Hilchos Sukkah: Ma’amid and Ma’amid D’Ma’amid—The Chazon Ish, Nails, and Schach Supports

Transcript

So, give maimid. What's a sugya of maimid? Mistama any good yeshiva bachur knows any Gemara, maimid. You hear the word maimid, you get nervous, and then they know the Chazon Ish was maimid the maimid. So let's discuss what is maimid. Does it really exist? Then we'll find out what maimid is and what the Chazon Ish really held about it. So the Gemara begins with a Mishnah: Hasomech sukkaso b'karei hamitah, k'sheirah. Shitas Rabbanan is kosher. רבי יהודה אומר, אם אינה יכולה לעמוד בפני עצמה, פסולה. Can't stand by itself, it's pasul. So the Rabbanan hold anyway this is kosher, so you don't have to ask why the Rabbanan, because there's nothing. Rabbanan say it's a regular sukkah; it's beautiful, there's nothing wrong, it's kosher. Rabbi Yehuda, the Gemara wants to know, mai ta'ama d'Rabbi Yehuda. פליגי בה רב זירא ורב אבא: חד אמר מפני שאין לה קבע. If it can't stand בפני עצמה, so it has no keva, it's not a sukkah. What is it? חד אמר מפני שמעמידה בדבר המקבל טומאה. Maimid, and this is where maimid of davar hamekabel tumah comes from. So you're going to say, the chamuflosha Gemara, a Mishnah, the Gemara, yeah? So the truth is, it's not so pashut. First maybe we pasken like the Rabbanan, who says we bichlal pasken according to Rabbi Yehuda this might be a problem of maimid, so according to Rabbanan, you see there's no maimid, you see it's kosher. So maybe you pasken like the Rabbanan. And even if you pasken like Rabbi Yehuda, maybe we pasken like the first pshat in the Gemara, that it's ein lei keva. Says Rashi, shemitaltelus al yedei mita. It's moving; it's not. It's such an unstable sukkah. Rabbi Yehuda l'taimei, d'amar sukkah diras keva ba'inan. We hold the pasken sukkah diras arai ba'inan. So pashtus, we pasken like Rabbanan. So there should be no sukkah, really, Rabbi Yehuda, unless you have the second sugya, shemamida, af al pi shelomeda pesulah l'schach. Ifrach Rashi, which is a very important Rashi in the sugya, ma'amid, it's only a psul in the schach. Since it's the ma'amid of the schach, so without it, it wouldn't exist, the schach, so it's part of the schach. So just like there's a psul davar hamekabel tumah on the schach, there's a psul davar hamekabel tumah on the ma'amid. But good, who says we pasken like this Rabbi Yehuda? And who says we pasken like this pshat in Rabbi Yehuda? So this is a very big machlokes Rishonim, and then afterwards machlokes Acharonim. The Rosh paskens like the Rabbanan. The Rosh says we pasken like the Rabbanan. So we're going to get to the Mishnah Berurah, so take out your Mishnah Berurah. The Rosh says we pasken like the Rabbanan. So there's no sugya bichlal of davar hamekabel tumah. What's the case, though? Hasomech sukkaso b'karei hamitah. Karei is the poles of the bed. So if it could stand on its own? If it stands on its own, it's no sukkah. I think it could stay. It's been weak. You're talking about karei hamitah. What are you talking about? U'tumah nothing. U'tumah, a sukkah that has basically nothing to it. So if it could stand, then it's keva. If not, it's not keva. But the davar hamekabel tumah. Now why is it? Because the bed is a kli, which is a mekabel tumah, so it's a ma'amid for the davar hamekabel tumah, for the schach. So you're being ma'amid with a davar hamekabel tumah. So again, maybe we pasken like the Rabbanan, and even if we pasken like Rabbi Yehuda that it's not kosher, maybe the reason is because ein lo keva, the first pshat. So the Rosh says we pasken like the Rabbanan. The Tumas HaDeshen says we pasken taka like Rabbi Yehuda, but according to the first reason of Rabbi Yehuda. So he says there's no problem of ma'amid. It doesn't exist, says the Tumas HaDeshen in siman tzadi aleph. So where does the problem come from? The Ramban and the Ra'avad pasken like Rabbi Yehuda, the second pshat. Rabbi Yehuda, the second pshat. So then we have a problem of ma'amid, which means it's held up by a davar hamekabel tumah. Good? So just because there's some machlokes Rishonim, we still don't have hachora how to pasken. In the Rif, I don't want to be ma'arich now, but there's a Rif that the Ran learns one pshat in the Rif, that he paskens like Rabbi...

