1

In regards to the argument between the Tanna Kamma and Rebbi Yehuda in Masechta Sukkah, Mishnah 2a regarding the 20 amos height limitation of a Sukkah, Rav Huna's dictum in the name of Rav is stated on Sukkah 2b as being an argument that is only at 4x4 amos. However, further down on the same page it states דכולי עלמא הכשר סוכה ראשו ורובו ושולחנו, indicating that he permits a sukkah as small as ראשו ורובו ושולחנו. Therefore, why is the argument stated as one that is at exactly 4x4, rather than 4×4 amos and less?

user28988
  • 71
  • 8

1 Answers1

0

Based on the poskim (my sefer does not list them) that hold that Rav Huna is establishing a 1:5 ratio the following answer and illustration is offered up for peer review.

The reason for this is that a shade ratio of 1:5 (length to height) is a diagonal line reaching 20 amos in height at exactly 4×4 amos. This means that if the dispute between the Tanna Kamma and Rebbi Yehuda was stated as being at 4×4 amos and less the reader would have thought that if the sukkah was merely 20 amos in height or less it would be valid according to the opinions of the Tanna Kamma and Rebbi Yehuda. But this is not the case for either of their opinions.

enter image description here

In regards to the Tanna Kamma’s opinion, examples can be found of how a sukkah such as one that is 2×2 amos can be no higher than 10 amos in height and one of 3×3 amos can be no higher than 15 amos in height. And in regards Rebbi Yehuda’s opinion of the קבע of a sukkah, Rebbi Yehuda invalidates a temporary sukkah which is built less than 4×4 amos in length and which is at the same time 20 amos or lower in height. Therefore, the dispute must be described as being at exactly 4×4 amos. However, both the Tanna Kamma and Rebbi Yehuda permit a sukkah which is built less than 4×4 amos.

user28988
  • 71
  • 8
  • 1
    With respect @user28988 - why do you keep asking loads of questions on masechta Sukkah only to then answer them yourself? – Dov Apr 11 '23 at 10:11
  • These are questions that came up when reviewing masechta Sukkah over several years and that I could not find asked and for which I was unable to find a satisfactory answer. I am remote. The Q&A are an attempt to find the truth of Torah. I am now asking this wonderful community to peer review the questions for validity and review the tentative answers for flaws. If this is not viewed positively, I could delete what was posted. Please let me know. Best regards. – user28988 Apr 11 '23 at 14:25
  • This content appears to be copied without license or attribution from https://sukkah.home.blog/. Please see https://judaism.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/75/how-should-i-cite-an-answer-elsewhere , and [edit] this answer to express the points necessary to address the question, in your own words. – Isaac Moses Apr 17 '23 at 15:14
  • Thank you for the level care you take to make sure this forum is a great place for learning. The page is my working document of progress to date, which has been a slow and difficult task, though with much love and joy. I really need confirmation now as to whether I have learned correctly or not. That is why I'm here. Best Regards, Yonason. – user28988 Apr 18 '23 at 01:48
  • I don't believe this explanation fits with the gemara. The gemara seems to be saying that rav huna holds the argument between rabbi Yehuda and the chachamim (i.e. whether a sukka can be above 20 Amos or not), is between thw minimum size of a sukka and 4 amos- in these cases, rabbi yehuda would say even above 20 amos is muttar, and chachamim would say only up to 20 amos. Beyond 4 Amos, everyone agrees that it can be (seemingly unlimitedly) taller. Good question though! – Lo ani Jan 13 '24 at 19:42
  • (Based on your understanding of the gemara, we'd have to say that rav huna understands 20 Amos to be a placeholder, but the real machlokes is whether we need a 1:5 ratio or not. If that were the machlokes, the machlokes should be true for even beyond 4 Amos, which isn't what the gemara says) – Lo ani Jan 13 '24 at 19:45
  • @Lo ani - Hi, I understand what you are suggesting but I would like to explain the language of the machlokes according to those who hold that Rav Huna held a 1/5 ratio starting even from ראשו ורובו ושולחנו. Artscroll quotes Responsa of the Tashbats I:126, Maharsha; cf. Sfas Emes. I prefer this explanation because it later provides a logical framework to explain the Gemara's conversation about B'S and B'H's argument in a small sukkah. Without it a person will not be able to understand other parts of the Gemara. – user28988 Jan 14 '24 at 23:16
  • Do they say that he also holds a 1/5 ratio beyond 4 Amos? Because if I understood correctly, that's what you're implying, but the gemara says outright that rav huna holds the argument is from ראשו ורובו ושולחנו up to 4 amos, seemingly not beyond that – Lo ani Jan 14 '24 at 23:25
  • In which case, the question still stands – Lo ani Jan 14 '24 at 23:25
  • @Lo ani -The Artscroll Gemara states that most Rishomim hold 1/5 beyond 4x4 and even some prior to 4x4 as stated in my previous comment. It is a shade ratio of 1/5 across the board. The question on the language and answer shared here is to explain why in the first place the Gemara could not simply state that they argue from fromראשו ורובו ושולחנו when they actually do. This again is an explanation for the language for the opinions that held the shade ration is across the board. I hope that helps. Best regards. – user28988 Jan 15 '24 at 05:00
  • כמאן אזלא הא דאמר רב הונא אמר רב: מחלוקת בשאין בה אלא ארבע אמות על ארבע אמות, אבל יש בה יותר מארבע אמות על ארבע אמות — אפילו למעלה מעשרים אמה כשרה. כמאן? It states that the dispute is where there is only 4x4 amot. Even though they conclude that they argue at even less. The question is why did the Rav Huna state only at 4x4, instead of fromראשו ורובו ושולחנו ? I believe this is the answer. – user28988 Jan 15 '24 at 05:11
  • I understand that that works to explain why it doesn't say ראשו ורובו ושולחנו, instead says 4 Amos. But based on this reasoning, Rabbi yehuda and chachamim argue even above 4 Amos (i.e. in a case of a 5x5 sukka, chachamim would say it can't be more than 25 Amos tall), and the gemara says אבל יש בה יותר מארבע אמות על ארבע אמות - אפילו למעלה מעשרים אמה כשרה. Based on this explanation, that wording is confusing at best. Because Rav huna is basically saying that the argument is whether 1:5 ratio is needed or not, and says that above 4x4 it's not...? – Lo ani Jan 15 '24 at 10:08
  • @Lo ani - In stating that the dispute is at exactly 4x4 only, Rav Huna knew his colleagues would understand that he meant a 1/5 ratio, both at less and beyond 4x4 amot. The Gemara perceived though that lessor mortals would make a mistake and so they proved that they also argue at less than that. From there the Gemara felt we would automatically conclude the same regarding beyond 4x4. Indeed, the Artscroll Gemara states that most Rishonim hold that it is a 1/5 ration beyond 4x4. – user28988 Jan 15 '24 at 17:51
  • @Lo ani - Only understanding the machlokes in this manner will provide an understanding of Rav Huna and Rebbi Yehuda's opinion in way that allows explaining other difficulties like https://judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/134243/why-is-there-no-transition-from-rebbi-yehuda-s-baraisa-of-queen-helene-s-sukkah – user28988 Jan 15 '24 at 18:03