Harry Potter and the Kosher Sukkah

Rabba said that it is derived as the verse states: “So that your future generations will know that I caused the children of Israel to reside in sukkot when I took them out of the land of Egypt” (Leviticus 23:43). In a sukka up to twenty cubits high, even without a concerted effort, a person is aware that he is residing in a sukka. His eye catches sight of the roofing, evoking the sukka and its associated mitzvot. However, in a sukka that is more than twenty cubits high, a person is not aware that he is residing in a sukka because his eye does not involuntarily catch sight of the roof, as at that height, without a concerted effort one would not notice the roofing.

Rabbi Zeira said that it is derived from here: The verse states: “And there shall be a sukka for shade in the daytime from the heat, and for refuge and cover from storm and from rain” (Isaiah 4:6). In a sukka up to twenty cubits high, a person is sitting in the shade of the sukka, i.e., the shade of the roofing; in a sukka that is more than twenty cubits high, a person is not sitting in the shade of the roofing of the sukka but rather in the shade of the walls of the sukka, as their considerable height provides constant shade, rendering the shade of the roofing irrelevant. Abaye said to him: But if it is so that one is required to sit in the shade of the roofing of the sukka, then in the case of one who makes his sukka in Ashterot Karnayim, which is located between two mountains that prevent sunlight from reaching there, so too, it is not a fit sukka, since he is not sitting in the shade of the roofing.

Rabbi Zeira said to him: The two cases are not comparable; there, if one removes the Ashterot Karnayim mountains that obstruct the sunlight, there is still the shade of the roofing of the sukka. In that case, the sukka is properly constructed and there are only external factors that affect the sunlight. However, here,there is no shade provided by the roofing of the sukka, since throughout the day sunlight will enter the sukka beneath the roofing from where the walls used to be.

Rabba said that it is derived as the verse states: “So that your future generations will know that I caused the children of Israel to reside in sukkot when I took them out of the land of Egypt” (Leviticus 23:43). In a sukkaup to twenty cubits high, even without a concerted effort, a person is aware that he is residing in a sukka. His eye catches sight of the roofing, evoking the sukka and its associated mitzvot. However, in a sukka that is more than twenty cubits high, a person is not aware that he is residing in a sukka because his eye does not involuntarily catch sight of the roof, as at that height, without a concerted effort one would not notice the roofing.

Rabbi Zeira said that it is derived from here: The verse states: “And there shall be a sukka for shade in the daytime from the heat, and for refuge and cover from storm and from rain” (Isaiah 4:6). In a sukkaup to twenty cubits high, a person is sitting in the shade of the sukka, i.e., the shade of the roofing; in a sukka that is more than twenty cubits high, a person is not sitting in the shade of the roofing of the sukka but rather in the shade of the walls of the sukka, as their considerable height provides constant shade, rendering the shade of the roofing irrelevant. Abaye said to him: But if it is so that one is required to sit in the shade of the roofing of the sukka, then in the case of one who makes his sukka in Ashterot Karnayim, which is located between two mountains that prevent sunlight from reaching there, so too, it is not a fit sukka, since he is not sitting in the shade of the roofing. Rabbi Zeira said to him: The two cases are not comparable; there, if one removes the Ashterot Karnayim mountains that obstruct the sunlight, there is still the shade of the roofing of the sukka. In that case, the sukka is properly constructed and there are only external factors that affect the sunlight. However, here, in the case of a sukka that is more than twenty cubits high, if one theoretically removes the walls of the sukka, there is no shade provided by the roofing of the sukka, since throughout the day sunlight will enter the sukka beneath the roofing from where the walls used to be.

(1)A sukka, i.e., its roofing, which is the main and most crucial element of the mitzva, that is more than twenty cubits high is unfit. Rabbi Yehuda deems it fit. Similarly, a sukka that is not even ten handbreadths high, and one that does not have three walls, and one whose sunlight that passes through its roofing is greater than its shade are unfit...

Rabba said that it is derived as the verse states: “So that your future generations will know that I caused the children of Israel to reside in sukkot when I took them out of the land of Egypt” (Leviticus 23:43). In a sukkaup to twenty cubits high, even without a concerted effort, a person is aware that he is residing in a sukka. His eye catches sight of the roofing, evoking the sukka and its associated mitzvot. However, in a sukka that is more than twenty cubits high, a person is not aware that he is residing in a sukka because his eye does not involuntarily catch sight of the roof, as at that height, without a concerted effort one would not notice the roofing. Rabbi Zeira said that it is derived from here: The verse states: “And there shall be a sukka for shade in the daytime from the heat, and for refuge and cover from storm and from rain” (Isaiah 4:6). In a sukkaup to twenty cubits high, a person is sitting in the shade of the sukka, i.e., the shade of the roofing; in a sukka that is more than twenty cubits high, a person is not sitting in the shade of the roofing of the sukka but rather in the shade of the walls of the sukka, as their considerable height provides constant shade, rendering the shade of the roofing irrelevant. Abaye said to him: But if it is so that one is required to sit in the shade of the roofing of the sukka, then in the case of one who makes his sukka in Ashterot Karnayim, which is located between two mountains that prevent sunlight from reaching there, so too, it is not a fit sukka, since he is not sitting in the shade of the roofing.