Who did the second shot? Some Rishonim, the Ritva and others, learn in the Rif that it's not that way. It's a she'eilah how to learn the Rif, and it's not for now because it's just I'm trying to bring out that it's a machlokes. How do we pasken? So who's going to be machria? So the first person to be machria was the Bach. So you should know that the Bach is the author of ma'amar. And I was soon going to learn that maybe the Mechaber also paskens. Not so pashut. There's a Magen Avraham that says that there's no such Mechaber, but the Bach is clear. So if you want to know ma'imit, ma'imit and Bach should be associated in your mind, that the posek, the one who paskens the ma'imit, is the Bach. The Bach says we pasken like the Ramban. He likes the Ramban. The Ramban is the machria, and the Rishonim, he says. The Ramban is the machria, and lemaaseh it becomes pasul. You hear? Pasul. Pasul, pasul. V'loy rak mi'midas chasidus, says the Bach. It's not a chumra; it's a psul. So according to the Bach, you got to care for the inyan of ma'imit, d'Oraisa or d'Rabbanan. When the Bach paskens with the shitah of the Ramban, is this ma'imit a psul d'Oraisa, or is this ma'imit a psul d'Rabbanan? What's the nafka mina? Extremely, extremely nogea, as we're soon going to learn. The Bach comes along and says, ma'imit pasul mi'd'Oraisa. Why? He tells on that Rashi I spoke to you about. Rashi comes along and says that there's a psul mekabel tumah in the schach. And since we learn that the thing that holds up the schach is like the schach, so he learns in that Rashi that Rashi means that even the ma'amid is pasul min haTorah. Just like min haTorah there's a psul davar hamekabel tumah on the schach, so that Rashi is mechadesh that the ma'amid velt azoi vi the schach. He brings this. That's his nekudah, the Rashi. That's a big thing by the Bach, this Rashi. The Ran learns in the Rashi that it's lav davka, that all he meant is that it's a din derabbanan, that there's a din derabbanan since lemaaseh there's a psul d'Oraisa on the schach. So midrabbanan, the ma'amid is like the schach. The Bach doesn't want to learn like this. The Bach says, I stick with my shita that it's d'Oraisa with the Rashi, and it's a psul. So it's mamish pasul min haTorah if you make a ma'amid on a davar hamekabel tumah. Now we're soon going to learn that davar hamekabel tumah is only one instance of psul schach. You can have many other cases of psul schach. For example, you can have something which is not only pasul, pasul lo min ha'asi, there's a psul schach. So could the ma'amid be pasul lo min ha'asi? There's a psul gazul on the schach, and Moshe speaks about in the teshuvos, beautiful teshuvos from Rav Moshe, that the ma'amid, you have to be careful, shouldn't be a psul of gazul, because if it is, just like the schach is pasul. If it's gazul, so the ma'amid would also be pasul gazul, because the sukkah nigzel is kosher. That's a mefurash halacha. We learned this in the Gemara, right? Sukkah, karka einah nigzeles, so there's no psul. I, the woods? The woods, we have a special halacha of, nu, takanas Meresh, right? The Gemara in third perek, that you just have to pay back the money, the sukkah is kosher. But al gazul, the schach is pasul. So according to Moshe, the ma'amid would have that problem also. And therefore, if you— and I'd like to be careful on this, because I want you to know that sometimes you find woods, for example here in Westgate, they're doing a lot of construction and a lot of pieces of wood, and kids take those woods, my children included. My children came home with beams, and they wanted to use it, and they said that those beams are thrown out because they have nails in them, and there's a junk pile and a good pile. I said, listen, do me a favor. The whole ma'amid— you listening? The whole ma'amid might not be a chiyuv problem, which means you might be able to be ma'amid on a davar hamekabel tumah, but if you do it on a gazul, yotzei. Not on the schach. No, but the walls, it lives as yours. But this is not ma'amid. The ma'amid is not the walls. The ma'amid is the schach. The problem is on the schach, Reb Moshe says. There's two sugyas. One is the walls.

Because it's binyan. And then the schach is a different problem. And therefore he says, you mamash, p'snat yotzer. I don't remember offhand the exact where the teshuva is. I want ma'amin was with the schach is resting on the... Right, right. But the ma'amin itself becomes part of the schach. So if the ma'amin is a gazul, says Rav Moshe, you wouldn't be yotzei. So it's likuva. You see, you have to make the cheshbon. The whole ma'amid might be mutar, because who says we pasken like the Bach, which I'll soon show you many Rishonim, including the Mechaber and the Magen Avraham, hold there's no real din ma'amid anyway. It's mutar l'halacha to have a ma'amid. There's no problem. So you would have more issue on a gazul if you took a ma'amid, let's say you took a piece of wood to put it on top of your sukkah to make the ma'amid, for example the canvas sukkahs. So people put a piece of wood over there. If it's gazul, you're running into more problems than just putting the schach straight on top on a davar hamekabel tumah, which agav אורחא, if you want to know maybe a different day on a different shiur, I'll explain to you that the canvas sukkahs, those poles are probably not mekabel tumah anyway. I spoke to Rav Feinstein about it because they're made for the sukkah. Those poles were made l'shem sichuch. They're made to be kosher for schach and sukkah, to hold up the sukkah. So they're not a davar hamekabel tumah. Something which is made for a sukkah is not made l'binyan; it's made l'shem schach. It's a sukkah by itself. I know you can't write because you don't know the whole pratim behind it. Just trust me on it, that the canvas sukkahs, everybody's going to tell you that you have to put a piece of wood across because otherwise you're being on top of a davar hamekabel tumah. Not so pashut. It's not for tonight. Trust me, it's a long sugya, and then we're not going to get to the sugya of ma'amid; that's l'gabei l'maaseh. All I'm trying to bring out is that the sugya of maimid is a machlokes if it's d'Oraisa or d'Rabbanan. According to the Bach, it's d'Oraisa. According to the Ran, it's only d'Rabbanan. The Bach is medayek from Rashi, but the Ran himself and Rashi says not like that. Point being, it's not only davar hamekabel tumah which the maimid is a problem. All psulei schach are a problem if the maimid would have those psulim as well. Whatever is not kosher for schach, the maimid is also not allowed to be. We'll discuss later on in the shiur certain dinim that the schach do have and the maimid do not have. And that whatever the psul is in the— that's the— whatever the— what's nogea right now in the shiur, whatever the psul of the schach cannot be in the maimid. And the question is, is it d'Oraisa or d'Rabbanan? Now, what's the nafka mina? I'll tell you the nafka mina. What happens if the whole psul that the maimid is is only a psul d'Rabbanan? For example, let's say you take a board which is more than four tefachim. A board which is more than four tefachim is pasul mid'Rabbanan al gezeiras tikra. So here the maimid is only pasul mid'Rabbanan. The whole din of maimid might only be a d'Rabbanan to begin with. So maybe it's only two d'Rabbanans. If you learn that it's a d'Oraisa, the whole sugya of maimid is d'Oraisa, so we could apply it even to something which is a psul schach mid'Rabbanan. Nesorim, beams which are four, is a psul only altz— Al gezeiras tikra, it's only drabonon d'kalach. What's our kashya l'schach? So if you learn that it's de'oraisa, then maybe it applies even on a ma'amid d'rabbanan. But if you learn it's only drabbanon, maybe you could say by two drabbanons we don't say. Where did I get this from? The Biur Halacha discusses this in the beginning of Taf-Reish Lamed, in the Mishnah Berurah. He brings from the Gra that only on a schach pasul de'oraisa is a problem of ma'amid. Something which is a schach pasul d'rabbanon, there's no problem. Azei zogt the Gaon, you can look it up, it's in the Biur Halacha, it's in the beginning of siman Taf-Reish Lamed, b'shem the Gra. Okay, the nafka mina I just told you are these big sefarim. Okay, less, rabosai, less than four tefachim we don't use. I don't know if people, Agavurcha's k'taida know this, we don't use even less for schach. This is only al tzah minhag. The Mishnah Berurah brings down that achshav nohagim al gezeiras tikra to not use even three, two. The question becomes, what about the small little pieces of wood? That's a very big tumul in the Acharonim. In Yerushalayim they used it. Rav Sternbuch brings down eidus from Gedolei Yerushalayim that they all used it. Ma'aseh d'Rav Chashulchan, I showed it to Rav Blazer or Krasner this morning, says clearly.

