(9) All seven days of Sukkot, a person renders his sukka his permanent residence and his house his temporary residence. If rain fell, from when is it permitted to vacate the sukka? It is permitted from the point that it is raining so hard that the congealed dish will spoil. The Sages told a parable: To what is this matter comparable? It is comparable to a servant who comes to pour wine for his master, and he pours a jug [kiton] of water in his face.

§ The mishna continues: The Sages told a parable: To what is this matter comparable? It is comparable to a servant who comes to pour wine for his master, and he pours a jug of water in his face. A dilemma was raised before the Sages: Who poured the water in whose face? Come and hear a proof, as it is taught explicitly in a baraita: His master poured a jug of water on his face and said to him: I do not want your service.

Who poured upon whom? This is difficult for me, as according to the language of the first clause, it explicitly implies that the master poured [the jug] on the servant. And it's possible to answer, that [one might have thought] perhaps this is what it's saying: According to the basis of the law it is permissible to leave the sukkah [when it's raining]; however one who does so is comparable to a servant who is serving their master, and when they see the master is not treating them with favor, pours the water upon them, saying "I don't desire to serve you." A

nd if this were the case, it would be suitable not to leave the sukkah immediately once the groats are ruined. However, according to that which we conclude, that the master is the one pouring [a jug] upon the servant, one should not wait before clearing out.

Who poured upon whom - The servant on their master, and this is what it would be saying: this is comparable to a servant that was serving their master improperly; so too it is known [when it rains] that Israel are not serving properly. Or perhaps this is what it's saying: and the master poured a jug on the servant's face, to say, "leave my presence, I do not desire your service!" and the descent of the rains is like the pouring of the jug. And in any case this (the rain) is a bad sign; however we need to explain our mishna, what is the pouring of the jug? Is it the sitting in the sukkah, or the pouring of the rain?

MISHNA: From when, i.e., from which date, does one begin to mention the might of the rains by inserting the phrase: He makes the wind blow and rain fall, in the second blessing of the Amida prayer? Rabbi Eliezer says: The phrase is inserted from the first Festival day of the festival of Sukkot. Rabbi Yehoshua says: From the last Festival day of the festival of Sukkot. Rabbi Yehoshua said to Rabbi Eliezer: Since rain is nothing other than a sign of a curse during the festival of Sukkot, as rainfall forces Jews to leave their sukkot, why should one mention the might of rain during this period?

(2) What is explained in the verse is from the roots of the commandment — so that we recall the great miracles that God, the blessed One, performed for our forefathers in the wilderness as they left Egypt. As God covered them with the clouds of glory, so that the sun would not harm them during the day nor the frost at night. And there are some that explained (Sukkah 11b) that the Children of Israel made actual huts in the wilderness. And through recalling Their wonders that They did with us and our forefathers, we will be careful with God's commandments, blessed be They, and we will be fitting for the receiving of good from Them. And that is God's desire, blessed be They, as They desire to do good.

We eat and drink and sleep in the Sukkah all seven days, both day and night, and we do not sleep outside of the Sukkah, even a very short sleep...Rem"a: And nowadays what is practiced to be lenient in the Sukkah, such that only the scrupulously observant sleep in the Sukkah; there are those who say that it is because of the cold, for it is uncomfortable to sleep in the cold places...

Eating in the Sukkah on the first night, is obligatory. If he ate an olive sized amount of bread, he has fulfilled his obligation. Henceforth it is optional; if he wished to eat a meal, he eats in the Sukkah; if he wishes, he can eat only fruits and nuts outside of the Sukkah all seven days, like the rules of eating Matzah on Pesach.

3. Sick people and those attending to them are exempt from the (Mitzvah of) Sukkah. And not just a sick person who is endangered; rather, even if he has head pain or eye pain. There is one who says that the attendants are exempt only at the time the sick person needs them.

(4) 4. One who is discomforted is exempt from the Sukkah, he, and not his attendants. But on the first night even the discomforted one must eat an olive-portion there (Kol Bo). Who is discomforted? He who cannot sleep in the Sukkah because of the wind; or because of the flies, fleas, and their ilk; or because of the smell. But this is only when the discomfort occurred by chance, after he built the Sukkah there, but he shouldn't build his Sukkah a priori in a smelly or windy place, and say, "I am discomforted ". Rem"a: ...And the discomforted is not exempt unless he will save himself from the discomfort, but otherwise, he must sleep in the Sukkah, even if he is discomforted (Mordekhai, chapter 'HaYashen').

Unless she will save herself from the discomfort. Because we require residing in the sukkah similar to normal dwelling, and it is not the way of people to stand around their home in pain...and this [halakha of the Rema] is difficult--it's obvious! Why would one be exempt when they have no more pain in their sukkah than in their home? And it's possible to answer, that one might have thought the rationale for a person in pain being exempt is because the essence of the mitzvah of sukkah is to mention the matter of the sukkah, as it says "In sukkot I made them dwell," and this person in pain is so distracted by their discomfort that they can't place this reminder upon their heart, and for this reason they're exempt. Therefore, the Rema comes to teach us that this is not the reason, but rather that we require residing in the sukkah similarly to the way one dwells, and no one dwells in a place of discomfort when they could save themself from it by leaving; so too with sukkah.

