Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility Skip to content

Today's Daf Yomi

July 29, 2021 | 讻壮 讘讗讘 转砖驻状讗

Masechet Sukkah is sponsored by Jonathan Katz in memory of his mother Margaret Katz (Ruth bat Avraham).

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Terri Krivosha for the Refuah Shlemah of her husband Harav Hayim Yehuda Ben Faiga Rivah.聽

  • This month's learning is dedicated by Debbie and Yossi Gevir to Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran Zoom group for their kindness, support, and care during a medically challenging year.

Sukkah 22

A month of shiurim are dedicated by Terri Krivosha for a refuah shleima for her beloved husband, Rabbi Hayim Herring, Hayim ben Feiga Riva.聽

A sukkah medublelet is a good sukkah. What is medublelet? Rav and Shmuel disagree. According to Shmuel it works by the principle chevot rami. What is that principle? Where else do we see it? There is a debate about whether or not the rows need to be within 3 handbreadths of each other in order for it to work. The mishna said that if there is more sun than shade, the sukkah is kosher. How does that work with the first mishna of the masechet that said that if the sukkah has more sun than shade, the sukkah is no good? Is a sukkah on a boat, wagon, camel, or tree a good sukkah? Can you use it on Yom Tov/Shabbat?

诪转谞讬壮 住讜讻讛 讛诪讚讜讘诇诇转 讜砖爪讬诇转讛 诪专讜讘讛 诪讞诪转讛 讻砖专讛 讛诪注讜讘讛 讻诪讬谉 讘讬转 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讗讬谉 讛讻讜讻讘讬诐 谞专讗讬谉 诪转讜讻讛 讻砖专讛

MISHNA: A sukka that is meduvlelet and whose shade exceeds its sunlight is fit. A sukka whose roofing is thick like a house of sorts, even though it is so thick that the stars cannot be seen from within it, is fit.

讙诪壮 诪讗讬 诪讚讜讘诇诇转 讗诪专 专讘 住讜讻讛 注谞讬讬讛 讜砖诪讜讗诇 讗诪专 拽谞讛 注讜诇讛 讜拽谞讛 讬讜专讚

GEMARA: The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of meduvlelet? Rav said: It means an impoverished sukka, i.e., a sukka whose roofing is sparse, although at no point in the roofing is there a gap of three handbreadths. And Shmuel said: It means that the roofing is aligned with one reed ascending and one reed descending. There are two layers of roofing, with each reed on the upper layer situated directly above the space between each reed on the lower level.

专讘 转谞讬 讞讚讗 讜砖诪讜讗诇 转谞讬 转专转讬 专讘 转谞讬 讞讚讗 住讜讻讛 诪讚讜讘诇诇转 诪讗讬 诪讚讜讘诇诇转 诪讚讜诇讚诇转 砖爪讬诇转讛 诪专讜讘讛 诪讞诪转讛 讻砖专讛 讜砖诪讜讗诇 转谞讬 转专转讬 诪讗讬 诪讚讜讘诇诇转 诪讘讜诇讘诇转 讜转专转讬 拽转谞讬 住讜讻讛 诪讘讜诇讘诇转 讻砖专讛 讜爪讬诇转讛 诪专讜讘讛 诪讞诪转讛 讻砖专讛

The Gemara explains: Rav taught the first clause in the mishna as one halakha, and Shmuel taught that clause as two halakhot. Rav taught one halakha: The halakha of a sukka meduvlelet. And what is a sukka meduvlelet? It is a sparse sukka. Nevertheless, as long as the shade exceeds the sunlight the sukka is fit. And Shmuel taught two halakhot. What is a sukka meduvlelet? It is a disordered sukka. And he teaches two halakhot: A disordered sukka is fit, and one whose shade exceeds its sunlight is fit.

讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 诇讗 砖谞讜 讗诇讗 砖讗讬谉 讘讬谉 讝讛 诇讝讛 砖诇砖讛 讟驻讞讬诐 讗讘诇 讬砖 讘讬谉 讝讛 诇讝讛 砖诇砖讛 讟驻讞讬诐 驻住讜诇讛 讗诪专 专讘讗 讗驻讬诇讜 讬砖 讘讬谉 讝讛 诇讝讛 砖诇砖讛 讟驻讞讬诐 谞诪讬 诇讗 讗诪专谉 讗诇讗 砖讗讬谉 讘讙讙讜 讟驻讞 讗讘诇 讬砖 讘讙讙讜 讟驻讞 讻砖专讛 讚讗诪专讬谞谉 讞讘讜讟 专诪讬

Abaye said: They taught that a sukka with two layers of roofing is fit only in a case where there is not a gap of at least three handbreadths between the top and bottom layers. However, if there is a gap of three handbreadths between them it is unfit. Rava said: Even if there is a gap of three handbreadths between them, we say that the two layers of roofing are not considered joined only in a case where there is not the width of a handbreadth in its upper roof. However, if there is the width of a handbreadth in its upper roof, even if the gap between them is three handbreadths, the sukka is fit, because we say that the principle: Lower and cast down the upper level of the sukka roofing down to the level of the lower sukka roofing, applies here.