I think it's in seif... I don't have the Aruch HaShulchan here. He says even the ktaniktanim, noyagim, the minhag is not to use, which means even little pieces, less than a tefach, slats, yeah, they don't use it. I don't mind, im yirtzeh Hashem, to teach you and teach you, but I'm trying b'kitzur just to give you a little bit. There's an Aruch HaShulchan. Tell the Aruch HaShulchan, because he says ktaniktanim. Unless he means ktaniktanim more than a tefach, I don't know. It's hard to know what he means. He says you don't do it because gezeiras tikro. The thing is, I was matir it. Why am I matir it? Because today those little things, they don't use for tikra. Nobody uses it. The reason that the Aruch HaShulchan brings is that people use it for tikra, for a roof. No roofer is going to use a piece that's less than a tefach. That's not how you make roofs today. I think they did. I think they did. That's how the Aruch HaShulchan... gezeiras tikra, since people use... It's a gezeirah d'Rabbanan, but it's nichlal in the gezeirah that we're machmir. He says, v'lo matzinu. The lashon of the Aruch HaShulchan is, lo matzinu mi sheyismach b'eitz. They bichlal don't use tree. But it's not within the gezeirah saying that less than that. It's not nichlal in the gezeirah. That's the shaylah. The shaylah is the gezeirah was on four. The minhag is, the way the poskim bring it down, מצד המנהג, they aser less than four. So l'choirah, there wouldn't be a psul ma'amin on less than four, right? Because it's only a minhag. The shaylah is four, which is only d'Rabbanan. So the Gra, which the Biur Halachah brings down, since it's only d'Rabbanan, so you can't come and say what? You can't come and say that there's a problem of davar hama'amid, because the whole thing is only psul d'Rabbanan. So the ma'amid is only a psul chachamim d'Rabbanan, so there's no problem of ma'amid. Halachah l'maaseh, what's the halachah l'maaseh? The Pri Megadim in Eshel Avraham, taf reish chaf tes, se'if katan yud aleph, says a yarei Shamayim should not use even a psul d'Rabbanan for a ma'amid. He says even though betzem there's a makom to be meikel, which is this Gra, a Yarei Shamayim doesn't do it. You look at the Biur Halacha, the ... yud aleph, he says he can be meikel, which is this goyen. L'maaseh, I don't have time to go through with you, and, mistama, he doesn't want to hear pilpulim tonight, but there's a stirah in the Mishnah Berurah. It's an often a stirah. If you look at the Biur Halacha that I told you, psulin d'rabbanan from the goyen, he just said there's no ma'amin. If you look in the Mishnah Berurah, siman taf reish chaf tes, se'if katan chaf hei, he says clearly that all ma'amin which are pasul mid'rabbanan is a problem. There's a shtickel stirah in the Mishnah Berurah. I have a yishuv, but it's a pilpul shiur, not for now. You're saying you can't be masmich totally with these things, but you can have beams in here. Exactly. What I'm saying is like this: you can't use one tefach, a tefach and more, and according to the Rosh Hashulchan maybe even less than a tefach for schach, but you definitely could put the schach on it, because since it's only a minig, so there shouldn't be a problem. Four, which is d'rabbanan, that's a machlokes, and there's two Mishnah Berurahs about it. Oh, I'm so sorry, I'm truly sorry. It's a common occurrence that people sit next to me and get wet. Is there a difference between psulin d'rabbanan and minhag? My talmidim know, I always tell them, if you don't have life insurance and health insurance, you shouldn't sit next to me during a shiur. I'm sorry, I'm sorry. ... It's this Yom Tov. For ma'amin you shouldn't use more than four tefachim either. For ma'amin, four tefachim and more you shouldn't use, al tz the Pri Megadim, huh? ... Remember that was the line I said. Four tefachim is used. I have a beam that's this wide. That's right, so that's not four tefachim. So that's fine. That's fine. You can sit directly under them, it's fine. Fine. Is there a difference between psulin d'rabbanan ... that's what I'm saying. So in the stirah, you said there's a stirah. The Mishnah Berurah is mashma any d'rabbanan. One d'rabbanan, in one place he says d'rabbanan ma'amin is kosher, that's the Biur Halacha in taf hei, and in taf reish chaf hei... It's Tafresh Chavtes, seif katan chaf hei. He says that even the derabbanan, you shouldn't have a mind. But nothing about minhag. Minhag is pashut. I don't see a makom. Again, maybe acharonim. Listen, I don't know all the acharonim. I just know how I would pasken. The Mishnah Berurah, it's not there. There's no shitah on the minhag. Okay. This is all beautiful. What's l'maaseh? Halacha, halacha, halacha l'maaseh. Shailah is, what's the shitah of the mechaber? So everybody take out your Mishnah Berurahs. The Mechaber in seif siman taf reish lamed. Let's see how he brings down the halacha of mitah. Does he bring it down nusach of the Rabbanan, or does he bring it down... I can't tell you, rabosai, how if you learn the sugyas, how beautiful Shas is, and how beautiful the poskim are. Every word the poskim... every single...

