reclining

His kinsmen, who were reclining with him, wondered at his instability, and thus expressed themselves:

And when the boat was about to come near the land, Jesus bent down His head upon one of His angels, and was quiet. And Andrew ceased speaking; and he also, reclining his head upon one of his disciples, fell asleep. And Jesus said to His angels: Spread your hands under him, and carry Andrew and his disciples, and go and put them outside of the city of the man-eaters; and having laid them on the ground, return to me. And the angels did as Jesus commanded them, and the angels returned to Jesus: and He went up into the heavens with His angels.

And they left the ship and entered into the city, and lo, there were noises of flutes and water-organs, and trumpets sounded about them; and the apostle inquired, saying: What is this festival that is in this city? And they that were there said to him: Thee also have the gods brought to make merry in this city. For the king hath an only daughter, and now he giveth her in marriage unto an husband: this rejoicing, therefore, and assembly of the wedding to-day is the festival which thou hast seen. And the king hath sent heralds to proclaim everywhere that all should come to the marriage, rich and poor, bond and free, strangers and citizens: and if any refuse and come not to the marriage he shall answer for it unto the king. And Abbanes hearing that, said to the apostle: Let us also go, lest we offend the king, especially seeing we are strangers. And he said: Let us go. And after they had put up in the inn and rested a little space they went to the marriage; and the apostle seeing them all set down (reclining), laid himself, he also, in the midst, and all looked upon him, as upon a stranger and one come from a foreign land: but Abbanes the merchant, being his master, laid himself in another place.

For as many cities as have special customs in the matter of drinking, eating, and reclining, have special officers appointed to look after their requirements.

And Judah rose up and lifted his father's head from the ground, and placed it upon his lap, and he wiped his father's tears from his cheeks, and Judah wept an exceeding great weeping, whilst his father's head was reclining upon his lap, still as a stone.

And when he shall ask us, saying, `What did ye drink out of? and where were ye sitting?' we will say unto him, `Out of cups of gold, and our seats were in the hall of his house where the cushions for reclining upon were placed.'" And they agreed together on this evil plot [whilst they were] on their way.

Now I think they must, in the first place, be required to show, if they can, agreeably to their own definition, that the Creator is just in punishing according to their deserts, either those who perished at the time of the deluge, or the inhabitants of Sodom, or those who had quitted Egypt, seeing we sometimes behold committed crimes more wicked and detestable than those for which the above-mentioned persons were destroyed, while we do not yet see every sinner paying the penalty of his misdeeds. Will they say that He who at one time was just has been made good? Or will they rather be of opinion that He is even now just, but is patiently enduring human offences, while that then He was not even just, inasmuch as He exterminated innocent and sucking children along with cruel and ungodly giants? Now, such are their opinions, because they know not how to understand anything beyond the letter; otherwise they would show how it is literal justice for sins to be visited upon the heads of children to the third and fourth generation, and on children’s children after them. By us, however, such things are not understood literally; but, as Ezekiel taught when relating the parable, we inquire what is the inner meaning contained in the parable itself. Moreover, they ought to explain this also, how He is just, and rewards every one according to his merits, who punishes earthly-minded persons and the devil, seeing they have done nothing worthy of punishment. For they could not do any good if, according to them, they were of a wicked and ruined nature. For as they style Him a judge, He appears to be a judge not so much of actions as of natures; and if a bad nature cannot do good, neither can a good nature do evil. Then, in the next place, if He whom they call good is good to all, He is undoubtedly good also to those who are destined to perish. And why does He not save them? If He does not desire to do so, He will be no longer good; if He does desire it, and cannot effect it, He will not be omnipotent. Why do they not rather hear the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ in the Gospels, preparing fire for the devil and his angels? And how shall that proceeding, as penal as it is sad, appear to be, according to their view, the work of the good God? Even the Saviour Himself, the Son of the good God, protests in the Gospels, and declares that “if signs and wonders had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago, sitting in sackcloth and ashes.” And when He had come near to those very cities, and had entered their territory, why, pray, does He avoid entering those cities, and exhibiting to them abundance of signs and wonders, if it were certain that they would have repented, after they had been performed, in sackcloth and ashes? But as He does not do this, He undoubtedly abandons to destruction those whom the language of the Gospel shows not to have been of a wicked or ruined nature, inasmuch as it declares they were capable of repentance. Again, in a certain parable of the Gospel, where the king enters in to see the guests reclining at the banquet, he beheld a certain individual not clothed with wedding raiment, and said to him, “Friend, how camest thou in hither, not having a wedding garment?” and then ordered his servants, “Bind him hand and foot, and cast him into outer darkness; there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” Let them tell us who is that king who entered in to see the guests, and finding one amongst them with unclean garments, commanded him to be bound by his servants, and thrust out into outer darkness. Is he the same whom they call just? How then had he commanded good and bad alike to be invited, without directing their merits to be inquired into by his servants? By such procedure would be indicated, not the character of a just God who rewards according to men’s deserts, as they assert, but of one who displays undiscriminating goodness towards all. Now, if this must necessarily be understood of the good God, i.e. either of Christ or of the Father of Christ, what other objection can they bring against the justice of God’s judgment? Nay, what else is there so unjust charged by them against the God of the law as to order him who had been invited by His servants, whom He had sent to call good and bad alike, to be bound hand and foot, and to be thrown into outer darkness, because he had on unclean garments?

