(a) Our Mishnah declares Kasher a Sukah ha'Meduvleles and one which has more shade than sun (which will be explained in the Sugya). What does the Tana about a Sukah ...

1. ... with very thick Sechach?

2. ... whose Sechach is so thick that one is unable to see the stars through it?

(a) Rav defines 'Sukah ha'Meduvleles' as a Sukah Aniyah (like the word 'Meduldeles' - poor). What is a 'Sukah Aniyah'?

(b) Shmuel interprets 'ha'Meduvleles' like 'ha'Mevulbeles'. What does that mean?

(c) How is the Halachah which follows 've'she'Tzilasah Merubah me'Chamasah' affected by the Machlokes between Rav and Shmuel?

(a) Abaye disqualifies Shmuel's 'Sukah ha'Meduvleles', should the top plank be three Tefachim or more away from the one below. How does Rava qualify Abaye's statement?

(b) On what principle is Rava's ruling based?

(c) Which principle is 'Chavot Rami' a part of?

(a) Rava proves his point from a Mishnah in Ohalos, which discusses uncemented beams of a house with an attic on top, and Tum'ah (a piece of Mes) lying underneath it. If there are two rows of planks, one on top of the other, with gaps between each plank, where will a vessel have to be to become Tamei, if the Tum'ah is lying ...

(a) We already quoted the Beraisa which (based on the principle of 'Lavud') extends a beam that stretches across the entrance of a Mavoy to within three Tefachim of the opposite wall, or two Koros that do not quite meet in the middle of the entrance, stopping short within three Tefachim of each other. What does Raban Shimon ben Gamliel say? What does he hold with regard to 'Lavud'?

(b) What is the minimum width that two beams placed side by side may be in order to serve a Mavoy as a Korah?

(c) Raban Shimon ben Gamliel is lenient in this point too. What does he say? How could the two beams be placed, even if they had a combined width of less than one Tefach?

(a) If the two beams are of a different height, Rebbi Yosi b'Rebbi Yehudah combines them, provided one is not higher than twenty Amos and the other one lower than ten Tefachim. What do we at first infer from Rebbi Yosi b'Rebbi Yehudah's words? Based on which principle will we then permit the two beams of different heights?

(b) How does that leave us with a Kashya on Rava's distinction between a Tefach and less than a Tefach by Chavot Rami?

(c) How do we amend our understanding of the Beraisa to resolve this problem? How close must the two beams be to be permitted, and which principle do we now apply in order to permit them?

(a) Why does our Mishnah, which validates a Sukah with more shade than sunshine, appear to contradict the Mishnah at the beginning of the Masechta, which invalidates a Sukah that has more sunshine than shade?

(b) How do we reconcile the two Mishnahs?

(c) What popular proverb is based n this answer?

(a) The Tana of our Mishnah validates a Sukah even if the Sechach is so thick that the stars cannot be seen through it. How thick will the Sechach have to be for Beis Shamai to invalidate the Sukah?

(b) What do Beis Hillel say?

(a) The Tana of our Mishnah validates a Sukah that is built on top of a wagon or a ship. Why would we have thought otherwise?

(b) What is the difference between the two above cases and a Sukah that is built on top of a tree or on top of a camel, which is also Kasher? Why does the Tana separate them?

(c) If entering a tree-Sukah is forbidden on Yom Tov, then why does the Tana see fit to inform us that it is Kasher?

(d) What if one does enter it on Yom-Tov, in spite of the prohibition?

(a) May one enter a Sukah on Yom-Tov ...

1. ... if two walls of the Sukah are supported by trees, whilst the third wall extends all the way down to the ground?

2. ... if the two adjacent walls are completely man-made, and the third one is supported by the tree?

(b) Is there any case when one is permitted to enter a Sukah which is partially supported by trees?

(c) What is the binding principle in this matter?