Candle Lighting
Light Candles before sunset
Today in Jewish History:• R. Yehudah Leib Alter of Ger (1905)
Rabbi Yehudah Leib Alter (1847-1905), the second Rebbe in the Chassidic dynasty of Ger -- known for his famed Chassidic work "Sefat Emmet" -- passed away on the 5th of Shevat of the year 5665 from creation (1905). He was succeeded by his son, Rabbi Abraham Mordechai.
Link: a quote from Sefat Emmet
Daily Quote:
You are needed to illuminate your environment with Torah and service of the heart (prayer). Livelihood and what you need—that, G‑d must provide for you. You do what you must, and G‑d will do what He must . . .[Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi to a chassid who complained about his difficulty in earning a livelihood]
Daily Study:
Chitas and Rambam for today:
Chumash: Bo, 6th Portion Exodus 12:29-12:51 with Rashi
• English / Hebrew Linear Translation | Video Class• Exodus Chapter 12
29It came to pass at midnight, and the Lord smote every firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh who sits on his throne to the firstborn of the captive who is in the dungeon, and every firstborn animal. כטוַיְהִ֣י | בַּֽחֲצִ֣י הַלַּ֗יְלָה וַֽיהֹוָה֘ הִכָּ֣ה כָל־בְּכוֹר֘ בְּאֶ֣רֶץ מִצְרַ֒יִם֒ מִבְּכֹ֤ר פַּרְעֹה֙ הַיּשֵׁ֣ב עַל־כִּסְא֔וֹ עַ֚ד בְּכ֣וֹר הַשְּׁבִ֔י אֲשֶׁ֖ר בְּבֵ֣ית הַבּ֑וֹר וְכֹ֖ל בְּכ֥וֹר בְּהֵמָֽה:
and the Lord: Heb. וַה. Wherever it says, “and the Lord,” it means “He and His tribunal” (Exod. Rabbah 12:4), for the “vav” is an expression of addition, like “so-and-so and (“vav” ) so-and-so.” וה': כל מקום שנאמר וה' הוא ובית דינו, שהוי"ו לשון תוספת הוא כמו פלוני ופלוני:
smote every firstborn: Even [a firstborn] of another nation who was in Egypt. — [from Mechilta] הכה כל בכור: אף של אומה אחרת והוא במצרים:
from the firstborn of Pharaoh: Pharaoh, too, was a firstborn, but he remained [alive] of the firstborn. Concerning him, He [God] says: “But, for this [reason] I have allowed you to stand, in order to show you My strength” (Exod. 9:16) at the Red Sea. — [from Mechilta] מבכר פרעה: אף פרעה בכור היה ונשתייר מן הבכורות, ועליו הוא אומר (שמות ט טז) [בעבור הראותך את כחי בים סוף]:
to the firstborn of the captive: Because they rejoiced at Israel’s misfortune (Tanchuma 7), and furthermore, so that they would not say, “Our deity brought about this retribution” (Mechilta). The firstborn of the slave woman was included, because [Scripture] counts from the most esteemed to the lowest, and the firstborn of the slave woman is more esteemed than the firstborn of the captive. See commentary on Exodus 11:5. עד בכור השבי: שהיו שמחין לאידם של ישראל. ועוד, שלא יאמרו יראתנו הביאה הפורענות זו, ובכור השפחה בכלל היה, שהרי מנה מן החשוב שבכלן עד הפחות, ובכור השפחה חשוב מבכור השבי:
30And Pharaoh arose at night, he and all his servants and all the Egyptians, and there was a great outcry in Egypt, for there was no house in which no one was dead. לוַיָּ֨קָם פַּרְעֹ֜ה לַ֗יְלָה ה֤וּא וְכָל־עֲבָדָיו֙ וְכָל־מִצְרַ֔יִם וַתְּהִ֛י צְעָקָ֥ה גְדֹלָ֖ה בְּמִצְרָ֑יִם כִּי־אֵ֣ין בַּ֔יִת אֲשֶׁ֥ר אֵֽין־שָׁ֖ם מֵֽת:
And Pharaoh arose: from his bed. ויקם פרעה: ממטתו:
at night: Unlike the custom of kings, [who rise] three hours after daybreak. — [from Mechilta] לילה: ולא כדרך המלכים בשלש שעות ביום:
he: [arose] first, and afterwards his servants. This teaches us that he went around to his servants’ houses and woke them up. — [from Mechilta] הוא: תחילה ואחר כך עבדיו, מלמד שהיה הוא מחזר על בתי עבדיו ומעמידן:
for there was no house in which no one was dead: If there was a firstborn, he was dead. If there was no firstborn, the oldest household member was called the firstborn, as it is said: “I, too, shall make him [David] a firstborn” (Ps. 89:28) (Tanchuma Buber 19). [Rashi explains there: I shall make him great.] Another explanation: Some Egyptian women were unfaithful to their husbands and bore children from bachelors. Thus they would have many firstborn; sometimes one woman would have five, each one the firstborn of his father (Mechilta 13:33). כי אין בית אשר אין שם מת: יש שם בכור מת. אין שם בכור, גדול שבבית קרוי בכור, שנאמר (תהילים פט כח) אף אני בכור אתנהו. דבר אחר מצריות מזנות תחת בעליהן ויולדות מרווקים פנויים, והיו להם בכורות הרבה, פעמים הם חמשה לאשה אחת, כל אחד בכור לאביו:
31So he called for Moses and Aaron at night, and he said, "Get up and get out from among my people, both you, as well as the children of Israel, and go, worship the Lord as you have spoken. לאוַיִּקְרָא֩ לְמשֶׁ֨ה וּלְאַֽהֲרֹ֜ן לַ֗יְלָה וַיֹּ֨אמֶר֙ ק֤וּמוּ צּאוּ֙ מִתּ֣וֹךְ עַמִּ֔י גַּם־אַתֶּ֖ם גַּם־בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל וּלְכ֛וּ עִבְד֥וּ אֶת־יְהֹוָ֖ה כְּדַבֶּרְכֶֽם:
So he called for Moses and Aaron at night: [This] tells [us] that Pharaoh went around to the entrances [i.e., to the doors of the houses] of the city, and cried out, “Where is Moses staying? Where is Aaron staying?” -[from Mechilta] ויקרא למשה ולאהרן לילה: מגיד שהיה מחזר על פתחי העיר וצועק היכן משה שרוי היכן אהרן שרוי:
both you: the men. גם אתם: הגברים:
as well as the children of Israel: The young children. גם בני ישראל: הטף:
and go, worship the Lord as you have spoken: Everything is as you said, not as I said. “Neither will I let Israel out” (Exod. 5:2) is nullified. “Who and who are going?” (Exod. 10:8) is nullified. “But your flocks and your cattle shall be left” (Exod. 10:24) is nullified. [Instead,] take also your flocks and also your cattle. What is [the meaning of] “as you have spoken” ? You too shall give into our hands sacrifices and burnt offerings (Exod. 10:25). — [from Mechilta] ולכו עבדו את ה' כדברכם: הכל כמו שאמרתם, ולא כמו שאמרתי אני, בטל לא אשלח (שמות ה ב) בטל מי ומי ההולכים (שם י ח) בטל רק צאנכם ובקרכם יצג (שם כד):
32Take also your flocks and also your cattle, as you have spoken, and go, but you shall also bless me." לבגַּם־צֹֽאנְכֶ֨ם גַּם־בְּקַרְכֶ֥ם קְח֛וּ כַּֽאֲשֶׁ֥ר דִּבַּרְתֶּ֖ם וָלֵ֑כוּ וּבֵֽרַכְתֶּ֖ם גַּם־אֹתִֽי:
Take also your flocks and also your cattle : What does "as you have spoken" mean? You too should give us sacrifices and free will offerings. גם צאנכם גם בקרכם קחו: ומהו כאשר דברתם, גם אתה תתן בידינו זבחים ועולות (שמות י כה):
Take… as you have spoken… but you shall also bless me: [I.e.,] pray for me that I shall not die, for I am a firstborn. — [from Onkelos] קחו כאשר דברתם וברכתם גם אתי: התפללו עלי שלא אמות, שאני בכור:
33So the Egyptians took hold of the people to hasten to send them out of the land, for they said, "We are all dead." לגוַתֶּֽחֱזַ֤ק מִצְרַ֨יִם֙ עַל־הָעָ֔ם לְמַהֵ֖ר לְשַׁלְּחָ֣ם מִן־הָאָ֑רֶץ כִּ֥י אָֽמְר֖וּ כֻּלָּ֥נוּ מֵתִֽים:
We are all dead: They said, “This is not in accordance with Moses’ decree, for he said, ‘And every firstborn in the land of Egypt will die’ (Exod. 11:5), but here, the ordinary people too are dead, five or ten in one house.” -[from Mechilta] See Rashi on verse 30. כלנו מתים: אמרו לא כגזרת משה הוא, שהרי אמר (לעיל יא ה) ומת כל בכור, וכאן אף הפשוטים מתים חמישה או עשרה בבית אחד:
34The people picked up their dough when it was not yet leavened, their leftovers bound in their garments on their shoulders. לדוַיִּשָּׂ֥א הָעָ֛ם אֶת־בְּצֵק֖וֹ טֶ֣רֶם יֶחְמָ֑ץ מִשְׁאֲרֹתָ֛ם צְרֻרֹ֥ת בְּשִׂמְלֹתָ֖ם עַל־שִׁכְמָֽם:
when it was not yet leavened: The Egyptians did not permit them to tarry long enough for it to leaven. טרם יחמץ: המצריים לא הניחום לשהות כדי חימוץ:
their leftovers: Heb. מִשְׁאִרֹתָם. The remaining matzah and bitter herbs. — [from Mechilta and Jonathan] משארתם: שירי מצה ומרור:
on their shoulders: Although they took many animals with them, they [carried the remaining matzoth and bitter herbs on their shoulders because] they loved the mitzvoth. — [from Mechilta] על שכמם: אף על פי שבהמות הרבה הוליכו עמהם מחבבים היו את המצווה:
35And the children of Israel did according to Moses' order, and they borrowed from the Egyptians silver objects, golden objects, and garments. להוּבְנֵֽי־יִשְׂרָאֵ֥ל עָשׂ֖וּ כִּדְבַ֣ר משֶׁ֑ה וַיִּשְׁאֲלוּ֙ מִמִּצְרַ֔יִם כְּלֵי־כֶ֛סֶף וּכְלֵ֥י זָהָ֖ב וּשְׂמָלֹֽת:
according to Moses’ order: that he said to them in Egypt: “and let them borrow, each man from his friend” (Exod. 11:2). — [from Mechilta] כדבר משה: שאמר להם במצרים (לעיל יא ב) וישאלו איש מאת רעהו:
and garments: These meant more to them than the silver and the gold, and [thus] whatever is mentioned later in the verse is more esteemed. — [from Mechilta] ושמלת: אף הן היו חשובות להם מן הכסף ומן הזהב, והמאוחר בפסוק חשוב:
36The Lord gave the people favor in the eyes of the Egyptians, and they lent them, and they emptied out Egypt. לווַֽיהֹוָ֞ה נָתַ֨ן אֶת־חֵ֥ן הָעָ֛ם בְּעֵינֵ֥י מִצְרַ֖יִם וַיַּשְׁאִל֑וּם וַיְנַצְּל֖וּ אֶת־מִצְרָֽיִם:
and they lent them: Even what they [the Israelites] did not request, they [the Egyptians] gave them. You say, “[Lend me] one.” [They responded,] “Take two and go!” -[from Mechilta] וישאלום: אף מה שלא היו שואלים מהם היו נותנים להם. אתה אומר אחד, טול שנים ולך:
and they emptied out: Heb. וַיְנַצְלוּ. Onkelos renders: וְרוֹקִינוּ, and they emptied out. וינצלו: ורוקינו:
37The children of Israel journeyed from Rameses to Succoth, about six hundred thousand on foot, the men, besides the young children. לזוַיִּסְע֧וּ בְנֵֽי־יִשְׂרָאֵ֛ל מֵֽרַעְמְסֵ֖ס סֻכֹּ֑תָה כְּשֵֽׁשׁ־מֵא֨וֹת אֶ֧לֶף רַגְלִ֛י הַגְּבָרִ֖ים לְבד מִטָּֽף:
from Rameses to Succoth: They were 120 “mil” [apart]. Yet they arrived there instantly, as it is said: “and I carried you on eagles’ wings.” -[from Mechilta] מרעמסס סכתה: מאה ועשרים מיל היו ובאו שם לפי שעה, שנאמר (שמות יט ד) ואשא אתכם על כנפי נשרים:
the men: from 20 years old and older. — [from Song Rabbah 3:6] הגברים: מבן עשרים שנה ומעלה:
38And also, a great mixed multitude went up with them, and flocks and cattle, very much livestock. לחוְגַם־עֵ֥רֶב רַ֖ב עָלָ֣ה אִתָּ֑ם וְצֹ֣אן וּבָקָ֔ר מִקְנֶ֖ה כָּבֵ֥ד מְאֹֽד:
a great mixed multitude: A mixture of nations of proselytes. — [from Zohar, vol. 2, p. 45b] ערב רב: תערובות אומות של גרים:
39They baked the dough that they had taken out of Egypt as unleavened cakes, for it had not leavened, for they were driven out of Egypt, and they could not tarry, and also, they had not made provisions for themselves. לטוַיֹּאפ֨וּ אֶת־הַבָּצֵ֜ק אֲשֶׁ֨ר הוֹצִ֧יאוּ מִמִּצְרַ֛יִם עֻגֹ֥ת מַצּ֖וֹת כִּ֣י לֹ֣א חָמֵ֑ץ כִּי־גֹֽרְשׁ֣וּ מִמִּצְרַ֗יִם וְלֹ֤א יָֽכְלוּ֙ לְהִתְמַהְמֵ֔הַּ וְגַם־צֵדָ֖ה לֹֽא־עָשׂ֥וּ לָהֶֽם:
matzah cakes: cakes of matzah. Dough which did not leaven is called matzah עגת מצות: חררה של מצה בצק שלא החמיץ קרוי מצה:
and also, they had not made provisions for themselves: for the trip. [This verse] tells [of] Israel’s praise, [namely] that they did not say, “How will we go out into the desert without provisions?” Instead they believed and left. This is what is what is stated explicitly in the Prophets: “I remember to you the loving kindness of your youth, the love of your nuptials, your following Me in the desert, in a land not sown” (Jer. 2:2). Now what was the [Israelites’] reward? It is explained afterward: “Israel is holy to the Lord, etc.” (Jer. 2:3). — [from Mechilta] וגם צדה לא עשו להם: לדרך. מגיד שבחן של ישראל, שלא אמרו היאך נצא למדבר בלא צדה, אלא האמינו והלכו, הוא שמפורש בקבלה (ירמיהו ב ב) זכרתי לך חסד נעוריך אהבת כלולותיך לכתך אחרי במדבר בארץ לא זרועה, ומה שכר מפורש אחריו (שם ג) קודש ישראל לה' וגו':
40And the habitation of the children of Israel, that they dwelled in Egypt, was four hundred and thirty years. מוּמוֹשַׁב֙ בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל אֲשֶׁ֥ר יָֽשְׁב֖וּ בְּמִצְרָ֑יִם שְׁלשִׁ֣ים שָׁנָ֔ה וְאַרְבַּ֥ע מֵא֖וֹת שָׁנָֽה:
that they dwelled in Egypt: after the other dwellings in which they dwelled as foreigners in a land that was not theirs. — [from Mechilta] אשר ישבו במצרים: אחר שאר הישיבות שישבו גרים בארץ לא להם:
was four hundred and thirty years: Altogether, from the time that Isaac was born, until now, were 400 years. From the time that Abraham had seed [i.e., had a child, the prophecy] “that your seed will be strangers” (Gen. 15:13) was fulfilled; and there were another 30 years from the decree “between the parts” (Gen 15:10) until Isaac was born. It is impossible, however, to say that [they spent 400 years] in Egypt alone, because Kehath [the grandfather of Moses] was [one] of those who came with Jacob. Go and figure all his years, all the years of his son Amram, and Moses’ 80 years; you will not find them [to be] that many, and perforce, Kehath lived many of his years before he descended to Egypt, and many of Amram’s years are included in the years of Kehath, and many of Moses’ years are included in Amram’s years. Hence, you will not find 400 years counting from their arrival in Egypt. You are compelled, perforce, to say that the other dwellings [which the Patriarchs settled] were also called being “sojournings” and even in Hebron, as it is said: “where Abraham and Isaac sojourned (גָּרוּ) ” (Gen. 35:27), and [Scripture] states also “the land of their sojournings in which they sojourned” (Exod. 6:4). Therefore, you must say that [the prophecy] “your seed will be strangers” [commences] when he [Abraham] had offspring. And only when you count 400 years from the time that Isaac was born, you will find 210 years from their entry into Egypt. This is one of the things that [the Sages] changed for King Ptolemy. — [from Mechilta, Meg. 9a] שלשים שנה וארבע מאות שנה: בין הכל משנולד יצחק עד עכשיו היו ארבע מאות שנה. משהיה לו זרע לאברהם נתקיים (בראשית טו יג) כי גר יהיה זרעך, ושלשים שנה היו משנגזרה גזירת בין הבתרים עד שנולד יצחק. ואי אפשר לומר בארץ מצרים לבדה, שהרי קהת מן הבאים עם יעקב היה צא וחשוב כל שנותיו וכל שנות עמרם בנו ושמונים של משה, לא תמצאם כל כך, ועל כרחך הרבה שנים היו לקהת עד שלא ירד למצרים, והרבה משנות עמרם נבלעים בשנות קהת והרבה משמונים של משה נבלעים בשנות עמרם, הרי שלא תמצא ארבע מאות לביאת מצרים, והוזקקת לומר על כרחך, שאף שאר הישיבות נקראו גרות, אפילו בחברון, שנאמר (בראשית לה כז) אשר גר שם אברהם ויצחק, ואומר (שמות ו ד) את ארץ מגוריהם אשר גרו בה, לפיכך אתה צריך לומר כי גר יהיה זרעך משהיה לו זרע. וכשתמנה ארבע מאות שנה משנולד יצחק, תמצא מביאתן למצרים עד יציאתן מאתים ועשר שנה, וזה אחד מן הדברים ששינו לתלמי המלך:
41It came to pass at the end of four hundred and thirty years, and it came to pass in that very day, that all the legions of the Lord went out of the land of Egypt. מאוַיְהִ֗י מִקֵּץ֙ שְׁלשִׁ֣ים שָׁנָ֔ה וְאַרְבַּ֥ע מֵא֖וֹת שָׁנָ֑ה וַיְהִ֗י בְּעֶ֨צֶם֙ הַיּ֣וֹם הַזֶּ֔ה יָֽצְא֛וּ כָּל־צִבְא֥וֹת יְהֹוָ֖ה מֵאֶ֥רֶץ מִצְרָֽיִם:
It came to pass at the end of four hundred and thirty years, and it came to pass in that very day: [This] tells [us] that as soon as the end [of this period] arrived, the Omnipresent did not keep them [even] as long as the blink of an eye. On the fifteenth of Nissan, the angels came to Abraham to bring him tidings. On the fifteenth of Nissan Isaac was born; on the fifteenth of Nissan the decree of “between the parts” was decreed. — [from Mechilta] ויהי מקץ שלשים שנה וגו' ויהי בעצם היום הזה: מגיד שכיון שהגיע הקץ לא עכבן המקום כהרף עין, בחמישה עשר בניסן באו מלאכי השרת אצל אברהם לבשרו, בחמישה עשר בניסן נולד יצחק, ובחמישה עשר בניסן נגזרה גזירת בין הבתרים:
42It is a night of anticipation for the Lord, to take them out of the land of Egypt; this night is the Lord's, guarding all the children of Israel throughout their generations. מבלֵ֣יל שִׁמֻּרִ֥ים הוּא֙ לַֽיהֹוָ֔ה לְהֽוֹצִיאָ֖ם מֵאֶ֣רֶץ מִצְרָ֑יִם הֽוּא־הַלַּ֤יְלָה הַזֶּה֙ לַֽיהֹוָ֔ה שִׁמֻּרִ֛ים לְכָל־בְּנֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל לְדֹֽרֹתָֽם:
It is a night of anticipation: for which the Holy One, blessed be He, was waiting and anticipating, [in order] to fulfill His promise to take them out of the land of Egypt. ליל שמרים: שהיה הקב"ה שומר ומצפה לו לקיים הבטחתו להוציאם מארץ מצרים:
this night is the Lord’s: This is the night concerning which He said to Abraham, “On this night I will redeem your children.” -[from Mechilta] הוא הלילה הזה לה': הוא הלילה שאמר לאברהם בלילה הזה אני גואל את בניך:
guarding all the children of Israel throughout their generations: from that time onward, it [the Israelites] is guarded from harmful spirits, like the matter that is stated: “and He will not permit the destroyer, etc.” (above verse 23). — [from Mechilta] שמרים לכל בני ישראל לדרתם: משומר ובא מן המזיקין, כענין שנאמר (פסוק כג) ולא יתן המשחית וגו':
43The Lord said to Moses and Aaron, "This is the statute of the Passover sacrifice: No estranged one may partake of it. מגוַיֹּ֤אמֶר יְהֹוָה֙ אֶל־משֶׁ֣ה וְאַֽהֲרֹ֔ן זֹ֖את חֻקַּ֣ת הַפָּ֑סַח כָּל־בֶּן־נֵכָ֖ר לֹא־יֹ֥אכַל בּֽוֹ:
This is the statute of the Passover sacrifice: On the fourteenth of Nissan, this section was told to them. — [from Exod. Rabbah 19:5] זאת חקת הפסח: בי"ד בניסן נאמרה להם פרשה זו:
No estranged one: Whose deeds have become estranged from his Father in heaven. Both a gentile and an Israelite apostate are meant. — [from Mechilta] כל בן נכר: שנתנכרו מעשיו לאביו שבשמים. ואחד נכרי ואחד ישראל משומד במשמע:
44And every man's slave, purchased for his money you shall circumcise him; then he will be permitted to partake of it. מדוְכָל־עֶ֥בֶד אִ֖ישׁ מִקְנַת־כָּ֑סֶף וּמַלְתָּ֣ה אֹת֔וֹ אָ֖ז יֹ֥אכַל בּֽוֹ:
you shall circumcise him; then he will be permitted to partake of it:[I.e., he means] his master. [This] tells [us] that the [failure to perform the] circumcision of one’s slaves prevents one from partaking of the Passover sacrifice. [These are] the words of Rabbi Joshua. Rabbi Eliezer says: The [failure to perform the] circumcision of one’s slaves does not prevent one from partaking of the Passover sacrifice. If so, what is the meaning of “then he will be permitted to partake of it” ? [“He” in this phrase is referring to] the slave. — [from Mechilta] ומלתה אתו אז יאכל בו: רבו, מגיד שמילת עבדיו מעכבתו מלאכול בפסח, דברי רבי יהושע. רבי אליעזר אומר אין מילת עבדיו מעכבתו מלאכול בפסח, אם כן מה תלמוד לומר אז יאכל בו, העבד:
45A sojourner or a hired hand may not partake of it. מהתּוֹשָׁ֥ב וְשָׂכִ֖יר לֹא־יֹ֥אכַל בּֽוֹ:
A sojourner: This is a resident alien. — [from Mechilta] [I.e., a gentile who has accepted upon himself not to practice idolatry but eats carcasses.] תושב: זה גר תושב:
or a hired hand: This is a gentile. Now why is this [verse] stated? Aren’t they uncircumcised? And it is stated: “but no uncircumcised man may partake of it” (verse 48). But this refers to a circumcised Arab or a circumcised Gibeonite, who is a sojourner or a hired hand. — [from Mechilta] ושכיר: זה הנכרי. ומה תלמוד לומר, והלא ערלים הם, ונאמר (פסוק מח) וכל ערל לא יאכל בו, אלא כגון ערבי מהול וגבעוני מהול והוא תושב או שכיר:
46It must be eaten in one house; you shall not take any of the meat out of the house to the outside, neither shall you break any of its bones. מובְּבַ֤יִת אֶחָד֙ יֵֽאָכֵ֔ל לֹֽא־תוֹצִ֧יא מִן־הַבַּ֛יִת מִן־הַבָּשָׂ֖ר ח֑וּצָה וְעֶ֖צֶם לֹ֥א תִשְׁבְּרוּ־בֽוֹ:
It must be eaten in one house: In one group, that those counted upon it may not become two groups and divide it. You say [that it means] in two groups, or [perhaps] it means nothing other than in one house as is its apparent meaning, and to teach that if they started eating in the yard and it rained, that they may not enter the house. Therefore, Scripture states: “on the houses in which they will eat it” (above verse 7). From here [we deduce] that the one who eats [the Passover sacrifice] may eat [it] in two places. — [from Mechilta] בבית אחד יאכל: בחבורה אחת, שלא יעשו הנמנין עליו שתי חבורות ויחלקוהו. אתה אומר בחבורה אחת, או אינו אלא בבית אחד כמשמעו, וללמד שאם התחילו והיו אוכלים בחצר וירדו גשמים שלא יכנסו לבית, תלמוד לומר (פסוק ז) על הבתים אשר יאכלו אותו בהם, מכאן שהאוכל אוכל בשני מקומות:
you shall not take any of the meat out of the house: [I.e.,] out of the group. — [from Mechilta] לא תוציא מן הבית: מן החבורה:
neither shall you break any of its bones: If it [the bone] is edible, e.g., if there is an olive-sized amount of meat on it, it bears the prohibition of breaking a bone; if there is neither an olive-sized amount of meat on it nor marrow [in it], it does not bear the prohibition against breaking a bone. — [from Pes. 84b] ועצם לא תשברו בו: הראוי לאכילה, כגון שיש עליו כזית בשר יש בו משום שבירת עצם, אין עליו כזית בשר אין בו משום שבירת עצם:
47The entire community of Israel shall make it. מזכָּל־עֲדַ֥ת יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל יַֽעֲשׂ֥וּ אֹתֽוֹ:
The entire community of Israel shall make it: Why was this stated? Because it says concerning the Passover sacrifice of Egypt: “a lamb for each parental home” (above verse 3), we might think that the same applies to the Passover sacrifice of later generations. Therefore, Scripture states: “The entire community of Israel shall make it.” -[from Mechilta] כל עדת ישראל יעשו אתו: למה נאמר, לפי שהוא אומר בפסח מצרים (פסוק ג) שה לבית אבות, שנמנו עליו למשפחות, יכול אף פסח דורות כן, תלמוד לומר כל עדת ישראל יעשו אותו:
48And should a proselyte reside with you, he shall make a Passover sacrifice to the Lord. All his males shall be circumcised, and then he may approach to make it, and he will be like the native of the land, but no uncircumcised male may partake of it. מחוְכִֽי־יָג֨וּר אִתְּךָ֜ גֵּ֗ר וְעָ֣שָׂה פֶ֘סַח֘ לַֽיהֹוָה֒ הִמּ֧וֹל ל֣וֹ כָל־זָכָ֗ר וְאָז֙ יִקְרַ֣ב לַֽעֲשׂת֔וֹ וְהָיָ֖ה כְּאֶזְרַ֣ח הָאָ֑רֶץ וְכָל־עָרֵ֖ל לֹא־יֹ֥אכַל בּֽוֹ:
he shall make a Passover sacrifice: We might think that everyone who converts must make a Passover sacrifice immediately. Therefore, Scripture states: “and he will be like the native of the land,” [indicating that] just as the native [makes the sacrifice] on the fourteenth [of Nissan], so must a proselyte [make it] on the fourteenth [of Nissan]. — [from Mechilta] ועשה פסח: יכול כל המתגייר יעשה פסח מיד, תלמוד לומר והיה כאזרח הארץ, מה אזרח בארבעה עשר אף גר בארבעה עשר:
but no uncircumcised male may partake of it: This includes one whose brothers died because of circumcision, [one] who is not considered an apostate in regards to circumcision, and [his disqualification] is not derived from “No estranged one may partake of it” (verse 43). — [from Mechilta] וכל ערל לא יאכל בו: להביא את שמתו אחיו מחמת מילה שאינו משומד לערלות ואינו נלמד מבן נכר לא יאכל בו (פסוק מג):
49There shall be one law for the native and for the stranger who resides in your midst." מטתּוֹרָ֣ה אַחַ֔ת יִֽהְיֶ֖ה לָֽאֶזְרָ֑ח וְלַגֵּ֖ר הַגָּ֥ר בְּתֽוֹכְכֶֽם:
There shall be one law: [This verse comes] to liken a proselyte to a native also regarding other commandments in the Torah. — [from Mechilta] תורה אחת וגו': להשוות גר לאזרח אף לשאר מצות שבתורה:
50All the children of Israel did; as the Lord had commanded Moses and Aaron, so they did. נוַיַּֽעֲשׂ֖וּ כָּל־בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל כַּֽאֲשֶׁ֨ר צִוָּ֧ה יְהֹוָ֛ה אֶת־משֶׁ֥ה וְאֶת־אַֽהֲרֹ֖ן כֵּ֥ן עָשֽׂוּ:
51It came to pass on that very day, that the Lord took the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt with their legions. נאוַיְהִ֕י בְּעֶ֖צֶם הַיּ֣וֹם הַזֶּ֑ה הוֹצִ֨יא יְהֹוָ֜ה אֶת־בְּנֵ֧י יִשְׂרָאֵ֛ל מֵאֶ֥רֶץ מִצְרַ֖יִם עַל־צִבְאֹתָֽם:
The Name of God appears eighteen times in this psalm, corresponding to which our Sages established eighteen blessings-the Amidah. The entire psalm can be interpreted as referring to the giving of the Torah and the ingathering of the exiles.
