Gone with the wind TB Sukkah 23

The Mishnah on today’s daf TB Sukkah 23 states that one may build a sukkah upon a boat. The Gemara identifies the author of this statement as Rabbi Akiva. Not everybody agrees with them. In fact Rabban Gamliel disagrees and holds that such a sukkah is invalid.

“The Gemara comments: In accordance with whose opinion is the mishna? It is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Akiva, as it is taught in a baraita: In the case of one who establishes his sukka at the top of the ship, Rabban Gamliel deems it unfit and Rabbi Akiva deems it fit.

There was an incident involving Rabban Gamliel and Rabbi Akiva, who were coming on a ship. Rabbi Akiva arose and established a sukka at the top of the ship. The next day the wind blew and uprooted it. Rabban Gamliel said to him: Akiva, where is your sukka? It was unfit from the start.” (Sefaria.org translation)

Abaye refines the disagreement. Rabbi Akiva and Rabban Gamliel agree that a sukkah is valid if it can withstand normal land breezes and is invalid if it cannot withstand strong winds which would blow down any sukkah. They disagree concerning sea breezes. “Abaye said: Everyone agrees that in a case where the sukka is unable to withstand a typical land wind, the sukka is of no consequence and it is not even a temporary residence. If it is able to withstand even an atypical land wind, everyone agrees that the sukka is fit. Where they disagree is in a case where the sukka is able to withstand a typical land wind but is unable to withstand a typical sea wind[1]. Rabban Gamliel holds: In order to fulfill the mitzva of sukka, we require a permanent residence, and since it is not able to withstand an atypical land wind, which is like a typical sea wind, it is of no consequence and is not a sukka at all. Rabbi Akiva holds: In order to fulfill the mitzva of sukka, we require a temporary residence, and since it is able to withstand a typical land wind, it is fit, although it is unable to withstand a typical sea wind.” (Sefaria.org translation)

Back on TB Sukkah 7 we learned about a basic disagreement between the tannaim. Some tannaim like Rabban Gamliel hold that the sukkah becomes the person’s permanent residence and others like Rabbi Akiva hold that it only needs to be a temporary dwelling. Rabban Gamliel holds that the sukkah on the boat which cannot withstand the sea winds can never be a kosher sukkah. Rabbi Akiva holds that as long as it is up as a temporary dwelling it is a kosher sukkah even though a strong sea wind could knock it down in the future

This sugiyah brought back memories of one of my adventures in the sukkah. My second son Hillel was born on Kol Nidre night. He was jaundiced and at that time he had to stay in the hospital until his bilirubin number went down. He was still in the hospital on Sukkot. My wife stayed at friend’s apartment near the hospital so she could breast-feed him. I stayed home with my firstborn, Amichai. We had already invited guests for the first night of Sukkot and I saw no reason to cancel. There I was sitting in my sukkah with two friends lamenting that my son was jaundiced and stuck in the hospital with my wife by his side. I missed both of them. I asked my friends, “What else can go wrong?” Immediately afterwards a strong wind actually blew down my sukkah and a collapsed behind us. I said: “Thank you God. Now I know what else can go wrong.”

 

Ever since then I’ve jokingly said that that year’s sukkah was featured in the movie “Gone with the Wind.”

---

[1] I have used a emended version of our text as found on the side of the Gemara. 

Shedding some light on the sukkah TB Sukkah 22

Previously we have learned that the purpose of the sukkah is to provide shade. “Any sukkah that is made properly is fit — even though it is not made for the sake of the commandment. And that is so long as it was made for shade” (Mishnah Torah, Laws of Sukkah, 5: 9, Sefaria.org translation) Today’s daf TB Sukkah 22 discusses how much sakhakh must be used to fulfill its mission of providing shade. The Mishnah teaches that the sakhakh must provide more shade than sunlight (שֶׁצִּילָּתָהּ מְרוּבָּה מֵחַמָּתָהּ). The mishnah continues: “A sukka whose roofing is thick like a type of house is fit (kosher-gg).” The second half of the Mishnah seems to contradict the first half and the Gemara provides further explanation.

“The Sages taught in a baraita: With regard to a sukka whose roofing is thick like a type of house, although it is so dense that the stars are not visible from within it, the sukka is fit. However, if it is so thick that the rays of the sun are also not visible from within it, Beit Shammai deem the sukka unfit and Beit Hillel deem it fit.” (Sefaria.org translation)

If you ask any student who has studied the holiday of Sukkot, he/she will tell you that if the rays of the sun are not visible from within it, the sukkah is not kosher. Generally speaking, the halakha follows Beit Hillel and not Beit Shammai. At first glance the halakha seems to be following Beit Shammai!

The Talmud Yerushalmi frames the disagreement between Beit Hillel and Beit Shammai as ex post facto (בדיעבד). They both agree that from the outset (להתחילה) one must see sunlight peeking through the sakhakh. Moses Maimonides in his Mishneh Torah decides “The way of covering is that it be light, in order that the large stars (i.e. the sun-gg) can be seen [through] it. If it was thick like a type of house[roof] — it is fit, even though the stars are not visible.” (Laws of Sukkah, 5:21, Sefaria.org translation)

Watch what you say TB Sukkah 21

The first chapter of our massekhet is about building the sukkah. We learned the maximum height (20 amot) and the minimum height (10 tefakhim) of the sukkah as well as the minimum area of the sukkah (7 tefakhim by 7 tefakhim). We also learned about the three necessary characteristics of kosher sekhakh; 1, it must grow from the ground; 2, it must be detached from the ground; and 3, it must not be susceptible to ritual unreadiness (טומאה). The second chapter now puts the person in the sukkah.

The Mishnah on daf TB Sukkah 20b cites a disagreement between the tanna kamma and Rabbi Yehuda whether one is allowed to sleep under his bed in the sukkah (why somebody sleeping under the bed in a sukkah is a question I can’t answer). “One who sleeps beneath the bed in the sukka did not fulfill his obligation, because the bed constitutes a tent that serves as a barrier between him and the roofing of the sukka. Rabbi Yehuda said: It was our custom that we would sleep beneath the bed before the Elders and they did not say anything to us to the effect that we are not fulfilling our obligation. Apparently, the halakhic status of the bed is not like that of a tent and it does not prevent fulfillment of the mitzva.” (Sefaria.org translation)

Rabbi Shimon agrees with the tanna kamma by telling a story. “Rabbi Shimon said, contrary to the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda: There was an incident involving Tavi, the Canaanite slave of Rabban Gamliel, who was sleeping beneath the bed, and Rabbi Gamliel lightheartedly said to the Elders: Did you see my slave Tavi, who is a Torah scholar and knows that slaves are exempt from the mitzva of sukka? Since it is a positive, time-bound mitzva, Canaanite slaves, whose status with regard to this halakhic category is like that of women, are exempt from the obligation to fulfill the mitzva of sukka. Therefore, he sleeps under the bed. Rabbi Shimon continued: And by the way, as Rabban Gamliel was not issuing a halakhic ruling, we learned that one who sleeps beneath the bed did not fulfill his obligation.” (Sefaria.org translation)

The Gemara on today’s daf TB Sukkah 21 teaches us that we not only learn from our rabbis’ classes and lectures, we can also learn life lessons from their casual conversations. “The mishna relates that Rabbi Shimon said, contrary to the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda: There was an incident involving Tavi, the Canaanite slave of Rabban Gamliel who was sleeping beneath the bed, and Rabban Gamliel claimed that Tavi did so because he was a Torah scholar and knew that slaves are exempt from the mitzva of sukka. It is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Shimon said: From the conversation of Rabban Gamliel we learned two matters. We learned that Canaanite slaves are exempt from the mitzva of sukka, and we learned that one who sleeps beneath the bed did not fulfill his obligation.

“The Gemara questions the formulation of the baraita. And let Rabbi Shimon say: From the statement of Rabban Gamliel. Why did he use the atypical expression: From the conversation of Rabban Gamliel? The Gemara answers: Through this expression he teaches us another matter in passing, like that which Rabbi Aḥa bar Adda said, and some say that Rabbi Aḥa bar Adda said that Rabbi Hamnuna said that Rav said: From where is it derived that even the conversation of Torah scholars require analysis, even when the intention of the speaker was apparently not to issue a halakhic ruling? It is as it is stated with regard to the righteous: “Which brings forth its fruit in its season and whose leaf does not wither” (Psalms 1:3). This teaches that with regard to a Torah scholar, not only is his primary product, his fruit, significant but even ancillary matters that stem from his conversation, his leaves, are significant.” (Sefaria.org translation)

Peter Parker a.k.a. Spider-Man understands that with great power comes great responsibility. The rabbis understood that they too have great responsibility because of their position in the community. They need to be careful how they speak at all times for their words can have great repercussions. “Abtalion used to say: Sages be careful with your words, lest you incur the penalty of exile, and be carried off to a place of evil waters, and the disciples who follow you drink and die, and thus the name of heaven becomes profaned.” (Pirkei Avot 1:11)

That's good advice for everybody.

Referring respectfully TB Sukkah 20

With today’s daf TB Sukkah 20 we finish the first chapter of our massekhet and begin the second. The first chapter concludes with a discussion of different kinds of mats and whether they are kosher for sakhakh. Remember that kosher sakhakh cannot become ritually unready (טמא). A mat that was constructed for the purpose of sitting, leaning, or reclining upon can become ritually unready (טומאת מדרס-tum’at madras-imparted by treading upon it) if a zav, zava (a man or woman who has a seminal emission), nidah (a woman who has a menstrual flow), and a woman who was given birth. Otherwise only a wooden object that has a receptacle i.e. an area in which it can contain other objects can become ritually unready, as opposed to a flat board.

Basically whether these mats are kosher sakhakh depends on the intention of the mat maker. If the intention was to make a mat, usually of reed like material or woven goat hair or horsehair was for reclining, then one may not use it for sakhakh. But if the same mat was constructed for the purpose of sakhakh, one may use it because it is neither intended to be used to recline upon nor has a receptacle. If the mat has an upturned ridge around its edge, a receptacle is created and this kind of mat is ineligible to become sakhakh.

