Sukkah 19 – Circular, conical, and reed mat sukkah

If one makes his sukkah round, igloo-shaped, it is invalid because one cannot tell where its walls end and the roof begins – that is the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer. The Sages, however, regard it as one large sloping roof, and it is valid. Some say that the logic is correct, but the attribution is the reverse – Rabbi Eliezer says what the Sages say, and vice versa.

If one wants to use a reed mat to cover his sukkah – a very convenient way, rather than messing with the leaves and branches – will it be a kosher s'chach? – A small mat is made for lying down on it, and it is thus a utensil; since all utensils are susceptible to ritual impurity and therefore cannot be used for the sukkah covering, the small mat is not kosher. However, with large mats, it depends. If it was made originally for lying down, it is a utensil and cannot be used. Still, if it was made for covering the sukkah – then it is not a utensil in the normal sense of the word, does not accept ritual impurity, and therefore is a kosher sukkah covering.

Art: Wigwam at Grand Portage By Eastman Johnson

Sukkah 18 – The edge of the roof

If one does not have the required walls in the sukkah, there can still be a possibility to make it valid. We can apply the principle of “the edge of the roof makes a wall,” or more literally, “the edge of the roof comes down and closes the opening.”

Imagine that one has suspended his sukkah roof (“s'chach”) in a courtyard surrounded by porches. It has no walls. If the porches are wider than four steps (amot) each, we have just declared such sukkah invalid. However, Abaye argues that the edge of the roof of each porch makes a wall for our sukkah!

How can Abaye argue with the clear-cut rule above? – He tells us that we misunderstood the situation: there, the sukkah's roof was flush with the roof of the porch. But if they are at different heights, we can extend the edge of the roof of the porch and imagine it is the sukkah wall.

Earlier in Eruvin, we had a similar disagreement concerning a pavilion – does its roof's edge come down and make a wall (which would permit carrying in it on Shabbat). Perhaps Rav, who said that it does,  lends support to Abaye in this case? – No, perhaps he does not: in the case of the pavilion, its own roof could serve as its wall, but here in the case of sukkah, we want to use the roofs of the porches – may be here even Rav would not say that it is valid.

Art: Couch on the Porch by Frederick Childe Hassam

Sukkah 17 – Holes in the roof

The sukkah covering (s'chach) must be complete, with holes no bigger than three-by-three handbreadths. Consider the following three cases.

1. If one took away the center of his house's roof and placed s'chach on top, this is a valid sukkah – provided that no more than four amot (about six feet) remain from the s'chach to the wall.

2. If a courtyard with many houses with porches is roofed with s'chach – it is a valid sukkah, provided that the porches are no wider than four amot.

3. A large sukkah covered with kosher s'chach in the middle is valid if the remaining invalid s'chach is no wider than four amot.

These cases seem repetitive, but each one is, in reality, needed. Had we been told the first case but not the second, you could argue that in the first case, the walls of the house can be imagined as bending inward, and the s'chach is thus valid because of the principle of “bent wall,” or “dofen akumah.” However, you could say that the porches and their walls don't bend outwards in the direction of the courtyard.

And had you been told cases 1 and 2, you could still argue that in case 3, the sukkah does not have bent walls but rather invalid s'chach, and that invalid s'chach for sure cannot be considered a continuation of the wall. Now that the teacher stated all three cases, he prevented these possible incorrect deductions.

Art: Roofs by Paul Cezanne

Sukkah 16 – Sukkah in a haystack

If one took his bed apart and then used the sides of the bed frame to cover his sukkah, this sukkah is not valid. Even though these boards are not utensils and therefore do not accept impurity and should be valid yet, since they originate from a utensil (bed), the Sages decreed not to use them.

If one hollows up a cavity under a haystack to use it as a sukkah, it is not valid because this hay was already there before, and he did make it for the sukkah. However, if initially, someone left even a small opening under the hay, then he can dig some more and live there: the initial opening qualified as a sukkah – if it was constructed for shade – and he just completed the necessary height.

If one left his wall hanging and not reaching the ground, this is OK, provided that they are within the three handbreadths from the ground and small goats cannot enter his sukkah. In fact, if his sukkah is only 10 handbreadths high, he can use such a hanging wall that is only slightly more than four handbreadths, right in mid-air. If it is closer than three handbreadths to both the floor and the ceiling, we apply the principle of “connect” (“lavud”) and consider the missing three handbreadths both above and below as if they were present.

