Sukkah 9
Share this shiur:
This month’s learning is sponsored by Adam, Carolyn, Michal, Josh, Benny, Izzy, Gali, Shim, Zoe, Zachy and Yehuda in loving memory of Judith Rosenfeld Hochstadter, Gittel bat Kreindel v’Binyamin BenZion on her second yahrzeit. “Her curiosity, humor, intellect and devout nature continues to inspire and hold us accountable. We miss her and think of her in all our pursuits, especially in our Hadran learning, where she would be glad to know that she didn’t have to boil more than 1 egg at a time!!”
Want to dedicate learning? Get started here:
Summary
Can one use a sukkah that was built not for the sake of the holiday of Sukkot? Beit Shamai and Beit Hillel disagree. From where does each find a source in the Torah for their opinion? If one built a sukkah under a tree, it is not a valid sukkah. In which case is there an exception? A sukkah on top of a sukkah – the upper one is valid but the bottom one is not. Rabbi Yehuda says it depends. Rabbi Yirmiah explains that there are four different types of cases regarding a sukkah on top of a sukkah and the law is different in each case.
Today’s daily daf tools:
This month’s learning is sponsored by Adam, Carolyn, Michal, Josh, Benny, Izzy, Gali, Shim, Zoe, Zachy and Yehuda in loving memory of Judith Rosenfeld Hochstadter, Gittel bat Kreindel v’Binyamin BenZion on her second yahrzeit. “Her curiosity, humor, intellect and devout nature continues to inspire and hold us accountable. We miss her and think of her in all our pursuits, especially in our Hadran learning, where she would be glad to know that she didn’t have to boil more than 1 egg at a time!!”
Sukkah 9
מַתְנִי׳ סוּכָּה יְשָׁנָה — בֵּית שַׁמַּאי פּוֹסְלִין וּבֵית הִלֵּל מַכְשִׁירִין. וְאֵיזוֹ הִיא סוּכָּה יְשָׁנָה, כׇּל שֶׁעֲשָׂאָהּ קוֹדֶם לֶחָג שְׁלֹשִׁים יוֹם. אֲבָל אִם עֲשָׂאָהּ לְשֵׁם חַג, אֲפִילּוּ מִתְּחִילַּת הַשָּׁנָה — כְּשֵׁרָה.
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.
גְּמָ׳ מַאי טַעְמַיְיהוּ דְּבֵית שַׁמַּאי? אָמַר קְרָא: ״חַג הַסּוּכּוֹת שִׁבְעַת יָמִים לַה׳״, סוּכָּה הָעֲשׂוּיָה לְשֵׁם חַג בָּעֵינַן.
GEMARA: The Gemara asks: What is the rationale for the opinion of Beit Shammai? The Gemara explains that it is as the verse states: “The festival of Sukkot is seven days unto the Lord” (Leviticus 23:34), indicating that we require a sukka established for the sake of the Festival. A sukka not constructed expressly for the Festival is unfit.
וּבֵית הִלֵּל? הַהוּא מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ לְכִדְרַב שֵׁשֶׁת. דְּאָמַר רַב שֵׁשֶׁת מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא: מִנַּיִן לַעֲצֵי סוּכָּה שֶׁאֲסוּרִין כׇּל שִׁבְעָה — תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״חַג הַסּוּכּוֹת שִׁבְעַת יָמִים לַה׳״,
The Gemara asks: And how do Beit Hillel interpret this verse? The Gemara answers: In Beit Hillel’s opinion, that verse is necessary to teach in accordance with the statement of Rav Sheshet, as Rav Sheshet said in the name of Rabbi Akiva: From where is it derived that use of the wood of the sukka is prohibited for any purpose other than for the sukka all seven days of the Festival, and it is designated exclusively for the mitzva? It is derived as the verse states: “The festival of Sukkot is seven days unto the Lord.”
וְתַנְיָא, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה בֶּן בְּתִירָה אוֹמֵר: כְּשֵׁם שֶׁחָל שֵׁם שָׁמַיִם עַל הַחֲגִיגָה, כָּךְ חָל שֵׁם שָׁמַיִם עַל הַסּוּכָּה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״חַג הַסּוּכּוֹת שִׁבְעַת יָמִים לַה׳״, מָה חַג לַה׳ — אַף סוּכָּה לַה׳.
And it is taught in a baraita in explanation that Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira says: Just as the name of Heaven takes effect upon the Festival peace-offering, so too, the name of Heaven takes effect upon the sukka, as it is stated: “The festival of Sukkot is seven days unto the Lord”; just as the Festival offering is consecrated to the Lord, so too, the sukka is consecrated to the Lord.
וּבֵית שַׁמַּאי נָמֵי מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ לְהָכִי! אִין הָכִי נָמֵי,
The Gemara asks: But don’t Beit Shammai require the verse to derive this halakha as well? The Gemara answers: Yes, indeed it is so that Beit Shammai derives the sanctity of the wood of the sukka from this verse. Therefore, the rationale for their opinion with regard to an old sukka must be based on a different verse.
אֶלָּא מַאי טַעְמַיְיהוּ דְּבֵית שַׁמַּאי — כְּתִיב קְרָא אַחֲרִינָא: ״חַג הַסּוּכּוֹת תַּעֲשֶׂה לְךָ שִׁבְעַת יָמִים״, סוּכָּה הָעֲשׂוּיָה לְשֵׁם חַג בָּעֵינַן.
Rather, what is the rationale for the opinion of Beit Shammai with regard to an old sukka? Another verse is written: “You shall prepare for you the festival of Sukkot for seven days” (Deuteronomy 16:13), from which it is derived that we require a sukka established for the sake of the Festival.
וּבֵית הִלֵּל — הַהוּא מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ לְעוֹשִׂין סוּכָּה בְּחוּלּוֹ שֶׁל מוֹעֵד.
The Gemara asks: And how do Beit Hillel interpret this verse? The Gemara answers: That verse is necessary to teach that one may establish a sukka even during the intermediate days of the Festival. If one failed to construct a sukka prior to the onset of the Festival, or if it collapsed during the Festival, he may establish it during the intermediate days, as the mitzva to establish a sukka is in effect for all seven days of the Festival.
וּבֵית שַׁמַּאי — סְבִירָא לְהוּ כְּרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר, דְּאָמַר: אֵין עוֹשִׂין סוּכָּה בְּחוּלּוֹ שֶׁל מוֹעֵד.
The Gemara asks: And from where do Beit Shammai derive this halakha? They hold in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer, who said: One may not establish a sukka during the intermediate days of the Festival. Therefore, the requirement to build the sukka for the sake of the mitzva may be derived from this verse.
וּבֵית הִלֵּל לֵית לְהוּ דְּרַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר רַב? דְּאָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר רַב: עֲשָׂאָהּ מִן הַקּוֹצִין וּמִן הַנִּימִין וּמִן הַגְּרָדִין — פְּסוּלָה. מִן הַסִּיסִין — כְּשֵׁרָה,
The Gemara proceeds to clarify Beit Hillel’s opinion: And do Beit Hillel not agree with the statement that Rav Yehuda said that Rav said? As Rav Yehuda said that Rav said: If one fashioned ritual fringes from hanging threads that remain protruding from the fabric like thorns after most of the superfluous threads were torn, and tied them into ritual fringes; or if he tied the fringes from threads that hang down after sewing; or if he tied them from the fringes [geradin] that hang from the bottom of a garment, the ritual fringes are unfit for fulfilling the mitzva. However, if the ritual fringes were tied from balls of thread that were not spun for the sake of the mitzva, they are fit.
כִּי אַמְרִיתַהּ קַמֵּיהּ דִּשְׁמוּאֵל, אָמַר לִי: אַף מִן הַסִּיסִין נָמֵי פְּסוּלָה, (אַלְמָא) דְּבָעֵינַן טְוִיָּה לִשְׁמָהּ. הָכָא נָמֵי בָּעֵינַן סוּכָּה עֲשׂוּיָה לִשְׁמָהּ!