In the passages containing the commandments also, similar things are found. For in the law Moses is commanded to destroy every male that is not circumcised on the eighth day, which is exceedingly incongruous, since it would be necessary, if it were related that the law was executed according to the history, to command those parents to be punished who did not circumcise their children, and also those who were the nurses of little children. The declaration of Scripture now is, “The uncircumcised male, i.e. who shall not have been circumcised, shall be cut off from his people.” And if we are to inquire regarding the impossibilities of the law, we find an animal called the goat-stag, which cannot possibly exist, but which, as being in the number of clean beasts, Moses commands to be eaten; and a griffin, which no one ever remembers or heard of as yielding to human power, but which the legislator forbids to be used for food. Respecting the celebrated observance of the Sabbath also he thus speaks: “Ye shall sit, every one in your dwellings; no one shall move from his place on the Sabbath-day.” Which precept it is impossible to observe literally; for no man can sit a whole day so as not to move from the place where he sat down. With respect to each one of these points now, those who belong to the circumcision, and all who would have no more meaning to be found in sacred Scripture than what is indicated by the letter, consider that there should be no investigation regarding the goat-stag, and the griffin, and the vulture; and they invent some empty and trifling tales about the Sabbath, drawn from some traditional sources or other, alleging that every one’s place is computed to him within two thousand cubits. Others, again, among whom is Dositheus the Samaritan, censure indeed expositions of this kind, but themselves lay down something more ridiculous, viz. that each one must remain until the evening in the posture, place, or position in which he found himself on the Sabbath-day; i.e. if found sitting, he is to sit the whole day, or if reclining, he is to recline the whole day. Moreover, the injunction which runs, “Bear no burden on the Sabbath-day,” seems to me an impossibility. For the Jewish doctors, in consequence of these [prescriptions], have betaken themselves, as the holy apostle says, to innumerable fables, saying that it is not accounted a burden if a man wear shoes without nails, but that it is a burden if shoes with nails be worn; and that if it be carried on one shoulder, they consider it a burden; but if on both, they declare it to be none.

If [those at the table] are sitting upright, each one blesses for himself. If they are reclining, one blesses for them all. If wine came during the meal, each one says a blessing for himself. If after the meal, one blesses for them all. The same one says [the blessing] over the incense, even though the incense is not brought until after the meal.

