring used to facilitate slaughter of the animals was fixed in place, rendering it useless, and its niche among the niches in the wall of the Chamber of Knives, where the priests would store their knives and other vessels, was sealed.

גמ׳ מאי מלפניה ומאי מלאחריה אילימא לפניה יום טוב ראשון לאחריה יום טוב אחרון היינו שבת שבתוך החג

GEMARA: The Gemara asks: What is the meaning in the mishna of preceding it and what is the meaning of following it? If we say preceding it is referring to the first Festival day preceding Shabbat and following it is referring to the last day of the Festival following Shabbat, then this is the case of Shabbat that is during the Festival, and that is how the mishna should have presented it.

אלא לפניה יום טוב אחרון לאחריה יום טוב ראשון מאי טעמא כיון דהני מקדמי והני מאחרי תיקנו רבנן מילתא כי היכי דניכלו בהדי הדדי:

Rather, preceding it is referring to the last day of the Festival that precedes Shabbat and following it is referring to the first Festival day that follows Shabbat. What is the reason that the watches share equally in these cases? Since these are coming early, as the arriving watch cannot arrive after Shabbat because the Festival begins right away, and these remain late, as the outgoing watch cannot leave at the end of the Festival due to the immediate onset of Shabbat, the Sages instituted this matter so that they would eat the shewbread together.

חל יום אחד:

The mishna continues: If one day happened. During the rest of the days of the year, the incoming watch takes six loaves and the outgoing watch takes six loaves. Rabbi Yehuda says: The incoming watch takes seven loaves and the outgoing takes five.

והני תרתי מאי עבידתייהו אמר רבי יצחק בשכר הגפת דלתות ונימא ליה דל בדל אמר אביי בוצינא טבא מקרא

The Gemara asks: And these two extra loaves received by the incoming watch, what is their purpose? Rabbi Yitzḥak says: They are as compensation for locking the doors of the Temple. The Gemara asks: Let the outgoing watch say to the incoming one: Remove your claim to the extra loaves this week and divide the loaves equally and next week’s incoming watch will remove its claim next week. Abaye said: A ripe cucumber now is better than a gourd that has yet to ripen. A small, immediate profit is preferable to a large, potential profit.

אמר רב יהודה ובמוספין חולקין מיתיבי משמרה היוצאת עושה תמיד של שחר ומוספין משמרה הנכנסת עושה תמיד של בין הערבים ובזיכין ואילו מוספין חולקין לא קתני האי תנא בחלוקה לא קא מיירי

Rav Yehuda said: And they divide the hides of the additional offerings between them. The Gemara raises an objection from a baraita: The outgoing watch performs the rite of the daily morning offering and the additional offerings, and the incoming watch performs the rite of the daily afternoon offering and the service of the vessels of frankincense for the shewbread. And the baraita teaches nothing about dividing the hides of the additional offerings. The Gemara answers: This tanna is not speaking of division of the hides, but is addressing the division of the Temple service, so sharing the hides is not mentioned.

אמר רבא והא תנא דבי שמואל דמיירי בחלוקה ובמוספין חולקין לא קתני דתנא דבי שמואל משמרה היוצאת עושה תמיד של שחר ומוספין משמרה הנכנסת עושה תמיד של בין הערבים ובזיכין ארבעה כהנים היו נכנסין שם שנים ממשמר זו ושנים ממשמר זו וחולקין לחם הפנים ואילו במוספין חולקין לא קתני תיובתא דרב יהודה תיובתא:

Rava said: But didn’t the tanna of the school of Shmuel, who speaks of division between the incoming and the outgoing watches, fail to teach division of the hides of the additional offerings mentioned by Rabbi Yehuda, as the school of Shmuel taught: The outgoing watch performs the daily morning offering and the additional offerings; the incoming watch performs the daily afternoon offerings and the service of the vessels. And how was this service performed? Four priests would enter the Sanctuary, two from this outgoing watch and two from that incoming watch, and they divide the shewbread. But it teaches nothing about dividing the hides of the additional offerings. The Gemara suggests: This is a conclusive refutation of the opinion of Rav Yehuda. The Gemara concludes: Indeed, it is a conclusive refutation.

