Thursday, October 05, 2006

Daf Yomi - Sukkah 33 - Highlights

1. The Mishnah rules that if the top of a hadas was cut off, it is invalid. Ulla learned that if a bud grows at the top of the hadas, it is valid. Rabbi Yirmiyah queried regarding a case where the top of the hadas was cut off prior to the festival and a bud grew on the hadas on the festival. The query was, do we say that once a mitzvah was rejected, i.e. the hadas was unfit from the onset of the festival, the hadas will remain rejected permanently, or do we say that that it is only a temporary rejection. This query is based on the principle of dichui, rejection, regarding sacrifices, i.e. an animal was slaughtered for an offering and subsequently one could not offer the animal for whatever reason. Since the animal was rejected as an offering, it can no longer be offered, so the question here is whether this principle will also apply to a mitzvah. The Gemara does not resolve the question. (33a1-33a2)
2. The Mishnah ruled that if there are more berries than leaves on a hadas, the hadas is invalid. Rav Chisda initially qualified this ruling to be referring to a case where the berries are in one place. If, however, the berries are spread out on the hadas in two or three places, it will be valid. Rava challenged Rav Chisda, and the Gemara revised Rav Chisda’s statement, stating that Rav Chisda learned that black berries will invalidate the hadas but if the berries are green and are the same color as the leaves, the hadas will be valid. Rav Pappa ruled that red berries are similar to black berries and red berries will thus also invalidate the hadas. (33a4-33b1)
3. The Mishnah ruled that if there are more berries than leaves on a hadas, the hadas is invalid. One is permitted to validate the hadas by removing the berries but one cannot remove the berries on the festival. There is a dispute between Tanaaim if the hadas will be valid if one removes the berries from a hadas on the festival. The Gemara offers several approaches to explain this dispute. (33b2-33b3)
4. Rabbi Eliezer maintains that one is permitted to remove the berries on the festival. The Gemara qualifies this ruling to be referring to a case where he plucked the berries with the intention of eating them. Rabbi Eliezer permits this because he rules in accordance with the opinion of his father Rabbi Shimon who maintains that one is permitted to perform a permitted act although he may unintentionally perform a forbidden act in the process. An example of this is when one drags a chair across the dirt on Shabbos where he may make a furrow in the ground. His intention is to move the chair and not to cerate the furrow, so even though he is aware that he may cerate a furrow, Rabbi Shimon maintains that this is permitted. The Gemara questions this because even Rabbi Shimon agrees that if the prohibition will inevitably occur, it is forbidden to perform the permitted act. The Gemara answers that we are referring to a case where the person has another hadas and when he plucks the berries from this hadas, he does not care whether the hadas is valid. Thus, we do not deem the plucking of the berries to be a repair and he has not committed a prohibited act at all. (33b2-33b3)
5. The Mishna rules that a stolen or dry aravah is invalid. An aravah used for idolatry is also invalid. If the top of the aravah was cut off, its leaves were torn or if it is a tzaftzafah, a willow with rounded leaves, it is invalid. If the aravah was withered, some of its leaves fell off, or if the aravah grew from a field and not near a stream, the aravah will be valid. (33b3-33b4)