Daf Yomi - Sukkah 47 - Highlights

1. The Rosh writes that one does not recite a blessing when entering a Sukkah on Shemini Atzeres because reciting a blessing would demonstrate contradictory behavior. When one recites a blessing for the Sukkah, he is demonstrating that dwelling in the Sukkah is a mitzvah, and then it cannot simultaneously be Shemini Atzeres. If it is now Shemini Atzeres and Sukkos has ended, then dwelling in the Sukkah cannot be deemed a mitzvah. To enter the Sukkah and not recite a blessing is not contradictory to Shemini Atzeres, because people will occasionally eat outdoors if it is pleasant for them. The Chachamim did not enact a decree, however, that one should take a lulav on Shemini Atzeres without reciting a blessing, because a person does not take a lulav on his own, and taking it on Shemini Atzeres would be in contradiction to the theme of the day. Tosafos adds that taking a lulav may involve the prohibition of handling muktzeh on Yom Tov. (46a1)
2. Rabbi Yochanan rules that one recites the shehechiyanu blessing on Shemini Atzeres but not on the seventh day of Pesach. The reason for this distinction is because Shemini Atzeres is considered an independent Yom Tov, as one is not required to sit in the Sukkah and take the lulav on Shemini Atzeres, and the water libations on the mizbeiach are not performed on Shemini Atzeres. (47a2)
3. The Gemara explains further that Shemini Atzeres is considered independent from the rest of Sukkos as it has its own arrangement of sacrificial offerings. In addition, the songs that the Leviim sang were not from the same category of songs that were sung on Sukkos. Another distinction is that the text of the Shemone Esrei that is recited on Shemini Atzeres is different that the text that is recited on Sukkos. Lastly, Shemini Atzeres requires that one stay overnight in Jerusalem until the day after the festival. (47a3)
4. Although there is normally a requirement that one stay overnight in Jerusalem after having offered a sacrifice, there is no such requirement regarding the festival of Pesach Sheini. (47b1-47b2)
5. There is an opinion that maintains that one does not recite the shehechiyanu blessing on Shemini Atzeres. The halacha, however, is in accordance with the opinion that one does recite the shehechiyanu blessing on Shemini Atzeres. (47b2-47b3)

Read more!

Daf Yomi - Sukkah 47 - A difficult departure

The Gemara concludes that the halacha regarding Shemini Atzeres is meisav yasvinan beruchei lo mevarchinan, we dwell in the Sukkah but we do not recite a blessing for the mitzvah of dwelling in the Sukkah. The Medrash states that the reason why we celebrate Shemini Atzeres is because HaShem declares, “you, the Jewish People have been with Me now for seven days. It is very difficult to have you part from Me. Please, stay with me another day.” We find that the word yeshiva in certain contexts means to tarry or to remain behind. Perhaps the Gemara is alluding to this idea that we tarry in the Sukkah because it is difficult for HaShem that we leave Him, but we do not recite a blessing, because HaShem has never left us.

Read more!

Daf Yomi - Sukkah 47 - Can't get Enough of Shmini Atzeres

The Rosh writes that if one enters the Sukkah on Shemini Atzeres without reciting a blessing, his behavior is not contradictory to the theme of the day, because people will occasionally eat outdoors if it is pleasant for them. Rashi in Sefer HaPardes and the Machzor Vitri write that the custom of many great people was to recite Kiddush in the Sukkah and then to finish the meal in the house. Perhaps the rationale for this custom is because it will only be pleasant for short intervals of time but it will not be pleasant to sit in the Sukkah for the entire meal.The Maharil rules that one should eat in the house at night and one should eat in the Sukkah by day. The rationale for this ruling is because it is not considered pleasurable to eat in the Sukkah at night when it is cold. For this reason the Korban Nesanel and the Aruch HaShulchan rule that if it is extremely windy or cold on Shemini Atzeres, one should not eat in the Sukkah. The discomfort that one feels when sitting in the Sukkah when there is inclement weather is in contradiction to Shemini Atzeres.The Minchas Elazar writes that when the requirement to eat in the Sukkah on Shemini Atzeres was instituted, the countries where the Jews resided generally had a mild climate and it was pleasant for the Jews to dwell in the Sukkah. Now that Jews reside in the northern countries where it is cold during the Sukkos season, one should not sit in the Sukkah on Shemini Atzeres because then it will be evident that he is sitting in the Sukkah for the sake of the mitzvah and not for his own pleasure. This will then contradict the theme of Shemini Atzeres. The Raaviah writes that the reason we do not sleep in the Sukkah on Shemini Atzeres is because one only recites a blessing when sitting in the Sukkah and not when sleeping in the Sukkah. When one sits in the Sukkah on Shemini Atzeres and does not recite a blessing, it is evident that he is sitting in the Sukkah because of the uncertainty of what day it is and not because he seeks to add on to the mitzvah of dwelling in the Sukkah. When one sleeps in the Sukkah, however, one never recites a blessing on sleeping in the Sukkah, so it is not evident why he is sleeping in the Sukkah and people will think that he is sleeping in the Sukkah to fulfill the obligation of Sukkah and this is incorrect.