Art: The haystack by Camille Pissarro

Sukkah 15 – Sukkah covered with kebab spits

If one was building a house, put up the roof but did not plaster it, can he use it for his sukkah? - Yes, but he should undo the nails, move the boards slightly, and take out every second board from the roof. Why so strict? - Firstly, he has not built it for the sukkah, and the requirement is that he should make it for the Holiday and not use something already there. Now it should be kosher, but if we allowed that, people might eventually come to use their houses as a sukkah, and so to prevent this, we require him to remove every second board. All this is the opinion of Beit Shammai. However, Beit Hillel School is not concerned that people may use their houses as sukkahs, and they do not require taking out the boards. Practical law is even more complex because Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yehudah have different versions of what Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel were arguing about.

If one covers his sukkah with metal kebab spits, they are invalid for many reasons: they are utensils and are thus susceptible to ritual impurity, and they don't grow from the ground. Both conditions are necessary for the proper sukkah covering (s'chach). However, if there are spaces equal to the thickness of the spits and he puts proper s'chach there, it becomes valid.

Can we deduce a principle from here that exactly half of valid s'chach makes the sukkah valid, and in general, exactly half of the permitted matter (such as in eruv) makes all permissible? - Maybe not; perhaps here he left a little more space between the spits than their thickness, so we cannot derive anything from this case.

Art: Kalevipoeg Carrying the Boards By Oskar Kallis

Sukkah 9 – Old sukkah

A sukkah that is “old,” that is, one that was built more than thirty days before the holiday of Sukkot, is invalid. The Torah said, “Sukkot is a festival to God for seven days.” That is, the sukkah must be built expressly for the festival – so says The School of Shammai. However,  Hillel's school rules that an old sukkah is completely valid. One should make a little adjustment to a small area of the roof (s'chach), which is sufficient. But what does Beit Hillel do with the phrase “festival for seven days”? – They say that it teaches one not to use the materials of the sukkah for any other purpose, for all seven days of the festival.

If one builds his sukkah under a tree, it is as if he built it inside the house, and it is invalid. In explaining this, Rava said, "If the tree foliage is thin and lets in more sun than it shades, it is valid." How does Rava know that, given that the rule did not differentiate between thick and thin foliage!? He noticed the precise language of the ruling, “as if inside the house.” Just as a house usually shields one from the sun completely, so here we are talking about trees that shield completely, and not those with sparse foliage. And yet, the leaves of the tree do give shade, and the sukkah leaves are not needed directly underneath, so let's consider them non-existent. Thus we have a sukkah whose s'chach (a tree) is attached to the ground, and that is definitely invalid! Rava will answer, “He bent the tree's branches down and intertwined them with his s'chach; therefore, they are not above but act in conjunction with the s'chach, which is then valid.

Art: Cottage and Peasant Woman under the Trees By Vincent Van Gogh

Sukkah 8 – Sun and shade

A sukkah must give some shade; otherwise, it is not considered shelter (the literal meaning of the word “sukkah”). How much? The roof, called "s'chach," should be thick enough to block out more than half the sun. What if the makeshift walls don't go all the way to the roof and therefore let in the sun? - That does not matter. However, Rabbi Yoshiyah says that just as in a normal house, the walls protect and shade you, so they must not let too much sun in the sukkah.

We see that Rabbi Yoshiyah requires some permanence in the construction of a sukkah. Other Sages also require permanence, as evidenced by their words in other areas. For example, Rabbi Yehudah validates a high sukkah, which would mean that its walls are sturdy and somewhat permanent; Rabbi Shimon requires four walls, and not just three; Rabban Gamliel does not allow a sukkah on a wagon or a car.

Can a sukkah be round? - No, because normal houses are not built like that. However, Rabbi Yochanan allows a round sukkah if it was large enough for twenty-four people to sit – since people do throw parties in this manner. The Talmud goes through multiple calculations to explain the twenty-four count.

Art: A Shaded Avenue By Jean-Honore Fragonard

Sukkah 7 – Two walls and a half

The sukkah is a temporary dwelling, and it only needs three walls. The third wall can be as small as one handbreadth. How do we know this? The words “sukkot” - meaning multiple sukkahs, are mentioned three times in the Torah. In two cases, the letter “o” (vav) is missing! This gives us a count of sukkahs (2), plus sukkah (1), plus another sukkah (1), a total of four. However, the first mention is needed for the simple meaning of the word – to live in a sukkah. Thus, we have a hint that a sukkah needs to have only three walls. In addition, we have another rule that God taught to Moses – that the third wall can be as narrow as a handbreadth.

All this assumes that we take the written text of the Torah as definitive. There is another point of view, however. In it, that the definitive is how the words are pronounced in the synagogues when the Torah is read. The word is always pronounced “sukkot” - that is, plural. The first three mentions are needed for their simple meaning, but the remaining two extra words – each pronounced as “sukkot” (2) give us four walls. The last fourth wall can be only a handbreadth.

The Talmud gives three more possible explanations for the argument whether sukkah needs to have three or four walls – in one all believe in the writing, in another – all believe in the pronunciation, and in the third – it does not depend on this distinction at all.