1. A psalm by David. Render to the Lord, children of the mighty, render to the Lord honor and strength.
2. Render to the Lord the honor due to His Name; bow down to the Lord in resplendent holiness.
3. The voice of the Lord is over the waters, the God of glory thunders; the Lord is over mighty waters.
4. The voice of the Lord resounds with might; the voice of the Lord resounds with majesty.
5. The voice of the Lord breaks cedars; the Lord shatters the cedars of Lebanon.
6. He makes them leap like a calf, Lebanon and Sirion like a young wild ox.
7. The voice of the Lord strikes flames of fire.
8. The voice of the Lord makes the desert tremble; the Lord causes the desert of Kadesh to tremble.
9. The voice of the Lord causes the does to calve, and strips the forests bare; and in His Sanctuary all proclaim His glory.
10. The Lord sat [as King] at the Flood; the Lord will sit as King forever.
11. The Lord will give strength to His people; the Lord will bless His people with peace.
Chapter 30
This psalm teaches one not to be distressed if God visits suffering upon him in this world, for only through suffering can one enter the World to Come. Even one of great spiritual stature should realize that his stability is not guaranteed, but that all is in the hands of God.
1. A psalm, a song of dedication of the House, by David.
2. I exalt You, Lord, for You have uplifted me, and did not allow my enemies to rejoice over me.
3. Lord, my God, I cried out to You, and You healed me.
4. Lord, You have brought up my soul from the grave; You have kept me alive, that I should not descend to the pit.
5. Sing to the Lord, you His pious ones, and praise His holy Name.
6. For His wrath endures but for a moment, when He is conciliated there is [long] life; when one retires at night weeping, joy will come in the morning.
7. In my security I thought, "I shall never falter.”
8. Lord, by Your favor You have made my mountain stand strong; when You concealed Your countenance I was alarmed.
9. I called to You, O Lord, and I made supplication to my Lord:
10. What profit is there in my death, in my going down to the grave? Can dust praise You? Can it proclaim Your truth
11. Lord, hear and be gracious to me; Lord, be a help to me.
12. You have turned my mourning into dancing; You have undone my sackcloth and girded me with joy.
13. Therefore my soul shall sing to You, and not be silent; Lord my God, I will praise You forever.
Chapter 31
Composed by a destitute and oppressed David, running from Saul while placing his trust in God, this psalm instructs man to put his trust in God alone.
1. For the Conductor, a psalm by David.
2. In You I have taken shelter, O Lord, I shall never be shamed; rescue me in Your righteousness.
3. Turn Your ear to me, save me quickly; be to me a rock of refuge, a fortress to deliver me.
4. For You are my rock and my fortress; for the sake of Your Name, direct me and lead me.
5. Remove me from the net they planted for me, for You are my stronghold.
6. I entrust my spirit into Your hand; You will redeem me, Lord, God of truth.
7. I despise those who anticipate worthless vanities; but I trust in the Lord.
8. I will rejoice and delight in Your kindness, for You have seen my affliction; You know the troubles of my soul.
9. You have not delivered me into the hand of the enemy; You have set my feet on spacious ground.
10. Be gracious to me, O Lord, for I am in distress; my eye wastes away from vexation-my soul and my stomach.
11. For my life is spent in sorrow, my years in sighing; my strength fails because of my iniquity, and my bones are wasted away.
12. Because of my adversaries I have become a disgrace-exceedingly to my neighbors, and a dread to my friends; those who see me outside flee from me.
13. Like a dead man, I was forgotten from the heart; I became like a lost vessel.
14. For I have heard the slander of many, terror on every side, when they assembled together against me and plotted to take my life.
15. But I trusted in You, O Lord; I said, "You are my God.”
16. My times are in Your hand; save me from the hands of my enemies and pursuers.
17. Shine Your countenance upon Your servant; deliver me in Your kindness.
18. O Lord, let me not be ashamed, for I have called You; let the wicked be shamed, let them be silent to the grave.
19. Let the lips of falsehood-which speak insolently against the righteous, with arrogance and contempt-be struck dumb.
20. How abundant is Your good that You have hidden for those who fear You; in the presence of man, You have acted for those who take refuge in You.
21. Conceal them from the haughtiness of man, in the shelter of Your countenance; hide them in a shelter from the strife of tongues.
22. Blessed is the Lord, for He has been wondrous in His kindness to me in a besieged city.
23. I said in my panic, "I am cut off from before Your eyes!" But in truth, You heard the voice of my pleas when I cried to You.
24. Love the Lord, all His pious ones! The Lord preserves the faithful, and repays with exactness those who act haughtily.
25. Be strong and fortify your hearts, all who put their hope in the Lord!
Chapter 32
This psalm speaks of forgiveness of sin, and of the good fortune of one who repents and confesses to God wholeheartedly.
1. By David, a maskil.1Fortunate is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered.
2. Fortunate is the man to whom the Lord does not reckon his sin, and in whose spirit there is no deceit.
3. When I was silent, my limbs wore away through my wailing all day long.
4. For day and night Your hand was heavy upon me; my marrow became [dry] as the droughts of summer, Selah.
5. My sin I made known to You, my iniquity I did not cover. I said, "I will confess my transgressions to the Lord," and You have forgiven the iniquity of my transgression forever.
6. For this let every pious man pray to You, at a time when You may be found; indeed, the flood of many waters will not reach him.
7. You are a refuge to me; protect me from distress; surround me with songs of deliverance forever.
8. I will enlighten you and educate you in the path you should go; I will advise you with what I have seen.
9. Be not like a horse, like a mule, senseless, that must be muzzled with bit and bridle when being adorned, so that it not come near you.
10. Many are the agonies of the wicked, but he who trusts in the Lord is surrounded by kindness.
11. Rejoice in the Lord and exult, you righteous ones! Sing joyously, all you upright of heart!
FOOTNOTES
1.A psalm intended to enlighten and impart knowledge(Metzudot).
Chapter 33
This psalm teaches the righteous and upright to praise God. For the more one knows of the Torah's wisdom, the more should he praise God, for he knows and understands His greatness.
1. Sing joyously to the Lord, you righteous ones; it is fitting for the upright to offer praise.
2. Extol the Lord with a harp; sing to Him with a ten-stringed lyre.
3. Sing to Him a new song; play well with sounds of jubilation.
4. For the word of the Lord is just; all His deeds are done in faithfulness.
5. He loves righteousness and justice; the kindness of the Lord fills the earth.
6. By the word of the Lord the heavens were made, and by the breath of His mouth all their hosts.
7. He gathers the waters of the sea like a mound; He places the deep waters in vaults.
8. Let all the earth fear the Lord; let all the inhabitants of the world tremble before Him.
9. For He spoke, and it came to be; He commanded, and it endured.
10. The Lord has annulled the counsel of nations; He has foiled the schemes of peoples.
11. The counsel of the Lord stands forever, the thoughts of His heart throughout all generations.
12. Fortunate is the nation whose God is the Lord, the people He chose as a heritage for Himself.
13. The Lord looks down from heaven; He beholds all mankind.
14. From His dwelling-place He looks intently upon all the inhabitants of the earth.
15. It is He Who fashions the hearts of them all, Who perceives all their actions.
16. The king is not saved by a great army, nor a warrior rescued by great might.
17. The horse is a false guarantee for victory; with all its great strength it offers no escape.
18. But the eye of the Lord is directed toward those who fear Him, toward those who hope for His kindness,
19. to save their soul from death and to sustain them during famine.
20. Our soul yearns for the Lord; He is our help and our shield.
21. For our heart shall rejoice in Him, for we have put our trust in His Holy Name.
22. May Your kindness, Lord, be upon us, as we have placed our hope in You.
Chapter 34
This psalm tells of when David was in grave danger while at the palace of Achish, brother of Goliath. David acted like a madman, letting spittle run down his beard, and writing on the doors: "Achish, king of Gath, owes me one hundred thousand gold coins," leading Achish to eject him from the palace. In his joy, David composed this psalm in alphabetical sequence.
1. By David, when he feigned insanity before Avimelech,1 who then drove him away, and he left.
2. I bless the Lord at all times; His praise is always in my mouth.
3. My soul glories in the Lord; let the humble hear it and rejoice.
4. Exalt the Lord with me, and let us extol His Name together.
5. I sought the Lord and He answered me; He delivered me from all my fears.
6. Those who look to Him are radiant; their faces are never humiliated.
7. This poor man called, and the Lord heard; He delivered him from all his tribulations.
8. The angel of the Lord camps around those who fear Him, and rescues them.
9. Taste and see that the Lord is good; fortunate is the man who trusts in Him.
10. Fear the Lord, you His holy ones, for those who fear Him suffer no want.
11. Young lions may want and hunger, but those who seek the Lord shall not lack any good thing.
12. Come, children, listen to me; I will teach you the fear of the Lord.
13. Who is the man who desires life, who loves long life wherein to see goodness?
14. Guard your tongue from evil, and your lips from speaking deceit.
15. Turn away from evil and do good, seek peace and pursue it.
16. The eyes of the Lord are directed toward the righteous, and His ears toward their cry.
17. The wrath of the Lord is upon the evildoers, to excise their memory from the earth.
18. But when they [repent and] cry out, the Lord hears, and saves them from all their troubles.
19. The Lord is close to the broken-hearted, and saves those with a crushed spirit.
20. Many are the afflictions of a righteous person, but the Lord rescues him from them all.
21. He protects all his bones; not one of them is broken.
22. Evil brings death upon the wicked, and the enemies of the righteous are condemned.
23. The Lord redeems the soul of His servants; all who take shelter in Him are not condemned.
FOOTNOTES
1.ll Philistine kings are referred to by the name Avimelech (Rashi).
---------------------
Tanya: Likutei Amarim, middle of Chapter 17
• Lessons in Tanya• English Text
Tanya: Likutei Amarim, middle of Chapter 17
• Lessons in Tanya• English Text
• Hebrew Text
• Audio Class: Listen | Download
• Video Class• Friday, Shevat 5, 5776 · January 15, 2016
• Audio Class: Listen | Download
• Video Class• Friday, Shevat 5, 5776 · January 15, 2016
Today's Tanya Lesson
| |
Likutei Amarim, middle of Chapter 17
|
וזה כל האדם, כי היום לעשותם כתיב, שהיום הוא עולם המעשה דוקא
This Torah study and fulfilling the mitzvot constitutes1 “the whole purpose of man,” for it is written:2 “I command you these mitzvot, that you do them this day” — “this day” referring specifically to this world of physical action.
The Alter Rebbe’s point is that the main objective in the commandment to love G‑d lies, not in the love itself, but in the practical and wholehearted fulfillment of the commandments that is motivated by this love, for the main thing in this world is action.
ולמחר כו׳ כמו שכתוב במקום אחר
Only “tomorrow” i.e., in the afterlife is the time of reward,3 as is explained elsewhere.
Hence the true love of G‑d, which is in itself a partial reward for one’s serving Him, is not as important in this life as the actual performance of the mitzvot, which can be generated even by a love which remains hidden in the mind and heart. This, then, is the love referred to in the verse, “for it is very near to you in your heart that you may do it” — a love which, though it may not find overt expression in the heart, is yet sufficient to motivate the performance of the mitzvot, and within reach of every Jew.
How does this love motivate one to perform the commandments? This the Alter Rebbe now goes on to explain:
והמוח שליט בטבעו ותולדתו על חלל השמאלי שבלב, ועל פיו ועל כל האברים שהם כלי הנעשה
The mind, by virtue of its inherent nature, is master over the left part of the heart, the seat of the animal soul, whence come one’s mundane desires and evil thoughts, and over the mouth and the other bodily organs, which are the instruments of action.
Hence by having — in his mind, at least — a love of G‑d and a desire to fulfill the mitzvot, one can utilize the natural mastery of the mind to overcome the desires of his heart, and to motivate his mouth and other bodily organs to study Torah and fulfill its commandments. We thus see that this can be done even by one whose heart is not under his control, as is atzaddik’s.
אם לא מי שהוא רשע באמת
This is true of everyone except he who is truly wicked — that is, not the Beinoni who is considered “like a rasha,” but one who is truly a rasha; in his case it cannot be said that his mind is master over his heart.
כמאמר רז״ל, שהרשעים הם ברשות לבם ואין לבם ברשותם כלל
On the contrary, our Sages state4 that the wicked are under the control of their heart but their heart is not under their control at all — they are unable to master the desires of their heart, for their mind has no active control over it.
This also resolves an apparent contradiction. The statement, “Tzaddikim have control over their heart,” indicates that anyone of a lesser rank, including a Beinoni, is not in control of his heart, while the statement that only the wicked are “under the control of their heart,” implies that anyone outside the category of rasha — even a Beinoni — is in control of his heart. Where, then, does the Beinoni actually stand? The previous discussion of the mastery of mind over heart explains this point. There are actually not two alternatives — of either being in control of one’s heart or controlled by it — but three. The tzaddikcontrols his heart. He can arouse a love of G‑d in his heart, directly, without resorting to his mind as a medium of influence. The rasha, on the other hand, not only does not control his heart, but is controlled by it. The Beinoni, although not in control of his heart, as is a tzaddik, rules his heart by way of his mind, which is under his control. To a certain extent, then, i.e., as regards the practical effect of his heart on his thought, speech, and action, the Beinoni does in fact control his heart. Therefore the Alter Rebbe says of the rasha “his heart is not under his control at all,” emphasizing that he is unable to influence his heart even by means of his mind.
The author previously stated that the ability of the mind to master the heart is natural and inherent in the mind. Why, then, do the wicked (resha‘im) lack this capacity? He answers:
וזה עונש על גודל ועוצם עונם
This is a punishment for the enormity and potency of their sinfulness.
However, this raises another question: If they have in fact lost the ability to master their heart, how can it be “very near” to them to observe the mitzvot “with their heart”? In answer, the author states:
ולא דברה תורה במתים אלו שבחייהם קרוים מתים
The Torah does not speak of the dead, that is, those wicked ones who are considered dead5 even during their lifetime.6
כי באמת אי אפשר לרשעים להתחיל לעבוד ה׳ בלי שיעשו תשובה על העבר תחלה
Indeed, it is impossible for the wicked to begin to serve G‑d, that is, to observe the mitzvot out of a feeling of love and fear of G‑d, without first repenting for their past,
לשבר הקליפות, שהם מסך מבדיל ומחיצה של ברזל המפסקת בינם לאביהם שבשמים
in order to shatter the kelipot that were created by their sins, which form a sundering curtain and an “iron wall” that interposes between them and their Father in Heaven.7
על ידי שבירת לבו ומרירת נפשו על חטאיו
How are these kelipot shattered? — By means of contriteness of heart and bitterness of soul over one’s sins.
כמו שכתוב בזהר על פסוק: זבחי אלקים רוח נשברה לב נשבר וגו׳ שעל ידי לב נשבר, נשברה רוח הטומאה דסיטרא אחרא
As the Zohar interprets the verse,8 “The sacrifices to the Almighty (Elokim) are a broken spirit, a broken and contrite heart…,” to mean that through one’s breaking his heart the unclean spirit of the sitra achra(the kelipot) is broken, and this is the sacrifice that we offer to the Divine Name, Elokim.
When speaking of the sacrifices and the laws pertaining to them, the Torah mentions only the Divine Name Havayeh (as in the oft-repeated phrase describing the sacrifices: “an appealing fragrance to G‑d (Havayeh)”). No mention is made of a sacrifice to the Divine Name, Elokim. What, asks the Zohar, does constitute a sacrifice to that Name? The Zohar interprets the previously quoted verse as answering this question. “The sacrifice to Elokim is a broken spirit” (i.e., breaking the spirit of thesitra achra; and this is accomplished by means of) “a broken and contrite heart.”
(עיין שם פרשת פינחס דף ר"מ, ופרשת ויקרא דף ח׳ ודף ה׳ עמוד א׳, ובפירוש הרמ״ז שם)
9(See Zohar on Parshat Pinchas, p. 240, and on Parshat Vayikra, p. 8 and p. 5a, and the commentary of Rabbi Moshe Zacuto thereon.)
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. | Kohelet 12:13. |
| 2. | Devarim 7:11. |
| 3. | Eruvin 22a. |
| 4. | Bereishit Rabbah 34:10; 67:8. |
| 5. | Berachot 18b. |
| 6. | The Rebbe notes that in the following sentences the Alter Rebbe addresses a difficulty which arises from his previous statement concerning the rasha: If indeed, the mind of the rasha is under the control of his heart, and if the heart is naturally inclined, not toward love and fear of G‑d (in any form, not even a love which remains hidden in the mind) but toward material pleasures, then (a) It is not only “far”, but in fact impossible for him to acquire a love or fear of G‑d; (b) It will remain impossible for him forever, G‑d forbid, for what will arouse him to love and fear once he has lost control over his mind, which is the medium of influence on the heart? Indeed, answers the Alter Rebbe; in his present state, it is in fact impossible for the rasha to attain a love or fear of G‑d. But it is in his hands to change this state of affairs — through repentance, which destroys the evil in his heart.In this way, the rasha tackles the problem at its source. Once his heart rules him no longer, his mind is free to influence it, and to arouse a love and fear of G‑d. |
| 7. | Cf. Yeshayahu 59:2. |
| 8. | Tehillim 51:19; Zohar II, 116b. |
| 9. | Parentheses are in the original text. |
--------------------
Rambam:
• Sefer Hamitzvos:• English Text | Hebrew Text |
Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class• Monday, Shevat 5, 5776 · January 15, 2016
Today's Mitzvah
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
Positive Commandment 169
Taking the Four Species
"And you shall take for yourselves on the first day..."—Leviticus 23:40.
We are commanded to take a lulav (palm branch) [along with willows, myrtles and a citron] and rejoice before G‑d on the seven days of the holiday of Sukkot.
Only in the area of the Holy Temple is this mitzvah biblically mandatory for the seven days of the holiday. In all other locations, the biblical obligation extends only to the first day of the holiday.
Women are exempt from this mitzvah.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Rambam:
• Sefer Hamitzvos:• English Text | Hebrew Text |
Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class• Monday, Shevat 5, 5776 · January 15, 2016Today's Mitzvah
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
Positive Commandment 169
Taking the Four Species
"And you shall take for yourselves on the first day..."—Leviticus 23:40.
We are commanded to take a lulav (palm branch) [along with willows, myrtles and a citron] and rejoice before G‑d on the seven days of the holiday of Sukkot.
Only in the area of the Holy Temple is this mitzvah biblically mandatory for the seven days of the holiday. In all other locations, the biblical obligation extends only to the first day of the holiday.
Women are exempt from this mitzvah.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Taking the Four Species
Positive Commandment 169
Translated by Berel Bell
The 169th mitzvah is that we are commanded to hold a lulav [palm branch, together with the other three species, esrog, myrtle, willow] and to rejoice1 before G‑d for seven days [i.e. the holiday of Sukkos].
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement,2 "And you shall take for yourselves."
The details of this mitzvah are explained in tractate Sukkah. There it is explained that only in the Holy Temple is this mitzvah obligatory for seven days. Elsewhere, the Biblical obligation is only on the first day.3
Women are not obligated in this mitzvah.
FOOTNOTES
1.This refers to rejoicing with the mitzvah of lulav, since the general mitzvah of rejoicing on holidays is counted separately (see P54). See sources quoted in Likkutei Sichos, Vol. 24, p.246, note 3. Kapach, 5731, note 34.
2.Lev. 23:40.
3.By Rabbinic law, however, the obligation applies all seven days of Sukkos.
-----------------------------------------------------------
• 1 Chapter: Maaser Maaser - Chapter 7 • English Text | Hebrew Text | Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class• Maaser - Chapter 7
Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class• Maaser - Chapter 7
Halacha 1
[The following laws apply when a person has a 100 log of wine that are tevelaccording to Scriptural Law.1 If he says: "The two lugim that I will separate areterumah;2 the ten are the first tithe, and the nine are the second tithe,"3 he should not begin drinking and leave over the quantity designated as terumahand the tithes at the end. Instead, he should make the separations and then drink. We do not say that the wine he left over at the end is retroactively considered as if it was set aside in the beginning.4 [The rationale for this stringency is that] the obligation [to separate] terumah and the tithes is Scriptural in origin, and with regard to [matters of] Scriptural Law, we do not say that we will consider it as if a separation has been made unless it actually has been made.5
Halacha 2
When a person specifies that his tithes were located at the opening of a jug [of wine], he should not drink from the bottom of the barrel. If he specifies that they are at the bottom, he should not drink from the top. [The rationale is that] the liquids intermingle.6 If, by contrast, one specified [that the tithes for produce] were at the opening of a storage container, one may eat from the bottom.7 If one specified that they were located at the bottom, one may eat from the top.8
Halacha 3
Halacha 4
When a person sets aside produce to use them for the separation of tithes,12he may continue to separate tithes relying on this produce on the assumption that it is intact, eating and drinking [from the produce from which he intended to separate tithes] until the entire quantity that was set aside has become tithes. He then gives that to a Levite. [If later] he discovers that the produce that he set aside [for tithes] has been lost, he must show concern for all the tithes that he set aside.13 He should not, however, tithe [the second time] with certainty.14
Halacha 5
When a person lends money to a priest,15 a Levite,16 or a poor person,17 so that he can separate [produce] for the money [they owe] from the portions due them,18 he may continue to separate tithes on their behalf on the assumption that they are alive. He need not show concern that the priest or Levite died or the poor man became wealthy.19
Halacha 6
How should he make these separations on their behalf? He should separateterumah, the first tithe, or the tithe for the poor20 and give it to another person for the sake of the priest, Levite, or poor person to whom he lent money.21 If [the debtors] would frequently take these separations from him or if he was accustomed to give these separations to them alone, he need not give them to another person on their behalf.22
After [the lender] makes these separations, he calculates the worth of the produce he separated and deducts it from the loan. [He continues doing this] until he repays the entire debt. He may sell the terumah to any priest of his choice and may partake of the tithes [himself].
Halacha 7
When he calculates the worth of the produce that he set aside, he has the right to consider their value according to the lower market price.23 This is not considered as interest.24 The Sabbatical year does not remit such a debt.25
If the lender desires to nullify this arrangement, he may not.26 But if [the borrowers] seek to do so, they may. If the owner despaired of receiving payment from them, he can no longer make these separations on their behalf. For we may not make separations because of [a debt that] was lost.27
If the priest, Levite, or poor person who borrowed money dies, he cannot continue to separate on their behalf unless he receives permission from the heirs.28 [Moreover, even if permission is granted,] it is effective only when [the deceased] left the heirs [a tract of] land at least the size of a needle.29 If, however, he left them only money, permission from the heir is not effective.30If he made the loan in court on the condition that he will make the separations on their behalf for this money, it is not necessary for him to receive permission from the heirs.31
Halacha 8
When an Israelite tells a Levite: "I am in possession of a kor34 of tithes for you," the Levite has the right to designate that produce as terumat ma'aser for other produce even if he did not draw it into his possession.35 If the Israelite gives it to another Levite, the first individual has nothing more than complaints against him.36
Halacha 9
When a person has produce in a silo and gives a se'ah to a Levite37and ase'ah to a poor person,38 he should not set aside eight se'ah from the silo and partake of it39 unless he knows with certainty that the two se'ah of the tithes are still intact. If, however, the Levite and/or the poor person partook of them, he may set aside only an amount of grain proportionate to what remains from the two se'ah.40
Halacha 10
[The following laws apply when] poor people exchange the presents given them with the owner of the field, i.e., they gave him a se'ah of leket, shichachah, peah or the tithes for the poor and they took a se'ah of grain from the grain pile.41 [The grain] he takes from them is exempt from the tithes,42even though it was prepared in the domain of the owner. [Tithes] must be separated from [the grain] they take from him even though it was given in exchange for their presents that are exempt.
