בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים: מִלְּמַעְלָה, וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים: מִלְּמַטָּה. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה: לֹא תְּהֵא מְחִיצָּה גְּדוֹלָה מִן הַכּוֹתֶל שֶׁבֵּינֵיהֶן!

Beit Shammai say: The partition that permits drawing water must be placed below; and Beit Hillel said it must be placed above. Rabbi Yehuda said: A partition for the cistern should be no more stringent than the wall serving as a partition between the two courtyards. Once there is a wall between courtyards, there is no need to erect an additional partition specifically for the cistern.

אָמַר רַבָּה בַּר בַּר חָנָה אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: רַבִּי יְהוּדָה בְּשִׁיטַּת רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אֲמָרָהּ, דְּאָמַר: מְחִיצָּה תְּלוּיָה מַתֶּרֶת.

Rabba bar bar Ḥana said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Rabbi Yehuda stated his opinion in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, who said that a suspended partition permits one to carry, and therefore the wall between the courtyards suffices to divide the cistern as well.

וְלֹא הִיא, לֹא רַבִּי יְהוּדָה סָבַר לָהּ כְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי, וְלֹא רַבִּי יוֹסֵי סָבַר לָהּ כְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה.

The Gemara rejects this equation. And that is not so, as neither does Rabbi Yehuda hold in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, nor does Rabbi Yosei hold in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda.

לֹא רַבִּי יְהוּדָה סָבַר לָהּ כְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי – עַד כָּאן לָא קָאָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה הָתָם אֶלָּא בְּעֵירוּבֵי חֲצֵירוֹת דְּרַבָּנַן, אֲבָל הָכָא סוּכָּה דְּאוֹרַיְיתָא – לֹא.

The Gemara elaborates: Neither does Rabbi Yehuda hold in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, as Rabbi Yehuda states his opinion that a suspended partition suffices only there, with regard to the joining of the courtyards, which is an obligation by rabbinic law. However, here, with regard to sukka , which is by Torah law, a suspended partition does not suffice.

וְלֹא רַבִּי יוֹסֵי סָבַר לָהּ כְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה, עַד כָּאן לָא קָאָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי הָכָא אֶלָּא בַּסּוּכָּה, דְּמִצְוַת עֲשֵׂה. אֲבָל שַׁבָּת דְּאִיסּוּר סְקִילָה – לֹא.

Nor does Rabbi Yosei hold in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, as Rabbi Yosei states his opinion that a suspended partition suffices only here, with regard to a sukka , which is a positive mitzva. However, in the case of carrying between courtyards on Shabbat, which is a prohibition that is punishable by stoning, no, a suspended partition does not suffice.

וְאִם תֹּאמַר: מַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁנַּעֲשָׂה בְּצִיפּוֹרִי עַל פִּי מִי נַעֲשָׂה? לֹא עַל פִּי רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אֶלָּא עַל פִּי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל בְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי.

The Gemara asks: And if you say: Since Rabbi Yosei does not hold in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda with regard to the laws of Shabbat, according to whose opinion was the action that was taken in Tzippori performed, where they relied on suspended partitions even on Shabbat? The Gemara answers: It was not performed according to the opinion of Rabbi Yosei but rather on the authority of Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei.

וּמַאי מַעֲשֶׂה? דְּכִי אֲתָא רַב דִּימִי אֲמַר: פַּעַם אַחַת שָׁכְחוּ וְלֹא הֵבִיאוּ סֵפֶר תּוֹרָה מֵעֶרֶב שַׁבָּת, לְמָחָר פֵּירְסוּ סְדִינִין עַל גַּבֵּי הָעַמּוּדִים וְהֵבִיאוּ סֵפֶר תּוֹרָה, וְקָרְאוּ בּוֹ.

And what was that incident? When Rav Dimi came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he said: One time they forgot and did not bring a Torah scroll to the synagogue on Shabbat eve prior to the onset of Shabbat. The next day, on Shabbat, to avoid violating the prohibition against carrying, they spread and suspended sheets on posts that were fixed along the path from the house in which the Torah scroll was stored to the synagogue, establishing partitions. And they brought a Torah scroll along that path and read from it.

פֵּירְסוּ סָלְקָא דַּעֲתָךְ מֵהֵיכָן הֱבִיאוּם בַּשַּׁבָּת? אֶלָּא: מָצְאוּ סְדִינִין פְּרוּסִין עַל גַּבֵּי הָעַמּוּדִים, וְהֵבִיאוּ סֵפֶר תּוֹרָה וְקָרְאוּ בּוֹ.

