Mar Zutrah offers an apparent proof that the two renditions of Chachamim's view represent BS and BH's views respectively - and that the issue of their machloket is the minimal shiur of a succah. The support is noted in the words of the baraita - of "Poslin" and "Machshirin" - literally: disqualify and declare kosher. If the subject of their machloket was the question of whether or not we make a rabbinic Gezeira, then the terms that should have been used are "fulfilled" (yatzah) and "not fulfilled" (lo yatzah) his obligation. This seems to prove that the issue is the shiur of the succah.
The baraita in fact gives an indication in both directions. To review:
1) The fact that the baraita sets up the scenario as a person whose rov and rosh are in the succah and table is in the house implies that the topic is whether, given where he is sitting, he has fulfilled the mitzvah
2) The terms "Poslin" and "machshirin", however, indicate that the topic is whether or not the succah is kosher.
The Gemara resolves this contradiction using a חסורי מחסרא - which means: something is missing in the text of the baraita. והכי קתני - and this is how it should read:
The Gemara precedes then to "edit" the baraita in a way that the first entry into the baraita - which talks about the man's physical position - is followed by a disagreement as to whether he is yotzeh (fulfilled) his mitzvah or not yotzeh (not fulfilled) his mitzvah. The gemara then inserts a new scenario - ie a succah that only holds his rosh and rov [but not table] - BS pasuls and BH says is kosher.
Now we have resolved the contradictory indicators as to what BH and BS are disagreeing about- and thereby reaffirm the original discussion between R. Shmuel and R. Aba as truly representing the view of BS in their argument with BHillel
No comments:
Post a Comment