Halacha 11
[The following laws apply when] there are two baskets of tevel from whichterumah was separated in front of a person and he says: "Let the tithes from this one be in the other one." The tithing of the first basket is effective, for he has established its tithes within the second basket. The tithing of the second basket is not effective because tithes cannot be set aside from the first basket because the obligation to tithe has already been discharged for the second basket from which the tithes from both must be separated.43
Halacha 12
If one says: "With regard to the tithes for these two baskets. The tithes for each one are established in the other," he has designated the tithes by name and has established the tithes within them. He therefore separates the tithes from them. He may not separate the tithes from another source.44
Halacha 13
How are the tithes separated [in the above situation]? One may separate the tithes for both of them from one of them or he should separate the tithes from each one of them from itself if they were of equal [size].45 If one of them was larger than the other, one should separate the tithes for the larger one from the smaller one and the tithes for the smaller one from the larger one.46
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. |
One might argue that this law does not apply at present. And indeed, did not apply throughout the entire Second Temple period. As explained in Hilchot Terumah 1:26 and notes, from the time of the exile of the tribes of Reuven and Gad towards the end of the First Temple period, the mitzvah to separate tithes was no longer required by Scriptural Law. On the other hand, since the source of the mitzvot are Scriptural, even though their observance now is Rabbinic, we follow stringencies as if the Scriptural mitzvah still applies.
|
| 2. |
I.e., he is giving one fiftieth which is the ordinary measure separated as terumah (ibid. 3:2).
|
| 3. |
For the second tithe is given as a tenth of the new total once the first tithe has been separated.
|
| 4. |
See Chapter 9, Halachah 10.
|
| 5. |
There is a difference of opinion among the Sages of the Talmud if this principle, referred to asbereirah should be applied or not (see Beitzah 37b). Because the matter is not resolved, with regard to questions of Scriptural Law, we are stringent, but with regard to matters of Rabbinic Law, we rule leniently.
|
| 6. |
And there is no way one can drink from the top without drinking from the bottom or drink from the bottom without drinking from the top.
|
| 7. |
This does not represent a contradiction to the previous halachah. In that instance, the person had not separated the terumah and the tithes. He had merely stated that he would. In this instance, he has made a separation even though he did not physically remove it.
|
| 8. |
For the produce will not become intermingled.
|
| 9. |
See Hilchot Ma'aser Sheni, ch. 4, which describes how the second tithe can be redeemed for silver coinage.
|
| 10. |
I.e., this is referring to a situation where the person did not make the separations in the desired sequence. This is undesirable, as stated in Hilchot Terumah 3:23.
|
| 11. |
He may not, however, separate it as terumat m'aser for this batch of produce, for it is not proper to separate terumat ma'aser before one separates the tithes themselves. See Chapter 9, Halachah 5.
The Ra'avad states that one may use it as terumat ma'aser for other produce, but not as ordinaryterumah.
|
| 12. |
I.e., he puts aside this batch of produce. Whenever he has new produce, he measures it and calculates a tenth. Afterwards, he considers that quantity of the produce set aside as tithes. When that entire batch of produce has been designated as tithes, he gives it to a Levite. See also (Hilchot Terumah 5:26).
|
| 13. |
I.e., he must separate tithes again, lest he had made the original separation after the produce which he designated for his tithes was lost. The Mishnah (Gittin 3:8) mentions the opinion of Rabbi Elazar who maintains that one shows concern only for the separations made within the last 24 hours. Other Sages differ, however, and maintain that one must show concern for all produce separated (Kessef Mishneh; see Rav Kapach's edition of the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah).
Tosafot Yom Tov (Gittin, loc. cit.) states that the Rambam's wording implies that one should separate tithes for one's produce even if that produce has already been eaten. Other authorities, however, do not accept this deduction.
|
| 14. |
For perhaps, the produce that he had set aside was intact at the time he made the separation.
|
| 15. |
Who is entitled to receive both terumah and the tithes.
|
| 16. |
Who is entitled to receive the tithes.
|
| 17. |
Who is entitled to receive the tithe for the poor.
|
| 18. |
I.e., the lender lent a Levite 100 zuz, but did not require him to pay it. Instead, he said that he would continually deduct the money in exchange for the produce he would set aside as tithes until the debt was paid, as described in the following halachah.
|
| 19. |
In which instance, they - and therefore, the lender - would not be entitled to the crops separated for these purposes.
|
| 20. |
There is obviously a printing error in the standard published text of the Mishneh Torah.
|
| 21. |
In this way, the produce separated formally becomes the property of the debtor. Even though ultimately the lender will be receiving the produce, he must make the separations so that the main batch of produce will not be tevel.
|
| 22. |
He must, however, make these separations. He need not give them to another person, because since these individuals are accustomed to receiving this produce, it is considered as if he already received them (Rashi, Gittin 30a).
|
| 23. |
I.e., whenever produce is sold, there is a buyer's bid and a seller's bid. The buyer's bid is always lower than the seller's. The lender may price the produce according to the buyer's bid.
|
| 24. |
Despite the fact that he is receiving an advantage - considering the produce's worth at a lower price - for having made the loan.
|
| 25. |
Although the Sabbatical year remits debts (Hilchot Shemitah, ch. 9), it remits only those debts for which a person must demand payment. In this instance, it is as if the payment has already been arranged (Meiri, Gittin 30a).
|
| 26. |
Our Sages ordained this measure for the sake of the recipients (Gittin, loc. cit.).
|
| 27. |
Rashi (Gittin, loc. cit.) explains that we are speaking about a situation where the lender stipulated that he would receive payment for the loan from the terumah or tithes from a particular year. That year was a year of drought and his harvest appeared lost entirely. He made a public statement of despair, acknowledging that he no longer expected to be able to collect the debt, because his fields would not grow enough crops. If, despite this condition, his fields produced crops, he is not entitled to keep the terumah and/or tithes for himself. The rationale is that he has already given up hope of their recovery.
|
| 28. |
I.e., the arrangement to pay the debt is not automatically transferred to the heirs of the estate. They must agree to it.
|
| 29. |
As long as the testator possesses land, his estate is responsible for the debt, because the land is on lien to it. Hence, his heirs can continue the arrangement if they so choose.
|
| 30. |
If the deceased left only movable property, the debt does not create a lien on the estate. There is a mitzvah for them to pay the debt, but no binding obligation. Hence, they cannot have terumah or tithes separated for the sake of paying the debt.
|
| 31. |
For it is as if the court agreed that all the priests and/or Levites would accept responsibility for the debt in the event of the debtor's death.
|
| 32. |
For a wealthy person cannot be a recipient of the tithes for the poor.
|
| 33. |
For it is as if the lender specified that he would accept this method as payment for the debt. If that method is no longer viable, he must suffer the loss.
|
| 34. |
A measure of volume.
|
| 35. |
I.e., and thus, he has not formally acquired it as his own. Nevertheless, he can rely on the assumption that a Jew will not act unfaithfully and will keep his word (Bava Metzia 49a).
|
| 36. |
The fact that by changing his mind and failing to keep his word, the Israelite caused a spiritual difficulty for the first Levite - for he caused him to violate a transgression by partaking of tithes for which terumat ma'aser was not separated - does not create a financial liability.
|
| 37. |
As the tithes.
|
| 38. |
As the tithe for the poor. As the Rambam writes in his Commentary to the Mishnah (Terumot 4:2), he does not have to separate a full se'ah as the tithes for the poor, for once the first tithe has been separated, all that is necessary is to separate a tenth from the new total and this will be slightly less than a se'ah.
|
| 39. |
I.e., he is thinking that the tithes will have been separated for these eight se'ah.
|
| 40. |
I.e., the produce possessed by each of the recipients should be one tenth of the amount of produce that he uses. We do not say that the produce that he originally separated can serve as the tithes for the produce he will set aside afterwards unless it is intact. See Halachah 4.
|
| 41. |
I.e., the owner acted generously with the poor people, taking a se'ah of their presents - which is usually produce of inferior quality - and exchanging it for a se'ah of quality produce from the grain pile.
|
| 42. |
For there is no obligation to separate tithes from the presents of the poor (Hilchot Terumah 2:9).
|
| 43. |
As stated in Chapter 1, Halachah 6, one may not separate tithes from produce that is exempt from the mitzvah of tithing or for which the obligation to tithe has already been discharged.
|
| 44. |
For he has designated the tithes as coming from those baskets.
|
| 45. |
From the Tosefta (Demai 8:12), it appears that if the piles of produce are equal, it makes no difference to the person from which pile he makes the separations. Thus he can separate them as he desires (Radbaz).
|
| 46. |
For his statements indicate that he desired to separate the tithes for one pile from the other.
|
---------------------
• 3 Chapters: Shofar, Sukkah, vLulav Shofar, Sukkah, vLulav - Chapter Six, Shofar, Sukkah, vLulav Shofar, Sukkah, vLulav - Chapter Seven, Shofar, Sukkah, vLulav Shofar, Sukkah, vLulav - Chapter Eight • English Text | Hebrew Text | Audio: Listen | Download• Shofar, Sukkah, vLulav - Chapter Six
Audio: Listen | Download• Shofar, Sukkah, vLulav - Chapter Six
Halacha 1
Women, slaves, and minors are freed from [fulfilling the mitzvah of] sukkah. Atumtum and an androgynous are obligated because of the doubt [concerning their status]. Similarly, a person who is half slave and half free is obligated.
A minor who does not require his mother's [presence] - i.e., a child of five or six - is obligated [to fulfill the mitzvah] of sukkah according to Rabbinic decree, to train him in [the performance of] mitzvot.
Commentary Halacha 1
Women, slaves, and minors are freed from [fulfilling the mitzvah of] sukkah. - The same laws that apply to hearing the shofar apply to Sukkah. Hence, women and slaves are free of obligation, as is the case regarding all mitzvot whose fulfillment is associated with a specific time. Minors have no obligations at all according to the Torah. (See the commentary on Chapter 2, Halachah 1.)
See also the commentary on Chapter 2, Halachah 2 regarding a woman's right to perform the mitzvah if she desires, and whether permission is granted for her to recite a blessing.
A tumtum and an androgynous are obligated because of the doubt [concerning their status]. - See the commentary on the above halachah for a definition of these terms and their status. Note Halachah 13 regarding their recitation of a blessing.
Similarly, a person who is half slave and half free is obligated. - See the commentary on Chapter 2, Halachot 1 and 3.
A minor who does not require his mother's [presence] - Sukkah 28b offers two definitions of this term:
a) a child who does not need his mother to help him after he relieves himself;b) a child who does not wake up in the night and call out: "Mommy! Mommy!"
Nevertheless, based on Eruvin 82a, the Rambam provided us with a more definite guideline...
i.e., a child of five or six - is obligated [to fulfill the mitzvah] of sukkah according to Rabbinic decree - According to Rashi (Berachot48a) and the Ramban (Milchamot Hashem, Berachot 20b), there is no obligation incumbent on the child himself. The child's father is obligated to educate him. If he has no father, the obligation falls on his mother and on the local Rabbinic court (Terumat Hadeshen 99).
Tosafot (Berachot 48a) differs and explains that the Sages placed the obligation on the minor himself. From the Rambam's phraseology, it appears that he accepts this view.
Support for this premise can be derived from the Rambam's decision inHilchot Berachot 5:15-16, which states that an adult who ate a small meal can fulfill his obligation by listening to a child reciting the grace after meals (for both are obligated by virtue of Rabbinic decree). Though others object on the grounds that the child himself is not obligated in the mitzvah, the Rambam states that such a practice is acceptable.
to train him in [the performance of] mitzvot. - The Rambam mentions the same concept in Hilchot Tzitzit 3:9, Hilchot Berachot 5:1, and Hilchot Lulav 7:19.
Halacha 2
The sick and their attendants are freed from [fulfilling the mitzvah] of sukkah. This applies not only to a person who is dangerously ill, but also to one with a headache or a sore eye.
A person who is uncomfortable [when dwelling in the sukkah] is freed from the obligation [to fulfill the mitzvah] of sukkah. This applies to the person himself, but not to his attendants.
Who is "a person who is uncomfortable [when dwelling in the sukkah]"? A person who cannot sleep in the sukkah because of the wind or because of the flies, mites, or the like, or because of the smell.
Commentary Halacha 2
The sick and their attendants - Since the latter's performance of a mitzvah - tending to the sick - does not enable them to perform the mitzvah of dwelling in the sukkah, they are absolved from the obligation. (See Sukkah 25a, 26a.) However, this leniency is granted only during the time the sick person requires their assistance (Shulchan Aruch HaRav640:7).
are freed from [fulfilling the mitzvah] of sukkah. This applies not only to a person who is dangerously ill - who is free from the obligation to perform all mitzvot, even those as severe as the Sabbath or Yom Kippur;
but also to one with a headache - or any other minor illness (Rambam, Commentary on the Mishnah, Sukkah 2:4).
This leniency is granted because of one of the basic principles related to the mitzvah of sukkah. Leviticus 23:42 states: "You shall dwell in sukkot (תשבו בסכת)." On that verse, Sukkah 26a comments: תשבו כעין תדורו - i.e., dwelling in the sukkah is comparable to living in one's own home. Thus, a person is not required to dwell in a sukkah under circumstances which would cause him to leave his own home.
Since a person who is sick would seek the most comfortable lodgings possible and would not camp outside, he is not obligated to do so to fulfill the mitzvah of sukkah (Rabbenu Manoach).
or a sore eye. - Sukkah 26a relates that Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel was granted permission to sleep outside the sukkah for this purpose.
The Torah's prohibitions are suspended not only when a person's life is in danger, but also when a particular limb might be lost. Though this premise is accepted by the Rambam (see Hilchot Shabbat 2:4), it does not appear that he is referring to it here. Rather, it seems that he means a minor ailment comparable to a headache. See also Tosafot (Sukkah, ibid.).
A person who is uncomfortable [when dwelling in the sukkah] is freed from the obligation [to fulfill the mitzvah] of sukkah. - based on the principle of תשבו כעין תדורו, as explained above. Just as a person would seek out a comfortable permanent dwelling, he is obligated to dwell only in a sukkah which does not cause him unpleasantness.
Rabbenu Manoach states that this leniency does not apply on the first night of Sukkot, on which there is a binding obligation to eat in the sukkah. (See Halachah 6.) The Ramah (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim640:4) quotes this statement as halachah.
This applies to the person himself, but not to his attendants. - Some earlier texts of the Mishneh Torah stated that leniency was also granted to such a person's attendants, but that is surely a printing error (Rabbenu Manoach).
Who is "a person who is uncomfortable [when dwelling in the sukkah]"? A person who cannot sleep in the sukkah because of the wind or because of the flies, mites, or the like, or because of the smell. - The Tur, the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 640:4), and the Ramah emphasize that this law applies only when the discomfort is an unexpected occurrence. However, a sukkah which is constructed in a place where the discomfort will surely come is considered to be unfit to dwell in and is unacceptable for the performance of the mitzvah.
Halacha 3
A mourner is obligated [to fulfill the mitzvah] of sukkah.
A groom, his attendants, and all the members of the wedding party are freed from [fulfilling the mitzvah] of sukkah throughout the seven days of [the wedding] festivities.
Commentary Halacha 3
A mourner - The term אבל refers to a person in the seven days of mourning which follow the burial of a father, mother, wife, brother, sister, son, or daughter. An אונן (a person in mourning for these relatives before their burial) is freed from the obligation of sukkah, because he is absolved of the duty to perform all mitzvot (Hilchot Eivel 4:6).
It must be noted that none of the mourning rites should be followed during a festival. If a close relative dies before the festival, the shiv'ah (seven days of mourning) is completed at the festival's commencement, even though all seven days have not passed (Hilchot Eivel 10:3, 8).
is obligated [to fulfill the mitzvah] of sukkah. - Sukkah 25b explains that a mourner (אבל) is obligated to fulfill all the mitzvot. Nevertheless, one might suppose that just as a person who is uncomfortable is freed from the obligation of sukkah, a mourner would also be absolved. Therefore, the Talmud includes a special teaching to emphasize the mourner's obligation, explaining that one is absolved only for discomfort which comes from external factors. In this case, the mourner brings discomfort upon himself. He should compose himself and concentrate his attention on the mitzvah.
Nevertheless, Shulchan Aruch HaRav (640:13) writes that if dwelling in a sukkah will cause a mourner more discomfort than dwelling in his home, he is allowed to choose the latter alternative.
A groom - because he is involved in the mitzvah of marriage. Sukkah25b adds that generally, a sukkah is to small to carry out the wedding celebrations in the proper manner. Furthermore, the groom is obligated to rejoice together with his wife, and the sukkah is not an appropriate setting.
his attendants - In Hilchot Zechiyah Umatanah, Chapter 7, the Rambam describes the custom of שושבינות (attending a groom).
and all the members of the wedding party - They are absolved of the mitzvah only while they are involved in the mitzvah of celebrating together with the bride and groom, however, when they leave, they are obligated. Furthermore, there are many authorities who require that the meals served the groom and his attendants be served in a sukkah. (SeeMishnah Berurah 640:33.)
are freed from [fulfilling the mitzvah] of sukkah throughout the seven days of [the wedding] festivities. - It must be emphasized that the wedding must have taken place during the four days between Yom Kippur and Sukkot. Weddings are not held during the Ten Days of Repentance, nor on Chol Hamo'ed.
Halacha 4
Emissaries charged with a mission involving a mitzvah are freed from [fulfilling the mitzvah] of sukkah both during the day and at night. People who journey during the day are freed from [fulfilling the mitzvah] of sukkah during the day and are obligated at night. People who journey during the night are freed from [fulfilling the mitzvah] of sukkah at night and are obligated during the day.
A city's day watchmen are freed from [fulfilling the mitzvah] of sukkah during the day and are obligated at night. Its night watchmen are freed from [fulfilling the mitzvah] of sukkah at night and are obligated during the day. The watchmen of gardens and orchards are freed from [fulfilling the mitzvah] during the day and the night, because if the watchman constructs a sukkah, a thief will realize that the watchman has a fixed place and will go to steal from another place.
Commentary Halacha 4
Emissaries charged with a mission involving a mitzvah - e.g., to study Torah, to greet a Sage under whom one studied Torah, or to redeem captives (Rashi, Sukkah 25a).
are freed from [fulfilling the mitzvah] of sukkah - i.e., they are not required to eat, sleep, or perform any of the activities in a sukkah described in Halachot 5-9.
both during the day and at night. - Rashi (Sukkah 25a, 26a) states that this applies even when they are lodging overnight. Since, at night they are also involved with thinking about how to fulfill the mitzvah, they are still considered as occupied with the performance of a mitzvah and are not required to seek out a sukkah. An example of this principle quoted by the Talmud supports this interpretation:
When Rav Chisda and Rabbah bar Rav Huna would attend [the lecture delivered] at the home of the exilarch on the Sabbath of the festival, they would sleep along the river banks of Sura.They explained: "We are emissaries involved in a mitzvah" (Sukkah 26a).
Though these Sages were visiting a city which served as a center of Jewish life and surely could have found a sukkah to lodge in, they did not see the necessity for doing so. (See also Sukkah 10b.)
Nevertheless, Tosafot, Sukkah 10b, interprets the passage differently and explains that leniency is granted these emissaries only when dwelling in the sukkah would in some way prevent them from carrying out the mitzvah which they set out to perform. If it is possible to do both - perform the mitzvah they set out to do and fulfill the mitzvah of sukkah - one must endeavor to do so.
The Maggid Mishneh explains that the Rambam shares Rashi's view. However, the final halachic position followed by most Ashkenazic authorities is closer to Tosafot's position: i.e., these emissaries are not obligated to trouble themselves to find a sukkah. However, if there is a sukkah available, they should make use of it. Nevertheless, if sleeping in the sukkah would prevent them from getting proper rest, and thus hold them back from fulfilling their mitzvah in a proper manner, they are not required to sleep in a sukkah (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 640:18; Mishnah Berurah 640:38).
(Abstractly, it is possible to differentiate between the two positions as follows. According to Rashi, there is no obligation of sukkah incumbent on this person whatsoever. In contrast, Tosafot would maintain that the person is obligated to perform the mitzvah. However, at all times he is bound by another commitment which takes precedence.)
People who journey during the day are freed from [fulfilling the mitzvah] of sukkah during the day - i.e., while they are traveling.Tosafot, Sukkah 26a explains that this concept is derived from the principle: תשבו כעין תדורו - i.e., dwelling in the sukkah is comparable to living in one's own home. Since a person will occasionally leave his home on a journey, he is also entitled to leave his sukkah.
and are obligated at night - if they lodge in a settled place (Tosafot, ibid.).
People who journey during the night are freed from [fulfilling the mitzvah] of sukkah at night - i.e., while traveling
and are obligated during the day. - if they lodge in a settled area.
A city's day watchmen are freed from [fulfilling the mitzvah] of sukkah during the day - when they are on duty.
and are obligated at night - when they are replaced by their colleagues. Conversely,...
Its night watchmen are freed from [fulfilling the mitzvah] of sukkah at night and are obligated during the day.
The watchmen of gardens and orchards - who spend their entire day guarding the produce (Rashi, Sukkah 26a)
are freed from [fulfilling the mitzvah] during the day and the night, because if the watchman constructs a sukkah, a thief will realize that the watchman has a fixed place and will go to steal from another place. - Sukkah, ibid., explains that based on this principle, the leniency is granted only to watchmen charged with guarding an entire orchard or farm. However, if a watchman is charged with guarding produce which is collected in one place, he is capable of fulfilling the mitzvah and discharging his duty. Hence, he is obligated to construct a sukkah there.
Halacha 5
How must the mitzvah of dwelling in the sukkah be fulfilled? A person must eat, drink, and live in the sukkah throughout all seven days [of the festival], both during the day and at night, in the same manner as he dwells in his home throughout the year.
During these seven days, he must consider his house as a temporary dwelling and the sukkah as his permanent home, as [Leviticus 23:42] states: "You shall dwell in sukkot for seven days."
What does this imply? His attractive utensils and attractive bedding [should be brought] to the sukkah. His drinking utensils - i.e., his cups and crystal pitchers - [should be brought] to the sukkah. However, utensils used for food - i.e., pans and plates - [may be left] outside the sukkah. A candelabra [should be brought] to the sukkah. However, if the sukkah is small, it should be left outside the sukkah.
Commentary Halacha 5
How must the mitzvah of dwelling in the sukkah be fulfilled? A person must eat, drink, and live - performing all the activities mentioned in this halachah and Halachot 6-9.
in the sukkah throughout all seven days [of the festival] - These statements and the Rambam's introduction to these halachot imply that each moment a person dwells in the sukkah throughout the seven days of the festival, he fulfills a mitzvah. (Accordingly, a blessing is recited whenever one makes use of the sukkah [Halachah 12]. See Halachah 7.)
both during the day and at night - Sukkah 43a derives this concept by drawing an analogy (גזרה שוה) to the seven days of preparation for the dedication of the Sanctuary. Thus, just as the priests were required to stay in the Sanctuary for seven days - day and night - similarly, the mitzvah of sukkah must be observed in the same manner.
in the same manner as he dwells in his home throughout the year -following the principle of תשבו כעין תדורו mentioned above.
During these seven days, he must consider his house as a temporary dwelling and the sukkah as his permanent home - This statement is a quote from the Mishnah, Sukkah 2:8. In his commentary on that Mishnah, the Rambam defines קבע as "of primary importance and a constant practice."
as [Leviticus 23:42] states: "You shall dwell in sukkot for seven days."
What does this imply? His attractive utensils and attractive bedding - [should be brought] to the sukkah. His drinking utensils - i.e., his cups and crystal pitchers - [should be brought] to the sukkah. -Doing so is a sign of honor and respect for the mitzvah.
However, utensils used for food - i.e., pans and plates - [may be left] outside the sukkah. - Obviously, during the meal one's plates must be in the sukkah. The Rambam's intent is that after the meal there is no necessity to keep one's plates in the sukkah, because they are not attractive and are generally stored in pantries outside the home. In contrast, it is customary in many communities not to bring pots into the sukkah, even while eating (Mishnah Berurah 639:5). [Needless to say, plates that must be washed must be removed from the sukkah.]
The printed (as opposed to certain manuscripts) text of Rashi (Sukkah29a) also shares the Rambam's interpretation. Tosafot explains the passage slightly differently, rendering "utensils used for food" as "utensils used in the preparation of food" - i.e., pots and pans.
A candelabra - i.e., the source of light
[should be brought] to the sukkah - even when it is not burning, since it is attractive.
However, if the sukkah is small, it should be left outside the sukkah. - lest it cause a fire (Tosafot, Sukkah, ibid.). This differs from Rashi's interpretation of Sukkah, ibid., which explains that the Talmud is referring to an earthenware lamp. Thus, we may assume that it should not be brought into the sukkah because it is unattractive. This, appears to justify the statements of the Maggid Mishneh, who writes that the lamp should not be brought into the sukkah when it is not burning. Both opinions are quoted by the later halachic authorities (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 639:3;Mishnah Berurah 639:7-8).
Halacha 6
We should eat, drink, and sleep in the sukkah through the entire seven days [of the festival], both during the day and at night. It is forbidden to eat a meal outside the sukkah for the entire seven [day period]. However, [there is no prohibition] if one eats a snack the measure of a k'beitzah or less, or even slightly more.
One may not sleep outside the sukkah at all, even a brief nap. It is permissible to drink water and eat fruit outside the sukkah. However, a person who follows the stringency of not drinking even water outside the sukkah is worthy of praise.
Commentary Halacha 6
We should eat, drink, and sleep in the sukkah through the entire seven days [of the festival], both during the day and at night. It is forbidden to eat a meal - i.e., a meal of bread or food prepared from the five species of grain
outside the sukkah for the entire seven [day period]. - The B'nei Binyamin explains that this expression includes the Sabbath and festivals, thus excluding the opinions which maintain that any meal of bread eaten on the Sabbath or festivals is significant and cannot be considered as a snack. See the commentary of Rabbi Akiva Eiger.
However, [there is no prohibition] if one eats a snack - even of bread, outside the sukkah.
Sukkah 26a defines "a snack" as "what the students will eat before they enter the study sessions." In his commentary on the Mishnah, Sukkah2:4, the Rambam explains it as "a small amount, [eaten] without considering it as a meal, in order to satisfy one's hunger [temporarily], until one can complete eating afterwards."
Rabbenu Manoach explains that though there is no prohibition involved, it is not desirable to eat even a snack of bread outside the sukkah.
the measure of a k'beitzah or less, - The Mishnah (ibid.) relates that less than a k'beitzah of bread was brought once to Rabbi Tzadok and he ate it outside the sukkah.
or even slightly more. - The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 639:2) restricts the leniency to a k'beitzah (approximately 56 cubic centimeters according to Shiurei Torah and, in this instance, 41 cubic centimeters according to the Chazon Ish) alone (See Tosafot, Yoma 79a.) The same principles are also applied to cooked foods made from the five species of grain.
One may not sleep outside the sukkah at all, even a brief nap. - In contrast to eating, where there is a difference between a fixed meal and a snack, no such difference exists regarding sleep. At times, even a rest of a few moments can have a major effect on a person. (See Sukkah 26a; Jerusalem Talmud, Sukkah 2:5.)
