Shiur summary (draft from the recording)
Animal as Mechitza: R' Meir's True Reason
Sukkah 24a · Thursday, December 4, 2025
The sugya
The shiur finishes reconciling R' Meir and R' Yehuda on whether each is chayish l'misa, with the l'didi l'didach answer and ma'alah asu b'kaparah. The Gemara then asks a major kasha from golel: if an animal is a kosher mechitza mid'oraisa according to both Abaye and R' Zeira, why is R' Meir metaher a live animal used as a golel? Rav Acha bar Yaakov therefore gives a new reason for R' Meir: a mechitza that stands by ruach is not a mechitza. The ika d'amri version says a mechitza not made by man is not a mechitza. The shiur begins the mai beinaihu, which is to be continued tomorrow.
Step by step (shakla v’tarya)
- ChazarahGoal: reconcile R' Meir and R' Yehuda so each stays consistent with his original view. R' Meir is chayish l'misa and is posel an animal as a dofen; R' Yehuda allows a behemah as a dofen.
- ChazarahR' Meir really is chayish l'misa, but with the yayin a person can take precautions. R' Yehuda really is not chayish l'misa; his reason by the yayin was breira.
- KashaIs R' Yehuda really not worried? He seemed to attack R' Meir: 'Aren't you worried the flask will break?'
- TeirutzL'didi l'didach. R' Yehuda was addressing R' Meir: I do not hold of breira, so I cannot allow the wine anyway. You hold of breira, so you should be worried the flask will break. R' Meir answered that he is not worried. It was never R' Yehuda's own concern.
- KashaIs R' Yehuda really not chayish l'misa? In Yoma he says a second wife is prepared for the Kohen Gadol on Yom Kippur, lest his wife die.
- TeirutzRav Huna brei d'Rav Yehoshua: ma'alah asu b'kaparah. R' Yehuda did not really think it would happen. Because the kaparah of all of Klal Yisrael hinged on the Kohen Gadol, they took extra precaution.
- Aside: the Kohen Gadol davened only a short tefillah in the Kodesh HaKodashim, so that Klal Yisrael would not worry that he had not made it out.
- GemaraLine 21: both according to the one who says shema tamus (Abaye) and the one who says shema tivrach (R' Zeira), it is only a precaution. Mid'oraisa an animal is a mechitza me'alya; the Rabbanan made a gezeirah.
- ChazarahSukkah wall, lechi, pasei bira'os: really an animal could be used, but it might shrink (die) or run away. One item on the list will 'throw us for a loop.'
- KashaIf so, according to R' Meir it should be tamei mishum golel. Yet the Mishnah says R' Yehuda is metamei mishum golel and R' Meir is metaher.
- Golel is either the cover of a coffin or the final slab/seal over the cave. It has the din of the mes itself, even if it later comes off.
- The RebbiBeing metaher is a kula. If the animal is good mid'oraisa, how can R' Meir remove the tumah? This shows R' Meir holds an animal is intrinsically not a mechitza even mid'oraisa. It has nothing to do with dying or running away.
- The RebbiThe kasha is not on R' Meir himself. It is on Abaye and R' Zeira, who explained R' Meir's reason as an extra precaution.
- The RebbiOn a surface level the wall is good, and only shema tamus/shema tivrach prevents it. Golel shows that at the root it does not work. For golel, even being placed for one second should give the status of tumah, so the worry about running away is irrelevant.
- ChazarahClarification: the earlier sugya of the gamal was about a sukkah on top of an animal, not an animal as a wall. These are two different usages of an animal.
- TeirutzLine 26, Ella amar Rav Acha bar Yaakov: a brand-new answer that discards the explanation of Abaye and R' Zeira for R' Meir. R' Yehuda was always fine: to him an animal is like a piece of wood.
- ShitahLine 27: R' Meir holds kol mechitza she'omedes b'ruach eina mechitza. A wall held up by air (e.g. a moon bounce or an inflatable sukkah) is not a mechitza, and an animal also stands by ruach.
- The RebbiThis is not a problem you can fix by tying the animal up. Anything inflatable is simply not called a mechitza, so it fails for all four cases, including golel.
- ShitahIka d'amri: it is the same Rav Acha bar Yaakov, with two versions of what he said. R' Meir holds kol mechitza she'einah asuyah b'yedei adam eina mechitza; a mechitza must be erected by a person. Both reasons attack the animal at its root.
- GemaraMai beinaihu? When there are two reasons, look for a case where they differ.
- MaskanaAccording to 'omedes b'ruach,' an inflated case stands by ruach and is not a mechitza. According to 'not man-made,' blowing up a balloon is done by a person, so it works. To be continued tomorrow.
- ChazarahReview lines 21 to 30.
Kashas
- R' Yehuda asked R' Meir whether he isn't worried the flask will break; this implies R' Yehuda worries about it.
- R' Yehuda prepares another wife for the Kohen Gadol lest his wife die; this implies he is chayish l'misa.
- If an animal is a valid mechitza mid'oraisa according to R' Meir, why is he metaher it as a golel?
Teirutzim
- L'didi l'didach: R' Yehuda holds no breira; he was only arguing according to R' Meir's view.
- Ma'alah asu b'kaparah: extra precaution because the kaparah of Klal Yisrael was at stake.
- Rav Acha bar Yaakov: R' Meir holds a mechitza that stands by ruach is not a mechitza (ika d'amri: one not made by man is not a mechitza).
Mareh mekomos
- Mishnah in Yoma (R' Yehuda): another wife is prepared for the Kohen Gadol lest his wife die. Cited as a kasha on R' Yehuda.
- The Kohen Gadol's short tefillah in the Kodesh HaKodashim, so Klal Yisrael would not worry. Cited to illustrate concern for Klal Yisrael on Yom Kippur.
- Mishnah: R' Yehuda metamei mishum golel, R' Meir metaher. This is the source of the kasha on Abaye and R' Zeira.
- Apparently the pasuk 'vayipach b'apav nishmas chayim' (partly unclear in recording), cited regarding the ruach in a living being.
The Rebbi’s chiddushim
- A Rabbinic gezeirah on something permitted mid'oraisa is typical of the Rabbanan, e.g. muktzah, much of which is because you might come to carry.
- Metaher by golel is a kula. It cannot be explained by a mere precaution, so it must reflect that the animal is intrinsically not a mechitza.
- Golel needs the item in place for even a second, so the worry of dying or running away does not apply. (A talmid's point that the Rebbi endorsed.)
- Omedes b'ruach means held up by air, like a moon bounce or an inflatable sukkah; an animal is likewise something 'inflatable' by nature.
- Under the new reason, tying the animal up does not help; it is not a mechitza at all.
Unclear in recording
- The attribution of the two explanations of golel (coffin cover vs. final slab) is unclear in recording.
- A remark comparing a person to an inflatable, mentioning Asher Yatzar, is unclear in recording.
- A talmid's question comparing this to ohel, and to a bed; the Rebbi said he has to think about it. Details are unclear in recording.
- The Rebbi's reading of the case in the mai beinaihu is largely unclear in recording.
Drafted from the recording of the shiur, for chazarah. Torah terms follow the Rebbi’s own words; anything that could not be made out is marked “unclear in recording”. Tap a time to hear that point. Corrections welcome.