讗诪专 专讘讗 诪谞讗 讗诪讬谞讗 诇讛 讚讻讬 讗讬转 讘讬讛 讟驻讞 讗诪专讬谞谉 讞讘讜讟 专诪讬 讜讻讬 诇讬转 讘讬讛 诇讗 讗诪专讬谞谉 讞讘讜讟 专诪讬 讚转谞谉 拽讜专讜转 讛讘讬转 讜讛注诇讬讬讛 砖讗讬谉 注诇讬讛诐 诪注讝讬讘讛 讜讛谉 诪讻讜讜谞讜转 讟讜诪讗讛 转讞转 讗讞转 诪讛谉 转讞转讬讛 讟诪讗

Rava said: From where do I learn to say that when there is a handbreadth of width in its roof, we say that the principle lower and cast applies, and when there is not a handbreadth in its roof, we do not say that the principle lower and cast applies? Rava learns this from the halakha of impurity imparted by a corpse, as we learned in a mishna: With regard to the boards of the ceiling of the first floor of the house and of the second story that do not have plaster on them, so that each of the boards is considered a separate entity, and the boards of each are aligned so that the boards of the ceiling of the second story are directly above the boards of the house: If there is a source of ritual impurity imparted by a corpse beneath one of the lower boards, any object that is directly beneath that board is rendered impure by means of a tent over a corpse. However, any object that is above the board or off to the side remains pure.

讘讬谉 讛转讞转讜谞讛 诇注诇讬讜谞讛 讘讬谞讬讛谉 讟诪讗 注诇 讙讘讬 讛注诇讬讜谞讛 讻谞讙讚讛 注讚 诇专拽讬注 讟诪讗 讛讬讜 讛注诇讬讜谞讜转 讻讘讬谉 讛转讞转讜谞讜转 讟讜诪讗讛 转讞转讬讛谉 转讞转 讻讜诇谉 讟诪讗 注诇 讙讘讬讛谉 讻谞讙讚谉 注讚 诇专拽讬注 讟诪讗

If the source of impurity is in the airspace of the second story between the lower and upper boards, any object between the two boards is impure; however, any object beneath the lower board or above the upper board or off to the side remains pure. If the source of impurity is atop the upper board, any object aligned with the source of impurity even up to the heavens is impure. However, if the upper boards are spaced between the lower boards, if the source of impurity is beneath any of the boards within the house, any object that is beneath any of the boards is impure, as the legal status of the roof is as though the upper boards were lowered to the level of the lower boards, and the result is one continuous ceiling. If the source of impurity is above them, i.e., above the top boards, any object aligned with the source of impurity even up to the heavens is impure.

讜转谞讬 注诇讛 讘诪讛 讚讘专讬诐 讗诪讜专讬诐 讘讝诪谉 砖讬砖 讘讛谉 讟驻讞 讜讘讬谞讬讛谉 驻讜转讞 讟驻讞 讗讘诇 讗讬谉 讘讬谞讬讛谉 驻讜转讞 讟驻讞 讟讜诪讗讛 转讞转 讗讞转 诪讛谉 转讞转讬讛 讟诪讗 讘讬谞讬讛谉 讜注诇 讙讘讬讛谉 讟讛讜专 讗诇诪讗 讻讬 讗讬转 讘讬讛 讟驻讞 讗诪专讬谞谉 讞讘讜讟 专诪讬 讜讻讬 诇讬转 讘讬讛 讟驻讞 诇讗 讗诪专讬谞谉 讞讘讜讟 专诪讬 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛

And it is taught in the Tosefta elaborating on this mishna: In what case is this statement said? It is only when these boards have the width of a handbreadth, and between them is the space of a handbreadth. However, if the boards are close together and there isn鈥檛 even the space of a handbreadth between them, then if the source of impurity is directly beneath one of the boards, only objects in the space beneath it is impure, while an object between the two layers of boards and atop them remains pure. Apparently, when there is a handbreadth in the upper layer, we say lower and cast the upper sukka roofing down to the level of the lower sukka roofing. And when there is not even a handbreadth in the upper layer, we do not say lower and cast the upper sukka roofing down. Indeed, conclude from here that this is the halakha.

讬转讬讘 专讘 讻讛谞讗 讜拽讗诪专 诇讛讗 砖诪注转讗 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 讗砖讬 诇专讘 讻讛谞讗 讜讻诇 讛讬讻讗 讚诇讬转 讘讬讛 讟驻讞 诇讗 讗诪专讬谞谉 讞讘讜讟 专诪讬

The Gemara relates: Rav Kahana sat in the study hall and stated this halakha of Rava, that in a case where the upper sukka roofing is a handbreadth wide, even if the gap between the two layers of roofing is greater than three handbreadths, they are considered attached. Rav Ashi said to Rav Kahana: Is it so that wherever there is not the width of a handbreadth, we do not say lower and cast?

