Sukkah, Daf Nun Vav, Part 6

 

Introduction

This is it the siyyum (conclusion) of Sukkah. This last section deals with the priestly watch known as Bilgah, and why they were set apart from the other watches.

 

הנכנסין חולקין בצפון. תנו רבנן: הנכנסין חולקין בצפון – כדי שיראו שהן נכנסין, והיוצאין חולקין בדרום – כדי שיראו שהן יוצאין.

 

The incoming watch divided it in the north.

Our Rabbis taught: The incoming priests divided their shares in the north in order that it should be seen that they were incoming, and the outgoing priests divided theirs in the south, so that it should be seen that they were the outgoing watch.

 

The watches generally divided their shares in separate sections of the Temple so that everyone could see that there were two watches, one whose week of service was beginning and one whose week was concluding. Furthermore, people seem to have entered in the north, such that it would make more sense that the incoming watch would divide in the north.

בילגה לעולם חולקת בדרום. תנו רבנן: מעשה במרים בת בילגה שהמירה דתה, והלכה ונשאת לסרדיוט אחד ממלכי יוונים. כשנכנסו יוונים להיכל היתה מבעטת בסנדלה על גבי המזבח, ואמרה: לוקוס לוקוס, עד מתי אתה מכלה ממונן של ישראל ואי אתה עומד עליהם בשעת הדחק! וכששמעו חכמים בדבר קבעו את טבעתה, וסתמו את חלונה.

ויש אומרים: משמרתו שוהה לבא, ונכנס ישבב אחיו עמו, ושימש תחתיו.

אף על פי ששכיני הרשעים לא נשתכרו – שכיני בילגה נשתכרו, שבילגה לעולם חולקת בדרום וישבב אחיו בצפון.

 

[The course of] Bilgah always divided it in the south.

Our Rabbis taught: It happened that Miriam the daughter of Bilgah became an apostate and married an officer of the Greek kings. When the Greeks entered the Sanctuary, she stamped with her sandal upon the altar, crying out, Lukos! Lukos! How long will you consume Israel’s money and not stand by them in the time of oppression!

And when the Sages heard of the incident, they made her ring immovable and blocked up her alcove.

Some however, say that the course [of Bilgah] was late in coming and [that of] Yeshbav its fellow entered in its place and served in their stead.

Although the neighbors of the wicked are not rewarded the neighbors of were rewarded, since [after the imposition of the penalty, the course of] Bilgah always divided their shares in the south, while that of his brother Yeshbav did so in the north.

 

According to this baraita, the watch of Bilgah was punished either for its apostasy or for its lack of diligence in Temple service. Modern historians note that this connects with the fact that the two Helenizing high priests in the Maccabean period, Simon and Menelaus, were both from the watch of Bilgah (this is preserved in II Maccabees 4:23). Furthermore, they were not late one time in their Temple service. Rather the watch wished to avoid their sacrificial duties altogether.

Thus the baraita is partly reflective of second century B.C.E. reality. However, there is no hint in earlier sources as to the sins of one particular individual, Miriam the daughter of Bilgah. This is found only in rabbinic literature.

The word "lokos" is Greek for wolf. Miriam accuses the altar of being a wolf, consuming Israel’s sacrifices without offering any benefit in return. Interestingly, this is probably a case of the rabbis using a marginalized figure to express their own doubt. They may have had their own doubts as to the efficacy of their sacrifices. Rather than express them themselves, they commonly attribute them to others, especially apostates and non-Jews.

Yeshbav was the name of the watch that followed Bilgah. They were rewarded by always dividing in the north.

 

בשלמא למאן דאמר משמרתו שוהה לבא – היינו דקנסינן לכולה משמר, אלא למאן דאמר מרים בת בילגה שהמירה דתה, משום ברתיה קנסינן ליה לדידיה? –

 

It goes well according to the one who stated that this watch was late in arriving, since for this reason the whole course might be penalized; but according to the one who stated that it was because of Miriam the daughter of Bilgah who apostatized, do we penalize [even a] father on account of his daughter?

 

The Talmud raises the difficulty that it does not seem fair to punish the entire watch on account of the actions of one individual.

 

 

אמר אביי: אין, כדאמרי אינשי: שותא דינוקא בשוקא, או דאבוה או דאימיה.

ומשום אבוה ואימיה קנסינן לכולה משמרה?

