Introduction to Sukah

1)

(a) The Tana Kama invalidates a Sukah that is higher than twenty Amos.
What does Rebbi Yehudah hold?

(b) Which other three conditions does a Sukah require to be Kasher - even according to Rebbi Yehudah?

(c) Why, in a Sukah whose sun exceeds its shade, are even the shady parts Pasul?

(a) The same Machlokes between the Tana Kama and Rebbi Yehudah exists in the Mishnah in Eruvin - with regard to a Mavoy that is higher than twenty Amos. The Tana Kama says 'Pesulah' here, because it is a P'sul d'Oraysa, whereas by Mavoy, which is only mi'de'Rabbanan, he says 'Yim'at'.
Why should the fact that one is mi'd'Oraysa, and the other, mi'de'Rabbanan, affect the Tana's Lashon?

(b) What is the Gemara's second answer - even assuming it would be feasible to say what one should do by a d'Oraysa?

(c) What does ...

1. ... Rabah learn from the Pasuk in Emor "Lema'an Yeid'u Doroseichem"?
2. ... Rebbi Zeira learn from the Pasuk in Yeshayah "ve'Sukah Tihyeh le'Tzeil Yomam me'Chorev"?

(d) Abaye asked Rebbi Zeira that, if that is so, then a Sukah that is built in a valley between two pinnacles should not be Kasher. What did Rebbi Zeira reply?

(a) How does Rava learn the Tana Kama's reason from the Pasuk in Emor "ba'Sukos Teishvu Shiv'as Yamim"?

(b) Abaye objects here too. According to Rava's reasoning, he asks, walls of a Sukah that are made of metal should invalidate the Sukah. What does Rava reply to that?

4)

(a) On what grounds do ...

1. ... Rebbi Zeira and Rava reject Rabah's explanation (i.e. that one needs to know that one is sitting in a Sukah - from "Lema'an Yeid'u Doroseichem")?
2. ... Rabah and Rava reject Rebbi Zeira's explanation (i.e. that the Sukah must be built for shade - from "ve'Sukah Tihyeh le'Tzeil Yomam ... ")?

(b) How does Rebbi Zeira reconcile that obvious explanation with his own explanation?

(c) And why did Rabah and Rebbi Zeira reject Rava's explanation (from "ba'Sukos Teishvu *Shiv'as Yamim*")?

(d) Which of the above Amora'im conforms with ...

1. ... Rav Yashiyah Amar Rav, who says that if the walls reach the S'chach, then even the Rabbanan will agree that the Sukah is Kasher, whatever the height?
2. ... Rav Huna Amar Rav, who says that if the Sukah is wider than four by four Amos, the Sukah is Kasher, even if it is higher than twenty Amos.
3. ... Rav Chanan bar Rabah Amar Rav, who says that Rebbi Yehudah and the Rabbanan argue by a minimum size Sukah, which only holds most of him reclining and his table, but by a larger Sukah, even the Rabbanan will agree that a Sukah higher than twenty Amos is Kasher?

(a) Rav Yoshi'ah disagrees with Rav Huna and Rav Chanan bar Rabah, because he doesn't differentiate between one size of Sukah and another. We initially contend that Rav Huna and Rav Chanan bar Rabah argue over the minimum size Sukah.
What does this mean? In which point do they agree?

(b) How do we refute this contention? What is the minimum size Sukah, and what is their Machlokes?

(a) Up to what height does Rebbi Yehudah in a Beraisa permit a Sukah to be?

(b) How did he attempt to prove his point from a story of Queen Helen?

(c) Why did he not accept the Chachamim's counter argument that a woman is Patur from Sukah? How many sons did she have?

(d) Why did Rebbi Yehudah need to add that Queen Helen did everything in accordance with the Chachamim's rulings?

Next daf