讜讛讗 转谞讬讗 拽讜专讛 讛讬讜爪讗讛 诪讻讜转诇 讝讛 讜讗讬谞讛 谞讜讙注转 讘讻讜转诇 讝讛 讜讻谉 砖转讬 拽讜专讜转 讗讞转 讬讜爪讗讛 诪讻讜转诇 讝讛 讜讗讞转 讬讜爪讗讛 诪讻讜转诇 讝讛 讜讗讬谞谉 谞讜讙注讜转 讝讜 讘讝讜 驻讞讜转 诪砖诇砖讛 讗讬谞讜 爪专讬讱 诇讛讘讬讗 拽讜专讛 讗讞专转 砖诇砖讛 爪专讬讱 诇讛讘讬讗 拽讜专讛 讗讞专转

Isn鈥檛 it taught in the Tosefta with regard to the halakhot of the merging of alleyways that one of the means of rendering carrying in a closed alleyway permitted on Shabbat is by placing a beam one handbreadth wide over the entrance of the alleyway within twenty cubits but no less than ten handbreadths off the ground? With regard to a cross beam that projects from this wall of an alleyway but does not touch the other opposite wall, and similarly, with regard to two cross beams, one projecting from this wall and one projecting from the other opposite wall, and they do not touch each other, if there is a gap of less than three handbreadths between the beam and the wall, or between the two beams respectively, one need not bring another cross beam to render the alleyway fit for a person to carry within it. This is because they are considered joined based on the principle of lavud. However, if there is a gap of three handbreadths, one must bring another cross beam.

专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讗讜诪专

However, Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, who holds that the principle of lavud applies to a gap of up to four handbreadths wide, says:

驻讞讜转 诪讗专讘注讛 讗讬谉 爪专讬讱 诇讛讘讬讗 拽讜专讛 讗讞专转 讗专讘注讛 爪专讬讱 诇讛讘讬讗 拽讜专讛 讗讞专转

If there is a gap of less than four handbreadths, one need not bring another cross beam. However, if there is a gap of four handbreadths, one must bring another cross beam.

讜讻谉 砖转讬 拽讜专讜转 讛诪转讗讬诪讜转 诇讗 讘讝讜 讻讚讬 诇拽讘诇 讗专讬讞 讜诇讗 讘讝讜 讻讚讬 诇拽讘诇 讗专讬讞 讗诐 诪拽讘诇讜转 讗专讬讞 诇专讞讘讜 讟驻讞 讗讬谉 爪专讬讱 诇讛讘讬讗 拽讜专讛 讗讞专转 讜讗诐 诇讗讜 爪专讬讱 诇讛讘讬讗 拽讜专讛 讗讞专转

And similarly, if two parallel, extremely narrow cross beams are placed alongside each other, even though there is not sufficient width in this beam in order to receive and support a small brick, and there is not sufficient width in that beam in order to receive and support a small brick, if the two beams together can receive a small brick along its handbreadth width, one need not bring another cross beam to render the alleyway fit for one to carry within it. But if not, one is required to bring another cross beam.

专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讗讜诪专 讗诐 诪拽讘诇讜转 讗专讬讞 诇讗专讻讜 砖诇砖讛 讟驻讞讬诐 讗讬谉 爪专讬讱 诇讛讘讬讗 拽讜专讛 讗讞专转 讜讗诐 诇讗讜 爪专讬讱 诇讛讘讬讗 拽讜专讛 讗讞专转

Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: If the two cross beams can receive a small brick along its length, which is three handbreadths, one need not bring another cross beam, but if not, one must bring another cross beam.

讛讬讜 讗讞转 诇诪注诇讛 讜讗讞转 诇诪讟讛 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讘专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 专讜讗讬谉 讛注诇讬讜谞讛 讻讗讬诇讜 讛讬讗 诇诪讟讛 讜讗转 讛转讞转讜谞讛 讻讗讬诇讜 讛讬讗 诇诪注诇讛 讜讘诇讘讚 砖诇讗 转讛讗 注诇讬讜谞讛 诇诪注诇讛 诪注砖专讬诐 讗诪讛 讜讛转讞转讜谞讛 诇诪讟讛 诪注砖专讛 讛讗 讝讛 讜讝讛 讘转讜讱 注砖专讬诐 讗诪专讬谞谉 讞讘讜讟 专诪讬 讗祝 注诇 讙讘 讚诇讬转 讘讬讛 讟驻讞

Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, says: If these two narrow cross beams are placed at different heights, one above and one below, one considers the upper one as though it were below, and the lower one as though it were above, i.e., close together. If the two together are capable of supporting a small brick, they render the alleyway fit for one to carry within it, although they are not actually close to each other, provided that the upper cross beam is not above twenty cubits off the ground and the lower one is not below ten handbreadths off the ground, between which a cross beam renders an alleyway fit for one to carry within it. By inference, if both this beam and that beam are within twenty cubits, we say that the principle: Lower and cast the upper beam down even though there is not the width of a handbreadth in the upper beam. This is difficult according to Rava鈥檚 opinion, as he holds that the principle: Lower and cast, does not apply when the width of the upper crossbeam is less than a handbreadth.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 转专讬抓 讜讗讬诪讗 讛讻讬 讜讘诇讘讚 砖诇讗 转讛讗 注诇讬讜谞讛 诇诪注诇讛 诪注砖专讬诐 讗诇讗 讘转讜讱 注砖专讬诐 讜讛转讞转讜谞讛 住诪讜讻讛 诇讛 讘驻讞讜转 诪砖诇砖讛 讗讬 谞诪讬 讘诇讘讚 砖诇讗 转讛讗 转讞转讜谞讛 诇诪讟讛 诪注砖专讛 讗诇讗 诇诪注诇讛 诪注砖专讛 讜注诇讬讜谞讛 住诪讜讻讛 诇讛 讘驻讞讜转 诪砖诇砖讛 讗讘诇 砖诇砖讛 讻讬讜谉 讚诇讬转 讘讬讛 讟驻讞 诇讗 讗诪专讬谞谉 讞讘讜讟 专诪讬