Art: White Walls By Karl Briullov

Sukkah 6 – Limits

Throughout the Talmud, we have multiple instances of specific limits; for example, sukkah must not be lower than ten handbreadths. Where are these limits coming from? – Most were taught to Moses by God on Mount Sinai and then passed through generations. This in contradistinction to laws that are written down in the Torah itself.

But even for other limits - they are all written in the Torah! - in the phrase which seems to be praising the Land of Israel, but which really serves as the enumeration of limits. Here it is: “It is a land of wheat, barley, grapes, figs, and pomegranates - a land of oil-olives and honey-dates.”

For example, wheat is used for measuring ritual impurity: if one stays in a house afflicted with the special type of leprosy for longer than it takes to eat half a loaf of wheat bread, his garments become impure. So too barley: a human bone the size of a barley seed makes one ritually impure. Fig – this is how much food one needs to carry on Shabbat to be liable, and so on.

So what is the origin of all the prescribed limits and measures? – Didn't we say that measures are specifically mentioned in the Torah phrase above? - No, of course not! It just talks about Israel's bounty, and the measures were given by God orally, made dependent on fruit sizes rather than absolute numbers, and are only hinted at in the Torah.

Art: A Bunch of white Grapes with Figs in a shallow Bowl By Jos Gozalves De Coniedo

Sukkah 5 – The sukkah and the angels

We mentioned that a sukkah lower than ten handbreadths is not a proper human dwelling and is thus invalid. However, the Talmud also derives this from the dimensions of the Temple. Since the height of the Ark was ten handbreadths, and since God spoke to Moses from the top of the Ark, while Moses listened from below, we see that the two domains never come closer than ten handbreadths. Therefore, this is the minimal size of the partition, and it applies to sukkah as well.

Others derive it from the angels on top of the Ark, called Cherubim. Since the sukkah's roof is called “s'chach,” which means shelter or cover, and since the Cherubim are said to shelter (“sochechim”) the Ark with their wings, we see that they literally define the word s'chach, which must be at the same height as their wings.

Art: Angelic Musician By Rosso Fiorentino

Sukkah 4 – Fixing the height of the sukkah

We mentioned that the sukkah cannot be higher than twenty amot (about 30 feet). What if one's sukkah is higher than that, and he decides to pile pillows and blankets on the floor? Unfortunately, we tell him that it does not help because he plans to remove them later, and so they are regarded as non-existent even now. What if he says, “I abandon these pillows here, for the seven days of the holiday?” - No use either because most people would not do such a thing, and his decision is nullified by the rest of the world's opinions. However, if he puts straw and abandons it, or better yet, he spreads dirt – this helps, and his sukkah becomes valid.

If he puts up a platform inside his sukkah, it also helps to reduce the height. He does not even have to put it right next to the walls; he can distance the platform up to 4 amot (6 feet) from each wall, and it will still be valid because we will regard each wall as a “bent wall,” ("dofen akumah"), one that first goes up, then bends horizontally, transforms itself into a roof, and remains a valid legal partition.

A sukkah that is too low can be fixed by digging the floor. Here, however, he needs to dig all the way, almost next to the walls, and not four amot from them as he did above, because the concept of “bent wall” only applies to bending the roof, not bending the floor.

Art: Cottage with Woman Digging By Vincent Van Gogh

Sukkah 3 – The smallest possible sukkah

Rav Itzhak bar Shmuel stated the law: the smallest possible sukkah has to be no less than seven handbreadths by seven handbreadths so that one can fit in it his head, most of his body, and his table. They asked him, “But this is the opinion of Beit Shammai, and we know that whenever Beit Hillel and Beit Shammai argue, the law is always like Beit Hillel!?” He answered, “And what should I do? In this case, Beit Shammai is correct.”

Note, however, that the table is inside the sukkah. This leaves room for a more lenient opinion: a sukkah that is so small that it only contains his head and body while the table is outside is still valid. That, indeed, is the opinion of Beit Hillel.

What if the sukkah is pretty big, but the table is still outside? Would this be valid or not? It turns out that Beit Hillel and Beit Shammai are consistent with their own opinions: Beit Hillel permits it, while Beit Shammai says he does not fulfill the mitzvah. What is then the basic underlying reason for their disagreement? - Beit Shammai says that the Sages instituted an additional law and disqualified a sukkah with an outside table out of concern that he will get drawn after the food on the table and will, in fact, eat outside the sukkah. Beit Hillel disagrees and says that there is no such concern.

Art: Peasants at the Table By Diego Rodriguez de Silva y Velazquez

Sukkah 2 – What is a Sukkah

Two weeks after Rosh Hashanah, one must build a hut called Sukkah and dwell in it for seven days. The Sukkah should be a temporary dwelling reminding him of the similar arrangements his ancestors had in the desert after going out of Egypt. Some say it reminds him not of the physical dwellings which the Jews used in the desert but rather the Heavenly clouds that surrounded them wherever they went.