And Rav Yehuda related: When I stated this halakha in the name of Rav before Shmuel, he said to me: Even ritual fringes tied from balls of thread are unfit, as we require the spinning of the thread to be for the sake of the mitzva. Just as the threads for the ritual fringes must be spun for the sake of the mitzva, here too, let us require a sukka established for the sake of the mitzva.
שָׁאנֵי הָתָם, דְּאָמַר קְרָא: ״גְּדִילִים תַּעֲשֶׂה לָךְ״, לָךְ — לְשֵׁם חוֹבָךְ. הָכָא נָמֵי: ״חַג הַסּוּכּוֹת תַּעֲשֶׂה לְךָ״, לָךְ — לְשֵׁם חוֹבָךְ!
The Gemara answers: It is different there, as the verse states: “You shall prepare for you fringes” (Deuteronomy 22:12), from which it is derived: “For you,” for the sake of your obligation. The fringes, from the beginning of their production, must be produced for the sake of the mitzva. The Gemara asks: Here, too, with regard to sukka, the verse says: “You shall prepare for you the festival of Sukkot” (Deuteronomy 16:13). Shouldn’t it be derived: “For you,” for the sake of your obligation?
הַהוּא מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ לְמַעוֹטֵי גְּזוּלָה. הָתָם נָמֵי מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ לְמַעוֹטֵי גְּזוּלָה!
The Gemara answers that this term “for you” is required to exclude use of a stolen sukka; establish the sukka for you, and do not use a sukka belonging to another. The Gemara asks: There, too, with regard to ritual fringes, isn’t the term “for you” required to exclude use of stolen ritual fringes?
הָתָם כְּתִיב קְרָא אַחֲרִינָא: ״וְעָשׂוּ לָהֶם״ — מִשֶּׁלָּהֶם.
The Gemara answers: There, with regard to ritual fringes, another verse is written: “And they shall make for them ritual fringes” (Numbers 15:38), from which it is derived: “For them,” of their own, to exclude the use of stolen ritual fringes. Therefore from the term “for you,” it may be derived that ritual fringes must be produced for the sake of the mitzva.
מַתְנִי׳ הָעוֹשֶׂה סוּכָּתוֹ תַּחַת הָאִילָן — כְּאִילּוּ עֲשָׂאָהּ בְּתוֹךְ הַבַּיִת. סוּכָּה עַל גַּבֵּי סוּכָּה — הָעֶלְיוֹנָה כְּשֵׁרָה וְהַתַּחְתּוֹנָה פְּסוּלָה. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: אִם אֵין דָּיוֹרִין בָּעֶלְיוֹנָה — הַתַּחְתּוֹנָה כְּשֵׁרָה.
MISHNA: With regard to one who establishes his sukka beneath a tree, it is as though he established it inside the house and it is unfit. If one established a sukka atop another sukka, the upper sukka is fit and the lower sukka is unfit. Rabbi Yehuda says: If there are no residents in the upper sukka, the lower sukka is fit.
גְּמָ׳ אָמַר רָבָא: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא בְּאִילָן שֶׁצִּלָּתוֹ מְרוּבָּה מֵחֲמָתוֹ, אֲבָל חֲמָתוֹ מְרוּבָּה מִצִּלָּתוֹ — כְּשֵׁרָה.
GEMARA: Rava said: They taught this halakha that a sukka beneath a tree is unfit only with regard to a tree whose shade is greater than its sunlight, as the source of the shade in the sukka is the tree and not the roofing. However, if its sunlight is greater than its shade, the sukka is fit, as in that case the roofing provides the shade.
מִמַּאי — מִדְּקָתָנֵי: ״כְּאִילּוּ עֲשָׂאָהּ בְּתוֹךְ הַבַּיִת״: לְמָה לִי לְמִיתְנֵי ״כְּאִילּוּ עֲשָׂאָהּ בְּתוֹךְ הַבַּיִת״? לִיתְנֵי ״פְּסוּלָה״! אֶלָּא, הָא קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן דְּאִילָן דּוּמְיָא דְּבַיִת: מָה בַּיִת צִלָּתוֹ מְרוּבָּה מֵחֲמָתוֹ — אַף אִילָן צִלָּתוֹ מְרוּבָּה מֵחֲמָתוֹ.
The Gemara asks: From where does Rava reach this conclusion? The Gemara answers: He learns this from the fact that the mishna teaches: It is as though he established it inside the house. Why do I need the mishna to teach: It is as though he established it inside the house? Let the mishna teach simply: It is unfit. Rather, this is teaching us that in the context of this halakha, a tree is similar to a house; just as with regard to a house, its shade is greater than its sunlight, so too, with regard to a tree, it invalidates the sukka only if its shade is greater than its sunlight.
וְכִי חֲמָתוֹ מְרוּבָּה מִצִּלָּתוֹ, מַאי הָוֵי? הָא קָא מִצְטָרֵף סְכָךְ פָּסוּל בַּהֲדֵי סְכָךְ כָּשֵׁר! אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא: בְּשֶׁחֲבָטָן.
The Gemara asks: And even if the sunlight is greater than the shade of the tree, what of it? Why does Rava deem the sukka beneath the tree fit in that case? Isn’t there unfit roofing, the uncut branches of the tree, joining together with the fit roofing on the sukka, rendering even the fit roofing on the sukka unfit? Rav Pappa said: This is referring to a case where one lowered the uncut branches and combined them with the fit roofing so that the branches still attached to the tree are inconspicuous. Given that the majority of the roofing is fit, the roofing in its entirety is fit.
אִי בְּשֶׁחֲבָטָן מַאי לְמֵימְרָא! מַהוּ דְּתֵימָא: נִיגְזוֹר הֵיכָא דַּחֲבָטָן אַטּוּ הֵיכָא דְּלֹא חֲבָטָן, קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן דְּלָא גָּזְרִינַן.
The Gemara asks: If it is a case where he lowered them, what is the purpose of stating this halakha? Isn’t it self-evident? The Gemara answers that it is necessary lest you say: Let us issue a decree and deem the roofing unfit in a case where one lowered them due to a case where one did not lower them. Therefore, it teaches us that we do not issue such a decree.
הָא נָמֵי תְּנֵינָא: הִדְלָה עָלֶיהָ: אֶת הַגֶּפֶן וְאֶת הַדְּלַעַת וְאֶת הַקִּיסוֹס, וְסִיכֵּךְ עַל גַּבָּן — פְּסוּלָה, וְאִם הָיָה סִיכּוּךְ הַרְבֵּה מֵהֶן אוֹ שֶׁקְּצָצָן — כְּשֵׁרָה.
The Gemara asks: That halakha, too, we already learned in a mishna: If one trellised the grapevine, the gourd, or the ivy, climbing plants, over a sukka while they are still attached to the ground, and he then added roofing atop them, the sukka is unfit, as roofing attached to the ground is unfit. If the amount of fit roofing was greater than the plants attached to the ground, or if he cut the climbing plants so that they were no longer attached to the ground, it is fit.
הֵיכִי דָמֵי? אִילֵּימָא בְּשֶׁלֹּא חֲבָטָן, הָא קָא מִצְטָרֵף סְכָךְ פָּסוּל עִם סְכָךְ כָּשֵׁר! אֶלָּא לָאו, כְּשֶׁחֲבָטָן, וּשְׁמַע מִינַּהּ דְּלָא גָּזְרִינַן! מַהוּ דְּתֵימָא: הָנֵי מִילֵּי בְּדִיעֲבַד — אֲבָל לְכַתְּחִילָּה לָא, קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן.
The Gemara clarifies the details of the mishna: What are the circumstances? If we say that it is referring to a case where he did not lower the climbing plants and combine them with the fit roofing, doesn’t the unfit roofing join together with the fit roofing on the sukka, rendering even the fit roofing on the sukka unfit? Rather, isn’t the mishna referring to a case where he lowered them, and conclude from this mishna that we do not issue a decree in a case where he lowered the branches due to a case where he did not lower the branches. Rava’s statement is therefore unnecessary. The Gemara answers: Lest you say that this applies only after the fact, i.e., that if one already lowered the uncut branches or plants it is not unfit, but one may not do so ab initio; therefore, Rava teaches us that one may place roofing in this manner even ab initio.