Besides teaching us a bit of interesting Jewish history, Reish Lakish shows respect for his rebbe, Rabbi Ḥiyya, when he defines the term ḥotzalot as mats. “as Reish Lakish said: I am the atonement for Rabbi Ḥiyya and his sons, as initially, when some of the Torah laws were forgotten from the Jewish people in Eretz Yisrael, Ezra ascended from Babylonia and reestablished the forgotten laws. Parts of the Torah were again forgotten in Eretz Yisrael, and Hillel the Babylonian ascended and reestablished the forgotten sections. When parts of the Torah were again forgotten in Eretz Yisrael, Rabbi Ḥiyya and his sons ascended and reestablished the forgotten sections. This expression of deference toward Rabbi Ḥiyya introduces the halakha that Reish Lakish is citing in his name. And so said Rabbi Ḥiyya and his sons: Rabbi Dosa and the Rabbis did not disagree concerning the soft mats of Usha, that they can become ritually impure, even with impurity imparted by treading, as those mats are produced for the purpose of lying upon them. And they also agreed concerning the coarse mats of Tiberias, that they are ritually pure, as these are produced exclusively for use in partitions and for roofing.” (Sefaria.org translation) See the rest of the Gemara to learn where Rabbi Dosa and the Rabbis disagree.

Reish Lakish says his corrections by suffering by the hand of the Holy One should be accounted for Rabbi Ḥiyya’s in favor not as an atonement for him. Rashi says this it is the way one should speak respectfully when quoting his deceased parent or rebbe. Rashi also notes that the entire Torah wasn’t forgotten, but only certain halakhot. Sages like Ezra, Hillel, and Rabbi Ḥiyya and his sons either remembered the correct tradition or were able to reconstruct it.

An easy way to enlarge your sukkah TB Sukkah 19

My parents wanted to enlarge our house by building an addition in the late 60s or very early 70s. The addition consisted of a formal living room, a small office for my father, and a bathroom with a stall shower. Even though only three rooms were added, the contractor not only had to worry about the building materials, but also electrical wiring, plumbing for the bathroom, and a dedicated boiler to heat the section of the house.

Today’s daf TB Sukkah 19 teaches us how to create in addition to our sukkah with the minimum amount of material. Remember that two of the three requirements of kosher sekhakh are: 1, it must grow from the ground; and 2, it must be detached. After what grew from the ground was processed (for example, removing the wheat from the chaff, the chaff which is inedible for human consumption) would be excellent sekhakh. Ironically this kosher sekhakh is called waste (pesal -פְּסָל) in the Talmud. This pesal extending beyond the walls the sukkah can create the addition.

“§ It was taught in the Tosefta: Fit roofing that consists of different kinds of agricultural waste products that extend from the sukka has the legal status like that of the sukka. The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of: Waste products that extend from the sukka? Ulla said: Branches that extend behind the sukka and are not limited to the area within the sukka walls.”  (Sefaria.org translation) In other words, we can utilize these extended branches to create a kosher addition to our sukkah. The Gemara proceeds to prove that this addition must satisfy all the other requirements of a kosher sukkah.

“The Gemara asks: But don’t we require three walls to render an area covered with roofing a fit sukka? The Gemara answers: It is referring to a case where there are three walls. The two side walls of the sukka do not end at the middle wall between them; rather, they too extend behind the sukka, forming a second sukka. The Gemara asks: But don’t we require seven by seven handbreadths as the minimum area for fitness of a sukka? The Gemara answers: It is referring to a case where there is the requisite minimum area. The Gemara asks: But don’t we require that its shade exceeds its sunlight? The Gemara answers: It is referring to a case where there is more shade than sunlight.

After noting that the sukka has three walls, the requisite area, and sufficient shade, the Gemara asks: If so, what purpose is there to state this halakha? The fact that this sukka extends from another is not relevant. The Gemara answers: Nevertheless, there is a novel element in this halakha. Lest you say that since, as evidenced by the placement of the connecting middle wall, these walls were initially established for inside the original sukka but not for outside the original sukka; and therefore you say no, the middle wall cannot be considered a wall for the additional sukka, Ulla teaches us that the initial intention is not relevant.” (Sefaria.org translation) When a family actually sleeps in the sukkah, this extension could serve as a second and welcomed bedroom.

Rabba and Rav Yosef provide us with a second interpretation of what it means to be an extension of the sukkah. Rabba and Rav Yosef both say with regard to the case in the Tosefta: Here, it is referring to a case with branches that extend before the front entrance of the sukka, and one of the side walls extends together with the roofing. Lest you say that this extension does not have the minimum requisite size for the fitness of a sukka, in terms of its area and number of walls, therefore, Ulla teaches us that it is fit because it is considered an extension of the sukka.” (Sefaria.org translation) In this interpretation, this extension as a vestibule that can serve lots of different purposes.

 

 

Fictional walls TB Sukkah 17 and 18

The rabbis have a very good and practical imagination when it comes to the building of a sukkah. Previously in the Gemara we learned about the two principles ascending walls, gud asik (גוּד אָסִיק), and descending walls gud akhit (גוּד אָחִית). As long as there is part of an actual physical wall, but it doesn’t reach to the ground or doesn’t reach to the roof of the sukkah we can consider the wall continuing up or down as the case may be and completing a kosher wall.

