Orthodox Union
www.ou.org
Sukkot
Sukkot
Sukkot is a holiday rich in tradition and meaning. From the holding of the Lulav and etrog to the sitting in a Sukkah, the holiday is filled with symbolism to express our relationship to G-d.
Sukkot comes just five short days following Yom Kippur. The timing is not accidental. Only after we have reached a new level of purity and atonement on Yom Kippur, can we then be truly joyous on Sukkot. Indeed, there is a special Mitzvah of Simcha, happiness, on Sukkot.
Sukkot commemorates how protective "Clouds of Glory" surrounded the Jewish people after leaving Egypt during the forty years of wandering in the desert. It also commemorates how the Jews lived in temporary dwellings during that same time. So too we leave the safety and security of our houses and put ourselves under the direct protection of G-d Almighty. His protection, in the final analysis, is the only one that matters
In Sukkot you shall dwell seven days, every citizen in Israel they shall dwell in Sukkot, in order that your generations shall know, that in Sukkot did I cause the children of Israel to dwell, when I brought them forth from the land of Egypt.. (Leviticus Chapter 23)
The Mitzvah of Sukkah
Eating meals, sleeping and spending time in the Sukkah is a unique religious experience. Some have the custom of decorating the Sukkah with fancy decorations such as fruits or New Year’s cards while others prefer to preserve its unadorned simplicity.
The Sukkah is the only Mitzvah in which we are completely surrounded by the Mitzvah itself; enveloped, as it were, in the divine presence.
Man Inspecting Etrog
The Mitzvah of Lulav and Etrog
The other well-known mitzvah which pertains to Sukkot is the mitzvah of taking a lulav and etrog. There are actually 4 elements involved in this mitzvah and all must be present to properly fulfill it. The four elements are etrog, lulav, (palm branch), hadas (avot tree branch), aravah (willows of the brook). A bracha is said on the four species everyday of Sukkot.
A Time of Hope For Universal Peace
When the Jewish people rejoice on Sukkot, our hearts go out to the whole entire world. That means that ultimately, when G-d brings peace to the earth it will be for all mankind. In those days of the when the Holy Temple stood in Jerusalem, the Sukkot Festival offerings included seventy oxen, corresponding to the seventy nations, in prayer for peace and harmony among all the nations of the world.
Other mitzvot on Sukkot include the libation of water on the Alter (in Temple Times), the beating of the Aravah on Hoshana Rabah; and a specific mitzvah to rejoice.
Sukkah - The Obligation
In the Torah, it is written, "But on the fifteenth day of the Seventh Month, when you harvest the produce of the Land, celebrate the Holiday of Hashem for seven days... You shall stay in "Sukkot" for seven days; every resident of Israel shall stay in "Sukkot." In order that your generations shall know that I housed the Children of Israel in "Sukkot" when I took them out of the Land of Egypt." (Vayikra 39: 42-43)
Our Sages have interpreted the expression "stay in" to mean "stay in your Sukkah, temporarily, in the manner that you live in your permanent homes."
How should this be done?
Eat your meals in the Sukkah, study Torah in the Sukkah, entertain your guests in the Sukkah, relax in the Sukkah and, very importantly, unless for some reason you find it very uncomfortable, sleep in the Sukkah.
What type of meal is one obligated to eat in the Sukkah?
Answering the question from the reverse side, a person is not supposed to eat an "achilat keva," a "substantial meal," outside of the Sukkah.
What is the definition of a "Seudat Keva?"
A "Seudat Keva" is a "regular meal including bread" or some "significant other" type of eating, such as pasta or mini-pizza, chicken or meat, as opposed to a fruit or juice snack, a cup of coffee, soda, Snapple [unless that's considered more significant since it's made of "the best stuff on earth"] or water.
Others are careful not to eat anything outside of the Sukkah.
Man Inspecting Lulavim
Photo by David Tuttle Cohen
What blessing should be made before eating in the Sukkah?
The following blessing should be made before eating in the Sukkah:
"Blessed are You, O L-rd our G-d Who made us holy by Obligating us to perform His Commandments, and Commanded us to Stay In the Sukkah!"
First, the "Birchat HaNehenin," is recited; afterwards, the Sukkah-related Berachah. The Birchat HaNehenin is the blessing made before partaking of an item in G-d's world, such as a tuna-fish sandwich (in this case, the blessing is "…HaMotzi Lechem min HaAretz," "…(that G-d is the One)… Who causes "bread" to be produced from the ground." (I sometimes think that if G-d had only created the tuna-fish for the enjoyment of Man, it would have been enough!))
When is the Obligation Strongest?
The obligation to be in the Sukkah on the first two nights of the Holiday is the strongest (in Israel, it is only the first night). The practical difference between the "strong" obligation and the "weaker" obligation is when it is raining. In general one applies the principle "One who is suffering is not obligated to eat in the Sukkah."
However, on the first night, one must make a great effort to make Kiddush in the Sukkah and to wash "Netilat Yadayim," the washing of the hands before the eating of a minimal amount from the "Challah." "Challah" is the special "bread" baked for Shabbat and the Holidays. The amount to be eaten is the size of an egg. Only thereafter may one retreat to the house, to complete the meal!
How Should One Feel in Such a Case?
Interestingly, the Talmud discusses the above question, even though one might be tempted to dismiss it with "What do you mean, it just rained - that's all!" Apparently, the Talmud is of the opinion that the relationship between G-d and the Jewish People should be so close that at a time when in order to fulfill a Command of the Torah, it is necessary for it not to rain, then we could expect that Hashem, strange though it may seem, would not let it rain!
In any case, the answer given in the Talmud to the above question is that a person should feel like a servant who has poured a cup of wine for his master, and his master threw it in his face!
Other Times…
Other times than the first night of Sukkot, when it is raining moderately, enough to cause drops of water to fall from the "Sechach" into one's food, or if it is VERY cold, or VERY hot, or if stinging insects have set up residence in the Sukkah, the obligation to eat in the Sukkah is cancelled. In fact, if one remains in the Sukkah while suffering, it is not like a situation which one would allow to exist in his own house and, since that is the basic measure of whether something should be done in the Sukkah, rather than being considered praiseworthy, that person is considered foolish.
Southern Hospitality
This is a story about Jews who lived in the "Old South," in the United States, in the early part of the twentieth century, amongst non-Jews who, oddly enough, didn't appreciate their presence. One night in early October, some members of the Town Council: Hobbs, Thomson and Wilson, the Butcher, Baker and Undertaker, noticed that the Jews were putting up a structure in the back of their synagogue.
Wilson, the Undertaker, spoke up, "These boys have their nerve. First of all, we let 'em live with us. An' we get mighty little business ourselves from the bunch of 'em. They can't jes build whenever they wanto. I say, 'Let's haul 'em into court. We'll see how long their buildin' stands!"
The Rabbi and the President were brought before the Court of Judge Lawton, not himself a great friend of the Jews. The President couldn't think of anything to say. But the Rabbi, with a twinkle in his eye, said, "Judge, we realize we made a mistake. Just give us ten days, then send over the Town Inspector, and the new building will be gone."
The Judge, not knowing what to believe, said, "Alright, Rabbi, I'll do what you said. But if my inspector tells me that you've still got something new over there, I'm going to haul you and your President in handcuffs into jail!"
Of course, it was "Sukkot," and the "Sukkah," which was the new building, wasn't needed for even ten days. So that, when the inspector arrived with two sets of handcuffs at the ready, he was dumbfounded, and could not understand what he was not seeing, and had to return to the Judge with his disappointing report.
The point of the story is somewhat humorous, in that it shows how a Jewish leader outwitted the enemies of his community. But it is also somewhat sad, because "Sukkot" is specifically That Holiday in which the Jewish People reach out to the world, to include them in our prayers and in our rejoicing.
It is also poignant, in that it illustrates one of the themes of Sukkot, paradoxical against the basic nature of the Holiday as the "Time of our Rejoicing." That theme is captured by "Megilat Kohelet," which is read on Shabbat "Chol HaMoed Sukkot," the Shabbat of the Intermediate Days of "Sukkot." It is the theme of the temporary-ness of life, that Man has really such a short time to accomplish his lofty goals, but also that if he tries, Hashem will help him.
The Essence of the "Sukkah"
The essence of a "Sukkah" is that it be a "temporary" structure, because that conveys the idea of our dependence on G-d's constant protection. The basic element of the Sukkah is the covering, the "Sechach," which protects us from the elements (rain, snow (it's happened on several occasions!)). The walls are of less importance, from the point of view of Jewish Law (perhaps not from the point of view of those sitting inside), as long as the structure is capable of standing in an "average" wind.
The Sukkah doesn't have to be as strong as Fort Knox, and indeed probably should not be so strong, because that would violate the spirit of "temporary"-ness which is the essence of the Sukkah.
About the “Sechach,” the Covering
Of What Materials May it be Made?
The "Sechach" must be made from some product of the earth, that is no longer attached to the earth. Therefore,
Wood of all kinds, including bamboo poles, leafy branches, branches of pine trees (very aromatic, but pine needles tend to wind up in one's soup), are all good.
However, the actual branches and leaves of a living tree, still attached to the ground, are not acceptable. It might be interesting as a "treehouse," but it doesn't make it as a Sukkah.
"Sechach" cannot be made from utensils; even wooden utensils, such as spoons and forks.
Metal and plastic and glass, in any form, utensil or not, are invalid as "sechach." Thus, strips of aluminum foil, thin stained glass rods, and plastic straws or mats, are all nono's.
Maximum and Minimum Heights
An "amah" is a length somewhere between eighteen inches and two feet. The maximum height of a Sukkah; that is, of its "Sechach" above the floor, is twenty "amot;" that is, a height somewhere between thirty and forty feet. (Mishnah 1 in Chapter 1 of Masechet Sukkah)
The minimum height of a Sukkah is ten "tefachim," where the "tefach," derived from a measure of the fist, is between 8 and 9.6 centimeters, or about 3.2 - 3.8 inches. The height is therefore between 32 and 38 inches, approximately, one yard, or meter. (Sukkah 1:1)
How Thick? Lets Light Pass? Blocks Light?
The thickness of the "Sechach" must be such that in the daytime it provides more shade than it allows sunlight to pass through.
On the other hand, it cannot be so thick that it would completely obscure the brightest stars at night.
Man Carrying Sechach
Photo by David Tuttle Cohen
"Active" and "Passive" Covering
There is a verse in the Torah from which is derived the requirement that the "Sechach" should be applied "actively" and not "passively." This principle is called "Ta'Aseh v'lo Min he'Asuy." Using other words, positive, intentional action on the part of the one who lays the "Sechach" is required, rather than the passive allowing of the arrival of the "Sechach" to occur.
This principle, the requirement of positive action, rather than passive involvement, has application in various areas of the Torah. Here, we will suffice with two examples of its application in the World of the "Sukkah:"
1. One who hollows out space within a large haystack, hoping to use the hay on top of the space as "Sechach," has not succeeded in creating a valid Sukkah, because that hay was not placed there for the purpose of "Sechach," but for some other hay-related purpose. (Of course, this is not to imply that hay is not valid as "Sechach" (watch that double negative!); it certainly is valid "Sechach" when it is placed properly.)
2. One may not use bundles of hay or some other valid "Sechach"-material as "Sechach." You ask, "Why not?" The answer given by the Talmud, perhaps somewhat more relevant in those times, or perhaps in the modern State of Israel, where there are many Jewish farmers, is that sometimes a farmer will put a bundle of hay on top of the Sukkah for the sole purpose of drying it in preparation for some purpose unrelated to "Sechach." Only afterwards will he decide to use those bundles as "Sechach!" But we would then be caught again in the trap of passive placement rather that active covering!
And because of that fear of someone initially putting up bundles to dry, and later deciding to use them as "Sechach," the Sages also said that even if the builder of the Sukkah wanted from the beginning to use the bundles as "Sechach," he is not permitted to do so.
About the Walls
The Average-Wind Principle
As mentioned above, any material is valid for wall construction, with the only requirement being that the structure be capable of withstanding an "average" wind, that blows in that location (the requirements for a Sukkah on the top of Mt. Washington, where the highest recorded wind velocity (231 MPH) was measured, would probably be different from the requirements in an area of gentle wind).
A Sukkot Fairy Tale
There is a story about three little pigs (pardon the expression) who decided that they were old enough to make their own way in the world, and so left their home. Each of them built a "house" (it would be difficult to say that the pigs made Sukkot) of different materials. Little Pig Number 1 built his out of straw, Little Pig Number 2 built his out of wood, and Little Pig Number 3 built his out of bricks.
A hungry wolf, not a friend of the little pigs, came to visit each. He attempted to blow their houses down (let's assume that he started with the force of an "average" wind, although in reality (which is very important in a fairy tale)) it was probably stronger.
The wolf succeeded immediately in blowing down the house of Little Pig Number 1, whose fate is unknown, except for the fact that the smell of pork chops (again, pardon the expression) was noticed in the neighborhood where Number 1's house had been.
When he went to the house of Little Pig Number 2, the wolf's initial attempts to blow the house down were unsuccessful. However, when he raised the intensity of his blowing to that of a strong wind, the house eventually collapsed, and Little Pig Number 2 met a similar fate as had Number 1.
However, when he went to Little Pig Number 3's house, which had been made of strong brick, the wolf huffed and he puffed, and he puffed and he huffed, until he was blowing as hard as a moderate-force hurricane, but the house withstood all his efforts.
Thus, we see that had the little pigs in fact been interested in Sukkah-building, Little Pig Number 1 would have failed miserably, even as his house did when put to the test by the wolf. Little Pig Number 2 probably had made an adequate Sukkah because it protected him against the initial blowing efforts by the wolf although, much to his ultimate displeasure, it could not protect him when the wolf raised the intensity of his blowing above the level of an "average" wind. Little Pig Number 3, although safe from the attack of the wolf, could probably have used his house as a bomb-shelter, and thus had gone way beyond the "temporary"-ness required of a Sukkah.
Man Inspecting Hadasim
Photo by David Tuttle Cohen
Walls Which Don't Quite Make It
If, say, the canvas walls of one's Sukkah were improperly designed, or done in this manner as an example of modern "Sukkah" architecture, but in any case don't quite reach the floor, what is the "shiur," or measure for validity, that is required?
According to the Sages, if the walls are within 3 "tefachim" of the ground, the Sukkah is acceptable. In centimeters, this measure is approximately 24 - 29 cm., about one foot. The explanation of this measurement is that it corresponds to the height under which a goat could run in and out, "adding" to the calm and peacefulness of the Holiday meals, and "rest periods."
What about the Overall Size of the "Sukkah"?
The overall size of any object, or thing, is given by the combination of the height and the area. For example, a city skyscraper and a flagpole might have the same height. But the fact that they have different areas makes the skyscraper much bigger than the flagpole!
The minimum area of a Sukkah is defined in the Talmud to be seven-by-seven "tefachim," or about two feet by two feet. When we combine this with the minimum height, ten "tefachim, or about one yard, we find that the mimimum overall size of a "Sukkah" is just about large enough to accommodate the "head and most of the body of a man, and the "mini" - table from which the man eats," to use the definition of the Talmud. This corresponds to the size of a small refrigerator, or the space needed to accommodate a short, seated adult.
There is no maximum for the overall size of a Sukkah. It could be so large, made so by vast lengths and widths, to accommodate the entire Jewish People, or the population of the world. The Midrash speaks of the Sukkah made for the righteous in the World-to-Come as being made from the skin of the Leviathan, the giant sea-creature. To use a much smaller, but perhaps more familiar example, consider Godzilla.
Ushpizin,” the Royal Guests
The "Ushpizin," The Seven Guests
On Pesach, at the Seder, we express the idea that "In every generation, each person is obligated to see himself as if he were one of the redeemed Jewish slaves." Similarly, on Sukkot, as we sit and enjoy the festive meals, we are privileged to have as our company seven of the greatest leaders of our People. As Eliyahu HaNavi visits each Seder Table on the Night of Pesach, so on each of the Seven Nights of Sukkot, one of these seven is our main guest, while the others of the "Faithful Shepherds" sit with us as well.
The presence of these great guests reminds us of the supreme importance in the Jewish Religion of having guests, specifically poor guests, or those who are less fortunate than us in some way, to share the joy of the festivals with us. For, as the RAMBAM reminds us, any kind of physical enjoyment which is not shared with the poor or less fortunate, is viewed by G-d as alien, and as only the enjoyment of our bellies. Whereas, if it is shared, that same physical celebration is raised to the heights of "Avodat Hashem," Service of the L-rd.
The seven are our three Avot,: Avraham, Yitzchak and Yaakov, our great teacher, Moshe, and his brother, beloved to all of Israel, Aharon HaKohen, Yosef the Righteous, and the "sweet singer of Israel," who also taught us how and when to fight for the Name of G-d, King David. David was also the ancestor of the "Mashiach," the Messiah, hopefully already born, "May he come soon and in our time!"
Each of these seven endured and overcame the difficulties of exile with the protection of Hashem:
Avraham was commanded "Go forth from your homeland, from your birthplace and from the house of your father, to the Land that I will show you." (Bereshit 12:1)
In connection with Yitzchak, we find "And there was a famine in the Land, in addition to the one that occurred in the days of Avraham; and Yitzchak went to Avimelech, King of the Philistines, in Gerar." (Bereshit 26:1)
In connection with Yaakov, we find "Arise, therefore, and go to Aram, the house of Bethuel, your mother's father." (Bereshit 28:2)
Similarly, Yosef was sold as a slave to Egypt. Moshe and Aharon led the Jewish People during their forty year sojourn in the desert. And David fled from his enemies into the Desert of Judea.
In all the above cases, we were taught how to maintain our faith in the Protection of Hashem despite great adversity, which is one of the secrets of the survival of the Jewish People.
In some Sephardic Communities, there is a "minhag" or custom, to prepare a special chair, decorated and dedicated in honor of the main guest of the evening, on each of the Seven Nights of Sukkot.
Decorations of the Sukkah (“Noy Sukkah”)
Our Sages have said, in Masechet Shabbat (133) the following: The verse "This is my G-d and I will give Him Beauty," (Shemot 15:2) may be interpreted in this way …- (The Sages are offering a Midrashic explanation to answer the unasked question, "How can Man give anything to G-d?" Who was the Creator, and therefore Owner, of, literally, everything - and is the quintessential example of the difficulty of giving presents to one who has everything!)
"Make yourself beautiful before Him in your performance of the "Mitzvot," the Commandments: "… a beautiful "Sefer Torah," "Scroll of the Torah;" written for the sake of the Commandment, with beautiful ink, with a beautiful pen, by an expert scribe, and placed in a beautiful covering."
The above principle, of performing the Commandments in a beautiful way applies to all the (248) Positive "Mitzvot," or Commandments of the Torah, but has special application to the "Mitzvot" of Sukkot, where "beauty" is not just a quality describing the Commandment, but is an essential part of the Commandment. When the Torah describes an "Etrog," a Citron Fruit, as a "Pri Eitz Hadar," (Vayikra 23:40) a "fruit of a tree of beauty," it doesn't mean to say only that the fruit should exhibit the quality of beauty, but that beauty should be part of the essential nature of the "etrog."
Man Inspecting Etrog
Photo by David Tuttle Cohen
To paraphrase Keats, with apologies, "Beauty is the "Etrog; the "Etrog," Beauty."
Keats had written, in "Ode on a Grecian Urn," the following:
"Beauty is Truth; Truth, Beauty
That is all ye know on earth,
And all ye need to know"
(which is somewhat doubtful).
For a Jewish Perspective on "Beauty," see Rabbi J. Schmidman's essay, Beauty and the Etrog.
In any case, this concept applies as well to all the "Mitzvot" of Sukkot, with lesser emphasis, perhaps, to the other members of the "four species," the four members of the fruit and plant "Kingdoms," which are used together as a "Mitzvah," but to the Sukkah, itself, as well.
That is why we go to such effort to beautify our Sukkot; to hang pleasant fruit and vegetables, real or imitation, fancy decorative hangings, pictures on the walls of the Land of Israel, of scenes from Jewish History, especially of Times of the Temple, verses from the Bible, portraits of great Jewish Leaders from ancient and less ancient times. It is why we use our best dishes and silverware, glasses and Kiddush Cups; to live in the "Sukkah," on a temporary basis, in the same manner as we live in our "permanent and secure" homes all year long.
Placement of the Sukkah
1. Note that the twenty "amot" mentioned above as the maximum height of the Sukkah are measured from the surface on which the Sukkah stands, not necessarily from the ground. Thus, if for example Sukkot are built on top of a city skyscraper or the Shalom Tower in Tel Aviv, and the height of the Sukkah itself is, say, ten "amot." The Sukkot are perfectly "kosher," or valid, and the heights of those two skyscrapers are temporarily augmented by the amount of ten "amot" for the duration of Sukkot.
2. One can make a valid Sukkah on the top of a wagon in motion, or on the top deck of a ship at sail; or for that matter, on the back of a flatbed truck traveling along a superhighway or the wing of a v--e--r--y s--l--o--w airplane in flight. The above statement is true despite the fact that the Sukkah is in motion with respect to the ground in the case of the wagon, and the ocean in the case of the ship, the highway or the air in the last two cases.
That motion is irrelevant! Why so? Because in all the cases, the Sukkah is at rest with respect to the wagon or the ship or the truck or the wing. That means that the Sukkah is not moving around on the wagon, or on the deck of the ship; it is not skipping around on the back of the truck, or scampering back and forth on the wing. Rather, it is quite still. And from the point of view of the occupants of the Sukkah, it is just as if the Sukkah were at rest in their own backyard!
It is for the same reason that a person inside a plane can walk leisurely along the aisle of a jet plane traveling smoothly through the air at 600 miles per hour. "Not to beat a dead horse," on whose back if it were alive, one could also construct a minimum-size Sukkah, It is because the occupants of the Sukkah as well as the passengers on the jet are traveling at the same speed as the Sukkah or the jet.
3. Speaking of constructing Sukkot on the backs of animals, the Talmud does also address the question of making one on the back of a camel. The conclusion is that the Sukkah would be valid, for the reasons given above, except that one could not climb up into it on the first days of the Holiday, because of a side reason. The Sages enacted a "gezera" against riding on animals on Shabbat and the Holidays, out of concern lest a rider unwittingly break off a branch as he or she rode along an overgrown trail, and that (the breaking of the branch) would be a violation of a "Melacha."
The Lulav and Etrog
And you shall take for you on the first day, the fruit of the tree ‘hadar’ and branches of palm trees, and a bough of the tree avot and willows of the brook, and you shall rejoice before the Hashem, your G-d, seven days. Leviticus Chapter 23.
The mitzvah of taking the four species is for all seven days of Sukkot. Two blessings are said the first day, all netilat lulav and she’hecheeyanu and one bracha, al netilat lulav is said for the other six days. According to Torah law, the lulav is taken for all seven days only in the Holy Temple in Jerusalem when it was standing, and outside the Temple only on the first day of Sukkot. Our sages ordained, however, that we should also take the four species for all seven days as a remembrance of Temple Times.
Boy Inspecting Hadasim
Photo by David Tuttle Cohen
The four species all taken together make up one single mitzvah. If any of the species are missing then you have not fulfilled the mitzvah at all. One lulav, one etrog, two aravot, and three hadasim is taken on Sukkot. The lulav, hadasim and aravot are bound together.
The four species are not taken on Shabbat even when it falls on the first day of Sukkot. The mitzvah applies during the day but not at night.
On the first day of Sukkot, a person must be careful to own the lulav and etrog he is performing the mitzvah with. On the the other six days, ownership is not strictly required.
A person should try to take four species, which are beautiful. Of course, this has to be done for the sake of the mitzvah and in service to G-d; not for the purpose of showing off to the neighbors.
Aspects of the Four Species
"Origin of (the Four) Species"
The Biblical origin is in the Book of Vayikra; specifically, in Parshat Emor, where the Torah commands "And you shall take for yourselves on the First Day the fruit of a beautiful tree, the branches of date palms, branches of the myrtle tree, and branches of the willow tree, and you shall rejoice before Hashem, your G-d, for Seven Days." (Vayikra 23:40)
Symbolism of the Four Species
The Commandment is to take these four species together as a unit, and to shake them together in all directions, at various times on Sukkot.
Man Inspecting Etrog
Photo by David Tuttle Cohen
One possible explanation is that we are taking these four elements from nature, and demonstrating that Hashem rules over nature everywhere and, by fulfilling this Command throughout the generations of our People, also at all times.
Two additional aspects of this "Group of Four" are as follows:
The "Etrog," the Citron, resembles in its shape, the heart, the driving force behind all our actions. The "Lulav," the Palm Branch, resembles the spine, which holds the body together and, without which, we would be unable to move. The "Hadasim," the Myrtle Branches, resemble, in their almond-shape, the eyes, with which we behold G-d's World. And the "Aravot," the Willow Branches, resemble the lips, with which we give expression to our thoughts and feelings.
By holding these four together, we show that a person should devote all of his-or- her strengths and capacities to the Service of Hashem.
The "Etrog" has both a pleasant taste and a pleasant aroma, symbolizing one who possesses both the blessings of knowledge of Torah and of good deeds. The "Lulav," the branch of a tree (the date palm) the fruit of which has good taste but no aroma, symbolizes the person who has Torah knowledge but not good deeds. The "Hadas," the myrtle, which has pleasant aroma only, symbolizes the person who has good deeds but not Torah. And the "Aravah," the willow branch, which has neither pleasant taste nor pleasant aroma, symbolizes the person who has neither Torah nor good deeds.
Holding these four in a tight bond represents the unity that is Hashem's goal for the Jewish People. The bond represents the conversion of a set of separate individuals into a People, which is far greater than any individual in both the Crown of Torah and the Crown of Good Deeds, and is far more deserving than any individual of the blessings of Hashem.
The Stolen (!) Four Species
For each of the Four Species, the Mishnah in Masechet Sukkah compares the stolen article to its dried out and lifeless form, which is absolutely invalid. This is derived from a word in the Torah, and is also very understandable. It is derived from the word "yourselves" in the expression "And you shall take for yourselves the fruit of a beautiful tree, …," implying that one's ownership is required."
But the explanation is to be found in the Talmud. The reason that the stolen "Lulav," for example, cannot be used as part of the fulfillment of a Divine Command, is that it would then be a "Command performed By Means of a Sin," which is self-contradictory! It is obvious that an Act would not be pleasing to Hashem, if it comes at the price of violation of one of His Own Commands.
Seventy Oxen
After the regular daily offering in the Temple, the Additional Offerings were brought. Each day there was a different number of these Additional Offerings were to be brought. All together seventy oxen were to be brought in the course of the entire festival. These seventy oxen corresponded to the seventy original nations of the world who descended from the sons of Noah, and who were the ancestors of all the nations till this day. Israel brought these sacrifices as atonement for the nations of the world and in prayer for their well being as well as for universal peace and harmony between them.
Rabbi Yehoshua Ben Levi said, "If the nations of the world had known the value of the Temple for them, they would have surrounded it with fortresses in order to protect it. For it was greater value for them than for Israel….
The Water Libations
Every sacrifice brought in the Temple was accompanied by a flour offering and the pouring of a prescribed measure of wine on the altar. During the seven days of the Festival of Sukkot a libation of water was added to that of wine together with each of the daily morning offerings. This water libation is not explicitly mentioned in Torah but it is a law revealed to Moshe on Sinai to which the Sages have found allusions in the Torah.
The Water Libation was performed with intense joy. Accompanying the Water Libation were festivities entitled Simchas Beis HaShoavah, or happiness of the house of the water-drawing) refering to the waters, which were drawn from the pool of Shiloach (which is referred to as the waters of salvation). The festivities were held in the Ezrat Nashim, which was the courtyard of the outer Temple. Though a relatively small area, miracously, many thousands of happy people were able to crowd in. There was dancing and singing in celebration of the drawing of the water.
Our sages said, "He who has not seen the rejoicing at the Simchas Beis Hashoavah, has never seen rejoicing in his life."
Why was the Water Libation such a happy occasion? It is as if G-d says to Israel, "All your offerings are precious to Me, but this offering of the water which you pour on the altar during the festival is especially precious. Water requires neither planting nor reaping or pressing no purifying. Let it be joined with the wine libation, which requires all sorts of preparations. In my eyes, your wine and water are equal, those that require great effort and those that don’t, so long as you rejoice in me without any mixture of foreign thoughts or ulterior motives." Through the water libation, the Jewish people knew that all their exertion in the service of G-d throughout the year rises to be accepted by him.
Hoshana Rabbah
Hoshana Rabbah is the seventh and last day of Sukkot, which is the day before Shmini Atzeres. Named for the fact that more hoshanot are said on this day than all the previous days of the festival. On Hoshana Rabbah the beating of the aravah, willow branch, is performed. Although Hoshana Rabbah was not accorded any different status by the Torah than the other days of Chol Hamoed, the Jewish people have observe many customs on this day and have invested it with a solemn character. For example, the white parochet, curtain on the ark, in shul remains up until after Hoshana Rabbah.
In the morning services of Hoshanna Rabbah, following Musaf (and some places after hallel) the hoshanot are said as written in the prayerbook, the congregation marches around the bima seven times, after which comes the beating of the aravah, willow branch. The aravahs are beaten against the floor five times. No blessing is recited over the beating of the aravah since it was merely a custom.
Hoshana Rabbah is known as the day of the final sealing of judgment, which began on Rosh Hashannah. During the festival of Sukkot the world is judged for water and for the blessings of the fruit and crops. The seventh day of the festival is the final sealing and since human life depends on water, Hoshanna Rabbah is somewhat similar to Yom Kippur. Hence there are additional prayers and quests for repentance as on Yom Kippur.
Beauty and the Etrog
Every civilization and every philosophical system searches for the meaning of beauty. In classical Western thought, the pursuit of the Beautiful is deemed to be as basic as the quest for the Good and the True. Contemporary culture has been profoundly influenced by this perspective. To this day, the striving for beauty is a dominant and desirable component of an accomplished individual -- an ideal to be devoutly pursued.
At first glance, it would seem that the enshrinement of beauty as a value in and of itself is not a major Jewish priority. The oft quoted phrase, taken in isolation, "hevel ha-yofi, beauty is vanity," seems, on a cursory level, to cast beauty in a negative light.
It seems to me, however, that a compelling argument ought to be made for the vital and central role that beauty occupies in the Jewish worldview. In order to do so, we must show that for Judaism, beauty is something unique and means something entirely different than in all other thought systems.
What, then, is distinct and singular about the Jewish concept of beauty? To answer this, one looks to the Torah to find the sources of the Jewish idea of beauty. Like all abstract theories in Judaism which ultimately find their expression in concrete mitzvot, the idea of beauty, as well, finds a tangible realization in the central mitzvot of the holiday of Sukkot. The Torah requires: "And you shall take unto yourselves on the first day (of Sukkot) a fruit of a beautiful tree -- pri etz hadar." The Talmud (Sukkot 35a) wishes to define what constitutes a beautiful tree by analyzing the Hebrew word for beautiful, hadar. The sages conclude that it is the etrog tree, because the word "hadar" is interpreted to be a fruit which "dwells continuously all year on the tree" [ha-dar, literally, "that which dwells"]. Thus, they understand the word "dar" to mean the opposite of temporary or intermittent residence; rather, it implies permanence, a continuous process through time [similar to the French "duree" or the English "endure"]. The etrog tree fulfils this requirement of constant dwelling, for most other fruits are seasonal, but the etrog grows, blossoms and produces fruit throughout all the seasons: in the heat and the cold, in the wind and in storm -- it stubbornly persists! It endures! And in the Jewish view, that is why it is beautiful.
Beauty, then, in classical Jewish sources, means the indomitable power of life, the determination to live on despite all difficulties, the affirmation of the victory of life over death, the drive for eternity.
In this light, we can understand another striking mitzvah in the Torah. Concerning the obligation to honor the elderly, the Torah states: "Ve'hadarta p'nei zakein," which is usually translated "and honor the face of the old person." The word hadar, however, literally means "beauty", so what the verse is actually telling us is to ascribe beauty to the old face. What is beautiful about an old face? This very idea contradicts the basic attitude of Western civilization which, since the time of the ancient Greeks, has always associated beauty with youth. In the contemporary Western world, the entire cosmetic industry is predicated on making people appear young, if they wish to look beautiful. The attempt is precisely to make the old face seem younger. Yet the Torah ascribes hadar, beauty, to the old face precisely because it expresses the ongoing triumph of a life which endured and persisted throughout the arduous passage of time.
How much determination, courage and will to live do we see in an old face! In this regard, the Talmud (Kiddushin 33a) tells us, "Rabbi Yochanan used to stand up even before aged Aramean heathens saying, 'How many troubles have passed over these.'" The Torah, thus, requires us to see in aging persons, not that they are fading away into oblivion, but to recognize in them the unremitting surge to live, and of the yearning of the immortal soul deep within each individual for eternity.
Therefore, Beauty in the Jewish worldview is not a value to be understood in isolation. It is not an attempt, as in other aesthetic systems, to merely "capture the moment," with its concomitant glorification of youth and the attempt to preserve it for all time. In Judaism, beauty inheres in the basic Jewish historical sensibility: the palpable experience of apprehending the eternal in the flow of passing time.
In a similar vein, the Menorah, which is central in the service of the Holy Temple, and which has become a symbol of the Jewish people itself, is described in the Torah as "ner tamid," an eternal light. The source in the Torah (Exodus 27:20) reads: "And thou (Moses) shall command the children of Israel that they bring unto you pure olive oil beaten for lighting to make a light shine out continuously." The Sages of the midrash point out that the olive -- the beaten olive -- whose oil burns continuously, is the true symbol of Israel. The midrash quotes the verse in Jeremiah (11:16): "The Lord called thy name (Israel) a leafy olive tree, beautiful with goodly fruit," and the midrash asks, why is it the olive tree with which Israel is identified? The answer given is that Israel is uniquely similar in many of its essential characteristics to the fruit of the olive tree. The olive is beaten, pressed, ground down, and then it produces its oil which gives rise to glowing light. So, too, the people of Israel: despite all the oppression, cruelty and exile visited upon them, they are not destroyed; rather, they continue to shine on magnificently, ever brighter. It is significant that in the passage quoted, Jeremiah declares not only the dauntless character of Israel's persistence in the face of every hardship, but defines this quality as being the very source of Israel's beauty -- "leafy olive tree, beautiful with goodly fruit."
In a comparable way, in the revelation to the prophet Zechariah declaring the triumph of the Divine spirit over physical might, he is shown a menorah surrounded by two olive trees. This prophecy, coming after the destruction of the First Temple and on the threshold of the building of the Second Temple, is intended to absolutely affirm that despite defeat and destruction, Israel will continue to flourish and give out ever-greater light. It is quite reasonable, also, to maintain that the requirement of "mehadrin min hamehadrin," to perform the mitzvah of lighting Chanukah lights, commemorating the Menorah of the Temple, in a particularly beautiful way, is an expression not only of the triumph of the life -- especially the spiritual life of the Jewish people over their oppressors -- but the continuous expansion of this light and life force. Hence, the ruling of Beit Hillel ["mosif v'holeich"], that each night an additional light is kindled.
When we complete the study of a tractate of the Talmud, we recite "hadran aloch, we shall return to you." We proclaim that our studies and the knowledge gained will not simply slip into the past, but that we shall continuously go back, revive, rejuvenate and find new meanings in our past learning. The very word hadran, from the root hadar, thus has basically the same meaning as the word hadar, as we now understand it: to continually persist and to be beautiful are identical!
The holiday of Sukkot dramatizes the paradoxical idea that while on the one hand, we are to recognize the temporary and transient nature of human existence on earth by residing in temporary sukkah booths, at the same time, we are to affirm the immortality of life and the eternity of Israel by taking hold of the ever-enduring etrog. The dialectic tension in these contradictory elements establishes the framework of our comprehension and experience of the beautiful. Discovering, affirming and struggling in the face of implacable difficulties, in the face of mutability and death itself, for the realization of the eternal creates the Jewish sense of beauty. The statement "beauty is vain" is to be understood as the charm of the moment; "the woman of valor" in Solomon's Proverbs, on the other hand, is truly beautiful, precisely because of her heroic dedication to the future and the triumph of her immortal ideals. We may paraphrase Keats' famous line, "A thing of beauty is a joy forever": we declare that the joy in struggling and ensuring that there is a forever is a thing of beauty. The ultimate beauty of Israel itself lies in the triumph of its eternity.
Sukkot and the Dedication of the Beit Ha-Mikdash
The haftarah of the second day of Sukkos details the dedication of the Beis Ha-Mikdash (the Temple) by Shlomo Ha-Melech. The haftarah narrates the final preparations for sanctifying the Beis Ha-Mikdash, explaining that the Aron Ha-Kodesh (Holy Ark) was brought by the Kohanim into the Kodesh Ha-Kodoshim (Holy of Holies), after which Hashem's cloud filled the chamber, indicting that the Shechinah (Divine Presence) now dwelled therein. Thereafter, Shlomo explained the original conception and history of the planning of the Beis Ha-Mikdash.
Why do we read this haftarah on Sukkos? It is true that the Beis Ha-Mikdash was dedicated as part of a 14-day assembly which ran through Sukkos; so, too, the Beis Ha-Mikdash is referred to as "Sukkas Dovid" - the Sukkah, or Tabernacle, of David. Still, these connections between Sukkos and the haftarah about the dedication of the Beis Ha-Mikdash are rather coincidental. Is there any deeper relationship between Sukkos and the haftarah?
Sukkos is positioned shortly after Yom Kippur, such that after becoming purified on Yom Kippur, we merit entry to the sukkah, which represents a venue of God's glory. The hoshanah of "E'eroch shu'i" depicts this theme, and it is well-established in halachic and aggadic literature. If we view the relationship of Sukkos and Yom Kippur through this perspective, it becomes clear that Sukkos is a yom tov which needs the spiritual preparation of Yom Kippur in order to have full meaning.
Thus, to answer to our question, the relationship of the haftarah to Sukkos is the theme of preparation. The haftarah details the preparations for Hashem's Presence to rest in the Beis Ha-Mikdash, and - similarly - our experience of Sukkos and entry to the sukkah depend on the spiritual preparation of Yom Kippur.
It must be noted that this preparation for Sukkos is not just practical; rather, it is part of the very essence of Sukkos. Just like the Biblically-mandated sequester of the Kohen Gadol before Yom Kippur is an integral part of the purification process (as it purifies the Kohen Gadol, who is the instrument for public purification on Yom Kippur), so, too, is the preparation provided by Yom Kippur essential to Sukkos. Without it, our observance of Sukkos would be incomplete.
There is a second component of spiritual preparation for Sukkos. One must be mentally prepared for the experience of entry to the sukkah, such that he appreciates its holiness and what it represents. (Some poskim hold that an awareness of the symbolism of the sukkah is critical to fulfilling the mitzvah of dwelling in a sukkah). One cannot instantly appreciate being enveloped by holiness. Experiencing kedushah (holiness) is not something that one can do "al regel achas" - on the spot. When an angel spoke to Shimshon's mother to inform her that she would finally have a baby, instructing her as to his special care (as a nazir), Shimshon's mother knew that the speaker was an angel. However, when Manoach, Shimshon's father, met the same angel, he invited the angel to eat and asked the angel his name, as if the angel were a person. The Tanach relates that Manoach was unaware that the visitor was an angel.
One can be in the Presence of God and not even know it. Sukkos teaches us that one must be prepared to encounter the Divine, for without spiritual preparation, a sukkah is a mere hut; with proper preparation, the sukkah becomes a reflection of the Beis Ha-Mikdash, may it be built again soon.
Get Happy!
Of all the seasons in the Jewish calendar year, Succos is the premier time to GET HAPPY!!
Yes, it’s true that the biblical mitzvah (commandment) of "rejoicing on the festivals" also applies to both Pesach and Shavuos, while the rabbinically ordained holiday of Purim is by no means lacking in heart-lifting and joyous (and often inebriated) celebration.
But there is something more, some extra measure of elation that is associated with the Succos holiday. The Torah hints at this in one of the places where Succos is discussed (Parshas Re’eh, in The Book of Devarim), employing an additional expression of rejoicing…after it has just instructed us to rejoice!
"You shall make the festival of Succos for a seven-day period, when you
gather in from your threshing floor and from your wine cellar. You shall
rejoice on your festival…A seven-day period shall you celebrate to Hashem, your G-d…for Hashem will have blessed you in all your crop and in all your handiwork, and you will be completely [or, exclusively] joyous (ach sameach)." (Deuteronomy: 16, 13-15 ; my emphasis. Translation from Stone Chumash)
Just what is it about Succos that necessitates the Torah to emphasize such an extreme level of joy (simcha)? Not, of course, that I am at all averse to being urged by anybody (and especially the Holy One, Blessed be He) to "get happy," or in this case, to "get really, intensely, and exclusively happy." (My cheerful wife will confirm that dark clouds of grumpiness DO sometimes characterize my weather pattern…so she, for sure, welcomes this divine directive.) For the sake of understanding, however, I must ask the question. What’s going on with all this joy on Succos?
The great Sages and commentators in our tradition have given many answers to this question. We will consider a few of them.
If we look at the verses quoted above, we can immediately discern one reason why Succos is a time of special simcha in the Jewish year. In a traditional agricultural society (which ancient Israel, living on the Holy Land, certainly was), the autumn was the season of the ingathering of the summer crops and fruits—the time of gathering in from the wine cellar and threshing floor. We, therefore, naturally felt joy at the blessings G-d had bestowed on us, in all our crops and our handiwork. What greater natural simcha than to reap, and then store for the winter season ahead, the bounty of G-d’s earth—and His Holy Land?
Now, most of us are probably rather remote from the rhythms of agricultural life. (I admit that the coffee crop is the only one I myself pay much heed to…and Starbuck’s seems always to be pretty well-stocked—Baruch Hashem!) However, the eternal observances of Succos are designed, in part, to help even us
city-dwellers focus our attention (for a week, anyway) on the agricultural blessings G-d so generously bestows. The beautiful mitzvah of the four species (arba’ah minim)—taking in our hands the fruit of the citron tree (esrog), the date-palm branch (lulav), the myrtle leaves (hadassim) and willow-branches (arovos), and waving them in all directions as we honor the One Who rules the whole universe—awakens the mind and soul to the fertility of G-d’s earth. [These four species also give symbolic representation to many important concepts, as expounded by our Sages.]
Some people might erroneously believe that Succos was "originally" an ancient agricultural festival, and that some time later in our history, it was transformed into a religious observance. Not so. Rather, the natural joy of each particular agricultural season (the harvest on Succos, the ripening of the first fruits on Shavuous, etc.) was intended by Hashem, from the very beginning, to be one component of each of the holidays—one of the "layers" of its meaning, if you will. Each holiday, however, also contains a unique historical remembrance for the Jewish people, while offering a unique spiritual opportunity to internalize important truths regarding our relationship to G-d.
As Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch writes in his masterful philosophical discussion of the Torah’s commandments (Horeb):
"From one point of view they [the festivals] thus have their historical significance; on the other hand, they are all bound to corresponding seasons of the year. Thus each festival takes place at the time of the year when G-d reveals Himself in Nature’s evolution, in the same way as the deed that forms the basis of the festival reveals G-d at work in the sphere of human history. Thus, Nature and Historical Revelation coincide, complementing and supporting one another." (Grunfeld trans., pp. 85-6)
With all their many layers of significance, then, the holidays "…serve as illuminating beacons for our inner and outer life, by our taking their fundamentals and their teachings to heart. They are sanctities [i.e., sanctuaries in time], which bring about the ever-fresh revival of Israel’s spirit…" (p. 85)
Okay, so there is a natural joy in Succos at the ingathering of the harvest. But is there not an almost equal natural joy at the coming of spring, and the first ripening of the spring crop—the agricultural season that coincides with Pesach? Perhaps (you could argue) the first awakening of the earth after winter is MORE joyous than the ingathering. We still may be puzzled at why Succos is (as we saw) considered, in some sense, more joyous than any other holiday.
And another question to ask is: What particular historical significance does Succos have? In other words, if Pesach commemorates the time of our freedom (and our birth as a full-fledged nation), and Shavuos commemorates the time of the Revelation of the Torah at Mount Sinai, what exactly does Succos commemorate?
I’m now going to answer ALL the questions quickly. (If I don’t get busy, Pesach will be here…and it will be time to ask a different set of questions.)
Think about when Succos occurs, with regard to certain OTHER recently completed sacred days. Hint: Apples and honey, with shofar blasts; a week of repentance; long 25-hour period of intense supplication (and equally intense hunger pangs). The Days of Succos joy begin—not coincidentally—four days after the completion of the Days of Awe, after that intense period of introspection and teshuva (repentance), and most significantly, after its culmination in the Day of ATONEMENT. We enter Succos, therefore, in a state of spiritual purity, cleansed of the stain of our past transgressions. After clarifying and strengthening our connection to G-d (our Father, our King) during the days of Awe, we are summoned to REJOICE before Him on the Festival of Sukkos, enjoying delightful meals and songs of praise (and a few l’chaims, for sure) and the holding aloft of the four lovely species. (Note: we do not pick up the four species on the Sabbath, however.)
What greater joy is there, truly, than being "reborn" in a state of purity? Than having been forgiven by G-d, and given a new chance and a fresh start? This is another layer—and perhaps the key one—in the joy of Sukkos.
But what exactly are we doing in huts (booths, sukkos)?!
"You shall dwell in booths for a seven-day period; every native in Israel shall dwell in booths. So that your generations will know that I caused Children of Israel to dwell in booths when I took them from the Land of Egypt…" (Leviticus: 23, 42-3)
Succos commemorates the divine protection G-d gave us when He took us out of Egypt, and led us in the Wilderness. As Rashi explains, the succah is meant to remind us of the miraculous Clouds of Glory that surrounded the Jewish People (like a giant, air-conditioned booth) in the Wilderness of Sinai. [Another opinion in the Talmud asserts that it is to remind us of actual booths, sukkos, that our ancestors constructed when they left Egypt.]
The important point, however, is to remember…and, more importantly, to take to heart NOW…that G-d has always protected and guided the Jewish people with a special providence-- hashgacha, in Hebrew. He protects us now. Otherwise, there is no possible way we would still exist as a people today—after all of our enemies’ attempts to destroy us. This is what the walls (and slender roof) of the Sukkah should call to mind: the watchful protection of G-d. It is therefore the most important holiday, our commentators tell us, for solidifying our emunah, our faith in G-d, and our bitachon, our sincere trust in Him.
We transfer our dwelling on Sukkos—physically, and psychologically—to a "temporary shelter," so that we may learn that it is NOT our solid roofs (or large, sturdy houses or worldly possessions) that ultimately protect us. Rather, it is Hashem, the Holy One, Blessed be He, Who protects us and guides us—as individuals and as a nation. He is the only ultimate Source of security. He is our Permanence. (And even the evanescent physical pleasures of life can be sanctified, transformed into something Eternal, within the holy walls of the Sukkah…and whenever we internalize that we are truly in His presence.)
Is there a greater joy than really believing (with strong emunah, and wholehearted bitachon) that the Almighty is our Protector, our Rock and our Shield? That His constant protection is our "booth in the wilderness" of exile?
When we combine all these concepts we’ve discussed—the ingathering of the harvest, our special state of spiritual purity (post-Yom Kippur), and the special injection of emunah and bitachon at the heart of this festival—is there any wonder that the Torah prescribes (and describes) the ULTIMATE JOY for Sukkos?
"A seven-day period shall you celebrate to Hashem, your G-d…for Hashem will have blessed you in all your crop and in all your handiwork, and you will be completely [or, exclusively] joyous (ach sameach)."
MAY WE ALL HAVE A TRULY JOYOUS SUKKOS, AND A WONDERFUL SHABBOS.
The Inner Meaning of the Four Species
At face value, the mitzvah of "Taking the Four Species" begs explanation. On the one hand, Halachah stipulates that once a person has lifted the Species (for the sake of performing the mitzvah), he has fulfilled his obligation (Sukkah 42a). On the other hand, after lifting the Species, one should wave them right away, as well as later on during Hallel. (Orach Chaim 651:8.) What is the function of waving the Species? Why are they waved in particular during Hallel?
The Talmud (Sukkah 37b) addresses the symbolism of waving the Species. Rabbi Yochanan explained that, "One moves (the Species) back and forth for the sake of Him to Whom the four winds belong; one lifts and lowers (them) for the sake of Him to Whom are the heavens and the earth." Others quote Rabbi Chama bar Ukva in the name of Rabbi Yose bar Rabbi Chanina as explaining that, "One brings (the Species in supplication) back and forth to prevent bad winds; one lifts and lowers (them in supplication) to prevent bad precipitation." (See Rashi ibid.)
Although the Talmud's elaboration addresses the message conveyed by waving the Species, it does not indicate the relationship between Hallel and the Species. Furthermore, it should be noted that waving the Species is not merely a symbolic rite. Rather, the waving is an integral component of the mitzvah of taking the Species, to the extent that one who failed to recite the berachah before taking the Species may still recite it prior to waving them (Mishnah Berurah 651:26), as the waving procedure is an extension of the mitzvah of taking the Species. Why is waving the Species so important from an halachic perspective? Again, why is it done during Hallel?
As noted in the dvar Torah, "Why is Sukkos Different", Sukkos gives the Jew the opportunity to enter the inner sanctums of kedushah (the Sukkah, representative of the Beis Ha-Mikdash) after having been spiritually cleansed on Yom Kippur. On Sukkos, we are privileged to spend a week in the realm of the Shechinah, replicative of the experience which our ancestors had in the Midbar (Desert). For this reason, many communities which do not normally recite Kabbalistic prayers do so on Sukkos, as on Sukkos we are all "insiders", dwelling in Hashem's sanctuary and thus more privy to the internal spheres of spirituality.
This is where the role of the Four Species fits in. The Species are all features of inanimate nature. Inherently, they have no spiritual value. However, on Sukkos, the theme of living under Hashgachah (Divine Providence) is applied to its fullest. Not only do we enter the protective veil of the Sukkah; we also proclaim that the entire universe - even the seemingly stoic and disinterested features of nature - are precisely manipulated by God for His purposes. In the Midbar, nature was utilized by Hashem in most stupefying ways to achieve His goals for His nation. We celebrate God's miraculous protection of the Jewish nation on Sukkos, in which natural objects and forces were specifically geared to shield us. So, too, on a daily basis, all that occurs in our seemingly mundane world is part of Hashem's scheme for the universe and is testimony to His Hashgachah. This outward recognition of Divine Providence is expressed on Sukkos by the Four Species.
Thus, the Species are waved during Hallel when we thank Hashem for His goodness [the verses of "Hodu..."] and when we beseech Him ["Ana Hashem..."], as we affirm God's extensive Hashgachah as epitomized on Sukkos, such that the entire natural order is manipulated by Hashem for His purposes and is therefore testimony of praise to Him. So, too, is waving the Species essential to the mitzvah of taking them, as waving the Species symbolizes the themes expressed by Rabbi Yochanan or Rabbi Yose bar Chanina; these themes are manifestations of God's universal Hashgachah, which is at the crux of the message of Sukkos and is therefore - by definition - integral to its mitzvos.
In light of the concept that the Four Species represent God's external Hashgachah, in which nature and the universe as a whole are subservient and function to fulfill the Divine plan, we can understand the Midrashic symbolism of the Species. Chazal (our Sages) relate that the Species signify the components of a person's body which serve God or that the Species are reflective of different types of Jews, all of whom must be bound together to do God's will. The underlying theme of both sets of symbols is that the Species express performance of God's mission, such that we realize that even bare nature is utilized as part of the Divine system and Providence.
This also explains the Kabbalistic practice of taking the Species each morning in the Sukkah, even though it may be halachically preferable to take the Species right before Hallel instead. By taking the Species in the Sukkah, one merges the inner Hashgachah of the Sukkah, which consists of God enabling Man to enter and dwell in the Shadow of the Divine, with God's outward Hashgachah in the universe as a whole, where God's Hand in immanent and all-involved, working through nature and lifeless forms to accomplish the Divine mission.
May we soon merit to enter the permanent Sukkah in Yerushalayim and experience God's Hashgachah on all levels.
Shabbat and Chol HaMoed/Yom Tov
The morning Torah reading of Shabbos Chol Ha-moed consists of selected portions from Parshas Ki Sisa. The conclusion of the kriah summarily addresses the Shalosh Regalim, and this would seem to be the relevance of the reading to the day. However, the first six aliyos have nothing to do with Yom Tov; rather, they deal with Moshe's supplication to Hashem to forgive the Jews for the Chet Ha-egel and the grand rapprochement between God and His people. Is there thus any other connection between the Torah reading and the Moed?
Shabbos Chol Ha-moed (as well as Shabbos which coincides with Yom Tov) is unique, for the character of the day is not just that of Shabbos as its own day alongside that of Moed, in which the two days and their respective themes exist on their own. On the contrary, when Shabbos and Moed are joined, they fuse to create a new, unparalleled kedushah and status. Please allow me to explain.
Shabbos is symbolized by its coming to the Jews. We go out to greet the Shabbos Queen, who is already on her way to us, and we welcome malachim to our homes on Friday night. Yom Tov is quite the opposite, for it requires that we ascend to Yerushalayim and enter the realm of the Shechinah. Rather than God sending his kedusha our way, we must go up to it and greet Hashem at His place.
Thus, when Shabbos and Yom Tov coincide, we rise and approach God (in the kedusha of Yom Tov), and He also comes to us (Shabbos). The closeness between Hashem and the Jew which is precipitated is qualitatively different than that which is created by the separate kedushos of Shabbos or Yom Tov on their own. It is, rather, a new closeness, and this closeness is mirrored precisely by the grand rapprochement between God and the Jews in Parshas Ki Sisa, when Hashem agrees to forgive His people and share with them a relationship heretofore unheard of.
It is based on the above that we reserve the public reading of Shir Ha-Shirim for Shabbos-Pesach and Koheles for Shabbos-Sukkos/Shmini Atzeres, for these megillos reflect on our relationship with Hashem and provide deep insight into His avodah as depicted by each Tom Tov. Thus, it is specifically on these Shabbos/Yom Tov days of special closeness between Hashem and Bnei Yisroel that we are able to have a greater understanding of our relationship with Hashem and immerse ourselves in the deeper avodah message of the Yom Tov.
Why is Sukkot Different?
The Torah reading for the first two days of Sukkos raises some serious questions. We understand that the reading is, for the most part (aliyos 1-4), not an historical depiction of Sukkos, as the Torah does not provide such narrative. However, when the Torah does focus its attention on Sukkos (aliya 5), the presentation is quite unusual.
If we carefully analyze the Torah reading (Vayikra 22:26-23:44), we readily note that the yomim tovim are prefaced by the pasuk (23:4), "These are the holy occasions which you shall designate in their seasons", and a corresponding conclusion of (ibid. 37) "These are the festivals of God which you shall appoint as holy occasions...", follows the pesukim about the days and sacrifices of Sukkos (the final holiday in the portion). However, Sukkos stands out from the other yomim tovim, as the Torah does not present the mitzvos of Sukkos in the main body of text about the holidays. Rather, after presenting a few very general facts about Sukkos, and concluding, "These are the festivals...", the Torah then says (ibid. 39-43), "However, on the fifteenth day of the seventh month (Tishrei)...you shall celebrate...and you shall take to yourselves on the first day a beautiful fruit...You shall dwell in sukkos for seven days..." Why are the commandments of Sukkos excluded from the main text and presented as an addendum? Why does the Torah close the section about yomim tovim with a generic conclusion after presenting the generalities of Sukkos and then go back to Sukkos and enumerate its mitzvos?
I really do not want to confuse anyone (especially myself), but I must also ask why it is that the historical background of Sukkos is not portrayed, or even alluded to, in the Torah. Other seemingly less important events are given full attention, whereas Sukkos, which represents (Gemara Sukkah 11b) the clouds of glory (according to Rabbi Eliezer) or actual protective booths (according to Rabbi Akiva) is the basis for an entire set of commandments, and we do not even know about the historical fundamentals of its background, save from the verses which themselves present the festival's requirements. It is precisely this elusiveness which gives rise to the Talmudic dispute concerning what exactly the sukka represents. Why, then, is the background of Sukkos not detailed in the Torah?
If we think about the first problem raised above (the Torah text's layout of the festivals and the unusual presentation of Sukkos), we can suggest a solution which sheds much light on the overall uniqueness of this holiday. Whereas all other yomim tovim are commemorated on their respective dates by observances which relate to those very dates, the mitzvos of Sukkos correspond to no historic date. The first of Tishrei is the anniversary of Creation (or God's plan for Creation) and is historically a day of universal judgment, and we recognize it as such by blowing the shofar and observing the rites of yom tov. The same is true of the fifteenth the Nisan (Pesach), which is the anniversary of the Exodus, and is thus aptly commemorated by the mitzvos of the seder night, etc. Sukkos has no historic date. The sheltering of Bnei Yisroel in the desert was ongoing and attached to no point in time. Thus, the mitzvos of Sukkos, and its very nature, differ starkly from those of all other festivals. It is likely for this reason that the observances of Sukkos are not part of the verses which summarize the festival and are relegated to pesukim afterwards.
Still, we can ask why Sukkos is mandated at all. Other acts of God's protection and caretaking have not earned the status of festivals (such as the provision of manna, Miriam's well, etc.); why is Sukkos different?
It would seem that the answer lies in Rabbi Akiva's explanation as to what the "sukkos" referenced in the Torah really were. Rabbi Akiva maintains that sukkos were protective booths which the Jews "made for themselves" (Gemara ibid.). This sounds strange -God established a yom tov to commemorate what humans built?
I think that Rabbi Akiva's clear intent was that we commemorate God's protection, albeit that it was experienced in man-made structures. (Rabbi Eliezer also recognizes that our sukka-dwelling reflects God's protection, but that he holds that the protection was in divinely-created shelters.) Rabbi Akiva must maintain, however, that the uniqueness of the protection of the sukka is not just that it was a successful protective shelter which God enabled to hold up well and keep out harsh weather. This is hardly comparable with other miracles recorded in the Torah which were eternalized as yomim tovim. Rather, the divine sheltering of the sukka in the midbar was significant to merit establishment as a yom tov inasmuch as it was not just an act - it was an experience. Living in sukkos - in God's protective region - was a type of existence. It was the prototype of life in a spiritual realm, beyond the natural. Thus, Sukkos represents living in the midbar under Hashem's wings and in His shadow. It encompasses all of the divine caregiving throughout our travels, thus exceeding specific acts of benevolence (e.g. the well, manna, Bnei Yisroel's clothing not wearing out, etc.). Life in a sphere of holiness was not confined to any one date, and it receives no specific mention in the Torah, as the entirety of Jewish existence at the time was in the background and on the stage of life under God's protective aura, as we know from the totality of the Torah's treatment of Bnei Yisroel in the midbar.
In light if this, we can appreciate the deeper significance of the extraordinary textual treatment of Sukkos. The lack of a specific calendar date which differentiates it from other yomim tovim in the Torah reading represents that Sukkos is not an historic event; rather, it was and is a timeless state of existence. Thus, its inclusion in the parsha of "moadim" ["appointed times"] read on the first day of Sukkos is somewhat of an enigma, and its detailed treatment is purposefully differentiated.
It is thus also understood why the Beis Hamikdash is symbolized by the sukka in our liturgy. After the completion of travel though the midbar, life in a realm filled with God's holiness, as marked by regular, revealed miracles, ceased to exist in a large-scale framework. Henceforth, the Beis Hamikdash was to serve as such a place. There, one was able to enter the region of the Shechina and observe the miracles described in the Gemara on a continual basis. The Beis Hamikdash was the encapsulation of life in the midbar.
(It is abundantly clear as well why one may not desecrate the the sukka by bringing in certain types of objects [Sh. Aruch, O.C.639], as the sukka represents a place of God's presence. )
We can also understand why many kabalistic notions and rites (Ushpizin, Hoshana Rabba tefillos,etc.) are widely-practiced during Sukkos even by communities which generally do not recite kabalistic texts or maintain kabalistic rituals. As on Sukkos, that which is hidden ("sod" - including Kabala) from normative existence becomes revealed, as we are privileged to dwell in God's sanctum and experience things more from an insider's perspective. Whereas non-Chassidic Ashkenazic and Western Sephardic mesorah (tradition) posits that Kabala is reserved for those who are on levels of kedusha fit to be privy to its teachings and practices, such mesora allows for laymen to recite kabalistic prayers on Sukkos, as all of us have been granted entry to God's palace and are thus living on the inside, so to speak.
It is noteworthy that Sukkos occurs shortly after the Yomim Noroim. This sequence represents moving from the soul-cleansing of Yom Kippur into the sanctity of the sukka, similar to one who undergoes purification prior to entering the Beis Hamikdash.
Let's conclude with an analysis of the dispute of Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Akiva as to what the sukka commemorates. It would at first seem to be a point of mere historical value. However, the crux of the argument is extremely profound. It may be that Rabbi Eliezer maintains that the historical sukka experience was akin to that of the balance of life in the midbar. Just as all of the other miracles, as well as seeing God's revelation at Sinai, were an educational process, in which Bnei Yisroel were imbued with deep emuna and commitment to Hashem and His Torah, regular life was in totality such an experience. It was a time in which God performed open miracles even when the result could have been attained by "natural" means, and the clouds of glory were not an exception to this theme. Rabbi Akiva perhaps holds that the educational process of the midbar was one of encouraging the Jews to invest of themselves in order to deserve God's miraculous benevolence, and it was thus necessary for the people to put forth effort first (building dwellings) as a sign of their trust in Hashem's protection and salvation (as at the Yam Suf, the various wars, etc.) Although both ideas are true, Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Akiva argue concerning whether the Jewish People's "hishtadlus" (efforts) were the means by which they deserved God's miracles or whether such effort was part of the educational faith-training itself as it comprised the desert experience.
May we merit to dwell in God's sukka with full trust in Him and His hashgacha (providence) over all. May the permanent sukka in Yerushalayim soon be rebuilt.
Travelling and the Mitzva of Sukka
This article will treat the permissibility of eating and sleeping outside the sukka during trips taken during Chol Ha-mo'ed - specifically those organized, as is customary, by youth groups.
SOURCE
The primary source on this issue is the passage in Sukka (26a):
The Rabbis taught: Those travelling during the day are exempt from sukka during the day and obligated at night; those travelling during the night are exempt during the night and obligated during the day; those travelling during both the day and night are exempt both during the day and at night.
The Rif quotes this gemara as halakha, although he leaves out the last case, apparently because it did not appear in his text of the gemara (despite the fact that it flows from the other two). It is cited, almost verbatim, by the Rambam (Hilkhot Sukka 6:4), as well as by the Shulchan Arukh (OC 640:8 - following the Rif's version). As far as I know, no halakhic authority disagrees.
The basis of the exemption for travelers is the principle of "teishvu ke-ein taduru" - that living in the sukka demands no more (and no less, as in Sukka 28b) than living in one's house does. As Rashi explains (Sukka 26a, s.v. Holkhei):
"For it is written, 'Live in sukkot,' as one lives in his home. Just as during the rest of the year one would not refrain from going on a business trip, so during the chol ha-mo'ed the Torah did not require that one refrain from travelling."
The intensity of a person's relationship to his sukka must parallel his relationship to his home, but need not exceed it. There is no obligation that a person suffer discomfort in order to live in his sukka any more than he would to live at home. Neither is there any demand that a person be confined to a sukka to the degree that it inhibits his normal activities, any more than one's movements would be limited by his connection to his home.
It would seem obvious, then, that one is permitted to arrange a trip during Sukkot, even if it involves neglecting the mitzva of dwelling in a sukka - just as one would not refrain from going on a trip merely because it would involve eating, drinking, and sleeping outside his home, or outside any home. Rashi's mention of a business trip seems to only be an example, although his formulation might lead one to think that he permits only traveling out of financial need. The Rishonim do not qualify the reasons it is permitted to travel; and when the Tosafot (s.v. Holkhei) summarize Rashi, they likewise do not mention the reason for the trip. [In Iggerot Moshe OC II:93, Harav Moshe Feinstein zt"l suggests that a pleasure trip would not be included in the traveler's exemption from a sukka. This inference seems difficult to me. It also seems that Rav Moshe would agree in the case under discussion: an educational trip organized for a youth group is surely no less permissible than a business trip.]
One should not, either, build on Tosafot's juxtaposition of the exemption for travelers with that of people suffering discomfort ["mitzta'er"]. The travelling exemption is not based on the discomfort caused by not being able to travel, but rather on the similarity between how one relates to his house and how he relates to his sukka. It thus seems, at first glance, that the solution to our problem is a simple one.
B. SELF-INDUCED DISCOMFORT
However, these trips might be problematic on Sukkot for another reason. The Or Zaru'a (Hilkhot Sukka #299) speaks of blood-letting (a common medical practice until relatively recent times) during Sukkot:
"There are some who, after they let blood during the holiday, eat outside the sukka. They say they are no different than those who feel pain in their eyes or have headaches [and, as sick people, are exempt from eating in the sukka]. They are mistaken, for one who lets blood is not sick; on the contrary, he is happy and eats and drinks much. Furthermore, he did not have to choose to let blood during the holiday. Even with regard to a mourner, whose suffering is due to causes outside his control, we say that he must calm himself and fulfill the mitzva [of sukka]. Certainly, the same should apply to these [who let blood], for they should not have chosen to let during the holiday."
The Or Zaru'a thus offers two reasons why one who lets blood is nevertheless obligated to fulfill the mitzva of sukka: he is not really sick, and he should have scheduled the bloodletting for another time. It seems from his second reason that the exemption of a "mitzta'er" does not apply where the source of the sickness is within the person's control (even though it stemmed out of a non-ideal situation). If one creates pain for oneself during the holiday, he is still obligated to live in the sukka, unless he is in physical danger. The Magen Avraham (OC 640:4) already commented:
"According to this reason one who drinks a laxative is still obligated in sukka, even though he is great pain, for he should have done this before the holiday or afterwards. Therefore he should not time this for the holiday."
In the spirit of the Or Zaru'a and the Magen Avraham, an educational trip that could have been scheduled for before or after the holiday would not exempt its participants from sukka.
However, there are three reasons why this approach would not lead us to adopt stringent conclusions in the case under discussion:
Most Rishonim do not rule in accordance with the Or Zaru'a.
Even the Or Zarua himself offered two reasons - bloodletting is not a sickness and even if it is, a scheduled sickness (or, we extrapolated - trip) does not create an exemption. According to the first reason, the tiyul might still be exempt. [The proof from the mourner is not ironclad. The gemara (Sukka 25b) explains that he is not included within the pain exemption because, it applies to "pain that comes to him; here he makes himself feel pain." The mourner is obligated, through inner effort, to assuage his pain and is therefore not exempt in the eyes of the halakha. The blood-letter's pain is genuine and objective; he just should not have caused it.
Most organized youth group's trips are practically difficult to schedule before or after the holiday.
FULFILLING BOTH NEEDS
There is still one point that demands clarification. It is obvious that the exemption for travelers only applies when it clashes with fulfilling the mitzva. In other words, when the traveller only has two options before him - either staying at home and fulfilling the mitzva of sukka, or travelling and forgoing it. If, however, one is able to achieve both, travelling and living in the sukka, one obviously should. For example, if one travelled to a city where there is a restaurant or hotel which has a sukka, one would definitely have to avail himself of it. Similarly, if one travelled to a place close enough to home that he would normally return to eat and sleep after travelling, he would certainly have to return home to his sukka. This seems to be the basis for the halakha that day travelers are obligated in sukka during the night.
However, this halakha can be understood in two ways:
At night the traveller ceases to be defined as a traveller in the eyes of the halakha and is obligated in sukka as one who, albeit for one night, dwells where he finds himself.
Even though he is still defined as a traveller, the traveler's exemption does not apply to him. Because at night the mitzva of sukka does not clash with his carrying his project, he is obligated to live in a sukka.
The Sefer HaMikhtam (Sukka 26a, followed by the Orchot Chaim Hilkhot Sukka #33), in line with the second understanding, writes:
"Since day travelers are obligated in sukka at night, we suggest that those who travel to villages collecting debts on Chol Ha-mo'ed must return home at night to eat in the sukka if the village does not have one. Even though one can maintain otherwise, one who follows this stringency will be blessed."
Even though he leaves room for another approach - apparently considering the first understanding of the night-time obligation - he is inclined to rule like the second understanding. This is apparently not just a stringency but the appropriate ruling.
Based on this, shouldn't travelers make the effort to fulfill the mitzva of sukka? There are two options:
Looking for an existing sukka to eat and sleep in;
To build a sukka where they stay for the night.
The Tosafot (Sukka 26a s.v. Ve-chayavin) refer to the travelers' night obligation as "when a man stays over in an inhabited area." Apparently, he is only obligated when there already is a sukka in the place he stays for the night, but would not have to travel to another village to make sure he would have a sukka.
HOW MUCH EFFORT
I have always had my doubts about how, now, in times of rapid transportation, we define a "place" for this halakha. The halakha generally places limits on how much we must exert ourselves to perform mitzvot. One must travel four "mil" (about four kilometers) for netilat yadayim or, according to Rashi, for communal prayer (Pesachim 46a - both are rabbinic obligations); one must give rebuke until the recipient is ready to hit of curse him; and - the paradigm - one should spend up to a fifth of his earnings on tzedaka (Ketubot 50a) or on mitzvot in general. Here, with regards to sukka, an extra factor comes into play - "mitzta'er," discomfort. This discomfort, based on the analogy to one's home, refers not only to that entailed by living in the sukka - cold, rain, bugs, etc. - but even to how much effort is required to reach a sukka.
The Rama (OC 640:4), based on the Terumat Ha-deshen, rules that:
"One whose Shabbat candles in his sukka went out, is permitted to go into the house where a candle is lit. He is not obligated to go to his friend's sukka if that involves a lot of trouble."
This halakha seems to be based on the discomfort exemption, as Rabbi Akiva Eiger comments in his glosses on the Shulchan Arukh. The Magen Avraham (at the beginning of OC 639), seems to see this as based on the general limits the halakha places on how much one must extend himself in order to perform any mitzvot.
[This might provide an answer to a question on Rabbi Akiva Eiger's approach. According to the Magen Avraham, this halakha even applies on the first night of Sukkot. Do we not follow the Rishonim who hold that discomfort is not an exemption on the first night of Sukkot (because on the first night of Sukkot there is an additional obligation to eat an olive sized piece of bread in the sukka based on a derivation from the first night of Pesach)? He can answer that it is not the discomfort clause that furnishes the exemption, but a general limit on how much to exert oneself for any mitzvot.]
The Rama's ruling, be the rationale what it may, absolves one from sukka if it involves "excessive effort." I find it difficult to judge what "excessive effort" is defined as, especially for someone with a car. Tosafot referred to one who reaches a small village and need not search any further to find a sukka. Nowadays, when one can easily travel from one town to another, is there no obligation to travel to the next town to find a sukka? Should we exert ourselves for the mitzva of sukka any less than we would to visit friends in another town? Though many situations are clear-cut and it is safe to assume that the halakha directs each person to use discretion in determining how far he must extend himself, there does not seem to be a guideline with which to judge borderline cases. This makes the travelers' exemption often very hard to apply practically.
Let us assume, though, that the exemption does apply when the closest available sukka is clearly difficult to reach. What about the second option - building a sukka? With regards to a group of travelers - our youth group tiyul scenario - building a sukka on the camping grounds becomes a live option. Is there an obligation on the group to build a sukka there?
This point is the subject of an disagreement amongst the Acharonim. The Magen Avraham (OC 640:15) rules that travelers must build a sukka where they stay for the night, whereas the Levush (Levush HaChur, OC 640:8) rules that they are only obligated at night if they reach a place where a sukka already stands. According to the Levush he need not build a sukka, "because there is no greater trouble and pain than this - to obligate them to build a sukka in the field or amongst the gentiles."
This was, in fact, already an argument in the times of the Rishonim. The Meiri (Sukka 26a) writes:
"They (the anonymous opinion ['yesh omrim'] quoted above) likewise wrote that day travelers must build themselves a sukka where they stay for the night. However, we rule that travelers only must live in a sukka if it is readily available. This is also common practice."
Even though a group of the great later halakhic authorities (the Arukh HaShulchan and the Mishna Berura, especially in the Bi'ur Halakha) ruled like the Levush, the anonymous opinion quoted by the Me'iri and echoed by the Magen Avraham seems more plausible. Why should one be exempt from the mitzva of sukka, even for one night, only because he is not in his own city or because building it involves troubling oneself? Is trouble an exemption from performing mitzvot? The mishna in Rosh Hashana (32b) rules that, "It is forbidden [on Yom Tov] to travel outside the city limits (techum) to obtain a shofar or to uncover one under a pile of rocks, etc." That this is explicitly forbidden on Yom Tov, indicates that it would apparently be mandated under normal situations. One would have to travel far or cross the water in order to obtain a shofar. Even the mitzva of sukka itself requires that kind of effort before the holiday. Why should the obligation to exert effort to build a sukka be lifted on Chol Ha-mo'ed? Why should they not build a sukka where they want to bed down for the night? Perhaps it would be true that if the effort involved in building a sukka would be so great that the traveller would prefer forgoing his trip and stay home rather than go through with it, the travelers' exemption would come into play. Travelers are permitted to travel even though it means not always performing the mitzva of sukka - perhaps this night time effort would be included in the day travelers' exemption. The halakha would find itself pinning a person to his sukka more than he would be to his own home. But if we speak of one who would still make the trip, why not obligate him at night?
At least three possible explanations are open to the Meiri and the Levush:
The effort involve in making a sukka for the night is of the degree that in mitzvot in general the Torah would not obligate it. This is parallel to the ruling of the Rama (OC 656) that applies the one fifth ceiling on tzedaka expenses to mitzvot in general;
The sukka-home analogy would exempt one from building a sukka just for the night. A person does not build a house to stay over for the night somewhere but sets down for a more substantial stretch of time;
One who already has a sukka at home would not be obligated to build a second sukka during his travels. One certainly does not relate to his house that way (he would not build temporary lodgings to stay in during a business trip, but look for a hotel or friends willing to put him up). [According to this reason, one travelling during all the days of sukkot might be obligated to build a sukka each night.]
Still, the approach of the Magen Avraham and that of the opinion the Meiri quotes seems more compelling.
HOW MUCH TIME
However, on second thought, thewhole dispute about whether day travelers must build a sukka to stay in at night might be irrelevant to the situation at hand. Even according to the Magen Avraham, if day travelers reached their destination right at dinner time they would not have to postpone their meal until after they finish building their sukka.
[The Magen Avraham himself seems to rule stringently in this case - "One who is stringent here is to be blessed, for this is improper, for he should have built a sukka and he did not." However, even he relates to this as a stringency (chumra). The Peri Megadim did not relate to this issue at all. We might add that the Magen Avraham took the Orchot Chaim a step beyond what seemed to be his original intention. The Orchot Chaim did not speak about building a sukka but about returning home.]
They likewise need not finish up their business dealing early in order to enable them to build a sukka before dinner time. Rather, they go about their business as usual and when they finish build a sukka for eating (if they have enough time before their normally scheduled dinner) or for sleeping. This is all included in the principle of "teishvu ke-ein taduru" that rules that one need not alter normal living habits in order to live in a sukka. Therefore, the Magen Avraham only obligated day travelers to build a sukka at night when they finish the business of the day.
However, certainly one who devotes the night to the same activity as he did during the day would not be obligate to stop and build a sukka. The obligation only takes effect the moment the person's activities cease. This is the rule of travelers during both the day and the night, according to our text of the gemara. The gemara was obviously not referring to someone travelling twenty-four hours a day, but to one who would not have time at night, because of his travels, to either build or find a sukka before eating or sleeping at night.
It follows that the youth group involved in an organized tiyul would not be obligated, even if they were able to, to build a sukka at night. As is well-known, the night is not only a period to rest from the day's activities. Night activities are an organic and integral aspect of the tiyul - the participants are precisely categorized as day AND night travelers as long as they are involved in the goals and activities of the tiyul. They are not, even according to the Magen Avraham, obligated to build a sukka, unless there is time to do so during the period between when the night's activities end and when they go to sleep or eat. By that time it is usually impossible realistically to build a sukka.
Therefore, the halakhic conclusions that follow are:
It is permitted to go on a trip during Chol Ha-mo'ed Sukkot even if it is clear that the participants will not be able to perform the mitzva of sukka during the tiyul.
If, during the tiyul, they reach, around the normal or scheduled eating or sleeping time, a place where there is a sukka they are able to enter, they must eat and/or sleep there. How to define the area and the distance that exempts them still needs clarification.
If they finish the tiyul at night and stay in a place where they are able to build a sukka, they are obligated to do so. To what degree they must exert themselves also demands further clarification.
If the activities of the tiyul extend late enough so not enough time is left to build a sukka before sleeping time, they are exempt from building one.
EDUCATION, MITZVOT, AND EXEMPTIONS - THE GREATER ISSUE
Up until now we spoke from a purely and exclusively halakhic vantage point. However, on a practical level the matter seems radically different.
One should be firmly and sharply opposed - both educationally and from the perspective of Jewish beliefs and values - to tiyulim or activities organized in a way that involves not observing the mitzva of sukka. The existence of formal exemptions from positive mitzvot is not the exclusive nor the only decisive way of gauging whether to perform them. We do not speak of actual evasive trickery (ha'arama) - itself a significant problem in halakha and belief - and this is not the forum to relate to it. Even not relating fully to a mitzva is problematic, even when it involves ignoring and not evading.
A Jew must be saturated with an ambition and longing for mitzvot and not, God forbid, view them as a burden he is inescapably stuck with that he tries to cast off at the first opportunity. This point is at the root of the trait of "zerizut" (acting with enthusiasm and energy), rooted in the obligation not just to serve God, but to serve him with joy and exhilaration. Rabbi Eliezer's statement, "If one's prayer is a fixed obligation it is not a supplication," is explained by Rav Oshaya as "One whose prayer is a burden to him." Of course this has special meaning in its home context, relating to prayer, but the concept at its root applies to all mitzvot.
The gemara (Pesachim 105b) explains that on Erev Shabbat kiddush precedes birkat ha-mazon (if one was eating when Shabbat enters) and that on Motza'ei Shabbat birkat ha-mazon precedes kiddush, because:
"Shabbat entering is different than Shabbat leaving; we try and have it enter as early as possible out of our love for it and have it exit as late as possible so that it is not a burden on us."
This is not just a derush or a pious custom, but mainstream halakha. This principle reflects a halakhic approach in all of its power and scope, beyond the restricted formal plane.
It is possible that the Ramban's famous expression, "Naval bi-reshut ha-Torah," (one who can succeed in being a vile individual while still technically acting within the confines of the laws of the halakha) is too harsh to apply to avoiding positive action - perhaps it is limited to one who drifts into negative behavior. But the idea at the base of the Ramban's concept does apply. Rav Chisda's statement to Rami b. Tamri, "I see you are very sharp," (Chullin 110b) includes a critique on his ability to use his intelligence to devise all sorts of exemptions.
Perhaps the central halakhic source in the Rishonim to clarify this issue is in the laws of tzitzit. They built on the discussion in the gemara (Menachot 41a) between the angel and Rav Katina. Both Rav Katina's summer and winter garments were technically exempt from tzitzit. The angel chastised him, "What will be with the mitzva of tzitzit?" The gemara's discussion makes it clear that Rav Katina was not violating the laws of tzitzit, but was evading the mitzva by using exemptions. Apparently based on this passage, the Rambam (Hilkhot Tzitzit 3:11) rules,
"Even though one is not obligated to buy a tallit and wrap himself in it in order to affix tzitzit to it, a pious person should not absolve himself from this mitzva. Rather, one should always try and wear a garment that is obligated in tzitzit in order to fulfill this mitzva."
Other Rishonim expanded on this - to obligate not only the pious but everyone; and to see this in the context of mitzvot in general. The Rosh (Tosafot Ha-Rosh Nidda 61b) writes,
"However, it is fitting that all God-fearing people buy a tallit with four corners to obligate himself in tzitzit, for it is a great and important mitzva. As we say in Bereishit Rabba (and, in a slightly different version in Sota 14a), 'Was Moshe anxious to enter the land in order to eat of its fruit and be satiated by its goodness?' Rather, thus said Moshe: 'Let mitzvot that can be fulfilled by me, be fulfilled by me.'"
If this is true of a mitzva that is always within one's reach, certainly this is the case with regards to a mitzva that one can only fulfill one week out of the year!
However, the question itself, especially when asked by Israeli youth groups that stand for education in service of Hashem and fear of God - and that no small number of benei Torah are involved in - is problematic. For decades I was in the Diaspora in places where the mitzva of sukka was not considered an "easy mitzva," and I was never asked about using the traveler's exemption when one is far from a sukka during the day. Did it ever enter the mind of a businesthat strives to scrupulously fulfill mitzvot and, in the course of his business, finds himself in New York's skyscrapers, to eat his lunch in his office because there is no sukka in his vicinity? Did a student who views himself as rooted in Torah and fear of God and finds himself forced to spend a long day in a university library ever think of eating in a cafeteria because the campus did not have a sukka? Is it possible that in Israel, where the mitzva of sukka is both easier and more inclusive - a mitzva that even many that are not generally observant still relate to in one way or another - is it possible that here benei Torah should avoid keeping this mitzva in its fullness?
I am well aware that many believe that there is much educational value to youth groups' tiyulim - mostly because of how it deepens the love and relationship to Eretz Yisrael. They also claim is that the days of Chol Ha-mo'ed are most appropriate for scheduling tiyulim. As an outsider, it is difficult for me to judge. However, I am convinced that, except for extremely extenuating circumstances, the most important educational message we can pass on to our youth during Sukkot is deepening the awareness and sensitivity for observance and enthusiasm about mitzvot - even if this means some difficulty and even if it involves sacrifice.
If there is need for tiyulim during the holiday, by all means have them. Rabbi Eliezer's statement (Sukka 27b), "I praise the 'lazy ones' who do not leave their homes on the holiday, for it says, 'You should be joyous, you and your household," is not cited halakhically. But if a tiyul is organized, arrangements should be made - the same way they are for trucks and water supply, counselors and guides - to be able to fulfill the mitzva of sukka properly. I am sure that the heads of the organizations, where the need and desire is clearly felt, can grapple with more complex technical and logistical challenges than arranging for sukkot for their campers.
We close with a prayer that He who spreads a sukka of peace over his people Israel should help them succeed and merit organizing programming that will give both recreation and education, both bring pleasure and uplift, while deepening the mitzva of sukka specifically and mitzvot in general. So said he who was the greatest of those who loved the land and longed for it, "Let mitzvot that can be fulfilled by me, be fulfilled by me."
The Mitzva of Building a Sukka
In general, a mitzva consists of performing a certain action with a particular object. For example eating matza, donning tefillin, "taking" a lulav, and blowing a shofar are all considered mitzvot. The mitzva consists of a precise action performed with a specific item known as the "cheftza" of the mitzva. In general, the "manufacture" of the item is not part of the essential mitzva. Instead, this preparatory stage is known as "hekhsher mitzva" - preparations which are necessary for the fulfillment of the mitzva but which do not constitute its essence. One would assume the same principle regarding sukka. The mitzva consists primarily in using a particular item (a sukka) as a residence, with the construction of the sukka being purely within the realm of hekhsher mitzva. A statement found in the Yerushalmi, however, alters this impression. The exact nature of the activity of building a sukka will form the subject of this article.
The mishna (9a) cites a machloket between Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel regarding an "old" sukka. Suppose, instead of building a sukka for the purposes of Chag Sukkot, a person employs an old hut, which just happens to be built according to the halakhic blueprint of a sukka. Beit Shammai invalidates this sukka, requiring a "sukka lishma" - one built specifically for yom tov. Beit Hillel (whose opinion is accepted as halakha) permits any hut as long as it was built according to the proper specifications. The Yerushalmi, however, adds one stipulation according to Beit Hillel. When using an "old" sukka a person must build one small part anew - "ve-tzarikh lechadesh bah davar." Many commentators interpret the Yerushalmi as defining a new mitzva - "construction of the sukka." Beit Hillel and Beit Shammai argue about the texture of the sukka and whether an old hut will suffice. They each agree, however, that a person himself has a mitzva to actually ERECT the sukka. Thus, even though Beit Hillel tolerates the use of an existing structure, they require a small act of NEW construction so that the person will fulfill his obligation to build a sukka. Indeed the Ran (1a in the pages of the Rif) refers to this obligation of the Yerushalmi as "mitzva min ha- muvchar" while the Me'iri in his comments (to 9a) applies the label "hiddur mitzva." The impression given is that this mitzva of constructing a sukka is not absolutely obligatory (it isn't me'akev be-dieved - if one doesn't actually build he has still fulfilled the principal mitzva); however, it still is preferable and enhances the quality of the mitzva.
SUMMARY:
The comment of the Yerushalmi - that when using an old sukka a person must at least add some new element - presents the impression that unlike other mitzvot, the mitzva of sukka actually involves manufacturing the cheftza of the mitzva.
The question remains as to whether this concept has any grounding in the Bavli. The gemara in Makkot (8a) discusses the fate of one who is chopping wood and subsequently kills a person when his ax blade dislodges. The gemara rules that such an inadvertent killer goes to exile only if his chopping was for mundane reasons, as opposed to chopping performed in the context of a mitzva. The gemara rules, however, that one who chops wood for a sukka is not chopping for a mitzva - since he is not required to chop; had he found chopped wood he could have utilized that wood. Rashi elaborates: "The ACTUAL CHOPPING IS NOT PART OF THE MITZVA, RATHER THE CONSTRUCTION IS THE MITZVA." Rashi declares construction of the sukka to be an integrated part of the actual mitzva of sukka. An additional gemara which might imply some sort of role for actual construction is the gemara in Sukka (46a) which examines a berakha recited on "sukka." In order to fully appreciate this gemara, however, we must first glance at a parallel gemara in the Yerushalmi. In two locations (Sukka 1:2 and Berakhot 9:3) the Yerushalmi obligates one who builds a sukka to recite a specific birkat ha-mitzva - "la'asot sukka." This reiterates the position of the Yerushalmi that the actual construction of a sukka is a separate mitzva and therefore deserves its own berakha. There is of course no identical gemara in the Bavli requiring a berakha on building a sukka. However, the aforementioned gemara in Sukka discusses a berakha - "she-hechiyanu." The gemara initially rules that the she-hechiyanu is recited when building the sukka. In fact the gemara asserts that if one uses a ready- made sukka, one should at least build some part anew to allow the berakha of she-hechiyanu to be recited. Does this not indicate that some sort of mitzva DOES apply when actually building the sukka? In truth, to determine whether this gemara indeed implies a mitzva we must first examine the exact nature of this berakha of she-hechiyanu recited during construction of the sukka. One might claim (as earlier stated) that the she- hechiyanu is being recited on the mitzva of building the sukka. Alternatively, one might assert that this she- hechiyanu is being recited for the yom tov of Sukkot. Instead of waiting until kiddush, the she-hechiyanu for yom tov is recited during the first interface with the yom tov - during construction of the sukka, which heralds the arrival of yom tov. Ultimately, the gemara accepts the position of Rav Kahana who schedules this berakha of she-hechiyanu during kiddush. According to Rav Kahana, the she-hechiyanu on the yom tov cannot be recited prior to its actual arrival. But what underlies the first position of the gemara which mandates a she-hechiyanu during construction of the sukka? It becomes necessary to determine the identity of this she-hechiyanu: Does it address the mitzva of building a sukka (if indeed it is a mitzva) or does it mark instead the actual yom tov of Sukkot?
Tosafot in Sukka (46a - s.v. Ha-oseh) question why we recite a she-hechiyanu on sukka and not on other mitzvot such as tefillin and tzitzit. Tosafot answer that the mitzva of sukka is a mitzva which relates to simcha (the special happiness of the festivals which involve a journey to Jerusalem, facilitated by the mitzvot of yom tov) and hence warrants a she-hechiyanu. Tosafot definitely view the she- hechiyanu as relating to the actual sukka and hence formulated their question: Why is this MITZVA different from others? Had the she-hechiyanu addressed the yom tov of Sukkot the question would be meaningless. A second question which might help us determine the nature of this she-hechiyanu is addressed by the Ritva. After reciting a she-hechiyanu during construction of the sukka, must we recite a second one during kiddush? The Ritva rules that we must. Does this not indicate that the original she- hechiyanu related to the mitzva of construction and not the actual yom tov; hence when the day arrives we must recite a second berakha on the yom tov? Of course we must refine our interpretation of the Bavli. If, according to the Bavli as well, building a sukka is a mitzva, why does it only receive a she-hechiyanu and not a standard berakha like those recited on every mitzva [such as "la'asot sukka"] as mandated by the Yerushalmi? To answer this question we must consider the gemara in Menachot (42b) which rules that a "birkat ha-mitzva" is only recited when the mitzva is completed. Performing mila completes that mitzva and hence deserves a distinct berakha ["al ha-mila"] while manufacturing tefillin is merely a prelude to donning them and hence does not warrant a berakha. Since building the sukka ultimately leads to the actual residence in it during Sukkot, according to the Bavli its berakha might be deferred. However, the construction is part of the mitzva and deserves a berakha - she-hechiyanu. Possibly, theinitial position cited in the gemara requiring a she-hechiyanu during construction of the sukka highlights an independent mitzva of building the sukka - even according to the Bavli. Ultimately, we reject this position and rule that a she-hechiyanu is only recited at the onset of yom tov during kiddush. According to this ruling, must our overall thesis (that construction is part of the mitzva) be likewise rejected? By reciting the she-hechiyanu during kiddush was Rav Kahana rejecting any mitzva of building a sukka? Or is it possible that Rav Kahana was merely combining two separate she-hechiyanus into one berakha - preferring that the she-hechiyanu upon the sukka and the she-hechiyanu upon Sukkot be collapsed into a berakha recited at the onset of yom tov when one first enters the sukka and recites kiddush? If we adopt the latter alternative, the concept of a separate mitzva to build a sukka might remain even according to Rav Kahana's final position. The only point he questions is the necessity of an INDEPENDENT she-hechiyanu to mark this mitzva.
SUMMARY:
Two statements in the Yerushalmi confirm the status of manufacturing a sukka as a mitzva. Moreover, the Bavli in Sukka which proposes a she-hechiyanu at the time of construction might further reflect this position. Even according to the final halakha, that she-hechiyanu is said only in kiddush, this concept - of construction as a mitzva - might remain.
METHODOLOGICAL POINTS:
1. Oftentimes, a Bavli and a Yerushalmi will dispute a particular halakha. The machloket itself is useful for crystallizing two distinct views of this halakha. 2. Sometimes the CONCEPT, most apparent in the Yerushalmi will hold water in the Bavli as well. The actual halakha of the Yerushalmi (which best reflects the PRINCIPLE or the CONCEPT) might be rejected by the Bavli for peripheral concerns. The Bavli might concede a mitzva in building the sukka but reject a distinct berakha because it isn't the completion of the mitzva. According to the Bavli a berakha is only recited at the consummation of a mitzva.
AFTERWORD: 1. See the Netziv (commentary to the She'iltot 179) who addresses this question amidst a more general backdrop. He discusses additional instances in which acts of preparation (such as baking matza) constitute part of the actual mitzva. 2. The Bavli in Sukka which mandates a she-hechiyanu when building the sukka also requires one when binding the four minim. What does this demonstrate about the binding process? 3. Tosafot (s.v. Ha-oseh - the first one) claims that according to the initial position a she-hechiyanu is recited only when building a sukka for oneself - not when building for others. How can this position be defended in light of the above?
An agricultural or historic holiday?
Wouldn't make more sense to celebrate Sukkot during the month of Nisan instead of Tishrei?
After all, this is the holiday that commemorates our dwelling in 'booths' in the desert after we left Egypt, and it was in the month of Nisan that we first set up camp in the desert! In fact, Sukkot was even the name of Bnei Yisrael's very first camp-site, during that first week of the Exodus, as Sefer Shmot records:
" And the children of Israel journeyed from Rameses to Sukkot, about six hundred thousand men on foot, beside children..." (see Shmot 12:37-39 / note as well that it was in the camp site of Succot when they first baked matza!]
Furthermore, the sole pasuk in Chumash that explains the historical reason for this holiday emphasizes how we must thank God for His special protection and care in the desert immediately after the Exodus:
"You shall sit in sukkot for seven days... in order that future generations may know that I made Bnei Yisrael dwell in sukkot when I brought them out of Egypt..." (see Vayikra 23:42-43).
Pay attention, however, to the special wording of this pasuk - for it doesn't command us to 'remember' (what happened in the desert), rather - we are commanded to 'know' ['lema'an yeid'u doroteichem' / as opposed to 'lema'an tizkeru']!
In the following shiur, we will show how this distinction can help us better understand the historical reason for the holiday of Sukkot, and appreciate why the Torah instructs us celebrate this holiday specifically during the autumn harvest season [i.e. to coincide with the agricultural holiday of "chag ha-asif"].
INTRODUCTION
As you probably recall, we find both an historical reason, as well as an agricultural reason for each of the three 'pilgrimage holidays' [the 'shalosh regalim'].
* In the beginning of the spring ['chag ha-aviv'] we celebrate our Exodus from Egypt = 'chag ha-matzot'
* During the grain harvest ['chag ha-katzir'] we celebrate the giving of the Torah = 'chag shavu'ot'
* During the fruit harvest [chag ha-asif] we celebrate our dwelling in 'booths' in the desert = chag ha-sukkot.
Now the reason why we are commanded to 'remember the Exodus' in the spring is simple - it's because that event took place in the spring (see Devarim 16:1). Similarly, we received the Torah in the month of Sivan, hence we are to commemorate that event seven weeks later - on "Shavuot".
However, there doesn't appear to be any obvious reason for celebrating 'our dwelling in booths in the desert' specifically in Tishrei. After all, this holiday does not commemorate a single event, but rather an entire time period of our national history - that spanned over forty years. So what makes Tishrei special?
In fact, it might have made more sense to commemorate 'our dwelling in sukkot' in Nissan - together with our commemoration of the Exodus. Certainly, both events are related (and as we explained earlier that Sukkot was first mentioned in Chumash when we left Egypt /see Shmot 12:37 & 13:20!).
Nevertheless, the Torah insists that we commemorate our 'desert experience' six months later, in the month of Tishrei (a month that certainly doesn't lack holidays), and specifically at the time of our grain harvest.
To explain why, we begin with a general distinction which relates to the historical reason for celebrating all of the holidays.
REMEMBERING 'WHAT', OR REMEMBERING 'WHY'
We posit that when Torah instructs us to remember a certain key historical event, God is not interested that we simply remember what happened, rather it is more important that we remember why that event took place.
[Recall that in our shiur on chag ha-matzot / Parshat Bo, we applied this principle to our understanding of chag ha-matzot and korban pesach; likewise in our shiurim on the underlying reason for the four fast days in Sefer Zecharya.]
Applying this principle to Sukkot, we posit that we don't sit in the sukka simply to 'remember' [and express thanksgiving] that God provided for our needs during our journey through the desert; rather the Torah commands that we sit in the sukka in order to remember why that entire desert experience was necessary!
Therefore, our shiur will first consider why the entire desert experience was necessary. Then, we will show why the summer harvest becomes an ideal time to commemorate that time period of our history. Finally we will explain why we are commanded to know these events (not just remember them); and why seven days are necessary to accomplish this goal!
LIFE IN THE DESERT - A TRANSITION STAGE
Let's begin by taking a closer look at the Torah's commandment to celebrate Sukkot, noting how the Torah focuses on commemorating the 'desert experience' (and not the Exodus itself):
"You shall sit in sukkot for seven days... - in order that your future generations may know that I made Bnei Yisrael dwell in sukkot when I brought them out of Egypt..."
(see Vayikra 23:43).
In our shiur on Parshat Beshalach, we explained how Bnei Yisrael's various experiences in the desert [after they left Egypt] could be understood as a 'training' period - initiated by God to help transform this nation of slaves into a nation capable of establishing His model nation in the Promised Land.
Even though this process began with a 'big bang' - i.e. the Ten Plagues, the Exodus, the splitting of Red Sea, etc.- those great miracles were necessary to convince Bnei Yisrael of their total dependence upon God (see shiur on Beshalach). However, that high level of miracles could be considered more of an 'attention getter' than an ideal. Sooner or later, Bnei Yisrael would need to learn to recognize God in their daily lives without the help of miracles. But this required a long 'educational' process that would spiritually prepare them for challenges of daily existence once they would inherit the Land of Israel.
In fact, Moshe Rabbeinu himself provides us with a beautiful explanation of the preparatory nature of the entire 'desert experience'! We need only quote from that speech, delivered to Bnei Yisrael as they prepare to finally enter the land, to understand the purpose of their experiences in the desert:
"All these mitzvot which I command you... keep in order that you live... and inherit the Land...
remember the way that God has led you during your wanderings of forty years in the desert - in order to test you with hardships to know what is in your hearts; whether you would keep His commandments, or not...
* "He gave you the manna to eat... in order to teach you that man does not live on bread alone, rather man lives on the words of God...
've-yada'ta" et levavecha...'
[In order that] you should know, that just as a father puts his son through hardship (to train him), so too has God put you through hardship" (See Devarim 8:1-6).
Note how Moshe explains how the 'manna' served as a 'training' food for Bnei Yisrael, to teach them in the desert that their food comes from God, so that when they enter the land of Israel - and make their own food - they will remember that God is the underlying source of their sustenance.
To support these introductory remarks, Moshe continues by explaining why this 'testing period' was necessary:
"...for God is bringing you into a good land... a land of wheat and barely, vines, figs and pomegranates, of olive trees and honey...a land where you will lack nothing...
* Be careful, lest you forget God and fail to keep His commandments. Should you eat and become satiated, and build fine houses and live in them... and everything you own has prospered...
* Beware lest you grow haughty and forget your God who took you out of Egypt...
* Lest you say: My own power and my own might have won this wealth for me.
* Remember that it is the Lord your God who gives you the power to get wealth..." (see Devarim 8:7-19).
It was specifically because daily life in the land of Israel would be without 'obvious miracles' - that this training in the desert was so necessary! As Moshe explains, God is fearful that once Bnei Yisrael cultivate the land and provide for themselves, they may become haughty thinking that 'they did it all themselves' - and hence reminds them how they must always remember 'their lesson' from the desert.
According to Moshe Rabbeinu's speech, this transition period in the desert was necessary to prepare Bnei Yisrael for the spiritual dangers facing their agrarian society, which they are about to establish in the Land of Israel. To recognize the hand of God in a miracle was easy - but to recognize His hand within the nature will be much more difficult.
This background provides us with a very logical reason for the Torah's commandment to celebrate Sukkot on a yearly basis.
As this danger of 'becoming haughty and forgetting God' is so real, it will apply to future generations as well, especially those who never experienced the desert! Hence, the Torah instructs Bnei Yisrael that all future generations must not only remember this 'desert experience', but they must virtually 're-live' [to know it] - by living in a sukka for seven days!
THE MOST FITTING TIME OF THE YEAR
This background also explains the 'advantage' of celebrating Sukkot at the conclusion of the harvest season.
If we are sitting in the 'sukka' to remember why that desert experience was necessary - and if that experience was necessary due to the fear of haughtiness that may stem from economic prosperity - then the 'harvest season' [when economic prosperity is at its highest] is the best time to remember those events, for that is when the fear of haughtiness is greatest!
This fear was not only expressed by Moshe Rabeinu in his speech (as quoted above in 8:3-12), but see also shirat Ha'azinu (see especially 31:16,20 and 32:13-15!). Our own life experience certainly supports the reality of this fear.
Just as dwelling in the desert prepared Bnei Yisrael for their entry into Eretz Yisrael, so too, our sitting in the sukka prepares us for the spiritual challenges that inevitably surface as we gather our produce & reflect on our 'profits' and wealth.
[See Rashbam on Vayikra 23:43, in contrast to the interpretation of Ramban to that pasuk. Our shiur will follow the direction of Rashbam, noting how he also quotes from Devarim chapter 8!]
Therefore, the Torah commands that we celebrate Sukkot at the climax of the agricultural year - as we gather the fruits and 'count our wealth'. It is specifically during this time of year that the spiritual dangers of affluence are greatest. At the height of the harvest season, we must not only 'remember' the lesson of that desert experience, we must actually re-live it, or as the Chumash commands us - we must know it.
KNOWING SOMETHING - In the Biblical Sense
The Torah's use of the phrase 'lema'an yeid'u doroteichem' takes on additional meaning when we consider the deeper meaning of the word 'lada'at' - to know. As we all remember, the Torah uses this word to describe the intimate relationship between husband & wife: 've-Adam yada et Chava ishto' (see Breishit 4:1). [It is not by chance that this word is also used to describe the Tree of Knowledge -'etz ha-da'at' in the story of Gan Eden.]
Later on in Sefer Breishit, when God takes a 'close look' at the people of Sedom - to punish them for their terrible sins - this type of intense relationship as well is described with the verb lada'at - see Breishit 18:21, [Note also Breishit 15:8 & 13.]
Similarly, in preparation for the Exodus, God wants to make sure that Bnei Yisrael will internalize the message of 'Ani Hashem' - that He is their God, and the only God: [See TSC shiur on Parshat Va'era / Ani Hashem.]
To emphasize this commandment, note again how the Torah employs the verb lada'at to describe this intense relationship:
"Therefore, tell Bnei Yisrael that I am God, and I will take them out of..., and save them... and redeem them with an outstretched hand... and take them as My nation and I will be their God ---
"vi-yda'tem ki Ani Hashem Elokeichem"-
In order that you will know that I am the God who has taken you out of Egypt" (see Shmot 6:6-7).
In other words, to 'know something' (or someone) in the Bible entails much more the intellectual knowledge. To know - reflects an intense and very close relationship - to internalize that idea.
This can help us appreciate to meaning of 'lema'an yeid'u doroteichem' in Vayikra 23:43. We are commanded to sit in the sukka not just to remember what happened, but to know it - i.e. to totally identify with the purpose of that 'desert experience' and its eternal message.
Note as well how Moshe Rabbeinu used this very same word when he explained the purpose of the original desert experience: "And you shall know in your hearts..." [that this was a 'training' experience] (see Devarim 8:5).
This also explains the difference between the mitzvot of Pesach and Sukkot. The mitzvot that we observe on Pesach (and chag ha-matzot) are in order to 'remember' [lizkor'] what happened (and why), yet we are not commanded to re-live that experience - for it was a 'one-time' event in Jewish history. In contrast, on Sukkot, we must re-live that 'desert experience' for its underlying purpose is no different today than it was back then - to inculcate the eternal message that man should not become haughty at the height of his prosperity.
WHY SEVEN DAYS?
This background can also help us understand why the Torah requires that we sit in the sukka specifically for seven days. Note that all the agricultural holidays revolve around the number seven.
* 7 days of chag ha-matzot in the spring;
* 7 weeks until chag ha-shavu'ot;
* 7 days of chag ha-sukkot
As we explained in our shiur on Parshat Breishit [perek aleph], the Torah's description of the story of Creation in seven days emphasizes that the creation of what we call nature was not by chance, nor a 'balance of powers' among a pantheon of gods, bur rather - the willful act of one God, for a purpose. Therefore, each time that seven is found in Chumash (e.g. Shabbat etc.), it is to remind us that God is the creator of, and master over, all nature.
Thus, it is only 'natural' that we find the number seven prominent in the agricultural holidays, as we thank God for His providence over nature, and recognize that He is the true source of our prosperity.
FROM SUCCOT TO SHMINI ATZERET
The above interpretation can also help us understand the importance of Shmini Atzeret. As the shalosh regalim come to their conclusion, we add one extra day of celebration, void of any specific mitzva, other than rejoicing with God. Even though it is the 'eighth day' of Sukkot, we do not need to sit in the sukka, nor do we need to take the lulav - for the preparatory stage is now over!
On the other hand, we cannot just jump from the desert right back into the Land of Israel. Instead, a time of transition is necessary to wean us from the 'desert environment' back to daily life. [This also emerges as a primary theme in Sefer Yehoshua.]
This may explain why we don't sit in the sukka on this 'final' day of Sukkot, for it represents how we must return to our homes. We keep the essence of our 'desert-like experience' - our closeness to God - and make it the basis of our daily natural existence.
From this perspective, one could suggest that we do not simply leave the sukka on Shmini Atzeret, rather we bring the sukka into our homes. We then rejoice with the Torah [dancing seven hakafot - just like Yericho!), for its mitzvot - that we received in the desert - enable us to continue the spirit of our 'Sukkot honeymoon' with God throughout the entire year
.
chag sameiach,
menachem
=========================
FOR FURTHER IYUN & some mini-shiurim
A. FROM THE SUKKA TO THE HOUSE
Based on the last point in the above shiur, we can explain our custom on Hoshana Rabba (7th day of Sukkot) afternoon to bring our 'keilim' (vessels) from the sukka back into the house - in preparation for Shmini Atzeret. This may highlight the primary purpose of this Yom Tov, i.e. to move the spiritual message of the sukka into our homes for the remainder of the year.]
[In a similar manner, the 7 days of Sukkot followed by Shmini Atzeret could be compared to the 7 day milu'im ceremony of the mishkan which was required before the special yom ha-shmini dedication ceremony (see Vayikra 8:1-10:1.). Note the from the eighth day onward, the mishkan became functional, but seven day are necessary as preparation. [Note also first mishna in Yoma - 7 days before Yom Kippur, the kohen must prepare himself etc.]]
B. PRI ETZ HADAR
The conclusions of our shiur may shed light on Chazal's explanation of 'pri etz hadar' (see Vayikra 23:40). Rashi quotes two Midrashim for etz hadar:
1) A tree that the 'taste of its fruit' is the same as the 'taste of the tree'.
2) A fruit that 'dwells on the tree' from year to year.
(see Rashi 23:40 & Masechet Sukka 35a)
The first Midrash is quite difficult for it relates to what Chazal refer to as 'chet ha-aretz' - i.e. the 'original sin' of the land during the process of Creation [see Breishit 1:11 / & Rashi on 'etz pri']. Even though God commanded that the land bring forth an 'etz pri oseh pri' - a fruit tree giving fruit - the land brought forth instead an 'etz oseh pri' - a tree giving fruit. Even though there doesn't seem to be much of a difference between these two expressions, Chazal relate this minute change to the manner by which nature appears to 'hide' God, or act itself as a god.
This is a bit difficult to explain, [and the following is an over simplification of a very complex topic] but in a 'nutshell', when the tree gives fruit every year, it appears that the tree itself creates the fruit. When man contemplates this phenomena in nature, that trees 'on their own' can create fruit, he may conclude that trees have their own power - or that there may be some nature god who 'programs' these trees (how else does it know what fruit to make). In other words, man begins to see various powers within nature, and relates them to many gods (e.g. fertility gods, rain gods, grain gods, sun gods etc.). This leads man to 'worship' these gods to ensure that nature produces the proper produce and provide a successful harvest.
In contrast to this dangerous misconception, God wants man to realize that there is only one God behind nature, even though the way that nature works often leads man to a very different conclusion. [See Rav Yehuda HaLevi's explanation of perek aleph in Breishit and 'shem Elokim' in HaKuzari ma'amar revi'i.]
In contrast to all of the other trees that give fruit according to the standard one year agricultural cycle, the etrog tree is very different. Instead of its fruit growing in the spring and harvested in the fall like all other trees, the fruit of the etrog can stay on the tree year after year, or as Chazal explain 'ha-dar' - a fruit that lives on the tree from year to year ['ha-dar ba-ilan mi-shana le-shana']. This special phenomena sort of 'breaks the rules' of nature - indicating that there must be a higher power above nature! By taking specifically an etrog on Sukkot, we take a powerful symbol from nature itself to remind ourselves that God is above nature, and He alone controls it.
C KOHELET & the Harvest Season
Relate the minhag to read Sefer Kohelet on Sukkot to above shiur and Devarim 31:7-13 (mitzvat Hakhel). Carefully compare the end of Sefer Kohelet to Devarim 31:12-13! Note also how Kohelet describes the spiritual problems relating to affluence.
D. VE-ACHALTA VE-SAVA'TA - & then what?
Recall how our shiur was based on Devarim chapter 8. In that chapter, review once again 8:10, the famous pasuk that we are learning birkat ha-mazon from, paying careful attention to its context.
Then, review Devarim 31:14-21, noting especially 31:20, and the phrase 've-achal ve-sava...'. Note how these psukim thematically relate to Devarim 32:7-15 in shirat Ha'azinu!
Can you explain the deeper meaning of the contrast between 've-achal ve-sava ve-dashen' and 've-achalta ve-sava'ta u-beirachta'!?
SOME ADDITIONAL MINI-SHIURIM
I. FROM YOM KIPPUR TO SUKKOT
We are all familiar with the custom to begin work on our sukka immediately after Yom Kippur. Although this custom is often understood as simply a great way to 'get off to a good start', ['mi-chayil el chayil'], it may also allude to something more significant
First of all, recall that the original Yom Kippur in Chumash was the day that Moshe came down with the second luchot and middot ha-rachamim. Recall as well that with the help of these middot, God had agreed to Moshe's plea that He return His Shchina to Bnei Yisrael, even though He had taken it away in the aftermath of chet ha-egel / see Shmot 33;1-8). Nonetheless, the Shchina itself, even though God promised that it would return, does not return immediately, rather - only some six months later - after Bnei Yisrael build the mishkan (see Shmot 25:8 & Vayikra 9:1-5!).
In fact, immediately after receiving the second luchot, the first thing that Moshe does is gather the people together and charge them with the building of the mishkan (note Parshat Vayakhel). Even though the Shchina is returning, Bnei Yisrael must become active in this process; they must do something to 'receive' the Shchina. Just like Moshe had to now carve his own second luchot ['psol lecha...' / see Shmot 34:1 (in contrast to the first luchot which God Himself had carved)], in a similar manner Bnei Yisrael must now become more active and build the mishkan.
The mitzva to build the sukka immediately after Yom Kippur may reflect this same idea. Just as Bnei Yisrael began to work on the mishkan after (and as a result of) Yom Kippur, we also begin building our sukkot in which can 'meet the Shchina' in a manner similar to the purpose of the mishkan.
We can also relate this to PART II of our shiur on Yom Kippur in regard to the deeper meaning of kappara.
Recall from our shiur on Yom Kippur that one aspect of kappara was to 'protect' man, allowing him to encounter the Shchina. If indeed our kappara on Yom Kippur was successful, then we should now be ready to encounter the Shchina. Considering that our sitting under the 'sechach' of the sukka symbolizes our sitting under the 'clouds of God's glory' in the desert ["sukkot kenegged ananei ha-kavod' / Sukka 11b], then Yom Kippur could actually be considered a preparation for Sukkot! To enable us to 'dwell' together with the Shchina in our sukka, we must first complete the process of kappara on Yom Kippur.
This thematic connection can help us understand many other halachot and customs of Sukkot.
For example, the gemara in Sukka 5b learns the minimum height of the sukka - 10 'tephachim' - from the height of the kaporet! [Recall last week's shiur which discussed the significance of the kaporet in relation to the Shchina / see also complete sugya in Masechet Sukka beginning at the bottom of 4b.] In fact, the same shoresh as 'sechach' is found in the pasuk which describes the keruvim on the kaporet: 've-hayu ha-keruvim... sochechim be-kanfeihem al ha-kaporet...' (see Shmot 25:20).
This pasuk clearly shows how the sechach of our sukka reflects our dwelling under the Shchina.
II. THE DOUBLE MUSSAF ON SUKKOT
In Parshat Pinchas (Bamidbar chps. 28-29) we find a complete list of all the korbanot mussaf which we offered in addition to the daily tamid offering in the bet ha-mikdash.
If you make a table of the korbanot for each holiday, you will notice an interesting pattern:
On each of the Tishrei holidays (except Sukkot), i.e. Rosh Hashana, Yom Kippur, and Shmini Atzeret, we offer an identical korban mussaf - 1 'par', 1 'ayil', and 7 'kevasim'.
On each of the shalosh regalim (except Sukkot), i.e. chag ha-matzot and Shavu'ot, we offer an identical korban mussaf - 2 parim, 1 ayil, and 7 kevasim.
The mussaf of Sukkot is quite different, each day the amount of parim changes (from 13 down to 7), and each day we offer 2 eilim and 14 kevasim! [See Bamidbar 29:12-34.]
The additional parim are the most striking difference, and Chazal explain that these are added for the 70 nations for whom Sukkot is also celebrated (13+12+11+10+9+8+7=70). [See also Zecharya chapter 14, haftara on first day Sukkot.]
However, the extra ayil & kevasim also require explanation.
Note, that they are double the number that are offered on all of the other holidays. In other words, instead of 1 ayil we bring 2 eilim; instead of 7 kevasim we bring 14 kevasim. This indicates that there must be something 'double' about Sukkot.
The answer may be quite simple. Sukkot is both one of the shalosh regalim (see Shmot 23:14-17 & Devarim 16:1-17), and a Tishrei holiday as well. Therefore, it requires a double mussaf. In other words, it should have daily:
3 parim [2+1];
2 eilim [1+1];
14 kevasim [7+7].
However, we add an additional 49 parim [10+9+8+7+6+5+4] to reach a total of 70 [49+(3x7)=49+21=70], as explained above.
[Again we find 49 [7x7] related to the shalosh regalim.]
This may reflect the double nature of Sukkot. On the one hand it is one of the shalosh regalim in which we thank Hashem for our harvest of the agricultural year which has just finished. At the same time, we stand in anticipation of the agricultural year which is about to begin, awaiting its important rainy season (see shiur on Rosh Ha'shana), just as we do on all of the other Tishrei holidays.
This 'double nature' is reflected by the two times in daily davening on Sukkot when we hold the lulav & etrog, during:
1) Hallel - to thank God for the harvest of the past year;
2) Hoshanot - to pray to God in anticipation of the new Year.
Similarly, this 'double nature' may also reflect the two reasons that Chazal [see Sukka 11b] give us for sitting in the sukka.
1) sukkot mamash - real booths, to protect us from the sun.
This may reflect the aspect of the harvest holiday, where we need to build temporary booths in the field as we gather our fruits in the fields.
2) sukkot kenegged ananei ha-kavod - representing God's Shchina which protected Bnei Yisrael in the desert.
III. NOT BY CHANCE
Regarding for celebrating each of the shalosh regalim.
In our shiur, we discussed the connection between the historical and agricultural reason for Succot. Now we will discuss that connection in regard to the other two shalosh regalim.
The fact that the Torah provides two reasons for celebrating sukkot should not surprise us. After all, the other two shalosh regalim - i.e. chag ha-matzot & Shavu'ot - also carry both historical and agricultural perspectives:
Chag ha-matzot not only commemorates the events of the Exodus from Egypt, but also must be celebrated at the onset of the spring. [See Shmot 13:3-4, 23:14-15, & Devarim 16:1-2.] Consequently, on that holiday the Torah commands us to bring the 'omer' offering from the first barley harvest (see Vayikra 23:10-11).
Similarly, even though chag Shavu'ot commemorates the historical event of matan Torah, the Torah presents it primarily as an agricultural holiday (= chag ha-katzir), marking the conclusion of the wheat harvest. [See Shmot 23:16 & Vayikra 23:15-17.]
This phenomena - that each of the shalosh regalim contains both historical and agricultural significance - begs explanation, and suggests that we search for a thematic connection between each perspective - for each holiday.
THEMATIC CONNECTIONS
Recall from our study of Sefer Shmot that God orchestrated the events of the Exodus in such a manner that we would celebrate this event specifically at the onset of the spring. [See Shmot 13:2-3, 23:14-15, & Devarim 16:1-2.]
Thematically, this may suggest that our freedom from bondage reflects only the first stage of the redemption process, just as the spring is only the first stage in the yearly cycle of the harvest season.
However, if this assumption is correct, then we should extend this reasoning to the other two holidays as well. One could suggest that Shavu'ot and Sukkot, respectively, each focuses on a certain aspect of the culmination of the redemption process that began with the Exodus. Let's explain how.
Recall how the Torah presented a double purpose for the Exodus from Egypt:
1) to receive the Torah at Har Sinai
"... ta'avdun et Elokim ba-har ha-zeh" (see Shmot 3:12)
2) to inherit the Land of Israel
"…a’aleh etchem…el eretz zavat chalav u-dvash"
(see 3:17).
[See TSC shiur on Parshat Shmot.]
This double purpose may be reflected in the respective historical aspects of the two 'harvest' holidays that follow the 'spring' holiday. Clearly, Shavu'ot - the 'grain harvest' holiday - commemorates the events of matan Torah. Hence, we must conclude that Sukkot - the fruit harvest holiday - must commemorate in some manner our entry into the Land of Israel.
We discussed this aspect in detail in the above shiur.
SUKKOT IN THE CYCLE OF FESTIVALS
Towards the end of the "cycle of the festivals", as
presented in parashat Emor, we are faced with a difficulty.
The portion itself follows chronological order: First it
deals with Shabbat, and then the order of festivals, starting
with Pesach (since Nisan serves as the beginning of the year
for the Regalim [Rosh Hashana 1:1]), and ending with Sukkot.