Rav Kahana said to him: Interpret the baraita and say as follows: Provided that the upper beam is not above twenty cubits but rather within twenty cubits and the lower one is adjacent to it, less than three handbreadths from it, as in that case they are joined due to the principle of lavud and not the principle of lower and cast. Alternatively, interpret the baraita as follows: Provided that the lower beam is not below ten handbreadths but rather above ten handbreadths and the upper beam is adjacent to it, less than three handbreadths from it. However, if the distance between the beams is three handbreadths, since there is not the width of one handbreadth in the beam, we do not say: Lower and cast the upper beam, and each beam is considered on its own.

讜砖爪讬诇转讛 诪专讜讘讛 诪讞诪转讛 讻砖专讛 讛讗 讻讬 讛讚讚讬 驻住讜诇讛 讜讛讗 转谞谉 讘讗讬讚讱 驻讬专拽讬谉 讜砖讞诪转讛 诪专讜讘讛 诪爪讬诇转讛 驻住讜诇讛 讛讗 讻讬 讛讚讚讬 讻砖专讛

搂 The mishna continues: A sukka whose shade exceeds its sunlight is fit. From the formulation of the mishna, it can be inferred that if its shade and sunlight are equal, the sukka is unfit. The Gemara asks: But didn鈥檛 we learn in a mishna in another chapter in this tractate: A sukka whose sunlight exceeds its shade is unfit. From the formulation of that mishna it can be inferred that if its sunlight and shade are equal, the sukka is fit. The inferences of the two mishnayot are contradictory.

诇讗 拽砖讬讗 讻讗谉 诪诇诪注诇讛 讻讗谉 诪诇诪讟讛 讗诪专 专讘 驻驻讗 讛讬讬谞讜 讚讗诪专讬 讗讬谞砖讬 讻讝讜讝讗 诪诇注讬诇 讻讗讬住转专讗 诪诇转讞转

The Gemara answers: This is not difficult. Here, where the inference was that when the sunlight and shade are equal the sukka is unfit, it is referring to the ratio of shade to sunlight from above, in the sukka roofing itself; and there, where the inference was that when the sunlight and shade are equal the sukka is fit, it is referring to the ratio of shade to sunlight from below, on the sukka floor. The two inferences are not contradictory, as the lower in the sukka one observes the light, the more diffused it is. Therefore, if the shade and the sunlight are equal on the floor of the sukka, clearly, the roofing is sufficiently dense and exceeds the gaps. Rav Pappa said: That is the meaning of the folk saying with regard to light: Like a zuz coin above, like an istera coin below.

诪注讜讘讛 讻诪讬谉 讘讬转 转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讛诪注讜讘讛 讻诪讬谉 讘讬转 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讗讬谉 讛讻讜讻讘讬诐 谞专讗讬谉 诪转讜讻讛 讻砖专讛 讗讬谉 讻讜讻讘讬 讞诪讛 谞专讗讬谉 诪转讜讻讛 讘讬转 砖诪讗讬 驻讜住诇讬谉 讜讘讬转 讛诇诇 诪讻砖讬专讬谉

The mishna continues: A sukka whose roofing is thick like a type of house is fit. 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.

诪转谞讬壮 讛注讜砖讛 住讜讻转讜 讘专讗砖 讛注讙诇讛 讗讜 讘专讗砖 讛住驻讬谞讛 讻砖专讛 讜注讜诇讬谉 诇讛 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘 讘专讗砖 讛讗讬诇谉 讗讜 注诇 讙讘讬 讙诪诇 讻砖专讛 讜讗讬谉 注讜诇讬谉 诇讛 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘

MISHNA: In the case of one who establishes his sukka at the top of the wagon or at the top of the ship, although it is portable it is fit, as it is sufficient for a sukka to be a temporary residence. And one may ascend and enter it even on the first Festival day. In the case of one who establishes his sukka at the top of a tree or atop a camel, the sukka is fit, but one may not ascend and enter it on the first Festival day because the Sages prohibit climbing or using trees or animals on the Festival.

砖转讬诐 讘讗讬诇谉 讜讗讞转 讘讬讚讬 讗讚诐 讗讜 砖转讬诐 讘讬讚讬 讗讚诐 讜讗讞转 讘讗讬诇谉 讻砖专讛 讜讗讬谉 注讜诇讬谉 诇讛 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘 砖诇砖 讘讬讚讬 讗讚诐 讜讗讞转 讘讗讬诇谉 讻砖专讛 讜注讜诇讬谉 诇讛 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘

If two of the walls of the sukka are in the tree and one is established on the ground by a person, or if two are established on the ground by a person and one is in the tree, the sukka is fit, but one may not ascend and enter it on the first Festival day because it is prohibited to use the tree. However, if three of the walls are established on the ground by a person and one is in the tree, then since it contains the minimum number of walls required, it is fit, and one may enter it on the first Festival day.