And everything's l'maaseh. ... halacha l'maaseh, you know, every word in the sugya is halacha l'maaseh. You know, when we learn kachim, we should have learned that also, but we don't have a Beis HaMikdash. But in the times of the Beis HaMikdash, they would learn kachim like we learn Moed. Okay, so let's see the Mechaber. What does the Mechaber bring down? If it has goyva k'no yud, it's kosher. Why? Because it's keva, right? He brings the lashon of keva. Taf-reish lamed, the end of taf-reish lamed. You have it? By mita. No, what's the sugya? Read it, no? ... Yeah. Right, since it has yud tefachim, what's the maila of yud tefachim? Because it's keva. So you see clearly that he brings the sugya of what? Of keva. So all the Acharonim are medayek, the poskim medayek, you see that the shita of the Mechaber is klal, because if it's al davar mekabel tumah, it has nothing to do with how high it is. You're being ma'amin on davar mekabel tumah. Problem. The Mechaber in taf-reish chaf-tes, se'if zayin, has a whole safek if you're allowed to put the schach on top of a sukkah that has in it a sulam, it has in it a ladder. What's the shailah? says the Taz, a sulam is a kli. A kli is a davar mekabel tumah. The sulam is a ma'amid, a davar shelo mekabel tumah, maybe it's a problem. So you see clear that the Mechaber had a safek about davar ma'amid mekabel tumah. On one hand, over here in the sugya of mita, he learns that the whole problem is ein lei keva. And in the sugya of, in the sugya of sulam, okay, everybody has a tof reish chaf tes, se'if zayin. I don't mind waiting a moment to make sure that you internalize. Lemesharayin, yishmak. The two mechabes. Look at the two mechabes and see the stira. You do a dikduk stira. On one hand, the mechaber says as long as it goes all the way up to the schach, it's not a problem. Why not? Because it's kavua, right? Obviously, it goes up because if it's al tzmaimid, there's no difference. It should be pasul either way. So you see that he learned that the sugya has to do with ein lei keva, right? Masha'en kein, by the sugya of sulam, you see clearly that he has a safek, and the Taz says, what's the safek? Because it's a ma'amin a davar mekabel tumah. Sulam is a davar mekabel tumah. Now, truthfully, there's many, many terutzim. There's a Magen Avraham that wants to mechalek. There's a Chashukei Chemed that wants to mechalek. I don't mind doing with you one day. It's not nogea halacha l'maaseh, okay? The only thing is the Aruch HaShulchan has an interesting chiddush, that the case of karya mitos is on the outsides of the sukkah and the sulam is in the middle. In the sulam, in the middle, we have a problem of the mesachech b'davar hamekabel tumah. On the outsides, nisht. Very interesting chiddush. Karya mitos on the outsides, meaning he has four poles. It was the queen's beds. Those days it was called the queen's. It was four, not klitei hamitah. There's four poles on the outside. So the schach in the middle is fine, but on the outskirts it's being nemad on a davar mekabel tumah, says the Aruch HaShulchan. See if yud ches, that it's not a problem when it's on the outside. When it's in the inside of the sukkah, then it becomes a problem. So it's a very big chiddush. He wants to mechadesh that according to the mechaber, there's a problem of ma'amid when it's on the inside. L'maaseh, says the Aruch HaShulchan, either way, we hold that there's a problem of ma'amid, and the Mishnah Berurah in se'if katan chaf gimmel says klar the same halacha, that we choshesh for ma'amid a davar mekabel tumah, and it's asur. That's the shitah how we follow. Okay, so we have a klal from the Chashulchan. There's other Acharonim also, you know, Mishnah Berurah, the Aruch, everybody says the same yesod, that we, halacha l'maaseh, there's a problem of mayim medavar mekabel tumah. So what's my shittah here? I'm gonna come out and say that's asur? You know I can't say that it's asur, because the shailah becomes, is that l'chatchilah or b'diavad? That's the shailah. The Chashulchan and Mishnah Berurah both say that there's a problem of mayim; I agree with you, but is that l'chatchilah or b'diavad? So there's a baku'ei Yankif, Taf Reish Chaf Tes, se'if katan yud-gimmel, that if the sukkah is a ma'amid and he doesn't have a different sukkah, it's kosher, and you can make a bracha on it, because the ganze sugya for ma'amid stands on a hair. It's not such a pashut sugya, and we don't know if it exists, and even if it exists, it's maybe only a chashash d'Rabbanan. You can make a bracha on such a sukkah. I never was sure pshat in this because—

Yankiv, it's כדאי to look it up, because could be he meant you don't have another sukkah, which means that you can't go to your friend. But if you go to your friend, maybe you shouldn't sit in such a sukkah. It doesn't mean that if a guy has a sukkah like that, you should go sit in it. Could be what he meant to say was that the next sukkah is a block away. He has to go to the chveista, down, down, who knows where, to get another sukkah, and it's too difficult. But if you could get your next-door neighbor, maybe you should go to your next-door neighbor's sukkah, and you should not sit in a sukkah that has a maimed. I want to tell you that all the acharonim disagree. Reb Yankiv in Emes l'Yaakov writes clear that it's l'chatchila, sit in a sukkah and you can make a bracha. There's no problem of maimed; mamash it's kosher, it's beganish. Reb Yankiv in Emes l'Yaakov. And I also brought, because I know that olam is going to say— I brought that Nissim Karelitz's sefer, and he quotes this b'shem the Chazon Ish. The Chazon Ish told him to make a sukkah with a maimed, with a maimed adam mekabel tumah. It says clearly, okay? So let me read it for you. It's in Chut Shani, it's in Hilchos Shabbos, because in the back of the Hilchos Shabbos, the last volume, he has on sukkah. Okay, so we're going to read it inside, and like this you'll say I didn't make it up. U'v'Chazon Ish kasav she'anu nohagim l'hachmir b'din hemidas sachach k'davar ha'mekabel tumah. It should be bidieved; it's a mistake, okay? Bidieved, a mekabel tumah. V'nir'eh pashut, he says, d'ein kavanas haChazon Ish sheyesh minhag l'hachmir, ela shehamedakdekim machmirim. Meaning, we're soon going to learn this, that even the Chazon Ish that said maimed d'maimed, that the thing that's holding the thing that's holding is a problem, he didn't mean that it's halacha, it's only a medakdekim. Chein zichrani. I remember, he says clearly, she'amar Miran chaznish l'sachek al gabi tzinoyres barzel. Don't mean to make a sukkah on top of metal poles of kvisa. They used to have those strings to hang the—what do they call that?