אמר אביי: אוי לרשע אוי לשכינו, טוב לצדיק טוב לשכינו, [שנאמר +ישעיהו ג+: אמרו צדיק כי טוב כי פרי מעלליהם יאכלו].

 

Abaye said: Indeed, as people say, "The talk of a child in the market-place, is either that of his father or of his mother."

May we then penalize the whole watch on account of her father or mother?

Abaye said: Woe to the wicked, woe to his neighbor; it is good for the righteous and good for his neighbor; as it is said, "Say you of the righteous, that it shall be well with him, for they shall eat the fruit of their doings."

 

Abaye provides a two-part answer as to why the whole watch was penalized for one girl’s actions. First of all, a child’s words, thoughts and actions are reflective of her parents. Clearly, Miriam must have heard such talk from her mother and father.

Second, while there is no evidence that the rest of the watch sinned, people who live in proximity to the wicked suffer the consequences. The whole watch of Bilgah is thus penalized for the evil behavior of the few.

הדרן עלך החליל וסליקא לה מסכת סוכה.

We have now completed the chapter "the flute" and all of Masekhet Sukkah.

Congratulations! You finished the entire Tractate. This was an amazing accomplishment, especially if you stuck with it for all 55 daf (remember, we started on page 2). Learning a whole masekhet of Talmud justifies a siyyum a celebratory mitzvah meal. Below is the Hebrew text recited at this occasion. You can recite the first part of this without a minyan, but the Kaddish which appears at the end requires a minyan. So bring it to your synagogue and celebrate.

On Sunday we will begin learning Megillah. See you then.

הֲדַרַן עַלָךְ מַסֶּכֶת סוכה וְהֲדַרַך עֲלָן, דַּעְתָּן עֲלָךְ מַסֶּכֶת סוכה וְדַעְתָּךְ עֲלָן. לָא נִתֽנַשֵׁי מִינָךְ מַסֶּכֶת סוכה וְלֹא תִּתֽנַשִׁי מִינַן, לָא בְּעָלְמָא הָדֵין וְלֹא בְּעָלְמָא דְאַָתֵי (3X).

יְהִי רָצוֹן מִלְּפָנֶיךָ אלוקינו ואלוקי אַבוֹתֵינוּ שֶׁתְהֵא תּוֹרַתְךָ אוּמוּנִתֵנוּ בָּעוֹלָם הַזֶה ותְהֵא עִמָנוּ לעוֹלָם הַבָּא. חַנִינָא בַּר פַּפָּא, רַמִי בַּר פַּפָּא, נַחְמָן בַּר פַּפָּא, אַחַאי בַּר פַּפָּא, אַבָּא בַּר פַּפָּא, רַפֽרַם בַּר פַּפָּא, רָכִיש בַּר פַּפָּא, סוֹרְחָב בַּר פַּפָּא, אַדָא בַּר פַּפָּא, דָרוֹ בַּר פַּפָּא."

הַעֲרֵב נָא ה’ אֱלֹקינוּ, אֶת דִּבְרֵי תּוֹרָתְךָ בְּפִינוּ וּבְפִיפִיּוֹת עַמְּךָ בֵּית יִשְׂרָאֵל, וְנִהְיֶה אֲנַחְנוּ כּוּלָנוּ וְצֶאֱצָאֵינוּ וְצֶאֱצָאֵי עַמְּךָ בֵּית יִשְׂרָאֵל, כּוּלָנוּ יוֹדְעֵי שְׁמֶךָ וְלוֹמְדֵי תּוֹרָתְךָ. "מֵאֹיְבַי, תְּחַכְּמֵנִי מִצְו‍ֹתֶךָ: כִּי לְעוֹלָם הִיא-לִי." "יְהִי-לִבִּי תָמִים בְּחֻקֶּיךָ– לְמַעַן, לֹא אֵבוֹשׁ."‏ לְעוֹלָם, לֹא-אֶשְׁכַּח פִּקּוּדֶיךָ: כִּי בָם, חִיִּיתָנִי.‏ ברוּךְ אַתָּה ה’ לַמֽדֵנִי חֻקֶּיךָ.‏ אמן אמן סלה ועד."