One who makes his sukkah like a cone-shaped hut or leans it against a wall: Rabbi Eliezer invalidates it since it has no roof, But the sages declare it valid. A large reed mat: if made for lying upon it is susceptible to [ritual] uncleanliness and is invalid as skhakh. If made for a skhakh, it may be used for skhakh and is not susceptible to uncleanliness. Rabbi Eliezer says, whether small or large: if it was made for reclining upon, it is susceptible to uncleanliness and is invalid as skhakh; if made for a covering, it is valid as a skhakh and is not susceptible to uncleanliness.

If a person entered a house afflicted with a nega, carrying his clothes upon his shoulders, and his sandals and rings in his hands, both he and they become unclean immediately. If, however, he was wearing his clothes and had his sandals on his feet and his rings on his hands, he becomes unclean immediately, but they remain clean, unless he stayed as much time as is required for the eating of half a loaf of wheat bread and not of barley bread, while in a reclining posture and eating with some condiment.

We have stated: It happened that Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah and Rebbi Ismael stayed at the same place and Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah was reclining while Rebbi Ismael was standing. When the time for the recital of the Shema‘ arrived did Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah stand and Rebbi Ismael reclined. Rebbi Eleazar said to Rebbi Ismael, this is as when one says to someone in the market place, your beard is overgrown, and he says, that is against those who shave. I, who was reclining, stood up and you, who were standing, went on to recline. He answered him: You stood up following the school of Shammai, I reclined following the school of Hillel. Another explanation: That the students should not see me and make it the permanent practice to follow the school of Shammai.

We have stated: It happened that Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah and Rebbi Ismael stayed at the same place and Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah was reclining while Rebbi Ismael was standing. When the time for the recital of the Shema‘ arrived did Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah stand and Rebbi Ismael reclined. Rebbi Eleazar said to Rebbi Ismael, this is as when one says to someone in the market place, your beard is overgrown, and he says, that is against those who shave. I, who was reclining, stood up and you, who were standing, went on to recline. He answered him: You stood up following the school of Shammai, I reclined following the school of Hillel. Another explanation: That the students should not see me and make it the permanent practice to follow the school of Shammai.

All the time that his deceased in lying before him, he eats at his neighbor’s, and if he has no neighbor, he eats in another room. If he has no other room, he makes a wall of separation and eats. If he is unable to make a wall of separation, he turns his face towards the wall and eats. He does not eat reclining; he does neither eat nor drink his fill. He eats neither meat nor drinks wine. One does not allow him to participate in a group to say Grace. If he recited Grace, one does not answer “amen” after him. If others recited Grace, he does not anwer “amen”. That is meant on weekdays. But on the Sabbath, he does eat reclining; he eats meat and drinks wine, eats and drinks his fill. One lets him participate in a group to say Grace. If he recited Grace, one does answer “amen” after him. If others recited Grace, he answers “amen”. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel said: Because I allowed all of these, oblige him for all other obligations of the Torah. If I permitted him temporary life, so much more eternal life. Rebbi Judah ben Pazi in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: Practice follows Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel.

All the time that his deceased in lying before him, he eats at his neighbor’s, and if he has no neighbor, he eats in another room. If he has no other room, he makes a wall of separation and eats. If he is unable to make a wall of separation, he turns his face towards the wall and eats. He does not eat reclining; he does neither eat nor drink his fill. He eats neither meat nor drinks wine. One does not allow him to participate in a group to say Grace. If he recited Grace, one does not answer “amen” after him. If others recited Grace, he does not anwer “amen”. That is meant on weekdays. But on the Sabbath, he does eat reclining; he eats meat and drinks wine, eats and drinks his fill. One lets him participate in a group to say Grace. If he recited Grace, one does answer “amen” after him. If others recited Grace, he answers “amen”. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel said: Because I allowed all of these, oblige him for all other obligations of the Torah. If I permitted him temporary life, so much more eternal life. Rebbi Judah ben Pazi in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: Practice follows Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel.

Rebbi Abba, son of Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba: If one eats walking, he stands still for Grace. If one eats standing, he sits down for Grace. If one eats sitting, he reclines for Grace. If one eats reclining, he wraps himself in his toga for Grace. If one acts in this fashion, he is like an Angel of Service. What is the reason? (Is. 6:2) “With two [wings] he would cover his face, and with two [wings] he would cover his feet.”

Abba bar bar Ḥana and Rav Ḥuna were sitting down and eating and Rebbi Zeïra was standing and serving them. He came and carried both in one hand. Abba bar bar Ḥana said to him: Is your other hand cut off? His father got angry with him and said to him: “Is it not enough for you that you are reclining and he stands and serves? But in addition, he is a Cohen and you make fun of him when Samuel said that he who uses a Cohen commits larceny. I order that he should recline and you get up and serve in his stead.” From where that he who uses a Cohen commits larceny? Rebbi Aḥa in the name of Samuel said (Ezra 8:28): “I said to them, you are holy and the vessels are holy.” Since one who uses the Temple vessels commits larceny, also one who uses a Cohen commits larceny!

All the time that his deceased is lying before him, he eats at his neighbor’s. If he has no neighbor, he eats in another room. If he has no other room, he makes a wall of separation and eats. If he is unable to make a wall of separation, he turns his face towards the wall and eats. He does not eat reclining; he does neither eat nor drink his fill. He eats neither meat nor drinks wine. One does not allow him to participate in a group to say Grace. If he recited Grace, one does not answer “amen” after him. If others recited Grace, he does not answer “amen”. That is on weekdays. But on the Sabbath, he does eat reclining; he eats meat and drinks wine, eats and drinks his fill. One lets him participate in a group to say Grace. If he recited Grace, one does answer “amen” after him. If others recited Grace, he answers “amen”. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel said: Because you allowed all of these, oblige him for all other obligations of the Torah. If you permitted him temporary life, so much more eternal life. Rebbi Judah ben Pazi in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: Practice follows Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel. If he was handed over to the public, he may eat meat and drink wine. If he was handed over to the carriers it is as if he was handed to the public.

All the time that his deceased is lying before him, he eats at his neighbor’s. If he has no neighbor, he eats in another room. If he has no other room, he makes a wall of separation and eats. If he is unable to make a wall of separation, he turns his face towards the wall and eats. He does not eat reclining; he does neither eat nor drink his fill. He eats neither meat nor drinks wine. One does not allow him to participate in a group to say Grace. If he recited Grace, one does not answer “amen” after him. If others recited Grace, he does not answer “amen”. That is on weekdays. But on the Sabbath, he does eat reclining; he eats meat and drinks wine, eats and drinks his fill. One lets him participate in a group to say Grace. If he recited Grace, one does answer “amen” after him. If others recited Grace, he answers “amen”. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel said: Because you allowed all of these, oblige him for all other obligations of the Torah. If you permitted him temporary life, so much more eternal life. Rebbi Judah ben Pazi in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: Practice follows Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel. If he was handed over to the public, he may eat meat and drink wine. If he was handed over to the carriers it is as if he was handed to the public.

The Rabbis have taught : Bet Hillel say : When standing they may read [the Shema'], when sitting they may read, when reclining they may read, when walking by the way they may read, when doing work they may read. It once happened that R. Ishmael and R. Eleazar b. 'Azariah were dining in a certain place, the former reclining and the latter sitting upright. When the time for reading the Shema' arrived, R. Eleazar reclined and R. Ishmael sat up. R. Eleazar b. 'Azariah said to R. Ishmael, "[Ishmael] My brother, I will narrate a parable for thee. To what is this like? To one who is told 'Thy beard is well grown' and he answers, 'Then it shall be taken in hand by the barbers. ' So art thou ; all the time that I was sitting up thou wert reclining, but now that I have reclined thou hast sat up !"

The Rabbis have taught : Bet Hillel say : When standing they may read [the Shema'], when sitting they may read, when reclining they may read, when walking by the way they may read, when doing work they may read. It once happened that R. Ishmael and R. Eleazar b. 'Azariah were dining in a certain place, the former reclining and the latter sitting upright. When the time for reading the Shema' arrived, R. Eleazar reclined and R. Ishmael sat up. R. Eleazar b. 'Azariah said to R. Ishmael, "[Ishmael] My brother, I will narrate a parable for thee. To what is this like? To one who is told 'Thy beard is well grown' and he answers, 'Then it shall be taken in hand by the barbers. ' So art thou ; all the time that I was sitting up thou wert reclining, but now that I have reclined thou hast sat up !"

