Sukkah 2a — the Talmud in English

The mitzva of sukkah is stated in the Torah twice: In the portion of Emor [Leviticus 23:42] - " In sukkot you shall dwell seven days. Every native-born Israelite shall dwell in sukkot. So that your generations may know that in sukkot I settled the Children of Israel when I brought them out from the land of Egypt; I am the Lord your God." And in the portion of Re'eh [Deuteronomy 16:13] - " The festival of Sukkot you shall make for yourself seven days, when you gather in from your threshing floor and from your winepress." In the chapter before us will be explained: the form of the sukkah, the manner of establishing it, and from what it is made. MISHNA:

The first Mishna opens with an explanation of three principal matters in the laws of sukkah.

The first: the laws of the height of the sukkah—what is the greatest height and what is the smallest height.

The second: the number of walls of the sukkah.

And the third: the law of the roofing, that its shade be greater than its sun.

A. First, the Mishna brings a dispute among tannaim: what is the greatest height of a sukkah:

A sukkah

that is higher than twenty cubits,

whose roofing is higher than twenty cubits above its floor,

is invalid.

The Gemara brings several differing reasons for this invalidation.

And Rabbi Judah declares it valid.

The Mishna continues to explain what is the smallest height, below which the sukkah is invalid:

And

a sukkah

that is not ten handbreadths high,

in which a person can dwell only with great difficulty, and therefore it is considered a "deplorable dwelling," which is unfit for fulfilling the mitzva of sukkah, is invalid.

B.

And

a sukkah

that does not have

at least

three walls,

C.

And

a sukkah

whose sun is greater than its shade is invalid.

The reason for the invalidation of a sukkah whose sun is greater than its shade is that the sukkah is called by the name of the roofing, and if the roofing is so scant that it shades only a minority of the sukkah, the matter is considered as though the sukkah were not roofed at all, since this shade is nullified by the majority; therefore such a sukkah is not called a sukkah.

And even if the roofing and the air above were exactly equal, but below, on the floor of the sukkah, there is more sun than shade, the sukkah is invalid, since the shade below is nullified by the majority of sun. [See below, 22b].

GEMARA:

The Gemara discusses why the tannai used in our Mishna the expression "invalid" when explaining the law of the height of a sukkah ["A sukkah that is higher than twenty cubits is invalid"], and did not use an expression of a remedy, namely, that such a sukkah must have its height reduced until it is lower than twenty cubits in order to declare it valid, as the tannai used at the beginning of tractate Eruvin, concerning a beam higher than twenty cubits at the entrance of a mavוי, where the tannai did not say that it is "invalid" and that one must rectify the mavוי with it, but said the opposite: that it can be declared valid by lowering the beam below twenty cubits:

We learned there,

at the beginning of tractate Eruvin [2a]:

An alleyway that is higher than twenty cubits,

where the beam was placed at a height above twenty cubits at the entrance of the alleyway, one may not carry from the private domain into it, and one may not carry within it, unless

he reduces

—he lowers the beam or raises the ground beneath it, until the beam is placed at a height below twenty cubits.

Rabbi Judah says: He need not

lower it. For even when the beam is above twenty cubits, it can be discerned, and it constitutes a sign for the residents of the alleyway so that they will not come to carry an object from it to the public domain. [Or because according to him the enactment of the beam is not because of a sign, but because it is considered a partition; therefore, although the beam is higher than twenty cubits, it is effective as a partition.]

And now the Gemara discusses:

What is different with regard to a sukkah, that he taught,

for the tannai taught in our Mishna the expression of invalidity, "A sukkah that is higher than twenty cubits

is invalid,"

and the tannai did not explain that it can be declared valid by lowering the roofing to a height of no more than twenty cubits?

And what is different with regard to an alleyway, that he taught a remedy,

for the tannai taught in the Mishna that they can lower the beam at its entrance in order to permit carrying within it on Shabbat?!

The Gemara explains: the law of a sukkah differs from that of an alleyway. For the measure of twenty cubits in the height of a

sukkah

is a law

of Torah origin,

and this law had already been stated at Sinai before this Mishna was taught. Therefore

he taught

in it the expression

"it is invalid,"

for the sukkah was not made according to the law from Sinai, which had already been taught.

But

an alleyway,

whose entire law is only

rabbinic, he taught

in it

a remedy.

And the reason is that the source for the measure of the height of an alleyway—twenty cubits and no more—is this Mishna itself, and it is not a Torah law from earlier times; and the Mishna does not ordinarily say "invalid" except concerning something whose invalidity was known even before the Mishna was taught.

And there is another distinction between a sukkah and an alleyway:

And if you wish, say:

even if

with regard to a Torah law he also teaches

in the language of

"a remedy"

wherever possible,

however,

with regard to

a sukkah, whose matters are numerous,

its laws being many, and it is impossible to specify for every invalidation what its remedy is, therefore

he states decisively and teaches

the tannai used decisively the expression "invalid," so as not to lengthen his words and specify the remedy for each and every invalidation. But

an alleyway, whose matters are not numerous,

its laws not being numerous in that Mishna,

he taught

in it the expression

"a remedy."

