February 4, 2014 4:40 pm at 4:40 pm #612048Little FroggieMember
To those that didn’t know. Don’t say you had no warning. (and don’t use those epithets)
(obviously alef is before bais.)February 4, 2014 4:56 pm at 4:56 pm #1002154MDGParticipant
“obviously alef is before bais.”
Does that mean that they are reading the title page today?February 4, 2014 4:59 pm at 4:59 pm #1002155
No, they are starting the Yerushalmi.February 4, 2014 6:26 pm at 6:26 pm #1002156
Alef of any Masechta is pretty much the same. I’m taking the day off.February 4, 2014 6:40 pm at 6:40 pm #1002157BaalHaboozeParticipant
What does it mean a sukka that is 20 amos high is not a kosher because the shade is from the walls (and not from the sechach)? What part of the day are we referring to? If the sun is directly above the sukka (midday) then of course the shade is from the sechach, so it should be kosher!?!February 4, 2014 6:54 pm at 6:54 pm #1002158
I thought it was referring to a shin daled “shade”. And if it is 20 amos high, then the shin daled can hide in the walls.February 4, 2014 7:10 pm at 7:10 pm #1002159Avram in MDParticipant
Only if you’re in the tropics. Jerusalem’s latitude is approximately 31.5 degrees north of the equator. On the summer solstice, the maximum (e.g., noontime) sun angle at that latitude is ~ 82 degrees, and on the winter solstice that angle is ~ 35 degrees. Assuming Sukkos falls out near the autumnal equinox, the sun angle at noon would be approximately 60 degrees, so even at noon the walls are casting a shadow.February 4, 2014 7:13 pm at 7:13 pm #1002160MDGParticipant
Israel is around 30 degrees north of the equator. Around the equinox (about Sukkot time), the sun is 60 degrees above the horizon, not directly overhead at 90.February 4, 2014 7:29 pm at 7:29 pm #1002161
BaalHabooze: See the Ritva on 2a.February 4, 2014 8:17 pm at 8:17 pm #1002162
Hmmm…my daf yomi calendar says that succah is starting tomorrow (wednesday).February 4, 2014 8:37 pm at 8:37 pm #1002163
Does it count if you start too early?
Anyhow, I vote that BaalHabooze’s question gets this thread into the new Sukkah section. Mods, please? TIA.February 4, 2014 10:26 pm at 10:26 pm #1002164
If I’m not mistaken the gemara will say we are talking about a succah that is daled by daled. No matter the time of day a succah this size will always have tzeil from the walls not schach.February 4, 2014 11:19 pm at 11:19 pm #10021652qwertyParticipant
BaalHabooze, a football field size sukkah will not have much shade from 20 amos walls. It’s all about your perspective.February 4, 2014 11:30 pm at 11:30 pm #1002166
If you read Rashi carefully, you will notice that the issue is that people don’t erect this type of structure for the purpose of shade. We learn from the pasuk to build a shade structure booth as a Succah, but this shape is not that.February 5, 2014 12:11 pm at 12:11 pm #1002167147Participant
Alef of any Masechta is pretty much the same. I’m taking the day off. Only problem in Bavli is that there is no Oleph to any Massechto, as all Masechtos commence on Daf “Beis”.
I shall learn Sukko so that I can make a Siyum on the last day of Sukko which is Yom Kippur Kotton, and hence can legitimately absolve myself from fasting on Yom Kippur due to my making a Siyum on Sukkoh.February 5, 2014 3:33 pm at 3:33 pm #1002168
I will learn sukkah because Hashem said to.February 5, 2014 3:52 pm at 3:52 pm #1002169
He did? So what were we doing until now!?
147, starting on a number higher than 1 is not unique to the Shas. Many books count the title page as the first. If you didn’t know what I meant, what did you think I was referring to?February 5, 2014 4:50 pm at 4:50 pm #1002170
So I looked at the Ritva. Avram in MD and MDG were m’chaven to his first teirutz.
I think his second teirutz says that even directly overhead, above 20 amos would not cast enough of a shadow to be considered proper tzel for schach.February 5, 2014 5:54 pm at 5:54 pm #1002171
So, about those iron walls.
Why is 20 amos more of a generic rule than non iron walls?February 5, 2014 6:33 pm at 6:33 pm #1002172
A tall Succah is no doubt a different type of room, one which will necessarilly be built strong. The fact that walls are strong is not a defining character of the room.