On dappim TB Sukkah 17 and 18 that the principal of lavud (לָבוּד) not only applies to walls but also to the sekhakh. The principle of lavud says that if there is a gap less than three tefakhim, one may consider the gap filled in and nonexistent. The example in massekhet Eruvin is a series of polls in a line less than three tefakhim apart from one another creates a “solid” wall. Our Gemara differentiates between airspace and unkosher sekhakh from the edge of the wall. “Rabba said: I found the Sages of the school of Rav, who were sitting and saying in the name of Rav: Space without roofing renders the sukka unfit with a measure of three handbreadths of space. However, unfit roofing renders the sukka unfit with a measure of four handbreadths.” (Sefaria.org translation) If the airspace is less than three tefakhim, we treat the area as if it is filled in. (Shulkan Arukh, Orekh Hayim, 632:2)

If the nonkosher sekhakh is less than four tefakhim from the wall we apply the principle of a “curved” wall (דּוֹפֶן עֲקוּמָּה). “as both Rav and Shmuel said that in this case, the Sages in the mishna touched upon the principle of curved wall. In other words, the fact that this house is a fit sukka is unrelated to the minimum measure of unfit roofing. It is fit due to the principle of curved wall.” (Sefaria.org translation) Imagine the wall moving in a diagonal direction in no more than four tefakhim to reach the kosher sakhakh. There are some commentators like Rabbi Nisan Gaon who explained that the wall curves to the kosher sekhakh. Most commentators however explain that we consider the nonkosher sekhakh as if it is part of the wall and not part of the roof.

Rava and Abaye disagree about the last imaginary wall, the edge of the roof descends and seals (פִּי תִקְרָה יוֹרֵד וְסוֹתֵם). “If one roofed a portico that does not have posts on its open side, Abaye said: The sukka is fit, and Rava said: The sukka is unfit. The Gemara elaborates: Abaye said: The sukka is fit, as we say that the edge of the roof descends and seals the opening. The edge of the roof itself is considered as though it were a small partition that extends downward and forms a wall. Rava said: This sukka is unfit, as we do not say that the edge of the roof descends and seals. (פִּי תִקְרָה יוֹרֵד וְסוֹתֵם)” (Sefaia.org translation) of course the edge has to be at least one tefakh. The Gemara later limits the disagreement between Rava and Abaye. Rava accepts the principle of the edge of the roof descends and seals when the edge was made for the purpose of the interior of the structure. If the edge was part of an exterior wall of a porch that has no polls supporting it, the edge cannot descend and seal the interior space of a sukkah. “and Rava could have said to you: Rav stated his opinion only there, with regard to a portico in the field, because the partitions formed by the descent of the edge of the roof are partitions established for the portico. However, here, in the case of a sukka, where the partitions formed by the descent of the edge of the roof are not partitions established for the portico, no, Rav would not say that the edge of the roof descends and seals.” (Sefria.org translation)

 

 

What does a person’s head, most of his body, a small table add up to? TB Sukkah 16

Up to now we have describe the minimum size of a sukkah is one that is large enough for person’s head, most of his body, and a small table. At the very end of today’s daf TB Sukkah 16 we shall learn the actual dimensions. For those minimalists amongst my readers, we first learn how to construct a kosher sukkah with the minimum amount of material thanks to the principal of lavud.

“§ Rav Ḥisda said that Avimi said: A mat that is four handbreadths and a bit wide can 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.

“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.” (Sefaria.org translation)

Now we shall learn the minimum dimensions of a sukkah. “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.

“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.” (Sefaria.org translation)

Thanks to the principle of lavud, we know that the minimum size of a sukkah which can hold a person’s head, most of his body, and a small table has to be seven tefakhim, handbreadths, by seven tefakhim. We learned previously the minimum height has to be ten tefakhim.

 

Enactment of the roof (גְּזֵרַת תִּקְרָה-gezeirat tikrah) TB Sukkah 15

The Mishna on yesterday’s daf TB Sukkah 14 presents a disagreement between Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Meir. “One may roof the sukka with boards like those used in the ceiling of a house; this is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Meir prohibits their use.” (Sefaria.org translation) Rav and Shmuel disagree about the framework of the disagreement in the Mishna.

According to Rav, Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Meir disagree whether the sages issued the enactment of the roof (גְּזֵרַת תִּקְרָה-gezeirat tikrah) on the board four tefakhim wide (approximately 16 inches-gg). The Hebrew word for roof is tikrah. Rabbi Meir prohibits using a board four tefakhim wide because there is no discernible difference between a person’s permanent home and his temporary sukkah. Rabbi Yehuda doesn’t believe that the gezeirat tikrah exists.

According to Shmuel, everybody agrees that a board less than three tefakhim wide is kosher sakhakh. Everybody agrees that a board four tefakhim wide is invalid as kosher sakhakh because of gezeirat tikrah. Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Meir disagree about a board that is between 3-4 tefakhim wide.

The Mishnah on today’s daf TB Sukkah is explained through the lens of Rav and Shmuel. “In the case of a roof made of boards that are four handbreadths wide upon which there is no coat of plaster, Rabbi Yehuda says that Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel disagree with regard to the manner in which to render it fit. Beit Shammai say: One moves each board, and then it is considered as though he placed the board there for the sake of the mitzva of sukka, and one then removes one board from among the boards and replaces it with fit roofing. Beit Hillel say: One need not perform both actions; rather, one must either move the boards or remove one from among them. Rabbi Meir says: One only removes one from among them and does not move the others.” Sefaria.org translation)

According to Rav, the conversation between Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Meir continues. “Rather, the latter clause is the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, who is saying to Rabbi Meir: Why do you prohibit roofing with boards? Is it due to the decree of the roof? That is the reason according to Beit Shammai, who are of the opinion that the Sages issued the decree. But, contrary to your opinion, Beit Hillel do not issue the decree. And Rabbi Meir said to Rabbi Yehuda: Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel did not disagree with regard to this matter at all. These are not two separate disputes; rather, it is one extended dispute.” (Sefaria.org translation)