—the clothing when it's to dry. It was like metal tzinoyres, yeah. K'shehoyah simchas beis hashoeivah b'Beis Miran, v'lo hayah makom acher. There was no other place. V'hayinu, v'hainu b'nei she'ein minhag l'hachmir, ela she'atchilah medakdekim machmirin, u'v'shaas hadchak efshar l'hakel. All right? U'kegon, says—what's the case? Chosen she'ochel etzel chamav. How many times you go to your shver and your shver is not the biggest talmid chacham in the world, so you put up a sukkah with a ma'amid. You're stamping out, you're running out, you're going next door, you're gonna turn up the whole— He brings this case. You want to read it? You can take it and I enjoy it, but I want you to enjoy it also. Come on, read. Late, read. U'kegon, chosen she'ochel etzel chamav, v'ein makpidim sham, shelo lehamtin es chach b'davar mekabel tumah, yachol l'hakel v'le'echol sham, ki ikar hahalachah. And then he says if you want to do it, you don't have to matir neder, because there's no halachah of davar hamekabel tumah; it doesn't really exist. Chazon ish, it's good enough for you. I beg you, I beg you, don't listen to what people say in the street. People walk around saying things b'shem gedolim; they don't know. Leinus understood halacha. They understood, you have to, you know, read it again. Seigel, go ahead. Leinus, Leinus, show you. It's right there. Right, right, from here, this piece, go ahead. No, don't be shver, and he's not makpid on mymid, leave it alone. So that's why I told you, the gazel might be more of a problem for your maimid than the whole maimid. Like Yankiv says, go ahead, make a... let's, you doa. Maimid is a very weak thing, yeah. The machmirim, very, very voss. It's the big, what do you call it, the frightening halacha, maimid, maimid, the maimid. Whole maimid is a shvach halacha. Are we going to talk about that? Is there an issue of chila? Let me tell you, let me tell you. There's no shayla, there's no shayla, of course, lechatchila, if you could, but if you can't. I'll tell you why I'm thinking. This year I was going to put up the wood. The wind is so strong, it's a sakana. I'm terrified to put the...

And how am I going to keep that wood down? Again, you're not gaining anything. If you knew Hilchos maimed, you'd understand that you're not gaining anything. To tie down the maimed—we're going to get to that. We're going to get to it. Zip ties. Zip ties, or you're talking about bamboo strings. Special things are not mekabel tumah. Not—it's fine, it's fine. Let me discuss everything with you. This is just the beginning of the shiur. We're going to go through everything. And then you'll see how, when you know, it looks a whole different sugya. You'll see it from a different angle. What are they talking about the whole time? So so far, azei shteit, okay. Like I said to you, we only know by davar mekabel tumah. We still don't know yet by the other pesul, for example, mechubar l'karka, when it's still attached. A lot of times people want to put the maimed on the houses, okay? So I want you to know there's a little shayna halachos. You know who shayna halachos is? He's the gadol hador of today. His name is Reb Chaim Kanievsky, and he brings this halacha, that it's not only by davar mekabel tumah, by all psulei s'chach—and that's how I began the shiur with you—all psulei s'chach you have a problem with maimed. So technically, you have a problem. It's not meant for davar mekabel tumah. The way the Gemara brings it, it's by davar mekabel tumah, and that's where maimed is rooted in. The emes is, the poskim—and you see Reb Chaim Kanievsky learned that way. You look in the Sha'arei Halachos, it's all, all psulei. Look how Reb Chaim brings it: all psulei of s'chach have a problem with the maimed, and that's why I asked you pasul loy min ha'asui. But I'll tell you I have a very big kashya. You know what my kashya is? All my years I had this kashya. The maimed is not there l'shem tzel. Schach has to be l'shem tzel. The maimed is there to keep up the schach, so it's not l'shem tzel. Whatever. What? Whatever people... Yeah, whatever. You have to be a talmid chacham is the problem, when you have to report. I do it because the bochurim in yeshiva have taanosim that I don't come to teach them. Ah, whatever you like. But here, my kashya—it's a major kashya. L'choira, l'shem tzel, l'shem tzel is the inyan of schach. The maimed is not there l'shem tzel, unless you say a mechudash, since the maimed, like Rashi says, is only for the schach, the whole maimed is for the schach. So meileh, if I put up a maimed l'shem tzel, that's called l'shem tzel. Even though the maimed itself is not there to give tzel, but since the maimed is for the sake of the schach, and that's al shem the schach, v'erdos schach, so meileh it comes out that I put the maimed l'shem tzel. In a roundabout way, it comes out that the maimed was made l'shem tzel. The problem is going to be in the... For example— You need the maimed to be l'shem tzel. Schach needs to be l'shem tzel. If I didn't put it l'shem tzel, it's pasul l'schach. Yeah? So it comes out— Or it's pasul l'schach, or it's just not kosher schach. It's