5. If it rains, one may go inside his house. From when is it permitted to go inside? From when so many drops of rain descend into the sukkah that, were they to fall into a cooked dish of beans which spoils quickly if only a small amount of water is added to it, that dish would spoil. RAMA: Even if he does not have a dish in front of him [Sma"g and Hagahos Ashiri]. A person who does not know how to calculate such a measure should reckon: If this same quantity of rain would come down into his house, he would leave his house, he may leave the sukkah. [Hagahos Ashiri; Mordechai; Mahari"l]. All of this applies specifically to the remaining days of the festival of Sukkot. But on the first night, one must eat an olive's worth in the sukkah even if it is raining [Tur; R"an; Rosh] and one must say Kiddush in the sukkah so he can pronounce the Zman regarding the sukkah.

If it rains. And just as we leave when it rains, so too we leave on account of intense heat and mosquitos, even if a person is not pained by them but it would ruin the food; the same is true with cold that makes the fats congeal in front of her--she should eat the meal in her home.

And on the second night, there's no need to eat a kazayit in the sukkah, as we're expert in the establishing of the months and rely on the poskim, and one does not need to eat in the sukkah when suffering. And one who wishes to be stringent doesn't need to say kiddush in the Sukkah, as they already did so yesterday, rather they should eat a kazayit there after their meal.

But on the first night... This implies and not on the second; and the rationale would be like that of the Maharai, that we rely on the Smak and Or Zarua who reason that even on the first night there's no obligation [to eat and say kiddush in the sukkah] when it rains.

But this requires examination, as it says afterwards here "and one says kiddush in the sukkah" which implies that one says the blessing of leishev basukkah, and that is difficult! Because according to the Smak and Or Zerua, this would be an unnecessary berakha, as there's no obligation whatsoever when the rain falls.

Rather it's clear that we hold like the Smag and the Rosh that on the first night it's an obligation even when it rains, and if so there's no concern of an unnecessary berakha; but if so, we should also be stringent on the second night, as these two are dependent on one another! Therefore it seems that on the second night there is also an obligation to eat a kazayit even when it rains, only that one doesn't bless leishev basukkah if it rains. And the Terumat HaDeshen poskened that on the second night one only needs to wait til the normal time of eating, and does not say kiddush in the sukkah, but rather one says kiddush in the home and eats their fill, and then eats a kazayit in the sukkah.

But on the first night - As even though she's uncomfortable/in pain on account of the rain, and anyone who's uncomfortable is exempt from sukkah, the Rema holds like those poskim who reason that on the first night even a person in discomfort is obligated; and their rationale is that we derive from the mention of the fifteenth here and the mention of the fifteenth with regard to Passover a complete derivation--just as there [with regard to eating matzah] one is obligated in any scenario, so too with sukkot. And there are other major rishonim who think the gezeira shava does not come to teach this, and one should not distinguish between the first night and the rest of the days. Therefore several achronim have decided that even though one is obligated to eat in the sukkah, on account of the uncertainty with regard to the berakha of leishev, one should not recite it, as in a case of uncertainty with berakhot we are lenient.

They also wrote that it's fitting to wait until midnight to see if the rain passes, as then one could enter the sukkah and make the berakha and eat and fulfill the mitzvah according to everyone. But there are some achronim who wrote that it is not worthwhile to wait so long, as if one delays the eating of the whole household, young and old, there is no greater prevention of the joy of yom tov than this. And the Pri Megadim also didn't mention midnight; rather one waits an hour or two and if the rain doesn't stop, say kiddush in the sukkah as the Rema wrote.

And one says kiddush in the sukkah in order to recite the time etc. - ...And if the rain stopped, even if one already said birkat hamazon on their first meal, they must eat again the amount of a beitzah and a bit more in the sukkah, and to make the berakha of leishev basukkah, in order to fulfill their obligation in accordance with the poskim who believe they didn't do so when blessing inside at the time of the rain. But this is if he hasn't yet laid down--but if he's already laid down, he doesn't need to get up from the bed, as if one who's suffering is liable, he's already fulfilled the obligation with his eating, and if they're not, there's no reason to rise from the bed.

7. If one is sleeping and it begins to rain at night, and one enters his house and the rain then stops, we do not bother him to return to the sukkah for the rest of that night. Rather, he should sleep in his house until dawn. RAMA: and then he wakes from his sleep (Tur). One who sleeps in the sukkah and it starts to rain does not have to wait the time that it takes for the dish to spoil, because even sleeping in light rain is unpleasant and he is allowed to leave. [Mahari"v] Whenever one is exempt from [the mitzvah] of sukkah, but does not leave the sukkah, he is not rewarded for dwelling there [at that time]. Instead, he is nothing but a commoner [Hagahos Maimoni]. When one leaves the sukkah because of rain, he should not leave brazenly, but submissively, like a servant who came to pour a drink for his master, and his master poured it out on his face, (as if to say, “I do not desire your service). (Mahari"l).

Commoners - It seems to me that when we say this is nothing but the action of commoners and one does not receive reward, this is specifically when one is exempt at the time of sitting, like one who's in discomfort and the like, and specifically in the case of rain since they're the pouring of a cup on one's face, as their master as shown that she does not desire their service and they wish to force the master to let them serve, for this is not proper behavior. But one who is exempt because of the exertion of going back to a sukkah, like when the rain stops at night or in the middle of his meal, or going to a friend's sukkah, there is reward for that, as it's no lesser than one who drinks water in the sukkah, which we say is praiseworthy even though it's not required.

There in the [Rema's] comment. And anyone who is exempt from sukkah etc. A great principle: it has only been said that one who is exempt from a matter and performs it is called a commoner in cases where it's a stringency that will lead to a leniency. For example, the one who's in discomfort, who is exempt from sukkah--if nonetheless they reside in the sukkah, they nullify the joy of yom tov; in this case one is called a commoner, as from the angle of sukkah there is no mitzvah, and from the angle of yom tov there is a violation.