Shmuel, who holds that everybody agrees one may not use a board four tefakhim wide, offers a great novel, but difficult interpretation. “One may not use boards of this sort for roofing his sukka. Even according to Rabbi Yehuda, a sukka roofed in that manner is unfit, due to the decree of the roof. However, here, in the latter clause, it is with regard to negating an existing roof that consists of boards of this sort, in order to render the sukka fit that they disagree. One Sage, Rabbi Yehuda, holds: The ceiling is thereby negated, by moving the boards, and one Sage, Rabbi Meir, holds that the ceiling is not thereby negated unless he also removes one beam from among them.” (Sefaria.org translation)  In other words Rabbi Yehuda holds that moving the boards is sufficient to demonstrate that this is a sukkah and not your permanent home. Rabbi Meir disagrees. 

Pitchforks and prayers TB Sukkah 14

Today’s daf TB Sukkah 14 contains a long and complicated discussion about the stems of fruit. When the stems make handling the fruit easier, they are considered part of the fruit and are invalid sakhakh. The stems can become ritually unready just like the fruit. When the stems are not considered part of the fruit (because you have no use for them) they are kosher sakhakh. The Gemara does a deep dive analyzing the case where a person originally considered the stems part of the fruit, but he changed his mind and wants to use the branch with the stem and fruit as part of the sahakh. At the very end of the sugiyah, “Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said: Even after the grain is trampled, the straw (which is parallel to stems of fruit –gg) suits his needs, since the straw is suited to facilitate turning over the grain with a pitchfork. (עֶתֶר)” (Sefaria.org translation)

The root of the word pitchfork (עֶתֶר) is the same root for an uncommon word for prayer. Back in the book of Genesis Isaac married Rebecca. Up to this point in their marriage she was barren. Isaac prayed on her behalf. “Isaac pleaded ( וַיֶּעְתַּ֨ר יִצְחָ֤ק) with the LORD on behalf of his wife, because she was barren; and the LORD responded to his plea, and his wife Rebekah conceived.” (Genesis 25:21) The rabbis saw a connection between pitchforks and prayers based on the common root.

“Rabbi Elazar said: Why are the prayers of the righteous (צַדִּיקִים) likened to a pitchfork [eter]? It is written: “And Isaac entreated [vayetar] the Lord for his wife, because she was barren” (Genesis 25:21), to say to you: Just as this pitchfork overturns the grain on the threshing floor from place to place, so too, the prayers of the righteous overturn the mind of the Holy One, Blessed be He, from the attribute of cruelty to the attribute of mercy, and He accepts their prayers.” (Sefaria.org translation)

If you are a rabbi as soon as Tisha B’Av is over, your thoughts turn to the High Holidays because Rosh Hashanah is only seven weeks away. Because we are in an eternal loving covenantal relationship with God, we don’t have to even be a tsaddik to influence the Holy One. The shofar blasts, our prayers without words, literally move God.

“In Vayikra Rabbah 29:3, we encounter the following passage: Yehudah b. Naḥmani in the name of R. Shim’on b. Laqish opened: God ascends amidst acclamation [teru’ah]; YHVH, to the blasts of the shofar (Psalms 47:6). When the Holy Blessed One ascends to sit on the throne of judgement on Rosh Hashanah, he ascends for judgement. This is that which is written, God [Elohim] ascends amidst acclamation [teru’ah]. And once Israel take their shofarot and blow them, immediately YHVH, to the blasts of the shofar. What does the Holy Blessed One do? He rises from the throne of judgement and sits on the throne of compassion, and is filled with compassion for them and transforms the quality of justice into the quality of compassion for them. When? On Rosh Hashanah, in the seventh month on the first of the month.” (https://www.thelehrhaus.com/timely-thoughts/rosh-hashanah-and-gods-battle-for-compassion/)

Kosher sekhakh you can’t use TB Sukkah 13

Today’s daf Sukkah 13 describes two plants which could be kosher sekhakh according to the Torah because they grow from the ground and are not subject to become tamei, ritually unready, because they are not food; however, the rabbis invalidate them. They are wormwood (שְׁווֹצְרֵ) and shrubs (הִיגֵי).

“Since their odor (of the wormwood-gg) grows offensive over time, one abandons the sukka and exits. It is inappropriate to establish a sukka in which it is impossible to remain…Since their leaves (of the shrubs-gg) fall over time and they are apt to fall into the food and disturb those in the sukka, one abandons the sukka and exits.” (Sefaria.org translation)

We leave our permanent dwelling on Sukkot and move into our temporary sukkah. The rabbis invalidate those things that would make our sukkah undesirable to dwell therein. Obviously nobody will want to remain in a sukkah that really smells bad nor where leaves would continually fall into your food and ruin it. There is a halakhic difference between wormwood and shrubs when it comes to the sukkah. One still would not be permitted to use the wormwood for the walls of the sukkah because of the smell. One would be permitted to use shrubs for the walls for the sukkah because no one cares if the leaves fall on the ground and not in our food.

 

3 pages 3 laws of the Sukkah TB Sukkah 10, 11, and 12

TB Sukkah 10

Previously in our massekhet we learned the minimum and maximum dimensions of a Sukkah. Besides having three walls, it must be at least seven tefakhim (handbreadths or approximately 14 inches) by seven tefakhim by three amot (cubits or approximately 6 feet). Neither can a kosher sukkah be higher than 20 amot (40 feet). TB Sukkah 10 teaches how decorations impact the dimension of a kosher sukkah.

