More Discussions for this daf
1. ha'He Savta 2. Tosfos DH Rebbi Yehudah 3. Stolen Land/Borrowed Sukah
4. Tosfos Yarok k'Karsi 5. Transliteration Of Old French In Tosfos DH Yarok 6. Incident With Old Woman
7. Gazul 8. The Elderly Lady and the Sukah 9. Sending someone out of his Sukah
10. Mitzvah that Comes from a Sin 11. Lulav of Avodah Zarah 12. Mitzvah ha'Ba'ah ba'Aveirah (Mitzvah that comes from a sin)
13. Sukah Gezulah 14. Extrapolating with the 13 Midos on One's Own 15. Tosafot R yehuda
16. ההיא סבתא
DAF DISCUSSIONS - SUKAH 31

Yale asked:

Thank-you so much Yaakov Montrose, for your assistance with the Tosfos (DH ba'Asheirah--daf 31b). I really appreciate it, and can't wait to start learning.

However, I have another question on the topic of Mitzvah ha'bah Be'averiah (mitzvah that comes from a sin) which is a daf back:

(1) If a Jew steals money in order to support himself, and, thus, complete all of his Mitzvos with this stolen money are they (Mitzvos) still valid? In specific-- is a lulav still valid if the Jew purchased it through his stolen money?

(a) I have a strong foundation on the 3 different ways on how to view the concept of a Mitzvah ha'bah Be'averiah (gift form, repulsive, tainted). I thougth that maybe because the money does not directly purchase the lulav it is still valid or maybe not (since stealing is still a sin)??

(b) I know the Gemarah in Shabbos that states the first question we will be asked when we come time to be judged is: "Were you honest in your buisness dealings?"-- Does this have any effect/proof in invalidating a Lulav from stolen money?

(c) I am also aware of the fact that the mitzvah of a Lulav is for Hash-m, therefore any reward from the mitzvah is not really for us, thus it is possible that a lulav funded from stolen objects/money may be still valid?? (Rashi on daf 31 discusses this view in regard to Avodah Zara-- is the concept still the same?)

If anyone can please help me find an answer it will be greatly appreciated, thank-you again!

Yale , Miami Beach, FL., U.S.A.

The Kollel replies:

(1) Although this should really be discussed at length, the main reason that this is not a problem of Mitzvah ha'Ba'ah ba'Aveirah is because the item itself was not stolen and did not have a sin committed by its purchase in any way.

(a) I'm not sure I understand the question.

(b) No.

(c) Rashi there is discussing an Avodah Zarah object that is forbidden from benefit. Accordingly, he addresses why benefiting from this object by performing a Mitzvah is not a transgression. However, this doesn't have an impact on the concept of Mitzvah ha'Ba'ah ba'Aveirah, where the concept is, as you stated in (a) above, due to other reasons.

All the best,

Yaakov Montrose