סוּכָּה עַל גַּבֵּי סוּכָּה וְכוּ׳. תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״(בַּסּוּכּוֹת) תֵּשְׁבוּ״, וְלֹא בְּסוּכָּה שֶׁתַּחַת הַסּוּכָּה, וְלֹא בְּסוּכָּה שֶׁתַּחַת הָאִילָן, וְלֹא בְּסוּכָּה שֶׁבְּתוֹךְ הַבַּיִת.
§ The mishna continues: If one established a sukka atop another sukka, the upper sukka is fit and the lower sukka is unfit. The Sages taught in a baraita that the verse states: “In sukkot shall you reside” (Leviticus 23:42), and not in a sukka that is beneath another sukka, and not in sukka that is beneath a tree, and not in a sukka that is inside a house.
אַדְּרַבָּה: ״בַּסּוּכּוֹת״ תַּרְתֵּי מַשְׁמַע! אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק: ״בַּסֻכֹּת״ כְּתִיב.
The Gemara questions that derivation. On the contrary, the term “in sukkot,” which is written in the plural, indicates two. The conclusion should be that one sitting inside a sukka beneath a sukka fulfills the mitzva. Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: Although the term is vocalized in the plural, basukkot is written without the vav, indicating a single sukka.
אָמַר רַבִּי יִרְמְיָה: פְּעָמִים שֶׁשְּׁתֵּיהֶן כְּשֵׁירוֹת, פְּעָמִים שֶׁשְּׁתֵּיהֶן פְּסוּלוֹת, פְּעָמִים שֶׁתַּחְתּוֹנָה כְּשֵׁרָה וְהָעֶלְיוֹנָה פְּסוּלָה, פְּעָמִים שֶׁתַּחְתּוֹנָה פְּסוּלָה וְהָעֶלְיוֹנָה כְּשֵׁרָה.
Rabbi Yirmeya said: There are times when both of the sukkot one atop the other are fit; there are times when both of the sukkot are unfit; there are times when the lower sukka is fit and the upper sukka is unfit; and there are times when the lower sukka is unfit and the upper sukka is fit.
פְּעָמִים שֶׁשְּׁתֵּיהֶן כְּשֵׁירוֹת הֵיכִי דָּמֵי? כְּגוֹן שֶׁתַּחְתּוֹנָה חֲמָתָהּ מְרוּבָּה מִצִּלָּתָהּ, וְהָעֶלְיוֹנָה צִלָּתָהּ מְרוּבָּה מֵחַמָּתָהּ, וְקָיְימָא עֶלְיוֹנָה בְּתוֹךְ עֶשְׂרִים.
The Gemara elaborates: There are times when both of the sukkot one atop the other are fit. What are the circumstances? It is in a case where in the lower sukka its sunlight is greater than its shade, rendering the sukka unfit, and in the upper sukka its shade is greater than its sunlight, rendering the sukka fit. And the roofing of the upper sukka is within twenty cubits of the ground. In that case, the roofing of the upper sukka is effective for both the upper sukka and the lower one.
פְּעָמִים שֶׁשְּׁתֵּיהֶן פְּסוּלוֹת הֵיכִי דָּמֵי? כְּגוֹן דְּתַרְוַיְיהוּ צִלָּתָן מְרוּבָּה מֵחֲמָתָן, וְקָיְימָא עֶלְיוֹנָה לְמַעְלָה מֵעֶשְׂרִים אַמָּה.
There are times when both of the sukkot are unfit. What are the circumstances? It is in a case where in both sukkot, their shade is greater than their sunlight, but the upper one is more than twenty cubits above the roofing of the lower sukka, rendering it unfit. Since the roofing of the upper sukka is unfit, and it casts shade over the lower sukka, the lower sukka is also unfit.
פְּעָמִים שֶׁתַּחְתּוֹנָה כְּשֵׁרָה וְהָעֶלְיוֹנָה פְּסוּלָה
There are times when the lower sukka is fit and the upper sukka is unfit.
Today’s daily daf tools:
Delve Deeper
Broaden your understanding of the topics on this daf with classes and podcasts from top women Talmud scholars.
New to Talmud?
Check out our resources designed to help you navigate a page of Talmud – and study at the pace, level and style that fits you.
The Hadran Women’s Tapestry
Meet the diverse women learning Gemara at Hadran and hear their stories.
I read Ilana Kurshan’s “If All the Seas Were Ink” which inspired me. Then the Women’s Siyum in Jerusalem in 2020 convinced me, I knew I had to join! I have loved it- it’s been a constant in my life daily, many of the sugiyot connect to our lives. My family and friends all are so supportive. It’s incredible being part of this community and love how diverse it is! I am so excited to learn more!
Jerusalem, Israel
Ontario, Canada
I began to learn this cycle of Daf Yomi after my husband passed away 2 1/2 years ago. It seemed a good way to connect to him. Even though I don’t know whether he would have encouraged women learning Gemara, it would have opened wonderful conversations. It also gives me more depth for understanding my frum children and grandchildren. Thank you Hadran and Rabbanit Michelle Farber!!
Tzur Hadassah, Israel
I started last year after completing the Pesach Sugiyot class. Masechet Yoma might seem like a difficult set of topics, but for me made Yom Kippur and the Beit HaMikdash come alive. Liturgy I’d always had trouble connecting with took on new meaning as I gained a sense of real people moving through specific spaces in particular ways. It was the perfect introduction; I am so grateful for Hadran!
Minnesota, United States
Shortly after the death of my father, David Malik z”l, I made the commitment to Daf Yomi. While riding to Ben Gurion airport in January, Siyum HaShas was playing on the radio; that was the nudge I needed to get started. The “everyday-ness” of the Daf has been a meaningful spiritual practice, especial after COVID began & I was temporarily unable to say Kaddish at daily in-person minyanim.
Wynnewood, United States
Geri Goldstein got me started learning daf yomi when I was in Israel 2 years ago. It’s been a challenge and I’ve learned a lot though I’m sure I miss a lot. I quilt as I listen and I want to share what I’ve been working on.
Ottawa, Canada
I learned Mishnayot more than twenty years ago and started with Gemara much later in life. Although I never managed to learn Daf Yomi consistently, I am learning since some years Gemara in depth and with much joy. Since last year I am studying at the International Halakha Scholars Program at the WIHL. I often listen to Rabbanit Farbers Gemara shiurim to understand better a specific sugyiah. I am grateful for the help and inspiration!
Berlin, Germany
Ive been learning Gmara since 5th grade and always loved it. Have always wanted to do Daf Yomi and now with Michelle Farber’s online classes it made it much easier to do! Really enjoying the experience thank you!!
Neve Daniel, Israel
Hearing and reading about the siyumim at the completion of the 13 th cycle Daf Yomi asked our shul rabbi about starting the Daf – he directed me to another shiur in town he thought would allow a woman to join, and so I did! Love seeing the sources for the Divrei Torah I’ve been hearing for the past decades of living an observant life and raising 5 children .
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States
I never thought I’d be able to do Daf Yomi till I saw the video of Hadran’s Siyum HaShas. Now, 2 years later, I’m about to participate in Siyum Seder Mo’ed with my Hadran community. It has been an incredible privilege to learn with Rabbanit Michelle and to get to know so many caring, talented and knowledgeable women. I look forward with great anticipation and excitement to learning Seder Nashim.
Karmiel, Israel
I was exposed to Talmud in high school, but I was truly inspired after my daughter and I decided to attend the Women’s Siyum Shas in 2020. We knew that this was a historic moment. We were blown away, overcome with emotion at the euphoria of the revolution. Right then, I knew I would continue. My commitment deepened with the every-morning Virtual Beit Midrash on Zoom with R. Michelle.
Zichron Yaakov, Israel
Raanana, Israel
What a great experience to learn with Rabbanit Michelle Farber. I began with this cycle in January 2020 and have been comforted by the consistency and energy of this process throughout the isolation period of Covid. Week by week, I feel like I am exploring a treasure chest with sparkling gems and puzzling antiquities. The hunt is exhilarating.
Pennsylvania, United States
When the new cycle began, I thought, If not now, when? I’d just turned 72. I feel like a tourist on a tour bus passing astonishing scenery each day. Rabbanit Michelle is my beloved tour guide. When the cycle ends, I’ll be 80. I pray that I’ll have strength and mind to continue the journey to glimpse a little more. My grandchildren think having a daf-learning savta is cool!