Read more!

Daf Yomi - Sukkah 47 - Sukkah on Shmini Atzeres by Reb Jay

In chutz la'aretz, we sit in the sukka on Shemini Atzeres because of Sefika D'yoma, but we do not make a brocha (for this reason, on Leil Shemini Atzeres, we wait until it is tzeis hakochavim to make kiddush). Chasidim generally sit in the sukka only for kiddush during the day of Shemini Atzeres (Rav Tzadok Hakohen has a fifty page teshuva called Meishev Tzedek being matzdk this minhag). This is because of tartei d'sasrei, as there is a Midrash Tanchuma that asks how can we daven for rain (Tefilas Geshem is said on Shemini Atzeres), and then sit in the sukka (furthermore, the tartei d'sasrei is that two different Yomim Tovim are being celebrated--Sukkos and Shemini Atzeres). Maybe we can answer that even though it is a tartei d'sasrei, this paradox serves as a reminder that we are in galus, and galus itself, writes the Maharal (peirush to Shir Hashirim) is a stirah to the essence of Klal Yisroel.

Rav Ahron Kotler asks an interesting question. The chiyuv to sit in the sukka on Shemini Atzeres includes bein hashmashos as well. Why don't we say a person is patur from the sukka during bein hashmashos because of s'fek s'feika (perhaps today is sukkos, but even if it is, bein hashmashos itself is a time of safek, as to whether it is day or night)? He answers that bein hashmashos is not a safek but a zman bifnei atzmo.

The Sharey Teshuva mentions that there are opinions that say that if a person made a mistake during davening of Shemini Atzeres (only on the first day and only in chutz la'aretz and said "B'yom chag hasukkos hazeh" he is yotzei because the day while having a chelek of the kedusha of Shemini Atzeres, also has a chelek of sukkos, because of Sefika D'yoma.

Read more!

Daf Yomi - Sukkah 47 - Shmini Atzeres by Rabbi Yosef Dov Karr

The Rosh writes that we do not pronounce a bracha upon entering a sukkah on Shemini Atzeres because doing so would be a demonstration of contradictory behavior. If we are declaring our being in a sukkah as a mitzvah, it cannot be Shemini Atzeres. And if it is Shemini Atzeres, and Sukkos is over, then our entering into a sukkah cannot be a mitzvah. Simply entering a sukkah without reciting a bracha is not inconsistent with it being Shemini Atzeres, because people occasionally eat outdoors if they feel that it is pleasant for them. Our sages did not enact to take lulav on Shemini Atzeres without a bracha, because this is not an activity which people do on their own, and taking it would be an overt sign of our denying that the day is Shemini Atzeres. Tosafos adds that taking lulav would involve handling what may be muktzah on Yom Tov.

Ritva points out that not only can entering a sukkah be interpreted as an elective activity, rather than a violation of Shemini Atzeres, but the fact that we do not recite a bracha is also a demonstration that we are only dwelling in the sukkah due to our uncertainty about the calendar date, and it therefore does not undermine the kedusha of the Yom Tov.

