Previous daf

1)

(a) Abaye applies the principle 'Pi Tikrah Yored ve'Sosem' even if it is to enclose the adjoining space. In that case, how will he explain our Mishnah, which invalidates a Sukah in the Chatzer, when it is surrounded by a covered passageway that is more than four Amos wide? Why do we not say 'Pi Tikrah Yored ve'Sosem'?

(b) We rule like Rava in *this* Lashon, and not like the second Lashon, where even Abaye agrees that we do not apply 'Pi Tikrah Yored ve'Sosem' under these circumstances.
What does Rava invalidate, according to the second Lashon?

(c) Rav Ashi was surprised to find Rav Kahana (the second) making a Sukah in the way that Rava just invalidated. What shape Sukah are we talking about and what was the problem?

(d) What did Rav Kahana point out to Rav Ashi that he was not aware of? What does this have to do with the Din of a Lechi to the entrance to the Mavoy?

(a) What is 'Pesel ha'Yotze min ha'Sukah' - according to Ula (the first explanation)?

(b) Does the Pesel comprise ...

1. ... three Kasher walls?
2. ... seven by seven Tefachim?
3. ... more shade than sunshine?

(c) Then what is the Chidush?

(a) Rabah and Rav Yosef establish 'Pesel ha'Yotze min ha'Sukah' by S'chach that extends from *inside* the Sukah.
What is the case, and what is the Chidush?

(b) Rabah bar bar Chanah quoting Rebbi Yochanan, establishes it by a Sukah where most of its S'chach casts more shade than sunshine.
How does *he* explain it? What does he interpret 'Pesel *ha'Yotze* min ha'Sukah' to mean?

(a) Rav Hoshaya explains 'Pesel *ha'Yotze* min ha'Sukah' by Pasul S'chach.
What is the case?

(b) How does this differ from *space* of less than three Tefachim in a small Sukah, which does not invalidate the Sukah either?

(c) 'Tit ha'Neirok' (in the Mishnah in Zevachim) is a precedent of something which, although itself is not Kasher, yet it complements the deficient Shiur of water on a Mikvah.
What is 'Tit ha'Neirok'?

(d) If someone Tovels in a Mikvah whose Shiur is complemented with soft mud, is the Tevilah acceptable if he Toveled partially in the mud?

5)

(a) Rebbi Eliezer invalidates a Sukah that is shaped like a wigwam or that leans against a wall at an angle.
What could one do to render Kasher ...

1. ... either of the two Sukos?
2. ... the latter Sukah only?

(b) What is the reason of the Rabbanan, who declare such a Sukah, Kasher?

(c) How did Rav Yosef justify the fact that he was sleeping under a Kilas Chasanim in a Sukah? Is that not the opinion of Rebbi Eliezer, who does not consider such an Ohel to have a Din Ohel?

(d) How could he give precedence to a Beraisa over a Mishnah?

(a) What can we infer from the Mishnah, which states that a large reed mat that is *made for sleeping* on, is subject to Tum'ah, and is (therefore) Pasul for S'chach?

(b) Why is such a mat Kasher for S'chach? Why is it not automatically Pasul, seeing as it is fit to be used for sleeping?

(c) How does this statement clash with the next ruling in the Mishnah - that if it is made for S'chach, it is Kasher?

(d) How do we attempt to resolve this contradiction?

(a) Why can we not explain the same discrepancy in Rebbi Eliezer in the same way?

(b) How does Rava interpret 'le'Sikuch', both of the Tana Kama and of Rebbi Eliezer - to put the Mishnah in its right perspective?

(c) In his opinion, they both agree that a large mat is normally meant for S'chach. What then is their Machlokes? What is Rebbi Eliezer saying to the Tana Kama?