The Rabbis have taught : Bet Hillel say : When standing they may read [the Shema'], when sitting they may read, when reclining they may read, when walking by the way they may read, when doing work they may read. It once happened that R. Ishmael and R. Eleazar b. 'Azariah were dining in a certain place, the former reclining and the latter sitting upright. When the time for reading the Shema' arrived, R. Eleazar reclined and R. Ishmael sat up. R. Eleazar b. 'Azariah said to R. Ishmael, "[Ishmael] My brother, I will narrate a parable for thee. To what is this like? To one who is told 'Thy beard is well grown' and he answers, 'Then it shall be taken in hand by the barbers. ' So art thou ; all the time that I was sitting up thou wert reclining, but now that I have reclined thou hast sat up !"

Shouldest thou say, "Bet Hillel also hold [that the Shema' may be read] in a reclining position!" that is so, but only when one was reclining from the first ; but in thy case, since hitherto thou has been sitting up and now thou reclinest, they will say, "We have to infer that [our teachers] agree with the opinion of Bet Shammai," and there is a fear, that the disciples seeing this, will fix the Halakah accordingly for future generations.

Shouldest thou say, "Bet Hillel also hold [that the Shema' may be read] in a reclining position!" that is so, but only when one was reclining from the first ; but in thy case, since hitherto thou has been sitting up and now thou reclinest, they will say, "We have to infer that [our teachers] agree with the opinion of Bet Shammai," and there is a fear, that the disciples seeing this, will fix the Halakah accordingly for future generations.

I quote in objection : He whose dead is lying before him should eat his meal in another room, and if he has no other room he should eat in a neighbour's house ; if such be not available, he should put up a partition and have his meal ; if he has nothing wherewith to make a partition, he should turn his face away [from the body] and eat. But he must not have his meal in a reclining position, or partake of meat or drink wine ; nor does he say Grace or arrange Zimmun,

It once happened that Rabban Gamaliel and the Elders were reclining in an upper chamber in Jericho ; dates were set before them and they ate. Rabban Gamaliel gave permission to R. 'Akiba to say Grace. R. 'Akiba sat up and said one benediction which is an abstract of three. Rabban Gamaliel said to him, "'Akiba, how long wilt thou put thy head between strife!" He replied, "Our master ! Although thou sayest thus and thy colleagues say otherwise, thou hast taught us, our master, that where the individual and the many differ, the Halakah is in accord with the view of the many ! "

"Wheat" — for there is a Mishnaic teaching : Whoever enters a plague-infected house with his garments upon his shoulders, his sandals and rings in his hand, he and they immediately become unclean. If he was clothed in his garments, his sandals upon his feet and his rings upon his finger, he immediately becomes un-clean, but they remain undefiled until he tarries there a sufficient time to eat a peras of wheaten-bread, but not barley-bread, reclining and eating it with a relish.

If men were sitting [at the meal], each one says Grace for himself. If they were reclining, one may say it for all.

If men were sitting [at the meal], each one says Grace for himself. If they were reclining, then yes; but if they were not reclining. no ! Against this I quote the following : If ten were journeying by the way, although they all partake of one loaf, each of them says Grace for himself ; should they sit down to eat, although each eats of his own loaf, one may say Grace for all. Note that he here states "they sit," i.e. although they are not reclining !

If men were sitting [at the meal], each one says Grace for himself. If they were reclining, then yes; but if they were not reclining. no ! Against this I quote the following : If ten were journeying by the way, although they all partake of one loaf, each of them says Grace for himself ; should they sit down to eat, although each eats of his own loaf, one may say Grace for all. Note that he here states "they sit," i.e. although they are not reclining !

