POINT BY POINT SUMMARY
by Rabbi Ephraim Becker
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
Ask A Question on the daf
Previous dafSukah 13
1) OTHER TYPES OF POTENTIAL S'CHACH
(a) (R. Chanan b. Rava) Hizmi and Higi (types of bush) may be
used as S'chach
2) THE NUMBER OF TIED ITEMS CONSTITUTING A BUNDLE
(b) (Abaye) Higi may not be used.
(c) Question: What is the reason for the prohibition?
(d) Answer: Since the Higi leaves tend to fall down, they may
cause a person, in his discomfort, to leave his Sukah.
(e) (R. Gidel citing Rav) The base of the young date-palm (where
the branches all originate) may be used.
1. This is even though it looks like a bundle, since it
was packaged by Heaven.
(f) (R. Chisda citing Ravina b. Shila) The same as by the young
date-palm is true by a group of canes growing out of one
branch (as the Beraisa states that Kanim and Dokranim may be
used as S'chach).
2. It is even permitted to tie the upper branches because
the decree is confined to many items that are tied
together, and not to one item that one ties in order to
connect its various parts.
1. Question: It is obvious that we could use Kanim!?
(g) (R. Chisda citing Ravina b. Shila) One may use Marerisa
deAgma as Maror on Pesach.
2. Answer: The Beraisa should be understood as permitting
the Kanim *of* Dokranim meaning, as stated, a bunch of
canes that grow out of one root.
1. Question: But the Beraisa disqualifies hyssop from
being used for the Parah Adumah, if it has a
descriptive title (i.e. 'a Greek hyssop' or 'a blue
hyssop'), since the Torah prescribes a *plain* hyssop.
2. Given that the Torah also prescribes plain Maror for
the Seder, how can Maror with a descriptive title be
3. Answer (Abaye): That restriction applies only to those
items which were selected by the Torah among other
items with similar, but with descriptive, names (as the
hyssop, selected among the various types of hyssop
mentioned, thus disqualifying them).
4. However, at the time when the Torah was given, our
Marerisa deAgma was called just plain Maror, and is
5. Answer (Rava): A disqualifying descriptive name
describes the species, not the place in which the item
grows, as the Marerisa deAgma is called such simply
because it grows in the marshes.
(a) (R. Chisda) One stalk is not called an Eged, three is a
bundle and two is a Machlokes between R. Yosi and Rabanan
(in the Mishnah in Parah regarding the Eizov).
1. (Tana Kama) The Mitzvah of Eizov requires three roots,
each comprising one stalk.
(b) We initially infer (from the way that R. Chisda invoked R.
Yosi) that R. Yosi permits *two* stalks even l'Chatchilah,
and that *three* is for a Mitzvah.
2. (R. Yosi) The Mitzvah requires three stalks, and it is
sufficient if two remain after one falls off
(Shirayav), and some bit must remain once the ends
break off from use (Girdumav).
(c) If that were so, then the Rabanan (who seem to be the more
Machmir position above) will hold that one is not Yotze at
all with less than three stalks.
(d) Question: But we find in the Beraisa that R. Yosi is
Machmir, holding that Eizov must have at least three stalks
l'Chatchilah and remaining with at least two!?
(e) Answer: We reverse our initial assumption and conclude that
R. Yosi, who heard the Chachamim require three stalks
l'Chatchilah, responded that three stalks are required even
(f) This is supported by the Beraisa which says that three is a
Mitzvah, two is a starting minimum, and one is a remaining
minimum (Rabanan) and adds, that it is Pasul if it remains
(g) Question: The Beraisa contradicts itself on whether
remaining with one is Kosher (the Reisha) or Pasul (the
(h) Answer: The Pesul of the Seifa speaks of the initial Eizov
which is taken, which may not be only one (as that is not
called a bundle) even though it may end up remaining as one
after use (and the Chachamim indeed hold that three is a
Mitzvah, and is not Me'akev).
3) OTHER PARAMETERS FOR BUNDLES
(a) (Mereimar) We may use bundles of canes in Sura (even though
they were tied) since they were tied into bundles (briefly,
to maintain a set number in each bundle) for the purpose of
selling them (not subject to Gezerias Otzar which remain as
4) MAROR VEGETABLES AS S'CHACH
(b) (R. Aba) We may use Tzerifa de'Urveni (a round, pointed hut
made out of willow branches) after untying the top knot.
1. Question: But the branches are still woven below!?
2. Answer (R. Papa): He must untie the knot which holds
the weaving together, but he need not actually undo the
3. Answer (R. Huna b.R. Yehoshua): It is unnecessary to
release the knot on the lower weaving because the hut
can no longer be carried (once the upper knot was
untied) and it is thus not invalidated as a bundle.
(a) (R. Aba citing Shmuel) Any vegetables which may be used as
Maror on Pesach creates an Ohel to transmit Tumah, but does
not block Tumah from rising through it (Gezeira d'Rabanan)
and it invalidates S'chach with a Shiur of *three* Tefachim
(like air does), and not *four* Tefachim (like S'chach Pasul
(b) The reason for these Chumros is because they tend to dry up,
so we view them (l'Chumra) as if they had already done so.
(a) (R. Aba citing R. Huna) Grapes that are picked for the
wine-press have no Yados (the stalks do not transmit Tumah
to the grapes because he does not need them to handle the
grapes) [Later called the case of Botzer].
(b) (R. Menasia b. Gada also citing R. Huna) Similarly, if
someone cuts sheaves (with grain) to use as S'chach, the
stalks are not considered a Yad to the wheat kernels (since
he does not wish for the kernels to remain attached to the
stalks) [The case of Kotzer].
(c) If the case of Kotzer does not create a Yad, then Botzer
certainly will not do so (since he certainly does not want
(wine-absorbing) stalks in his wine press.
(d) If we learn that Botzer does not create a Yad, then we could
infer that Kotzer *does* since he may wish that the grains
remain attached to (and preserve [or be preserved by]) the
(e) Question: It seems like the teaching of R. Menasia b. Gada
(whether Kotzer creates Yados) is a Machlokes Tanaim in the
1. (Tana Kama) If one has any type of branch, sheave or
stalk with its fruit on it, there must be more inedible
vegetation than fruit for the branches to be S'chach.
(f) Answer: R. Menasia b. Gada maintains that even Acheirim
holds like him (that stalks do not have the Din of Yados)
and the Beraisa speaks where the owner initially cut the
stalks for food, but then changed his mind to use them as
S'chach (and Acheirim gives the stalks the Din of Yad
because we go after the owner's intention at the time when
he cut them).
2. (Acheirim) The waste must exceed both the fruit and the
Yados (the part of the stalks which would serve as a
handle) to the fruit to be Mevatel them.
3. It is clear that R. Aba (who maintains that the stalks
on Sukos *are* Yados -see 5.d.) cannot hold like the
Tana Kama, who holds that they are *not* Yados, and
needs this to be a Machlokes Tanaim so that he can hold
4. However, R. Menasia b. Gada could explain his position
on Kotzer either as dependent on the Machlokes (and he
would side with the Tana Kama) or independent of it.
(g) Question: Then why (if they were cut for food) would Rabanan
not give them Yados?!
(h) Answer: Rabanan hold that his second thought cancels his