Maybe we can able this to wearing tefillin on Chol HaMoad According to the Rosh we should not wear Tefillin because it would be a demonstration of contradictory behavior of the nature of Chol HaMoed, is it chol or Moed? If its Moad then we never wear Tefillin. According to the Ritva, however we should wear Tefillin without a bracha due to the uncertainty about the date. .Clearly the two opinions have nothing to do whether or not one works of Chol HaMoad or not.

Read more!

Daf Yomi - Sukkah 46 - Highlights

1. The Gemara states that when the Bais HaMikdash was standing and there was a biblical obligation to take the lulav for all seven days of Sukkos, one would recite a blessing on the lulav every day. After the destruction of the Bais HaMikdash, however, when the biblical obligation to take a lulav was only the first day of Sukkos, one recites a blessing only on the first day of Sukkos and one does not recite a blessing on the remaining days of Sukkos. This opinion maintains that a blessing is not recited on a mitzvah that is rabbinically ordained. (46a1)
2. There is a dispute whether one is required to recite a blessing every day that he eats in the Sukkah or is it sufficient to recite the blessing on the first day of Sukkos and this blessing discharges his obligation for the remaining days of Sukkos. There is a similar dispute amongst Tanaaim regarding Tefillin if one is required to recite a new blessing upon donning his Tefillin for a second time after using the lavatory. There is an opinion that maintains that one would be required to recite a new blessing every time one touches his Tefillin. (46a1-476a2)
3. The Gemara cites opinions that maintain that one is required to recite a blessing on a rabbinically ordained mitzvah. One recites a blessing prior to lighting the Chanukah Menorah although kindling the Chanukah lights is not a biblically ordained mitzvah. The reason why we recite the words asher kideshanu bimitzvosav, Who has sanctified us with His commandments, although HaShem did not command us in the Torah, is because it is said you shall not deviate from the word that the rabbis will relate to you. Thus, we are rabbinically commanded to follow the decrees of the Chachamim. (46a2-46a3)
4. The Gemara discusses if one recites the shehechiyanu blessing when he builds the Sukkah or if he recites the blessing when he commences eating in the Sukkah. (46a4)
5. There is a dispute if one has many mitzvos in front of him whether he should recite one general blessing on all of the mitzvos or if he should recite a blessing for each respective mitzvah. (46a4-46a5)
6. An esrog is huktzeh lemitzvaso, i.e. set aside for the mitzvah performance, on the seventh day, but the esrog is permitted for use as food on the eighth day, which is Shemini Atzeres. The Biur Halacha explains that we do not say that since the esrog is muktzeh during bain hashmashos, twilight, it should be prohibited for the entire day, as the only reason that the esrog is prohibited at bain hashmashos is because of an uncertainty of which day it is. (46b2)
7. In the Diaspora, the esrog is forbidden for use on the eighth day, Shemini Atzeres, referred to as sfeika deyoma, a day of uncertain status, whereas on the ninth day, which is Simchas Torah, it is permitted for use. The Shulchan Aruch quotes an opinion that maintains that the esrog is prohibited on the ninth day as well, but the Mishna Berura writes that if necessary, one can eat the esrog on the ninth day because most opinions are lenient. (46b2)
8. One should not give the lulav bundle to a child on the first day of Sukkos before he himself has discharged his obligation, as a minor can acquire an object legally but he cannot transfer the object to someone else. The Tur, Rambam, and the Shulchan Aruch maintain that the definition of a child in this case is thirteen years old. The Shulchan Aruch cites an opinion that maintains that a child is one who does not cry out for his mother, which would be a child who is six or seven years old, depending on the child. Most opinions maintain, however, that a child is one who is under the age of thirteen. (46b2)
9. The Gemara states that one should not promise something to a child and then not give it to him, because it will teach the child to lie. (46b3)
10. One who designated seven esrogim, one for each of the seven days of Sukkos, Rav maintains that he is permitted to eat the esrog after discharging his obligation, whereas Rav Assi maintains that one can only eat the esrog on the following day. (46b3)

Read more!