At present, there are many communities where leniency is taken in this regard. In some climates, the cold will cause everyone to consider sleeping in the sukkah as uncomfortable and, hence, they are freed of that obligation. Furthermore, in many communities, there is also a danger involved. In addition, if a husband would sleep in a sukkah, he would deprive his wife of some of the happiness and satisfaction that should accompany a festival. (See Ramah, Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim639:2.)
Nevertheless, many authorities explain that these leniencies apply only at night, but during the day one is obligated to sleep in the sukkah.
It is permissible to drink water - or any other beverage, including wine (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 639:2), outside the sukkah. There is a difference of opinion among the later halachic authorities if this decision also applies when one sits down to a party centering on drinking wine (קובע עצמו לשתות). Some (the Bach and Shulchan Aruch HaRav 639:12) require that such drinking be carried out in a sukkah. However, others (the Vilna Gaon and the Mishnah Berurah 639:13) are more lenient.
and eat fruit outside the sukkah. - for these do not constitute a significant meal.
Sukkah 27a relates that Rabbi Elazar ben Shamu'a ate dates and grapes outside the sukkah, because "fruit does not require a sukkah."
Rabbenu Manoach and some other commentaries maintain that this leniency applies only to fruit. In contrast, meat, fish, cheese, and other substantial foods which form the basis of a meal must be eaten in a sukkah. While many later halachic authorities do not accept this view, some maintain that one should not sit down with company to a meal of such foods outside a sukkah. (See Shulchan Aruch HaRav 639:11;Mishnah Berurah 639:15.)
However, a person who follows the stringency of not drinking even water outside the sukkah is worthy of praise. - To exemplify this principle, the Mishnah (ibid.) quotes the following:
Once they brought a cooked dish for Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai to taste, and two dates and a pitcher of water for Rabban Gamliel. They said: "Take them up to the sukkah."
Sukkah 26b explains that often our Sages counselled against accepting extra stringencies upon oneself, lest one take pride in one's piety. However, in this instance they make no such reservations.
Halacha 7
Eating in the sukkah on the first night of the festival is an obligation. If a person eats merely a k'zayit of bread, he fulfills his obligation. Afterwards, [the matter is left to one's] volition. If one desires to eat a meal, one must eat it in the sukkah. If one desires, throughout the seven [days of the festival], one may eat only fruit or roasted grain outside of the sukkah. The same laws apply as those regarding the eating of matzah on Pesach.
Commentary Halacha 7
Eating in the sukkah on the first night of the festival is an obligation. - Sukkah 27a draws an analogy between the first night of Sukkot and the first night of Pesach. Just as eating a k'zayit of matzah on the fifteenth of Nisan is a mitzvah, so too, each Jewish male is required to eat in the sukkah on the fifteenth of Tishre.
If a person eats merely a k'zayit of bread - This is the minimum amount required by the Torah in all mitzvot that involve eating. In modern measurements, the figure corresponds to 28 cubic centimeters according to Shiurei Torah, and 48 cubic centimeters according to the Chazon Ish.
he fulfills his obligation. Afterwards, [the matter is left to one's] volition. - The difference in the requirement between the first night and the remaining days has other ramifications. As mentioned in Halachah 2, a person who is uncomfortable in the sukkah is freed from his obligation. However, this leniency applies only on the first night after the mitzvah of eating a k'zayit has been fulfilled (Maggid Mishneh; Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 639:3).
If one desires to eat a meal - including bread, or according to some authorities, other hearty foods, as mentioned above
one must eat it in the sukkah. If one desires, throughout the seven [days of the festival], one may eat only fruit or roasted grain - which may be eaten...
outside of the sukkah. - The Lechem Yehudah explains that the Rambam is speaking only from the perspective of the mitzvah of sukkah. However, one is obligated to eat three meals on the Sabbath as an expression of the mitzvah of honoring the Sabbath and taking pleasure in its celebration. (See Hilchot Shabbat 30:9.) Similarly, one is required to eat festive meals on the first day of Sukkot in honor of the holiday. These meals must be eaten in the sukkah.
The same laws apply as regards the eating of matzah on Pesach. -The Rambam's intent is that, as explained in Hilchot Chametz U'matzah6:1, after the first night of the festival a person is not obligated to eat matzah and may subsist on other foods. Similarly, on Sukkot one may eat foods that do not require consumption within a sukkah.
However, according to most authorities, his choice of words is not exact. The mitzvah of sukkah differs from that of matzah. In the latter instance, there is no mitzvah involved in eating matzah after the first night of the holiday. In contrast, every activity performed in the sukkah constitutes a further fulfillment of the mitzvah.
Accordingly, after the first night of the festival no special blessing is recited before partaking of matzah. In contrast, as stated in Halachah 12, a blessing is recited every time we make use of the sukkah. See also the Moznaim publication of Hilchot Chametz U'Matzah 6:1.
Halacha 8
It is forbidden for a person to sit and eat with his head and the majority of his body inside a sukkah while his table is in his home or outside the sukkah. It is considered as if he did not eat inside the sukkah. [Rather,] the table must also be inside the sukkah. This was decreed lest one be drawn after one's table. This law applies even in a large sukkah.
Commentary Halacha 8
It is forbidden for a person to sit and eat with his head and the majority of his body inside a sukkah while his table is in his home or outside the sukkah. - The Mishnah (Sukkah 2:6) records a difference of opinion on this matter between the School of Shammai and the School of Hillel. In this instance, the halachah follows the School of Shammai.
It is considered as if he did not eat inside the sukkah. - The Mishnah (ibid.) continues:
An incident occurred when the elders of the School of Shammai and the elders of the School of Hillel went to visit Rabbi Yochanan ben Hachoroni and found him sitting with his head and the majority of his body in the sukkah while his table was in his house...The elders of the School of Shammai told him: "If this has been your practice, you have never fulfilled the mitzvah of sukkah."
Rabbenu Nissim questions how the Sages' decree can negate the fulfillment of a mitzvah, and thus explains the last phrase to mean: "You have never fulfilled the mitzvah as desired by our Sages." However,Tosafot, Sukkah 3a explains that the Sages' decree is powerful enough to nullify the person's actions entirely, and it is considered as if he never fulfilled the mitzvah at all.
Halacha 9
Throughout the seven days [of the festival], a person should read in the sukkah. However, when he attempts to comprehend what he reads in depth and appreciate its details, he should do so outside the sukkah, so that his mind will be settled.
When a person prays, he may pray inside the sukkah or outside the sukkah, as he desires.
Commentary Halacha 9
Throughout the seven days [of the festival], a person should read in the sukkah. - Since the person must regard his sukkah as his home throughout the festival, in addition to eating and sleeping, he must perform all his other day-to-day functions inside of it. Hence, he should also read in the sukkah.
However, when he attempts to comprehend what he reads in depth and appreciate its details, he should do so outside the sukkah -Sukkah explains that any time it is necessary to study a concept in depth, one should do so outside the sukkah...
so that his mind will be settled - while he studies. The Magen Avraham639:13 adds a further reason to study at home: the difficulty in bringing one's texts back and forth from the sukkah. The Magen Avrahamexplains that this matter also depends on the individual person. If he is as comfortable studying in the sukkah as studying at home, he is obligated to do so.
When a person prays - at a time when he is unable to pray in the synagogue (Magen Avraham 639:14)
he may pray inside the sukkah or outside the sukkah, as he desires -depending on where he will be able to concentrate more.
Halacha 10
If rain descends, a person may enter his home. When is one permitted to leave [the sukkah]? When enough raindrops descend into the sukkah so that they would spoil a cooked dish - even a dish of beans - were they to fall into it.
If a person was eating in the sukkah and rain descended, and hence, he entered his home, if the rains stop we do not obligate him to return to his sukkah {that entire night} until he is finished eating.
If he was sleeping and rain descended, and hence, he entered his home, we do not obligate him to return to his sukkah that entire night should the rains cease. Rather, he may remain sleeping in his house that entire night until dawn.
Commentary Halacha 10
If rain descends, a person may enter his home. - The descent of rain on Sukkot implies that our actions are not desired by God. The Mishnah (Sukkah 2:8) compares the matter to a servant who came to serve his master drink and the latter poured the pitcher in his face.
Tzafenat Paneach explains that there is a fundamental difference between this law and the case of a person who is uncomfortable while in the sukkah. In the latter instance, in essence, the person is obligated to fulfill the mitzvah. However, because of his discomfort, his obligation is temporarily waived. In contrast, when rain descends it is impossible to fulfill the mitzvah at all, because the sukkah is not fit to dwell in. Hence, there is no obligation whatsoever.
There is a practical difference between these two abstract positions regarding the question whether a person is obligated to eat in the sukkah on the first night of the holiday even when it rains. (See the commentary on Halachah 7.) According to the Tzafenat Paneach, under these circumstances there is no mitzvah which one is required to fulfill. Thus, one may eat at home. In contrast, most authorities do not differentiate between rain and other uncomfortable situations. Thus, since eating in the sukkah on that night is a binding obligation, they require a person to fulfill the mitzvah.
There is a further aspect to this concept. The Maharil explains that a person who eats in a sukkah when he is not obligated to do so is a simple person and receives no reward for his "piety." On this basis, in many communities, people make no effort to stay in the sukkah when it rains. In contrast, there are some communities where people will continue to eat in the sukkah despite pouring rain.
What is the difference between these two approaches? The first approach follows the perspective that, during the rain, there is no mitzvah to dwell in the sukkah whatsoever. Hence, there is no need to strain oneself to remain there. In contrast, the second perspective does not differentiate between rain and any other uncomfortable circumstances, but maintains that, in essence, dwelling in the sukkah is a mitzvah even under such circumstances. Accordingly, they remain in the sukkah, because while they are involved in fulfilling God's will they do not feel even the slightest trace of discomfort.
When is one permitted to leave [the sukkah]? - The Maharil writes that when a person is forced to leave the sukkah because of rain, he should depart with humility rather than with anger.
when enough raindrops descend into the sukkah so that they would spoil a cooked dish - We need not wait until the food actually spoils. As soon as enough rain descends to spoil the food, one is free to enter one's home (Ramah, Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 639:5).
even a dish of beans - i.e., a dish made from bean meal, which spoils quickly (Rambam, Commentary on the Mishnah, Sukkah 2:8).
were they to fall into it.
If a person was eating in the sukkah and rain descended, and hence, he entered his home, if the rains stop, we do not obligate him to return to his sukkah - to finish his meal...
{that entire night} - This phrase is set off by brackets because it is most likely a printing error. It is not easily understood, nor is it found in the manuscript copies of the Mishneh Torah or in the quotation of this halachah in the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 639:6).
until he is finished eating. - However, after he concludes eating he must return to the sukkah.
If he was sleeping and rain descended - The Ramah (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 639:7) emphasizes that even the slightest amount of rain is sufficient to free one from the obligation of sleeping in the sukkah.
and hence, he entered his home, we do not obligate him to return to his sukkah that entire night should the rains cease. - The same law applies if it was raining when he desired to go to sleep, and hence, he never slept in the sukkah at all (Mishnah Berurah 639:39).
Rather, he may remain sleeping that entire night in his house - even if he wakes up in the middle of the night and it is no longer raining, he is not required to move to the sukkah.
until dawn. - The Maggid Mishneh and Rabbenu Manoach note that the Rambam's choice of phraseology implies that the person cannot sleep his normal measure, but must rise at dawn to return to the sukkah. They are not stringent and allow the person to remain sleeping at home until he wakes up. The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 639:7) quotes the Rambam's statements verbatim. However, the Ramah includes this leniency.
Halacha 11
A person should not take apart his sukkah after he finishes eating on the seventh day [of Sukkot]. However, from the afternoon on, he may take down his utensils and remove them.
If he has no place to put the utensils, he should reduce its space by at least four handbreadths by four handbreadths.
If he has to eat later that day, he must eat in the sukkah, because the mitzvah extends throughout the seven days.
Commentary Halacha 11
This halachah applies only in places where Sukkot is celebrated for seven days, as required by the Torah. The laws pertaining to the Diaspora, where the festival is celebrated for eight days, are described in Halachah 13.
A person should not take apart his sukkah after he finishes eating on the seventh day [of Sukkot]. - lest he require it later during the day.
However, from the afternoon on, he may take down his utensils and remove them - Keeping one's utensils in the sukkah is included in the mitzvah of dwelling within it, as mentioned in Halachah 5. Nevertheless, one is allowed to take them home to prepare them for use on Shemini Atzeret as a sign of deference to that holiday. (See Sukkah 4:7.)
If he has no place to put the utensils - i.e., if he used his home as a sukkah, and thus must continue to remain there on Shemini Atzeret (seeSukkah 48a)...
he should reduce its space - by opening up [a portion of s'chach]
at least four handbreadths by four handbreadths - to make the sukkah, or at least a significant portion of it, unfit for use. This safeguards against the violation of the command of בל תוסיף (Deuteronomy 13:1), which forbids adding to the mitzvot of the Torah. These acts will differentiate between his eating in the sukkah during the festival, when he is required to do so in fulfillment of the mitzvah, and eating there afterwards, once the mitzvah has been completed (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 666).
The Ramah adds that this requirement applies only when one desires to eat in the sukkah on Shemini Atzeret. Once that holiday passes, one may eat in a sukkah without making any changes.
If he has to eat later that day - even if he has removed his utensils or taken away part of the s'chach...
he must eat in the sukkah, because the mitzvah extends throughout the seven days.
Halacha 12
Whenever a person enters a sukkah with the intention of sitting down throughout the seven [days of Sukkot], he should recite the following blessing before sitting:
[Blessed are You...] who has sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us to dwell in the sukkah.
On the first night of the festival, one should first recite the blessing on the sukkah, and then the blessing for the occasion.
One should recite all the blessings over a cup of wine. Thus, one should recite kiddush while standing, recite the blessing leishev basukkah, sit, and then recite the blessing shehecheyanu.
This was the custom of my teachers and the Rabbis of Spain: to recitekiddush while standing on the first night of the Sukkot festival, as explained.
Commentary Halacha 12
Whenever a person enters a sukkah with the intention of sitting down throughout the seven [days of Sukkot], he should recite the following blessing - Note the commentary on Halachah 7, which explains the difference between this law and the rules governing the blessing recited before eating matzah.
before sitting - The Rambam maintains that by sitting or doing any other activity which one would perform in one's home in the sukkah, one fulfills the mitzvah. Hence, the blessing is recited before one performs the mitzvah, as required by Hilchot Berachot 11:2.
The Maggid Mishneh questions why the blessing is not recited before one enters the sukkah, noting that the interpretation of the command לישב בסוכה is "to dwell in the sukkah," not "to sit in the sukkah." However, theTaz 643:2 explains that merely passing through the sukkah is not part of the mitzvah. Rather, one must perform an activity that reflects "dwelling." Hence, the blessing is not recited until one sits down, because previously it is not obvious that one wants to perform a significant activity in the sukkah.
The Ra'avad objects to the Rambam's decision, maintaining that one should recite the blessing only before partaking of a meal in the sukkah. This reflects the decision of the Ashkenazic authorities, who maintain that though the performance of all one's activities in the sukkah is a mitzvah, it is not customary to recite the blessing except when eating. When reciting the blessing on that occasion, one should intend to include all other activities. (See Tur and Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 639:8.)
[Blessed are You...] who has sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us to dwell in the sukkah. - The Maggid Mishnehstates that there is no limit to the number of times one recites the blessing each day. Nevertheless, if one left the sukkah for a brief interval or left with the intent of performing an activity which would improve the sukkah, that departure is not considered an interruption and no blessing is required upon one's return.
On the first night of the festival, one should first recite the blessing on the sukkah, and then the blessing for the occasion - i.e., the blessing shehecheyanu, which thanks God for enabling us to reach this occasion. This blessing is recited whenever one performs a mitzvah that can be fulfilled only from time to time (Hilchot Berachot 11:9).
That halachah and, similarly, Sukkah 46a, imply that, at the outset, one should recite the blessing shehecheyanu upon construction of the sukkah. Though the Rambam makes no mention of that concept here, the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 641:1) states that one should have the construction of the sukkah in mind when reciting shehecheyanu at night.
One should recite all the blessings over a cup of wine - as did Rav Kahana (Sukkah 46a).
Thus, one should recite kiddush - for the festival
while standing - The Ramah (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 643:2) states that kiddush may be recited while sitting.
recite the blessing leishev basukkah - Though one might presume thatshehecheyanu would be recited first, since it is more frequent, precedence is given to leishev basukkah, because it is "the mitzvah of the day" (Rabbenu Manoach).
sit, and then recite the blessing shehecheyanu. - On the second night, it is Ashkenazic custom to recite to the blessing shehecheyanu before the blessing leishev basukkah, since on that occasion the blessing is associated with the celebration of the festival and not the mitzvah of sukkah. (See Bnei Binyamin.)
This was the custom of my teachers and the Rabbis - Rav Kapach notes that most of the manuscripts of the Mishneh Torah state רבי "the great men of" and not רבני, "the Rabbis of."
of Spain - The Ra'avad objects and comments that even in Spain such a custom was not followed.
to recite kiddush while standing on the first night of the Sukkot festival, as explained.
Halacha 13
At present, when we celebrate holidays for two days, we dwell in the sukkah for eight days. On the eighth day, which is the first day of the holiday of Shemini Atzeret, we dwell in the sukkah, but do not recite the blessing leishev basukkah.
Similarly, a tumtum and an androgynous never recite the blessing leishev basukkah, because their obligation [to perform the mitzvah is based] on doubt, and a blessing is never recited when one is doubtful [of one's obligation].
Commentary Halacha 13
At present - in the Diaspora and in certain places in Eretz Yisrael(Hilchot Kiddush HaChodesh, Chapter 9)
when we celebrate holidays for two days - because originally, the messengers sent by the Sanhedrin could not reach there in time to notify them when the holiday should be celebrated. Hence, even now, when we follow the fixed calendar, we continue to follow this custom. (See Hilchot Kiddush Hachodesh, Chapters 3 and 5.)
we dwell in the sukkah for eight days. - In deference to the possibility that the festival could have begun on the second day and the seven days should be counted from then.
The commandment בל תוסיף (Deuteronomy 13:1) forbids adding to the mitzvot of the Torah. Indeed, in Halachot 11 and 14, we find certain safeguards instituted because of this commandment. Nevertheless, dwelling in the sukkah on the eighth day does not constitute a violation of this commandment, because the time when the mitzvah is to be performed has already passed. Placing a fifth passage in one's tefillin during the day violates this commandment, because we are obligated to perform the mitzvah at this time. However, once the seven days of Sukkot pass, there is no mitzvah associated with the sukkah whatsoever (Rosh Hashanah 28b).
Nevertheless, many Ashkenazic authorities would carry out additional safeguards regarding this matter. For example, the Tur relates (though he opposes this practice himself) that some follow the custom of eating in the Sukkah only on the day of Shemini Atzeret, but not the night. Many of the Rabbis who would sleep in the Sukkah throughout the festival refrain from doing so on Shemini Atzeret. (See K'tav Sofer, Responsum 120.)
On the eighth day, which is the first day of the holiday of Shemini Atzeret - As its name implies, Shemini Atzeret is the eighth day of Sukkot. However, it also has certain aspects in which it is considered a holiday in its own right (Sukkah 48a).
we dwell in the sukkah, but do not recite the blessing leishev basukkah. - because as the Rambam explains, a blessing is not recited when a mitzvah is performed only because of a doubt.
Sukkah 47a relates that "Rav Huna bar Bizna and all the great Sages of the generation dwelled in a sukkah on the eighth day - which might have been the seventh day - [of the festival], but did not recite a blessing."
Similarly, a tumtum and an androgynous - See Chapter 2, Halachah 1 for a definition of these terms and these individuals' status.
never recite the blessing leishev basukkah, because their obligation [to perform the mitzvah is based] on doubt - i.e., they are required to perform the mitzvah because of the doubt concerning their status: maybe they are to be considered men.
and a blessing is never recited when one is doubtful [of one's obligation]. - This follows the rationale that when there is a doubt concerning one's obligation in matters required by the Torah itself, one must follow the more stringent view. However, regarding obligations of a Rabbinic nature, one may opt towards leniency. Since the mitzvah is required by the Torah, even a person in doubt must perform it. However, the blessing is a Rabbinic requirement; hence, there is no necessity in reciting it. Furthermore, by reciting the blessing when one is not required, one uses God's name in vain.
This perspective is not accepted by all authorities. As explained in the commentary on Chapter 2, Halachah 1, the Ashkenazic practice is to allow women and others who are not obligated in the performance of a mitzvah to recite a blessing when fulfilling it.
The above applies only regarding the doubts concerning the obligations of a tumtum and an androgynous. However, on Shemini Atzeret, when there is a doubt concerning the obligation of the entire Jewish people even the Ashkenazic authorities would agree that a blessing should not be recited.
Halacha 14
After a person finishes eating on the eighth day [of Sukkot], he should take down his utensils and remove them.
When a person has no place to put the utensils, [the following rules apply]: If it is a small [sukkah], he should bring his candelabra into it; if it is a large sukkah, he should bring in his pots, plates, and the like, to bring to mind that it is no longer acceptable and that its mitzvah is completed. Since the day is a holiday, one may not reduce its space and nullify it.
Commentary Halacha 14
This halachah, like the previous one, describes the law in the Diaspora, where the holidays are celebrated for two days.
After a person finishes eating on the eighth day [of Sukkot], he should take down his utensils and remove them - from the sukkah and bring them home, where he will eat on Simchat Torah.
When a person has no place to put the utensils - and desires to continue eating in the sukkah on Simchat Torah,
[the following rules - safeguards adopted to differentiate between eating in the sukkah as required, and eating there afterwards
apply]: If it is a small [sukkah], he should bring his candelabra into it - As mentioned in Halachah 5, a candelabra should not be brought into a small sukkah for Sukkot.
It must be noted that the Rambam changes the text of Sukkah 48a, which states: "light his lamp there." (See Kessef Mishneh, Halachah 5.)
if it is a large sukkah, he should bring in his pots, plates, and the like - which are generally kept outside the sukkah, as explained in Halachah 5.
to bring to mind that it - the sukkah
is no longer acceptable and that its mitzvah is completed.
Since the day is a holiday, one may not reduce its space and nullify it. - as suggested in Halachah 11.
Halacha 15
A person who did not construct a sukkah [before the holiday] - whether intentionally or unintentionally - should construct a sukkah on Chol Hamo'ed. One should even construct a sukkah on the final moments of the seventh day, because its mitzvah lasts throughout the seventh day.
The wood with which the sukkah was constructed is forbidden [to be used for other purposes] on all eight days of the festival. This applies to both the wood used for the walls and the wood used for the s'chach. Throughout [these] eight days, no benefit may be derived from it for other purposes.
[They are prohibited on the eighth day] because the sukkah is muktzeh the entire seventh day, including the period beyn hash'mashot. Since it wasmuktzeh during the period beyn hash'mashot, it is muktzeh on the entire day [that follows].
Commentary Halacha 15
.
A person who did not construct a sukkah [before the holiday] - whether intentionally or unintentionally - Sukkah 27b explains that not only a person whose sukkah fell down in the middle of the festival should reconstruct it, but even one who never built a sukkah at all is entitled to do so.
should construct a sukkah on Chol Hamo'ed. - The literal translation of Deuteronomy 16:13 is: "Make the Sukkot festival for seven days."Sukkah 27b interprets this verse to mean that a sukkah may be built during the seven days of the festival.
The Jerusalem Talmud (Sukkah 2:7) explains that Rabbi Eleazar wanted to forbid a person who purposely did not build a sukkah from doing so during the festival, as a punishment for his failure to prepare for the festival. However, the Sages did not accept that premise.
A sukkah may not be constructed on the first day of the festival, even if the walls are already built and all that is necessary is to spread s'chachover it. However, even though certain types of work are forbidden on Chol Hamo'ed, there is no prohibition in this instance (Bi'ur Halachah637).
One should even construct a sukkah in the final moments of the seventh day, because its mitzvah lasts throughout the seventh day. - See Halachah 11.
The wood with which the sukkah was constructed is forbidden [to be used for other purposes] - e.g., for use as a toothpick. This prohibition applies even in the event the sukkah falls. Also, in contrast to the decorations, as mentioned in the following halachah, this prohibition cannot be nullified by making a condition that one desires to use them for one's own purposes (Ramah, Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 638:1).
on all eight days of the festival. - Sukkah 9a derives the prohibition against using the wood of the sukkah for other purposes throughout Sukkot from Leviticus 23:34: "The Sukkot festival shall be seven days unto God." The latter term is used also regarding the Chaggigah offering sacrificed on the festival. Thus, its use in this context implies that the entities which enable us to celebrate the Sukkot festival must be consecrated "unto God" like those sacrifices.
The reason why the wood of the sukkah may not be used on the eighth day is explained below.
This applies to both the wood used for the walls and the wood used for the s'chach. - Rabbenu Asher differs and explains that the essential element of the sukkah is its s'chach. Hence, the prohibition applies only to the s'chach and not to the sukkah walls. The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 638:1) quotes the Rambam's opinion. However, the Taz (638:1) explains that the prohibition against using the walls is only Rabbinic in nature.
Rav Chayim Soloveitchik explains that though the word sukkah as used by the Torah refers to the s'chach and not to the walls, a different principle is involved in this instance. The Torah teaches us that all the entities which enable us to fulfill the mitzvah of sukkah may not be used for other purposes. Since the sukkah walls also serve that purpose, because a sukkah is not kosher without walls, they are also included in that prohibition.
Throughout [these] eight days - Note the contrast to the etrog in Chapter 7, Halachah 27.
no benefit may be derived from it for other purposes. - However, if the sukkah falls, it may be rebuilt using the same wood. Furthermore, the wood used for s'chach may be used for the walls and vice versa.
[They are prohibited on the eighth day] because the sukkah is muktzeh - Muktzeh literally means "set aside." In this context, it refers to objects which may not be used for mundane purposes.
the entire seventh day, including the period beyn hash'mashot. -Beyn hash'mashot is the period between sunset and the emergence of three stars.
Since it was muktzeh during the period beyn hash'mashot, it is muktzeh on the entire day [that follows]. - Hilchot Shabbat 25:10 states: "Any utensil which is forbidden to be moved during beyn hash'mashot is forbidden to be moved throughout the entire Sabbath, even after the factor that caused its prohibition has passed."
Halacha 16
Similarly, it is forbidden to take from the food and beverages that were hung in the sukkah as decorations for all eight days [of the festival]. However, if at the time one hung [the decorations], he made the condition: "I will not refrain from using them during the entire period of beyn hash'mashot," he is entitled to use them whenever he desires, because he did not set them aside, nor did the sanctity of the sukkah encompass them, nor are they considered part of it.
Commentary Halacha 16
Similarly, it is forbidden to take from the food and beverages that were hung in the sukkah as decorations - even if they fall (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 638:2). As mentioned in the commentary on Halachot 17 and 18, the sukkah decorations are not considered an independent entity, but rather as part of the sukkah itself. Furthermore, employing articles used to decorate a mitzvah for other purposes demonstrates lack of respect for the mitzvah (Rabbenu Nissim, Beitzah). Hence, the same restrictions that apply to the sukkah apply to it.
for all eight days [of the festival] - as is the sukkah itself.