הנכנסין חולקין בצפון: תנו רבנן הנכנסין חולקין בצפון כדי שיראו שהן נכנסין והיוצאין חולקין בדרום כדי שיראו שהן יוצאין:

§ The mishna continues: Members of the incoming watch divide the shewbread in the north section of the courtyard, and members of the outgoing watch in the south. The Sages taught in a baraita: Members of the incoming watch divide the shewbread in the north, which was an area of greater sanctity in the Temple courtyard, so that it would be seen that they are incoming, and members of the outgoing watch divide the shewbread in the south, so it would be seen that they are outgoing.

בילגה לעולם חולקת בדרום: תנו רבנן מעשה במרים בת בילגה שהמירה דתה והלכה ונשאת לסרדיוט אחד ממלכי יוונים כשנכנסו יוונים להיכל היתה מבעטת בסנדלה על גבי המזבח ואמרה לוקוס לוקוס עד מתי אתה מכלה ממונן של ישראל ואי אתה עומד עליהם בשעת הדחק וכששמעו חכמים בדבר קבעו את טבעתה וסתמו את חלונה

We learned in the mishna that Bilga always divides the shewbread in the south, even when it is the incoming watch. The Gemara elaborates: The Sages taught in a baraita: There was an incident involving Miriam, the daughter of a member of the Bilga watch, who apostatized and went and married a soldier [sardeyot] serving in the army of the Greek kings. When the Greeks entered the Sanctuary, she entered with them and was kicking with her sandal on the altar and said: Wolf, wolf [lokos], until when will you consume the property of the Jewish people, and yet you do not stand with them when they face exigent circumstances? And after the victory of the Hasmoneans over the Greeks, when the Sages heard about this matter and how she denigrated the altar, they fixed the ring of the Bilga watch in place, rendering it nonfunctional, and sealed its niche.

ויש אומרים משמרתו שוהה לבא ונכנס ישבב אחיו עמו ושימש תחתיו אף על פי ששכיני הרשעים לא נשתכרו שכיני בילגה נשתכרו שבילגה לעולם חולקת בדרום וישבב אחיו בצפון

And some say that the watch was penalized for a different reason. It happened once that some members of the Bilga watch tarried in arriving at the Temple. The members of the previous watch, the watch of Yeshevav, his brother, entered together with the members of the Bilga watch who had arrived, and served in the place of the absent members of his brother’s watch. The Gemara notes: Although neighbors of the wicked do not typically profit, according to the principle: Woe unto the wicked, woe unto his neighbor, Bilga’s neighbors profited, as Bilga always divides the shewbread in the south, even when the watch is incoming, and his brother Yeshevav always divides in the north, even when the watch is outgoing.

בשלמא למאן דאמר משמרתו שוהה לבא היינו דקנסינן לכולה משמר אלא למאן דאמר מרים בת בילגה שהמירה דתה משום ברתיה קנסינן ליה לדידיה אמר אביי אין כדאמרי אינשי שותא דינוקא בשוקא או דאבוה או דאימיה

The Gemara clarifies: Granted, according to the one who said that Bilga was penalized because members of his watch tarried in arriving at the Temple; that is why the entire watch is penalized. However, according to the one who said it is due to Miriam, daughter of Bilga, who apostatized, do we penalize the entire watch of Bilga because of his daughter? Abaye said: Yes, as people say, the speech of a child in the marketplace is learned either from that of his father or from that of his mother. Miriam would never have said such things had she not heard talk of that kind in her parents’ home.

ומשום אבוה ואימיה קנסינן לכולה משמרה אמר אביי אוי לרשע אוי לשכינו טוב לצדיק טוב לשכינו [שנאמר אמרו צדיק כי טוב כי פרי מעלליהם יאכלו]

The Gemara asks: And due to Miriam’s father and mother, do we penalize an entire watch? Abaye said: Woe unto the wicked, woe unto his neighbor. To conclude the tractate on a positive note, the Gemara says: Good for the righteous, good for his neighbor, as it is stated: “Say you of the righteous that it shall be good for him, for they shall eat the fruit of their doings” (Isaiah 3:10); the neighbors of a righteous man who witness and acknowledge the good that befalls him will benefit from their proximity to him.

הדרן עלך החליל וסליקא לה מסכת סוכה

We have now completed the chapter “the flute” and all of Masekhet Sukkah.