Soucca 5b — Talmud de Babylone

▶ 💬 Guemara of a bird called bar Yokhani, whose face is significantly larger than a handbreadth? The Gemara rejects this suggestion:…

of a bird called bar Yokhani, whose face is significantly larger than a handbreadth? The Gemara rejects this suggestion: If you grasped many, you did not grasp anything; if you grasped few, you grasped something. The Gemara asks: If so, say that it is like the face of a bird, which is extremely small? Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov said: Rav Huna derives that the thickness of the Ark cover was one handbreadth not through an actual comparison to the real faces of different creatures but rather by means of a verbal analogy between the terms penei and penei written in different places in the Torah. It is written here: “Before [penei] the Ark cover” (Leviticus 16:2), and it is written there: “From the presence of [penei] Isaac his father” (Genesis 27:30). The dimension of the Ark cover is like that of the face of a person, a handbreadth. The Gemara suggests: And let us derive a verbal analogy from the face of God, as it is written: “For I have seen your face as one sees the face of [penei] God, and you were pleased with me” (Genesis 33:10). The term penei is used with regard to the face of God as well. The Gemara rejects this suggestion: If you grasped many, you did not grasp anything; if you grasped few, you grasped something. The Gemara suggests: And let us derive a verbal analogy from the face of the cherub in the Tabernacle and the Temple, as it is written: “Toward the Ark cover shall be the faces of [penei] the cherubs” (Exodus 25:20), and their faces were presumably smaller than one handbreadth. Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov said: We have learned through tradition that the faces of the cherubs were not smaller than a handbreadth, and indeed Rav Huna derived the thickness of the Ark cover from here as well, i.e., from the verbal analogy between the instances of the word penei in the verses: “Upon the face of [penei] the Ark cover on the east” and: “The faces [penei] of the cherubs,” indicating that both are the same size. Apropos the cherubs, the Gemara asks: And what is the form of the face of a cherub [keruv]? Rabbi Abbahu said: Like that of a child [keravya], as in Babylonia one calls a child ravya. Abaye said to him: But if what you say is so, what is the meaning of that which is written about the faces of the celestial beasts drawing the celestial chariot: “The face of the first was the face of the cherub, and the face of the second was the face of a man” (Ezekiel 10:14)? According to your explanation, this face of the cherub is the same as that face of a man. The Gemara answers: Although two of the celestial beasts drawing that chariot had the face of a man, the difference between them is that one was a large face and one was a small face. In other words, the face described as the face of a man was the face of an adult, and the face described as the face of a cherub was that of a child. This is the source that the Ark and the Ark cover were ten handbreadths high. However, with regard to the application of this measure to the halakhot of sukka, the Gemara asks: And from where is it derived that the interior space of the sukka must be ten handbreadths high without the thickness of the roofing? Say that the ten handbreadths of the sukka are with the thickness of the roofing. Just as the ten handbreadths of the Ark are measured from the bottom of the Ark to the top of the Ark cover, let the sukka be measured to the top of the roofing. Rather, the dimension of the sukka is not derived from the Ark; one instead derived it from the dimensions of the eternal Temple, as it is written: “And the house which King Solomon built for the Lord, its length was sixty cubits, and its breadth twenty cubits, and its height thirty cubits” (I Kings 6:2). And it is written: “The height of the first cherub was ten cubits, and likewise was the second cherub” (I Kings 6:26). And it is taught in a baraita: Just as we find in the eternal Temple that the cherubs stand reaching one-third the height of the Temple, as each cherub was ten cubits high and the Temple was thirty cubits high, in the Tabernacle as well, the cherubs stand reaching one-third the height of the Tabernacle. And to calculate: How many cubits