not schach. Okay, so here you don't need schach. You don't want a maimed. You don't want a schach. Good, but it has to be kosher for schach. You need to be maimed on a davar which is kosher for schach, so you don't need schach. So how could the maimed be something which is not schach? No, if it's pasul... Huh? You can never use anything but wood, baby. Plastic. You can't use these fiberglass... you can't use, what's it called? Yeah, that's what I just told you. The bias. That's exactly what I just told you. That's the chiddush. The chiddush is maybe pshat is only did a davar mekabel tumah. What if pshat is anything, anything that has to be ma'amid has to be ra'ui l'schach. That's what I was telling you. Reb Chaim is learning, since the house is not ra'ui l'schach, you're saying two nekudos. One is that פסול סכך and not ראוי לסכך. Okay. Let's continue, but you hear my shaylah. Okay. Now let's discuss. Why is it... It's just there's a ma'amid. What kind of sechach is it giving? You have a neser arba. You have a neser arba. It's giving you... what kind of shade is it giving? It's ראוי itself. The house. The wall of the house. Not tzel סכך. It can't be tzel from the side. Tzel defanos. Tzel defanos is not called tzel. It's tzel. It's a Gemara. Adam yosh...

Shebetzel tefanis, that's the pshat. Ashter is kanai. When a person retires in twenties, something... Adam yoshev b'tzel tefanis, v'eino yoshev b'tzel... Tzel tefanis is not ראוי. What's the pshat attaching it to the wall? What's the pshat attaching it to the wall of the house? The house is not ראוי for סכך. So if it's not ראוי for סכך, he'd be meimen a davar that's not ראוי for סכך. Okay, let's continue. That's l'choira, Kointrup Chaim Kanievsky, it should be a problem. You take a look at the... Okay. Another nekudah is ma'amid from the top. What happens if I put the סכך on top? Instead of putting it, the ma'amid on the bottom, and I put the סכך on top, what happens if it's ma'amided from the top? The wind should blow it off. The Maharil speaks about it. There's a very famous Maharil. The Maharil says that's still called ma'amid, it's asur. It's not supporting it. So it's talui what your kavanah is. No, is ma'amid under or is ma'amid holding? If I'm putting it there—Josh, it's the whole sugya, that ma'amid is holding. If I'm putting it there not for... I'm putting it there, but even though it's ראוי for... but I'm putting it there as a weight, but it's ראוי for... So then what? No, if it's ראוי for... it's kosher. I'm saying, but a puzzle thing. If I took a puzzle, I took something, a rock, I put rocks on top, so your ma'amid... And you're talking about from four and onward? Forget about four now. Anything which is pasul l'schach, I put it on top. It's a ma'amid and a pasul. The shailah l'maalah is ma'amid. Everybody understands ma'amid from underneath. The truth is ma'amid, according to Maharil, according to many poskim, is from the top also. But it has to be that it's there to do something with the סכך. Anything that holds down the סכך will still... You know, over years I understood Reb Elyashiv. You know, Reb Elyashiv has very interesting psakim about these. We're going to get to it in a minute. Okay, the next part of the shiur, you must know: a gevaldige kasha for the Tzvi Pesach Frank. Tzvi Pesach Frank in the Korei Kodesh, chelek aleph, siman chaf-alef, has a meidige kasha. L'maaseh, let's say you take a piece of wood and you put it on top of the, let's say, the canvas sukkah, because you want ma'amid on a davar which is kosher, so you put a small piece of wood. L'maaseh, what's really holding up the sukkah? That piece of wood is holding. If you took away that wood, the whole thing is going to— no, it's going to stand on the— so it's really standing on the— so the metal is not a ma'amid; the ma'amid, the metal is the ma'amid. So what does it help you? Zogt Tzvi Pesach Frank, fashteit nisht, doesn't understand the whole sugya. Let's say you put something on top; that's the minhag. You put a piece of wood, right, to make sure that it's not a ma'amid on a davar hamekabel tumah. It doesn't help you anything, because at the end of the day, the real thing that's holding it up— see, that's what I'm trying to explain to you— it's not a din in what, rabosai, what's under; it's what's holding it. What's holding it is the klum. Zogt Tzvi Pesach Frank, a gevaldige yesod in ma'amid. Ma'amid is only din in heker. Anything which is actually holding it up and not more, because it looks like it's part of the schach. Stam that it holds it up is not a chisaron. So you see how the poskim argue in the yesod of ma'amid. Is ma'amid anything that holds it up, or is the chelek from the schach? Or the ma'amid is the pshat something that's underneath it, and it looks like it's part of the schach. is a problem. You want to give me ...? Am I saying it too fast? Am I going a little too quickly? What would be something that's... Can I give you an example? That's part of it. Can I glue? Can I glue it down? Oh, then it would be part of it. If you hide it. The ... is maybe you could chew it. That you can't see it. If it's a ... dehalacha, then maybe it's a problem. Very famous teshuvah from Rav Vozner about gluing, and I'm going to talk to you about gluing with chazonish's ma'amid and ma'amid. Okay, so let's make a little quick chazarah, because I don't know if maybe there's a little too much information quickly. So again, ma'amid. Considered ma'amid? Holding it up. Depends what... What? Glue? Why? Can't be mesachek with glue. What are you talking about? Okay, so let's make a quick chazarah. Let's make a quick chazarah, okay? So the first shailah becomes ma'amid. Does it or doesn't it exist? From the Chazon Ish, you see clearly that it might not necessarily exist. Even if it exists, it's important to know what it is. Is ma'amid the pshat that it's holding up, or ma'amid is that it's holding it?

