Sukkah, Daf Yod Tet, Part 2

 

Introduction

Today’s section begins a new topic.

 

תנא: פסל היוצא מן הסוכה נידון כסוכה.

מאי פסל היוצא מן הסוכה?

אמר עולא: קנים היוצאים לאחורי סוכה.

 

A Tanna taught: kosher skhakh projecting from a Sukkah is regarded as the Sukkah.

What is meant by kosher skhakh projecting from a Sukkah ? Ulla said, Sticks projecting beyond the back of the Sukkah.

 

Our sugya contains four different explanations of the opening baraita (a tannaitic source not found in the mishnah). The first explanation is by the amora Ulla. He takes the baraita to mean that if there are sticks projecting out the back of the skhakh of a sukkah, the area under the sukkah is considered to be part of the sukkah. As we shall see in a moment, this halakhah is quite puzzling for it is overly obvious.

 

והא בעינן שלש דפנות! – בדאיכא.

והא בעינן הכשר סוכה! – בדאיכא.

והא בעינן צלתה מרובה מחמתה!

בדאיכא. – אי הכי מאי למימרא? – מהו דתימא: הואיל ולגוואי עבידי, ולבראי לא עבידי – אימא לא, קא משמע לן.

 

But do we not need three walls?

[This refers to a case] where there were [three walls].

But do we not need the size prescribed as a minimum for the validity of a Sukkah?

[This refers to a case] where there was [the size prescribed as a minimum for the validity of a Sukkah].

But do we not need that the shade should exceed the sun?

[This refers to] where there was [more shade than sun].

If so, what does it teach us?

One might have said that since they were made for the inside but not for the outside it is not [valid], therefore he informs us [that it is valid].

 

The Talmud proceeds to ask a series of difficulties that can be summed up in one question how can this area underneath the skhkakh projecting out from behind a sukkah count as a sukkah if it doesn’t have the other requirements of a sukkah? The answer to all of these questions is that it does fulfill these other requirements. There are three walls back there, the sukkah is wide enough and there is enough skhakh to provide more shade than sun.

But if this area is simply another sukkah, why does the baraita need to exist? Obviously this space counts as a sukkah.

The answer is that we might have thought that this skhakh couldn’t count for the back sukkah because the skhakh was put there with the intent that it be used for the front sukkah. Therefore, the baraita teaches us that it does count.

 

רבה ורב יוסף אמרי תרוייהו: הכא בקנים היוצאים לפנים מן הסוכה, ומשכא ואזלא חדא דופן בהדייהו. מהו דתימא: הא לית בה הכשר סוכה – קא משמע לן.

Rabbah and R. Joseph both stated: This refers to sticks projecting in front of a Sukkah, one wall of which continues with them.

What might one have said? That it does not contain the prescribed minimum for the validity of a Sukkah, therefore he informs us [that it is valid].

 

Rabbah and R. Joseph say that the baraita refers to a case where the sticks (kosher skhakh) go out in front of the sukkah, on the open side of a three-walled sukkah and there is one wall that goes out with them. We might have thought that the continuation of this sukkah is its own sukkah and it is not valid because it has only one wall. Therefore, the baraita teaches that it is valid. We look at it as part of the sukkah which is covered by the rest of the sticks.

 

רבה בר בר חנה אמר רבי יוחנן: לא נצרכה אלא לסוכה שרובה צלתה מרובה מחמתה, ומעוטה חמתה מרובה מצלתה. מהו דתימא: תפסל בהך פורתא – קא משמע לן. ומאי יוצא – יוצא מהכשר סוכה.

 

Rabbah b. Bar Hana said in the name of R. Yohanan: it was necessary only in the case of a Sukkah, most of which has more shade than sun, while a minor part of it has more sun than shade.

What might one have said? That this small portion invalidates it, therefore he informs us [that it does not].

What then is meant by going out ? [It means] going out from the validity of a Sukkah.

 

Rabbah b. Bar Hana provides an entirely different interpretation of the above baraita. He would translate it as if it read: "skhakh that goes out of its validity counts as part of the sukkah." What this means is that if there is a sukkah and throughout most of the sukkah there is more shade than sun, but in one small part there is more sun than shade, the sukkah is still valid. The small portion that has more sun does not invalidate the large portion that has more shade.

 

רבי אושעיא אמר: לא נצרכה אלא לסכך פסול פחות משלשה בסוכה קטנה. ומאי יוצא – יוצא מתורת סוכה.

 

R. Oshaia said: This is necessary only in the case of a small sukkah which has invalid skhakh to an extent of less than three [handbreadths].

And what is meant by going out ? Going out from the laws governing a Sukkah.

 

R. Oshaia says that the baraita refers to a small sukkah whose dimensions are only 7 x 7 handbreadths. There is a strip of invalid skhakh that is less than three handbreadths. This strip does not invalidate the sukkah. He would translate the words "going out" in the baraita as a strip of skhakh that "goes out" from being valid skhakh for use in a sukkah.