high was the Tabernacle? It was ten cubits, as it is written: “Ten cubits shall be the length of a beam” (Exodus 26:16). How many handbreadths do these ten cubits contain? They contain sixty handbreadths. And one third of that total is how many? It is twenty handbreadths. Subtract from this figure ten handbreadths of the Ark and the Ark cover upon which the cherubs stood, and ten handbreadths remain, which was the height of each individual cherub. And it is written: “And the cherubs shall spread out their wings upward, screening [sokhekhim] the Ark cover with their wings” (Exodus 25:20). Here the Merciful One is referring to the wings using the terminology of roofing [sekhakha] specifically when they are ten handbreadths above the Ark cover. This is a source that the roofing of the sukka is placed at least ten handbreadths high. The Gemara asks: And from where is it known that their wings were spread above their heads, from which it is derived that roofing is ten handbreadths high? Perhaps they were spread level with their heads. In that case, the ten handbreadths derived would include the roofing, leaving the interior space of the sukka less than ten handbreadths high. Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov said that it is written: “Spread out their wings upward,” indicating that the wings were above their heads. The Gemara asks: If so, say that the wings were extremely high to an unspecified height. The Gemara answers: Does the verse say: Upward, upward? It says upward only once, meaning slightly over their heads. There is proof from the verses that the roofing was at least ten handbreadths off the ground. The Gemara asks: This calculation works out well according to Rabbi Meir, who said that all the cubits in the Tabernacle and the Temple were intermediate cubits, consisting of six handbreadths; however, according to Rabbi Yehuda, who said that the cubit used in the dimensions of a building in the Temple was a cubit consisting of six handbreadths, but the cubit used in the dimensions of vessels was a cubit consisting of only five handbreadths, what is there to say? Based on that calculation, how many handbreadths was the height of the Ark and the Ark cover? They totaled eight and a half handbreadths. The height of the Ark was one and a half cubits, which, based on a five-handbreadth cubit, equals seven and a half handbreadths. Including the additional handbreadth of the Ark cover, the total height is eight and a half handbreadths. If the cherubs were one third of the height of the Tabernacle, which is twenty handbreadths, eleven and a half handbreadths remain for the height of the cherubs, over which their wings were spread. Therefore, say that for a sukka to be fit for use its interior space must be eleven and a half handbreadths high. However, there is no recorded opinion that requires a sukka with that dimension. Rather, according to Rabbi Yehuda, the Sages learned the minimum height of a sukka as a halakha transmitted to Moses from Sinai. As Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Ashi said that Rav said: The measures in various areas of halakha, e.g., olive-bulk, dried fig-bulk, egg-bulk, and the various halakhot of interpositions that serve as a barrier between one’s body and the water in a ritual bath and invalidate immersions, and the dimensions and nature of halakhic partitions are all halakhot transmitted to Moses from Sinai. They were not written in the Torah; rather, they were received in the framework of the Oral Law. The Gemara questions this assertion: Are measures a halakha transmitted to Moses from Sinai? They are written in the Torah, as it is written: “A land of wheat, and barley, and vines, and figs, and pomegranates, a land of olive oil and honey” (Deuteronomy 8:8), and Rav Ḥanin said: This entire verse is stated for the purpose of teaching measures with regard to different halakhot in the Torah. Wheat was mentioned as the basis for calculating the time required for one to become ritually impure when entering a house afflicted with leprosy, as we learned in a mishna: With regard to one who enters a house afflicted with leprosy of the house (see Leviticus, chapter 14), and his clothes are draped over his shoulders, and his sandals and his rings are in his hands, both he and they, the clothes, sandals, and rings, immediately become ritually impure.

