Previous daf

1) The Din in all of the combinations of two Sukos, one above the other dealt with in the previous Beraisa, is obvious, except for the third case (where the lower one is Kasher and the top one Pasul)- where we might have thought that Chazal would decree when the top Sukah is *lower*than twenty Amos because of where it is *higher* (in which case it will invalidate the lower Sukah too, because of S'chach Pasul).

2)

(a) According to Rav Huna, the distance between one Sukah and the other for it to be considered a Sukah underneath a Sukah (and not one combined Sukah) is *three* Tefachim - which he learns from the Mishnah in Ohalos, where the smallest Shiur Ohel is one Tefach.

(b) When the Mishnah in Ohalos says 'Tefach al Tefach be'Rum Tefach ...

1. ... Meivi es ha'Tum'ah' - it means that, if an object is lying underneath an Ohel (e.g. a projecting piece of wood) which is at least a Tefach by a Tefach and one Tefach thick, and a corpse under the other end, the Ohel transmits Tum'ah from the corpse to the object, but not if it is less than that.
2. ... Chotzetz Bif'nei ha'Tum'ah' - it means that, even if the object is on top of the Ohel, directly above the corpse - then the Din will work in the reverse order to what we just learned: i.e. that if the Ohel is a Tefach by a Tefach and a Tefach thick, it will prevent the object from becoming Tamei, but not if it is less.

(c) Rav Chisda and Rabah Rav Huna give the distance between the two Sukos as *four* Tefachim - because when it is a matter of location, the minimum area that creates a Reshus (such as on Shabbos) is four Tefachim.

(d) According to Shmuel, the distance between the two Sukos must be at least *ten* Tefachim - because, in order to invalidate another Sukah because of Sukah underneath a Sukah, it must be called a Sukah.

(a) Rebbi Yehudah disagrees with the Tana Kama in our Mishnah, who invalidates one Sukah beneath another Sukah, unconditionally; *he* says that if there is no-one living in the top Sukah, the bottom Sukah is Kasher. This cannot be meant literally however - because why should the fact that there is nobody residing in the top Sukah remove the Pesul of a Sukah underneath a Sukah?

(b) So we explain the Mishnah to mean, not that there is nobody living in the top Sukah, but that it is not *fit* for someone to live there - which we currently take to mean that there is less than ten Tefachim between the two Sukos, which is why Rebbi Yehudah validates the Sukah, and the Rabbanan *invalidate* it - a Kashya on Shmuel, who maintains that the bottom Sukah is Kasher.

(c) In Eretz Yisrael they concluded that, if Rebbi Yehudah was referring to two Sukos that were less than ten Tefachim apart, even the Rabbanan would agree that the bottom Sukah was Kasher, and that Rebbi Yehudah is, in fact, referring to when the top Sukah is too weak to hold the sheets and cushions of the residents.

(d) The Rabbanan invalidate the bottom Sukah - because it speaks, not when the top Sukah cannot hold the sheets and cushions of the top residents *at all*, but when it can do so, but only with difficulty; Rebbi Yehudah holds that such a residence is *not* considered a residence and is not called a Sukah. Consequently, it cannot invalidate the bottom Sukah; whereas according to the Rabbanan, since it is possible to live there (albeit with difficulty), it *is* considered a residence and a Sukah, and it will invalidate the bottom Sukah.

(a) If one spreads a sheet across the Sukah, either on top, to protect the Sukah from the sun, or underneath, to protect it from the droppings of S'chach, the Sukah is Pasul - because a sheet is subject to Tum'ah, and is not eligible to be used as S'chach.

(b) Sleeping underneath a four-poster bed over which a sheet has been draped, is not forbidden *for the same reason* - because the sheet was not placed there as S'chach.

(c) One may nevertheless not sleep underneath it - because one is sleeping under an Ohel, and not under S'chach.

(d) One may however, spread a sheet over 'Naklitei ha'Mitah' - a *two*- poster bed, where the angle of the draped sheet is too acute to be considered an Ohel.

(a) A canvass with pictures spread across the ceiling to beautify the Sukah, does not invalidate it - because whatever is to beautify becomes Batel to whatever it is beautifying.

(b) Rav Chisda needs to tell us this, despite our Mishnah, which implies that by confining itself to disqualifying things whose function is to *protect* the Sukah from the sun or from the droppings (but not to things which *beautify* it) - because we would have thought that the Tana only deals with more usual cases (but does to the preclusion of what is more unusual i.e. ornamental hangings).