Masechet Sukkah is sponsored by Jonathan Katz in memory of his mother Margaret Katz (Ruth bat Avraham).
  • This month's learning is sponsored by Terri Krivosha for the Refuah Shlemah of her husband Harav Hayim Yehuda Ben Faiga Rivah.聽

  • This month's learning is dedicated by Debbie and Yossi Gevir to Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran Zoom group for their kindness, support, and care during a medically challenging year.

Want to explore more about the Daf?

See insights from our partners, contributors and community of women learners

learn daf yomi one week at a time with tamara spitz

Sukkah 21 – 27 – Daf Yomi: One Week at a Time

This week we will learn about various cases where the covering, schach, of the Sukka isn鈥檛 complete and if this...
talking talmud_square

Sukkah 22: On a Boat, in a Tree, on a Camel, Oh, What Can Be?

A new mishnah! A sukkah that is "meduvlelet" and with more shade than sun, is kosher. That is, a sukkah...
alon shvut women

Halachic Spaces

Succah, Daf 22 Teacher: Susan Suna https://youtu.be/V0sqYzhNUHY

Sukkah 22

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Sukkah 22

诪转谞讬壮 住讜讻讛 讛诪讚讜讘诇诇转 讜砖爪讬诇转讛 诪专讜讘讛 诪讞诪转讛 讻砖专讛 讛诪注讜讘讛 讻诪讬谉 讘讬转 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讗讬谉 讛讻讜讻讘讬诐 谞专讗讬谉 诪转讜讻讛 讻砖专讛

MISHNA: A sukka that is meduvlelet and whose shade exceeds its sunlight is fit. A sukka whose roofing is thick like a house of sorts, even though it is so thick that the stars cannot be seen from within it, is fit.

讙诪壮 诪讗讬 诪讚讜讘诇诇转 讗诪专 专讘 住讜讻讛 注谞讬讬讛 讜砖诪讜讗诇 讗诪专 拽谞讛 注讜诇讛 讜拽谞讛 讬讜专讚

GEMARA: The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of meduvlelet? Rav said: It means an impoverished sukka, i.e., a sukka whose roofing is sparse, although at no point in the roofing is there a gap of three handbreadths. And Shmuel said: It means that the roofing is aligned with one reed ascending and one reed descending. There are two layers of roofing, with each reed on the upper layer situated directly above the space between each reed on the lower level.

专讘 转谞讬 讞讚讗 讜砖诪讜讗诇 转谞讬 转专转讬 专讘 转谞讬 讞讚讗 住讜讻讛 诪讚讜讘诇诇转 诪讗讬 诪讚讜讘诇诇转 诪讚讜诇讚诇转 砖爪讬诇转讛 诪专讜讘讛 诪讞诪转讛 讻砖专讛 讜砖诪讜讗诇 转谞讬 转专转讬 诪讗讬 诪讚讜讘诇诇转 诪讘讜诇讘诇转 讜转专转讬 拽转谞讬 住讜讻讛 诪讘讜诇讘诇转 讻砖专讛 讜爪讬诇转讛 诪专讜讘讛 诪讞诪转讛 讻砖专讛

The Gemara explains: Rav taught the first clause in the mishna as one halakha, and Shmuel taught that clause as two halakhot. Rav taught one halakha: The halakha of a sukka meduvlelet. And what is a sukka meduvlelet? It is a sparse sukka. Nevertheless, as long as the shade exceeds the sunlight the sukka is fit. And Shmuel taught two halakhot. What is a sukka meduvlelet? It is a disordered sukka. And he teaches two halakhot: A disordered sukka is fit, and one whose shade exceeds its sunlight is fit.

讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 诇讗 砖谞讜 讗诇讗 砖讗讬谉 讘讬谉 讝讛 诇讝讛 砖诇砖讛 讟驻讞讬诐 讗讘诇 讬砖 讘讬谉 讝讛 诇讝讛 砖诇砖讛 讟驻讞讬诐 驻住讜诇讛 讗诪专 专讘讗 讗驻讬诇讜 讬砖 讘讬谉 讝讛 诇讝讛 砖诇砖讛 讟驻讞讬诐 谞诪讬 诇讗 讗诪专谉 讗诇讗 砖讗讬谉 讘讙讙讜 讟驻讞 讗讘诇 讬砖 讘讙讙讜 讟驻讞 讻砖专讛 讚讗诪专讬谞谉 讞讘讜讟 专诪讬

Abaye said: They taught that a sukka with two layers of roofing is fit only in a case where there is not a gap of at least three handbreadths between the top and bottom layers. However, if there is a gap of three handbreadths between them it is unfit. Rava said: Even if there is a gap of three handbreadths between them, we say that the two layers of roofing are not considered joined only in a case where there is not the width of a handbreadth in its upper roof. However, if there is the width of a handbreadth in its upper roof, even if the gap between them is three handbreadths, the sukka is fit, because we say that the principle: Lower and cast down the upper level of the sukka roofing down to the level of the lower sukka roofing, applies here.

