Sukkah, Daf Mem Gimmel, Part 2

 

Introduction

This section opens with a discussion of how we know that one has to take the lulav on the first day of Sukkot even in the "provinces." This term refers either to land outside of Jerusalem, or to any place outside of the Temple, including the rest of Jerusalem.

 

דאיתיה מן התורה בגבולין מנא לן? דתניא: +ויקרא כ"ג+ ולקחתם – שתהא לקיחה ביד כל אחד ואחד, לכם – משלכם, להוציא את השאול ואת הגזול. ביום – ואפילו בשבת. ראשון – אפילו בגבולין. הראשון – מלמד שאינו דוחה אלא יום טוב הראשון בלבד.

 

From where do we derive that [the taking of the lulav] is a Torah obligation in the Provinces? As it has been taught: "And you shall take" that the lulav must be taken in the hand by everyone of you; "for yourself" that it must be yours, thus excluding a borrowed or a stolen [lulav]; "On the day" even on Shabbat; "First" even in the Provinces; "The first" this teaches that it overrides only the first day of the Festival.

 

The baraita cited here deals with the first four words of Leviticus 23:40 which refers to the lulav. Taken all together this baraita teaches that everyone must take a lulav, it must belong to them, they should do so on Shabbat, anywhere, even in the Provinces, but only on the first day of Sukkot. On other days, at least in the Provinces, one does not take a lulav on Shabbat.

 

אמר מר: ביום ואפילו בשבת.

מכדי, טלטול בעלמא הוא, איצטריך קרא למישרי טלטול?

אמר רבא; לא נצרכא אלא למכשירי לולב, ואליבא דהאי תנא. דתניא: לולב וכל מכשיריו דוחין את השבת, דברי רבי אליעזר.

 

The Master said, "On the day" even if it is Shabbat.

But since [the taking of the lulav] is just ordinary carrying, do we need a verse to permit ordinary carrying?

Rava said: It was necessary only with regard to those things that enable the lulav, and this is in accordance with a ruling of that Tanna of whom it has been taught, The lulav and all the things that enable it override the Shabbat, the words of R. Eliezer.

 

The Talmud now raises the difficulty that we shouldn’t even need a verse to allow taking the lulav on Shabbat. What could possibly be problematic with just lifting up the lulav?

Rava answers that the verse allows one to do things on Shabbat that would enable one to take the lulav. This would include even cutting the lulav down from the tree which would normally be a Shabbat prohibition. But this is only according to R. Eliezer. The other sages would not agree, as we shall see below.

 

מאי טעמא דרבי אליעזר

אמר קרא ביום – ואפילו בשבת.

 

What is the reason of R. Eliezer?

Scripture says: "On the day," implying, even on Shabbat.

 

R. Eliezer reads the verse as if it emphasizes that one can do anything necessary to get a lulav even on Shabbat.

 

ורבנן: האי ביום מאי עבדי ליה? מיבעי ליה: ביום ולא בלילה.

 

But what do the rabbis do with the words "on the day"?

They need it to infer from it that on the day, [the lulav is taken] but not at night.

 

The Talmud now asks, as it often does, what does the other side in a debate do with the words that the rival used as a basis for his halakhah. R. Eliezer used the word "on the day" to prove that one can do anything necessary to get a lulav on Shabbat. The rabbis disagree. So what do they do with that word?

They use it to rule that the lulav must be taken during the day and not at night.

 

 

ורבי אליעזר, ביום ולא בלילה מנא ליה? – נפקא ליה מסיפא דקרא, +ויקרא כג+ ושמחתם לפני ה’ אלהיכם שבעת ימים – ימים ולא לילות.

And R. Eliezer, from where does he deduce that [the lulav is to be taken] by day, and not at night?

He deduces it from the conclusion of the verse, "And you shall rejoice before the Lord your God for seven days" "days" but not nights.

 

The Talmud continues in its usual manner. R. Eliezer has used the word "on the day" to teach that one can do anything to prepare a lulav on Shabbat. So how does he learn that one takes the lulav during the day and not at night.

He learns it from the word "days" at the end of the verse.

 

ורבנן, אי מהתם – הוה אמינא: לילף ימים ימים מסוכה, מה להלן ימים ואפילו לילות – אף כאן נמי ימים ואפילו לילות.

 

And the Rabbis? If I learned it from that verse, I might have said that we ought to compare days [mentioned here] with days mentioned with regard to the Sukkah so that just as there [the expression of] days includes nights, so here also [the expression of] days includes nights.

 

The rabbis don’t learn from the verse used by R. Eliezer because we might have thought that the word "days" refers to days and nights, as it does for the Sukkah. Jews are obligated to dwell in the Sukkah not just during the day, but also at night. But this is not true for the lulav, which is taken only during the day. To avoid this faulty learning, the rabbis derive the rule for the lulav from the word "on the day."