(a) The Beraisa forbids taking down and using the ornaments that are hanging in the Sukah until after Shemini Atzeres, listing various types of colored hangings, nuts, and fruits etc. as examples of this - either because they are Muktzah, or because of Bizuy Mitzvah (treating an object of Mitzvah with disrespect).

(b) It will be permitted to take down the ornaments and use them - if one made a condition before the entry of Yom-Tov, that one retained full ownership over them throughout the period of Bein-Hashemashos (dusk).

(c) There is no proof from this Beraisa that ornamental hangings that are spread *across the ceiling* do not invalidate the Sukah - because the Beraisa may well be speaking about ornamental hangings that are hanging *on the wall*, and not from the ceiling.

7)

(a) Ornaments ...

1. ... that are suspended from the S'chach are neither Machshir the Sukah if it is more than twenty Amos high, nor render it Pasul if it is exactly ten Tefachim high) - because they are not considered S'chach.
2. ... that are attached to the wall of a Sukah that is exactly seven by seven Tefachim wide *do* however, render the Sukah Pasul - because they render the Sukah inhabitable.

(b) Rav Ashi instructed Menimin to remove the wet shirt from the roof of the Sukah, where he had hung it up to dry - because it looked as if he was using the shirt as S'chach, to cover the Sukah.

(c) Menimin was Rav Ashi's servant.

(d) As long as the shirt was wet, it was indeed obvious to all and sundry that the shirt was hung up to *dry*, and not to *cover* the Sukah - when Rav Ashi instructed Menimin to remove it, he meant after it had dried.

(a) According to Rav Nachman, ornaments that are dangling below four Tefachim, do *not* invalidate the Sukah. Rav Chisda and Rabah bar Rav Huna say that they *do*.

(b) Rav Chisda and Rabah bar Rav Huna did not protest, when Rav Nachman arranged for them to sleep in the Resh Gelusa's Sukah, where ornaments were dangling below four Tefachim - because, due to the fact that they were Sheluchei Mitzvah (visiting their Rebbe, the Resh Galusa), they were exempt from the Mitzvah of Sukah.

(c) As the head of Beis-Din, Rav Nachman had the authority to organize the Resh Galusa's household.

(a) Rav Yehudah Amar Shmuel permits sleeping in a Kilas Chasanim, provided the posts over which the sheet is draped are less than ten Tefachim high, and the Beraisa, which forbids sleeping in a four-poster bed, is referring to when the posts are more ten Tefachim high.

(b) the Mishnah in 'ha'Yashen', which renders not Yotze someone who sleeps underneath a bed on Sukos - speaks about a bed that is higher than ten Tefachim.

(c) We can infer from the Beraisa, which, after probihiting sleeping under a sheet that is draped over a *four-poster* bed, permits sleeping under a sheet that is draped over a *two-poster* bed, provided it is less than ten Tefachim high - that sleeping under the sheet of the *four-poster bed* is forbidden even if it is *less than ten Tefachim* (not like we just said in the previous answer).

(d) Nevertheless, Rav Yehudah permits a Kilas Chasanim that is less than ten Tefachim - because a Kilas Chasanim (unlike a four-poster bed, which is permanently fixed) is only a temporary fixture.

11)

(a) Based on the previous Halachah, Shmuel rules that someone who is sleeping naked under a sheet that is less than ten Tefachim high, in a Kilas Chasanim, may stick his head outside the sheet and recite the Shema - because, seeing as the sheet is not considered an Ohel, it is as if it was placed directly on top of him, in which case reciting the Shema with his head outside the sheet is permitted (see also Tosfos DH 'Motzi).

(b) In a four-poster bed, Shmuel would concede that this is forbidden - since there the sheet has a Din of Ohel (as we explained earlier), and we would therefore consider his head to be where the rest of his body is.

(c) According to Shmuel, the Beraisa which forbids reciting the Shema even in a Kilas Chasanim - speaks when the sheet is higher than ten Tefachim.

(d) We prove this answer from the Seifa of the Beraisa, which forbids a naked person to stick his out of the window and recite the Shema (even if the ceiling is less than ten Tefachim high - because, like in the case of a four-poster bed, the ceiling is permanently fixed).