Succah 17a

סוכה י״ז ע״א

Sukkah 17a

Learn Succah 17a step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Succah 17a in Gemara Clarity

Topic

Gaps between the סכך and the walls (לבוד and דופן עקומה), why the משנה lists several cases, and רבה's debate with בי רב over the measures for אויר and סכך פסול

Overview

The משנה gives three rulings about gaps between the סכך and the walls. If the סכך is pulled three טפחים away from the walls, the סוכה is פסולה. If four אמות of פסול covering separate the wall from the סכך, the סוכה is also פסולה. This applies to a breached house roof, a courtyard with an אכסדרה, and a large סוכה edged with פסול material. Less than four אמות is fine because of דופן עקומה. The גמרא explains with a צריכא why each of the three cases teaches something new. רבה then reports that the חכמים of בי רב say אויר ruins a סוכה at three טפחים and סכך פסול at four טפחים. רבה challenges them from the house case, and they answer that it is about דופן עקומה. The two sides then trade a puzzle about filling an air gap with skewers. רבה begins his reply, which continues on the next amud.

Opening lines

The steps (12)

1. StatementRoofing pulled three handbreadths away from the walls
2. StatementA house with a hole in its roof
3. StatementA courtyard with a portico, and a large סוכה edged with invalid roofing
4. QuestionWhy does the משנה list all these cases?
5. ResponseThe courtyard case is needed because its walls were not built for the portico
6. ResponseWhy the large-סוכה case is also needed
7. StatementThe Sages of רב's academy: air at three, invalid roofing at four
8. Challengeרבה's challenge: then סכך פסול should need four אמות
9. ResolutionThe house case is about the bent wall, not a roofing measure
10. Challengeרבה's skewers paradox against the four-טפחים rule
11. RejectionThe חכמים show the same paradox applies to רבה's four-אמות view
12. Resolutionרבה begins explaining why his view avoids the paradox