The Gemara discusses:

From where are these matters,

from where did we learn that a sukkah higher than twenty cubits is invalid?

The Gemara brings the words of three amoraim who gave three different reasons for invalidating a high sukkah:

A.

Rabba said: For the verse says, "So that your generations may know that in sukkot I settled the Children of Israel."

The Gemara now assumes that from this verse we learn that the person sitting in the sukkah must see and know that he is sitting beneath the shade of the sukkah.

For if the intention of the verse were to say that the future generations should know that the Holy One, blessed is He, settled the Children of Israel in sukkot of clouds of glory, it would have sufficed for it to write, "In sukkot you shall dwell seven days, for in sukkot I settled them"; and why did the verse add, "so that your generations may know"? Rather, it is proven that the verse came to teach us that one who sits in a sukkah must know that he is sitting in it.

Therefore, if the sukkah was as high as

twenty cubits, a person knows that he is dwelling in a sukkah,

for his eye discerns the roofing.

But if the roofing was high

above twenty cubits, a person does not know that he is dwelling in a sukkah,

because

the eye does not have mastery over it

—over the roofing—

of a person.

And the Torah said, "So that your generations may know": make a sukkah whose dwelling in it is recognizable to you—that is, a sukkah that is not twenty cubits high.

B.

Rabbi Zeira said,

we learn this law

from here,

as it is written [Isaiah 4:6]:

"And there shall be a sukkah for shade by day from the heat."

And it follows that roofing is called roofing only if it is made for shade [as was explained above, that "the sukkah is called by the name of the roofing," and therefore the purpose of the roofing, which is making shade, defines the essence of the sukkah].

Therefore, if the sukkah was as high as

twenty cubits, a person sits in the shade of the sukkah.

That is, in the shade of the roofing.

But if the roofing was placed

above twenty cubits, a person does not sit in the shade of the sukkah, but in the shade of the walls.

Since the sun comes somewhat from the side, the walls of the sukkah cast some shade inside the sukkah; and when its walls are higher than twenty cubits, they cast shade from the side over the entire area of the sukkah, whereas no shade at all is cast by the roofing above.

And the Gemara raises an objection:

Abaye said to him: If so, one who makes his sukka in Ashterot Karnayim—

between two high cliffs, where there is no sun at all because of the shade of the cliffs—

is it likewise not a sukka,

the one made there is fit, since he is sitting in the shade of the cliffs and not in the shade of the sukka?!

And the Gemara answers:

He said to him,

Rabbi Zeira:

There,

in Ashterot Karnayim,

remove Ashterot Karnayim—

for if you remove the mountains,

there is the shade of the sukka—

there is shade because of the roofing, and it is only because of the cliffs beside it that it does not actually provide shade. Therefore, the sukka is fit.

But

here,

in a sukka higher than twenty cubits,

remove the walls—

if we lower its partitions—

there is no shade of the sukka.

For the sun comes somewhat from the side, and since the roofing is higher than twenty cubits, the sun enters from the side and covers the entire area of the sukka.

c.

And Rava said,

this law, that a sukka higher than twenty cubits is invalid, we learned

from here:

it is written [Leviticus 23:42]

“You shall sit in sukkot for seven days,”

and it implies that thus

the Torah said: For all seven days—

leave a permanent dwelling and sit in a temporary dwelling.

And we learn from this verse that the sukka is to be a temporary dwelling and not a permanent one like a house; therefore, its walls must be light.

Up to

the height of

twenty cubits, a person makes his dwelling a temporary dwelling.

But if the sukka is high

above twenty cubits, a person does not make his dwelling a temporary dwelling,

because if he makes it temporary, it will immediately fall on account of its height and weight,

but

he makes it

a permanent dwelling.

And concerning the mitzva of sukka, we were commanded to sit specifically in a temporary dwelling.

And the Gemara raises an objection:

Abaye said to him

to Rava:

If so,

even a sukka that is low, below twenty cubits, if

he made his sukka with

walls of

iron

that are fixed and strong,

and roofed over them

properly,

is it likewise not a sukka,

because its construction is permanent and not temporary?!

And the Gemara answers:

He said to him: This is what I am saying to you—

this was my intention to say:

Up to twenty cubits, when a person makes his dwelling a temporary dwelling,

if so, even

when he makes it a permanent dwelling,

with walls of iron and the like,

he likewise fulfills his obligation,

he fulfills his obligation.

For inevitably the Torah was not particular that the sukka be genuinely temporary, for it is impossible to measure precisely and make it fit to stand exactly seven days, no less and no more. Rather, certainly, the law of “temporary” was stated concerning the measure of the sukka: that it be fit to be temporary.

But

above twenty cubits, when a person makes his dwelling a permanent dwelling,

out of concern that if he makes it temporary it will fall, even

when he makes it temporary,

even if he makes it temporary,

he likewise does not fulfill his obligation,

since it is not fit for this.

The general principle is: There is no obligation to sit specifically in a temporary sukka; rather, the measure of the sukka is anything such that, if it were temporary, it would stand.