Daf Yomi - Sukkah 46 - Review and gain new insights

The Gemara states that if one listens to the old by constantly reviewing what he has studied, he will be able to gain new insight into what he has previously learned. If, however, one abandons his learning by not reviewing his studies, then he will not be able to gain new insight into what he has studied. The Gemara states that Torah study is akin to fish in the sea, who always ascend to the surface to drink in the new drops of rain, despite the fact that the fish are surrounded by water at all times. Torah study is not a subject where one can assimilate information from a text and then carry on with life. The Gemara in Kiddushin 30a teaches us that the mitzvah of Torah study, derived from the words vishinantam levonecho, you shall teach them thoroughly to your children, necessitates that one constantly delve deeper into Torah. The word vishinantam can also imply review, as the root word is shoneh, which means reputation. One must constantly review his studies, and only then can he be assured that he will gain new insight into Torah.

Read more!

Daf Yomi - Sukkah 46 - Teaching Children not to Lie by Reb Dave

The Gemara states that one should not promise something to a child and then not give it to him, because it will teach the child to lie. The obvious question here is, why are we concerned about teaching a child to lie in the future, yet we are not concerned that the person himself is guilty of lying. Perhaps we can suggest that the Gemara is aware of this issue and the Gemara is revealing to us that besides the lie being told by the individual himself, there are further repercussions as the child will learn how to lie. In one of the Hagados Shel Pesach it is recorded that when his children grew older, Reb Yaakov Kaminetsky zt”l ceased performing the ceremony of having a child return the afikomen in exchange for a gift, because Reb Yaakov realized that as the children grew in age, their requests also became more extravagant. Reb Yaakov saw that it would not always be possible to fulfill their requests, so he chose to stop the ceremony outright, rather than issue promises that he could not adhere to.

Read more!

Daf Yomi - Sukkah 46 - Heoros on Rashi by Reb Dave

46a – Rashi q.v. Mitzvos Harbeh - Some infer from this Rashi that there is a mitzvah to wear tefillin on Chol Hamoed. Others break up the Rashi into two parts, as though he were saying, “ . . . to take a lulav and to sit in the succah, AND/OR to wear tefilin and to wear tzitiiz”.

46a – Rav Marei the son of Bas Shmuel – Rashi in Berachos explains why we refer to him with reference to him being “the son of the daughter of Shmuel”, a most unusual appellation.

46b – Rashi q.v. visameinu libracha – Note how Rashi emphasizes the test as “yom shemini chag atzeres hazeh”. He spells it all out again on 47a q.v. beruchi loh mivorchinon, and a third time on 47b q.v. bircas hamazon. It is unusual that Rashi would go to the extreme of writing out the full text three times in such close succession. To me it is clear that Rashi knew other opinions held the correct formulation is “ yom shemin atzeres hachag hazeh”, and he therefore emphasized that the correct opinion is otherwise.

Read more!

Daf Yomi - Sukkah 46 - Minor and the First Days by Reb Jay

A person should not be makneh the Arba minim to a katan, as while a katan can be koneh, he cannot be makneh to others. What is defined as a katan? The Tur, the Rambam, and the Mechaber hold it is thirteen years old. The Mechaber brings a yesh omrim that says a katan is a child who does not cry out for his mother (six or seven years old, depending on the child). According to most opinions though, a katan is anyone under thirteen. This, however, leads to a problem on the first day of sukkos (and second day in chutz la'aretz), for many families (this is relevant to all children, not just one's own children; however, since in most cases we are dealing with a father and his children, we will use that case in our discussion here). Since there is a chiyuv to own the Arba minim on the first day (u'lkachtem lachem--and it shall be taken for you), and if the katan cannot be makneh the Arba minim back to his father, how can the gadol perform the mitzva the right way (if the katan did it first)? And even if the father has already fulfilled his chiyuv, the katan cannot be makneh the Arba minim to his brothers. And if the father does not give his son the Arba minim, then he is being deficient in his chiyuv of chinuch. In Eretz Yisroel this is not a problem, as the father can ensure that he performs the mitzva before his child, and then when he is makneh the Arba minim to his son, he has already been mikayim the mitzva, and even though the katan cannot give it back, nonetheless, the father can be yotzei the rest of sukkos as a borrower. But this only works if there is one son. In chutz la'aretz where there is a chiyuv of lachem--ownership-- on the first two days, and in Eretz Yisroel if the family has more than one child who is a katan, how can the mitzva be performed the right way?
This leads to the question of what is chinuch? Is chinuch teaching a child to be habitual in mitzvos (The Ra'avan), and therefore it is sufficient to lend him the Arba minim (and he does not need to be makneh the Arba minim to the child thus avoiding the problem that the child cannot return the Arba minim), and as long as the brocha is made and the na'anuim are done, the father has been mechanech the child in the mitzva of Arba minim. Or, is chinuch ensuring that the mitzva is done the right way in all aspects, which in the case of Arba minim includes owning the Arba minim, in which case the father is obligated to buy a set of Arba minim for all his children that are ketanim. The Igros Moshe writes that in Europe when the Arba minim were hard to come by and prohibitively expensive, people relied on the Ra'avan. Today, however, when they are not so expensive, if a father is able he should endeavor to purchase for each child a set of Arba minim.
The Bikkurei Yaakov gives an ingenious answer. He writes that the father can make a t'nai on each day of Yom Tov: "if today is really the first day of Yom Tov (as there is a Sefika D'yoma), then I am fulfilling my chiyuv, then I am being makneh the Arba minim to my son. If tomorrow is the first day, then I am only being lending the Arba minim to my son." A similar t'naiis made on the second day. However, this eitzah of the Bikkurei Yaakov only works if one has one child that is a katan, otherwise, we are still left with the problem of how to transmit the Arba minim to the other children.