Jerusalem, Israel
I started to listen to Michelle’s podcasts four years ago. The minute I started I was hooked. I’m so excited to learn the entire Talmud, and think I will continue always. I chose the quote “while a woman is engaged in conversation she also holds the spindle”. (Megillah 14b). It reminds me of all of the amazing women I learn with every day who multi-task, think ahead and accomplish so much.
Zichron Yakov, Israel
I never thought I’d be able to do Daf Yomi till I saw the video of Hadran’s Siyum HaShas. Now, 2 years later, I’m about to participate in Siyum Seder Mo’ed with my Hadran community. It has been an incredible privilege to learn with Rabbanit Michelle and to get to know so many caring, talented and knowledgeable women. I look forward with great anticipation and excitement to learning Seder Nashim.
Karmiel, Israel
A Gemara shiur previous to the Hadran Siyum, was the impetus to attend it.It was highly inspirational and I was smitten. The message for me was התלמוד בידינו. I had decided along with my Chahsmonaim group to to do the daf and take it one daf at time- without any expectations at all. There has been a wealth of information, insights and halachik ideas. It is truly exercise of the mind, heart & Soul
Hashmonaim, Israel
I started learning Talmud with R’ Haramati in Yeshivah of Flatbush. But after a respite of 60 years, Rabbanit Michelle lit my fire – after attending the last three world siyumim in Miami Beach, Meadowlands and Boca Raton, and now that I’m retired, I decided – “I can do this!” It has been an incredible journey so far, and I look forward to learning Daf everyday – Mazal Tov to everyone!
Florida, United States
I decided to learn one masechet, Brachot, but quickly fell in love and never stopped! It has been great, everyone is always asking how it’s going and chering me on, and my students are always making sure I did the day’s daf.
Memphis, Tennessee, United States
I am a Reform rabbi and took Talmud courses in rabbinical school, but I knew there was so much more to learn. It felt inauthentic to serve as a rabbi without having read the entire Talmud, so when the opportunity arose to start Daf Yomi in 2020, I dove in! Thanks to Hadran, Daf Yomi has enriched my understanding of rabbinic Judaism and deepened my love of Jewish text & tradition. Todah rabbah!
California, United States
Sukkah 9
ΧΦ·ΧͺΦ°Χ Φ΄ΧΧ³ Χ‘ΧΦΌΧΦΌΦΈΧ ΧΦ°Χ©ΧΦΈΧ ΦΈΧ β ΧΦΌΦ΅ΧΧͺ Χ©ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦ·ΧΧ Χ€ΦΌΧΦΉΧ‘Φ°ΧΦ΄ΧΧ ΧΦΌΧΦ΅ΧΧͺ ΧΦ΄ΧΦΌΦ΅Χ ΧΦ·ΧΦ°Χ©ΧΦ΄ΧΧ¨Φ΄ΧΧ. ΧΦ°ΧΦ΅ΧΧΧΦΉ ΧΦ΄ΧΧ Χ‘ΧΦΌΧΦΌΦΈΧ ΧΦ°Χ©ΧΦΈΧ ΦΈΧ, ΧΦΌΧΧ Χ©ΧΦΆΧ’Φ²Χ©ΧΦΈΧΦΈΧΦΌ Χ§ΧΦΉΧΦΆΧ ΧΦΆΧΦΈΧ Χ©ΧΦ°ΧΦΉΧ©ΧΦ΄ΧΧ ΧΧΦΉΧ. ΧΦ²ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ΄Χ Χ’Φ²Χ©ΧΦΈΧΦΈΧΦΌ ΧΦ°Χ©ΧΦ΅Χ ΧΦ·Χ, ΧΦ²Χ€Φ΄ΧΧΦΌΧΦΌ ΧΦ΄ΧͺΦΌΦ°ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦΌΦ·Χͺ ΧΦ·Χ©ΦΌΧΦΈΧ ΦΈΧ β ΧΦΌΦ°Χ©ΧΦ΅Χ¨ΦΈΧ.
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.
ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦΈΧ³ ΧΦ·ΧΧ ΧΦ·Χ’Φ°ΧΦ·ΧΦ°ΧΧΧΦΌ ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦ΅ΧΧͺ Χ©ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦ·ΧΧ? ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ Χ§Φ°Χ¨ΦΈΧ: Χ΄ΧΦ·Χ ΧΦ·Χ‘ΦΌΧΦΌΧΦΌΧΦΉΧͺ Χ©ΧΦ΄ΧΦ°Χ’Φ·Χͺ ΧΦΈΧΦ΄ΧΧ ΧΦ·ΧΧ³Χ΄, Χ‘ΧΦΌΧΦΌΦΈΧ ΧΦΈΧ’Φ²Χ©ΧΧΦΌΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ°Χ©ΧΦ΅Χ ΧΦ·Χ ΧΦΌΦΈΧ’Φ΅ΧΧ Φ·Χ.
GEMARA: The Gemara asks: What is the rationale for the opinion of Beit Shammai? The Gemara explains that it is as the verse states: βThe festival of Sukkot is seven days unto the Lordβ (Leviticus 23:34), indicating that we require a sukka established for the sake of the Festival. A sukka not constructed expressly for the Festival is unfit.
ΧΦΌΧΦ΅ΧΧͺ ΧΦ΄ΧΦΌΦ΅Χ? ΧΦ·ΧΧΦΌΧ ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦΌΦ°Χ’Φ΅Χ ΧΦ΅ΧΧΦΌ ΧΦ°ΧΦ΄ΧΦ°Χ¨Φ·Χ Χ©ΧΦ΅Χ©ΧΦΆΧͺ. ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ Χ¨Φ·Χ Χ©ΧΦ΅Χ©ΧΦΆΧͺ ΧΦ΄Χ©ΦΌΧΧΦΌΧ Χ¨Φ·ΧΦΌΦ΄Χ Χ’Φ²Χ§Φ΄ΧΧΦΈΧ: ΧΦ΄Χ ΦΌΦ·ΧΦ΄Χ ΧΦ·Χ’Φ²Χ¦Φ΅Χ Χ‘ΧΦΌΧΦΌΦΈΧ Χ©ΧΦΆΧΦ²Χ‘ΧΦΌΧ¨Φ΄ΧΧ ΧΦΌΧΧ Χ©ΧΦ΄ΧΦ°Χ’ΦΈΧ β ΧͺΦΌΦ·ΧΦ°ΧΧΦΌΧ ΧΧΦΉΧΦ·Χ¨: Χ΄ΧΦ·Χ ΧΦ·Χ‘ΦΌΧΦΌΧΦΌΧΦΉΧͺ Χ©ΧΦ΄ΧΦ°Χ’Φ·Χͺ ΧΦΈΧΦ΄ΧΧ ΧΦ·ΧΧ³Χ΄,
The Gemara asks: And how do Beit Hillel interpret this verse? The Gemara answers: In Beit Hillelβs opinion, that verse is necessary to teach in accordance with the statement of Rav Sheshet, as Rav Sheshet said in the name of Rabbi Akiva: From where is it derived that use of the wood of the sukka is prohibited for any purpose other than for the sukka all seven days of the Festival, and it is designated exclusively for the mitzva? It is derived as the verse states: βThe festival of Sukkot is seven days unto the Lord.β
ΧΦ°ΧͺΦ·Χ Φ°ΧΦΈΧ, Χ¨Φ·ΧΦΌΦ΄Χ ΧΦ°ΧΧΦΌΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΦΆΧ ΧΦΌΦ°ΧͺΦ΄ΧΧ¨ΦΈΧ ΧΧΦΉΧΦ΅Χ¨: ΧΦΌΦ°Χ©ΧΦ΅Χ Χ©ΧΦΆΧΦΈΧ Χ©ΧΦ΅Χ Χ©ΧΦΈΧΦ·ΧΦ΄Χ Χ’Φ·Χ ΧΦ·ΧΦ²ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦΈΧ, ΧΦΌΦΈΧΦ° ΧΦΈΧ Χ©ΧΦ΅Χ Χ©ΧΦΈΧΦ·ΧΦ΄Χ Χ’Φ·Χ ΧΦ·Χ‘ΦΌΧΦΌΧΦΌΦΈΧ, Χ©ΧΦΆΧ ΦΌΦΆΧΦ±ΧΦ·Χ¨: Χ΄ΧΦ·Χ ΧΦ·Χ‘ΦΌΧΦΌΧΦΌΧΦΉΧͺ Χ©ΧΦ΄ΧΦ°Χ’Φ·Χͺ ΧΦΈΧΦ΄ΧΧ ΧΦ·ΧΧ³Χ΄, ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ·Χ ΧΦ·ΧΧ³ β ΧΦ·Χ£ Χ‘ΧΦΌΧΦΌΦΈΧ ΧΦ·ΧΧ³.