▶ 🇫🇷 Résumé en français d' un oiseau appelé bar Yokhani, dont le visage est considérablement plus grand qu'un empan ? La Guemara rejette cette s…

d' un oiseau appelé bar Yokhani, dont le visage est considérablement plus grand qu'un empan ? La Guemara rejette cette suggestion : Si tu as saisi beaucoup, tu n'as rien saisi ; si tu as saisi peu, tu as saisi quelque chose. La Guemara demande : Si c'est le cas, dis qu'il est comme le visage d'un oiseau, qui est extrêmement petit ? Rav Aḥa bar Ya'akov dit : Rav Huna déduit que l'épaisseur du couvercle de l'Arche était d'un empan, non par une comparaison réelle avec les visages réels de différentes créatures, mais plutôt par une analogie verbale entre les termes penei et penei écrits à différents endroits de la Torah. Il est écrit ici : « Devant [penei] le couvercle de l'Arche » (Lévitique 16:2), et il est écrit là : « De la présence de [penei] Isaac son père » (Genèse 27:30). La dimension du couvercle de l'Arche est comme celle du visage d'une personne, un empan. La Guemara suggère : Et que l'on déduise une analogie verbale du visage de Dieu, comme il est écrit : « Car j'ai vu ton visage comme on voit le visage de [penei] Dieu, et tu m'as agréé » (Genèse 33:10). Le terme penei est également utilisé en ce qui concerne le visage de Dieu. La Guemara rejette cette suggestion : Si tu as saisi beaucoup, tu n'as rien saisi ; si tu as saisi peu, tu as saisi quelque chose. La Guemara suggère : Et que l'on déduise une analogie verbale du visage du chérubin dans le Tabernacle et le Temple, comme il est écrit : « Vers le couvercle de l'Arche seront les visages de [penei] les chérubins » (Exode 25:20), et leurs visages étaient vraisemblablement plus petits qu'un empan. Rav Aḥa bar Ya'akov dit : Nous avons appris par tradition que les visages des chérubins n'étaient pas plus petits qu'un empan, et en effet Rav Huna a déduit l'épaisseur du couvercle de l'Arche d'ici aussi, c'est-à-dire de l'analogie verbale entre les occurrences du mot penei dans les versets : « Sur la face de [penei] le couvercle de l'Arche à l'est » et : « Les visages [penei] des chérubins », indiquant que les deux sont de la même taille. À propos des chérubins, la Guemara demande : Et quelle est la forme du visage d'un chérubin [keruv] ? Rabbi Abbahou dit : Comme celui d'un enfant [keravya], car en Babylonie on appelle un enfant ravya. Abaye lui dit : Mais si ce que tu dis est ainsi, quel est le sens de ceci qui est écrit à propos des visages des créatures célestes tirant le char céleste : « La face de la première était la face d'un chérubin, et la face de la seconde était la face d'un homme » (Ézéchiel 10:14) ? Selon ton explication, ce visage de chérubin est le même que ce visage d'homme. La Guemara répond : Bien que deux des créatures célestes tirant ce char aient eu le visage d'un homme, la différence entre eux est que l'un était un grand visage et l'autre un petit visage. En d'autres termes, le visage décrit comme le visage d'un homme était le visage d'un adulte, et le visage décrit comme le visage d'un chérubin était celui d'un enfant. C'est la source que l'Arche et le couvercle de l'Arche avaient dix empans de haut. Cependant, en ce qui concerne l'application de cette mesure aux halakhot de sukka, la Guemara demande : Et d'où est-il dérivé que l'espace intérieur de la sukka doit être de dix empans de haut sans l'épaisseur du toit ? Dis que les dix empans de la sukka sont avec l'épaisseur du toit. Tout comme les dix empans de l'Arche sont mesurés du bas de l'Arche jusqu'au sommet du couvercle de l'Arche, que la sukka soit mesurée jusqu'au sommet du toit. Plutôt, la dimension de la sukka n'est pas dérivée de l'Arche ; on l'a déduite des dimensions du Temple éternel, comme il est écrit : « Et la maison que le roi Salomon bâtit pour l'Éternel, sa longueur était de soixante coudées, sa largeur de vingt coudées, et sa hauteur de trente coudées » (I Rois 6:2). Et il est écrit : « La hauteur du premier chérubin était de dix coudées, et de même le second chérubin » (I Rois 6:26). Et il est enseigné dans une baraita : De même que nous trouvons dans le Temple éternel que les chérubins se tiennent atteignant un tiers de la hauteur du Temple, car chaque chérubin avait dix coudées de haut et le Temple avait trente coudées de haut, dans le Tabernacle aussi, les chérubins se tiennent atteignant un tiers de la hauteur du Tabernacle. Et pour calculer : Combien de coudées de haut était le Tabernacle ? Il était de dix coudées, comme il est écrit : « Dix coudées sera la longueur d'une poutre » (Exode 26:16). Combien d'empans ces dix coudées contiennent-elles ? Elles contiennent soixante empans. Et un tiers de ce total est combien ? C'est vingt empans. Soustrais de ce chiffre dix empans de l'Arche et du couvercle de l'Arche sur lesquels les chérubins se tenaient, et il reste dix empans, ce qui était la hauteur de chaque chérubin individuel. Et il est écrit : « Et les chérubins étendront leurs ailes en haut, couvrant [sokhekhim] le couvercle de l'Arche de leurs ailes » (Exode 25:20). Ici, le Miséricordieux fait référence aux ailes en utilisant la terminologie de toiture [sekhakha] spécifiquement lorsqu'elles sont à dix empans au-dessus du couvercle de l'Arche. C'est une source que le toit de la sukka est placé à au moins dix empans de haut. La Guemara demande : Et d'où sait-on que leurs ailes étaient déployées au-dessus de leurs têtes, d'où il est dérivé que le toit est à dix empans de haut ? Peut-être étaient-elles déployées au niveau de leurs têtes. Dans ce cas, les dix empans dérivés incluraient le toit, laissant l'espace intérieur de la [...]

📜 Soucca — 5b

📋 Références bibliques — Soucca 5b

✜️ Votre éternité se joue maintenant