Read more!

Daf Yomi - sukkah 46 - Sefika D'yoma by Reb Jay

An esrog is huktzeh l'mitzva on the seventh day, but is muttar on the eighth day (Shemini Atzeres; the Biur Halacha explains that we do not say since it is muktzeh during bein hashmashos, it should be assur the whole day, because it is only assur during bein hashmashos because of a safek).
In chutz la'aretz, the esrog is assur on the eighth day (Sefika D'yoma), but it is muttar on the ninth day (Simchas Torah). The Mechaber brings a yesh omrim that it is assur on the ninth day as well, but the Mishna Berura says if it is needed, the esrog may be eaten, as most opinions are matir.
L'choreh, the reason the Arba minim are not taken in chutz la'aretz on Shemini Atzeres because of a Sefika D'yoma is that with the exception of the first day, the Arba minim are a mitzva d'rabanan, and we do not do a mitzva d'rabanan on a Sefika D'yoma (we are not moseif a day of Chanuka or purim, as they are mitzvos d'rabanan; although we do mitzvos of the Pesach Sederthat are d'rabanan even on the second night [maror, arba kosos], since the Seder itself is a D'oraysa, the mitzvos d'rabanan are done because they are connected to the D'oraysa).

Read more!

Daf Yomi - Sukkah 46 - Shehechiyanu by Reb Jay

A Shehechiyanu is said on the lulav on the first day, and the brocha on the lulav is said once a day (on the first seven days of sukkos), even if it is taken many times. Unlike on other mitzvos of Yom Tov, where the brocha of Shehechiyanu is said both the first and second day (Pesach, Sukkos, Shavuos, the Shehechiyanu on the Shofar), the Shehechiyanu on the lulav is only said on the first day. One reason is that the Shehechiyanu said on the second day is for Yom Tov itself, and the second day always has the din of the first day (Sefika D'yoma). The exception to this is shofar, though, in reality, it is not an exception, as the mitzva of shofar on Rosh Hashana is intrinsic in the day itself (Rosh Hashana is called Yom Hatreuah in the Torah), as opposed to lulav which is a mitzva on the day, not "of" the day. The Mishna Berura says another reason, that the brocha of Shehechiyanu is said both days of Rosh Hashana is because sometimes the ikar day of Rosh Hashana is the second day (Sefika D'yoma), and as we mentioned, the shofar defines the day.
A brocha is not said on the making of the sukka. The Mechaber writes that a Shehechiyanu should be said, but we are yotzei with the Shehechiyanu said on the first night. The Sheiltos D'rav Achai Gaon says that the making of the sukka is a mitzva in itself (Chag hasukkos ta'aseh lecha) and requires a brocha. L'choeroh, it would also be a nafka minah with regards to oisek b'mitzva patur min hamitzva, as most shitos say building a sukka is hechsher mitzva and would not be considered oisek mitzva, with the Sheiltos considering it a mitzva, thus building the sukka is oisek b'mitzva and one would be patur from another mitzva.

