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 23
SUKAH 21-25 - my brother Ari Kornfeld has generously sponsored one month of
Dafyomi publications for the benefit of Klal Yisrael
1) A MOVING SUKAH
(a) Question: Who is the Tana who permits a Sukah on a
wagon or boat?
2) A SUKAH ON AN ANIMAL
(b) Answer: R. Akiva (and R. Gamliel argues).
1. The Beraisa reports an incident in which R.
Akiva's Sukah blew off the boat.
(c) (Abaye) The point of dispute between R. Akiva and R.
Gamliel is only regarding a Sukah strong enough to
withstand land winds but not strong enough to withstand
normal sea winds.
2. R. Gamliel asked R. Akiva regarding the
whereabouts of his Sukah.
1. R. Akiva judges the walls as whether they are
Halachically viewed as Mechitzos for a temporary
dwelling, an assessment made on land.
2. R. Gamliel looks for Mechitzos which befit a
permanent structure, such as a Sukah, to his view.
(a) Question: Who is the Tana who permits such a Sukah?
3) USING AN ANIMAL AS A SUKAH WALL
(b) Answer: R. Meir (and R. Yehudah argues).
(c) Question: What is R. Yehudah's rationale?
(d) Answer: The Pasuk indicates that the Sukah must be a
residence for seven days which this Sukah, due to the
prohibition of entering it on YomTov, does not fulfill.
(e) Question: And what will R. Meir claim?
(f) Answer: Mi'd'Oreisa, this Sukah *is* valid for seven
days (as the prohibition to go on the animal is
(a) (R. Meir) An Sukah is Pesulah if an animal is serving
as a wall (R. Yehudah permits it).
1. (R. Meir) Anything alive may not serve as a Sukah
wall, as a Lechi, as posts around a well nor will
it receive Tumah as the cover on a grave.
(b) Question: What is R. Meir's rationale for prohibiting
an animal's use as a Sukah wall?
2. (R. Yosi HaGelili) Gittin may not be written on
it, as well.
(c) Answer (Abaye): Lest the animal die.
(d) Answer (R. Zeira): Lest the animal run away.
(e) A case which would illustrate the difference between
them is an untied elephant.
1. Its death would not invalidate the Sukah since it
would remain 10 Tefachim.
(f) Question: Surely Abaye should be concerned that the
animal may run away!?
2. It might well run away, however.
(g) Answer: Indeed, and an untied elephant may not be used.
1. They argue, instead, by a tied smaller animal.
(h) Question: Surely R. Zeira should be concerned lest it
2. We are concerned for its death (Abaye).
3. We are not concerned lest it run away (R. Zeira).
(i) Answer: We view death as improbable.
(j) Question: But there is open space under the animal's
legs (which would invalidate the Sukah)!?
(k) Answer: We close up the opening with foliage.
(l) Question: But the animal may crouch!?
(m) Answer: It is tied upright with ropes from above.
(n) Question: Such tying should eliminate our concern for
its dying, as well (it would still be a Mechitzah even
if it died)!?
(o) Answer: If it is exactly the minimum wall when alive
(seven Tefachim and a bit, with less than three
Tefachim from the S'chach) its death would cause it to
shrink, invalidating the Sukah.
4) VIEWING DEATH AS (IM)PROBABLE
(a) Question: But, unlike the above, Abaye holds that R.
Meir is *not* concerned for death (and R. Yehudah
1. There is a contradiction where a Mishnah allows
the wife of a Kohen to eat Terumah on the
assumption that her husband is alive, and a
Beraisa where such a woman must refrain from
eating Terumah lest her husband has died.
(b) Answer: We must reverse Abaye's positions of R. Meir
and R. Yehudah in the above resolution, to bring his
positions in line with 3.b. and c. above.
2. Abaye resolves the contradiction by saying that
the Mishnah is R. Meir who is not concerned about
death, and the Beraisa is R. Yehudah, who is.
3. Abaye supports this distinction by citing a
Beraisa regarding the tithing of wine.
i. R. Yehudah *is* concerned about the
designated barrel breaking (and would
certainly be concerned about a person dying).
ii. R. Meir *is not* concerned about the barrel
breaking (and would not be concerned about a
1. R. Meir *is* concerned for death and R. Yehudah
2. In support of this distinction, Abaye may cite our
Beraisa, wherein R. Meir forbids the use of an
animal and R. Yehudah permits it.