(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem

Previous daf

Sukah 14


(a) We just suggested that according to Rav Menashya bar Gada, everyone agrees that wheat that is reaped for *S'chach* does not have the Din of a Yad, and that the reason that Acheirim gives the stalks the Din of a Yad, is because they were initially reaped for *food*; and that the Rabbanan hold that once the owner changes his mind and decides to use the wheat as S'chach, the stalks lose their Din of Yad.
What is the problem with this?

(b) How will a piece of leather cut in such a way as to clearly indicate that it is to be used as a table, lose its eligibility to become Tamei?

(a) To answer the above Kashya, how do we attempt to differentiate between vessels and the stalks of fruit?

(b) This explanation is feasible according to Rebbi Elazar, who explains the Mishnah in Uktzin (which declares Tahor the Yados of 'Ochlin she'Basesan') to mean food whose bundles they untied.
Why is that?

(c) How does Rebbi Yochanan interpret 'Basesan', and how does that discount the contention that makes a distinction between vessels and fruit?

(a) If Basesan means an act, as we just explained, then Acheirim, who maintains that the stalks still have a Din of Yados, must hold like Rebbi Yossi.
What does Rebbi Yossi say? What reason does Resh Lakish give for Rebbi Yossi's statement?

(b) Then what is the reason of Acheirim, since Resh Lakish's reason only applies wheat being to the granary - and we are not talking about wheat in a granary?

(a) In which connection does the Torah refer to the Tefilah of a Tzadik as a pitch-fork?

(b) Why does it do that? What do we learn from there?

(a) Rebbi Yehudah permits the use of planks as S'chach.
What does Rebbi Meir say?

(b) Does a plank of four Tefachim invalidate the Sukah that is ...

  1. ... in the middle of the Sukah?
  2. ... adjacent to the wall of the Sukah?
(c) May one sleep underneath a four Tefachim wide plank that is adjacent to the wall of the Sukah?
(a) According to Rav, Rebbi Meir and Rebbi Yehudah argue over a plank that is at least *four Tefachim* wide.
What is the basis of their Machlokes? Why do they agree that a plank of *less* than four Tefachim wide is Kasher?

(b) Shmuel establishes the Machlokes by planks that are *less than four Tefachim* wide. According to him, what is the reason of ...

  1. ... Rebbi Meir?
  2. ... Rebbi Yehudah?
(c) What will Shmuel hold by planks that are ...
  1. ... *four* Tefachim wide or more?
  2. ... less than *three*?
(d) According to Rav, who is the author of our Mishnah, which forbids sleeping underneath a plank of four Tefachim?
Answers to questions



(a) In another Beraisa, the Tana Kama invalidates two sheets placed next to each other, as if they were one, but not two planks; Rebbi Meir invalidates two planks just like two sheets. Shmuel will establish this Beraisa by two planks that make up four Tefachim.
Who is the Tana Kama?

(b) How will Shmuel explain the Machlokes?

(c) What is the problem with Rav (in whose opinion Rebbi Meir and Rebbi Yehudah argue about a plank of four Tefachim, but not less)?

(d) How *will* Rav in fact, explain the Machlokes?

(a) According to the second Lashon, it is Shmuel who explains the 'Mitztarfin' of Rebbi Meir to refer to four *Amos*.
In which point does this Lashon disagree with the first Lashon?

(b) What is now Rebbi Yehudah's reason, according to Shmuel?

(c) Rav will learn Rebbi Meir in exactly the same way as Shmuel. Rebbi Yehudah's statement however, appears superfluous.
How *does* Rav justify it?

(a) We have one Beraisa in support of Rav, and another in support of Shmuel.
In the first Beraisa, from where does Rebbi Yehudah bring a proof for his opinion that planks of four Tefachim are Kasher?

(b) On what grounds do the Rabbanan refute his proof?

(c) In the second Beraisa, under which circumstances does Rebbi Meir concede that the Sukah is Kasher even if there are planks of three (or even four) Tefachim on the Sukah? To which size Sukah is Rebbi Meir referring, and how are the planks and the S'chach arranged?

(d) How could the Tana have informed us the same Chidush according to Rebbi Yehudah? And why did he choose to tell it to us according to Rebbi Meir?

10) What does Rebbi Yehudah concede to Rebbi Meir in the same Beraisa?


(a) What did Rav Chisda and Rabah bar Rav Huna think about planks of four Tefachim wide but less than four Tefachim thick, that are placed on their sides?

(b) They hoped that Rav Nachman who came to visit Sura, would support them, but he didn't. He agreed with Rav Huna.
What does Rav Huna say?

(a) The Beraisa invalidates a Sukah that cannot fit a person's head, most of him and his table.
What size Sukah would that be?

(b) The Tana also invalidates a Sukah, if a gap in the bottom of the wall is large enough to allow a kid-goat to enter easily.
What size would the gap have to be to invalidate the Sukah?

(c) How do we attempt to prove Rav Huna right from the same Beraisa, which invalidates a Sukah which has a plank that is four Tefachim wide, but which only takes up three Tefachim in the Sukah?

(d) But we reject this proof by establishing the Beraisa by Pesel ha'Yotze min ha'Sukah.
What is the Tana then saying?

Answers to questions
Next daf

For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,