And it is taught in a baraita in explanation that Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira says: Just as the name of Heaven takes effect upon the Festival peace-offering, so too, the name of Heaven takes effect upon the sukka, as it is stated: βThe festival of Sukkot is seven days unto the Lordβ; just as the Festival offering is consecrated to the Lord, so too, the sukka is consecrated to the Lord.
ΧΦΌΧΦ΅ΧΧͺ Χ©ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦ·ΧΧ Χ ΦΈΧΦ΅Χ ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦΌΦ°Χ’Φ΅Χ ΧΦ΅ΧΧΦΌ ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧΦ΄Χ! ΧΦ΄ΧΧ ΧΦΈΧΦ΄Χ Χ ΦΈΧΦ΅Χ,
The Gemara asks: But donβt Beit Shammai require the verse to derive this halakha as well? The Gemara answers: Yes, indeed it is so that Beit Shammai derives the sanctity of the wood of the sukka from this verse. Therefore, the rationale for their opinion with regard to an old sukka must be based on a different verse.
ΧΦΆΧΦΌΦΈΧ ΧΦ·ΧΧ ΧΦ·Χ’Φ°ΧΦ·ΧΦ°ΧΧΧΦΌ ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦ΅ΧΧͺ Χ©ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦ·ΧΧ β ΧΦΌΦ°ΧͺΦ΄ΧΧ Χ§Φ°Χ¨ΦΈΧ ΧΦ·ΧΦ²Χ¨Φ΄ΧΧ ΦΈΧ: Χ΄ΧΦ·Χ ΧΦ·Χ‘ΦΌΧΦΌΧΦΌΧΦΉΧͺ ΧͺΦΌΦ·Χ’Φ²Χ©ΧΦΆΧ ΧΦ°ΧΦΈ Χ©ΧΦ΄ΧΦ°Χ’Φ·Χͺ ΧΦΈΧΦ΄ΧΧΧ΄, Χ‘ΧΦΌΧΦΌΦΈΧ ΧΦΈΧ’Φ²Χ©ΧΧΦΌΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ°Χ©ΧΦ΅Χ ΧΦ·Χ ΧΦΌΦΈΧ’Φ΅ΧΧ Φ·Χ.
Rather, what is the rationale for the opinion of Beit Shammai with regard to an old sukka? Another verse is written: βYou shall prepare for you the festival of Sukkot for seven daysβ (Deuteronomy 16:13), from which it is derived that we require a sukka established for the sake of the Festival.
ΧΦΌΧΦ΅ΧΧͺ ΧΦ΄ΧΦΌΦ΅Χ β ΧΦ·ΧΧΦΌΧ ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦΌΦ°Χ’Φ΅Χ ΧΦ΅ΧΧΦΌ ΧΦ°Χ’ΧΦΉΧ©ΧΦ΄ΧΧ Χ‘ΧΦΌΧΦΌΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΧΦΌΧΦΌΧΦΉ Χ©ΧΦΆΧ ΧΧΦΉΧ’Φ΅Χ.
The Gemara asks: And how do Beit Hillel interpret this verse? The Gemara answers: That verse is necessary to teach that one may establish a sukka even during the intermediate days of the Festival. If one failed to construct a sukka prior to the onset of the Festival, or if it collapsed during the Festival, he may establish it during the intermediate days, as the mitzva to establish a sukka is in effect for all seven days of the Festival.
ΧΦΌΧΦ΅ΧΧͺ Χ©ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦ·ΧΧ β Χ‘Φ°ΧΦ΄ΧΧ¨ΦΈΧ ΧΦ°ΧΧΦΌ ΧΦΌΦ°Χ¨Φ·ΧΦΌΦ΄Χ ΧΦ±ΧΦ΄ΧΧ’ΦΆΧΦΆΧ¨, ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨: ΧΦ΅ΧΧ Χ’ΧΦΉΧ©ΧΦ΄ΧΧ Χ‘ΧΦΌΧΦΌΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΧΦΌΧΦΌΧΦΉ Χ©ΧΦΆΧ ΧΧΦΉΧ’Φ΅Χ.
The Gemara asks: And from where do Beit Shammai derive this halakha? They hold in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer, who said: One may not establish a sukka during the intermediate days of the Festival. Therefore, the requirement to build the sukka for the sake of the mitzva may be derived from this verse.
ΧΦΌΧΦ΅ΧΧͺ ΧΦ΄ΧΦΌΦ΅Χ ΧΦ΅ΧΧͺ ΧΦ°ΧΧΦΌ ΧΦΌΦ°Χ¨Φ·Χ ΧΦ°ΧΧΦΌΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ Χ¨Φ·Χ? ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ Χ¨Φ·Χ ΧΦ°ΧΧΦΌΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ Χ¨Φ·Χ: Χ’Φ²Χ©ΧΦΈΧΦΈΧΦΌ ΧΦ΄Χ ΧΦ·Χ§ΦΌΧΦΉΧ¦Φ΄ΧΧ ΧΦΌΧΦ΄Χ ΧΦ·Χ ΦΌΦ΄ΧΧΦ΄ΧΧ ΧΦΌΧΦ΄Χ ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦ°Χ¨ΦΈΧΦ΄ΧΧ β Χ€ΦΌΦ°Χ‘ΧΦΌΧΦΈΧ. ΧΦ΄Χ ΧΦ·Χ‘ΦΌΦ΄ΧΧ‘Φ΄ΧΧ β ΧΦΌΦ°Χ©ΧΦ΅Χ¨ΦΈΧ,
The Gemara proceeds to clarify Beit Hillelβs opinion: And do Beit Hillel not agree with the statement that Rav Yehuda said that Rav said? As Rav Yehuda said that Rav said: If one fashioned ritual fringes from hanging threads that remain protruding from the fabric like thorns after most of the superfluous threads were torn, and tied them into ritual fringes; or if he tied the fringes from threads that hang down after sewing; or if he tied them from the fringes [geradin] that hang from the bottom of a garment, the ritual fringes are unfit for fulfilling the mitzva. However, if the ritual fringes were tied from balls of thread that were not spun for the sake of the mitzva, they are fit.
ΧΦΌΦ΄Χ ΧΦ·ΧΦ°Χ¨Φ΄ΧΧͺΦ·ΧΦΌ Χ§Φ·ΧΦΌΦ΅ΧΧΦΌ ΧΦΌΦ΄Χ©ΧΦ°ΧΧΦΌΧΦ΅Χ, ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ ΧΦ΄Χ: ΧΦ·Χ£ ΧΦ΄Χ ΧΦ·Χ‘ΦΌΦ΄ΧΧ‘Φ΄ΧΧ Χ ΦΈΧΦ΅Χ Χ€ΦΌΦ°Χ‘ΧΦΌΧΦΈΧ, (ΧΦ·ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ) ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦΈΧ’Φ΅ΧΧ Φ·Χ ΧΦ°ΧΦ΄ΧΦΌΦΈΧ ΧΦ΄Χ©ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧΦΌ. ΧΦΈΧΦΈΧ Χ ΦΈΧΦ΅Χ ΧΦΌΦΈΧ’Φ΅ΧΧ Φ·Χ Χ‘ΧΦΌΧΦΌΦΈΧ Χ’Φ²Χ©ΧΧΦΌΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ΄Χ©ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧΦΌ!
