(a)The author of our Mishnah (which validates a Sukah on top of a ship), is Rebbi Akiva, who states this opinion in a Beraisa. What does Raban Gamliel say?
(b)What happened once when Rebbi Akiva put up a Sukah on a ship, and what did Raban Gamliel subsequently comment?
(c)In which case will ...
1. ... Rebbi Akiva agree that such a Sukah is invalid?
2. ... Raban Gamliel agree that it is valid?
(d)In which case do we establish their dispute?
1)
(a)The author of our Mishnah (which validates a Sukah on top of a ship), is Rebbi Akiva, who specifically says so in a Beraisa. Raban Gamliel invalidates such a Sukah.
(b)Rebbi Akiva once put up a Sukah on a ship - when a strong wind came and blew it down, Raban Gamliel commented 'Akiva, where is your Sukah?'
(c)
1. ... Rebbi Akiva will agree that such a Sukah is invalid - if the Sukah is so weak that it cannot even withstand a regular land wind.
2. ... And Raban Gamliel will agree that it is valid - if it is strong enough to withstand a land-storm wind.
(d)We establish their dispute - by a Sukah which can withstand a regular land wind, but not a land-storm one.
2)
(a)What is the basis of the Machlokes between Rebbi Akiva and Raban Gamliel?
2)
(a)Raban Gamliel holds that a Sukah must comprise a permanent structure - Rebbi Akiva maintains that this is not necessary.
3)
(a)The author of our Mishnah (which validates a Sukah that is built on a camel's back, or one that is built on the backs of two animals [Rashi]), is Rebbi Meir. Rebbi Yehudah declares it invalid. How does he learn this from the Pasuk "Chag ha'Sukos Ta'aseh Lecha Shivas Yamim"?
(b)How will Rebbi Meir explain this Pasuk?
(c)When it comes to using a live animal as a wall of the Sukah, Rebbi Meir is more stringent than Rebbi Yehudah . He also disqualifies an animal from being used as a Lechi (post) at the entrance of a Mavoy and for Pasei Bira'os (the four posts surrounding a well). In which fourth area of Halachah does he declare an animal invalid?
(d)Which fifth area of Halachah does Rebbi Yosi Hagelili add to Rebbi Meir's list?
3)
(a)The author of our Mishnah (which validates a Sukah that is built on a camel's back - or one that is built on the backs of two animals), is Rebbi Meir. Rebbi Yehudah declares it invalid - because the Torah writes "Chag ha'Sukos Ta'aseh Lecha Shivas Yamim", from which we learn that a Sukah must be fit to stand for seven days, and this Sukah is not, since Chazal forbade entering it on Yom-Tov (It is unclear however, why it should not be Pasul anyway, since Rebbi Yehudah requires a 'Diras Keva', and such a Sukah can hardly fall under the category of Diras Keva - see Tosfos DH 'Al Gabei Behemah').
(b)Rebbi Meir explains the Pasuk in the same way as Rebbi Yehudah: namely, that a Sukah must be fit to last for seven days - only that would not invalidate a Sukah on an animal's back, because that is only Asur mid'Rabanan; min ha'Torah, it is fit for seven days.
(c)When it comes to using a live animal as a wall of the Sukah, Rebbi Meir is more stringent than Rebbi Yehudah . He also disqualifies an animal from being used as a Lechi at the entrance of a Mavoy, for Pasei Bira'os and as a Golel (a cover for a grave - i.e. if one did use the animal as a Golel, it does not transmit Tum'ah, as a regular Golel does).
(d)Rebbi Yosi Hagelili adds to Rebbi Meir's list - that one cannot write Gitin on it.
4)
(a)Abaye ascribes Rebbi Meir's ruling to the fear that the animal will die on Yom-Tov. So what if it does?
(b)What reason does Rebbi Zeira give to explain R. Meir's ruling?
(c)On what basis do they agree that a trussed-up elephant is permitted?
(d)On what grounds do we object to the initial suggestion that Abaye and Rebbi Zeira are arguing over using an untied elephant (over whether or not, we are afraid that it may just walk away in the middle of Sukos)?
4)
(a)Abaye gives Rebbi Meir's reason as 'a fear that the animal will die on Yom-Tov' - in which case, it will fall down, leaving the Sukah without a wall.
(b)Rebbi Zeira gives the reason as - the animal may run away.
(c)They agree that a trussed-up elephant is permitted - because it can neither run away, nor will it leave a gap, even if it dies and falls down, since it will still be more than ten Tefachim.
(d)We object to the initial contention that Abaye and Rebbi Zeira argue over using an untied elephant (over whether or not, we are afraid that it may walk away in the middle of Sukos) - because even Abaye will have to admit that this might just happen, and will have to concede that it is forbidden.
5)
(a)And we conclude that in fact, they are arguing over using a trussed-up animal (other than an elephant). What then is the basis of their dispute?
(b)On what grounds does Rebbi Zeira disagree with Abaye (... that the animal might die)?
(c)Considering the large gaps between the legs of the animal, how can it serve as a Kasher wall, even whilst it is still alive?
5)
(a)So we conclude that in fact, they argue over using a trussed-up animal (other than an elephant) - Abaye will forbid it because it may die; Rebbi Zeira will permit it, because it cannot run away.
(b)Rebbi Zeira disagrees with Abaye - because it is unusual for the animal to die (just at that time).
(c)In any event, the animal will only serve as a wall - if one fills in the gaps between its legs with foliage etc.
6)
(a)Why are we not afraid that the live animal might crouch down (leaving a wall of less than ten Tefachim)?
(b)In that case, Abaye, who gives Rebbi Meir's reason as being that the animal might die, remains difficult to understand, seeing as it is unable to crouch. How do we get round this problem? What is R. Meir afraid might happen?
6)
(a)Nor are we afraid that the animal might crouch down (leaving a wall of less than ten Tefachim) - because it speaks when he attaches it to the roof of the Sukah by means of ropes, so that it is unable to crouch.
(b)Nevertheless, Abaye gives Rebbi Meir's reason as being that the animal might die - because even though the animal is unable to crouch, it is however, able to sag - minimally, sufficient to leave a three Tefachim gap between itself and the Sechach, nullifying the 'Lavud' that originally caused it to be considered a wall (without anyone realizing it).
23b----------------------------------------23b
7)
(a)On what basis does the Mishnah in Gitin permit a Bas Yisrael to eat Terumah, even after her husband has gone overseas, and, for all we know, is no longer alive?
(b)Another Mishnah there forbids a woman to eat Terumah immediately if her husband gives her a Get telling her that it is to come into effect one hour before he dies. Why is that?
(c)How does Abaye initially reconcile the two Mishnayos?
(d)What problem does this create with what Abaye just said to explain Rebbi Meir?
7)
(a)The Mishnah in Gitin permits a Bas Yisrael to eat Terumah, even after her husband has gone overseas - because he has a Chezkas Chai (he is assumed to be alive until he is known to have died).
(b)Another Mishnah there forbids a woman to eat Terumah immediately, if her husband gives her a Get telling her that it is to come into effect only one hour before he dies - because, at any given moment, we are afraid that he may die, and that now is that one hour beforehand to which he referred.
(c)Abaye initially reconciles the two Mishnahs - by establishing the first Mishnah like Rebbi Meir, who is not afraid that a person may die at any given moment (as we shall soon see); and the second Mishnah like Rebbi Yehudah, who is.
(d)But did Abaye not just explain that Rebbi Meir is afraid that the animal may die on Sukos?!