“Apropos decorations, it was stated: Sukka decorations do not diminish the height of the sukka. Decorations hanging from the roofing are not considered part of the structure and therefore do not diminish the height of the sukka. If the roofing is more than twenty cubits above the ground, the decorations hanging within twenty cubits of the ground do not render the sukka fit. Rav Ashi said: However, if the decorations are spread on the side of the roof, they are considered part of the structure and diminish the area. If the decorations render the interior of the sukka less than seven by seven handbreadths, the sukka is unfit.” (Sefaria.org translation) That is the halakha. (Shulkhan Arukh, Orekh Hayim, 433:3)

 

TB Sukkah 11

One of the qualifications of a kosher sukkah is that one has to prepare it and not from that which has already been prepared (based on the verse “You shall prepare for you the festival of Sukkot” (Deuteronomy 16:13).)-"תַּעֲשֶׂה"  וְלֹא מִן הֶעָשׂוּי.. The Mishna teaches, “If one trellised climbing plants such as a grapevine, or gourd plant, or ivy [kissos], over a sukka while they were still attached to the ground, and then added roofing atop them, the sukka is unfit.” (Sefaria.org translation) Rav and Shmuel disagree what a person has to do to make these climbing plants part of the kosher Sukkah. “Rav deems the roofing fit merely by cutting them, without moving them.” (Sefaria.org translation) By detaching the climbing plants is sufficient preparation to make the plants part of the kosher sekhakh. Shmuel holds “one is obligated to move the branches, thereby performing an action with the branches in order to render the roofing fit. When he placed the climbing plants atop the sukka, they were attached and therefore unfit roofing. When he ultimately cut them, it was as if the sukka were roofed by itself. In that case, the sukka is unfit due to the principle: Prepare it, and not from that which has already been prepared, derived from the verse: “You shall prepare for you the festival of Sukkot” (Deuteronomy 16:13).” (Sefaria.org translation)

Even though the halakhah follows Rav in matters of permissive and forbidden, in this case the halakha follows Shmuel because the Gemara raises an insolvable problem to Rav’s position.

 

TB Sukkah 12

The Mishnah back on TB Sukkah 11a cites the three requirements of kosher sekhakh. It has to grow from the ground, be detached, and cannot become ritually unready (מְּקַבֵּל טוּמְאָה). Today’s daf wants to know the source for the rule that cannot become ritually unready. The Gemara provides for sources with the last two being the most acceptable.

The first source is from the Torah. “When Ravin came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia he said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said that the verse states: “You shall prepare for you the festival of Sukkot for seven days as you gather from your threshing floor and from your winepress” (Deuteronomy 16:13), and the Sages interpreted that it is with regard to the waste of the threshing floor and of the winepress that the verse is speaking. One uses grain stalks and vines for roofing the sukka, materials that are not susceptible to ritual impurity and grow from the ground.” (Sefaria.org translation)

The second source is from the book of the Nehemiah. “Rav Ḥisda said that proof can be cited from here: “Go forth to the mount and fetch olive branches, and branches of wild olive, and myrtle branches, and palm branches, and the boughs of a dense-leaved tree in order to make sukkot as written” (Nehemiah 8:15). From this verse, the materials for sukka roofing can be derived.”(Sefaria.org translation)

An interesting side tidbit comes from Rashi ד"ה צאו ההר. All throughout the Talmud he treats the books Ezra and Nehemiah as one book named Ezra. In our case it actually comes from the book of the Nehemiah and not from Ezra as Rashi states.

 

Is an old Sukka kosher? TB Sukkah 8 and 9

On daf TB Sukkah 9 Beit Hillel and Beit Shammai argue whether a sukka needs to be built for the sake of the holiday (לְשֵׁם חַג). Bet Hillel says no and Bet Shammai says yes. This topic is introduced in the Mishna. “With regard to an old sukka, Beit Shammai deem it unfit for the mitzva of sukka and Beit Hillel deem it fit. And which is considered an old sukka? It is any booth that one established thirty days or more prior to the Festival without expressly designating that it was for the mitzva of sukka. In that case, the assumption is that he constructed it for some other purpose. However, if he established it expressly for the sake of the festival of Sukkot, even if he constructed it at the beginning of the previous year, it is fit for use in the fulfillment of the mitzva of sukka, even according to Beit Shammai.” (Sefaria.org translation) We have the tradition to begin reviewing the laws of the holiday 30 days before the holiday begins. That’s why Beit Shammai considers a sukka old if was built more than 30 days before the Sukkot. If the person was building it within the 30 day period, obviously Sukkot is on his mind and is building it for the sake of the holiday.

As usual the halakha follows Beit Hillel with one proviso. The tosefot cites the Talmud Yerushalmi’s condition that one must renew an old sukka by adding to it a handbreadth anywhere or anything new on the walls of the sukka. The Shulkhan Arukh adds this condition when it codifies the law that one does not need to build a sukka for the sake of the holiday (Orekh Hayim, 636:1). So to do many other rishonim like the Ritba, Meiri, and the ‘etur) The Bakh says that to refresh any sukkah is a good idea because it’s a way to publicize that the sukka is being built for the sake of the holiday.

