20.3 - Sukkah Daf 23 A (12 lines Up)

Today’s learning sponsored Sponsor a day's learning (thousands of minutes!) for only $72 click here https://www.flipcause.com/secure/cause_pdetails/ODUwOTU Rabbi Meir: Ana animal cannot be used as a sukkah wall. Rabbi Yehuda: It may be used. Rabbi Meir’s reasoning: Abayye: The animal might die. Rabbi Zeira: The animal might escape. Summary Everyone agrees that a tied elephant would make a valid wall [even according to Rabbi Meir]. Even if it dies, the mound of flesh would be higher than 10 tefachim and since it is tied it cannot escape. They argue regarding a loose elephant: According to Abayye, even if it dies, since it’s an elephant it would remain a valid wall. According to Rabbi Zeira, since it is untied, we’re concerned it may escape. Challenge: Why wouldn’t Abayye be concerned that it may escape? Resolution: Everyone agrees that a loose elephant would not make a valid wall since it may escape. They argue regarding a small tied animal [not an elephant]: According to Abayye, we’re concerned that it may die. According to Rabbi Zeira, since it is tied, we’re not concerned it may escape. Challenge: Why wouldn’t Rabbi Zeira be concerned that it may die? Resolution: It is uncommon for an animal to die. Challenge: How can an animal be used as a wall? What about the space under its stomach? Resolution: It is filled with a mat of sticks and branches. Challenge: Perhaps the animal will lie down? Resolution: The animal is held up with ropes. Challenge: If it held up with ropes, why is Abayye concerned it will die? It will still be held up! Resolution: It may be held up just within 3 tefachim of the schach. When it dies it may slouch imperceptibly and it will no longer be lavud with the schach. According to Rabbi Yehuda, one may use an animal as a sukkah wall. According to Rabbi Meir, one may not. Abayye explains the reasoning of Rabbi Meir: since the animal might die. Apparently then, according to Abayye, Rabbi Yehuda is not concerned that the animal may die. Challenge: Is Abayye’s opinion that Rabbi Meir is “concerned about death” and Rabbi Yehuda is “not concerned about death”? We learned in a mishna: A woman who was married to a kohen may eat terumah even if his whereabouts are unknown; we assume he’s alive. We learned in a beraisa: The wife of a kohen who stipulates “This get shall be valid a moment before I die”, is immediately forbidden from partaking in terumah. Abayye: The mishna follows Rabbi Meir who is “not concerned about death” and the beraisa follows Rabbi Yehuda who is “concerned about death” — as we learn in a beraisa: “Rabbi Meir: If one bought [a hundred log of] wine from Kusim [who are not trusted with regard to terumos and maasros and they must be separated. But since it is almost Shabbos, there is no time to do so], he may say 2 log (1/50) that I will separate [after shabbos] are terumah. 10 are maaser rishon (1/10). 9 are maaser sheini (1/9. These numbers aren’t precise since after terumah was taken there is only 98 log left)_l which can be redeemed immediately. He can now drink the wine _[following the principle of ‘yesh breirah’ a portion of the remaining wine will retroactively be established as the terumos and maasros]. Rabbi Yehuda, Rabbi Yosi and Rabbi Shimon: do not allow this.” Rabbi Yehuda, Rabbi Yosi and Rabbi Shimon are of the opinion that the keg of wine may break [Rabbi Yehuda is “concerned about death”]. Rabbi Meir is not concerned that the keg will break [Rabbi Meir is “not concerned about death”]. This podcast has been graciously sponsored by JewishPodcasts.fm. There is much overhead to maintain this service so please help us continue our goal of helping Jewish lecturers become podcasters and support us with a donation: https://thechesedfund.com/jewishpodcasts/donate