However, if at the time one hung [the decorations] - Rabbenu Manoach questions what the law would be if the condition were made after the decorations were hung but before the holiday commences.
he made the condition: "I will not refrain from using them during the entire period of beyn hash'mashot" - Everything depends on the status of the decorations at the time the festival begins. If they are not considered part of the sukkah at that time, the "sanctity of the sukkah" does not affect them throughout the festival (Sukkah 10b).
The Ramban and the Ramah differ, and require that the person stipulate that he will not refrain from using the decorations during the entire period of beyn hash'mashot of each of the eight days of the festival. If he makes the condition regarding the first day alone, the decorations become forbidden on the subsequent days of the festival.
he is entitled to use them whenever he desires - In contrast to the walls or s'chach, in this instance the condition has an effect. It is possible for a sukkah to exist without decorations, but not without walls (Rabbenu Manoach).
for he did not set them aside, nor did the sanctity of the sukkah encompass them, nor are they considered part of it.
Shofar, Sukkah, vLulav - Chapter Seven
Halacha 1
The term "the frond of the date palm" employed by the Torah refers to the branches of a date palm as they sprout, before their leaves separate and spread out in various directions. Rather, they should appear as a scepter. This is called a lulav.
Commentary Halacha 1
The term "the frond of the date palm" employed by the Torah -Leviticus 23:40.
refers to the branches of a date palm - The Tzafenat Paneachquestions whether or not the tree from which the lulav is taken must actually produce dates.
as they sprout, before their leaves separate - Thus, if the leaves spread out and were later bound together by human activity, it is not acceptable (Ramah, Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 645:2).
and spread out in various directions. - Periodically, the date palm sprouts forth new branches. Initially they are closed, and as time passes they spread out to a fanlike shape. The Torah requires that they be used for the lulav while they are still in their initial state.
This obligation is derived from the fact that the Torah spells the word כפת, without a ו, implying that the date branch should appear to be a single entity (Sukkah 32a).
There is a homiletic aspect to using the lulav while its leaves are closed.Vayikra Rabbah 30:12 emphasizes how the mitzvah of lulav and etrog expresses the unity and oneness which pervade the Jewish people. Not only is this unity expressed by the combination of the four species into a single mitzvah, it is reflected in each of the species themselves. Thus, the lulav is used while its leaves are together as one, before they separate into distinct entities.
Rather, they should appear as a scepter. - Here, too, our Sages have emphasized the homiletic lesson to be derived from this shape. Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur are days of judgement. The lulav can be considered as the Jews' scepter of victory, acknowledging that they have prevailed (Medrash Tanchumah, Emor).
This is called a lulav.
Halacha 2
The "fruit of the beautiful tree" mentioned in the Torah is the etrog.
The "boughs of covered trees" mentioned in the Torah refer to the [species of] myrtle whose leaves surround its branch; i.e., there will be three or more leaves in each ring. However, if there are two leaves on one level, with a third leaf slightly higher than them, that is not considered to be "covered." Rather, it is called a wild myrtle.
Commentary Halacha 2
The "fruit of the beautiful tree" mentioned in the Torah - Leviticus, ibid.
is the etrog. - Sukkah 35a explains that this term is used to refer to the etrog because of a unique quality possessed by this fruit. The taste of the tree itself resembles the taste of the fruit. Alternatively, the word הדר can be interpreted to mean "which dwells," and thus refer to the etrog, which can grow on the tree for an entire year.
The "boughs of covered trees" mentioned in the Torah - Leviticus, ibid.
refer to the [species of] myrtle whose leaves surround its branch; -thus, covering the branch
i.e., there will be three or more leaves in each ring - on the same level.
Our translation follows the interpretation of the Maggid Mishneh, who requires that the three leaves be on the same level over the entire length of the myrtle. However, other opinions interpret the Rambam's words to mean that a myrtle may be used if the leaves of merely one ring are on the same level. The Kessef Mishneh (and similarly, the Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 646:5) maintain that a myrtle is kosher if the leaves grow properly over three handbreadths (its minimum size), or at least the majority of that distance.
However, if there are two leaves on one level, with a third leaf slightly higher than them, that is not considered to be "covered." -but rather from a different species of tree. Hence, it can never be used in the lulav (Or Sameach).
Rather, it is called a wild myrtle - since its leaves do not grow in the normal pattern.
Halacha 3
The term "willows of the brook" mentioned by the Torah does not include just any plant that grows by a brook, but rather a particular species, which is called the "willows of the brook."
Its leaf is extended as a brook, its edge is smooth, and its stem is red. It is called a willow. The majority of this species grow near brooks. Therefore, it is called the "willows of the brook." Even if this species grew in the desert or on a mountain, it would be kosher.
Commentary Halacha 3
The term "willows of the brook" mentioned by the Torah - Leviticus, ibid.
does not include just any plant that grows by a brook, but rather a particular species, which is called the "willows of the brook." - That species is defined as follows:
Its leaf is extended as a brook - i.e., it comes to a point, rather than being rounded (Sukkah 33b).
This characteristic is also quoted as an explanation of the name "willows of the brook" (Rabbenu Asher).
its edge is smooth - rather than jagged (Sukkah ibid.).
and its stem is red. It is called a willow. The majority of this species grow near brooks. Therefore, it is called the "willows of the brook." - However, the use of that name is not meant to be exclusive...
Even if this species grew in the desert or on a mountain, it would be kosher - for the fulfillment of this mitzvah.
Halacha 4
There is another species which resembles the willow. However, its leaf is rounded, its edge resembles a saw, and its stem is not red. This is called atzaftzefah. It is unfit [to be used for the mitzvah].
There is another type of willow, whose leaf does not have a smooth edge, but it is not like a saw. Rather, it has tiny juttings, like the edge of a small sickle. It is kosher.
All the above definitions were explained according to the oral tradition transmitted by Moses, our teacher.
Commentary Halacha 4
There is another species which resembles the willow. However, its leaf is rounded, its edge resembles a saw - i.e., its edge is very jagged, with large protrusions
and its stem is not red - but white (Sukkah 34a).
This is called a tzaftzefah. It is unfit [to be used for the mitzvah] - for it is not considered to be merely a different type of willow, but rather another species entirely.
There is another type of willow, whose leaf - is also extended
does not have a smooth edge, but it is not like a saw. Rather, it has tiny juttings, like the edge of a small sickle. It is kosher. - TheMishnah Berurah 647:6 mentions that willows are frequently picked by young children who are not learned and may mistake a non-kosher species for a kosher one. Hence, the purchaser should carefully examine the willows before purchasing them.
All the above definitions were explained according to the oral tradition transmitted by Moses, our teacher. - Indeed, in his introduction to his Commentary on the Mishnah, the Rambam uses the definitions of the four species as examples of how the oral tradition is explained in the Talmud:
The explanations which we have received from Moses are not contested at all. Throughout all the ages, from Moses' time until the present, we have not heard of a dispute started by a Sage whether... the expression "a fruit from a beautiful tree" refers to the etrog. Nor have we heard of a dispute that the "covered tree" refers to the myrtle...Concerning these and the like, it has been said: "The entire Torah, [both the mitzvot] in general, and all their particulars were given to Moses on Mount Sinai." Though the tradition was received and there is no dispute about it, one can also derive these definitions through the accepted processes of exegesis.Thus, when the Talmud debates and discusses a concept and offers a suggestion...that perhaps, "the fruit of the beautiful tree" is a pomegranate...[and does not resolve the matter] until they bring proof from the exegesis of the verse..., one should not conclude that the matter was left in doubt until this point of exegesis was discovered.Rather, from the time of Joshua onward, we saw that the etrog was the species taken with the lulav and there is no debate about that. They were merely investigating how they could find support from the Torah for the interpretation that had been transmitted.
Halacha 5
These four species are considered to be one mitzvah, and each one is required for its performance. All of them [together] are called the mitzvah of lulav. One may not diminish them or add to them. If one of the species cannot be found, a similar species may not be substituted for it.
Commentary Halacha 5
These four species are considered to be one mitzvah - In contrast to putting on the head tefillin and the arm tefillin, which are considered to be two mitzvot. Here, taking all four species is considered to be a single mitzvah...
and - therefore,...
each one - of the species...
is required for its performance - and only then is the mitzvah performed. Nevertheless, as explained in Halachah 6, the species need not be bound together; it is sufficient to take them one after the other.
This statement is taken from the Mishnah, Menachot 3:6, which includes the four species of the lulav in a long list of mitzvot in which all the particular elements that make up the mitzvah are required for its performance to be acceptable.
All of them [together] are called the mitzvah of lulav. - Since the lulav is the tallest of all the species, the entire mitzvah is referred to by this name (Sukkah 37b).
One may not diminish them - doing so violates the commandment בל תגרע (Deuteronomy 13:1), which forbids diminishing the Torah's commandments.
or add to them. - doing so violates the commandment תוסיף בל (Deuteronomy 13:1), which forbids adding to the Torah's commandments.
If one of the species cannot be found, a similar species - e.g., atzaftzefah for the willow, or a lemon for the etrog
may not be substituted for it. - Rather, the mitzvah cannot be fulfilled at all. Nevertheless, the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 651:12) recommends taking the species that are available, as a remembrance of the mitzvah. However, in such circumstances, a blessing should not be recited.
Halacha 6
The most desirable way of performing the mitzvah is to bind the lulav, myrtle, and willow together, thus making a single, unified entity from the three of them.
Before one takes them to perform the mitzvah, he should recite the blessing on the mitzvah of taking the lulav, for all the others are dependent upon it.
Afterwards, he takes this bound entity in his right hand and the etrog in his left hand. He must take them as they grow - i.e., their roots below towards the earth, and their heads upward towards the sky.
If a person did not bind them together, but rather took them one by one, he has fulfilled his obligation, provided he possesses all four species. However, if he has only one species or he is lacking one species, he should not take them until he acquires the remaining species.
Commentary Halacha 6
The most desirable way of performing the mitzvah is to bind the lulav, myrtle, and willow together, thus making a single, unified entity from the three of them. - Sukkah 11b explains that binding the three species together is considered more attractive than taking them each individually. Thus, taking the species in this manner conforms to the general directive requiring us to perform the mitzvot in the most esthetically appealing manner possible.
Sukkah 34b mentions an exegetic teaching that explains why the etrog is not bound together with the other species.
Before one takes them to perform the mitzvah, he should recite the blessing - for the blessings should always be recited before the performance of the mitzvot.
on the mitzvah of taking the lulav - Our translation follows the commentary of the Kessef Mishneh, who notes that in Hilchot Berachot11:15, the Rambam states that if one recites the blessing before taking the lulav in his hand, he should conclude the blessing ...v'tzivanu litol lulav. The blessing should be concluded ...v'tzivanu al netilat lulav only if one has already taken the lulav in his hands.
for all the others are dependent upon it. - As mentioned in the previous halachah and commentary, since the lulav is the tallest of all the species, its name is used to refer to the entire mitzvah.
Afterwards, he takes this bound entity in his right hand and the etrog in his left hand. - Since three of the four species are bound together, they are held in the hand which the Torah considers of greater prominence (Sukkah 37b).
He must take them as they grow - Sukkah 45b derives this concept from Exodus 26:15, which states: "upright beams of acacia wood." Implied is that all mitzvot fulfilled with agricultural products must be performed while they are in an upright position. (See also Halachah 9.)
i.e., their roots below towards the earth, and their heads upward towards the sky. - Even though the etrog hangs from the tree with thepitam downwards, its "upright" position is when the pitam faces upward (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 651:12).
If a person did not bind them together, but rather took them one by one, he has fulfilled his obligation, provided he possesses all four species. - Sukkah 11b states that it is a mitzvah to bind the three species together, but one may fulfill the mitzvah even when one has not done so.
This law is accepted as halachah (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim651:12). The preference of the Rabbis for binding the species together is so great that if one has not bound them together before the beginning of the festival, the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 651:1) recommends binding them together with a loop on the holiday rather than taking each one individually.
However, if he has only one species or he is lacking one species, he should not take them until he acquires the remaining species. - as explained in the previous halachah.
Halacha 7
How many does one take of each of them? One lulav, one etrog, two willow branches, and three myrtle branches. If one would like to add more myrtle branches so that the bundle will be larger, he may. Indeed, it is considered to be an adornment of the mitzvah. However, it is forbidden to add to or reduce the numbers of the other species. If one adds to or reduces their number, it is not acceptable.
Commentary Halacha 7
How many does one take of each of them? One lulav - Sukkah 34b derives this concept from the fact that Leviticus 23:40 writes כפת without a ו, implying a single entity, as mentioned in the commentary on Halachah 1.
one etrog - because the above verse mentions "a fruit (singular) from the beautiful tree" (Sukkah, ibid.).
two willow branches - because the above verse states "willows of the brook," using the plural, and thus two are required (ibid.)
and three myrtle branches. - The above verse uses three words ענף עץ עבות, each word implying the addition of another branch (Rashi, Sukkah, ibid.).
If one would like to add more myrtle - Some editions of the Mishneh Torah also add "and willow." However, most of the manuscripts and texts of the Mishneh Torah omit that phrase. Furthermore, in one of his responsa, the Rambam states that since the Talmud mentions adding only myrtles, it is improper to add any of the other species.
branches so that the bundle will be larger, he may. Indeed, it is considered to be an adornment of the mitzvah. - The latter statement can be understood to be an explanation of the former. In contrast to the other species, the myrtle is considered an adornment of the mitzvah. Since the extra myrtle branches are viewed as adornments, they are not considered to be an intervening substance separating the person from the mitzvah. (See the commentary on Halachah 11.) Nor is including them considered to be adding to the mitzvah (and thus, a violation of בל תוסיף). (See also Rabbenu Nissim and the Rashba, Vol. I, Responsum 535.)
There are some authorities who allow additional myrtle branches to be included even though they do not meet the requirement of having all three leaves on the same level. However, others do not accept this leniency (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 651:15).
However, it is forbidden to add to or reduce the numbers of the other species. - because they are not considered to be "adornments."
If one adds to or reduces their number, it is not acceptable. - The Ra'avad objects to this statement, arguing that the adding to the numbers of the other species does not nullify the performance of the mitzvah. Rav Avraham, the Rambam's son, writes that, based on Sanhedrin 88b, the Rambam amended his own manuscript copy of the Mishneh Torah to state "it does not nullify it" (Birkat Avraham 31).
Halacha 8
What is the required length of each of these species? The lulav may not be less than four handbreadths. [Beyond that,] regardless of its length, it is kosher. Its length is measured only from its shidrah and not from the tips of the leaves.
The myrtle and the willow may not be less than three handbreadths. [Beyond that,] regardless of their length, they are kosher. Even if each branch has only three fresh leaves on it, they are kosher, provided the leaves are at the top of the branch.
If one has bound [the other species together with] the lulav, the shidrah of the lulav must extend beyond the myrtle and the willow a handbreadth or more.
The minimum size of an etrog is the size of an egg. [Beyond that,] regardless of its size, it is kosher.
Commentary Halacha 8
What is the required length of each of these species? - The Mishnah Berurah 650:8 states that if the species are smaller than the minimum limits established, they may not be used throughout the festival. Though certain leniencies are granted after the first day, they do not apply regarding this matter.
The lulav may not be less than four handbreadths. - The Mishnah (Sukkah 3:1) describes the length of the lulav as "three handbreadths [and more], so that it can be shaken," implying that, like the other species, it should be three handbreadths in length. However, since all three handbreadths of the lulav must be shaken (see the following two halachot) an additional handbreadth was required for the person to hold the lulav in his hand (Rambam, Commentary on the Mishnah).
[Rashi and most other commentaries based on Sukkah 32b consider the handbreadth of the lulav that extends beyond the myrtle and the willow as the addition included "so that it can be shaken." From the latter clauses of this halachah, it appears that the Rambam may have also adopted this interpretation.]
A handbreadth is 8 centimeters according to Shiurei Torah, and 9.6 centimeters according to the Chazon Ish. In his commentary on the above Mishnah, the Rambam emphasizes that the measure refers to three full handbreadths, each four fingerbreadths in length. This is necessary to negate the opinion of certain authorities (see the Ra'avad), who state that here the intent is three "small" handbreadths, so that the total length is only 10 fingerbreadths.
The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 650:1) accepts the Ra'avad's opinion. Nevertheless, the Ramah suggests following the Rambam's view if possible.
[Beyond that,] regardless of its length, it is kosher. - Menachot 42a states that a lulav has a minimum length, but no maximum length.
Its length is measured only from its shidrah - i.e., what is measured is its center stem from its base until the portion which separates into two twin leaves that cling to each other.
and not from the tips of the leaves. - i.e., its full length.
The myrtle and the willow may not be less than three handbreadths. [Beyond that,] regardless of their length, they are kosher. - The latter principle is derived from the laws of the lulav.
Even if each branch has only three fresh leaves on it, they are kosher, provided the leaves are at the top of the branch. - Sukkah33a states:
If most of [the myrtle's] leaves dried out, but three fresh leaves remain, it is kosher.Rav Chisda said: "Provided they are at the top of each branch."
The Rambam maintains that the same principles can also be applied to the willow.
[Note the commentary on Halachah 8:5, which mentions certain relevant principles. Indeed, in general, this clause appears to be more closely related to the principles mentioned in the following chapter, where the Rambam mentions the characteristics that disqualify the various species, rather than in this chapter, where he relates the fundamental requirements of each one. Based on Sukkah 34a, which relates that myrtles which are not dry (a factor still common in many Diaspora communities today) are very difficult to find, we can interpret this as an almost parenthetical expression teaching that freshness is not among the fundamental requirements for a myrtle.]
If one has bound [the other species together with] the lulav, the shidrah of the lulav must extend beyond the myrtle and the willow a handbreadth or more. - The Rambam maintains that regardless of the length of the myrtles and the willows, the shidrah of the lulav must extend beyond them an additional handbreadth, so that it can be shaken. TheShulchan Aruch (ibid.:2) does not require adherence to the Rambam's view. Nevertheless, it is accepted without question by Shulchan Aruch HaRav 650:2.
The minimum size of an etrog is the size of an egg. - 57.6 cubic centimeters according to Shiurei Torah; in this context, 100 cubic centimeters according to the Chazon Ish.
[Beyond that,] regardless of its size, it is kosher. - Sukkah 36b relates that Rabbi Akiva came to synagogue with an etrog so large he had to sling it over his shoulder. (This is not out of the question, because, as mentioned above, an etrog is capable of remaining on its tree for an entire year and can attain quite a large size.)
Halacha 9
Once a person lifts up these four species - whether he lifts them up together or one after the other - whether in his right hand or in his left hand - he has fulfilled his obligation. [This applies] only when he lifts them up as they grow. However, if he does not lift them up as they grow, he has not fulfilled his obligation.
The fulfillment of the mitzvah as the law [requires is as follows]: One should lift up the three species as they are bound together in one's right hand and the etrog in one's left hand. Then, one should pass them back and forth, up and down, and shake the lulav three times in each direction.
Commentary Halacha 9
Once a person lifts up these four species - whether he lifts them up together - as described in Halachah 6.
or one after the other - lifting up each of the four species individually. However, a person must have all four species before him when he fulfills the mitzvah.
whether in his right hand or in his left hand - Although, in Halachah 6, the Rambam suggested holding the lulav together with the myrtle and willows together in his right hand and the etrog in his left, this is the most desirable way of fulfilling the mitzvah. However, even if a person does not lift up the species in this manner...
he has fulfilled his obligation. - Rabbenu Chanan'el does not accept this decision. He interprets Sukkah 42a, "If he lifted it up in an opposite manner, he did not fulfill his obligation," as referring to such a circumstance. Nevertheless, the Rambam (and similarly, most halachic authorities, including the Ramah, Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 651:3) interpret that statement as referring to lifting them up opposite to their natural pattern of growth.
This applies] only when he lifts them up as they grow. - See Halachah 6 and the commentary on it.
However, if he does not lift them up as they grow, he has not fulfilled his obligation. - For this reason, it is customary in many communities to hold the etrog upside down before reciting the blessing, and then to turn it right side up after the blessing has been recited.
The fulfillment of the mitzvah as the law [requires is as follows]: One should lift up the three species as they are bound together in one's right hand and the etrog in one's left hand. - holding the etrog together with the lulav (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 651:11).
In the Beit Yosef, Rav Yosef Karo quotes the following story from the Recanti. The latter dreamed that he saw a particular pious individual writing God's name with a space separating the last ה from the first three letters. He could not comprehend the dream at all until the next day, when he saw that individual holding his etrog separate from his lulav (Mishnah Berurah 651:21).
Then, one should pass them back and forth, up and down - The Ari suggests that one should face the east and pass the lulav back and forth in the following order; first to the south; then to the north, then east, up, down, and to the west (Mishnah Berurah 651:20). Sukkah 37b relates that shaking the lulav in all directions prevents unfavorable winds.
When shaking the lulav downward, one should not turn it upside down, for this is opposite its natural pattern of growth. (See Ramah, Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 651:9.)
Halacha 10
What does the above entail? One passes the lulav forward and shakes the top of the lulav three times, brings it back and shakes the top of the lulav three times. One follows this same pattern when lifting it up and down.
At what point [in prayer] does one pass the lulav back and forth? During the reading of the Hallel, at the first and final recitation of the verse [Psalms 118:1, 118:29]: Hodu Lado-nai ki tov... and at the verse [Psalms 118:25]: Ana Ado-nai hoshi'ah na.
It is acceptable to take the lulav throughout the entire day. However, it is not taken at night.
Commentary Halacha 10
What does the above entail? One passes the lulav forward - once in each direction
and shakes the top of the lulav three times - while the lulav is extended outward in that particular direction.
brings it back - to one's chest
and shakes the top of the lulav three times. - while holding the lulav close to oneself.
The Ramah (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 651:9) explains that passing the lulav back and forth is itself considered to be shaking it. Hence, rather than shake the lulav three times while it is extended, one must shake it as one extends it and brings it back, and repeat that process a total of three times in each direction.
One follows this same pattern when lifting it up and down. - Thus, one will have shaken the lulav a total of 36 times.
At what point [in prayer] - Rabbenu Manoach states that the lulav was also passed back and forth and shaken at the time the blessing is recited. This is our custom at present.
does one pass the lulav back and forth? During the reading of the Hallel - which is recited in its entirety on each day of the Sukkot festival.
at the first and final recitation of the verse [Psalms 118:1, 118:29]: Hodu Lado-nai ki tov... - Tosafot, Sukkah 37b explains the derivation of this practice as follows: 1 Chronicles 16:33 states: "Then all the trees of the forest will rejoice." The following verse (ibid. 34) states "Hodu Lado-nai...," and the subsequent verse: "Let them say Hoshi'eynu...."
The rejoicing of the trees - the shaking of the lulav - is thus associated with the verse "Hodu..." and the verse "Ana Ado-nai hoshi'ah na."
and at the verse [Psalms 118:25]: Ana Ado-nai hoshi'ah na. - It is customary to repeat this verse when reciting the Hallel. The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 651:8) relates that the lulav is passed back and forth both times the verse is recited.
It is acceptable to take the lulav throughout the entire day. -However, one should not delay the performance of the mitzvah unnecessarily. Indeed, the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 652:2) forbids eating before fulfilling the mitzvah.
However, it is not taken at night. - Megillah 20b derives this concept from Leviticus 23:40: "On the first day take...." We may infer: "the lulav is to be taken by day, and not by night."
Halacha 11
If one wraps a cord of silver or gold around [the three species] as they are bound together, or wraps a [decorative] cloth around them and takes them, one fulfills his obligation. Taking the lulav through another medium is still considered to be taking it, provided [that medium] is one which gives honor and beauty [to the mitzvah, because]: "any entity which makes a substance more attractive is not considered to be a separation."
However, if one placed these species in a vase or a pot and took them, one has not fulfilled one's obligation.
Commentary Halacha 11
If one wraps a cord of silver or gold around [the three species] as they are bound together - The Mishnah (Sukkah 3:8) relates that the inhabitants of Jerusalem would wrap their lulavim together with golden cords.
or wraps a [decorative] cloth around them and takes them, one fulfills his obligation. - Though we are commanded to take the lulav, that does not necessarily imply actually holding the lulav in one's hands, because...
Taking the lulav through another medium is still considered to be taking it - i.e., holding another substance in which the lulav is contained is still considered to be holding the lulav...
provided [that medium] is one which gives honor and beauty [to the mitzvah, because]: "any entity which makes a substance more attractive is not considered to be a separation." - between one's hands and the lulav. The substance used to bind the lulav is not considered to be an independent entity, but rather an extension of the lulav. This principle is also mentioned in the commentary on Halachah 7 of this chapter and Halachot 5:17-18. The Ramah (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 651:8) states that it is customary to remove rings or other intervening substances that cover even small portions of one's hands before taking the lulav.
However, if one placed these species in a vase or a pot - Sukkah 42a explains that this is unbecoming to the mitzvah.
and took them, one has not fulfilled one's obligation. - The Mishnah Berurah 651:31 states that this applies even if the container in which one placed the species is made of silver or gold.
Halacha 12
If one binds the lulav together with the myrtle and the willow and separates between the lulav and the myrtle with a cloth or the like, it is considered to be a separation. If one separates between them with myrtle leaves, it is not considered to be a separation, because an entity does not separate between its own kind.
One may bind the together with a string, a cord, or with any substance one desires, since binding it together is not a required element of the mitzvah.
Commentary Halacha 12
If one binds the lulav together with the myrtle and the willow and separates between the lulav and the myrtle with a cloth or the like -i.e., a substance which does not contribute to the lulav's attractiveness
it is considered to be a separation. - between the various species. Taking the lulav in this manner is not acceptable. The Ramah (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 651:1) notes that the myrtle branches are frequently bound together with a cord. This must be removed before using them to fulfill the mitzvah.
If one separates between them with myrtle leaves - i.e., if the myrtle leaves fall off and collect between the lulav and the myrtle branches,
it is not considered to be a separation, because an entity does not separate between its own kind. - This principle applies in many different contexts. (See also Hilchot P'sulei Hamukdashin 1:21 andHilchot Ma'aseh Hakorbanot 19:5.)
One may bind them together with a string, a cord, or with any substance one desires - i.e., using substances other than the three species used in the lulav
since binding it together is not a required element of the mitzvah. -the substance used to bind it is not considered to be significant. Therefore, using a different substance is not considered as adding a new entity to the mitzvah. However, if the binding were required, as one opinion (Sukkah 6b) maintains, it would be forbidden to use a different substance.
Halacha 13
The mitzvah of taking the lulav in every place, during every age - even on the Sabbath - applies only on the first day of the festival, as [Leviticus 23:40] states: "And on the first day, you shall take..."