מוֹדִים אֲנַחְנוּ לְּפָנֶיךָ ה’ אלוקינו ואלוקי אֲבוֹתֵינוּ שֶׁשַּׂמְתָּ חֶלְקֵנוּ מִיּוֹשְׁבֵי בֵּית הַמִּדְרָשׁ, וְלֹא שַׂמְתָּ חֶלְקֵנוּ מִיּוֹשְׁבֵי קְרָנוֹת. שֶׁאָנוּ מַשְׁכִּימִים וְהֵם מַשְׁכִּימִים אָנוּ מַשְׁכִּימִים לְדִבְרֵי תּוֹרָה וְהֵם מַשְׁכִּימִים לִדְבָרִים בְּטֵלִים. אָנוּ עֲמֵלִים וְהֵם עֲמֵלִים. אָנו עֲמֵלִים וּמְקַבְּלִים שָׂכָר וְהֵם עֲמֵלִים וְאֵינָם מְקַבְּלִים שָׂכָר. אָנוּ רָצִים וְהֵם רָצִים. אָנוּ רָצִים לְחַיֵּי הָעוֹלָם הַבָּא, וְהֵם רָצִים לִבְאֵר שַׁחַת. שֶׁנֱאמַר: ‘וְאַתָּה אֱלֹקים, תּוֹרִדֵם לִבְאֵר שַׁחַת–אַנְשֵׁי דָמִים וּמִרְמָה, לֹא-יֶחֱצוּ יְמֵיהֶם; וַאֲנִי, אֶבְטַח-בָּךְ.’".

"יְהִי רָצוֹן מִלְּפָנֶיךָ ה’ אלקי, כְּשֵׁם שֶׁעֲזַרֽתַּנִי לְסַיֵים מַסֶּכֶת ברכות, כֵּן תּֽעַזְרֵנִי לְהַתְחִיל מְסֶכְתוֹת וּסֽפָרִים אַחֵרים וּלְסַיֵימָם, לִלְמֹד וּלְלַמֵּד, לִשְׁמֹר וְלַעֲשׂוֹת וּלְקַיֵּם אֶת כָּל דִּבְרֵי תַלְמוּד תּוֹרָתְךָ בְּאַהֲבָה, וּזְכוּת כֹֹּל הַתְנָאִים וְאָמוֹרָאִים וּתַּלְמִידֵי חֲכָמִים יַעֲמוֹד לִי וּלְזַרְעִי שֶׁלֹא תָּמוּש הַתּוֹרָה מִפֽי וּמִפִי זַרְעִי עד עוֹלָם. וַיִתְקַיֵים בִּי: בְּהִתְהַלֶּכְךָ, תַּנְחֶה אֹתָךְ, בְּשָׁכְבְּךָ תִּשְׁמֹר עָלֶיךָ; וַהֲקִיצוֹתָ, הִיא תְשִׂיחֶךָ.‏  כִּי-בִי, יִרְבּוּ יָמֶיךָ; וְיוֹסִיפוּ לְּךָ, שְׁנוֹת חַיִּים‏ אֹרֶךְ יָמִים, בִּימִינָהּ; בִּשְׂמֹאולָהּ, עֹשֶׁר וְכָבוֹד.‏ ה’ עֹז לְעַמּוֹ יִתֵּן; ה’, יְבָרֵךְ אֶת-עַמּוֹ בַשָּׁלוֹם.

 

יִתְגַּדַּל וְיִתְקַדַּשׁ שְׁמֵהּ רַבָּא בְּעָלְמָא דִּי הוּא עָתִיד לְאִתְחַדְתָּא, וּלְאַחֲיָאה מֵתַיָּא, וּלְאַסָּקָא יַתְּהוֹן לְחַיֵּי עָלְמָא, וּלְמִבְנָא קַרְתָּא דִּי יְרוּשְלֵם, וּלְשַׁכְלְלָא הֵיכָלֵהּ בְּגַוָּהּ, וּלְמֶעֱקַר פּוּלְחָנָא נוּכְרָאָה מִן אַרְעָה, וּלְאָתָבָא פּוּלְחָנָא דִּי שְׁמַיָּא לְאַתְרָהּ, וְיַמְלִיך קוּדְשָׁא בְּרִיךְ הוּא בּמַלְכוּתֵה וִיקָרֵהּ בְּחַיֵּיכוֹן וּבְיוֹמֵיכוֹן וּבְחַיֵּי דְכָל בֵּית יִשְׂרָאֵל, בַּעֲגָלָא וּבִזְמַן קָרִיב, וְאִמְרוּ אָמֵן

יְהֵא שְׁמֵהּ רַבָּא מְבָרַךְ לְעָלַם וּלְעָלְמֵי עָלְמַיָּא.

