ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous dafSukah 12
SUKAH 12 (27 Nisan) - has been dedicated to the memory of ha'Rav Shmuel (ben
Aharon) Grunfeld of Jerusalem/Efrat. Rav Shmuel was a truly great Torah
scholar, whose tragic death left all who knew him with an inconsolable sense
(a) Rebbi Yochanan ultimately learns the specifications of S'chach - from
the Pasuk in Re'ei "be'Ospecha mi'Gornecha u'mi'Yikvecha", which means that
the Sukah must be made of the waste products from the granary and from the
wine-press - i.e. the stalks etc. of the one, and the branches and foliage
from the other (commodities that are subject to Tum'ah and that grow from
When Nechemyah, instructed the people to ascend the mountains and collect
among other materials "Eitz Avos" and "Alei Hadas" - he meant Kasher Hadasim
for their Lulavim, and Pasul ones (known as 'Hadas Shoteh') for their Sukos.
(b) We initially explain that the Pasuk cannot refer to the actual contents
of the granary and the wine-press themselves - because "Yekev" really
refers to wine, and how can one possibly make S'chach out of wine?
(c) Along came Rebbi Yirmiyah however, and threw a spanner in the wheel - by
suggesting that the Pasuk refers to congealed wine that comes from S'nir
(alias Mount Chermon - see Devarim 3:9), which resembled cakes of dried
figs, and which could be used as S'chach.
(d) Rav Ashi derived the specifications of Sukah from the very words
("*mi*'Gornecha u'*mi*'Yikvecha") themselves - implying the (waste) *from*
the granary and *from* the wine-press, but not the wheat and the wine
(a) Bundles of straw, wood or canes are Pasul - they do however, become
Kasher, if one unties them (even after they are already on the roof of the
Sukah - seeing as they are only forbidden because of a decree, and are not
(b) One may however, use them (or any other material for that matter) as
walls of the Sukah?
(c) Besides the reason for the Pesul of bundles of straw etc. - Rebbi
Ya'akov also heard from Rebbi Yochanan the reason for the Pesul of
scratching out a Sukah in a haystack (as stated in the Mishnah on 15a).
(d) The two reasons that apply to the two Mishnahs are 1. 'Gezeiras Otzar'
(that one might go on from there to use one's storehouse with piles of
materials that were placed on the roof for storage, and not for shade); 2.
'Ta'aseh ve'Lo min he'Asuy' - mi'de'Rabbanan and mi'd'Oraysa respectively.
(a) Rebbi Ya'akov had not however, heard what Rebbi Chiya bar Aba said in
the name of Rebbi Yochanan, who explained that our Mishnah forbids using
bundles of straw etc. - for fear that someone arriving home from the field
with bundles of straw might place them on the roof to dry, and then change
his mind to use them as S'chach ('Gezeiras Otzar').
(b) In which case, the reason for invalidating a Sukah that is burrowed out
of a hay-stack - must be because of 'Ta'aseh ve'Lo min he'Asuy'.
(c) Rav Ashi queried Rebbi Yochanan on the grounds that seeing as both
Ta'aseh ve'Lo min he'Asuy' and Gezeiras Otzar apply to both cases, how does
he know that the one reason applies to the one, and the other, to the other?
Perhaps they are both Asur min ha'Torah, or perhaps they are both Asur
(d) We reply that Rebbi Yochanan derives his distinction from the Lashon of
the Tana in each case - because our Tana says 'Ein Mesachechin Bahen'
(implying Asur Lechatchilah, but Kasher Bedieved - something that we only
say by an Isur de'Rabbanan); whereas with regard to a Sukah in a haystack,
the Tana says 'Einah Sukah' (implying even Bedieved, it is not a Sukah, in
which case it must be an Isur d'Oraysa).
'Gezeiras Otzar' does not apply in the case of 'ha'Chotet be'Gadish' -
because 'Einah Sukah' mi'd'Oraysa implies that the owner did *not* even
shake the S'chach (because if he did, then it would not be Pasul
mi'd'Oraysa), but that, if he *did*, it would be Kasher (because once one
does something positive to make the Sukah Kasher, it is no longer feasible
that one will learn from there to use Pasul S'chach the next time).
(a) A 'male' arrow is the pointed head of the arrow which screws into the
'female' shaft - both of which are made of wood.
(b) The former is Kasher for S'chach - because wooden objects that are not
made in the form of a receptacle (that can hold liquid) are not subject to
Tum'ah (and may therefore be used as S'chach); whereas the latter is Pasul -
because, since it is a receptacle, it is subject to Tum'ah, (and we have
already learned that, whatever is subject to Tum'ah, is Pasul).
(c) It is necessary to tell us that ...
1. ... male arrows are Kasher as S'chach - because we would otherwise have
thought that Chazal would have decreed male arrows because of female ones.
2. ... female arrows are Pasul - because we would otherwise have thought
that a receptacle that is made to be permanently filled, is not called a
(a) The flax stalks need first to be soaked and then pounded in the mortar.
The other two processes essential to flax-making before they are cut into
threads - are combing and bleaching.
Rav Yehudah permits herbs by the name of Shushi and Shivtzeri to be used as
(b) With regard to S'chach, Rabah bar bar Chanah quoting Rebbi Yochanan
invalidates 'Anitzei Pishtan' but validates 'Hutznei Pishtan':
(c) Rebbi Yochanan himself is uncertain whether 'Hushnei Pishtan' are valid
as S'chach or not - and Rabah bar bar Chanah is uncertain as to what
constitutes Rebbi Yochanan's Safek: whether Hushni constitutes the bundles
of flax between the pounding and the combing (whereas between the soaking
and the pounding, they are still called 'Hutzni' and are Kasher for
S'chach); or pehaps, once they have been soaked, they are already called
Hushni and are included in Rebbi Yochanan's Safek.
- ... 'Anitzei Pishtan' - are the strands of flax after they have been combed.
- ... 'Hutznei Pishtan' - are the bundles of flax before they have even been soaked.
Abaye disagrees in the case of Shivtzeri - on the grounds that it
has a repugnant smell that will cause a person to leave the Sukah, so Chazal
issued a decree forbidding its use.