And Rav Yehuda related: When I stated this halakha in the name of Rav before Shmuel, he said to me: Even ritual fringes tied from balls of thread are unfit, as we require the spinning of the thread to be for the sake of the mitzva. Just as the threads for the ritual fringes must be spun for the sake of the mitzva, here too, let us require a sukka established for the sake of the mitzva.
Χ©ΧΦΈΧΧ Φ΅Χ ΧΦΈΧͺΦΈΧ, ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ Χ§Φ°Χ¨ΦΈΧ: Χ΄ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦ΄ΧΧ ΧͺΦΌΦ·Χ’Φ²Χ©ΧΦΆΧ ΧΦΈΧΦ°Χ΄, ΧΦΈΧΦ° β ΧΦ°Χ©ΧΦ΅Χ ΧΧΦΉΧΦΈΧΦ°. ΧΦΈΧΦΈΧ Χ ΦΈΧΦ΅Χ: Χ΄ΧΦ·Χ ΧΦ·Χ‘ΦΌΧΦΌΧΦΌΧΦΉΧͺ ΧͺΦΌΦ·Χ’Φ²Χ©ΧΦΆΧ ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ΄, ΧΦΈΧΦ° β ΧΦ°Χ©ΧΦ΅Χ ΧΧΦΉΧΦΈΧΦ°!
The Gemara answers: It is different there, as the verse states: βYou shall prepare for you fringesβ (Deuteronomy 22:12), from which it is derived: βFor you,β for the sake of your obligation. The fringes, from the beginning of their production, must be produced for the sake of the mitzva. The Gemara asks: Here, too, with regard to sukka, the verse says: βYou shall prepare for you the festival of Sukkotβ (Deuteronomy 16:13). Shouldnβt it be derived: βFor you,β for the sake of your obligation?
ΧΦ·ΧΧΦΌΧ ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦΌΦ°Χ’Φ΅Χ ΧΦ΅ΧΧΦΌ ΧΦ°ΧΦ·Χ’ΧΦΉΧΦ΅Χ ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΧΦΌΧΦΈΧ. ΧΦΈΧͺΦΈΧ Χ ΦΈΧΦ΅Χ ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦΌΦ°Χ’Φ΅Χ ΧΦ΅ΧΧΦΌ ΧΦ°ΧΦ·Χ’ΧΦΉΧΦ΅Χ ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΧΦΌΧΦΈΧ!
The Gemara answers that this term βfor youβ is required to exclude use of a stolen sukka; establish the sukka for you, and do not use a sukka belonging to another. The Gemara asks: There, too, with regard to ritual fringes, isnβt the term βfor youβ required to exclude use of stolen ritual fringes?
ΧΦΈΧͺΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΦ°ΧͺΦ΄ΧΧ Χ§Φ°Χ¨ΦΈΧ ΧΦ·ΧΦ²Χ¨Φ΄ΧΧ ΦΈΧ: Χ΄ΧΦ°Χ’ΦΈΧ©ΧΧΦΌ ΧΦΈΧΦΆΧΧ΄ β ΧΦ΄Χ©ΦΌΧΦΆΧΦΌΦΈΧΦΆΧ.
The Gemara answers: There, with regard to ritual fringes, another verse is written: βAnd they shall make for them ritual fringesβ (Numbers 15:38), from which it is derived: βFor them,β of their own, to exclude the use of stolen ritual fringes. Therefore from the term βfor you,β it may be derived that ritual fringes must be produced for the sake of the mitzva.
ΧΦ·ΧͺΦ°Χ Φ΄ΧΧ³ ΧΦΈΧ’ΧΦΉΧ©ΧΦΆΧ Χ‘ΧΦΌΧΦΌΦΈΧͺΧΦΉ ΧͺΦΌΦ·ΧΦ·Χͺ ΧΦΈΧΦ΄ΧΧΦΈΧ β ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦΌΧΦΌ Χ’Φ²Χ©ΧΦΈΧΦΈΧΦΌ ΧΦΌΦ°ΧͺΧΦΉΧΦ° ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦ·ΧΦ΄Χͺ. Χ‘ΧΦΌΧΦΌΦΈΧ Χ’Φ·Χ ΧΦΌΦ·ΧΦΌΦ΅Χ Χ‘ΧΦΌΧΦΌΦΈΧ β ΧΦΈΧ’ΦΆΧΦ°ΧΧΦΉΧ ΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΦ°Χ©ΧΦ΅Χ¨ΦΈΧ ΧΦ°ΧΦ·ΧͺΦΌΦ·ΧΦ°ΧͺΦΌΧΦΉΧ ΦΈΧ Χ€ΦΌΦ°Χ‘ΧΦΌΧΦΈΧ. Χ¨Φ·ΧΦΌΦ΄Χ ΧΦ°ΧΧΦΌΧΦΈΧ ΧΧΦΉΧΦ΅Χ¨: ΧΦ΄Χ ΧΦ΅ΧΧ ΧΦΌΦΈΧΧΦΉΧ¨Φ΄ΧΧ ΧΦΌΦΈΧ’ΦΆΧΦ°ΧΧΦΉΧ ΦΈΧ β ΧΦ·ΧͺΦΌΦ·ΧΦ°ΧͺΦΌΧΦΉΧ ΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΦ°Χ©ΧΦ΅Χ¨ΦΈΧ.
MISHNA: With regard to one who establishes his sukka beneath a tree, it is as though he established it inside the house and it is unfit. If one established a sukka atop another sukka, the upper sukka is fit and the lower sukka is unfit. Rabbi Yehuda says: If there are no residents in the upper sukka, the lower sukka is fit.
ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦΈΧ³ ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ Χ¨ΦΈΧΦΈΧ: ΧΦΉΧ Χ©ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΌ ΧΦΆΧΦΌΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦΈΧ Χ©ΧΦΆΧ¦ΦΌΦ΄ΧΦΌΦΈΧͺΧΦΉ ΧΦ°Χ¨ΧΦΌΧΦΌΦΈΧ ΧΦ΅ΧΦ²ΧΦΈΧͺΧΦΉ, ΧΦ²ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ²ΧΦΈΧͺΧΦΉ ΧΦ°Χ¨ΧΦΌΧΦΌΦΈΧ ΧΦ΄Χ¦ΦΌΦ΄ΧΦΌΦΈΧͺΧΦΉ β ΧΦΌΦ°Χ©ΧΦ΅Χ¨ΦΈΧ.
GEMARA: Rava said: They taught this halakha that a sukka beneath a tree is unfit only with regard to a tree whose shade is greater than its sunlight, as the source of the shade in the sukka is the tree and not the roofing. However, if its sunlight is greater than its shade, the sukka is fit, as in that case the roofing provides the shade.
ΧΦ΄ΧΦΌΦ·ΧΧ β ΧΦ΄ΧΦΌΦ°Χ§ΦΈΧͺΦΈΧ Φ΅Χ: Χ΄ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦΌΧΦΌ Χ’Φ²Χ©ΧΦΈΧΦΈΧΦΌ ΧΦΌΦ°ΧͺΧΦΉΧΦ° ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦ·ΧΦ΄ΧͺΧ΄: ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ΄Χ ΧΦ°ΧΦ΄ΧΧͺΦ°Χ Φ΅Χ Χ΄ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦΌΧΦΌ Χ’Φ²Χ©ΧΦΈΧΦΈΧΦΌ ΧΦΌΦ°ΧͺΧΦΉΧΦ° ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦ·ΧΦ΄ΧͺΧ΄? ΧΦ΄ΧΧͺΦ°Χ Φ΅Χ Χ΄Χ€ΦΌΦ°Χ‘ΧΦΌΧΦΈΧΧ΄! ΧΦΆΧΦΌΦΈΧ, ΧΦΈΧ Χ§ΦΈΧ ΧΦ·Χ©ΧΦ°ΧΦ·Χ’ ΧΦ·Χ ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΧΦΌΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦ·ΧΦ΄Χͺ: ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΦ·ΧΦ΄Χͺ Χ¦Φ΄ΧΦΌΦΈΧͺΧΦΉ ΧΦ°Χ¨ΧΦΌΧΦΌΦΈΧ ΧΦ΅ΧΦ²ΧΦΈΧͺΧΦΉ β ΧΦ·Χ£ ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦΈΧ Χ¦Φ΄ΧΦΌΦΈΧͺΧΦΉ ΧΦ°Χ¨ΧΦΌΧΦΌΦΈΧ ΧΦ΅ΧΦ²ΧΦΈΧͺΧΦΉ.