If men were sitting [at the meal], each one says Grace for himself. If they were reclining, then yes; but if they were not reclining. no ! Against this I quote the following : If ten were journeying by the way, although they all partake of one loaf, each of them says Grace for himself ; should they sit down to eat, although each eats of his own loaf, one may say Grace for all. Note that he here states "they sit," i.e. although they are not reclining !

When Rab died, his disciples followed his cortege. On their return they said, "Let us go and have our meal by the River Danak." After they had eaten, they sat on and the question was asked : Does our Mishnah intend that only when they recline [does one say the benediction for all] and not if they sit ; or is it perhaps that where people say, "Let us go and eat our meal in a certain place" this is to be regarded the same as reclining? They were unable [to answer the question].

If they were reclining, one may say Grace for all. Rab said : This teaching applies only to bread for which reclining is necessary, but for wine reclining is not necessary. R. Johanan, however, said : Even for wine likewise reclining is needed.

If they were reclining, one may say Grace for all. Rab said : This teaching applies only to bread for which reclining is necessary, but for wine reclining is not necessary. R. Johanan, however, said : Even for wine likewise reclining is needed.

If they were reclining, one may say Grace for all. Rab said : This teaching applies only to bread for which reclining is necessary, but for wine reclining is not necessary. R. Johanan, however, said : Even for wine likewise reclining is needed.

If they were reclining, one may say Grace for all. Rab said : This teaching applies only to bread for which reclining is necessary, but for wine reclining is not necessary. R. Johanan, however, said : Even for wine likewise reclining is needed.

Against this teaching is quoted : What is the procedure of reclining? The guests enter and seat themselves upon stools and chairs until all are assembled. Then water is brought to them, and each washes one hand. Wine is set for them, and each says the benediction for himself. They thereupon ascend [the couch] and recline, and water is brought before them ; and although each one has washed one hand, he again washes both hands. Wine is brought to them, and although each has said the benediction for himself, one may now say it for all !

According to one version of Rab's statement, viz. : "This teaching applies only to bread for which reclining is necessary, but for wine reclining is not necessary," the first part [of this Baraita] is in disagreement!

According to one version of Rab's statement, viz. : "This teaching applies only to bread for which reclining is necessary, but for wine reclining is not necessary," the first part [of this Baraita] is in disagreement!

Rab Sheshet said [to the Exilarch] : I know a teaching, viz. : What is the procedure of reclining ? When there are two couches, the more important person reclines first, and the other below him. When there are three couches, the chief person reclines first, the next important above him, and the third below him. They begin the washing previous to the meal with the chief guest. As for the washing at the conclusion of the meal, when there are five, they commence with the chief guest; but when there are a hundred they commence with the person of least importance until they reach the last five, and then they commence with the principal guest. To whom the water after the meal returns, [the privilege of saying] Grace likewise returns.

If, however, he was wearing his clothes and had his sandals unclean immediately, but they remain clean, unless he stayed as much time as is required for the eating of half a loaf of wheat bread and not of barley bread, while in a reclining posture and eating with some condiment.

Mishnah: A large reed mat: if made for lying upon it is susceptible to [ritual] impurity and is invalid as skhakh. If made for skhakh, it may be used for skhakh and is not susceptible to uncleanliness. Rabbi Eliezer says: whether small or large: If it was made for reclining upon, it is susceptible to uncleanliness and is invalid as skhakh; If made for a covering, it is valid as a skhakh and is not susceptible to uncleanliness.

GEMARA. [Is not our Mishnah] self-contradictory? It says, if made for reclining upon is susceptible to [ritual] uncleanliness and is invalid as skhakh The reason then is because it was made specifically for reclining upon, but if it was made without specific purpose, [it would be assumed that it was] for skhakh.

GEMARA. [Is not our Mishnah] self-contradictory? It says, if made for reclining upon is susceptible to [ritual] uncleanliness and is invalid as skhakh The reason then is because it was made specifically for reclining upon, but if it was made without specific purpose, [it would be assumed that it was] for skhakh.

