The last part of the Gemara (from last Wednesday’s shiur) attempted to reinforce the מתקיף לה by showing from the language of the baraita that the real machloket between BH and BS was a גזירה and not the definition of the minimal shiur of a succah. The proof was from the fact that the baraita set up a case of a person who was sitting in the succah and his table was in the house. If, says the Gemara, the machloket between BH and BS dealt with the shiur of a succah, the baraita should have been discussing a succah that either contains or doesn’t contain enough room for rosho, rubo, and shulchano….From this we sharpen the challenge to R. Shmuel and R. Aba’s view evident early in this sugyah.
The Gemara attempts to defend the original position by arguing once again that BH and BS are indeed arguing re: shiur of a succah. It does so by citing two baraitot, both involving a machloket between Chachamim/TK and Rebbe. In both cases, Rebbe holds that a minimal succah is 4 x 4, but Chachamim seem to change their position between the two sources: in one, they hold rosho, rubo, shulchano, and in the other, just rosho and rubo alone.
The Gemara resolves the contradiction by maintaining that one is a report of the view of BS and one of BH
No comments:
Post a Comment