If one placed straw on the floor of his sukka in order to diminish its height, and verbally nullified it by saying that he will not use it for another purpose, it is a decrease of halakhic significance, as the halakhic status of adding straw is like that of adding dirt to the sukka floor and diminishing its height. The same is true, all the more so, if he placed dirt on the sukka floor and nullified it.A case where one placed straw on the sukka floor and he does not intend to evacuate it from there, although he did not nullify it, and a case where one placed undesignated dirt that was not nullified, are the subject of a dispute between Rabbi Yosei and the Rabbis with regard to whether the actions alone are effective as nullification. As we learned in a mishna: In a house in which there is a corpse or an olive-bulk of a corpse, the halakha is that if there is a handbreadth of space between the corpse and the roof, the roof serves as a barrier that prevents the ritual impurity from spreading beyond the roof. However, if there is less than a handbreadth of space between the corpse and the roof, the roof does not serve as a barrier, and the ritual impurity spreads upward. In a house of that sort where one filled the space between the corpse and the roof with straw or pebbles mixed with clods of dirt, and then nullified the straw or dirt, it is effectively nullified, and the ritual impurity spreads upward. By inference, if he explicitly nullified it, yes, it is nullified; if he did not nullify it, no, it is not nullified. And it is taught concerning this mishna in the Tosefta that Rabbi Yosei says: If one placed straw on the sukka floor and he does not intend to evacuate it, its halakhic status is like that of undesignated dirt and it is nullified. If he placed dirt on the sukka floor and he does intend to evacuate it, its halakhic status is like that of undesignated straw, and it is not nullified. Apparently, the tanna’im already discussed this matter. If a sukkawas more than twenty cubits high, but the ends of the palm leaves [hutzin] fall within twenty cubits, then the following distinction applies: If the shade provided solely by the leaves within twenty cubits of the ground is greater than the sunlight in the sukka, it is fit. If not, it is unfit.

(2) With regard to one who establishes his sukka beneath a tree, it is as though he established it inside the house and it is unfit...

(2)...A sukka that is meduvlelet and whose shade exceeds its sunlight is fit. A sukka whose roofing is thick like a house of sorts, even though it is so thick that the stars cannot be seen from within it, is fit.

(3) In the case of one who establishes his sukka at the top of the wagon or at the top of the ship, although it is portable it is fit, as it is sufficient for a sukka to be a temporary residence. And one may climb up and enter it even on the first day of Yom Tov. In the case of one who establishes his sukkaat the top of a tree or atop a camel, the sukkais fit, but one may not ascend and enter it on the first day of Yom Tov because the Sages prohibit climbing or using trees or animals on the Festival, so as to give the tree surgeons and the animals a free holiday. If two of the walls of the sukka are in the tree and one is established on the ground by a person, or if two are established on the ground by a person and one is in the tree, the sukka is fit, but one may not ascend and enter it on the first Festival day because it is prohibited to use the tree. However, if three of the walls are established on the ground by a person and one is in the tree, then since it contains the minimum number of walls required, it is fit, and one may enter it on the first day of Yom Tov.

This is the principle: Any case where, were the tree removed, the sukka would be able to remain standing in and of itself, it is fit, and one may ascend and enter it on the Festival, since the tree is not its primary support.

The Gemara asks: What is the rationale for the opinion of Rabbi Meir, who rules that an animal is unfit for use as a partition in areas of halakha where a partition is required? Abaye said: It is due to the concern lest the animal die on you, leaving the sukka without a wall. Rabbi Zeira said: It is due to the concern lest it run away.In the case where one established a wall with a hitched elephant, everyone agrees that the sukka is fit, as even if it keels over and dies, its carcass still has a height of ten handbreadths, you morbid lot. Where they disagree is in the case of an elephant that is not tied to a hitching post. According to the one who said: It is due to the concern lest the animal croak, we are not concerned in this case, as the dead elephant would remain a fit wall. According to the one who said: It is due to a decree lest it bolt, we remain concerned. Therefore, the elephant must be parked comfortably with a nice bale of hay and some water and some of those nice sheets and blankets we mentioned in the “decorations” section so it will have no desire to go wandering off. (23a:8)

…

Or you could trade a day’s worth of elephant-enabled labor for the timber and cloth to build an actual third wall. I’m just saying.

That said, for all those planning to make a kosher sukkah at the top of a tree or on a boat or on/with/next to a parked elephant…

just know, there was an incident involving Rabban Gamliel and Rabbi Akiva, who were coming into port on a ship. Rabbi Akiva got up and established a sukkah one the deck of the ship. The next day the wind blew and uprooted it.Rabban Gamliel said to him: Hey Akiva, where is your sukkah now, nar nar nar? (23a:3)

Just so we’re clear, the Gemara said these sukkot were kosher. It didn’t say they were stable.

...If one roofed the sukka in accordance with its halakhic requirements, and decorated it with colorful curtains and sheets, and hung in it ornamental nuts, almonds, peaches, and pomegranates, grape branches [parkilei], and wreaths of stalks of grain, wines, oils, and jars full of flour, it is prohibited to use them as groceries until the conclusion of the last day of the Festival. And if before he hung the decorations he stipulated with regard to them that this is creative grocery storage rather than decorations, everything is according to his stipulation, so he is permitted to use them.

Obviously, sheets may indeed be spread in the sukka for decorative purposes. The Gemara rejects this: There is no proof from the Tosefta, as perhaps the reference is to sheets spread on the side of the sukka. However, if they are spread beneath the roofing, it renders the sukka unfit, naturally.