讗诪专 专讘讗 诪谞讗 讗诪讬谞讗 诇讛 讚讻讬 讗讬转 讘讬讛 讟驻讞 讗诪专讬谞谉 讞讘讜讟 专诪讬 讜讻讬 诇讬转 讘讬讛 诇讗 讗诪专讬谞谉 讞讘讜讟 专诪讬 讚转谞谉 拽讜专讜转 讛讘讬转 讜讛注诇讬讬讛 砖讗讬谉 注诇讬讛诐 诪注讝讬讘讛 讜讛谉 诪讻讜讜谞讜转 讟讜诪讗讛 转讞转 讗讞转 诪讛谉 转讞转讬讛 讟诪讗

Rava said: From where do I learn to say that when there is a handbreadth of width in its roof, we say that the principle lower and cast applies, and when there is not a handbreadth in its roof, we do not say that the principle lower and cast applies? Rava learns this from the halakha of impurity imparted by a corpse, as we learned in a mishna: With regard to the boards of the ceiling of the first floor of the house and of the second story that do not have plaster on them, so that each of the boards is considered a separate entity, and the boards of each are aligned so that the boards of the ceiling of the second story are directly above the boards of the house: If there is a source of ritual impurity imparted by a corpse beneath one of the lower boards, any object that is directly beneath that board is rendered impure by means of a tent over a corpse. However, any object that is above the board or off to the side remains pure.

讘讬谉 讛转讞转讜谞讛 诇注诇讬讜谞讛 讘讬谞讬讛谉 讟诪讗 注诇 讙讘讬 讛注诇讬讜谞讛 讻谞讙讚讛 注讚 诇专拽讬注 讟诪讗 讛讬讜 讛注诇讬讜谞讜转 讻讘讬谉 讛转讞转讜谞讜转 讟讜诪讗讛 转讞转讬讛谉 转讞转 讻讜诇谉 讟诪讗 注诇 讙讘讬讛谉 讻谞讙讚谉 注讚 诇专拽讬注 讟诪讗

If the source of impurity is in the airspace of the second story between the lower and upper boards, any object between the two boards is impure; however, any object beneath the lower board or above the upper board or off to the side remains pure. If the source of impurity is atop the upper board, any object aligned with the source of impurity even up to the heavens is impure. However, if the upper boards are spaced between the lower boards, if the source of impurity is beneath any of the boards within the house, any object that is beneath any of the boards is impure, as the legal status of the roof is as though the upper boards were lowered to the level of the lower boards, and the result is one continuous ceiling. If the source of impurity is above them, i.e., above the top boards, any object aligned with the source of impurity even up to the heavens is impure.

讜转谞讬 注诇讛 讘诪讛 讚讘专讬诐 讗诪讜专讬诐 讘讝诪谉 砖讬砖 讘讛谉 讟驻讞 讜讘讬谞讬讛谉 驻讜转讞 讟驻讞 讗讘诇 讗讬谉 讘讬谞讬讛谉 驻讜转讞 讟驻讞 讟讜诪讗讛 转讞转 讗讞转 诪讛谉 转讞转讬讛 讟诪讗 讘讬谞讬讛谉 讜注诇 讙讘讬讛谉 讟讛讜专 讗诇诪讗 讻讬 讗讬转 讘讬讛 讟驻讞 讗诪专讬谞谉 讞讘讜讟 专诪讬 讜讻讬 诇讬转 讘讬讛 讟驻讞 诇讗 讗诪专讬谞谉 讞讘讜讟 专诪讬 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛

And it is taught in the Tosefta elaborating on this mishna: In what case is this statement said? It is only when these boards have the width of a handbreadth, and between them is the space of a handbreadth. However, if the boards are close together and there isn鈥檛 even the space of a handbreadth between them, then if the source of impurity is directly beneath one of the boards, only objects in the space beneath it is impure, while an object between the two layers of boards and atop them remains pure. Apparently, when there is a handbreadth in the upper layer, we say lower and cast the upper sukka roofing down to the level of the lower sukka roofing. And when there is not even a handbreadth in the upper layer, we do not say lower and cast the upper sukka roofing down. Indeed, conclude from here that this is the halakha.

讬转讬讘 专讘 讻讛谞讗 讜拽讗诪专 诇讛讗 砖诪注转讗 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 讗砖讬 诇专讘 讻讛谞讗 讜讻诇 讛讬讻讗 讚诇讬转 讘讬讛 讟驻讞 诇讗 讗诪专讬谞谉 讞讘讜讟 专诪讬

The Gemara relates: Rav Kahana sat in the study hall and stated this halakha of Rava, that in a case where the upper sukka roofing is a handbreadth wide, even if the gap between the two layers of roofing is greater than three handbreadths, they are considered attached. Rav Ashi said to Rav Kahana: Is it so that wherever there is not the width of a handbreadth, we do not say lower and cast?