Is it underneath, or the fact that that holds, nafkamina would be if it's on top. The Maharil says even if on top, it's called a ma'amid. The other nafkamina is if it's a piece of wood which is on top of a metal, which is the metal of sukkah. L'maaseh, what's holding up the schach? The metal. You're not going to say that the wood is holding it up. Afal pi kein, since what's under the schach is the wood, ... that's already called ma'amid. And like I said, the nafkamina would be things which are not necessarily—he says it's al heker, it's a heker dekalach. The whole din of ma'amid, it looks like it's part of the schach and it's a davar hamekabel tumah, and someone's going to use pasul schach because of it. So something which you can't tell l'chaira, Rav Vozner says it shouldn't be a nafkamina. Okay. L'maaseh, Reb Elyashiv, Reb Shlomo Zalman, and Reb Belsky karelitz paskens that even if you have a wood on top of a metal sukkah, it's not going to help you because the real ma'amid is the poles underneath. It's not true. Reb Tzvi Pesach wants to mechadesh that the wood on top will help you. So if you hold it's a problem of ma'amid, says Reb Elyashiv and Reb Shlomo Zalman and Reb Karelitz, it doesn't, because the real thing that's holding up the schach is actually the metal poles, is holding up the metal poles, so then it doesn't even help you. So it's interesting, a lot of people do it. So it's not even so pashut according to the poskim if that works. Now, let me tell you over— What's the eitz? I don't know. The eitz is you'll have to listen to me and Reb David Feinstein that the whole metal pole isn't a mekabel tumah because it's made for the schach. Okay. The Chazon Ish. Chazon Ish has a major chiddush. Chazon Ish wants to say that if the schach is standing by itself, in our case, you add a ma'amid to be mechazek the schach, that's not called a ma'amid. Kuf mem gimmel ois beis, says the Chazon Ish, that ma'amid has to be that it's holding up, and without it, it would fall. But if the pshat is without it, it wouldn't fall anyway, so technically, if I put in nails just to be mechazek, so then this is no real sugya of ma'amid. Meaning, any time—so the schach doesn't roll off. Meaning, it's going to stay anyway; it's not going to roll off with the wind, so that's not a problem. I don't know if that's what he means, but it's just tosefes chizuk. I don't know how the derech of tosefes chizuk... I guess maybe just to be guaranteed it's not going to... Even on the bottom, going across? Is that what you're sitting under, or is that even on the side of...? It doesn't do with that. The yesod of ma'amid means that it's taka holding it up, not that it's enforcing it down, like holding up. Those nails are ma'amid or not? Which nails are you talking about? To prevent the... That's what I'm saying, l'chaira it's tosefes chizuk, because it's anyway not a problem. That's what I'm trying to tell you, that as the Chazon Ish klar, that ma'amid is only that it holds it up. If it would stay up anyway, and then the nails are just there just to be mosif, there's no such sugya. I guess you do a ruach metzuyah. And a ruach metzuyah, obviously. Okay. Now, what about... Like I said, gluing it. I said Rav Vazner says you're allowed to glue it, okay. Reb Chaim ta'ines in algu, we spoke about this. There's a whole shaila if it's allowed to be kavua, the schach. For example, let's say you have these, what do you call those mats, right? So there's two they make. They make mats that are with bamboos, and then they make it with wood sticks, little wood sticks. They have ones with little wood sticks, okay. So Reb Elyashiv says that those wood sticks, if you tie it down, that's called kavua, and the schach cannot be kavua. So Reb Chaim clarifies, let's put down the contrarian from Reb Chaim, that if you glue the schach down, your problem is not al tzmaimid, but your problem is you're kovea the schach. So it's not an eitzah. Even if you're going to say that there's no problem of maimid, you still run into the problem of what? Of kvius. More than a problem of bamboo? What? I'm talking about two different sugyas. One sugya is about tying it down with bamboos, because Reb Elyashiv says that's not kavua because it's not like a bayis. Bamboos are not a bayis. No, and we spoke about it. Yes, we spoke. You missed that, okay. We discussed.