יִתְבָּרַךְ וְיִשְׁתַּבַּח וְיִתְפָּאַר וְיִתְרוֹמַם וְיִתְנַשֵּׂא וְיִתְהַדָּר וְיִתְעַלֶּה וְיִתְהַלָּל שְׁמֵהּ דְּקֻדְשָׁא. בְּרִיךְ הוּא. לְעֵלָּא (בעשי"ת לְעֵלָּא לְעֵלָּא מִכָּל) מִן כָּל בִּרְכָתָא וְשִׁירָתָא תֻּשְׁבְּחָתָא וְנֶחֱמָתָא דַּאֲמִירָן בְּעָלְמָא. וְאִמְרוּ אָמֵן.

יְהֵא שְׁלָמָא רַבָּא מִן שְׁמַיָּא וְחַיִּים עָלֵינוּ וְעַל כָּל יִשְׂרָאֵל. וְאִמְרוּ אָמֵן:

עוֹשֶׂה שָׁלוֹם (בעשי"ת הַשָּׁלוֹם) בִּמְרוֹמָיו הוּא יַעֲשֶׂה שָׁלוֹם עָלֵינוּ וְעַל כָּל יִשְׂרָאֵל וְאִמְרוּ אָמֵן:

 

Sukkah, Daf Nun Vav, Part 5

 

Introduction

The mishnah had stated: "A festival which fell next to Shabbat, either before or after it, all the watches shared equally in the distribution of the showbread." Our sugya discusses the precise meaning of this mishnah and then discusses other parts of the mishnah.

 

גמרא. מאי מלפניה ומאי מלאחריה? אילימא לפניה – יום טוב ראשון, לאחריה – יום טוב אחרון, היינו שבת שבתוך החג! – אלא: לפניה – יום טוב אחרון, לאחריה – יום טוב ראשון.

 

Gemara. What is meant by before and what by after? If you say that before refers to the first day of the Festival and after to the last day of the festival, isn’t this then the Shabbat of Hol Hamoed?

Rather before refers to the last day of the festival and after refers to the first day of the festival.

 

If "before" means that the first day of the festival fell before Shabbat and "after" means that the last day of the festival fell after Shabbat, then the Shabbat is Shabbat Hol Hamoed. We already know from earlier in the mishnah that on this Shabbat the watches divide the showbread equally.

Therefore, it must mean that the last day of the festival fell right before Shabbat or the first day of the festival fell right after Shabbat.

 

מאי טעמא? כיון דהני מקדמי והני מאחרי – תיקנו רבנן מילתא, כי היכי דניכלו בהדי הדדי..

 

What is the reason?

Since the one watch had to arrive early and the other had to leave late, the Rabbis made an enactment in order that they might eat together.

 

If the last day of the festival comes right before Shabbat, then the watch that serves after the festival will have to arrive early and the watch that is leaving will have to stay an extra day. So too if the first day of the festival fell right after Shabbat. Since in either case both watches had to stay in Jerusalem an extra day, thereby overlapping with the other watch, the rabbis made an enactment such that they would eat together.

חל יום אחד…: והני תרתי מאי עבידתייהו? – אמר רבי יצחק: בשכר הגפת דלתות. –

ונימא ליה: דל בדל! – אמר אביי: בוצינא טבא מקרא.

 

If there was one day . But why the extra two?

R. Yitzchak said: As a reward for the closing of the doors.

But [why should not the outgoing watch] say to the other, "Take less for less"?

Abaye said: A young pumpkin [in hand] is better than a full-grown one [in the field].

 

In the mishnah R. Judah had stated that the watch that is incoming gets seven loaves whereas the watch that is outgoing takes only five. Why the extra two loaves?

R. Yitzchak says that this is a reward for closing the doors, which were opened by the watch that was leaving in the morning. I guess this was a lot of work.

The problem is that this system doesn’t really make sense. Why not just make it even every week? After all, the entering watch is going to receive less next week.

Abaye answers with a maxim that is equivalent to our "a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush." The incoming watch would prefer to receive an extra two loaves now, even if that means they will receive less next week.

 

אמר רב יהודה: ובמוספין חולקין. מיתיבי: משמרה היוצאת עושה תמיד של שחר ומוספין. משמרה הנכנסת עושה תמיד של בין הערבים ובזיכין. ואילו מוספין חולקין לא קתני! – האי תנא בחלוקה לא קא מיירי. –

 

Rav Judah said: [And so too] do they divide the musaf offerings.