讜讛讗 转谞讬讗 拽讜专讛 讛讬讜爪讗讛 诪讻讜转诇 讝讛 讜讗讬谞讛 谞讜讙注转 讘讻讜转诇 讝讛 讜讻谉 砖转讬 拽讜专讜转 讗讞转 讬讜爪讗讛 诪讻讜转诇 讝讛 讜讗讞转 讬讜爪讗讛 诪讻讜转诇 讝讛 讜讗讬谞谉 谞讜讙注讜转 讝讜 讘讝讜 驻讞讜转 诪砖诇砖讛 讗讬谞讜 爪专讬讱 诇讛讘讬讗 拽讜专讛 讗讞专转 砖诇砖讛 爪专讬讱 诇讛讘讬讗 拽讜专讛 讗讞专转

Isn鈥檛 it taught in the Tosefta with regard to the halakhot of the merging of alleyways that one of the means of rendering carrying in a closed alleyway permitted on Shabbat is by placing a beam one handbreadth wide over the entrance of the alleyway within twenty cubits but no less than ten handbreadths off the ground? With regard to a cross beam that projects from this wall of an alleyway but does not touch the other opposite wall, and similarly, with regard to two cross beams, one projecting from this wall and one projecting from the other opposite wall, and they do not touch each other, if there is a gap of less than three handbreadths between the beam and the wall, or between the two beams respectively, one need not bring another cross beam to render the alleyway fit for a person to carry within it. This is because they are considered joined based on the principle of lavud. However, if there is a gap of three handbreadths, one must bring another cross beam.

专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讗讜诪专

However, Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, who holds that the principle of lavud applies to a gap of up to four handbreadths wide, says:

驻讞讜转 诪讗专讘注讛 讗讬谉 爪专讬讱 诇讛讘讬讗 拽讜专讛 讗讞专转 讗专讘注讛 爪专讬讱 诇讛讘讬讗 拽讜专讛 讗讞专转

If there is a gap of less than four handbreadths, one need not bring another cross beam. However, if there is a gap of four handbreadths, one must bring another cross beam.

讜讻谉 砖转讬 拽讜专讜转 讛诪转讗讬诪讜转 诇讗 讘讝讜 讻讚讬 诇拽讘诇 讗专讬讞 讜诇讗 讘讝讜 讻讚讬 诇拽讘诇 讗专讬讞 讗诐 诪拽讘诇讜转 讗专讬讞 诇专讞讘讜 讟驻讞 讗讬谉 爪专讬讱 诇讛讘讬讗 拽讜专讛 讗讞专转 讜讗诐 诇讗讜 爪专讬讱 诇讛讘讬讗 拽讜专讛 讗讞专转

And similarly, if two parallel, extremely narrow cross beams are placed alongside each other, even though there is not sufficient width in this beam in order to receive and support a small brick, and there is not sufficient width in that beam in order to receive and support a small brick, if the two beams together can receive a small brick along its handbreadth width, one need not bring another cross beam to render the alleyway fit for one to carry within it. But if not, one is required to bring another cross beam.

专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讗讜诪专 讗诐 诪拽讘诇讜转 讗专讬讞 诇讗专讻讜 砖诇砖讛 讟驻讞讬诐 讗讬谉 爪专讬讱 诇讛讘讬讗 拽讜专讛 讗讞专转 讜讗诐 诇讗讜 爪专讬讱 诇讛讘讬讗 拽讜专讛 讗讞专转

Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: If the two cross beams can receive a small brick along its length, which is three handbreadths, one need not bring another cross beam, but if not, one must bring another cross beam.

讛讬讜 讗讞转 诇诪注诇讛 讜讗讞转 诇诪讟讛 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讘专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 专讜讗讬谉 讛注诇讬讜谞讛 讻讗讬诇讜 讛讬讗 诇诪讟讛 讜讗转 讛转讞转讜谞讛 讻讗讬诇讜 讛讬讗 诇诪注诇讛 讜讘诇讘讚 砖诇讗 转讛讗 注诇讬讜谞讛 诇诪注诇讛 诪注砖专讬诐 讗诪讛 讜讛转讞转讜谞讛 诇诪讟讛 诪注砖专讛 讛讗 讝讛 讜讝讛 讘转讜讱 注砖专讬诐 讗诪专讬谞谉 讞讘讜讟 专诪讬 讗祝 注诇 讙讘 讚诇讬转 讘讬讛 讟驻讞

Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, says: If these two narrow cross beams are placed at different heights, one above and one below, one considers the upper one as though it were below, and the lower one as though it were above, i.e., close together. If the two together are capable of supporting a small brick, they render the alleyway fit for one to carry within it, although they are not actually close to each other, provided that the upper cross beam is not above twenty cubits off the ground and the lower one is not below ten handbreadths off the ground, between which a cross beam renders an alleyway fit for one to carry within it. By inference, if both this beam and that beam are within twenty cubits, we say that the principle: Lower and cast the upper beam down even though there is not the width of a handbreadth in the upper beam. This is difficult according to Rava鈥檚 opinion, as he holds that the principle: Lower and cast, does not apply when the width of the upper crossbeam is less than a handbreadth.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 转专讬抓 讜讗讬诪讗 讛讻讬 讜讘诇讘讚 砖诇讗 转讛讗 注诇讬讜谞讛 诇诪注诇讛 诪注砖专讬诐 讗诇讗 讘转讜讱 注砖专讬诐 讜讛转讞转讜谞讛 住诪讜讻讛 诇讛 讘驻讞讜转 诪砖诇砖讛 讗讬 谞诪讬 讘诇讘讚 砖诇讗 转讛讗 转讞转讜谞讛 诇诪讟讛 诪注砖专讛 讗诇讗 诇诪注诇讛 诪注砖专讛 讜注诇讬讜谞讛 住诪讜讻讛 诇讛 讘驻讞讜转 诪砖诇砖讛 讗讘诇 砖诇砖讛 讻讬讜谉 讚诇讬转 讘讬讛 讟驻讞 诇讗 讗诪专讬谞谉 讞讘讜讟 专诪讬

