handbreadth

But why did you say in the previous case that one loose handbreadth suffices while here you say that there must be a strip of four handbreadths? There where there are two valid walls, a loose handbreadth suffices, but here where there are not two valid walls, if there is a strip of four handbreadths it is valid, otherwise, it is not [valid].

R. Ashi found R. Kahana making [the third wall of a Sukkah] a loose handbreadth wide and constructing also the form of a doorway. He said to him: Does not the Master hold the opinion of Rava who said that it is also valid with the form of a doorway? He answered: I hold like the other reading of [the statement of] Rava that in addition [to a board of the size of a handbreadth] the form of a doorway is also necessary.

R. Ashi found R. Kahana making [the third wall of a Sukkah] a loose handbreadth wide and constructing also the form of a doorway. He said to him: Does not the Master hold the opinion of Rava who said that it is also valid with the form of a doorway? He answered: I hold like the other reading of [the statement of] Rava that in addition [to a board of the size of a handbreadth] the form of a doorway is also necessary.

‘Two walls must be of the prescribed dimensions etc.’ Rava said: And similarly with regard to the Shabbat. Since [the handbreadth] is regarded as a valid wall of the Sukkah it is also regarded as a valid wall in respect of the Sabbath.

But if this is so, let it also be stated: [The law relating to] the ordinary Sukkah is more [stringent] than [that of] the Sukkah of Shabbat since [the validity of] an ordinary Sukkah demands a width of a loose handbreadth [for the third wall] while [the validity of] the Sukkah of Sabbath does not require the width of a loose handbreadth [for a wall] but a side-post alone is sufficient,

But if this is so, let it also be stated: [The law relating to] the ordinary Sukkah is more [stringent] than [that of] the Sukkah of Shabbat since [the validity of] an ordinary Sukkah demands a width of a loose handbreadth [for the third wall] while [the validity of] the Sukkah of Sabbath does not require the width of a loose handbreadth [for a wall] but a side-post alone is sufficient,

‘R. Shimon? — As it has been taught: Two [walls] must be of the prescribed dimensions and the third [may be] even one handbreadth. ‘R. Shimon said: Three [walls] must be of the prescribed dimensions and the fourth [may be] even one handbreadth.

‘R. Shimon? — As it has been taught: Two [walls] must be of the prescribed dimensions and the third [may be] even one handbreadth. ‘R. Shimon said: Three [walls] must be of the prescribed dimensions and the fourth [may be] even one handbreadth.

Since a man occupies the space of a cubit, and where the circumference [of a circle] is three handbreadths its diameter is one handbreadth, it would therefore be enough of only twelve men [can sit around it]?

R. Huna replied: A handbreadth since we find a handbreadth [prescribed as the minimum size] with regard to overshadowing in cases of uncleanliness, as we have learned: [A space of] one handbreadth square and one handbreadth high acts as a carrier of uncleanliness and as an interposition to it, but if it is less than one handbreadth high it neither conveys nor interposes.

R. Huna replied: A handbreadth since we find a handbreadth [prescribed as the minimum size] with regard to overshadowing in cases of uncleanliness, as we have learned: [A space of] one handbreadth square and one handbreadth high acts as a carrier of uncleanliness and as an interposition to it, but if it is less than one handbreadth high it neither conveys nor interposes.

R. Huna replied: A handbreadth since we find a handbreadth [prescribed as the minimum size] with regard to overshadowing in cases of uncleanliness, as we have learned: [A space of] one handbreadth square and one handbreadth high acts as a carrier of uncleanliness and as an interposition to it, but if it is less than one handbreadth high it neither conveys nor interposes.

R. Huna replied: A handbreadth since we find a handbreadth [prescribed as the minimum size] with regard to overshadowing in cases of uncleanliness, as we have learned: [A space of] one handbreadth square and one handbreadth high acts as a carrier of uncleanliness and as an interposition to it, but if it is less than one handbreadth high it neither conveys nor interposes.

R. Huna replied: A handbreadth since we find a handbreadth [prescribed as the minimum size] with regard to overshadowing in cases of uncleanliness, as we have learned: [A space of] one handbreadth square and one handbreadth high acts as a carrier of uncleanliness and as an interposition to it, but if it is less than one handbreadth high it neither conveys nor interposes.

If he hollows out a haystack: R. Huna said: This was taught only where there is not a hollow of one handbreadth [in height] extending to seven [handbreadths square], but if there is a hollow of one handbreadth extending to seven, it is a [valid] sukkah.