According to either reason, Sukkah must be a temporary dwelling, and its height cannot exceed twenty amot (about thirty feet). Why? If he builds the Sukkah that is higher, he must make it much stronger. Thus his Sukkah would be invalid. Some say that in a Sukkah that is high, he simply does not see its roof and forgets that he is in the Sukkah.

When we learned about Shabbat, we had a similar limitation: the height of an eruv bar, reminding people of the Shabbat boundaries where one cannot carry things also had to be less than twenty amot, but there one had to lower it. Why, when talking about Sukkah, we say that it is invalid if too high, but about eruv, we are given the advice to lower it? The details of the Sukkah construction are too numerous; thus, our teacher preferred to say that it is simply invalid rather than offer all possible corrections.

Art: The Flight of the Israelites out of Egypt By Benedetto Caliari

Yoma 88 – One should always forgive

Rav was explaining Torah verses in the class of his teacher, Rabbi Yehudah the Prince. Every time a new student came in, he was forced to start from the beginning, out of respect for him. Finally, when Rabbi Chanina came in, Rav did not restart, and Rabbi Chanina was offended. For thirteen years, Rav came to ask forgiveness on the eve of Yom Kippur, but Rabbi Chanina was not appeased.

How did Rav do it, seeing that one should not ask for forgiveness more than three times? - Rav went beyond the letter of the law. And how could Rabbi Chanina not forgive? We know that if one overlooks an insult and does not insist on his rights, then the Heavenly court overlooks his mistakes and the fact that he himself is unworthy? - Rabbi Chanina had a special reason: in a dream, he saw Rav hanging from a palm tree, and he knew that this meant that Rav was destined to become the head of the academy. This meant that he, Rabbi Chanina, who was the head of the academy in Israel, would have to die to vacate the post. Therefore, he pushed Rav to go to Babylonia, where Rav finally established his great academy, which existed for eight hundred years.

If one has a seminal emission on Yom Kippur, his sins are forgiven. But we learned in another place, “his sins are arranged in front of him!?” - Arranged to be forgiven.

Art: Forgiven by Thomas Faed

Yoma 87 - Saying “excuse me”

On Yom Kippur, one is supposed to apologize for his wrongdoings, in front of God and in front of the people whom he may have wronged. In fact, when one apologizes before God, even his willful wrongdoings are considered mere mistakes. What is the proof? - from the phrase “Return… you have stumbled in your iniquity.” Iniquity is something done on purpose, yet here it is called “stumbled.”

But we know more than that; his willful bad acts become his merits! What is the proof of that? - “And if a bad man turns away from his bad deeds… he shall live on account of them.” That is, even his bad deeds will provide merit for his future life. How can both be true? - the first applies when he apologizes out of fear, and the second - when he does it because of love.

Should one apologize again for something he apologized for last year? Some say he should not: he was already forgiven, and now he can only be sullied again by his memories. Others, however, say that it is even better, following the psalms, “I recognize my transgressions, and they are always in front of me.”

Art: Joseph's Forgiveness of his Brethren By Siegfried Detler Bendixen

Yoma 80 - One, who tries to get a little, will succeed

We have seen that to transmit ritual impurity, the food must have at least the volume of an egg. But, how do we know this?

Since the Torah said, “Any food that is eaten,” we understand that we are talking about food coming from another food. And what is it? - Chicken egg: it is food, and it comes from another food, a chicken. But maybe it is a young goat, which comes from its mother, who is also food? - No, it does not just "come," but it requires slaughter. But perhaps it is an egg of a bar-yuchani bird, which is as big as sixty cities? - No, because we have a rule: one, who tries to grab a little, succeeds in that, and may even be added more, but one who tries to grab a lot - he may not be given anything at all, and so we have to limit ourselves to a chicken egg. But perhaps the Torah meant an egg of a tiny bird?

The last question is indeed irrefutable, and we abandon this complete chain of questions and answers. Rather, “Any food that is eaten” implies that it is eaten in one gulp, and the Sages estimated that the throat cannot hold more than a hen’s egg.

Back to measures of food for which one bears responsibility if he eats it on Yom Kippur: solids in the amount of a large date, and liquid - a full cheek. How can we have one measure that depends on an objective average large date and another - on his personal cheek capacity? - The Sages estimated that this much would assuage the suffering of the fast, and less than that would not. This is even true for a giant called Og, whose full cheek was huge but whose limit of solid on Yom Kippur would also be a large date.

Art: A lady seated in an interior, with a maidservant and a girl holding a chicken and basket of eggs By (after) Tibout Regters