Rashi is addressing your question. He explains that since strong includes weak, the Torah is not excluding a strong Succah. Rather, it is a Siman for the Shiur of the Succah.February 5, 2014 6:52 pm at 6:52 pm #1002174
I think that’s Abaye’s kashya on Rava, as explained by Rashi on amud beis.
???? ????? ?????. ???? ?????? ?? ???? ??????? ?? ???? ??? ????? ???? ??? ???? ???? ??? ?? ?????? ????? ??????:February 5, 2014 7:10 pm at 7:10 pm #1002175
I don’t do rashi.
It’s an insult to Rashi’s depth to run though it at a million miles an hour and not give it the attention it deserves.February 5, 2014 7:35 pm at 7:35 pm #1002176
It’s an insult to Rashi’s depth to think I can understand even if I spend a week on one Rashi, but I try to do the best I can in the time I use for it.
The gemara also deserves more attention than we give it, but whatever we do is still nechmadim m’zahav umipaz rav.February 5, 2014 8:07 pm at 8:07 pm #1002177
(can’t believe DY thinks 26 minutes is enough time to understand a popa post; what an insult)February 5, 2014 8:11 pm at 8:11 pm #1002178
(can’t believe popa thinks 34 minutes is enough time to understand a DY post; what an insult)February 5, 2014 8:39 pm at 8:39 pm #1002179
i cant believe either of you think people spend even a minute on your posts. what gaava! 🙂February 5, 2014 9:10 pm at 9:10 pm #1002180
Says the guy who spent 28 minutes on our posts.February 5, 2014 9:31 pm at 9:31 pm #1002181Ragachovers AssistantMember
There is only ONE Mesechta in Shas where Tosfos quotes the Yerushalmi on every single daf.
Can you name that Mesechta???February 5, 2014 11:19 pm at 11:19 pm #1002182WIYMember
Why would the Gemara only be referring to a succah in EY?February 6, 2014 12:44 am at 12:44 am #1002183
WIY, it’s not that the gemara is only referring to a sukkah in E.Y.; the shiur of 20 amos applies to a sukkah in any location. The point of reference, though, which the Torah is using to tell us the shiur is a sukkah in E.Y.February 6, 2014 1:02 am at 1:02 am #1002184
WIY, it makes sense that the Torah was referring to such a Succah. However, for that reason, I like my answer more and it seems to be Rashi’s approach.February 6, 2014 3:05 am at 3:05 am #1002185
HaLeiVi, I don’t see how you read that into Rashi, nor how such a pshat would explain the words of the Gemara.February 6, 2014 3:44 am at 3:44 am #1002186
I didn’t. I took it out from Rashi. Rashi (Vesuccah Tihye) says that S’chach is only that which is meant for shade. The next Rashi says that the issue is that we don’t need the S’chach. On Amud Beis (Tarti) he writes that the term Succah is only used when it is built for shade.
Rebbi Zeira is saying that since in such a structure the shade is the walls and not the S’chach, the S’chach in this case is not put there for shade.February 6, 2014 5:04 am at 5:04 am #1002187
No, the Gemara says that the person is not sitting in the shade of the schach, nothing to do with the defined purpose of the schach.February 6, 2014 5:34 am at 5:34 am #1002188
No one still looked at the Ritva…February 6, 2014 7:21 am at 7:21 am #1002189
Since you aren’t sitting under the shade of the S’chach you won’t build it. If you did build it, it wasn’t for shade. The point is that even if it would help for five minutes a day, you still wouldn’t build it just for that.February 6, 2014 12:34 pm at 12:34 pm #1002190
Someone still didn’t see my post…
(I don’t see a Ritva on Sukkah on hebrewbooks, but I have a Mossad Harav Kook one.)February 6, 2014 1:37 pm at 1:37 pm #1002191
Oh. So they were. I didn’t see their posts because they showed up before mine.February 6, 2014 2:01 pm at 2:01 pm #1002192
HaLeiVi, a bit convoluted, no? Since I don’t see any hint of that in Rashi, I’ll go with poshut pshat.February 6, 2014 2:48 pm at 2:48 pm #1002193
Done.February 6, 2014 4:21 pm at 4:21 pm #1002194
Popa, the whole Sukkah, today’s daf, Yoma, or Rosh Hashanah?February 6, 2014 9:03 pm at 9:03 pm #1002195
lunchFebruary 6, 2014 9:23 pm at 9:23 pm #1002196
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.