The Gemara asks: From where does Rava reach this conclusion? The Gemara answers: He learns this from the fact that the mishna teaches: It is as though he established it inside the house. Why do I need the mishna to teach: It is as though he established it inside the house? Let the mishna teach simply: It is unfit. Rather, this is teaching us that in the context of this halakha, a tree is similar to a house; just as with regard to a house, its shade is greater than its sunlight, so too, with regard to a tree, it invalidates the sukka only if its shade is greater than its sunlight.
ΧΦ°ΧΦ΄Χ ΧΦ²ΧΦΈΧͺΧΦΉ ΧΦ°Χ¨ΧΦΌΧΦΌΦΈΧ ΧΦ΄Χ¦ΦΌΦ΄ΧΦΌΦΈΧͺΧΦΉ, ΧΦ·ΧΧ ΧΦΈΧΦ΅Χ? ΧΦΈΧ Χ§ΦΈΧ ΧΦ΄Χ¦Φ°ΧΦΈΧ¨Φ΅Χ£ Χ‘Φ°ΧΦΈΧΦ° Χ€ΦΌΦΈΧ‘ΧΦΌΧ ΧΦΌΦ·ΧΦ²ΧΦ΅Χ Χ‘Φ°ΧΦΈΧΦ° ΧΦΌΦΈΧ©ΧΦ΅Χ¨! ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ Χ¨Φ·Χ Χ€ΦΌΦΈΧ€ΦΌΦΈΧ: ΧΦΌΦ°Χ©ΧΦΆΧΦ²ΧΦΈΧΦΈΧ.
The Gemara asks: And even if the sunlight is greater than the shade of the tree, what of it? Why does Rava deem the sukka beneath the tree fit in that case? Isnβt there unfit roofing, the uncut branches of the tree, joining together with the fit roofing on the sukka, rendering even the fit roofing on the sukka unfit? Rav Pappa said: This is referring to a case where one lowered the uncut branches and combined them with the fit roofing so that the branches still attached to the tree are inconspicuous. Given that the majority of the roofing is fit, the roofing in its entirety is fit.
ΧΦ΄Χ ΧΦΌΦ°Χ©ΧΦΆΧΦ²ΧΦΈΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ·ΧΧ ΧΦ°ΧΦ΅ΧΧΦ°Χ¨ΦΈΧ! ΧΦ·ΧΧΦΌ ΧΦΌΦ°ΧͺΦ΅ΧΧΦΈΧ: Χ Φ΄ΧΧΦ°ΧΧΦΉΧ¨ ΧΦ΅ΧΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΦ·ΧΦ²ΧΦΈΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΧΦΌ ΧΦ΅ΧΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦΉΧ ΧΦ²ΧΦΈΧΦΈΧ, Χ§ΦΈΧ ΧΦ·Χ©ΧΦ°ΧΦ·Χ’ ΧΦ·Χ ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΦΈΧΦ°Χ¨Φ΄ΧΧ Φ·Χ.
The Gemara asks: If it is a case where he lowered them, what is the purpose of stating this halakha? Isnβt it self-evident? The Gemara answers that it is necessary lest you say: Let us issue a decree and deem the roofing unfit in a case where one lowered them due to a case where one did not lower them. Therefore, it teaches us that we do not issue such a decree.
ΧΦΈΧ Χ ΦΈΧΦ΅Χ ΧͺΦΌΦ°Χ Φ΅ΧΧ ΦΈΧ: ΧΦ΄ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ Χ’ΦΈΧΦΆΧΧΦΈ: ΧΦΆΧͺ ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦΆΧ€ΦΆΧ ΧΦ°ΧΦΆΧͺ ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦ·Χ’Φ·Χͺ ΧΦ°ΧΦΆΧͺ ΧΦ·Χ§ΦΌΦ΄ΧΧ‘ΧΦΉΧ‘, ΧΦ°Χ‘Φ΄ΧΧΦΌΦ΅ΧΦ° Χ’Φ·Χ ΧΦΌΦ·ΧΦΌΦΈΧ β Χ€ΦΌΦ°Χ‘ΧΦΌΧΦΈΧ, ΧΦ°ΧΦ΄Χ ΧΦΈΧΦΈΧ Χ‘Φ΄ΧΧΦΌΧΦΌΧΦ° ΧΦ·Χ¨Φ°ΧΦΌΦ΅Χ ΧΦ΅ΧΦΆΧ ΧΧΦΉ Χ©ΧΦΆΧ§ΦΌΦ°Χ¦ΦΈΧ¦ΦΈΧ β ΧΦΌΦ°Χ©ΧΦ΅Χ¨ΦΈΧ.
The Gemara asks: That halakha, too, we already learned in a mishna: If one trellised the grapevine, the gourd, or the ivy, climbing plants, over a sukka while they are still attached to the ground, and he then added roofing atop them, the sukka is unfit, as roofing attached to the ground is unfit. If the amount of fit roofing was greater than the plants attached to the ground, or if he cut the climbing plants so that they were no longer attached to the ground, it is fit.
ΧΦ΅ΧΧΦ΄Χ ΧΦΈΧΦ΅Χ? ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦΌΦ΅ΧΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΦ°Χ©ΧΦΆΧΦΌΦΉΧ ΧΦ²ΧΦΈΧΦΈΧ, ΧΦΈΧ Χ§ΦΈΧ ΧΦ΄Χ¦Φ°ΧΦΈΧ¨Φ΅Χ£ Χ‘Φ°ΧΦΈΧΦ° Χ€ΦΌΦΈΧ‘ΧΦΌΧ Χ’Φ΄Χ Χ‘Φ°ΧΦΈΧΦ° ΧΦΌΦΈΧ©ΧΦ΅Χ¨! ΧΦΆΧΦΌΦΈΧ ΧΦΈΧΧ, ΧΦΌΦ°Χ©ΧΦΆΧΦ²ΧΦΈΧΦΈΧ, ΧΦΌΧ©ΧΦ°ΧΦ·Χ’ ΧΦ΄ΧΧ ΦΌΦ·ΧΦΌ ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΦΈΧΦ°Χ¨Φ΄ΧΧ Φ·Χ! ΧΦ·ΧΧΦΌ ΧΦΌΦ°ΧͺΦ΅ΧΧΦΈΧ: ΧΦΈΧ Φ΅Χ ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦΌΦ΅Χ ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦ΄ΧΧ’Φ²ΧΦ·Χ β ΧΦ²ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ°ΧΦ·ΧͺΦΌΦ°ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦΌΦΈΧ ΧΦΈΧ, Χ§ΦΈΧ ΧΦ·Χ©ΧΦ°ΧΦ·Χ’ ΧΦ·Χ.
The Gemara clarifies the details of the mishna: What are the circumstances? If we say that it is referring to a case where he did not lower the climbing plants and combine them with the fit roofing, doesnβt the unfit roofing join together with the fit roofing on the sukka, rendering even the fit roofing on the sukka unfit? Rather, isnβt the mishna referring to a case where he lowered them, and conclude from this mishna that we do not issue a decree in a case where he lowered the branches due to a case where he did not lower the branches. Ravaβs statement is therefore unnecessary. The Gemara answers: Lest you say that this applies only after the fact, i.e., that if one already lowered the uncut branches or plants it is not unfit, but one may not do so ab initio; therefore, Rava teaches us that one may place roofing in this manner even ab initio.