They objected: "The outgoing watch offered the morning Tamd and the musaf offerings, and the incoming watch offered the evening Tamud and the incense dishes" and it does not state, that they divided the musaf offerings?

This Tanna does not deal with the question of division.

 

According to Rav Judah, the incoming and outgoing watches also share in the hides of the musaf offerings offered on Shabbat. [The musaf offering was fully burned on the altar, so there was no division of the meat].

An objection is raised against Rav Judah from a baraita. This baraita discusses who offers what on Shabbat the incoming or outgoing watch. At first, the baraita is understood as refuting Rav Judah because it doesn’t state that they shared the offerings. It seems therefore that the outgoing watch would have received the musaf offering hides.

However, Rav Judah could resolve the difficulty by claiming that the baraita simply does not discuss dividing the offerings. It only discusses who offers what.

 

אמר רבא: והא תנא דבי שמואל, דמיירי בחלוקה, ובמוספין חולקין לא קתני, דתנא דבי שמואל: משמרה היוצאת – עושה תמיד של שחר ומוספין, משמרה הנכנסת – עושה תמיד של בין הערבים ובזיכין. ארבעה כהנים היו נכנסין שם, שנים ממשמר זו ושנים ממשמר זו, וחולקין לחם הפנים. ואילו במוספין חולקין לא קתני, תיובתא דרב יהודה! תיובתא

 

Rava said: But the Tanna of the house of Shmuel does deal with the question of division, and yet does not mention the division of the additional offerings, as it was taught in the school of Shmuel: The outgoing watch offered the morning Tamid and the musaf offerings; the incoming watch offered the Evening Tamid and the incense dishes. Four priests entered there, two from one watch and two from the other and they divided the showbread.

But it does not mention that they divided the musaf offerings.

This is a refutation of Rav Judah? It is indeed a refutation.

 

Rava now cites a baraita that is almost the same as the above baraita. The main difference is that this baraita does briefly discuss the division of offerings, when it discusses how the showbread was divided. Therefore, the baraita can be read as evidence that just at the outgoing watch offered the musaf sacrifices, so too the outgoing watch received the hides of the musaf offerings. They were not divided between the two watches.

Thus Rav Judah’s statement that they divided the musaf offerings is thus refuted.

 

Sukkah, Daf Nun Vav, Part 4

 

Introduction

Today’s section is a mishnah. My commentary is taken from Mishnah Yomit.

The final mishnah of Sukkah is a continuation of the previous mishnah which dealt with the division of the showbread.

 

משנה.

יום טוב הסמוך לשבת, בין מלפניה בין לאחריה, היו כל המשמרות שוות בחילוק לחם הפנים.

חל להיות יום אחד [להפסיק] בינתים, משמר שזמנו קבוע – היה נוטל עשר חלות, והמתעכב נוטל שתים.

ובשאר ימות השנה – הנכנס נוטל שש והיוצא נוטל שש.

רבי יהודה אומר: הנכנס נוטל שבע, והיוצא נוטל חמש.

הנכנסין חולקין בצפון והיוצאין בדרום.

בילגה לעולם חולקת בדרום, וטבעתה קבועה, וחלונה סתומה.

 

1)    A festival which fell next to Shabbat, either before or after it, all the watches shared equally in the distribution of the showbread.

2)    If one day intervened between them [Shabbat and Yom Tov], the watch whose time of service was fixed [for that week] took ten [of the] loaves, while they that were detained took two.

3)    On all other days of the year the incoming watch took six loaves and the outgoing watch six.

a)    Rabbi Judah said, the incoming watch took seven and the outgoing five.

4)    The incoming watch divided it in the north, and the outgoing in the watch.

5)    [The watch of] Bilgah always divided it in the south; their ring was fixed and their alcove was blocked up.

 

Section one: If Shabbat fell either on the day before the festival or the day after, all of the watches would receive an equal portion of the showbread. If it fell before the festival, they would have to get to Jerusalem before Shabbat, a day earlier than if the festival had fallen during the week. If it fell after the festival, they would have to stay a day later. Since they had to be there anyway, they received a portion of the showbread even though Shabbat was not on the festival.

Section two: If there was one day in between Shabbat and Yom Tov, the watch whose week it was would get most of the showbread but not all. Since some of the watches might not be able to begin their way back home because they lived too far away to make it in one day, or might need to get to Jerusalem before Shabbat, they were compensated by getting at least a little bit of the showbread.

Section three: At all other times of the year the incoming and outgoing watches would split the showbread evenly. The watches would actually switch their service on Shabbat. The new watch would arrange the new showbread and the two would split the showbread from the previous week.

