Sukkah, Daf Yod, Part One
Introduction
This is a continuation of yesterday’s section 6 where we learned that when one sukkah is placed on top of another, there are different variations as to which is valid.
פעמים שתחתונה כשרה והעליונה פסולה, היכי דמי – כגון שהתחתונה צלתה מרובה מחמתה, ועליונה חמתה מרובה מצלתה, וקיימי תרוייהו בתוך עשרים.
Sometimes the bottom one is valid and the upper one is invalid?
In what circumstances? When the lower one has more shade than sun, and the upper one more sun than shade, and both are within twenty cubits [from the ground].
In this case, since the upper sukkah lets in more sun than shade it doesn’t count as a sukkah. Furthermore, this sukkah is within twenty cubits of the ground, so it is valid to join with the skhakh of the bottom sukkah. Altogether, this allows the bottom sukkah to be valid. The top sukkah is invalid because it doesn’t have sufficient skhakh.
ופעמים שהעליונה כשרה ותחתונה פסולה, היכי דמי – כגון דתרוייהו צלתן מרובה מחמתן, וקיימא עליונה בתוך עשרים. –
And sometimes the upper one is valid and the lower one is invalid .
In what circumstances? When in both of them the shade is more than the sun, and the upper one is within twenty cubits.
If both of them create more shade than the sun they allow in, and both are within 20 cubits of the ground, then the bottom one is prevented from being valid because it is a sukkah underneath another valid sukkah. The top sukkah is valid, because it within 20 cubits of the ground.
פשיטא! – תחתונה כשרה ועליונה פסולה איצטריכא ליה; מהו דתימא ניגזר דלמא מצטרף סכך פסול בהדי סכך כשר – קא משמע לן.
This is obvious!
The statement: "the lower one is valid and the upper one is invalid" was necessary. For what might you have said: we should invalidate [the lower sukkah] as a preventive measure lest one also joins invalid skhakh with valid skhakh, therefore it teaches us [that it is valid].
The Talmud asks isn’t this obvious! Rashi explains that it would be obvious that if the skhakh allows more sun in than shade that it doesn’t count as a sukkah, so we wouldn’t have a case of one sukkah underneath another one.
The answer is that if R. Jeremiah had not made this statement we might have disqualified even the lower sukkah even when the top one was within 20 cubits from the ground, lest one think that one could join the top skhakh with the bottom one even when it is above 20 cubits from the ground. R. Jeremiah issued his ruling to teach that we don’t rule stringently. As long as the top one is within 20 cubits of the ground, the bottom one is valid (when the top one lets in more sun than shade).