Read more!

Daf Yomi - Sukkah 45 - Highlights

1. The Mishna states that the procedure regarding the mitzvah of aravos was that they would go down to a place below Yerushalayim which was called Motza and they would cut the aravos. They would then place the aravos by the side of the mizbeiach and the tops of the aravos would bend over the top of the mizbeiach. The Kohanim would then sound the shofar. (45a1)
2. The Mishnah states further that every day they would circle the mizbeiach one time and on Hoshanah Rabbah they would circle the mizbeiach seven times. There is a dispute regarding what was recited as they were circling the mizbeiach. (45a1)
3. The aravos were at least eleven Amos high which enabled them to lean over an amah on top of the mizbeiach. The Gemara states that the aravos were placed on the yesod of the mizbeiach which was one amah off the ground because otherwise the aravos could not lean over the mizbeiach. The reason for this is because the top of the mizbeiach was indented two amos more than the bottom because of the two upper protrusions of the mizbeiach and since the aravos were only eleven amos high, they would not reach the top of the mizbeiach. (45a3)
4. The Gemara states that one who eats and drinks on the festivals is deemed to have built a mizbeiach and offered a korban on it. Rashi in his second explanation of the Gemara learns that this statement refers to one who eats and drinks on the day after the festival, known as Isru Chag. (45b1)
5. The Gemara states in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai that all mitzvos must be performed by holding the object used for the mitzvah in the manner in which it grows. (45b1)
6. Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai stated that he and his son Rabbi Elazar along with King Yosam the son of Uziyahu, King of Judea, had such great merits that they would have been capable of exempting the entire world from punishment for the sins that were committed since the world was created until its end. Rabbi Shimon Ben Yochai also stated that there were very few people in the world who merited receiving the Divine Presence. (45b2)
7. The Gemara discusses the manner in which the people praised Hashem and the mizbeiach after performing the mitzvah with the aravah. (45b3-45b4)
8. The Gemara cites differing opinions regarding the recital of the blessings prior to performing the mitzvah of Sukkah and lulav. Shmuel maintains that one recites a new blessing every day for the lulav. Regarding the blessing for the Sukkah, however, one recites a blessing on the first day and this blessing suffices for all seven days. Rabbah in the name of Rabbi Yochanan maintains the exact opposite opinion and Ravin in the name of Rabbi Yochanan maintains that one recites daily a new blessing on the lulav and on the Sukkah. (45b4-45b5)

Read more!

Daf Yomi - Sukkah 45 - There is only one G-d

Rabbi Shimon Ben Yochai declared, “there are few people of the highest level, i.e. who have received the Divine presence. If there are a thousand, I and my son are from that group. If there are a hundred, I and my son are from that group. If they are two, they are myself and my son.” Why did Rabbi Shimon Ben Yochai have to state that if there are two, then they are myself and my son? This would seem obvious, based on his previous declaration. Perhaps Rabbi Shimon Ben Yochai was demonstrating extreme humility with this statement. Rashi in Parashas Bereishis cites a few instances where HaShem created the world in a certain manner so that people would not be led to think that man is also a god. Rabbi Shimon Ben Yochai, who understood his greatness, was concerned that people might come to worship him due to his great spiritual level. For this reason, Rabbi Shimon Ben Yochai declared that there were two great people in the world, himself and his son, so no one would be led to believe that he was a god, Heaven forbid.

Read more!

Daf Yomi - Sukkah 45 - How does Bamboo Grow?

The Gemora states in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai that all mitzvos must be perfomed by holding the object in the manner in which it grows.

The Tur writes that there are some that rule that the walls of the sukkah when they are constructed with wood must be positioned in the way which they grew. The Tur disagrees and maintains that one does not have to be strict regarding this since the walls can be made from things that do not grow from the ground such as metal and there obviously this halacha would not apply, so too when they are made out of wood this halacha doesn't apply.

According to this, s'chach which must be from items that grow from the ground would have this requirement to be positioned in the manner in which they grew. The Bach writes that since the essense of s'chach is to cover the width of the sukkah, it is self evident that the Torah did not prescribe that this mitzva must be done in the manner in which it grew.

