POINT BY POINT SUMMARY
by Rabbi Ephraim Becker
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
Ask A Question on the daf
Introduction to SukahSukah 2
SUKAH 2 - This Daf has been dedicated in honor of the Perlowitz family of
Brooklyn, NY and the Fass family of Edison, NJ on the recent marriage of
their children Avi and Becky, by Ben Sugerman (Boca Raton, FL)
1) MISHNAH: THE HEIGHT OF A SUKAH
(a) (Tana Kama) If the S'chach of the Sukah is higher than 20
Amos, the Sukah is Pesulah.
2) SOURCES FOR THE PESUL OF EXCESSIVE HEIGHT
(b) (R. Yehudah) It is Kesheirah.
(c) A Sukah less than 10 Tefachim tall, or having less than
three walls, or whose light is more than its shade, is
(a) Question: Why by Eruvin are we taught to repair the Mavui
(by shortening it) while here we are only taught that it is
(b) Answer: Regarding Sukah, which is d'Oreisa, the appropriate
language is Pesulah, as opposed to a Mavui (d'Rabanan).
(c) Alternate Answer: Our Mishnah lists many Pesulim, whose
varied corrective measures would encumber the Mishnah (as
opposed to Mavui with fewer invalidations).
(d) Question: What is the source for the Pesul of height?
(e) Answer (Rabah): The Pasuk instructs us to dwell in a Sukah
in order to recall HaShem's miraculous protection, and this
is lost if the Sukah is too tall to catch one's eye (20
(f) Answer (R. Zeira): The Pasuk (Yeshaya 4:6) teaches that we
should be dwelling in the *shade* of the Sukah not the shade
of the walls, which would be the case over 20 Amos.
1. Question (Abaye): Then we should invalidate a Sukah
built in a valley between two tall mountains!?
(g) Answer (Rava): Such a tall Sukah would not normally be made
as a temporary dwelling (Diras Ar'ai), a requirement of
Sukah (based on the Pasuk).
2. Answer (R. Zeira): There the Sukah would still be valid
even without the sun-blocking mountains, whereas our
Sukah would not be valid (since its S'chach does not
generate any shade at all) without the walls.
1. Question (Abaye): Would a Sukah made of iron walls then
2. Answer (Rava): The Pasuk is delimiting a *measurement*
for a Diras Ar'ai (not specifying that the structure
must be built to collapse after seven days).
(h) Question: On what basis do Rabah, R. Zeira and Rava argue?
3) R. YOSHIYA, R. HUNA AND R. CHANAN B. RABAH
(i) Answer: Owing to a weakness in each of the positions.
1. They disagree with Rabah because they understand the
Pasuk is speaking of historical awareness not awareness
of the dwelling itself.
(j) Question: With which opinion does the teaching of Rav agree?
2. They disagree with R. Zeira because the Pasuk he cites
is speaking of the future clouds in the times of the
Mashiach (which will create shade, but not speaking of
a Sukah, which is only for S'chach, not for shade).
i. Question: Why does R. Zeira disagree with this?
3. They disagree with Rava because of Abaye's question.
ii. Answer: If so, the Pasuk would say Chupah, not
Sukah (which adds the additional implication).
1. (R. Yoshiya) Rav taught that the Machlokes in our
Mishnah is only where the walls do not reach the
(k) Answer: Like Rabah, who makes the criteria for Kashrus that
which catches the eye, and the unbroken wall draws one's
eyes all the way to the S'chach.
2. If the walls reach the S'chach, then even more than 20
Amos are acceptable according to all.
(l) Question: With which opinion does the teaching of Rav agree?
1. (R. Huna) Rav taught that the Machlokes in our Mishnah
is only where the floor of the Sukah is less than 4x4
(m) Answer: Like R. Zeira, who looks for shade in a Sukah, and
the larger Sukah allows for the shade of the S'chach to
reach the floor (it is not only shaded by the walls).
2. If the floor is 4x4, then even more than 20 Amos height
(n) Question: With which opinion does the teaching of Rav agree?
1. (R. Chanan b. Rabah) Rav taught that our Machlokes is
only if the Sukah is less than 7x7 Tefachim (minimum
space for a table and most of a person).
(o) Answer: Like none of the opinions cited (the S'chach does
not catch the eye, it does not provide shade, and the walls
would not be Ar'ai).
2. Larger than 7x7 Tefachim will permit a taller Sukah.
(a) Question: On what basis do each of these understand the
Machlokes between R. Yehudah and Rabanan differently?
4) THE SUKAH OF QUEEN HELENA
(b) We can understand why R. Yoshiya argues with the others
because he maintains that the Machlokes in the Mishnah is
not bound by a Shiur of the floor size of the Sukah (see R.
Chananel for an alternate Girsa).
(c) But why not maintain that R. Huna and R. Chanan b. Rabah
(are not arguing over what Rav taught, because Rav only
referred to a Kosher Sukah, but they) are arguing over the
minimum size of a Sukah (4x4 Amos or 7x7 Tefachim)?
(d) No, all agree that the minimum size of a Sukah is 7x7
Tefachim, and they are arguing over whether Rav taught that
the Machlokes in our Mishnah is in any size larger than 7x7,
or is it only until 4x4 Amos, at which point all would agree
that the taller Sukah is Kesheirah.
(a) Question: The incident of Queen Helena's Sukah should prove
the position of Rabah!?
1. A Beraisa teaches that R. Yehudah supports his position
(of permitting unlimited height) from the silence of
the Chachamim regarding the taller Sukah of Queen
Helena in Lod.
(b) Answer: The discussion regarding the Queen's Sukah took
place because it was comprised of small rooms (which were
less than 4x4 Amos, thus triggering the Machlokes Chachamim
and R. Yehudah).
2. That is because she is Peturah from Sukah!
3. (R. Yehudah) But she had seven sons, and, furthermore,
she was always careful to consult the Chachamim for
4. Question: Why did R. Yehudah need to add the
5. Answer: He was thus anticipating their responses:
i. (Chachamim) The boys were minors (Peturim in
6. We understand there being a Machlokes between Chachamim
and R. Yehudah about the Kashrus of the Queen's Sukah
according to Rabah, since it is reasonable that a Queen
would have a Sukah whose walls do not reach the
S'chach, (to provide ventilation), but it is unlikely
that she was sitting is a *small* Sukah and, according
to R. Zeira and Rava (who say that the Machlokes in our
Mishnah only applies to a Sukah of small dimensions),
there should not have been a Machlokes about the
Queen's Sukah at all!?
ii. (R. Yehudah) Surely among these seven there was at
least one who was old enough to be obligated,
Mi'd'Rabanan, in Sukah.
iii. (Chachamim) She did not pay attention to Rabbinic
iv. (R. Yehudah) Furthermore, she was always careful..
(c) Question: Does a Queen make a Sukah out of small rooms?
(d) Answer: No, it was a large Sukah which *also* had a small
room (her private chambers).
1. The Chachamim assumed that her sons were dwelling in
the large room and she was using the small chamber for
her privacy, and hence they did not see any reason to
(e) Hence, according to R. Yehudah, the silence of the Chachamim
is indicative of his position regarding the height of Sukah.
2. R. Yehudah understood that her sons sat with her in her
chambers and that there were, among them, those who
were already obligated d'Rabanan, in Sukah.