The Gemara asks: Does it enter your mind that they spread the sheets on Shabbat? Carrying before the partitions were established was prohibited. From where did they bring these sheets on Shabbat? Rather, they found sheets already spread on the posts, and they brought a Torah scroll and read from it. They relied on a suspended partition even in this matter related to Torah law. They relied neither on the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda nor on the opinion of Rabbi Yosei; rather, they relied on the authority of a third tanna .

אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא אָמַר אֲבִימִי: מַחֲצֶלֶת אַרְבָּעָה וּמַשֶּׁהוּ מַתֶּרֶת בַּסּוּכָּה מִשּׁוּם דּוֹפֶן. הֵיכִי עָבֵיד – תָּלֵי לֵיהּ בָּאֶמְצַע, פָּחוֹת מִשְּׁלֹשָׁה לְמַטָּה וּפָחוֹת מִשְּׁלֹשָׁה לְמַעְלָה, וְכָל פָּחוֹת מִשְּׁלֹשָׁה כְּלָבוּד דָּמֵי.

§ Rav Ḥisda said that Avimi said: A mat that is four handbreadths and a bit wide permit the use of a sukka as a wall. The Gemara explains: How does one accomplish this? He suspends it in the middle of a space ten handbreadths high, with less than three handbreadths below it and less than three handbreadths above it. And the principle states: The legal status of any objects that have a gap of less than three handbreadths between them is as if they were joined [ lavud ]. Therefore, a mat four handbreadths and a bit wide can constitute a fit partition of ten handbreadths.

פְּשִׁיטָא! מַהוּ דְּתֵימָא: חַד לָבוּד – אָמְרִינַן, תְּרֵי לָבוּד – לָא אָמְרִינַן, קָא מַשְׁמַע לָן.

The Gemara asks: This is obvious. The principle of joining with regard to a gap of less than three handbreadths is well known. There is no need to teach this halakha . The Gemara answers: Lest you say that we state the principle of lavud once with regard to a particular surface but we do not state the principle of lavud twice to consider it joined in different directions, Avimi teaches us that one may implement the principle twice.

מֵיתִיבִי: מַחֲצֶלֶת שִׁבְעָה וּמַשֶּׁהוּ מַתֶּרֶת בַּסּוּכָּה מִשּׁוּם דּוֹפֶן! כִּי תַּנְיָא הַהִיא בְּסוּכָּה גְּדוֹלָה. וּמַאי קָא מַשְׁמַע לָן – דִּמְשַׁלְשְׁלִין דְּפָנוֹת מִלְּמַעְלָה לְמַטָּה כְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי.

The Gemara raises an objection to the opinion of Avimi from a baraita : A mat that is seven handbreadths and a bit wide permit use of a sukka as a wall. Apparently, a mat can serve as the wall of a sukka only when the principle of joined objects is implemented once. The Gemara answers: When that baraita was taught, it was with regard to a large sukka , one considerably higher than ten handbreadths. One suspends the mat from a bit less than three handbreadths from the roofing, and it is considered a fit sukka wall although it is a significant distance off the ground. And what does it teach us? It teaches that one may lower walls from up downward, in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei.

אָמַר רַבִּי אַמִי: פַּס אַרְבָּעָה וּמַשֶּׁהוּ מַתִּיר בַּסּוּכָּה מִשּׁוּם דּוֹפֶן, וּמוֹקִים לֵיהּ בְּפָחוֹת מִשְּׁלֹשָׁה טְפָחִים סָמוּךְ דּוֹפֶן. וְכָל פָּחוֹת מִשְּׁלֹשָׁה סָמוּךְ לַדּוֹפֶן כְּלָבוּד דָּמִי.

Apropos forming a sukka wall based on the principle of lavud , the Gemara cites that Rabbi Ami said: A board that measures four handbreadths and a bit can permit the use of a sukka , serving as a wall, and it is effective if one establishes it less than three handbreadths from the adjacent wall. And the principle states: The legal status of any objects with a gap of less than three handbreadths between them is as if they were joined.

מַאי קָא מַשְׁמַע לָן? הָא קָא מַשְׁמַע לָן: שִׁיעוּר מֶשֶׁךְ סוּכָּה קְטַנָּה שִׁבְעָה.

The Gemara asks: What is he teaching us? The principle of lavud is well known. The Gemara answers: He comes to teach us that the minimum measure of the horizontal extension of the wall of a small sukka is seven handbreadths. Therefore, it is possible to establish a wall for the sukka using a board that measures four handbreadths and a bit.