Rabbi Judah says that this division was not completely equal.

Section four: In order that the watches should not get confused, the incoming watch would divide the showbread in the northern section of the Temple and the outgoing watch would divide in the south.

Section five: Bilgah is the name of one of the watches (see I Chronicles 24:14). According to the Talmud they divided their sacrificial meat as punishment. We shall learn why in the final two sections of the tractate.

In the Temple there were twenty-four rings, one for each watch. When skinning a sacrifice they could put the animal s neck through the ring and have it held up while they skinned it. Bilgah s ring was closed up so that they couldn t use it. In addition, every watch had its own alcove in which they could store their knives. Bilgah s was closed up, again as a punishment for their misdeeds.

 

Sukkah, Daf Nun Vav, Part 3

 

Introduction

This short section deals with the sacrifices divvied up the watch of priests whose set time fell during the festival.

 

משמר שזמנו קבוע [וכו’] ושאר קרבנות צבור. לאתויי מאי? – לאתויי פר העלם דבר של צבור, ושעירי עבודה זרה. והוא מקריב את הכל לאתויי מאי? – לאתויי קייץ המזבח.

 

The watch of priests whose period of service was fixed etc., and all other congregational sacrifices.

What does [this] come to include?

It includes the bull brought as a result of a transgression caused by the forgetfulness of the congregation and the he-goats brought as atonement for idolatry.

And it offered them all. What does this include?

It includes the sacrifices offered when the altar was not otherwise occupied.

 

The mishnah had stated: "A watch whose period of service was fixed [for that festival week] offered the tamid, vow-offerings and freewill-offerings and all other public offerings; and it offered them all."

The Talmud asks what else the words "all other public offerings" includes. After all most public offerings had already been listed. It answers with two types of sacrifices not already mentioned a bull brought when the entire congregation erred and sinned. And the male goats brought as atonement for unintentional acts of idolatry committed by the public.

The second half of the mishnah also contains some additional words "and it offered them all." What do these words come to include? The Talmud answers they include animals offered on the altar when it was not otherwise being used. The altar was not supposed to be left without any other sacrifice on it. Rashi explains that there were special funds for this. Occasionally an animal set aside for a sacrifice cannot be offered. It is then left to pasture until it develops a blemish. The animal is then "redeemed" meaning its value goes to the Temple and animal becomes non-sacred. These funds go for this purpose.

 

 

Sukkah, Daf Nun Vav, Section 2

 

Introduction

Today’s section is a direct continuation of yesterday’s comparison of the debate between Rav and Rabbah b. Bar Hannah over the order of blessings made in the sukkah with Bet Shammai and Bet Hillel’s dispute over the order of blessings of Kiddush.

 

אמר לך רב: אנא דאמרי אפילו לבית הלל, עד כאן לא קאמרי בית הלל התם – אלא שהיין גורם לקידושא שתאמר, אבל הכא – אי לאו זמן, מי לא אמרינן סוכה?

 

[No,] Rav could say to you: I can state my view even according to Bet Hillel, for Bet Hillel stated their ruling only in that case, since the wine is the cause of the sanctification being recited, but not in this case, since even if there were no blessing of the season, would we not still say [the blessing of] the Sukkah?

 

Rav said that we recite the blessing over the festival first and then the blessing over the season, whereas Bet Hillel said that when it comes to Kiddush, the blessing over the wine is first and then the sanctification of the day. These positions seem to differ. However, Rav claims that Bet Hillel made his statement only with regard to Kiddush, where the wine is the mechanism through which Kiddush (the sanctification of the day) is recited. No wine, no Kiddush. In contrast, the blessing over the sukkah is independent from the blessing over the season. It is recited even on subsequent days, when no blessing over the season. Therefore, it comes first.

ורבה בר בר חנה אמר לך: אנא דאמרי אפילו לבית שמאי, עד כאן לא אמרי בית שמאי התם – אלא שהיום גורם ליין שיבא, אבל הכא – אי לאו סוכה, מי לא אמרינן זמן?

 

And Rabbah b. Bar Hannah could say to you: I could state my view even according to Beth Shammai, for Beth Shammai stated their ruling only in that case, since it is the day which causes the wine to be brought, but in this case, if it were not for the Sukkah, would we not still recite [the blessing of] the season?