If he hollows out a haystack: R. Huna said: This was taught only where there is not a hollow of one handbreadth [in height] extending to seven [handbreadths square], but if there is a hollow of one handbreadth extending to seven, it is a [valid] sukkah.

Some put it in the form of a contradiction. We have learned: if he hollows out a haystack to make for himself a sukkah, it is no sukkah. But has it not been taught that it is [a valid] Sukkah? R. Huna answered: There is no difficulty, the latter refers to where there is a hollow of a handbreadth extending to seven [handbreadths] while the former refers to where there is no hollow of a handbreadth extending to seven [handbreadths].

Some put it in the form of a contradiction. We have learned: if he hollows out a haystack to make for himself a sukkah, it is no sukkah. But has it not been taught that it is [a valid] Sukkah? R. Huna answered: There is no difficulty, the latter refers to where there is a hollow of a handbreadth extending to seven [handbreadths] while the former refers to where there is no hollow of a handbreadth extending to seven [handbreadths].

In that case the reason has been given, as Rabbi Shimon said: "What is the reason? Since they are susceptible to uncleanliness if [a zav] sits on them, as we have learned: if he cuts from any one of them a piece one handbreadth square, it is susceptible to uncleanliness’.

if he cuts from any one of them a piece one handbreadth square, it is susceptible to uncleanliness’. Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish in the name of R. Yannai said, it can be used as a patch for [the saddle of] a donkey.

What is the reason of the one who says that the rule of lavud is not applied in the middle? — Because we learned: If a skylight in [the roof of] a house was of one handbreadth square, and there was an object of uncleanliness in the house, all the house is unclean, but what is directly below the skylight is clean. If the unclean object is directly below the skylight, the whole house is clean.

If the skylight was less than a handbreadth square, and there was an unclean object in the house, what is directly below the skylight is clean. If the unclean object is directly below the skylight, the whole house is clean.

GEMARA. It has been taught: R. Eliezer agrees that if he raised it one handbreadth from the ground, or if he separated it one handbreadth from the wall, it is valid.

GEMARA. It has been taught: R. Eliezer agrees that if he raised it one handbreadth from the ground, or if he separated it one handbreadth from the wall, it is valid.

Abaye stated, this applies only where there are not three handbreadths of distance between one reed and another, but if there are three handbreadths between one and another, it is invalid. Rava says, even if there are three handbreadths between one and another we also do not say [that it is invalid] unless the upper reed is not a handbreadth wide but if the upper reed is a handbreadth wide, it is valid, since we apply to it the law of "beat and cast it down."

Abaye stated, this applies only where there are not three handbreadths of distance between one reed and another, but if there are three handbreadths between one and another, it is invalid. Rava says, even if there are three handbreadths between one and another we also do not say [that it is invalid] unless the upper reed is not a handbreadth wide but if the upper reed is a handbreadth wide, it is valid, since we apply to it the law of "beat and cast it down."

Rava said: From where do I say that if the upper reed is a handbreadth wide we apply to it the law of ‘beat and throw it down,’ and if it is not so wide we do not apply it? From what we have learned: 1) [With regard to] the roof beams of a house and of the upper story which have no plaster ceiling upon them and are in a line, [the upper ones exactly above the lower]: a) If there is uncleanness beneath one of them, all beneath that one becomes unclean.

And on this it was taught, when do these apply? When the beams are each a handbreadth [wide] and there is [a gap] of a handbreadth between them, but if there is not [a gap] of a handbreadth between them, if there is uncleanliness under one of them, whatever is under that beam is unclean while the space between them and above them is clean. Thus it clearly follows that if there is a handbreadth we apply the law of ‘beat and throw it down’, but if there is not a handbreadth we do not apply this law. Conclude from this.

And on this it was taught, when do these apply? When the beams are each a handbreadth [wide] and there is [a gap] of a handbreadth between them, but if there is not [a gap] of a handbreadth between them, if there is uncleanliness under one of them, whatever is under that beam is unclean while the space between them and above them is clean. Thus it clearly follows that if there is a handbreadth we apply the law of ‘beat and throw it down’, but if there is not a handbreadth we do not apply this law. Conclude from this.

And on this it was taught, when do these apply? When the beams are each a handbreadth [wide] and there is [a gap] of a handbreadth between them, but if there is not [a gap] of a handbreadth between them, if there is uncleanliness under one of them, whatever is under that beam is unclean while the space between them and above them is clean. Thus it clearly follows that if there is a handbreadth we apply the law of ‘beat and throw it down’, but if there is not a handbreadth we do not apply this law. Conclude from this.