Meshech Chochmah writes that this requirement only applies by a mitzva that stands by itself, such as a lulav or the wood for the Mishkan; however the walls and s'chach of the sukkah that are dependent on each other does not have this halacha.

Rav Elyashiv states that this halacha only applies by a mitzva where the Torah mandates that the item should be in the same form as it grew; however by s'chach and the walls of a sukklah, one could theoretically grind up the wood or branches and use the pieces for his sukkah. Obviously there is no requirement that it should be positioned in the same manner in which it grew.

Read more!

Daf Yomi - Sukkah 45 - One more Day of Eating

Rashi in his second explanation of the Gemara learns that one who eats and drinks on the day after the festival is regarded as if he built a mizbeiach and offered a korban on it. The Shaar Yissachar explains that this procedure is in contrast to Motzai Shabbos where melaveh malkah is eaten at night and here we see that one eats and drinks following the festival. The reason for this distinction is because here the Gemara states that one who eats and drinks is deemed to have brought a sacrifice, which can only be offered during the day. Melaveh malkah, however, cannot be eaten on Sunday, because that would be similar to the gentiles who worship their deity on Sunday.

Read more!

Daf Yomi - Sukkah 44 - Halachos from Heaven

The Gemora cites an argument between Rabbi Yochanan and Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi regarding the mitzva of taking the arovos on Sukkos if it is just a custom from the Prophets or was it instituted as an obligation from the Prophets. Rabbi Yochanan maintains that it is an obligation instituted by the Prophets. The Gemora asks a contradiction regarding Rabbi Yochanan's view since we find elsewhere that he stated the mitzva of arovos if learned from a halacha l'moshe misinai and not from the prophets? The Gemora answers that this halacha was forgotten in Bavel and was later reestablished by the Prophets.

Rashi explains that the Prophets learned this from a divine spirit. The Commentators ask that this is inconsistent with the Gemora in Temurah 16 which states that the Prophets cannot teach a halacha which they have learned through their divine spirit and this is true even if it is only to reveal a forgotten halacha.

Sheorim Mitzuyanim B'halacha answers that the principle of 'Torah not being in the heavens' only applies when we are asking from above, however where it was revealed to us without our inquiry, the halacha can be received.

This is the explanation in the words of the Raavad where he states that the halacha was revealed to him as a secret from Hashem for those that fear him.

This can also explain the Gemora in Eruvin where it was revealed to them from heaven that the halacha is in accordance with Beis Hillel since they are a majority even though Beis Shamai was regarded as being sharper.

If someone can explain the reasoning for this distiction, I would appreciate it.

Read more!

Daf Yomi - Sukkah 44 - Inspirational Simchas HaTorah

The Gemora relates a story where a wealthy man came to Rebbe Eliezer bar Tzadok and asked him if the method he was using to pay his workers during shemitah was correct according to halacha. They were digging in the field and he was allowing them to eat from the produce. Rabbi Eliezer told him that this manner was forbidden since one cannot conduct business with the fruits of shemitah. The man immediately left and Rabbi Eliezer proclaimed that he was living in Eretz Yisroel for forty years and he never saw such a scrupulous person before. The man later returned and asked Rabbi Eliezer as to what method should he use to pay them and Rabbi Eliezer responded that he should pay them with money.

There are two obvious questions on this Gemora. Firstly, if this man was so concerned about the halacha, why did he depart from Rabbi Eliezer prior to receiving the complete answer? Secondly, what did Rabbi Eliezer see in this person that caused to him to praise him in such a manner?

Rabbi Mordechai Miller delivered a drasha on Shabbos in Gateshead and explained that the learning of Torah must be fresh and new to a person each day. This will enable him to fulfill its laws with a tremendous desire. This wealthy man heard a new halacha for the first time and he realized that he was conducting himself incorrectly. This made an awesome impression on him and he immediately went to rectify this mistake. That was the only thing he was concerned with at that moment. It was only after his mistake was corrected, did he return to Rabbi Eliezer to inquire as to how he should continue.

This should be one of the inspiring lessons we should take from a Simchas Torah.

Read more!