 

Rabbah b. Bar Hannah says that the blessing over the season comes first and then the blessing over the day. He could claim that Bet Shammai who says that the blessing over the day comes first could agree with him in the case of the sukkah that the blessing of the season is first. Bet Shammai says that the blessing over the day comes first because it is the reason that we drink the wine. No festival/Shabbat, no wine. In contrast, even if one didn’t have a sukkah, he’d still have to recite the blessing over the season. Therefore, the two are independent, and even Bet Shammai could agree that first the blessing over the season is recited and then the blessing over the day.

תנן: בעצרת אומר לו: הילך מצה הילך חמץ. והא הכא, דחמץ עיקר ומצה טפל, וקתני: הילך מצה והילך חמץ, תיובתא דרב! –

 

We have learned: On Shavuot they used to say to the priest, "Here is matzah for you, here is leavened bread." Now here, surely, the leavened bread is the essential feature [of the Festival] and the matzah a secondary one, and yet it teaches, "Here is matzah for you, here is leavened bread." Is this not then a refutation of Rav?

 

The Talmud now raises a difficulty on Rav. On Shavuot there are both the regular showbread which comes in the form of matzah and the leavened bread of the two special loaves for Shavuot. The leavened bread is the essential main sacrifice of the festival, yet the matzah of the regular showbread is mentioned first when both breads are divvied out to the priests. This is a difficulty for Rav who holds that the blessing over the day comes first because that is the main feature of the day.

 

אמר לך רב: תנאי היא, דתניא: הילך מצה הילך חמץ, אבא שאול אומר: הילך חמץ הילך מצה.

 

Rav could say to you: This is a tannaitic dispute; for it has been taught, "Here is matzah for you, here is leavened bread for you." Abba Shaul says: [They said,] "Here is leavened bread for you, here is matzah."

 

Rav resolves the difficulty upon him by referring to a baraita in which there is a tannaitic debate over which comes first the matzah or the unleavened bread. Rav would hold like Abba Shaul who says that they first mentioned the leavened bread, the special sacrifice for Shavuot.

 

דרש רב נחמן בר רב חסדא: לא כדברי רב דאמר סוכה ואחר כך זמן, אלא: זמן ואחר כך סוכה. ורב ששת בריה דרב אידי אמר: סוכה ואחר כך זמן. והלכתא: סוכה ואחר כך זמן.

 

R. Nahman b. R. Hisda expounded: The law is not according to Rav who said, [First the blessing over] the Sukkah and then [that of] the season, rather first [is the blessing of] the season and then [that of] the Sukkah.

R. Shesheth the son of R. Idi said: First [the blessing of] the Sukkah and then [that of] the season.

And the halakhah is that the blessing of the Sukkah is first and then that of the season.

 

Here there is a dispute among later amoraim as to the order of the berakhot. The sugya concludes with a ruling that first we recite the blessing over the Sukkah (leshev basukkah) and then the blessing over the season (shehehiyanu). That is the way the practice remains to this day.

 

 

 

Sukkah, Daf Nun Vav, Part 1

 

Introduction

Today’s sugya discusses the order of the blessings recited when we first enter the sukkah.

 

בעצרת אומר לו הילך וכו’.

איתמר, רב אמר: סוכה ואחר כך זמן, רבה בר בר חנה אמר: זמן ואחר כך סוכה. רב אמר: סוכה ואחר כך זמן, חיובא דיומא עדיף. רבה בר בר חנה אמר: זמן ואחר כך סוכה, תדיר ושאינו תדיר – תדיר קודם.

 

On Shavuot they used to say to the priest etc.

It was stated, Rav said: [The blessing of] the Sukkah [comes first] and then that of the season.

Rabbah b. Bar Hannah said: [The blessing of] the season [is first] and then that of the Sukkah.

Rav ruled, [The blessing of] the Sukkah [comes first] and then that of the season, since the obligation of the day is more important.

Rabbah b. Bar Hannah said: [The blessing of] the season [is first], since that which is frequent precedes that which is infrequent.

 

This amoraic debate is over which blessing is said first "who sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us to dwell in the Sukkah" or "who has kept us alive and brought us to this day" (shehehiyanu). According to Rav we first recite the blessing over the sukkah because that is the obligation of the day, and the obligation of the day always takes precedence. According to Rabbah b. Bar Hannah we first recite the blessing over the season because it is recited more frequently than the blessing over the sukkah and there is general halakhic principle that whatever is performed more frequently is performed first.