Yesterday’s daf TB Sukka 8 provides us with different examples of already standing structures that can be used as a sukka because they do not need to be built for the sake of the holiday. There are two categories of these types of Sukkot, one more inferior than the other. The Gemara tries to discern which category is the better of the two.

“The Sages taught: The booths represented by the mnemonic: Gimmel, nun, beit, kaf, which stands for a booth of gentiles [goyim], a booth of women [nashim], a booth of domesticated animals [behema], a booth of Samaritans [Kutim], a booth of any sort, each is fit for use as a sukka, provided it is roofed in the standard sense. None of them is disqualified due to the one who constructed it or the purpose for which it was constructed. (Although Gentiles, women and Samaritans are not obligated to observe the mitzvah of dwelling in the sukka, their building a sukka doesn’t invalidated-gg)

“The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of the term: In the standard sense? Rav Ḥisda said that it means: And provided that one established the booth to provide shade of a sukka from its roofing, it may be used to fulfill the mitzva of sukka.

“The Gemara asks: What does the phrase: A booth of any sort, come to include? What other booths are included in this generalization? The Gemara answers: It comes to include the booths listed in another baraita with the mnemonic: Reish, kuf, beit, shin, as the Sages taught: The booth known by the mnemonic reish, kuf, beit, shin, which stands for the booth of shepherds [ro’im], the booth of fig driers [kayyatzim], the booth of guards of fields [burganin], the booth of the guards of produce [shomerei peirot], a booth of any sort, each is fit, provided it is roofed in the standard sense.

“The Gemara asks again: What is the meaning of the term: In the standard sense? Rav Ḥisda said that it means: And provided that one established the booth to provide shade of a sukka, it may be used to fulfill the mitzva of sukka.

“The Gemara asks: What does the phrase: A booth of any sort, come to include? The Gemara answers: It comes to include the booths listed in the first baraita cited above with the mnemonic gimmel, nun, beit, kaf.

“The Gemara explains: This tanna who taught and detailed the halakhot of booths of gimmel, nun, beit, kaf did so because the fitness of the booths of gimmel, nun, beit, kaf for use in fulfilling the mitzva of sukka is powerful and more obvious to him because they are permanent structures, even though their builders are not obligated in the mitzva. And he taught: Booths of any sort, to include the booths of reish, kuf, beit, shin, which, although they are seasonal and not permanent structures, may still be used to fulfill the mitzva of sukka.

“And that other tanna who taught and detailed the halakhot of booths of reish, kuf, beit, shin did so because the fitness of the booths of reish, kuf, beit, shin for use in fulfilling the mitzva of sukka is powerful and more obvious to him because those who constructed the booths are obligated in the mitzva of sukka. And he taught: Booths of any sort, to include the booths of gimmel, nun, beit, kaf, which, although those who constructed them are not obligated in the mitzva, may still be used to fulfill the mitzva of sukka.” (Sefaria.org translation)

Although the Gemara never decides which is the more inferior of the two categories, we learn an important halakha. Whatever the standing structure is, the booth must provide shade of a sukka to be a kosher sukka. This discussion also proves that the halakha follows Beit Hillel that the sukka does not need to be built for the sake of the holiday.

Glass walls for the sukkah are kosher, but those who dwell therein still shouldn’t throw stones. TB Sukkah 7

Today’s daf TB Sukkah 7 teaches an important halakha. What makes a sukkah a sukkah is the sakhakh, the roof. We shall learn later that kosher sakhakh must have grown from the ground and now is detached. We layer the sakhakh on top of the sukkah to form the roof. The Mishnah teaches us “And a sukka whose sunlight, i.e., the sunlight that passes through the roofing, is greater than its shade, is unfit.” (Sefaria.org translation)

The Gemara defines where the shade is necessary. “The Sages taught in a baraita that in the statement: Whose sunlight is greater than its shade, the reference is to sunlight that passes through due to sparse roofing, and not to the sunlight entering due to gaps in the walls. It is possible for a sukka to have more sunlight than shade due to sunlight passing through the sides and not the roofing, in which case the sukka is fit. Rabbi Yoshiya says: If the sunlight exceeds the shade the sukka is unfit, even if the sunlight is due to gaps in the walls.

“Rav Yeimar bar Shelemya said in the name of Abaye: What is the rationale for the statement of Rabbi Yoshiya? It is as it is written: “And you shall screen [vesakkota] the Ark with the curtain” (Exodus 40:3). The curtain is a partition and not a covering over the Ark, and nevertheless, the Merciful One calls it roofing [sekhakha]. Apparently, we require the purpose of a partition to be similar to the purpose of roofing; just as the roofing must be mostly impermeable by sunlight, so must the partition.

And how do the Rabbis, who disagree with Rabbi Yoshiya, interpret the term: And you shall screen [vesakkota]? That term teaches that we should bend the top of the curtain a bit so that it appears as roofing over the Ark.” (Sefaria.org translation)

The halakha follows the sages. (Shulkan Arukh, Orekh Hayim, 630:1) Based on this ruling, a person may build a sukkah using translucent or transparent walls and not worry whether the entering sunlight from the walls would invalidate the sukkah. Alternately, if a person’s walls don’t go up to the roof for ventilation purposes and sunlight shines through this small gap of no more than 3 handbreadth, you still have a kosher sukkah.