Rav Kahana said to him: Interpret the baraita and say as follows: Provided that the upper beam is not above twenty cubits but rather within twenty cubits and the lower one is adjacent to it, less than three handbreadths from it, as in that case they are joined due to the principle of lavud and not the principle of lower and cast. Alternatively, interpret the baraita as follows: Provided that the lower beam is not below ten handbreadths but rather above ten handbreadths and the upper beam is adjacent to it, less than three handbreadths from it. However, if the distance between the beams is three handbreadths, since there is not the width of one handbreadth in the beam, we do not say: Lower and cast the upper beam, and each beam is considered on its own.

讜砖爪讬诇转讛 诪专讜讘讛 诪讞诪转讛 讻砖专讛 讛讗 讻讬 讛讚讚讬 驻住讜诇讛 讜讛讗 转谞谉 讘讗讬讚讱 驻讬专拽讬谉 讜砖讞诪转讛 诪专讜讘讛 诪爪讬诇转讛 驻住讜诇讛 讛讗 讻讬 讛讚讚讬 讻砖专讛

搂 The mishna continues: A sukka whose shade exceeds its sunlight is fit. From the formulation of the mishna, it can be inferred that if its shade and sunlight are equal, the sukka is unfit. The Gemara asks: But didn鈥檛 we learn in a mishna in another chapter in this tractate: A sukka whose sunlight exceeds its shade is unfit. From the formulation of that mishna it can be inferred that if its sunlight and shade are equal, the sukka is fit. The inferences of the two mishnayot are contradictory.

诇讗 拽砖讬讗 讻讗谉 诪诇诪注诇讛 讻讗谉 诪诇诪讟讛 讗诪专 专讘 驻驻讗 讛讬讬谞讜 讚讗诪专讬 讗讬谞砖讬 讻讝讜讝讗 诪诇注讬诇 讻讗讬住转专讗 诪诇转讞转

The Gemara answers: This is not difficult. Here, where the inference was that when the sunlight and shade are equal the sukka is unfit, it is referring to the ratio of shade to sunlight from above, in the sukka roofing itself; and there, where the inference was that when the sunlight and shade are equal the sukka is fit, it is referring to the ratio of shade to sunlight from below, on the sukka floor. The two inferences are not contradictory, as the lower in the sukka one observes the light, the more diffused it is. Therefore, if the shade and the sunlight are equal on the floor of the sukka, clearly, the roofing is sufficiently dense and exceeds the gaps. Rav Pappa said: That is the meaning of the folk saying with regard to light: Like a zuz coin above, like an istera coin below.

诪注讜讘讛 讻诪讬谉 讘讬转 转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讛诪注讜讘讛 讻诪讬谉 讘讬转 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讗讬谉 讛讻讜讻讘讬诐 谞专讗讬谉 诪转讜讻讛 讻砖专讛 讗讬谉 讻讜讻讘讬 讞诪讛 谞专讗讬谉 诪转讜讻讛 讘讬转 砖诪讗讬 驻讜住诇讬谉 讜讘讬转 讛诇诇 诪讻砖讬专讬谉

The mishna continues: A sukka whose roofing is thick like a type of house is fit. 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.

诪转谞讬壮 讛注讜砖讛 住讜讻转讜 讘专讗砖 讛注讙诇讛 讗讜 讘专讗砖 讛住驻讬谞讛 讻砖专讛 讜注讜诇讬谉 诇讛 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘 讘专讗砖 讛讗讬诇谉 讗讜 注诇 讙讘讬 讙诪诇 讻砖专讛 讜讗讬谉 注讜诇讬谉 诇讛 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘

MISHNA: In the case of one who establishes his sukka at the top of the wagon or at the top of the ship, although it is portable it is fit, as it is sufficient for a sukka to be a temporary residence. And one may ascend and enter it even on the first Festival day. In the case of one who establishes his sukka at the top of a tree or atop a camel, the sukka is fit, but one may not ascend and enter it on the first Festival day because the Sages prohibit climbing or using trees or animals on the Festival.

砖转讬诐 讘讗讬诇谉 讜讗讞转 讘讬讚讬 讗讚诐 讗讜 砖转讬诐 讘讬讚讬 讗讚诐 讜讗讞转 讘讗讬诇谉 讻砖专讛 讜讗讬谉 注讜诇讬谉 诇讛 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘 砖诇砖 讘讬讚讬 讗讚诐 讜讗讞转 讘讗讬诇谉 讻砖专讛 讜注讜诇讬谉 诇讛 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘

If two of the walls of the sukka are in the tree and one is established on the ground by a person, or if two are established on the ground by a person and one is in the tree, the sukka is fit, but one may not ascend and enter it on the first Festival day because it is prohibited to use the tree. However, if three of the walls are established on the ground by a person and one is in the tree, then since it contains the minimum number of walls required, it is fit, and one may enter it on the first Festival day.

Scroll To Top