In the holy place alone, it is to be taken on each of the seven days of the festival, as [the above verse] continues: "and you shall rejoice before God, your Lord, [seven days]."
When the Sabbath falls during the [later] days, [the lulav] is not taken on the Sabbath. This is a decree lest one carry it four cubits in the public domain, as decreed regarding the shofar.
Commentary Halacha 13
The mitzvah of taking the lulav in every place - i.e., even outside Jerusalem
during every age - i.e., whether or not the Temple is standing
even on the Sabbath - applies only on the first day of the festival, as [Leviticus 23:40] states: "And on the first day, you shall take..." -See Halachah 16. See also the Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah (Sukkah 4:2).
In the holy place alone - In his Commentary on the Mishnah (Sukkah3:10), the Rambam states that the term מקדש refers to Jerusalem in its totality, not only the Temple Mount. Thus, the Jerusalem Talmud (Sukkah3:11) states:
"And you shall rejoice before God, your Lord, seven days" - in Jerusalem.
(See also the commentary on Halachah 2:8.)
it is to be taken on each of the seven days of the festival, as [the above verse] continues: "and you shall rejoice before God, your Lord [seven days]."
When the Sabbath falls during the [later] days, [the lulav] is not taken on the Sabbath. - neither in Jerusalem (where taking the lulav is a mitzvah according to the Torah) nor outside the holy city (where taking the lulav is a Rabbinic decree, as stated in Halachah 15).
This is a decree - instituted by the Rabbis (Sukkah 43a)
lest one carry it four cubits in the public domain, as decreed regarding the shofar. - See Halachah 2:6.
Halacha 14
Why was this decree not put in effect on the first day of the festival? Because [taking the lulav on that day] is a mitzvah from the Torah even outside of Jerusalem. Thus, the laws applying to it are not the same as those applying to the remaining days, because on the subsequent days of the festival a person is obligated to take the lulav only in the holy place.
Commentary Halacha 14
Why was this decree not put in effect on the first day of the festival? Because [taking the lulav on that day] is a mitzvah from the Torah even outside of Jerusalem. Thus, the laws applying to it are not the same as those applying to the remaining days - Taking the lulav on the first day was obviously a matter of great importance. Hence, the Sages did not feel that the fear that perhaps a person might carry the lulav in the public domain was sufficient reason to nullify the mitzvah. In contrast, on the subsequent days the mitzvah is not considered to be so severe a matter. Hence, the mitzvah could be nullified in Jerusalem as well.
The Rabbis question why the Sages differentiated between the lulav and the shofar, and (as explained in Halachah 2:6), nullified the mitzvah of hearing the shofar when Rosh Hashanah fell on the Sabbath. As explained in our commentary on that halachah, in Rabbenu Nissim's commentary on the tractate of Sukkah, he states that this decree was instituted only because in most Jewish communities, the people were not aware of the date the court had established for Rosh Hashanah. (Note the details of the explanation there.)
because on the subsequent days of the festival a person is obligated to take the lulav only in the holy place. - Thus, while the Temple was standing, the lulav would not be taken outside Jerusalem during the subsequent days of the festival.
Halacha 15
When the Temple was destroyed, [the Sages] ordained that the lulav be taken everywhere for the entire seven days of the festival, as a remembrance of the Temple.
On each day, one recites the blessing on it:
[Baruch Attah Ado-nai...] asher kid'shanu b'mitzvotav v'tzivanu al netilat lulav.
because it a mitzvah ordained by the Rabbis.
This enactment, like the other enactments instituted by Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai when the Temple was destroyed [is only temporary]. When the Temple is rebuilt, these matters will return to their original status.
Commentary Halacha 15
When the Temple was destroyed, [the Sages] ordained that the lulav be taken everywhere for the entire seven days of the festival as a remembrance of the Temple. - Sukkah 41a explains the source for the establishment of remembrances for the Temple practices:
[Jeremiah 30:17] states: "'I will restore health to you. I will heal you of your wounds," says God. 'Because they called you an outcast. Zion, for whom no one cares.'The verse states "for whom no one cares," implying that a show of our care is required.
On this basis, Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai established a number of practices in remembrance of the Temple practices.
On each day - but only once a day (Ramah, Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 651:5).
one recites the blessing on it: [Baruch Attah Ado-nai...] asher kid'shanu b'mitzvotav v'tzivanu al netilat lulav. - As mentioned in the commentary on Halachah 6, the Rambam explains in Hilchot Berachot11:15 that it is preferable to conclude the blessing, litol lulav. The Kessef Mishneh maintains that the Rambam's present statement is only a reference to his previous one, and not a reversal of his opinion. Nevertheless, the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 651:5) and all later authorities recommend reciting al netilat lulav.
because it a mitzvah ordained by the Rabbis. - In Hilchot Berachot11:3, the Rambam writes that a blessing should be recited before the performance of a Rabbinic commandment. It is appropriate to sayv'tzivanu (and He commanded us) because the commandment to follow the Sages includes the observance of all their enactments.
This enactment, like the other enactments instituted by Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai when the Temple was destroyed [is only temporary]. When the Temple is rebuilt, these matters will return to their original status. - The Tosefta, Rosh Hashanah 2:7, states this concept explicitly. It is also obvious from Beitzah 5b, which explains that "when in the near future, the Temple will be rebuilt," difficulties may arise from following Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai's decree.
Halacha 16
While the Temple was standing, the lulav would be taken [in the holy place even] when the first day of Sukkot fell on the Sabbath. The same applies in other places where they were certain that this day was celebrated as a holiday in Eretz Yisrael. However, the places which were distantly removed from Jerusalem would not take the lulav on this day because of the doubt involved.
Commentary Halacha 16
While the Temple was standing - and the day when a new month began was established through the testimony of witnesses who saw the new moon.
the lulav would be taken [in the holy place - i.e., the city of Jerusalem
even] when the first day of Sukkot fell on the Sabbath. - as stated above in Halachah 13.
The same applies in other places - throughout Eretz Yisrael and the Diaspora
where they were certain that this day - the fifteenth of Tishre
was celebrated as a holiday in Eretz Yisrael. - As mentioned in Hilchot Kiddush Hachodesh, Chapter 3, the Sanhedrin would send messengers to all Jewish communities to inform them when each new month had begun. The communities which received this information before the Sukkot festival celebrated the holidays for only one day. They would be allowed to take the lulav when the first day of Sukkot fell on the Sabbath.
Sukkot 41b relates:
When the first day of the festival fell on the Sabbath, everyone would bring their lulav to the synagogue [on Friday]. On the following day, everyone would recognize his lulav and take it.
This was the practice outside Jerusalem. Sukkot 42b describes the practice in the Temple.
They would bring their lulavim to the Temple Mount [on Friday]. The attendants would take them from them and place them on benches. The elders would place their lulavim in chambers. They would teach them to say: "Whoever receives my lulav may consider it as a gift."In the morning, they would arise and come [to the Temple]. The attendants would throw [the lulavim] to the people. They would grab them from one another and even come to violence. When the court saw that the situation was becoming dangerous, they ordained that each person should take [the lulav] in his own home.
However, the places which were distantly removed from Jerusalem - and were not informed of the day on which Rosh Hashanah had fallen, would celebrate two days. Therefore, they...
would not take the lulav on this day because of the doubt - whether or not the day was, in fact, Sukkot
involved. - i.e., had they known for sure that the holiday began on this day, they would have taken the lulav. However, since they were not sure of that fact, the Sages did not want to risk the possible violation of the Sabbath laws.
Halacha 17
When the Temple was destroyed, the Sages forbade even the inhabitants ofEretz Yisrael who had sanctified the new month to take the lulav on the Sabbath on the first day of Sukkot.
[This was instituted] because of the inhabitants of the distant settlements, who were not aware of when the new month had been declared. Thus, a uniform guideline was established, rather than having some take the lulav on the Sabbath and some not. [The guiding principle was] that the obligation [of taking the lulav] on the first day applies in all places, and there is no longer a Temple to use as a point of distinction.
Commentary Halacha 17
When the Temple was destroyed - even though the new moon was still sanctified according to the testimony of witnesses. (That practice continued several hundred years after the destruction of the Temple -Hilchot Kiddush Hachodesh 5:3.)
the Sages forbade even the inhabitants of Eretz Yisrael who had sanctified the new month - and thus knew that they were certainly obligated to perform the mitzvah
to take the lulav on the Sabbath on the first day of Sukkot - for the reasons mentioned in Halachah 13.
[This was instituted] because of the inhabitants of the distant settlements, who were not aware of when the new month had been declared. Thus, a uniform guideline was established, rather than having some take the lulav on the Sabbath and some not. - The Sages did not want confusion to arise because of a difference in local custom. Accordingly, they were willing to decree that many Jews forego the performance of a mitzvah from the Torah, in order to establish uniformity throughout the Jewish people.
[The guiding principle was] that the obligation [of taking the lulav] on the first day applies in all places - and the people in the distant communities could not take the lulav when the first day fell on the Sabbath because of the doubt involved
and there is no longer a Temple to use as a point of distinction - i.e., while the Temple was standing, the difference in practice between the people living in places where the date of the month was known and those where it was not known could be explained because everyone knew that the lulav was taken on the first day in the Temple. However, when the Temple was destroyed, there was no point of distinction, and the Sages established a totally uniform practice.
The Lechem Mishneh questions why Sages did not institute the celebration of the second day of each festival in Eretz Yisrael as well. If their desire for uniformity of observance was so great, why did they not establish a single practice in this regard as well?
He explains that the Sages were more reluctant to exercise their authority when they had to establish a new practice (קום ועשה) - celebrating an additional day as a festival - than when all that was necessary was to have the people refrain from the performance of a mitzvah (שב ועל תעשה), as in the case of the lulav.
Another concept can be derived from this halachah. The Hebrew word translated as Temple - מקדש - is used by the Rambam to refer to the entire city of Jerusalem. Thus, we can infer from the statement "there is no longer a מקדש" that this distinction is conferred on the holy city only while the Temple is standing.
Halacha 18
At present, when everyone follows a fixed calendar, the matter remains as it was, and the lulav is not taken on the Sabbath in the outlying territories or inEretz Yisrael even on the first day [of the festival]. [This applies] even though everyone knows the actual day of the month.
As explained, the reason for the prohibition of taking the lulav on the Sabbath is a decree lest one carry it four cubits in the public domain.
Commentary Halacha 18
At present, when everyone follows a fixed calendar - See Chapter 5 of Hilchot Kiddush Hachodesh.
the matter remains as it was, and the lulav is not taken on the Sabbath in the outlying territories or in Eretz Yisrael - or in Jerusalem
even on the first day [of the festival]. - when the obligation to do so is from the Torah itself.
[This applies] even though everyone knows the actual day of the month. - As mentioned regarding the celebration of the second day of a festival (Beitzah 4b; Hilchot Kiddush Hachodesh 5:5), according to Torah law this practice should not be followed. Nevertheless, as a mark of respect for established custom, the practice is continued.
As explained - in Halachah 13,
the reason for the prohibition of taking the lulav on the Sabbath is a decree lest one carry it four cubits in the public domain.
Halacha 19
Whoever is obligated to fulfill [the mitzvot of] shofar and sukkah is obligated to take the lulav. Whoever is not obligated regarding shofar and sukkah is not obligated to take the lulav.
A child who knows how to shake [the lulav] is obligated regarding the lulav by Rabbinic law, in order to train him in the performance of mitzvot.
Commentary Halacha 19
Whoever is obligated to fulfill [the mitzvot of] shofar and sukkah is obligated to take the lulav. Whoever is not obligated regarding shofar and sukkah is not obligated to take the lulav. - i.e., the lulav, like the shofar and the sukkah, is a positive commandment whose observance is restricted to a specific time. Accordingly, women and slaves are under no obligation. (See Halachot 2:1 and 6:1.)
A child who knows how to shake [the lulav] - according to the instructions of our Sages (Rabbenu Manoach). (See Halachot 9 and 10.)
is obligated - See the note on Halachah 6:1.
regarding lulav by Rabbinic law, in order to train him in the performance of mitzvot. - Note the specific instructions in Halachah 8:10 regarding a child's performance of the mitzvah on the first day of the festival.
Halacha 20
It is a halachah conveyed by Moses from Mount Sinai that - in addition to the willow of the lulav - another willow branch was taken in the Temple. A person does not fulfill his obligation with the willow branch in the lulav.
The minimum requirement [to fulfill this mitzvah] is one branch with one leaf.
Commentary Halacha 20
It is a halachah conveyed by Moses from Mount Sinai - i.e., a commandment that has the status of Torah law even though there is no explicit commandment to that effect in the Torah.
that - in addition to the willow of the lulav - There is another totally different mitzvah performed with the willow.
another willow branch was brought in the Temple. - as described in the following halachot.
Rashi and Tosafot, (Sukkah 43b) explain that the mitzvah of the willow branch was only performed by the priests for only they were allowed to approach the Temple altar where the branches were arranged. However, from halachah 22, it appears that the Rambam does not share this opinion.
Sukkah 44a, b also mentions that outside the Temple there was a custom of established in the time of the prophets requiring the taking of the willow by all Jews. (See also Hilchot Berachot 11:16.)
A person does not fulfill his obligation with the willow branch in the lulav - even if after using for the lulav, he detaches it and takes it by itself (Sukkah 44b, Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 664:6).
Halacha 21
How was this mitzvah performed?
On each of the seven days [of the festival], branches of willows were brought and stood upright near the altar with their tops bent over the altar. When they would bring them and arrange them [near the altar,] a series of [shofar blasts] - teki'ah, teru'ah, and teki'ah - were sounded.
When the Sabbath fell in the midst of the festival, the willows would not be arranged [near the altar] unless the seventh day fell on the Sabbath. [On such an occasion,] the willows were arranged [near the altar], to publicize the fact that [taking] them is a mitzvah.
Commentary Halacha 21
How was this mitzvah performed? On each of the seven days [of the festival], branches of willows were brought - from Motza, a small town slightly west of Jerusalem (Sukkah 45a).
and stood upright near the altar - From this fact, Rashi and Tosafotconclude that the willows were taken by priests only because Israelites were not allowed to approach the Temple altar.
with their tops bent over the altar. - These willow branches were eleven cubits high and were placed on the base of the altar.
Afterwards, they would be taken by the people, as stated in the following halachah. Rabbenu Manoach maintains that the priests would take the willow branches and give them to the people because Israelites were not allowed to approach the altar, as above. However, he notes that Rav Yitzchak ibn Giat's description of the mitzvah could be interpreted to mean that the Israelites themselves were permitted to approach the altar on this occasion.
When they would bring them and arrange them [near the altar,] a series of [shofar blasts] - teki'ah, teru'ah, and teki'ah - were sounded - as an expression of happiness (Tosafot, Sukkah, ibid.). The shofar was also sounded in connection with the communal sacrifices and other rites carried out in the Temple.
When the Sabbath fell in the midst of the festival, the willows would not be arranged [near the altar] - on the Sabbath, since the mitzvah of lulav was negated on such an occasion (Halachah 13). Indeed, in his Commentary on the Mishnah (Sukkah 4:3), the Rambam writes that the reason the mitzvah of taking the willow on the Sabbath was negated was so that people would not extend the leniency and take the lulav as well.
unless the seventh day fell on the Sabbath. - The seventh day of Sukkot falls on the Sabbath only when Rosh Hashanah is celebrated on Sunday. Since the Sages attempted to prevent the latter occurrence (Hilchot Kiddush Hachodesh 7:7) - indeed, it is impossible according to today's fixed calendar - it was rare that the seventh day of Sukkot would fall on the Sabbath.
[On such an occasion,] the willows were arranged [near the altar] -and the willows were taken as during the week. Though the mitzvah of lulav would not be performed on such an occasion, an exception was made regarding the willows, in order...
to publicize the fact that [taking] them is a mitzvah. - Since the willows were placed near the altar by the priests, and the performance of the mitzvah was under the supervision of the court, there was no need to worry about people carrying willows in the public domain (Sukkah 43b).
In a related context, Sukkah 43b relates that the followers of Boethus, who did not respect the Oral Law, once tried to prevent the people from following the mitzvah of the willow branches on the Sabbath. Indeed, precisely because the source for the mitzvah is the oral tradition alone, the Sages made a point of allowing it to be observed on the Sabbath at least under such circumstances (Rabbenu Manoach).
The actual performance of the mitzvah on the Sabbath is described in the following halachah.
Halacha 22
How would they fulfill [this mitzvah on the Sabbath]?
They would bring [the branches] to the Temple on the Sabbath eve and place them in golden containers, so their leaves would not dry out. On the following morning, they would be placed next to the altar and the people would take them in the same manner as they did each day.
Since the willow is not explicitly mentioned in the Torah, it is not taken on each of the seven days of the festival as a remembrance of the Temple. Rather, at present it is taken only on the seventh day.
What is done? One takes one branch or many branches in addition to the willow of the lulav, and hits the ground or a utensil with them two or three times. No blessing is recited, because this practice is a custom instituted by the prophets.
Commentary Halacha 22
How would they fulfill [this mitzvah on the Sabbath]? They would bring [the branches] to the Temple on the Sabbath eve and place them in golden containers so their leaves would not dry out. - Some commentaries explain that the golden vessels were used as an expression of respect for the mitzvah. However, the Ma'aseh Rokeachexplains that, in comparison to containers made of other metals, golden ones are more beneficial in preserving the willows' freshness.
On the following morning, they would be placed next to the altar, and the people would take them in the same manner as they did each day. - Note the commentary on the previous halachah.
Since the willow is not explicitly mentioned in the Torah - TheMaggid Mishneh's text of the Mishneh Torah reads: "it is not explicitly [an obligation] from the Torah." Accordingly, he and the other commentators debated whether the Rambam considers a halachah conveyed by Moses from Mt. Sinai as a Torah obligation or not. In Hilchot Tum'at Meit 2:10, the Rambam specifically states that a halachah conveyed by tradition has the power of Torah law.
it is not taken on each of the seven days of the festival as a remembrance of the Temple - as is the lulav (Halachah 15).
Rather, at present it is taken only on the seventh day. - Hoshanah Rabbah.
What is done - to fulfill the mitzvah at present?
One takes one - willow
branch or many branches - At present, it is customary to take five.
in addition to the willow of the lulav and hits the ground - The Zoharmentions this practice
or a utensil with them two or three times. - According to Kabbalah, the custom is to hit the ground five times.
No blessing is recited, because this practice is a custom instituted by the prophets. - In his Commentary on the Mishnah (Sukkah 4:3), the Rambam writes: "The willow is a halachah conveyed by Moses....It was a custom of the prophets to take it without a blessing."
However, in Hilchot Berachot 11:15, he writes:
Every practice which is a custom - even if it a custom of the prophets (e.g., taking the willow on the seventh day of the festival)... - [does not require] the recitation of a blessing.
It is possible to reconcile the two statements as follows: A blessing was never recited upon taking the willow in the Temple (though it could have been), because of the custom of the prophets mentioned in his Commentary on the Mishnah. There was never any reason to recite a blessing over taking the willow outside the Temple because it was only a custom.
Halacha 23
On each day of the festival, they would walk around the altar once, carrying their lulavim in their hands, reciting: "Please, God, save us. Please, God, grant us success" [Psalms 118:25]. On the seventh day, they would walk around the altar seven times.
It has become universally accepted Jewish custom to place the ark in the center of the synagogue and walk around it each day, as they walked around the altar in remembrance of the Temple [service].
Commentary Halacha 23
On each day of the festival - in the Temple
they - There is a question if this practice was carried out only by the priests, or by Israelites as well. (See the commentary on Halachah 21.)
would walk around the altar once, carrying their lulavim - Sukkah43b mentions an opinion that states that the people would walk around the altar carrying the willow branch, but concludes as the Rambam does. (See also Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 664:4.)
in their hands, reciting: "Please, God, save us. Please, God, grant us success" - Many manuscripts of the Mishneh Torah state "Please, God, save us" twice, repeating that verse as is our custom in the recitation of Hallel.
On the seventh day, they would walk around the altar seven times. - The Yalkut Shimoni notes that this recalls the miracle of the conquest of Jericho.
It has become universally accepted Jewish custom to place the ark in the center of the synagogue - From Hilchot Tefillah 11:3, it appears that in addition to the main ark of the synagogue, there was a small movable ark that was positioned in the center of the synagogue. The present custom is to hold the Torah scrolls on the reader's platform in the center of the synagogue. This is also mentioned in the Yalkut Shimoni: "The chazan stands as an angel of God, holding the Torah scroll in his arm."
and walk around it each day - once, and seven times on Hoshanah Rabbah.
as they walked around the altar in remembrance of the Temple [service].
Halacha 24
The following custom was observed in Jerusalem: A person would leave his house in the morning [carrying] his lulav in his hand. He would enter the synagogue with it in his hand; pray while it was in his hand; go to visit the sick and comfort the mourners with it in his hand. When he entered the House of Study, he would send it home with his son or servant.
Commentary Halacha 24
The following custom was observed in Jerusalem - as an expression of the dearness with which the people regarded the mitzvah:
A person would leave his house in the morning [carrying] his lulav in his hand. - The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 652:1) states that "the eager" fulfill the mitzvah of lulav early in the morning. Afterwards, the lulav would be carried - while open, without a carrying case - throughout the day.
He would enter the synagogue with it in his hand; pray while it was in his hand - Even though one should not ordinarily hold any objects in one's hands while praying, lest one's concentration be distracted, since holding the lulav is a mitzvah dear to a Jew's heart, it will not become a distraction.
go to visit the sick and comfort the mourners with it in his hand - for there is no difficulty in carrying the lulav while fulfilling those mitzvot.
When he entered the House of Study, he would send it home with his son or servant. - We fear that a person's involvement in his studies will prevent him from showing proper attention to the lulav, and perhaps he will drop it (Rashi, Sukkah, ibid.).
Halacha 25
During the time the lulav was taken on the Sabbath, a woman was allowed to receive the lulav from her son or her husband and return it to the water on the Sabbath. On the festival, a person might add to the water. On Chol Hamo'ed, one might change the water.
Commentary Halacha 25
42a).
During the time the lulav was taken on the Sabbath - See Halachot 13 and 14. At present, it is forbidden to carry the lulav on the Sabbath (Ramah, Orach Chayim 558:2).
a woman was allowed to receive the lulav from her son or her husband - Though she was not required to fulfill the mitzvah herself, no prohibition was instituted against her carrying the lulav.
and return it to the water on the Sabbath. - This was not considered a violation of the Sabbath laws which prevent causing any agricultural growth. However, it was forbidden to add to the water or change it on the Sabbath because of the trouble involved.
On the festival, a person might add to the water. - but not change it.
On Chol Hamo'ed - though there are certain restrictions against work
one might change the water. - Indeed, it is proper to do so to keep the lulav fresh (Rabbenu Manoach).
Halacha 26
It is forbidden to smell the myrtle in the lulav. Since it is useful only for smelling and it has been set aside for the performance of the mitzvah, it is forbidden to smell it. However, it is permitted to smell an etrog, because setting it aside for the mitzvah [prohibits it from being] eaten.
Commentary Halacha 26
It is forbidden to smell the myrtle in the lulav. - As explained in Chapter 6, Halachah 15, with regard to the s'chach of a sukkah: after it has been set aside for use as a mitzvah, it may not be used for mundane purposes throughout the holiday.
Since it is useful only for smelling - in contrast to the etrog, mentioned in the second clause.
and it has been set aside for the performance of the mitzvah, it is forbidden to smell it. - The prohibition applies even on the Sabbath, when the lulav is not taken (Mishnah Berurah 653:2).
However, it is permitted to smell an etrog, because setting it aside for the mitzvah [prohibits it from being] eaten. - An etrog is primarily used for eating. Thus, its being set aside for use for the mitzvah causes that function to be prohibited. However, smelling it is a secondary function that is not included in that prohibition.
Nevertheless, the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 653:1) recommends refraining from smelling the etrog, because of the doubt regarding the proper blessing to recite. The Mishnah Berurah (653:3) states that with the exception of the time when the lulav is being taken, one may smell the etrog throughout the holiday.
Halacha 27
It is forbidden to eat the etrog throughout the seventh day [of the festival]; since it was set aside for a portion of the day, it is set aside for the entire day. However, on the eighth day it is permitted to be eaten.
At present, when we celebrate [the festivals for] two days - even though the etrog is not taken on the eighth day - the etrog is forbidden on the eighth day, since it was forbidden on the eighth day during the time [the festivals] were celebrated for two days because of the doubt whether [the eighth day] was, in fact, the seventh.
When a person sets aside seven etrogim, [one for each] of the seven days [of the festival], each one of them can be used for the mitzvah on its day and eaten on the morrow.
Commentary Halacha 27
It is forbidden to eat the etrog - even if it has become unacceptable for use in performing the mitzvah (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 665:1).
throughout the seventh day [of the festival] - The Mishnah (Sukkah4:6) relates that despite this prohibition, after the mitzvah was fulfilled on the seventh day of Sukkot the children would eat their etrogim.
since it was set aside for a portion of the day, it is set aside for the entire day. However, on the eighth day it is permitted to be eaten. -In contrast, the s'chach of the sukkah might not be used for a mundane purpose on the eighth day either (Chapter 6, Halachah 15). Rabbenu Manoach explains the difference, relating that - should one desire to eat - the sukkah must also be used beyn hash'mashot - the period between sunset and the appearance of three stars - while the lulav would not be taken during that time.
At present, when we celebrate [the festivals for] two days - because of the previously established custom, even though there is no question regarding the dates of the holidays because of the fixed calendar we use, as explained in the commentary on Halachah 18.
even though the etrog is not taken on the eighth day - The Maggid Mishneh notes the contrast between the mitzvot of lulav and of the sukkah, which, as mentioned in Chapter 6, Halachah 13, must be fulfilled on the eighth day of the festival. He differentiates between the two, noting that it is a mitzvah from the Torah to dwell in the sukkah for all seven days of the holiday. Therefore, because of the doubt, that mitzvah was also observed on the eighth day. In contrast, outside of Jerusalem there was never a mitzvah from the Torah to take the lulav for seven days. Hence, that mitzvah need not be observed on the eighth day.
The Kessef Mishneh adds a further point. It is forbidden to carry the lulav for no purpose on the eighth day, the holiday of Shemini Atzeret. No such prohibition applies regarding the use of the sukkah.
the etrog is forbidden on the eighth day - However, it is permitted on the ninth day, Simchat Torah (Shulchan Aruch, ibid.).
In contrast, at present, the use of the s'chach is forbidden on the ninth day.
since it was forbidden on the eighth day - The Kessef Mishnehadvises amending the text to read "on the seventh day." In either case, the intent is the same - because it was forbidden by law on the seventh day, that prohibition was observed on the eighth day as well, because of the doubt involved.
during the time [the festivals] were celebrated for two days because of the doubt whether [the eighth day] was, in fact, the seventh. - i.e., during the time when the calendar was established according to the testimony of witnesses, and word of the sanctification of the new moon could not reach the people in the outlying communities in time for the celebration of the holiday, as mentioned in the commentary on Halachah 16.
