Sukkah 15b (טו:) — the Talmud in English

And therefore the Gemara asks:

But,

behold,

it is possible to make them precisely equal

and arrange for the space between the spits to be exactly equal to the width of the spits. From where is it obvious to the one who answers that wherever the Mishna uses the expression “like them,” it does not mean that the space was exactly like them

?! And the Gemara answers:

Rabbi Ami said:

Actually, it is possible to make them precisely equal and make the space exactly the measure of the spits; nevertheless, our Mishna is speaking of a case in which he did not make them precisely equal, but rather

where he left an excess,

meaning that he intentionally made the space between the spits slightly wider than the area occupied by the spits themselves. And when we learned that the space was “like them,” this means that it was the measure of the spits in a case of “entering and exiting,” and not that it was precisely equal. All this is according to the one who says that when the breached area is equal to the standing area, it is invalid. But one who permits a breached area equal to the standing area explains our Mishna according to its plain meaning: The space was exactly equal to the width of the spits.

Rava said

to resolve in another manner the difficulty raised against Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, from our Mishna:

You may even say

that our Mishna is to be explained

as referring to a case where he left no excess,

and “like them” means exactly like them. Our Mishna can be explained as referring to a case in which he does not place the kosher roofing alongside the invalid roofing in the space between the spits,

but rather

, if the

spits or the bed rails

were placed

on the sukka

across [

that is, along its length], he

places

the kosher roofing

lengthwise [

across its width]. That is, he places the ends of the reeds on top of the spits. Similarly, if the spits were placed on the sukka

lengthwise [

across its width], he

places

the roofing reeds

across its width.

And since he increased the kosher roofing over the invalid roofing—for the ends of the reeds placed on the spits join the kosher portion between the spits—the minority of invalid roofing is nullified by the kosher roofing, which is greater than it, and it is as though the entire sukka were roofed with kosher roofing.

We learned in the Mishna: “One who roofs his sukka with spits,”

or with bed rails:

Bed rails are beams made in a square, forming the base of the bed, with ropes stretched between them, upon which the pillows and mattresses are placed.

Shall we say

that our Mishna, which disqualifies bed rails for roofing because they are susceptible to ritual impurity—even though, when they are not attached to the bed, they are not fit for use and do not have the status of a vessel that is susceptible to ritual impurity—

supports Rabbi Ami bar Taviumi?

For Rabbi Ami bar Taviumi said: If one roofs

his sukka

with worn-out vessels [

worn-out garments], which are not susceptible to ritual impurity in their own right because they are not three fingerbreadths wide, as will be explained below, the sukka

is invalid.

Since, before they became worn out, they were part of a garment that had the status of a vessel and was susceptible to ritual impurity, the Sages decreed that one may not roof with them even though they are now not susceptible to ritual impurity, lest one come to roof with vessels that are susceptible to ritual impurity.

The Gemara initially understood that our Mishna disqualifies bed rails for roofing for this reason, since they came from a vessel fit to become susceptible to ritual impurity.

The Gemara rejects this: Our Mishna is not speaking of one who roofs with bed rails alone. Rather, the Mishna is to be explained as follows:

As Rabbi Ḥanan said in the name of Rabbi

in explaining another Mishna [as follows], that it is speaking

of a long rail,

a beam made along the length of the bed,

and two legs [

supports] attached to it—one at its head and one at its foot. Or

of a short rail,

a beam made across the width of the bed, at its head or at its foot,

and two legs

attached to it.

And

here too,

when the tanna said here “with bed rails,” he did not mean the bed rails alone, but rather

a long rail and two legs,

or

a short rail and two legs.

And since the legs of the bed are attached to that beam, its status as a “vessel” has not been removed, and it is fit to become susceptible to ritual impurity.

And

where was it stated

this statement

of Rabbi Ḥanan in the name of Rabbi?

Concerning that which we learned [

Kelim 18:9]: