________________________________________________________
ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler of Kollel Iyun Hadaf
daf@dafyomi.co.il, www.dafyomi.co.il
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
________________________________________________________
 Previous |
SUKAH 41 |  Next |
 Ask the Kollel |
(a) According to Rav Ashi's initial statement, it is only by the original fruit that Rebbi Elazar argues with Rebbi Yochanan, but as for the second fruit, he concedes that one may even redeem it by way of Chilul. Nevertheless, the Tana speaks about 'Lakach' even by the second and by the third fruit (rather than 'Chilel') - because he had to do so by the original fruit.
(b) If someone wishes to purchase a shirt with a Sela of Shevi'is the problem that arises is - that the shirt will adopt Kedushas Shevi'is, and unlike food, that is soon eaten, it will normally survive the time of Bi'ur.
(c) So the Tana of another Beraisa suggests - that he contacts a storekeeper with whom he is acquainted (i.e. whom he can trust) and buys from him fruit with his Sela. Then he gives the fruit back to the storekeeper as a gift (who must treat it with Kedushas Shevi'is), and, in return, the storekeeper gives him back his Sela (which is now Chulin) as a gift, thus enabling him to now purchase his shirt.
(d) The fact that the Beraisa insists that he transfers the Kedushah of the Sela via a storekeeper, and not on his own fruit - proves that one may only transfer Shemitah fruit (even if it is not the original fruit) by way of purchasing, and not by way of Chilul. The Beraisa can only be speaking about the second fruit - since Sela'im do not grow on trees.
(a) According to Rav Ashi's re-worded statement - it is only by the second fruit that Rebbi Yochanan argues with Rebbi Elazar, but as far as the first fruit is concerned, even he concedes that it may not be redeemed by way of purchasing.
(b) When the Tana in the Beraisa that supports Rebbi Yochanan, speaks about transferring Shevi'is - he does not mean first-hand Shevi'is, but 'Dmei Shevi'is' (i.e. the goods with which he exchanged the Shevi'is).
(c) This must be the case - because, if the Tana was referring to the original Shevi'is and Ma'aser Sheni fruits, it would not be possible to change Ma'aser Sheni for anything other than money, as the Torah writes in Re'eh "v'Nasata b'kesef, v'Tzarta ha'Kesef b'Yad'cha").
(a) We learn from the Pasuk in Emor "u'Semachtem Lifnei Hash-m Elokeichem Shiv'as Yamim" - that it is only in front of Hash-m (in the Beis Hamikdash) that one takes Lulav for seven days, but elsewhere, only one day ...
(b) ... even in Yerhushalayim.
(c) After the Churban Beis-Hamikdash, Raban Yochanan ben Zakai instituted - that one should take Lulav seven days everywhere, in memory of the Beis Hamikdash.
(d) He also instituted that 'Yom Henef Kulo Asur', forbidding Chadash the entire day of the sixteenth of Nisan, even though min ha'Torah, it is permitted (as we shall see shortly).
(e) We learn from the Pasuk in Yirmeyahu that ends "Tziyon Hi, Doresh Ein Lah" - that one needs to seek Tziyon, by commemorating it.
(a) 'Chadash' - is the new crop that took root after the previous Omer was brought on the second day of Pesach.
(b) We learn from the Pasuk in Emor (in connection with Chadash) "Ad Etzem ha'Yom ha'Zeh" (implying as soon as the day arrives) that - when there is no Beis Hamikdash, Chadash is permitted already from the morning of the sixteenth.
(c) Raban Yochanan ben Zakai forbade it until the seventeenth - because he is concerned that people who are living when there is no Beis Hamikdash, might take their cue from there, and continue to eat Chadash in subsequent years already from dawn-break, even after the Beis Hamikdash has already been built.
(d) The problem with this, assuming the Beis Hamikdash will be built any time up to the sixteenth of Nisan - is that Raban Yochanan ben Zakai should then have only decreed until midday of the sixteenth (since the Kohanim, who were quick, had always brought the Korban by then).
(a) So the Takanah takes into account that the Beis Hamikdash may be built on the night of the sixteenth of Nisan or just before Sheki'ah of the sixteenth. The problem with that is - that it may neither be built on Yom-Tov, nor at night-time (see Tosfos DH 'I Nami').
(b) We solve the problem by confining the prohibition by the first two Batei Mikdash, which were built by man; whereas we are speaking about the third B.H., which will be Divinely-constructed, and which will come down from Heaven ready-made, when the time comes.
(c) And this is what sparked off Raban Yochanan ben Zakai's Takanah - because, seeing as the Beis Hamikdash will only be constructed so late, there will not be sufficient time to prepare the Omer (which requires many processes, including sifting it thirteen times), in which case, it will not be ready by midday of the sixteenth. Consequently, he forbade Chadash all day.
41b----------------------------------------41b
(a) Alternatively, Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak explains, Rebbi Yochanan ben Zakai holds like his great-grand-Talmid Rebbi Yehudah - who Darshens that the Pasuk in Emor "Ad Etzem ha'Yom ha'Zeh" means until the end of the sixteenth day (because according to him, the word "Ad" is inclusive).
(b) In reality, Raban Yochanan ben Zakai himself holds like Rebbi Yehudah. Nevertheless, Rebbi Yehudah (in the Mishnah in Menachos) disagrees with him - because he misunderstood what R. Yochanan ben Zakai meant. Based on the Lashon 've'Hiskin', he thought that he had introduced a Rabbinical institution, when in fact, he had Darshened it from exactly the same Pasuk as Rebbi Yehudah himself ...
(c) ... and the Mishnah in Menachos uses the expression 'Hiskin Raban Yochanan ben Zakai' - because until then, they used to eat Chadash from midday (on the assumption that the Omer had been brought by then). But now that the Beis Hamikdash was destroyed, it became necessary to institute a new state of affairs matters, albeit based on the Pasuk "Ad Etzem ha'Yom ha'Zeh".
(a) The Mishnah now discusses what they used to do with their Lulavim when the first day of Sukos fell on Shabbos. The Tana informs us - that they would bring their Lulavim to Shul before Shabbos. The following morning, each person would recognize his own Lulav and take it.
(b) If Shabbos fell on any other day of Sukos (after Raban Yochanan ben Zakai's Takanah to Bentch Lulav throughout Sukos) - taking the Lulav did not override Shabbos.
(c) Rebbi Yosi that someone who carried his Lulav into the street on the first day of Sukos that fell on Shabbos - is Patur from bringing a Chatas, because he was busy with the Mitzvah of Lulav (which he had the authority to do).
(a) We learn that one cannot fulfill the Mitzvah of Lulav with somebody else's Lulav on the first day of Sukos - from the Pasuk in Emor "u'Lekachtem Lachem ba'Yom ha'Rishon".
(b) And we learn from "u'Lekachtem" - that every individual is obligated to take the Lulav.
(a) Of the four Tana'im who were traveling together on the ship, only Raban Gamliel had a set of Arba Minim. The others were all Yotzei with his set on the first day of Sukos - by means of a 'Matanah al Menas Lehachzir' - a temporary gift, given on the express condition that it is returned, which is legally considered a Matanah.
(b) The Beraisa needs to add that each of them returned it to Raban Gamliel - to teach us the principle of 'Matanah al Menas Lahachzir ... '.
(c) Rava adds to this - that if the recipient fails to return the Matanah, then it will turn out retroactively, not to have been a Matanah at all (and, in the case of a Lulav, he will not have been Yotzei).
(d) The Tana informs us that Raban Gamliel paid a thousand Zuz for his set - to teach us just how precious the Mitzvos were in the eyes of the Tana'im.
(a) A person may not hold anything during the Amidah, which will caused him to lose his concentration. Consequently, one is forbidden to hold ...
1. ... a knife -because he will be afraid that the knife may fall and cut him.
2. ... a dish of food - because he is afraid that it will spill.
3. ... a loaf - because it may fall and get spoiled.
4. ... money - because it may fall and roll away.
(b) Neither is one permitted to Daven the Amidah holding Tefilin or a Sefer-Torah - since here too, he will be afraid that they may fall.
(c) Ameimar was nevertheless perfectly justified in informing Rav Ashi that his father used to hold the Lulav during the Amidah - because, since he was performing a Mitzvah in the process, holding it was no longer a burden, because the joy of the Mitzvah would override the concern that it may fall.
(a) When the men of Yerushalayim would leave the house, go to Shul, or recite the Shema or the Amidah - they would hold the Lulav in their hand.
(b) They would also take their Lulav with them - when they went to visit the sick or to comfort mourners.
(c) They would ...
1. ... put it on the floor - when they Leined in the Torah, or (if they were Kohanim) when they went up to Duchen.
2. ... send it home with a Shali'ach - when they entered the Beis- Hamedrash to learn Torah.
(d) We learn from all this - how keen the men of Yerushalayim were to perform Mitzvos.
Index to Review Questions and Answers
for Maseches Sukah
D.A.F. Homepage
OTHER D.A.F. RESOURCES ON THIS DAF | ||||||||||||||||||||
the Daf | • | to the Daf | • | Point | • | Outlines | • | Charts |
||||||||||||
l'Daf | • | Quiz | • | Charts | • | Da'as | • | on the Daf | • | Masechta | • | Lectures |
|
Other Masechtos
• Join Mailing Lists
• Ask the Kollel Dafyomi Calendar • חומר בעברית Donations • Feedback • Links |