When a person sets aside seven etrogim, [one for each] of the seven days [of the festival], each one of them can be used for the mitzvah on its day and eaten on the morrow - more precisely, even on the night after it was used, for the etrog was set aside only for that day alone.
Shofar, Sukkah, vLulav - Chapter Eight
Halacha 1
[These are the rules governing] the four species: the lulav, the myrtle, the willow, and the etrog. If one of them was:
a) dried out,b) taken by force or stolen, even after [the owner had] despaired of its recovery,c) came from an ashera that has been worshiped, even though the worship of the ashera has already been nullified,d) or it came from an apostate city
it is not acceptable.
If one of them belonged to an idolater: at the outset, it should not be taken. If it was taken, the person has fulfilled his obligation.
If [one of the species] was wilting, but had not dried out entirely, it is kosher. In extreme situations or in a time of danger, a dried out lulav is kosher. However, [this does not apply] to the other species.
Commentary Halacha 1
[These are the rules governing] the four species: the lulav, the myrtle, the willow, and the etrog. If one of them was: a) dried out -The etrog is described as פרי עץ הדר (the fruit of the beautiful tree).Sukkah 31a explains that an analogy is established among the various species, and all of them must be "beautiful." Fruit or branches that are dried out do not fit the latter description.
The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 645:5, 646:7) defines "drying out" as losing all its green and fading to a whitish color. The Ramah mentions an even more lenient opinion.
b) taken by force - גזל - armed robbery or the like
or stolen - גנבה - petty theft and the like. Though in other areas there are differences between these two categories of theft, in this context the same laws apply.
In his Commentary on the Mishnah (Sukkah 3:1), the Rambam explains that any of the species which are stolen may not be used for the mitzvah, because a sin may not serve as the medium with which a mitzvah will be performed (מצוה הבאה בעבירה). (See also Hilchot Chametz U'matzah 6:7;Hilchot Issurei Mizbe'ach 5:7, 5:9.)
Sukkah 29b-30a mentions this reason, but also a second explanation: because, as stated in Halachah 10, on the first day of the festival a person must own the four species he uses for the mitzvah. (See the commentary on Halachah 9 for a further discussion of this matter.)
even after [the owner had] despaired of its recovery - According to the first reason, the owner's despair over the recovery of his article has no effect on the thief's potential to use it for a mitzvah. Even according to the second opinion, the despair over recovering the article is not sufficient to allow the thief to use it, as is obvious from Hilchot Gezeilah2:1, where the Rambam writes:
A stolen article whose form has not changed...even though its owner has despaired of its recovery...must be returned to its owner.
Thus, the article is not considered to belong to the thief, and he may not use it to fulfill the mitzvah. However, if the thief performed a deed which changed the appearance of the lulav or any of the other species, he is considered to have acquired it and may fulfill the mitzvah with it. Nevertheless, he should not recite a blessing before performing the mitzvah with such a lulav (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 649:1).
c) came from an ashera - a tree which is worshiped as a deity. It is also forbidden to be used for the mitzvah, on the basis of the principle that a sin may not serve as the medium with which a mitzvah will be performed (מצוה הבאה בעבירה) (Rambam, Commentary on the Mishnah, ibid.).
that has been worshiped, even though the worship of the ashera has already been nullified - The commentaries on Sukkah 31b explain that this refers to an ashera that entered a Jew's possession before it was nullified, or an ashera that was worshiped by a Jew. In these instances, the nullification of the ashera will not cause it to be permitted for use; rather, it must be totally destroyed. Hence, it is considered to have no size at all, and, therefore, may not be used for the mitzvah (Maggid Mishneh). (See also the Commentary on Chapter 1, Halachah 3.)
Alternatively, since the ashera itself was worshiped, it may no longer be used for a mitzvah. A parallel can be found in Hilchot Tzitzit 1:11, which relates that the wool of a sheep that was worshiped may not be used for tzitzit, although that wool does not become prohibited.
d) or it came from an apostate city - All the property of an apostate city must be destroyed. Therefore, any of the four species that come from such a city is considered to have no size at all, and, thus, is unacceptable for use in the mitzvah. (See also the commentary on Chapter 1, Halachah 3.)
it is not acceptable.
If one of them belonged to an idolater - but was not worshiped itself (Rabbenu Manoach); i.e., it grew in a garden of the temple of an idol. However, the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 649:3) explains that it applies even when the tree itself was worshiped.
at the outset, it should not be taken. - Because of its connection with idol worship, such an article is considered to be disgusting, and it is improper to fulfill the mitzvah with it (Rabbenu Manoach). However...
If it was taken, the person has fulfilled his obligation - provided the tree had belonged to a gentile and the latter had nullified its connection with idol worship before it came into the Jew's possession. Alternatively, on any day of the festival but the first, one may take it even before its connection with idol worship was nullified. Since the possibility exists that it can be nullified, it is not considered to be a nonexistent entity. (See also the commentary on Chapter 1, Halachah 3.)
If [one of the species] was wilting, but had not dried out entirely, it is kosher. - Sukkah 31a explains that as long as the species have some moisture left to them, they are not disqualified for use.
In extreme situations or in a time of danger, a dried out lulav is kosher. - Sukkah 32b relates that the inhabitants of the large cities would bequeath their lulavim to their descendants as part of their estate. Obviously, the lulavim would have dried out during this time.
However, [this does not apply] to the other species. - for only the lulav was mentioned in that passage.
The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam and maintains that even a dried out lulav is not acceptable. The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 645:5) follows the Ra'avad's view.
Halacha 2
An etrog of orlah, of impure terumah, and of tevel is unacceptable. [An etrog] of d'mai is permitted, for it is possible for a person to declare all of his property as ownerless. Thus, he will be a poor man who is permitted to eat d'mai.
An etrog of pure terumah and of ma'aser sheni in Jerusalem should not be taken, lest one cause it to become susceptible to contracting ritual impurity. However, if it was taken, it is kosher.
Commentary Halacha 2
An etrog - These laws apply only to an etrog, because the agricultural prohibitions mentioned in this halachah apply only to fruit and not to mere branches (Rabbenu Manoach).
of orlah - For the first three years of a tree's growth, one is forbidden to benefit from its produce (Leviticus 19:23).
The Torah's prohibition against orlah applies only in Eretz Yisrael. In the Diaspora, there is also a prohibition against orlah, which was received as a halachah from Moses from Mount Sinai. However, much greater leniency is involved, and if there is a doubt whether a fruit is orlah or not, it may be eaten (Hilchot Ma'achalot Asurot 10:10). The same rules apply regarding its use for this mitzvah.
of impure terumah - Terumah refers to the portion of produce which must be separated and given to a priest (Numbers 18:12). If the terumahbecomes ritually impure, it is no longer permitted to be eaten and must be destroyed (Hilchot Terumah 12:1).
In his Commentary on the Mishnah (Sukkah 3:8), the Rambam writes that etrogim of orlah and impure terumah are not acceptable because "they must be destroyed by burning. Therefore, they are unacceptable, because God requires 'a fruit,' and these are not fit to be eaten at all."
and of tevel - produce from Eretz Yisrael from which the agricultural requirements - Terumah, Ma'aser Rishon (the first tithe), and Ma'aser Sheni (the second tithe) - have not been separated. Tevel is also unfit to be eaten, and thus, it may not be used for the mitzvah.
is unacceptable.
[An etrog] of d'mai - Produce concerning which there is doubt whether or not the tithes have been separated (Hilchot Ma'aser, Chapter 9).
is permitted, for it is possible for a person to declare all of his property as ownerless. - In his Commentary on the Mishnah (ibid.), the Rambam states "he can consecrate all his property to the Temple." In practice, there is no difference between the two.
Thus, he will be a poor man who is permitted to eat d'mai. - SeeHilchot Ma'aser 10:11. Since there is a possibility of his being allowed to eat the etrog, he may use it for the mitzvah (Rambam, Commentary on the Mishnah, ibid.).
An etrog of pure terumah and of ma'aser sheni in Jerusalem - In the first, second, fourth, and fifth years of the seven-year agricultural cycle, the second tithe had to be taken to Jerusalem and eaten there in a state of ritual purity (Deuteronomy 14:22-27).
The Rambam maintains that one can use an etrog of ma'aser sheni for the mitzvah only while in Jerusalem, since that is the only place that it is permitted to be eaten (Commentary on the Mishnah, ibid.). However, Rabbenu Nissim and others differ and allow such an etrog to be used for the mitzvah in other places as well. They maintain that though we are not allowed to benefit from ma'aser sheni outside Jerusalem, the fulfillment of mitzvot is not an act of personal benefit.
should not be taken, lest one cause it to become susceptible to contracting ritual impurity - which was undesirable. From Leviticus 11:34, our Sages learned that produce does not become subject to contracting ritual impurity until it comes into contact with water. Since the lulav was generally placed in water (see Chapter 7, Halachah 25), when it was taken together with the etrog it would probably make the etrog wet, and thus cause it to become subject to contracting ritual impurity.
However, if it was taken, it is kosher. - for there is no inherent difficulty with such an etrog.
Halacha 3
A lulav whose tip becomes cut off is unacceptable. Should it become split to the extent that the two sides of the split become severed and appear to be two, it is unacceptable.
If it is bent forward so that its shidrah appears like a hunchback, it is unacceptable. If it is bent backwards, it is kosher, since that is its natural pattern of growth. If it is bent toward either side, it is unacceptable.
If its leaves have separated one from the other, but they have not begun to hang downward like the top of a date palm, it is kosher. However, if its leaves have burst open and they hang down from the shidrah as does the top of the date palm, it is unacceptable.
Commentary Halacha 3
A lulav whose tip - According to the Maggid Mishneh and Rabbenu Manoach, this refers to the center leaf that extends outward from theshidrah, and not the shidrah itself. Rabbenu Asher and the Ra'avad explain that this refers to the majority of the lulav's leaves, and theShulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 645:6) quotes their opinion. However, the Ramah quotes the Maggid Mishneh's statements.
becomes cut off is unacceptable. - because such a lulav is not "beautiful" (הדר: Jerusalem Talmud, Sukkah 3:1). All the other factors mentioned in this halachah disqualify a lulav for the same reason.
Should it become split to the extent that the two sides of the split become severed and appear to be two, it is unacceptable. - Sukkah31b, 32a states: A lulav which is split is kosher; [but] if it is like a fork, it is not. The commentaries explain that the Talmud refers to a shape like a tuning fork, where the two ends are distant from each other. The commentaries explain that such a separation can disqualify a lulav even if the majority of leaves are not split in this manner, and hence, the principles mentioned in the following halachah would not apply.
If it is bent forward - i.e., the shidrah would be bent toward a person facing it
so that its shidrah appears like a hunchback, it is unacceptable -Sukkah (ibid.) states: If it is bent like a scythe, it is unacceptable. TheKessef Mishneh emphasizes that the bend must be severe (as described by the examples given by the Talmud and the Rambam). However, a slight curve will not disqualify a lulav.
If it is bent backwards - the shidrah bending away from a person facing it
it is kosher, since that is its natural pattern of growth - and this can be considered as a "beautiful" lulav (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 645:19). TheShulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 645:9) differentiates between when theshidrah bends gradually and when it is bent over to the extent that its tip points downward. In the latter case, even if it is bent backwards, the lulav is unacceptable.
If it is bent toward either side, it is unacceptable. - Sukkah (ibid.) questions whether such a lulav is kosher or not and leaves the matter unresolved. Hence, we follow the more stringent view (Rav Yitzchak Alfasi).
If its leaves have separated one from the other, but they have not begun to hang downward like the top of a date palm - i.e., the leaves are still firm and pointed upward (Rambam, Commentary on the Mishnah,Sukkah 3:1).
it is kosher. - However, the most proper way of performing the mitzvah is to use a lulav whose leaves are not separated at all (Maggid Mishneh).
However, if its leaves have burst open and they hang down from the shidrah as does the top of the date palm, it is unacceptable - even if they are bound together against the lulav. This applies only if the majority of the lulav's leaves have opened up in this fashion (Ramah, Orach Chayim 645:2).
Halacha 4
The natural pattern of growth of the leaves of the lulav is that two grow in pairs, connected at their back. The back of each pair of connected leaves is called the tiyomet. If the tiyomet is split, it unacceptable. Should a lulav's leaves grow individually from the beginning of its formation without having atiyomet, it is unacceptable.
When a lulav's leaves do not grow on top of the other like all lulavim, but rather one below the other, [the following rules apply:] If the top [of the lower leaf] reaches the base of the one above it so that the entire shidrah of the lulav is covered with leaves, it is kosher. If the top [of the lower leaf] does not reach the base of the one above it, it is unacceptable.
Commentary Halacha 4
The natural pattern of growth of the leaves of the lulav is that two grow in pairs, connected at their back. The back of each pair of connected leaves is called the tiyomet. If the tiyomet is split, it is unacceptable. - The Maggid Mishneh explains that the Rambam maintains that the lulav is not acceptable only if the majority of the leaves are split. However, others (Rashi, Tosafot) explain that this law refers to the middle leaf alone. If the majority of that leaf is split, the lulav is unacceptable. The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 645:3) quotes the Rambam's opinion, while the Ramah favors that of Rashi and Tosafot.
Should a lulav's leaves grow individually from the beginning of its formation without having a tiyomet, it is unacceptable. - i.e., there is no difference if the lulav's lack of a tiyomet is a natural phenomenon or is brought about through human activity; in all cases it is unacceptable.
When a lulav's leaves do not grow on top of the other like all lulavim, but rather, one below the other, [the following rules apply:] If the top [of the lower leaf] reaches the base of the one above it so that the entire shidrah of the lulav is covered with leaves, it is kosher. - This is the tzinei har habarzel mentioned in the Mishnah (Sukkah 3:1). Sukkah 32b relates that such lulavim grow at the entrance to Gehinnom.
Halacha 5
A myrtle branch whose top is cut off is acceptable. Even though most of its leaves have fallen off, it is kosher, provided three leaves remain in one row.
When there are more berries than leaves, [the following rules apply:] If they are green, it is kosher. If they are red or black, it is not acceptable. If one reduced their number, it is acceptable.
We may not reduce their number on the holiday itself, because [by doing so, one] makes [the myrtle] fit for use. If one transgressed and removed them or removed them one by one to eat them, it is kosher.
Commentary Halacha 5
A myrtle branch whose top is cut off is acceptable. - Since the myrtle branch is covered by its leaves, the fact that its top is cut off is not noticeable (Rabbenu Manoach).
Though the Mishnah (Sukkah 3:2) states that such a myrtle is unacceptable, the Talmud (Sukkah 34b) states that the halachah follows Rabbi Tarfon, whose opinion is quoted by the Rambam in this halachah.
In his commentary on this halachah, the Ra'avad states:
For a number of years, the spirit of prophecy has been present in our chamber of study, and we have determined that [such a myrtle] is not acceptable.
The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 646:10) quotes the Rambam's opinion. However, the Ramah writes that it is proper to adhere to the Ra'avad's view if possible. However, he quotes Rabbenu Nissim, who maintains that the top of a myrtle is only considered to be "cut off" when the top of the branch is broken. The leaves' falling off is not considered of significance.
Even though most of its leaves have fallen off, it is kosher, provided three leaves remain in one row. - The Maggid Mishneh explains that this refers to an Egyptian myrtle, which has seven leaves in each row. Rabbenu Manoach explains that this clause refers to the entire myrtle branch, stating that even though most of its leaves have fallen off, as long as it has one full row of leaves covering the branch (at its top, as in Chapter 7, Halachah 8), it is kosher.
The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 646:4) quotes the Maggid Mishneh'sstatements as halachah. In contrast, Rabbenu Manoach's interpretation is not accepted. Halachah 5 (ibid.) states that the majority of the length of the myrtle branch must be covered with leaves. However, if that condition is met, the myrtle is kosher even if the leaves at its top have fallen off.
When there are more berries than leaves, [the following rules apply:] If they are green, it is kosher - for their color is the same as the leaves of the myrtle.
If they are red or black - since the berries are a different color from that of the leaves...
it is not acceptable - since this is not considered to be "beautiful" (Rashi, Sukkah 33b).
If one reduced their number - so that there would be more leaves than berries,
it is acceptable.
We may not reduce their number - i.e., the number of black or red berries
on the holiday itself - i.e., on the first day of the festival, when the restrictions against work apply
because [by doing so, one] makes [the myrtle] fit for use - and this may not be done on a holiday. (See Hilchot Sh'vitat Yom Tov 4:8.) However...
If one transgressed and removed them or removed them one by one to eat them - which is permitted. Sukkah 33b states that permission is granted, provided only that one has another myrtle to use for the mitzvah. Otherwise, it is forbidden to eat the berries, because through one's activity one will definitely make the myrtle fit for use. Hence, even though one's act was motivated by another intention as well, it is forbidden. (SeeShulchan Aruch HaRav 646:13.)
The Maggid Mishneh quotes a slightly different version of the text, substituting "or if they were removed by another person" for the phrase "removed them one by one." Authentic Yemenite manuscripts of theMishneh Torah follow the Maggid Mishneh's text.
it is kosher - despite the fact that it was made fit for use on the holiday.
Halacha 6
A willow branch whose top is cut off is kosher. If its leaves have burst open, it is not acceptable.
Commentary Halacha 6
A willow branch whose top is cut off is kosher. - The Rambam maintains that the laws pertaining to the willow parallel those governing a myrtle. However, even many of the Sages who accept the Rambam's opinion regarding the myrtle disagree with regard to the willow. They explain that such a myrtle is acceptable because its leaves cover the branch's severed top. This concept does not apply with regard to a willow. The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 647:2) also states that such a willow is unacceptable.
If its leaves have burst open - i.e., they are hanging down limply from the branch (Maggid Mishneh)
it is not acceptable - for this is not beautiful. Rabbenu Aharon Halevi interprets the Hebrew נפרצו as "split." The Shulchan Aruch HaRav 647:6 quotes both of these opinions as halachah.
Halacha 7
If an etrog is perforated from side to side - no matter how small the hole is - it is not acceptable. When [the hole] does not go from side to side, if it is the size of an isar or more, [the etrog] is not acceptable. If [a hole was made in an etrog which caused] even the slightest amount [of the etrog] to be missing, [the etrog] is not acceptable.
If its pitam - i.e., the small protrusion from which its flower grows - was removed, it is not acceptable. [Similarly,] if the stem from which it hangs from the tree is removed from the etrog itself and a hole is left, it is not acceptable.
If it becomes covered with bumps in two or three places, it is not acceptable. Even if it is covered with bumps in only one place, if that place covers the majority of the etrog's surface area, it is not acceptable. [Similarly,] if a bump grows on even the slightest portion of the pitam, it is not acceptable.
If its peel is removed without causing [the etrog] to lose any substance and it remains greenish yellow as in its natural state, [the following rules apply:] If the peel was entirely removed, it is not acceptable. If even the slightest portion of the original peel remains, it is kosher.
Commentary Halacha 7
If an etrog is perforated - even though none of the etrog's substance is missing
from side to side - This is the literal translation of the term מפולש. Nevertheless, Rabbenu Asher interprets that term differently, explaining that the etrog is unacceptable if the hole reaches the etrog's seed chamber. The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 648:3) quotes both opinions. Regarding halachah l'ma'aseh, the authorities recommend heeding Rabbenu Asher's opinion. However, they state that when it is difficult to find a kosher etrog, the Rambam's opinion may be relied upon.
no matter how small the hole is - i.e., even if it was perforated with a thin needle
it is not acceptable. - This and the other factors mentioned in this halachah disqualify an etrog for use because it is not "beautiful."
The Ra'avad objects to this statement and maintains that some of the etrog's substance must also be lacking for it to be deemed unacceptable. The difference between these two opinions depends on a difference in the text of the Mishnah (Sukkah 3:6). The Rambam's text reads:
If [an etrog] was perforated, peeled, cracked, or lacking even the slightest amount of its substance, it is unacceptable.
In contrast, the Ra'avad's text read:
If [an etrog] was perforated, peeled, cracked: when it lacks even the slightest amount of its substance, it is unacceptable.
The Shulchan Aruch (ibid. 2) follows the Rambam's view. The Ramah writes that when it is difficult to find another kosher etrog, one may rely on the Ra'avad's view.
When [the hole] does not go from side to side, if it is the size of an isar - a silver coin from the Talmudic period, four barley corns in size (Rambam, Commentary on the Mishnah, Sukkah 3:6).
or more - e.g., the hole was made by plunging an awl into the etrog (Rashi, Sukkah 36a).
[the etrog] is not acceptable. - Here, too, the Ra'avad differs and maintains that as long as none of the etrog's substance is lacking, it is kosher.
If [a hole was made in an etrog which caused] even the slightest amount [of the etrog] to be missing, [the etrog] is not acceptable. -The Ra'avad differs and maintains that an isar of the etrog's substance must be missing. In this and in the previous case, the same decisions of the Shulchan Aruch and the Ramah mentioned above apply.
If its pitam - i.e., the small protrusion from which its flower grows -The Maggid Mishneh differentiates between the stem of the pitam and its tip from which its flower grew, maintaining that only the removal of the former disqualifies the etrog for use. The Ramah (ibid. 7) quotes this opinion as halachah. However, he suggests trying to use an etrog whosepitam is entirely complete.
was removed, it is not acceptable. - However, there is no difficulty in using an etrog that grows without a pitam, as many etrogim do (Rabbenu Manoach; Ramah, ibid.).
[Similarly,] if the stem from which it hangs from the tree is removed from the etrog itself and a hole is left, it is not acceptable. - However, if only part of the stem is cut off and the portion attached to the etrog remains, it is kosher (Ramah, ibid. 8).
If it becomes covered with bumps - The term חזזית is generally used to refer to human skin ailments - e.g., boils or warts. In this context, it refers to bumps which protrude above the etrog's surface. However, the commentaries disqualify an etrog only if the bumps grow naturally from the etrog itself. However, if they are caused by external factors - e.g., thorns - the etrog is not disqualified.
in two or three places - The Ra'avad asks why both the numbers two and three are mentioned. In response, the Mishneh Lamelech quotes many examples of the use of similar terminology throughout the Talmud. It must be noted that the Rambam, in his commentary on the Mishnah (ibid.), and the Shulchan Aruch HaRav (648:19) mention only two places.
it is not acceptable. - because it looks spotty (Sukkah 35b).
Even if it is covered with bumps in only one place - i.e., as long as there is no place for an additional bump between the two, it is considered to be one place (Shulchan Aruch HaRav, ibid.).
if that place covers the majority of the etrog's surface area - TheMagen Avraham 648:13 also disqualifies an etrog if there is a line of bumps that covers the majority of the etrog's circumference from any point on its surface.
it is not acceptable. [Similarly,] if a bump grows on even the slightest portion of the pitam - See the Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah, ibid.
it is not acceptable - because a blemish on the pitam is very obvious and unattractive.
Sukkah (ibid.) states: "if a bump grows on the etrog's nose, it is not acceptable." The Rambam interprets "nose" as referring to the pitam. However, Rabbenu Asher and others explain that it refers to the portion of the etrog which begins to narrow as it approaches the pitam. TheShulchan Aruch (ibid. 9) accepts the latter view.
If its peel is removed without causing [the etrog] to lose any substance and it remains greenish yellow as in its natural state - i.e, only the outer coating of the peel was removed and the thick, white inner peel is not yet revealed. Should this peel be revealed, the etrog is considered as though it has lost some of its substance (Rambam, Commentary on the Mishnah, ibid.).
[the following rules apply:] If the peel was entirely removed, it is not acceptable. - for the attractiveness of the etrog will begin to decrease without any possibility of its returning to its original state (Levush 586:6)
If even the slightest portion of the original peel remains - the peel could have regenerated itself if it had remained connected to the tree (Levush, ibid.). Therefore,...
it is kosher. - Tosafot, Sukkah 36a maintains that at least a portion of the original peel equivalent to a sela (a large silver coin) must remain. TheShulchan Aruch (ibid. 6) follows the Rambam's opinion.
Halacha 8
An etrog which is inflated, decaying, pickled, cooked, black, white, spotted, or green like a leek is unacceptable.
If it was grown in a mold and shaped into the form of another creation, it is unacceptable. If its natural form was preserved, even though it was shaped in different layers, it is kosher. Two etrogim that grow joined together, and an unripe etrog are kosher.
In places where the etrogim grow naturally with a slight black tinge, it is kosher. However, if [the etrogim] are very black - i.e., like a Kushite - they are unacceptable everywhere.
Commentary Halacha 8
An etrog which is inflated - i.e., water fell on it after being detached from the tree and it became inflated (Rabbenu Manoach, Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 648:15).
decaying - i.e., it produces a foul odor because it is infested with worms (Rabbenu Manoach).
Based on Sukkah 36b, the Ba'al Halachot Gedolot writes that "inflated" and "decaying" etrogim are disqualified only when the blemish is externally visible. However, if the blemish is only internal, they are kosher. (See Shulchan Aruch (ibid. 4) and commentaries.)
pickled - The Shulchan Aruch (ibid. 15) defines "pickled" as "placed in vinegar." However, the Magen Avraham (648:22) maintains that "pickled" should be interpreted according to its definition in the Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah (105:1-2). Thus, if an etrog has been soaked in water or in any other liquid for more than 24 hours straight, it is considered to be "pickled" and disqualified for use. One should take care regarding this matter when soaking etrogim to preserve their freshness.
cooked - thoroughly on a fire or in boiling water (Rabbenu Manoach).
black, white, spotted - i.e., a mixture of any two or more colors. When the different color is concentrated in only one place, the etrog is not disqualified unless that color covers more than half the etrog's surface area. However, if there is more than one spot of different colors, it is disqualified regardless of their size (Shulchan Aruch, ibid. 16).
or green like a leek is unacceptable. - The Hebrew word ירוק refers to two different colors: dark green and yellow. Initially, the etrog, like most citrus fruit, is dark green. As it matures, it turns yellowish.
If it was grown in a mold and shaped into the form of another creation, it is unacceptable - It is not considered "beautiful" because its natural form was changed (Rabbenu Manoach).
If its natural form was preserved, even though it was shaped in different layers, it is kosher. Two etrogim that grow joined together - This is kosher because the etrogim grew naturally in this way. In this instance, when performing the mitzvah, a person should hold both etrogim in his hands. Though the Shulchan Aruch (ibid. 20) accepts this decision, there are other authorities who differ. Hence, it is preferable to use another etrog (Mishnah Berurah 648:63).
and an unripe etrog are kosher. - Sukkah 31b mentions etrogim which are small and green as being not fully ripe. However, since the Rambam mentioned those factors previously, it appears that here the intent is different and refers to a fruit that is not yet ready to be eaten, even though it is as large as an egg and has begun to turn yellow. (See also Sukkah 36a.)
In places where the etrogim grow naturally with a slight black tinge, it is kosher. - Rashi (Sukkah 36a) states that if such an etrog is brought to a place where etrogim of a normal color grow, it may not be used.