 

How many walls does a kosher sukkah need is a law transmitted to Moses. TB Sukkah 6

Even though the size of measurements are transmitted to Moses from upon Mount Sinai (הֲלָכָה לְמֹשֶׁה מִסִּינַי) according to the sages, they like to find support (asmakhtah -אַסְמַכְתָּא) from verses in the Torah. Today’s daf TB Sukkah 6 provides scriptural support for many different measurements. I’ll just share one that pertains to Yom Kippur and one that pertains to Sukkot.

The verse enumerating the seven species of the land of Israel provides that scriptural support for different measurements. “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. (Ultimately the Gemara decides that this verse is only an asmakhtah.-gg)

“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.

“However, if he was dressed in his clothes, and his sandals were on his feet, and his rings were on his fingers, he immediately becomes ritually impure, but they, the clothes, sandals, and rings, remain pure until he stays in the house long enough to eat half a loaf of bread. This calculation is based on wheat bread, which takes less time to eat, and not on barley bread, and it relates to one who is reclining and eating it together with relish or a condiment, which hastens the eating. This is a Torah measurement connected specifically to wheat.”(Sefaria.org translation)

The time it takes to eat at half a loaf of bread has practical halakhic implications for us. If a sick person needs to eat on Yom Kippur but doesn’t want to violate the Torah prohibition of fasting, how much time does he have to wait in between eating an amounts smaller than a size of the date with its pit i.e. the amount of time of eating half a loaf of bread?

“There are various opinions regarding the number of minutes it takes to eat 3 or 4 Kebeitza’s of bread, and hence the practical time of Kdei Achilas Peras is under debate. The following are the various opinions in the Poskim: Some “Poskim[12] rule that Kdei Achilas Peras is 2 minutes. Other Poskim[13] rule that Kdei Achilas Peras is 3 minutes. Some Poskim[14] rule that Kdei Achilas Peras is 4 minutes. Some Poskim[15] rule that the Shiur of Kdei Achilas Peras is 6-8 minutes. Some Poskim[16] rule that the Shiur of Kdei Achilas Peras is 9 minutes.” (https://shulchanaruchharav.com/halacha/how-much-is-kdei-achilas-peras/) Many modern Orthodox rabbis except Rabbi Moses Feinstein’s measurement of 4 ½ to 5 minutes as the amount of time it takes to eat ½ loaf of wheat bread to answer my question above about on Yom Kippur.

The second example of a measurement transmitted to Moses from Mount Sinai is how many full walls a sukkah needs. “The Sages taught in the Tosefta: In order to construct a fit sukka, two of the walls must be walls in the standard sense, sealing the entire length and height of the sukka, and the third wall may be even one handbreadth long. Rabbi Shimon says: Three of the walls must be walls in the standard sense, and the fourth wall may be even one handbreadth long.” (Sefaria.org translation) I recommend that you follow the thread how each side comes to its conclusion in the Gemara. The Gemara provides four different ways the sages and Rabbi Shimon reach their conclusion with the last one revolving around the halakha being transmitted to Moses from upon Mount Sinai.

“One Sage, the Rabbis, holds: When the halakha transmitted to Moses comes to teach, it is to reduce to one handbreadth the dimension of one of the three walls derived from the verses. And one Sage, Rabbi Shimon, holds: When the halakha transmitted to Moses comes to teach, it is to add another wall to the three walls derived from the verses; however, the dimension of that fourth wall may be one handbreadth.” (Sefaia.org translation)

A kosher sukkah only needs two standard walls with a third wall being as small as a handbreadth. (Shulkhan Arukh, Orekh Hayim, 430:2)

__________

[12] Rav Y.Y. Kanievsky in Shiuran Shel Torah Shiureiy Hamitzvos 30

[13] Igros Moshe 4:41 in name of Marcheshes; Orchos Rabbeinu p. 70 that so was custom of Chazon Ish; Sefer Haminhagim ibid and footnotes 342-344 in tradition from the Tzemach Tzedek, in name of Rav Hillel Miparitch, that the minimum of Achilas Peras is 3 minutes and maximum 7 minutes. The Rebbe concludes there in the footnote that one is required to suspect for the above tradition.

[14] Shiurei Torah 3:15 [p. 303]; Aruch Hashulchan 202:8; Kaf Hachaim 210:5; Piskeiy Teshuvos 210:1 that so is the widespread custom

[15] Some Poskim rule that the Shiur of Kdei Achilas Peras is 6-7 minutes. [Tzemach Tzedek Shaar Hamiluim 1:8- fifth [English] p. 93 regarding Tishe Beav] Other Poskim rule that the Shiur of Kdei Achilas Peras for 4 Kebeitzim [i.e. Yom Kippur] is 8 minutes, while the Shiur for eating Mitzvos or after blessing is 6 minutes. [Gulot Ariel Chidushei Mishnayos Mikvaos 10:7 in name of Alter Rebbe “I received in the name of my great uncle, the Alter Rebbe, that the Shiur is eight minutes, as he measured the eating an egg by an average person and it took two minutes, and so is my custom to rule”]

[16] Chasam Sofer 6:16; Tzemach Tzedek Shaar Hamiluim 1:8-10, brought in Ketzos Hashulchan 36 footnote 5; M”B 618:21; Shiurei Torah 3:15 [p. 203]; Aruch Hashulchan 202:8; Kaf Hachaim 210:5; Piskeiy Teshuvos 210:1; Sefer Haminhagim ibid and footnotes 342-344; See Shiurei Torah 3:15; Piskeiy Teshuvos ibid