ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous dafSukah 22
SUKAH 21-25 - my brother Ari Kornfeld has generously sponsored one month of
Dafyomi publications for the benefit of Klal Yisrael
(a) Even if the S'chach is as thick as a house - the Sukah is nevertheless
(b) And it is Kasher even if one is unable to see the stars through it.
(a) The Tana of our Mishnah invalidates a Sukah ha'Meduvleles, which Rav
describes as a Sukah Aniyah - a sparsely covered Sukah, but without any
spaces of three Tefachim or more.
(b) Shmuel interprets 'ha'Meduvleles' like 'ha'Mevulbeles' - meaning 'mixed
up' (with some beams up, and some beams down).
(c) The Tana of our Mishnah follows the Din of a Sukah ha'Meduvleles with
've'she'Tzilasah Merubah me'Chamasah', a continuation ...
- ... according to Rav (i.e. provided it casts more shade than sunshine),
- ... bur not according to Shmuel - in whose opinioin it comes to add Rav's Din (of Sukah Aniyah) to that of Sukah ha'Meduvleles.
(a) Abaye disqualifies Shmuel's 'Sukah ha'Meduvleles', should the top plank
be three Tefachim or more away from the one below. Rava declares it Kasher,
provided the top plank is at least one Tefach wide - because then we apply
the principle of Chavot Rami, which joins them by creating walls from the
top plank to the bottom one.
The Beraisa establishes the former case (d 1.) when the spaces and
consequently the top planks, were at least one Tefach wide. If they were
not, then only vessels that were underneath the same plank as the Tum'ah
would become Tamei - proving Rava's point, that 'Chavot Rami' applies by an
Ohel that is at least one Tefach wide.
(b) 'Chavot Rami' by a wall is known as 'Gud Acheis Mechitzasah'.
(c) If there are two rows of planks, one on top of the other, with gaps
between each plank, then, if the Tum'ah (i.e. the piece of corpse) was ...
1. ... underneath one of the planks - the vessel would have to be underneath
the same plank in order to become Tamei.
(d) If the top planks, instead of being directly above the lower planks,
were exactly above the spaces in between the lower ones, then, if the Tum'ah
2. ... on top of the lower plank - it would have to be in between the two
3. ... on top of the top plank - it would have to be above it, anywhere up
to the sky.
1. ... underneath any one of the planks - the vessel would have to be
anywhere in the room, below any of the lower planks, in order to become
2. ... lying on top of any one of them - it would have to be anywhere
directly above that plank, anywhere up to the sky.
(a) We already quoted the Beraisa (on 18a), which extends (through the Din
of 'Levud') a Koreh that stretches across the entrance of a Mavoy to within
three Tefachim of the opposite wall, or two Koros that do not quite meet in
the middle of the entrance, stopping short within three Tefachim of each
other. Raban Shimon ben Gamliel says that as long as they are within *four*
Tefachim of each other, they are considered joined - because, in his
opinion, 'Levud' applies up to *four* Tefachim.
(b) The minimum combined width of two beams placed *side by side* to serve
the Mavoy as a Koreh - is one Tefach (sufficiently wide to hold a brick of
one and a half Tefachim, including one Etzba of cement on either side of the
(c) Raban Shimon ben Gamliel is lenient in this point too. According to him,
as long as the two beams, when placed *close to each other* (even if they
are not side by side), are strong enough to hold the brick *lengthwise*
(i.e. three Tefachim), they form a Kasher beam.
(a) If the two beams were of a different height, Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Yehudah
combines them, provided one of them is not higher than twenty Amos and the
other one lower than ten Tefachim. We initially understand this to mean that
they combine, even if one of the beams is just below twenty Amos, and the
other, just above ten Tefachim - in which case, they combine through the
principle of 'Chavot Rami'.
(b) But we are speaking of two beams, each of which is less than a Tefach
wide - and, according to Rava, 'Chavot Rami' does not apply in such a case?
(c) So we explain the Beraisa to mean that either the one beam is just below
twenty Amos or it is just above ten Tefachim - and, in each case, the second
beam is placed within *three* Tefachim of the first. Consequently, it is the
principle of 'Levud' that we apply to combine them, not 'Chavot Rami'.
(a) From our Mishnah, which *validates* a Sukah with more *shade than
sunshine* - we can infer that if the shade and the sunshine are equal, the
Sukah is Pasul; whereas the previous Mishnah, which *invalidates* a Sukah
that has more *sunshine than shade*, implies that when they are equal, the
Sukah is Kasher (an apparent contradiction).
The Tana of our Mishnah validates a Sukah even if the S'chach is so thick
that the *stars* cannot be seen through it. If however, if it is so thick
that even the *sun's rays* cannot penetrate it - then according to Beis
Shamai, it is Pasul.
(b) We reconcile the two Mishnahs by establishing the earlier Mishnah,
looking at the shade and the sunshine on the *ground* (where the area of
sunshine is twice that of its source in the S'chach), and *our* Mishnah, at
the *S'chach* (where the area of sunshine is only half as large as it is on
(c) From here, they formulated the popular saying 'If it (the hole) is the
size of a Zuz above, then it (the sunshine) is the size of a Sela (*two*
(a) The Tana of our Mishnah validates a Sukah that is built on top of a
wagon - despite the fact that it can be easily moved around, or of a ship -
despite the fact that a strong wind may demolish it.
(b) These two cases are not only Kasher, but one may also enter them on
Yom'Tov - which one is not permitted to do by a Sukah that is built on top
of a tree or a camel, even though they too, are Kasher. That explains why
the Tana separates them.
(c) Even though entering a tree-Sukah is forbidden on Yom-tov, the Tana
nevertheless informs us that it is Kasher - because of Chol ha'Mo'ed, when
one is permitted to enter it, too.
(d) Someone who *did* enter a tree Sukah (in spite of the prohibition), has
fullfilled the Mitzvah of Sukah.
(a) One may *not* enter a Sukah on Yom-Tov ...
1. ... if two walls of the Sukah are supported by trees which were extended
upwards by man-made walls, with the third wall man-made from the ground
(b) One would however, be permitted to enter a Sukah which was partially
supported by a tree - if *three* of the walls were man-made, with the fourth
wall only supported by a tree.
2. ... if the two adjacent walls were completely man-made, and the third one
was supported by the tree.
(c) The binding principle in this matter is - that if the Sukah can stand
without the help of the tree, then it is Kasher, but if not, then it is