However, if [the etrogim] are very black - i.e., like a Kushite - they are unacceptable everywhere - even in Africa, where etrogim of this color grow naturally (Rashi, Sukkah 34b).
Halacha 9
All the species which we categorized as unacceptable because of the blemishes we described or because they were stolen or taken by force are [disqualified for use] only on the first day of the festival. On the second day of the festival and on the other days, they are all kosher.
Those which are disqualified because of the association with idol worship or because the etrog is forbidden to be eaten are unacceptable both on the first day and on the later days.
Commentary Halacha 9
649) explains that these requirements apply only "on the first day." According to this explanation, these leniencies would also apply on the later days even in Jerusalem, where it is a Torah commandment to take the lulav on the later days (Chapter 7, Halachah 13).
Others explain that, as mentioned in Chapter 7, Halachot 13 and 15, at present, taking the lulav is a commandment from the Torah only on the first day of the Sukkot. On the subsequent days, the commandment is Rabbinic in origin, instituted to recall the Temple practice. Hence, greater leniency can be taken, because only a Rabbinic ordinance is involved.
All the species which we categorized as unacceptable because of the blemishes we described - Sukkah 36b relates that Rabbi Chanina would eat from an etrog and then use it for the mitzvah. Though an etrog which is lacking even the slightest amount of its substance may not be used (Halachah 7), he still fulfilled his obligation with it. From this incident, our Sages concluded that, on the later days, even such an etrog is kosher.
According to the Rambam's opinion, the same applies to all other physical blemishes on the species. Since there is no greater blemish than an etrog which is bitten into, none of the requirements for "beauty" must be observed on the later days.
Nevertheless, Tosafot, Sukkah 29b and Rabbenu Asher maintain that this leniency applies only to etrogim which are lacking in substance. All the species which were disqualified because they are not "beautiful" may not be used on the later days as well. Though the Shulchan Aruch 649:5 quotes the Rambam, the Magen Avraham (649:17) and the Taz (649:9) quote the other view.
or because they were stolen or taken by force - The Pri Megadimexplains that even according to the Rambam, a blessing should not be recited when performing the mitzvah in this fashion.
are [disqualified for use] only on the first day of the festival. - As mentioned in the commentary on Halachah 1, there are two explanations why a stolen lulav may not be used on the first day:
a) a sin may not serve as the medium with which a mitzvah will be performed (מצוה הבאה בעבירה);
b) as stated in Halachah 10, on the first day of the festival a person must own the four species he uses for the mitzvah.
The commentaries explain that the Rambam follows the latter rationale. However, those who follow the first opinion (the Ra'avad, the Ramban, Rabbenu Asher) forbid the use of stolen species on the later days as well. The Shulchan Aruch (ibid.) quotes the Rambam, while the Ramah follows the other view.
[Though the above explanation is frequently used, it is difficult to accept. First, in his Commentary on the Mishnah (Sukkah 3:1), the Rambam mentions the reason of מצוה הבאה בעבירה. Also, in Hilchot Chametz U'matzah 6:7 and in Hilchot Issurei Mizbe'ach 5:7 and 5:9, he forbids the use of stolen articles for the performance of a commandment. In addition, he has not yet mentioned the halachah requiring one to own the lulav used on the first day.
The Taz (649:15) clarifies the matter slightly further by explaining that since taking the lulav on the second day is only a Rabbinic commandment, using a stolen lulav is allowed even though it is a מצוה הבאה בעבירה.]
On the second day of the festival - The literal translation of the Rambam's words are "from the second holiday," implying that these leniencies are granted even in the Diaspora, where the second day is celebrated as a holiday. Though all the laws of the holiday apply on the second day as well as the first, this applies only to the laws of the holiday itself. In contrast, in other contexts, since we follow a fixed calendar and know that the holidays fall on their appropriate dates, the restrictions applying to the first day do not apply on the subsequent days (Maggid Mishneh).
Rabbenu Asher differs and maintains that all the restrictions that apply to the lulav on the first day must also be observed on the second day as well. The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 649:5) writes that all the species disqualified on the first day may be taken on the second day, but a blessing should not be recited.
and on the other days - Chol Hamo'ed, when all opinions agree that...
they are all kosher.
Those which are disqualified because of the association with idol worship - mentioned in Halachah 1
or because the etrog is forbidden to be eaten - as mentioned in Halachah 2
Halacha 10
On the first day of the festival, a person cannot fulfill his obligation by using a lulav that belongs to a colleague and was borrowed from him, unless the latter gives it to him as a present.
If [the owner of the lulav] gives it to him as a present on the condition that he return it, he may fulfill his obligation with it and return it, because a present given on condition that it be returned is considered a present. If he does not return it, he does not fulfill his obligation, because it is as though it were stolen.
[On the first day,] a lulav should not be given to a minor, since, according to Torah law, a minor can acquire articles but cannot transfer them to others. Thus, [the minor's] return of the article is not considered to be a return [from a legal perspective].
The above applies to the lulav and to each of the other species of the four taken with it. If one of them was borrowed, the person does not fulfill his obligation on the first day of the festival.
Commentary Halacha 10
On the first day of the festival - It appears from the Rambam's statements that even in Jerusalem, where Torah law requires that the mitzvah be fulfilled for all seven days of the festival, the obligation to own the lulav applies only on the first day.
a person cannot fulfill his obligation by using a lulav that belongs to a colleague and was borrowed from him - As explained in the commentary on the previous halachah, the Biblical source for the mitzvah of taking the four species, Leviticus 23:40, states: "On the first day, take for yourself the fruit of a beautiful tree..." The phrase "for yourself" implies that a person must own the species he uses for the mitzvah (Sukkah41b).
As mentioned in Chapter 5, Halachah 25, a borrowed sukkah may be used on the holiday. Though Deuteronomy 16:13 states "Celebrate the Sukkot holiday for yourself for seven days." In this context, only a stolen sukkah is disqualified and a borrowed sukkah is permitted (Sukkah 27b).
Since in both cases, the source for the exclusion is the same phrase, one might ask why the laws pertaining to each are different. Many explain that since, as explained in the commentary to that halachah, the Torah includes a special verse to teach us that a borrowed sukkah is permitted, the scope of the exclusion implied by "for yourself" is limited.
The Shulchan Aruch HaRav 637:3 explains that since the person owning the sukkah grants his colleague the use of it, the borrowed sukkah can be considered "as his own." Since a person has to treat a sukkah as his permanent dwelling for the seven days of the holiday, it follows that the sukkah was lent for that purpose. Thus, while a person is using it, he may consider it "as his own," i.e., just like his own dwelling. See Likkutei Sichot, Vol. 19.
unless the latter gives it to him as a present. - Though there are certain restrictions against the transfer of property on a holiday, it is permitted to give a colleague a present (Rambam, Commentary on the Mishnah, Sukkah 3:11).
If [the owner of the lulav] gives it to him as a present on the condition - The use of the Hebrew term על מנת frees one from certain obligations in phrasing the terms of the conditional agreement. (SeeHilchot Zechiyah Umatanah 3:8.)
that he return it, he may fulfill his obligation with it and return it -There are authorities who require that the owner specifically state that he is giving the lulav to his colleague on the condition that the latter return it. However, the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 658:5) states that even if the owner gives a colleague a lulav without making such a statement, it is assumed that the lulav was given subject to this condition.
for a present given on condition that it be returned is considered a present. - See Hilchot Zechiyah Umatanah 3:9.
If he does not return it, he does not fulfill his obligation, because it is as though it were stolen. - i.e., by failing to fulfill the condition under which the present was given, the recipient nullifies the legal transfer of ownership. Thus, although he was in physical possession of the article, it did not belong to him. Hence, it is considered to be stolen and, thus, not eligible to be used for the mitzvah (Sukkah, ibid.).
[On the first day,] - before all the adults who desire to use it have fulfilled the mitzvah (Shulchan Aruch, ibid. 6)
a lulav should not be given to a minor - The definition of the term "minor" in this context has been the subject of debate among the Rabbis. From the Rambam's phraseology, it appears that he includes all minors in this category. However, Rabbenu Nissim writes that a child of six or seven can transfer property and, hence, his return of the lulav is valid.
Support for Rabbenu Nissim's position is brought from the Jerusalem Talmud (Sukkah 3:10), which relates that Rav Nachman bar Ya'akov gave his etrog as a present to his son and told him: "When you take possession of it and fulfill the mitzvah, return it to me." Nevertheless, the passage does not serve as conclusive proof, because the possibility exists that his son had already reached majority. The Shulchan Aruch(ibid. 6) follows the Rambam's view.
since, according to Torah law, a minor can acquire articles - which are given to him by others who consciously desire that the minor acquire the property, in contrast to ownerless articles, which he cannot acquire according to Torah law (Maggid Mishneh, Hilchot Zechiyah Umatanah4:7).
but cannot transfer them to others. - The transfer of the ownership of an article requires a conscious decision. Torah law maintains that a child lacks intellectual maturity (דעת), and thus is incapable of making such a decision.
Thus, [the minor's] return of the article is not considered to be a return [from a legal perspective]. - i.e., although he has physically returned the article, the child still remains the legal owner.
The Machaneh Ephraim (Hilchot Meshichah 2) notes that according to Rabbinic law, a child can transfer property that he owns to another. Thus, the Rambam's statements seem to imply that any of the four species that are acquired only according to Rabbinic law may not be used for this mitzvah.
A very practical point can be derived from this concept. According to Torah law, property that is purchased changes ownership only after it has been paid for. The completion of a transaction when the property are taken by the purchaser (meshichah) is a Rabbinic institution. Accordingly, if a person purchased a lulav and etrog on the condition that he pay for it after the holiday - even though the seller willingly consented - the purchaser has only acquired the lulav and etrog according to Rabbinic law. Thus, based on this halachah, he would not be able to use it for the mitzvah.
The above applies to the lulav and to each of the other species of the four taken with it. - The verse quoted above includes all the four species, and not only the lulav. Therefore...
If one of them was borrowed, the person does not fulfill his obligation on the first day of the festival.
Halacha 11
When partners purchase a lulav or etrog together, neither is able to fulfill his obligation with it on the first [day of the festival] unless his colleague gives him his portion as a present.
Should brothers purchase etrogim from the funds [of their father's] estate, which they have not divided yet: If one of them takes an etrog with the intent of fulfilling his obligation, [the following rules apply:] If he could eat it without the other brothers objecting, he has fulfilled his obligation. If they would object, he does not fulfill his obligation until they give him their share [in the etrog] as a present.
If one brother bought an etrog and another a quince, or together they bought an etrog, a pomegranate, and a quince from the funds [of their father's] estate, which they have not divided yet, one cannot fulfill one's obligation with the etrog until the others give him their share [in it] as a present, even though they would not object to his [use of it].
Commentary Halacha 11
When partners purchase a lulav or etrog together, neither is -considered to be the owner of the species in its entirety. Therefore, neither is...
able to fulfill his obligation with it on the first [day of the festival] -Bava Batra 137b relates that the requirement of owning a lulav includes not only having a share in it, but rather owning it entirely.
unless his colleague gives him his portion as a present. - The principles mentioned in the previous halachah regarding giving a lulav as a present also apply to giving a share of it as a present.
The Maggid Mishneh mentions a very frequent application of this concept: a lulav and etrog purchased by a synagogue for the use of all of its members. He quotes the Rashba, who explains that since the etrog was purchased with the intent that it be used by each member of that community, implicit in their agreement is that, on the first day, it will belong to each individual entirely at the time he uses it to fulfill the mitzvah.
The Ramah (Orach Chayim 648:7) quotes this statement as halachah. However, the Magen Avraham 648:10 raises questions concerning it and suggests that each member of the community should grant his colleague his share as a present.
Should brothers purchased etrogim from the funds [of their father's] estate, which they have not divided yet: - This is the case mentioned in Bava Batra (ibid.), from which the above principle is derived. In such an instance, the estate is considered to be the mutual property of all the brothers concerned.
If one of them takes an etrog with the intent of fulfilling his obligation, [the following rules apply:] If he could eat it without the other brothers objecting - it is considered to be his own. Hence,...
he has fulfilled his obligation. If they would object - and require that an equal division of the property be made before it was used, he cannot be considered to be the full owner of the etrog. Hence,...
he does not fulfill his obligation until they give him their share [in the etrog] as a present.
The above principles apply only when the funds of the estate were used to purchase a number of etrogim. Since many fruits of the same species were purchased with the money from the estate, it is possible that the other brothers will not object to one brother's taking an etrog for his own use. However, if the money of the estate was used to buy a number of different species of fruit - e.g.,...
If one brother bought an etrog and another a quince, or together they bought an etrog, a pomegranate, and a quince from the funds [of their father's] estate, which they have not divided yet - we assume that the brothers would desire to have the property formally divided before using it. Hence, they are all considered to be mutual owners of the fruit. Thus,...
one cannot fulfill one's obligation with the etrog until the others give him their share [in it] as a present, even though they would not object to his [use of it].
Halacha 12
Even though it is a mitzvah to rejoice on all the festivals, there was an additional celebration in the Temple on the festival of Sukkot, as [Leviticus 23:40] commands: "And you shall rejoice before God, your Lord, for seven days."
What was done? On the eve of the first day of the festival, they would set up a place in the Temple where women [could watch] from above, and men from below, so they would not intermingle with each other.
The celebration would begin on the night after the first day of the festival. Similarly, on each day of Chol Hamo'ed, after offering the daily afternoon sacrifice, they would begin to celebrate for the rest of the day and throughout the night.
Commentary Halacha 12
Even though it is a mitzvah to rejoice on all the festivals - asDeuteronomy 16:14 teaches: "And you shall rejoice on your festivals." Though that verse is mentioned with regard to Sukkot, Deuteronomy 16:11 states with regard to Shavuot: "and you shall rejoice before God," and Rosh Hashanah 4b explains that an analogy is established to include Pesach as well.
there was an additional celebration in the Temple on the festival of Sukkot - The Rambam's words present a question: The Mishnah (Sukkah 5:1) refers to this celebration as Simchat Beit Hasho'evah, connecting it with the drawing of water for the water libation. (See Hilchot T'midim Umusafim 10:6-10.) Indeed, the Talmud (Sukkah 50b; see also the Rambam's commentary on the above-mentioned Mishnah) emphasizes that connection, quoting Isaiah 12:3: "And you shall draw water with happiness." However, here, the Rambam makes no mention of that water at all!
We are forced to say that the Rambam views the verse from Isaiah as a mere asmachtah (an allusion from the Bible with which our Sages connected a verse to an independent concept) and that the celebration came about because of the unique nature of the Sukkot festival. Though this celebration was associated with the water libation, the latter is not the source for the practice. Indeed, the choice of the name Simchat Beit HaSho'evah (the celebration of the house of drawing the water), and notSimchat Hasho'evah (the celebration of the drawing of the water) allows for such an interpretation. (Likkutei Sichot, Vol. XVII).
as [Leviticus 23:40] commands: "And you shall rejoice
before God, your Lord - i.e., in the Temple
for seven days." - Although this verse is used to derive the requirement of taking the lulav in Jerusalem for each of the seven days of the festival (Chapter 7, Halachah 13), its simple meaning remains.
Nevertheless, this charge is not considered to be an independent commandment, but rather an extension (and an intensification) of the mitzvah of celebrating on the festivals. Thus, in Sefer Hamitzvot (Positive Commandment 54), the Rambam describes that mitzvah and explains that it includes "to celebrate with musical instruments and to dance in the Temple....This is Simchat Beit Hasho'evah."
This explanation resolves another question: Mo'ed Kattan 8b teaches that one celebration should not be interposed upon another. For this reason, weddings are not held during the festivals so that the wedding celebrations should not clash with those of the festival.
Thus, were one to consider the celebration of Simchat Beit Hasho'evahas associated with the water offering, one might ask why the Sages instituted such a celebration which might appear to overshadow the celebration of the festival itself. However, the above explanation resolves this difficulty as well, for as stated above, the Simchat Beit Hasho'evahcelebration is an extension of the festival celebrations and not an independent matter. (See Likkutei Sichot, ibid.)
What was done? On the eve of the first day of the festival - Two reasons are given why the courtyard was not set up during the festival itself:
a) It involved construction, which is forbidden on Chol Hamo'ed (Knesset Hagedolah)
b) Preparing the courtyard before the festival would allow the celebrations to begin immediately after the departure of the festival (Kinat Eliyahu).
they would set up a place in the Temple - in the open courtyard before the entrance to the Temple courtyard proper. This was called Ezrat Nashim - the women's courtyard - because in contrast to the Temple courtyard, women were allowed to enter the Ezrat Nashim even when they were not offering sacrifices. The Rambam describes the Ezrat Nashim in Hilchot Beit Habechirah 5:7.
where women [could watch] from above, and men from below, so they would not intermingle with each other. - Originally, the men and the women would stand in separate sections on the same level. However, the Sages feared that, particularly during a time of celebration, such closeness might lead to frivolous interaction between the sexes, and decided to have a balcony constructed for the women (Sukkah 51b).
The celebration would begin on the night after the first day of the festival. - Since, as explained in the following halachah, the celebration was not held on the first night of the festival.
Similarly, on each day of Chol Hamo'ed, after offering the daily afternoon sacrifice, they would begin to celebrate for the rest of the day and throughout the night. - Sukkah 53a quotes Rabbi Yehoshua ben Chananyah as saying: "While we were celebrating at Simchat Beit Hasho'evah, our eyes saw no sleep."
Halacha 13
What was the nature of this celebration? The flute would be sounded and songs played on the harp, lute, and cymbals. [In addition,] each person would play on the instrument which he knew. Those who could sing, would sing. They would dance and clap their hands, letting loose and whistling, each individual in the manner which he knew. Words of song and praise were recited.
This celebration does not supersede either the Sabbath or the festival [prohibitions].
Commentary Halacha 13
What was the nature of this celebration? - The Mishnah (Sukkah 5:1-2) states:
Whoever has not seen Simchat Beit Hasho'evah has never seen rejoicing in his life!...There were golden candelabras....There was not a courtyard in Jerusalem that was not illuminated with the light of Beit Hasho'evah.The pious and men of stature would dance before them with torches of fire in their hands and recite songs of praise. The Levites would play the harps, lutes, cymbals, and all other types of instruments on the steps...leading down from the Israelites' courtyard.
The flute would be sounded - Indeed, from the Mishnah (Sukkah 5:1), which states: "The flute, for five or six days; this was the flute of Beit Hasho'evah," it appears that this was the major element of the celebration.
and songs played on the harp, lute, and cymbals. [In addition,] each person would play on the instrument which he knew. Those who could sing, would sing. - See the quote from the Mishnah above.
They would dance and clap their hands, letting loose and whistling, each individual in the manner which he knew. Words of song and praise were recited. - Note the following halachah and commentary.
This celebration does not supersede either the Sabbath or the festival [prohibitions]. - Since, as explained above, the celebration involved musical instruments, it would not be held on the first night of the festival (or on the Sabbath), when playing such instruments is forbidden (Hilchot Shabbat 23:4).
The celebration is an extension of a Torah commandment, while the above prohibition is only Rabbinic in nature. Furthermore, it was held in the Temple, where Rabbinic prohibitions of this nature were usually suspended (אין שבות במקדש, Pesachim 65a). Nevertheless, since there is no specific Torah obligation to celebrate in this manner, the celebrations were suspended because of the Rabbinic prohibition (Likkutei Sichot, ibid.).
Halacha 14
It is a great mitzvah to maximize this celebration. The common people and anyone who desired would not perform [in these celebrations]; only the greatest of Israel's wise men: the Rashei Yeshivot, the members of the high court, the pious, the elders, and the men of stature. They were those who would dance, clap their hands, sing, and rejoice in the Temple on the days of the festival of Sukkot. However, the entire people - the men and the women - would come to see and hear.
Commentary Halacha 14
It is a great mitzvah to maximize this celebration - for the experience of genuine Torah happiness is a fundamental and necessary element of our service of God, as explained in the following halachah.
The common people and anyone who desired would not perform [in these celebrations] - Though they would attend, as mentioned in the final clause of the halachah
only the greatest of Israel's wise men: the Rashei Yeshivot, the members of the high court, the pious, the elders, and the men of stature. - for it was only their celebration that could inspire the people with spiritual feeling.
They were those who would dance, clap their hands, sing, and rejoice in the Temple on the days of the festival of Sukkot. - Sukkah53a relates how Hillel the Elder would rejoice at Simchat Beit Hasho'evah. Other Sages would also participate. For example, Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel would juggle eight torches of fire and bow down so low he could kiss the ground. The Jerusalem Talmud (Sukkah 5:3) relates how Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzedek would perform unique feats of jumping.
However, the entire people - the men and the women - would come to see and hear - deriving joy from this passive participation.
Halacha 15
The happiness with which a person should rejoice in the fulfillment of the mitzvot and the love of God who commanded them is a great service. Whoever holds himself back from this rejoicing is worthy of retribution, as [Deuteronomy 28:47] states: "...because you did not serve God, your Lord, with happiness and a glad heart."
Whoever holds himself proud, giving himself honor, and acts haughtily in such situations is a sinner and a fool. Concerning this, Solomon warned [Proverbs 28:10]: "Do not seek glory before the King."
[In contrast,] anyone who lowers himself and thinks lightly of his person in these situations is [truly] a great person, worthy of honor, who serves God out of love. Thus, David, King of Israel, declared [II Samuel 6:22]: "I will hold myself even more lightly esteemed than this and be humble in my eyes," because there is no greatness or honor other than celebrating before God, as [II Samuel 6:16] states: "King David was dancing wildly and whistling before God."
Commentary Halacha 15
, the Rambam derives a fundamental principle in the service of God.
The happiness with which a person should rejoice in the fulfillment of the mitzvot and the love of God who commanded them is a great service. - By mentioning this concept at the conclusion - but as part - of the these halachot, the Rambam emphasizes how the celebration of the festivals is not just an isolated experience, but rather is intended to influence the totality of our service of God. The rejoicing of the festival of Sukkot enables us to appreciate true happiness in all aspects of our Torah service.
Whoever holds himself back from this rejoicing is worthy of retribution, as [Deuteronomy 28:47] states: "...because you did not serve God, your Lord, with happiness and a glad heart." - This verse comes after the full description of the curses and retribution which God will visit upon the Jewish people for their sins. From the Rambam's statements, it appears that it is the lack of happiness in the service of God, and not the sins themselves, which brought about this punishment.
The Ari, Rabbi Yitzchak Luria, explains that even though the punishment comes for the sins, had the Jewish people served God with true joy and happiness, that happiness would have caused Him to overlook those transgressions, regardless of how serious they were. In contrast, a lack of happiness in the performance of the mitzvot demonstrates a deficiency in the person's awareness of the connection to God established thereby.
Whoever holds himself proud, giving himself honor, and acts haughtily in such situations is a sinner and a fool - for he is concerned with himself, rather than with God.
Concerning this, Solomon warned [Proverbs 28:10]: "Do not seek glory before the King." - i.e., God, in whose presence we are at every moment.
[In contrast,] anyone who lowers himself and thinks lightly of his person in these situations - transcending his self-consciousness and committing himself to God totally, without any restrictions
is [truly] a great person, worthy of honor - his ability to open himself up to God allows him to serve as a medium for the expression of His greatness, and thus, his own personal prestige rises, because, as our Sages commented: "A king's servant is like a king."
who serves God out of love. - See Hilchot Teshuvah, Chapter 10.
Thus, David, King of Israel - The mention of David's position further emphasizes the concept explained. Alternatively, a king has a connection to each of his subjects. Thus, mentioning the example of the king of Israel emphasizes how each Jew has a potential to achieve this rung of service.
declared [II Samuel 6:22]: "I will hold myself even more lightly esteemed than this and be humble in my eyes," because there is no greatness or honor other than celebrating before God, as [II Samuel 6:16] states: "King David was dancing wildly and whistling before God." - When Michal, Saul's daughter, witnessed David's recklessness and total lack of inhibitions, she reproved him for conduct unbefitting a king. David answered her sharply, explaining that it is precisely this ability to give oneself totally over to Godliness which characterizes a Jewish monarch and makes him fit to lead the people in the service of God.
Though the Rambam stresses how an approach of humility and happiness befits people of honor - as is obvious from the nature of the Sages' celebration of Simchat Beit Hasho'evah - these ideas also apply to every Jew. When an individual is conscious of God's constant presence, he will naturally be infused with these two emotions. He will feel his own smallness in God's presence, yet he will also feel real joy at the knowledge that God is with him at every moment, and that through his service of Torah and mitzvot, he can develop a greater connection with Him.
May our service of God with joy hasten the time when "crowned with eternal joy" (Isaiah 35:10), we will be able to "rejoice before God, your Lord, for seven days," in the Messianic Temple. May we merit it, speedily, in our days.
---------------------
Hayom Yom:
• English Text | Video Class• Friday, Shevat 5, 5776 · 15 January 2016
"Today's Day"
Monday Sh'vat 5 5703
Torah lessons: Chumash: Bo, Sheini with Rashi.
Tehillim: 29-34.
Tanya: And this constitutes (p. 73)...The "Ramaz" thereon). (p. 73).
One must recite words of Torah copiously, saying Tehillim or verbally reviewing Mishna whenever and wherever possible, in order to bolster the existence of Creation, to be saved from chibut hakever1 and kaf hakela,1 and to merit all the highest revelations.
FOOTNOTES
1. Processes of purgatory undergone by the soul after death; see Tanya; Ch. 8. See Tevet 7
Hayom Yom:
• English Text | Video Class• Friday, Shevat 5, 5776 · 15 January 2016
"Today's Day"
Monday Sh'vat 5 5703
Torah lessons: Chumash: Bo, Sheini with Rashi.
Tehillim: 29-34.
Tanya: And this constitutes (p. 73)...The "Ramaz" thereon). (p. 73).
One must recite words of Torah copiously, saying Tehillim or verbally reviewing Mishna whenever and wherever possible, in order to bolster the existence of Creation, to be saved from chibut hakever1 and kaf hakela,1 and to merit all the highest revelations.
FOOTNOTES
1. Processes of purgatory undergone by the soul after death; see Tanya; Ch. 8. See Tevet 7
---------------------• Daily Thought:
Rebuke
By the time Moses returned to the scene, his people had hit an all-time low. They worshipped idols, spoke slanderously of each other, and had wandered very far from the path of their forefathers. Perhaps he should have told them off, saying, “Repent, sinners, lest you perish altogether!”
But he didn’t. Instead, he told them how G‑d cared for them and felt their suffering, how He would bring about miracles, freedom and a wondrous future out of His love for them.
As for rebuke, Moses saved that for G‑d. “Why have You mistreated Your people?!” he demanded.
If you don’t like the other guy’s lifestyle, do him a favor, lend him a hand. Once you’ve brought a few miracles into his life, then you can urge him to chuck his bad habits.
---------------------
No comments:
Post a Comment