Then comes the conclusion of the portion: "These are the
feasts of the Lord, which you shall proclaim to be holy
gatherings... beside the Sabbaths of the Lord..." (Vayikra
23:37-38).
And then, surprisingly enough, the Torah speaks again
about Sukkot: "Also on the fifteenth day of the seventh
month, when you have gathered in the fruit of the land, you
shall keep a feast to the Lord seven days... And you shall
take for yourselves on the first day a "pri etz hadar"... you
shall dwell in booths seven days... that your generations may
know that I made the children of Israel dwell in booths..."
(ibid 39-43). And then the closing again: "And Moshe
declared to the children of Israel the appointed seasons of
the Lord" (ibid 44).
The way in which the Torah divides the discussion about
Sukkot is somewhat surprising: part of it is included in the
portion dealing with the festivals, and the rest is included
afterwards as a sort of addendum. We have dealt with this
question before and have suggested some possible solutions
(see Shema'tin, vol. 67-68). Here we shall attempt to examine
the issue from a new angle.
II.
It appears that Sukkot is a part of two separate cycles:
a. the cycle of the Regalim (pilgrimage festivals)
b. the festivals of the month of Tishrei.
On one hand, Sukkot is the third of the Regalim
(following Pesach and Shavuot).(1) On the other hand, Sukkot
is the culmination of the festivals of the month of Tishrei:
Rosh Hashana, Yom Kippur and Sukkot (and Shmini Atzeret).
It may be that the portion of the festivals, Parashat
Emor, is comprised of two cycles. The Three Regalim form the
major cycle while the festivals of Tishrei form a minor cycle.
The major cycle, on the one hand, encompasses the whole
parasha, which opens with the words, "And the Lord spoke to
Moshe saying, Speak to the children of Israel and say to them,
the feasts of the Lord..." (Vayikra 23:1-2) and closes with
"And Moshe declared to the children of Israel the appointed
seasons of the Lord" (ibid 44). The minor cycle, on the other
hand, is situated in the middle, in parentheses as it were, in
pesukim 23-38. Here too we find the closing: "These are the
feasts of the Lord...", followed by the rest of the major
cycle, which returns to the subject of Sukkot. Hence the
structure of parshat hamo'adot is as follows:
- Pesach
- Shavuot
- (Rosh Hashana, Yom Kippur, Sukkot)
- Sukkot
III.
This may enable us to explain the different aspects of
the festival of Sukkot. On the one hand, it is a particularly
Jewish festival: "Every citizen of Israel should dwell in
sukkot in order that your generations may know that I provided
shelter the children of Israel in sukkot when I brought them
out of the land of Egypt..." (Vayikra 23:42-43).
On the other hand, Sukkot also has a universal aspect,
which manifests itself in the sacrifices of the day. As Rabbi
Eliezer explains: "These seventy oxen [the total number
sacrificed over the seven days of Sukkot] - of whom are they
representative? The seventy nations" (Sukka 55b). This
aspect of the festival is expressed in the vision of Zekharia
concerning the nations of the world, which we read in the
haftara of the day: "And it shall come to pass that everyone
that is left of all the nations who came against Jerusalem
shall go up from year to year to worship the King, the Lord of
hosts, and to keep the feast of Sukkot. And whoever does not
come up of all the families of the earth to Jerusalem to
worship the King, the Lord of hosts, upon them shall be no
rain. And if the family of Egypt does not go up, and does not
come, then they shall have no overflow. This shall be the
plague, with which the Lord will smite the nations that shall
not come up to keep the feast of Sukkot. This shall be the
punishment of Egypt, and the punishment of all nations that do
not come up to keep the feast of Sukkot" (Zekharia 14:16-19).
The "Jewish" aspect of Sukkot is what characterizes it as
part of the cycle of the Shalosh Regalim. This cycle is
particular to Israel. Pesach is the festival of freedom for
Israel from slavery in Egypt, and we are warned: "The
stranger shall not eat of it..." (Shemot 12:43-47). Shavuot
is the festival of the giving of the Torah, and it is given to
Israel specifically. In the same way, Sukkot is a festival
for Israel, in order that all future generations will know
that God provided the children of Israel with sukkot.
However, Sukkot is also one of the "festivals of
Tishrei", the festivals of judgment, and judgment is passed
over the entire world, as the Mishna teaches: "On Rosh
Hashana all the creatures of the world pass before You as
sheep" (Rosh Hashana 1:2). The timing of Rosh Hashana is also
a result of its being "the beginning of Your creation, a
remembrance of the first day..." (2).
The seventh day of Sukkot represents the final sealing of
judgement which was passed on Rosh Hashana (Zohar, Vayikra 31;
Shibbolei HaLeket, siman 371; Sefer HaManhig, Hilkhot Etrog,
38). Perhaps even the judgement for water which is passed on
this day has some continuity from Rosh Hashana, since water is
a basic necessity for life. As a day of judgement, and as
part of the festivals of the month of Tishrei, the month of
creation, Sukkot is a universal festival.
IV.
The two commandments particular to this festival - sukka
and the arba minim - symbolize these two aspects.
The commandment of the sukka is a remembrance of the
sukkot in which Bnei Yisrael dwelled during their stay in the
desert. There is disagreement among the Tannaim as to the
nature of these "sukkot", and the prevailing opinion is that
this is a reference to the Ananei HaKavod (divine clouds of
glory): "The sukkot mentioned in the Torah, in which Israel
dwelled, are a reference to the Ananei HaKavod which
surrounded them in order to protect them from the elements"
(Tur, Orah Haim, siman 725). But these clouds also served the
purpose of providing a protective barrier between Israel and
the other nations, thus realizing - even during their sojourn
in the desert - the prophecy, "They will be a people which
dwells alone and is not counted among the nations." And so
the sukka represents the national uniqueness and separateness.
Therefore the Torah emphasizes, "every citizen of Israel will
dwell in sukkot."
The arba minim, on the other hand, which are waved in all
directions, represent the move outwards, in the direction of
the nations of the world. Indeed, the arba minim are
particularly bound up with the issue of the judgement of this
festival - that of water. Everyone joins in the Simhat
HaMayim. The essence of the commandment of the arba minim is
in the Temple: "And you shall celebrate before the Lord your
God seven days" (Vayikra 23:40). The Temple also has a
universalistic aspect in that it is meant to serve as a House
of Prayer for all the nations (Yishayahu 56:7). (3) Even the
sacrifices of this festival include representation for the
nations of the world.
The specifically Jewish side finds expression in the
sacrifices of the festival; on Shmini Atzeret, only one ox is
sacrificed: "Why one single ox? To represent one single
nation" (Sukka 55b).
V.
The proof provided by the two mitzvot of the festival as
expressions of its two aspects, and the fact that the essence
of the mitzvah of the four species is only realized if it is
carried out in the Temple, may be the key to solving our
dilemma.
The Yalkut Shimoni comments on the pasuk, "You shall not
plant an ashera of any tree near the altar of the Lord your
God" (Devarim 16:21) as follows: "Not even a house, not even
a sukka." If there could be no sukka near the altar, how,
then, how, then, were the kohanim to eat the remains of the
menakhot on Hol HaMoed (since eating is forbidden outside a
sukka)? (4) We are even more astonished at the following
description in the Gemara: "R' Yehoshua ben Hananya said,
When we would celebrate the Simhat Beit HaShoeva, we would
have no sleep. How was this possible? The first hour was
devoted to the Tamid of Shaharit, from there we went on to
tefilla... from there to the Tamid of Bein HaArbayim, and from
then on was the Simhat Beit HaShoeva" (Sukka 53b).
The Gemara questions this, pointing out that a person
cannot manage for even three days consecutively without sleep
(as we know it from Rabbi Yohanan's statement regarding an
oath) and answers: "Rather, what it means is that we did not
sleep properly, but rather dozed on each other's shoulders."
There was no proper sleep, but there was dozing. But is
dozing not considered as a type of short sleep? Even a short
sleep is forbidden outside of a sukka (Sukka 26)!
One answer provides the solution to both of these
problems: No sukka was required in the Temple courtyard,
neither for sleep nor for eating. There, only one aspect of
sukkot is emphasized - not the separate and individual aspect,
but rather the breaking down of barriers, the universalistic
aspect of the festival.
Perhaps what is meant, however, is something different:
The Temple is itself like a sukka, since the same function
which the sukka fulfills for each individual in Israel, is
fulfilled by the Temple (and its courtyard) for the nation of
Israel. Sitting in the sukka is termed in the Zohar (Vayikra
103) "yeshiva betzila demehimnuta" - sitting in the shade of
faith. And there is no place more worthy of being considered
the seat of faith than the Beit HaMikdash.
VI.
"One of the characteristics of Sukkot is simha (joy):
Although we are commanded to rejoice on every
festival, on Sukkot there was additional joy in the
Temple, as it is written: "You shall rejoice before
The Lord your God seven days"... It is a mitzva to be
abundantly joyful..." (Rambam, Hilkhot Lulav, 8:12ff)
The extra joy of the festival seems to be derived from
the accumulated joy from the other Regalim, together with the
joy of the Yamim Noraim (since even the latter are festivals,
and are celebrated with joy). We learn this both from Torah
and from Hazal. Ezra and Nehemia told the nation on Rosh
Hashana, "Go your way, eat well and drink sweet drinks and
send portions to those for whom nothing is prepared... for the
joy of the Lord is your strength." (Nehemia 8:10). And so it
was: "And all the people went their way to eat and to drink
and to send portions and to make a great celebration..." (ibid
12).
And Hazal teach with regard to Yom Kippur: "There were
no joyous days in Israel... like Yom Kippur" (Mishna, end of
Taanit).
Thus the days of Sukkot are the epitome of all the
festivals of the year, and the joy of these days is the
culmination of the joy of all the festivals.
Footnotes:
(1) Alternatively it may be that the two festivals that
comprise Sukkot - Sukkot and Shmini Atzeret - parallel Pesach
and Shavuot, as indicated by Pesikta deRabi Kahana, piska 28,
on the pasuk: "BaYom ha-Shmini Atzeret" (Bamidbar 29:35):
"Just as the atzeret of Pesach is fifty days away from Pesach,
so this atzeret should be fifty days away. So why is it
adjacent to Sukkot... because after Sukkot the rains begin and
the roads are difficult to travel." According to this, the
seven days of Sukkot parallel the seven days of Pesach, and
Shmini Atzeret parallels Shavuot.
(2) Yom Kippur is the day on which forgiveness culminates for
ISRAEL (Rambam, Hilkhot Teshuva, 2:7) for it is the day upon
which Moshe descended from Har Sinai with the second tablets
and the message that God had forgiven the nation. It is also
the day of the re-giving of the Torah (end of Masekhet
Taanit), which is particular to Israel. But the obligation of
the day, that of Teshuva, is incumbent on the entire world, as
expressed by the haftara which we read at Mincha and which
deals with the Teshuva of non-Jews - the population of Ninveh.
(3) Also, Sukkot was celebrated already in the desert, and we
remember those sukkot. The mitzva of the arba minim, on the
other hand, seems to have become obligatory only when Bnei
Yisrael entered their land. While walking in the desert they
were a "solitary nation," but with the entry into the land
they were faced with the challenge of becoming a kingdom of
priests and a light unto the nations. For this reason the
Torah was written in seventy languages (see Sota 36a).
(4) On this question see the discussion in Dvar Malkhut by
the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Erev Shabbat Ki Tetze 5751.
Sukkos - Why Booths?
The holiday of Sukkos starts on the 15th day of Tishrei. The holiday of Sukkos is characterized by the unique commandment of dwelling in Sukkos - temporary, hut-like dwellings, as the Torah says in Vayikra (23: 42-43 ) "In booths you are to dwell for seven days ...so that your generations will know that I caused the children of Israel to dwell in booths when I took them from the land of Egypt...."
The Sages in the tractate of Succah (11b) disagree as to what the "booths" that the Israelites dwelt in refer to. Rabi Eliezer says that these booths are a reference to the miraculous "Ananai HaKavod," the "Clouds of Glory," with which G-d surrounded the Israelites throughout their forty year sojourn in the desert after having left Egypt. These clouds protected the Israelites from the elements and the hot desert floor, kept the Jews' clothing clean, and guided the nation of Israel through the desert. Rabi Akiva maintains, however, that these "booths" refer to the actual booths or huts that the Israelites built while in the desert to serve as their dwellings.
The Aruch HaShulchan (Orech Chayim 625 ) raises the following question: Whereas Rabi Eliezer's booths were manifestations of a great miracle that G-d performed for the Jews in the desert, and certainly merits a commandment commemorating the infinite kindness and protection of G-d, Rabbi Akiva's interpretation is most puzzling in light of the commandment to dwell in the Sukkah. What is the significance of the huts that the Jews lived in while in the desert?
The Aruch HaShulchan answers his own question. According to Rabi Akiva, the Succah commemorates the greatness of the Jewish people. Their faith in G-d was so complete and so total that they traveled into the uninhabitable desert wasteland at G-d's command. In this wasteland, the Jews did not even have permanent dwellings, but merely booths, trusting in G-d that He would care for their every need in the wilderness, which of course, He did.
Based on what we have seen, both Rabi Eliezer's and Rabi Akiva's interpretation of the Israelite's "booths" in the desert relate our observance of the commandment of Sukkos to G-d's miraculous protection of the Jews during their forty year sojourn through the desert on route to the land of Israel. This protection was not furnished only to the Jewish people while in the desert, but in His infinite kindness, G-d has extended that protection to our people throughout the ages. This special protection, symbolized by the Sukkah, has ensured the continued existence and survival of the Jewish people until this very day.
Sukkos - The Four Species
There is a commandment that is unique to Sukkos - the commandment to dwell in the Sukkah. There is another commandment which is also unique to Sukkos - the commandment to take the Four Species. In Vayikra (23:40) the verse says "And you shall take for yourself on the first day the fruit of a goodly tree, branches of palm trees, the boughs of thick trees, and willows of the brook, and you shall rejoice before Hashem your G-d for seven days." The Gemora in the tractate of Sukkah ( 35a) explains the verse as follows: the "fruit of a goodly tree is an Esrog (citron); the branch of the palm tree is the Lulav; the "boughs of thick trees" are Hadasim (myrtle); and, the "willows of the brook" are Aravos (willow branches).
The Sefer HaChinuch (324) explains why we have this precept of the taking of the Four Species. As an introduction to the reason, he writes that man is influenced by those actions which he does on a regular basis. His thoughts are drawn to that which he does constantly, whether it be good or bad. This is why Hashem has given us many Mitzvos (commandments). By increasing the number of Mitzvos which we perform, we will always have opportunity to do Mitzvos, we will always be doing Mitzvos, and therefore have Mitzvos (and Hashem) on our mind. Furthermore, we will also be doing good all day long, for which we will be rewarded. By performing the commandments, we are to constantly focus our thoughts toward the good, and we are to remember and assure that we conduct ourselves in an honest and righteous fashion.
The reason for the taking of the four species is very similar to this reasoning. The holiday of Sukkos has another name besides "Sukkos:'' The other name is "Chag Ha'Asif," "The Harvest Festival." It has this name because at this time of the year the crops are gathered and fruits are harvested and brought into the house. The harvest is a time of joy and happiness. G-d commanded that we have a festival at this time of happiness, so that we could take this natural reaction and channel it towards Hashem. Hashem, by His command that this happiness should be directed towards Him, provided us with another opportunity to serve Him, thereby surrounding and accustoming ourselves to the performance of Mitzvos, and meriting reward at the same time. By merely being happy, a natural reaction at this time of the year, we are fulfilling a commandment of Hashem thereby immersing ourselves in the performance of a mitzvah and meriting reward.
However, since manifestations of joy and happiness are accomplished largely through physical and material expressions, there is a danger that the manifestations of joy will be in a way that is anything but a channeling of happiness directed towards G-d. A person may come to forget Hashem during this highly emotional time and act in a way that is not in accordance with Hashem's commandments. Therefore Hashem commanded that we should take in our hands objects that will remind us that all the rejoicing of our hearts should be for His sake and for His glory. Hashem also desired that the "reminder" be something that in it of itself causes happiness and joy, as the season is a joyful one. Therefore, the Sefer HaChinuch writes, Hashem commanded that we take the four species because "it is known in the ways of nature that all four species gladden the heart of those who see them."
The Sefer HaChinuch adds that there is another significance to the Four Species, as they resemble certain distinctive organs of a person. The Esrog resembles the heart, which is, as the Sefer HaChinuch notes, "the seat of the intelligence." We take a heart-shaped specie to signify that we should serve Hashem with our intelligence. The Lulav is like the spine, that which is a main element in man. We take the Lulav to signify that one should direct his entire body towards the worship of Hashem. We take the myrtle, whose leaves resemble eyes, to imply that one, on this day of happiness, should not let his eyes lead him astray. We take a willow, whose leaves resemble lips, to signify that one should focus his words and be cautious not to use them improperly at this time of rejoicing.