And on this it was taught, when do these apply? When the beams are each a handbreadth [wide] and there is [a gap] of a handbreadth between them, but if there is not [a gap] of a handbreadth between them, if there is uncleanliness under one of them, whatever is under that beam is unclean while the space between them and above them is clean. Thus it clearly follows that if there is a handbreadth we apply the law of ‘beat and throw it down’, but if there is not a handbreadth we do not apply this law. Conclude from this.

And on this it was taught, when do these apply? When the beams are each a handbreadth [wide] and there is [a gap] of a handbreadth between them, but if there is not [a gap] of a handbreadth between them, if there is uncleanliness under one of them, whatever is under that beam is unclean while the space between them and above them is clean. Thus it clearly follows that if there is a handbreadth we apply the law of ‘beat and throw it down’, but if there is not a handbreadth we do not apply this law. Conclude from this.

R. Kahana was sitting and he recited this statement. Rav Ashi said to Rav Kahana, do we then not apply the law of ‘beat and throw down’ where an object is not a handbreadth wide?

2) And so in the case of two parallel beams neither of which can support a half-brick, if they can support a half-brick on their joint width of a handbreadth, it is not necessary to bring another beam; if not, it is necessary to bring another beam.

3) If one was above and the other below: Rabbi Yose son of Rabbi Judah said, we regard the upper one as though it were lower down or the lower one as though it were higher, provided that the upper one is not more than twenty [cubits from the ground] nor the lower one less than ten [handbreadths from the ground]. From which it follows that if both of them were within twenty [cubits] we do apply the law of ‘beat and throw down’ even though none of them is a handbreadth [wide]?

He replied, solve it and say it this way: 1) Provided that the upper one is not more than twenty [cubits from the ground], but within the twenty [cubits], and the lower one is near it within less than three [handbreadths], 2) Alternatively provided that the lower one is not less than ten [cubits from the ground] but more than ten, and the upper one is near it within less than three [handbreadths], 3) But if they were three [handbreadths apart] since [the upper beam] is not a handbreadth [wide], we do not apply the law of ‘beat and throw down’.

A lulav which is three handbreadths in length. Rab Judah said in the name of Samuel: The [minimum] length of the hadas and the aravah is three [handbreadths], and that of the lulav four, so that the lulav should extend one handbreadth beyond the hadas.

And R. Parnakh said in the name of R. Yohanan, The spine of the lulav should extend a handbreadth beyond the hadas.

R. 'Abahu further said: The first rainfall is satisfactory if there is enough of it to enter the ground to the depth of a handbreadth; the second is satisfactory when the soil is fit to be used for sealing the mouth of a cask. R. Ḥisda said: If there is rainfall enough to make the soil fit to be used for sealing the mouth of a cask, the verse in Deuteronomy (11.17): "He will shut up (the heavens)," etc., has no application. R. Ḥisda further said: If rain fell before the reading of the verse just mentioned in the Shema', the verse in question no longer has application. Said 'Abbayi, this applies to the Shema' read in the evening, but if rain falls before the reading of the Shema' in the morning, the verse in question still has application, for R. Samuel, son of R. Isaac, said (Berakot, 59a): Those morning clouds have no real value, as it is written (Hos., 6.4): "Your goodness is as a morning cloud, and as the dew that early passeth away." Said R. Papa to 'Abbayi: But do not people say: "If there is rain at the opening of the doors (in the morning)—lay down thy bag, O ass-driver, and sleep"? That is no contradiction, for the proverb refers to a case when the rain pours down from a heavy cloud, while R. Samuel refers to a case when the rain comes from a light cloud.

MISHNA: How do flog him? We tie his two hands to the post here and here. The superintendent of the synagogue grabs his clothes. If they tear they tear, and if they rip at the seams they rip at the seams. until he reveals his heart. A stone is placed behind him. The superintendent of the synagogue stands on it and a strap is in his hand of a calf doubled once into two and then again into four. And two straps of donkey hide go up and down through it. The handle is a handbreadth and its width is a handbreadth and its tip reaches his stomach.

MISHNA: How do flog him? We tie his two hands to the post here and here. The superintendent of the synagogue grabs his clothes. If they tear they tear, and if they rip at the seams they rip at the seams. until he reveals his heart. A stone is placed behind him. The superintendent of the synagogue stands on it and a strap is in his hand of a calf doubled once into two and then again into four. And two straps of donkey hide go up and down through it. The handle is a handbreadth and its width is a handbreadth and its tip reaches his stomach.