And then it is taught: if made for a covering it is valid as skhakh and is not susceptible to [ritual] uncleanliness. The reason then is because it was made specifically for a covering, but if it was made without specific purpose [it would be assumed that it was] made for reclining upon?

But read the latter portion [of the Mishnah]. R Rabbi Eliezer says: whether small or large: If it was made for reclining upon, it is susceptible to uncleanliness and is invalid as skhakh. The reason is that he made it for reclining, but if made without a specific purpose it can be used as skhakh

But read the latter portion [of the Mishnah]. R Rabbi Eliezer says: whether small or large: If it was made for reclining upon, it is susceptible to uncleanliness and is invalid as skhakh. The reason is that he made it for reclining, but if made without a specific purpose it can be used as skhakh

But [again] read the later portion [of the Mishnah] If made for a covering, it is valid as a skhakh and is not susceptible to uncleanliness. The reason then is that it was made specifically for covering, but if made without specific purpose, [it would be assumed that it was] for reclining upon?

Rather Rava said: In the case of a large [mat] all agree that if made without specific purpose [it is assumed to be intended] for a covering. They only differ in the case of a small [mat]. The first Tanna holds that ordinarily a small one is for reclining upon, and R. Eliezer holds that ordinarily a small one is for a covering as well.

And this is what was meant: If a large mat of reeds is made specifically for reclining upon, it is susceptible to [ritual] uncleanliness and is invalid as skhakh. The reason is that it was made specifically for reclining upon, but ordinarily it is regarded as though it was made for a covering, and is valid as skhakh. A small [mat], if made for a covering, is valid as skhakh. The reason is that it was made specifically for covering, but ordinarily it is regarded as though made for reclining upon, and is invalid for a Sukkah-covering. [This is the view of the first Tanna] And R. Eliezer comes to say that whether it is small, or large, if made without specific purpose, it is valid as skhakh.

And this is what was meant: If a large mat of reeds is made specifically for reclining upon, it is susceptible to [ritual] uncleanliness and is invalid as skhakh. The reason is that it was made specifically for reclining upon, but ordinarily it is regarded as though it was made for a covering, and is valid as skhakh. A small [mat], if made for a covering, is valid as skhakh. The reason is that it was made specifically for covering, but ordinarily it is regarded as though made for reclining upon, and is invalid for a Sukkah-covering. [This is the view of the first Tanna] And R. Eliezer comes to say that whether it is small, or large, if made without specific purpose, it is valid as skhakh.

And this is what was meant: If a large mat of reeds is made specifically for reclining upon, it is susceptible to [ritual] uncleanliness and is invalid as skhakh. The reason is that it was made specifically for reclining upon, but ordinarily it is regarded as though it was made for a covering, and is valid as skhakh. A small [mat], if made for a covering, is valid as skhakh. The reason is that it was made specifically for covering, but ordinarily it is regarded as though made for reclining upon, and is invalid for a Sukkah-covering. [This is the view of the first Tanna] And R. Eliezer comes to say that whether it is small, or large, if made without specific purpose, it is valid as skhakh.

Rather R. Papa said: With regard to a small [mat], all agree that ordinarily it is intended for reclining upon. About what do they disagree? About a large one. The first Tanna is of the opinion that ordinarily a large one is intended for a covering, while R. Eliezer is of the opinion that ordinarily a large one is intended also for reclining.

Rather R. Papa said: With regard to a small [mat], all agree that ordinarily it is intended for reclining upon. About what do they disagree? About a large one. The first Tanna is of the opinion that ordinarily a large one is intended for a covering, while R. Eliezer is of the opinion that ordinarily a large one is intended also for reclining.

And what is meant by ‘if it was made for reclining'? It is this that was meant: Ordinarily also its manufacture is assumed to be for the purpose of reclining upon unless one made it specifically for a covering.

And what is meant by ‘if it was made for reclining'? It is this that was meant: Ordinarily also its manufacture is assumed to be for the purpose of reclining upon unless one made it specifically for a covering.