Rav Yashda doesn't like the mats. That's the famous thing. Rav Yashda holds, you not use those mats, those things that they put the bamboos together. Rav Yashda holds you not do it. It's a raya that it's kavua, it's a whole rashba. It's two different sugyas. There's two problems. The main problem is, he says it's al tikra, because that itself is a tikra. Now, I don't know who makes a tikra like that, but hakol panim, I was thinking, so maybe Rav Yasha would say that in Japan, where they make the tikra from the bamboos, maybe that would be the problem. I don't know what the hagdarah is, but that's what Rav Yasha says. There's a problem of kvius in how the schach is made, because then it turns into a tikra. So that's Rav Chaim Kanievsky's klal. If I would take schach and glue it down, then I run into this problem of kvius. I go from the problem of dover hamekabel tumah, maybe it's not a problem, altz ma'amin, but then you run into the problem of kvius. Okay. So this, rabosai, is pretty much the sugya of ma'amid, that it's not necessarily l'ikuvah, that even if we do pasken like the shitos that hold that there's a problem of ma'amid, it's only maybe l'chatchilah, b'di'eved if you have no choice. And, what I think in Westgate, you don't have a choice, rabosai. Your sukkah, especially those that are out there, it's going to fly away. You got to tie down the sukkah. So if you don't have a thing to tie it down, I don't know, maybe you say there are things that are davar she'eino mekabel tumah, you can tie it down on that. You have things which are not mekabel tumah. Yeah, but suddenly if it's outside the sukkah, it's not a problem anyway, so if you tie it down to the porch. Tie it down to the— No, no. You can't tie it down to— it has to be davar hama'amid b'Yisrael. So you said— tie it down to the ma'amid, no? Oh, you tie it with that aruch ha'shulchan. Am I going to tie it to pasmak in aruch ha'shulchan? Pashtus the velt is not machmir, that any ma'amid is no good. So if you tie it to the house, it's no good. So you tie it to the ma'amid. If I take the ma'amid and I tie it to the house, which is what you did— I did that years ago, and I— I tell you not to do. What's the schach or the ma'amid? This is the sukkah. Years ago I tied my— to my garage door. What's the problem to tie— just for chizuk, that's the problem. To tie the schach? It's a sukkah itself or it's the schach? The chazonish— what? The sukkah or the schach? The schach is not allowed to be tied down. Why can't you put wood on top of it? On something— the sukkah, you could attach to the house. No problem. You're supposed to attach to the house. Sukkah is supposed to attach. What's a ma'amid? Sukkah is not a ma'amid. The sukkah is kosher, it's kosher. Even if you tie it down? Sukkah is kosher. Even if you tie it down— if you tie down a ma'amid, that's still going to be okay? You're allowed to tie down the ma'amid. It's pasul schach. We don't hold ma'amid. Only the ma'amid is a problem. No, so I'm saying, could I tie down the ma'amid? Yeah, that's what I'm trying to tell you. Even though the schach is pasul if I tie it down, we're saying that a ma'amid is like schach. That's ma'amid d'ma'amid, so we're going to learn that right now. We're not holding it yet. Okay, so rabosai, listen, we're getting to this nekudah, so let me just get through the ma'amid d'ma'amid now. Very machmir. I wentsh I had a very hard time, because I use it, I use it. What, the mat? I use the mat. I use the bamboo mats. The Rebbe has a roll, a roll mat, no? That's not the mat he passled. That's not true. Reb Elyashiv passled these mats that are made out of wood this thick, and they use them. I don't know. Reb Elyashiv? How do you know that? The square mats, that's what. That's not true. He passled all the mats. He doesn't like any, any tie, you know. These are bamboos that we have. It doesn't make a difference. He doesn't hold of the tying. He holds of the kvius; it's a problem. The way I said about the tying down, but he doesn't hold of the mats for different reasons. It's clear. That's why I told you there's two different sugyas. One sugya is the tying down, that it's kavua like the house, and then there's another problem of machzel shel kanim, that it comes over. Then you can cut it, derech ha-shulchan, as I told you yesterday. To what? To cut. The truth is, Reb Leizer, I'd love to teach you more and more. It's ma'ariv time, so let me just— What? Okay, so there's a derech ha-shulchan, Reb Leizer, here. No, not yet. One more, so let's finish. We're still in one more. No, no, no. Let me just finish ma'amid d'maamid. Let me just finish ma'amid d'maamid, okay? Ma'amid d'maamid, the mechaber in Taf Reish Chaf Tes, se'if ches, says clearly you gotta be mechaber klinsa'os ha-sukkah, right? It's mutar. You're gonna go look it up. Go ahead. Taf Reish Chaf Tes, se'if ches. Who's looking it up? Taf Reish Chaf Tes, se'if ches. Says the Magen Avraham, from here we have a raya that the mechaber holds ma'amid d'maamid—oh, ma'amid d'maamid is kasher. Zogt the Chazon Ish, ma'amid d'maamid is nishkasher. Nishtems, nishkasher.

Someone says, again, the Chazon Ish ... This Chazon Ish is not to be listened to; we don't have to mekabel the Chazon Ish. It's a chumra yeseira, gezeirah l'gezeirah, minchas Shlomo, Tinyana, siman nun hei. And even Reb Elyashiv, believe it or not, says that the Chazon Ish is nisht lahalacha, against the Chazon Ish. He says it's a raya, it's clear, the Magen Avraham is gerecht from the mechaber, that there's no sugya mai midemai. Now I want to tell you that the oilam makes a big mistake in mai midemai. Rav Greineman, as well as the meidim zmanim, write clearly that he didn't mean the nails in the walls that hold up the walls that hold up the thing. When the Chazon Ish pasled the nails, he meant the nails in the maimer itself, because of this halacha that the maimer is a— There's only one problem: the Velt is right when they read the Chazon Ish. The Chazon Ish doesn't say that. The Chazon Ish says it the way the Velt says: the nails in the walls. He says it. Because those are the words of the Chazon Ish. Okay, so what's the tzad anyway, the tzad fakert? Okay, the tzad fakert is, Rabosai, the Chazon Ish himself held that what he said is not lahalacha. This is in the Orchos Rabbeinu. Rav Chaim Kanievsky says that he heard from a mekurav of the Chazon Ish that the Chazon Ish said that he wrote it for himself and himself only. Okay, so we're going to read it inside, with shleimus ha'inyan, and then we're going to say goodbye to the sugya, okay? Here. He says that he only wrote it—only wrote it—it's on page daled. I'll read down the exact page.