Χ‘ΧΦΌΧΦΌΦΈΧ Χ’Φ·Χ ΧΦΌΦ·ΧΦΌΦ΅Χ Χ‘ΧΦΌΧΦΌΦΈΧ ΧΦ°ΧΧΦΌΧ³. ΧͺΦΌΦΈΧ ΧΦΌ Χ¨Φ·ΧΦΌΦΈΧ Φ·Χ: Χ΄(ΧΦΌΦ·Χ‘ΦΌΧΦΌΧΦΌΧΦΉΧͺ) ΧͺΦΌΦ΅Χ©ΧΦ°ΧΧΦΌΧ΄, ΧΦ°ΧΦΉΧ ΧΦΌΦ°Χ‘ΧΦΌΧΦΌΦΈΧ Χ©ΧΦΆΧͺΦΌΦ·ΧΦ·Χͺ ΧΦ·Χ‘ΦΌΧΦΌΧΦΌΦΈΧ, ΧΦ°ΧΦΉΧ ΧΦΌΦ°Χ‘ΧΦΌΧΦΌΦΈΧ Χ©ΧΦΆΧͺΦΌΦ·ΧΦ·Χͺ ΧΦΈΧΦ΄ΧΧΦΈΧ, ΧΦ°ΧΦΉΧ ΧΦΌΦ°Χ‘ΧΦΌΧΦΌΦΈΧ Χ©ΧΦΆΧΦΌΦ°ΧͺΧΦΉΧΦ° ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦ·ΧΦ΄Χͺ.
Β§ The mishna continues: If one established a sukka atop another sukka, the upper sukka is fit and the lower sukka is unfit. The Sages taught in a baraita that the verse states: βIn sukkot shall you resideβ (Leviticus 23:42), and not in a sukka that is beneath another sukka, and not in sukka that is beneath a tree, and not in a sukka that is inside a house.
ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦ°Χ¨Φ·ΧΦΌΦΈΧ: Χ΄ΧΦΌΦ·Χ‘ΦΌΧΦΌΧΦΌΧΦΉΧͺΧ΄ ΧͺΦΌΦ·Χ¨Φ°ΧͺΦΌΦ΅Χ ΧΦ·Χ©ΧΦ°ΧΦ·Χ’! ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ Χ¨Φ·Χ Χ Φ·ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΦ·Χ¨ ΧΦ΄Χ¦Φ°ΧΦΈΧ§: Χ΄ΧΦΌΦ·Χ‘Φ»ΧΦΌΦΉΧͺΧ΄ ΧΦΌΦ°ΧͺΦ΄ΧΧ.
The Gemara questions that derivation. On the contrary, the term βin sukkot,β which is written in the plural, indicates two. The conclusion should be that one sitting inside a sukka beneath a sukka fulfills the mitzva. Rav NaαΈ₯man bar YitzαΈ₯ak said: Although the term is vocalized in the plural, basukkot is written without the vav, indicating a single sukka.
ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ Χ¨Φ·ΧΦΌΦ΄Χ ΧΦ΄Χ¨Φ°ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ: Χ€ΦΌΦ°Χ’ΦΈΧΦ΄ΧΧ Χ©ΧΦΆΧ©ΦΌΧΦ°ΧͺΦΌΦ΅ΧΧΦΆΧ ΧΦΌΦ°Χ©ΧΦ΅ΧΧ¨ΧΦΉΧͺ, Χ€ΦΌΦ°Χ’ΦΈΧΦ΄ΧΧ Χ©ΧΦΆΧ©ΦΌΧΦ°ΧͺΦΌΦ΅ΧΧΦΆΧ Χ€ΦΌΦ°Χ‘ΧΦΌΧΧΦΉΧͺ, Χ€ΦΌΦ°Χ’ΦΈΧΦ΄ΧΧ Χ©ΧΦΆΧͺΦΌΦ·ΧΦ°ΧͺΦΌΧΦΉΧ ΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΦ°Χ©ΧΦ΅Χ¨ΦΈΧ ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ’ΦΆΧΦ°ΧΧΦΉΧ ΦΈΧ Χ€ΦΌΦ°Χ‘ΧΦΌΧΦΈΧ, Χ€ΦΌΦ°Χ’ΦΈΧΦ΄ΧΧ Χ©ΧΦΆΧͺΦΌΦ·ΧΦ°ΧͺΦΌΧΦΉΧ ΦΈΧ Χ€ΦΌΦ°Χ‘ΧΦΌΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ’ΦΆΧΦ°ΧΧΦΉΧ ΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΦ°Χ©ΧΦ΅Χ¨ΦΈΧ.
Rabbi Yirmeya said: There are times when both of the sukkot one atop the other are fit; there are times when both of the sukkot are unfit; there are times when the lower sukka is fit and the upper sukka is unfit; and there are times when the lower sukka is unfit and the upper sukka is fit.
Χ€ΦΌΦ°Χ’ΦΈΧΦ΄ΧΧ Χ©ΧΦΆΧ©ΦΌΧΦ°ΧͺΦΌΦ΅ΧΧΦΆΧ ΧΦΌΦ°Χ©ΧΦ΅ΧΧ¨ΧΦΉΧͺ ΧΦ΅ΧΧΦ΄Χ ΧΦΌΦΈΧΦ΅Χ? ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΧΦΉΧ Χ©ΧΦΆΧͺΦΌΦ·ΧΦ°ΧͺΦΌΧΦΉΧ ΦΈΧ ΧΦ²ΧΦΈΧͺΦΈΧΦΌ ΧΦ°Χ¨ΧΦΌΧΦΌΦΈΧ ΧΦ΄Χ¦ΦΌΦ΄ΧΦΌΦΈΧͺΦΈΧΦΌ, ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ’ΦΆΧΦ°ΧΧΦΉΧ ΦΈΧ Χ¦Φ΄ΧΦΌΦΈΧͺΦΈΧΦΌ ΧΦ°Χ¨ΧΦΌΧΦΌΦΈΧ ΧΦ΅ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦΈΧͺΦΈΧΦΌ, ΧΦ°Χ§ΦΈΧΦ°ΧΧΦΈΧ Χ’ΦΆΧΦ°ΧΧΦΉΧ ΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΦ°ΧͺΧΦΉΧΦ° Χ’ΦΆΧ©ΧΦ°Χ¨Φ΄ΧΧ.
The Gemara elaborates: There are times when both of the sukkot one atop the other are fit. What are the circumstances? It is in a case where in the lower sukka its sunlight is greater than its shade, rendering the sukka unfit, and in the upper sukka its shade is greater than its sunlight, rendering the sukka fit. And the roofing of the upper sukka is within twenty cubits of the ground. In that case, the roofing of the upper sukka is effective for both the upper sukka and the lower one.
Χ€ΦΌΦ°Χ’ΦΈΧΦ΄ΧΧ Χ©ΧΦΆΧ©ΦΌΧΦ°ΧͺΦΌΦ΅ΧΧΦΆΧ Χ€ΦΌΦ°Χ‘ΧΦΌΧΧΦΉΧͺ ΧΦ΅ΧΧΦ΄Χ ΧΦΌΦΈΧΦ΅Χ? ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΧΦΉΧ ΧΦΌΦ°ΧͺΦ·Χ¨Φ°ΧΦ·ΧΦ°ΧΧΧΦΌ Χ¦Φ΄ΧΦΌΦΈΧͺΦΈΧ ΧΦ°Χ¨ΧΦΌΧΦΌΦΈΧ ΧΦ΅ΧΦ²ΧΦΈΧͺΦΈΧ, ΧΦ°Χ§ΦΈΧΦ°ΧΧΦΈΧ Χ’ΦΆΧΦ°ΧΧΦΉΧ ΦΈΧ ΧΦ°ΧΦ·Χ’Φ°ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ΅Χ’ΦΆΧ©ΧΦ°Χ¨Φ΄ΧΧ ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦΈΧ.
There are times when both of the sukkot are unfit. What are the circumstances? It is in a case where in both sukkot, their shade is greater than their sunlight, but the upper one is more than twenty cubits above the roofing of the lower sukka, rendering it unfit. Since the roofing of the upper sukka is unfit, and it casts shade over the lower sukka, the lower sukka is also unfit.
Χ€ΦΌΦ°Χ’ΦΈΧΦ΄ΧΧ Χ©ΧΦΆΧͺΦΌΦ·ΧΦ°ΧͺΦΌΧΦΉΧ ΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΦ°Χ©ΧΦ΅Χ¨ΦΈΧ ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ’ΦΆΧΦ°ΧΧΦΉΧ ΦΈΧ Χ€ΦΌΦ°Χ‘ΧΦΌΧΦΈΧ
There are times when the lower sukka is fit and the upper sukka is unfit.