 

לימא רב ורבה בר בר חנה בפלוגתא דבית שמאי ובית הלל קמיפלגי;

דתנו רבנן: דברים שבין בית שמאי ובית הלל בסעודה: בית שמאי אומרים: מברך על היום ואחר כך מברך על היין, ובית הלל אומרים: מברך על היין ואחר כך מברך על היום.

בית שמאי אומרים: מברך על היום ואחר כך מברך על היין – שהיום גורם ליין שיבא, וכבר קידש היום ועדיין יין לא בא.

ובית הלל אומרים: מברך על היין ואחר כך מברך על היום. שהיין גורם לקידושא שתאמר.

דבר אחר: ברכת היין תדירה, וברכת היום אינה תדירה, תדיר ושאינו תדיר – תדיר קודם.

לימא רב דאמר כבית שמאי ורבה בר בר חנה דאמר כבית הלל!

 

Shall we say that Rav and Rabbah b. Bar Hannah differ on the same principles as those on which Bet Shammai and Beth Hillel differed?

For our rabbis have taught, These are the points of difference between Beth Shammai and Beth Hillel with regard to [the ritual at] a meal:

Beth Shammai says that one recites the blessing of the day and then the blessing over the wine, whereas Beth Hillel says that one recites the blessing over the wine and then the blessing of the day.

Beth Shammai says that one recites the blessing of the day and then the blessing over the wine since it is the day which causes the wine to be brought and the day has been sanctified before the wine was brought.

Whereas Bet Hillel says that one recites the blessing over the wine first and then the blessing of the day, since the wine is the cause of the sanctification being recited.

Another reason: The blessing over wine is frequent, and the blessing of the day is infrequent, and that which is frequent takes precedence over that which is infrequent. Shall we say that Rav is in agreement with Beth Shammai and Rabbah b. Bar Hannah with Beth Hillel?

 

The Talmud now tries to establish a parallel between the dispute concerning the two blessings recited upon entering the Sukkah and the dispute between Bet Shammai and Bet Hillel concerning the two blessings that constitute Kiddush. Bet Shammai holds that one first recites the blessing over the day (mekadesh hashabbat/hazemanim) and then the blessing over the wine (bore peri hagafen) because the important occasion of the holy day is what causes the wine to be drunk. This is similar to Rav who holds that the blessing over the sukkah comes first due to its importance.

Bet Hillel holds that we first recite the blessing over the wine because it is more frequent. This is similar to Rabbah b. Bar Hannah who said the exact same thing with regard to the blessings of the sukkah. First the shehehiyanu, which is more frequently recited, then the blessing over the sukkah.

Tomorrow’s section will reject this parallel. We should note that whenever the Talmud says, "shall we say X" it is always rejected. So stay tuned!

 

Sukkah, Daf Nun Heh, Part 6

 

Introduction

Today’s section explains various portions of the mishnah that deal with what parts of sacrifices each of the watches receive.

 

גמרא. אמורי הרגלים? של גבוה נינהו!

אמר רב חסדא: מה שאמור ברגלים.

 

GEMARA. But are not the emurim the Most High’s?

R. Hisda said: [The meaning is], that which is said [amur] [to be offered] on the Festivals.

 

The mishnah had taught that the "emurim" were shared by all the watches. The usual meaning of "emurim" are the parts that are completely burned on the altar. So how could this belong to the watches of priests? It belongs to God!

R. Hisda therefore reinterprets the word to be pronounced "said" the mishnah refers to the special sacrifices offered on the festivals.

תנו רבנן: מנין שכל המשמרות שוות באימורי הרגלים – תלמוד לומר +דברים יח ו+ ובא בכל אות נפשו ושרת. יכול אף בשאר ימות השנה כן – תלמוד לומר מאחד שעריך לא אמרתי אלא בשעה שכל ישראל נכנסין בשער אחד.

 

Our Rabbis taught: From where do we know that all the watches share equally in the sacrifices of the Festival? Scripture says, "And he comes with all the desire of his soul . . . and he serves" (Deuteronomy 18:6). It might have been that the same applies to all the days of the year, Scripture says "From one of your gates" [meaning this:] I have said so, [says the Lord], Only when all Israel enters by one gate.

 

This baraita offers a midrash supporting the idea that during the festivals all watches share the sacrifices equally. The Torah refers to a priest who comes to Jerusalem when he so desires and serves in the Temple there. The beginning of the verse describes the priest as coming from "one of your gates." The midrash interprets these words to mean that the priest comes when all of Israel is gathered at "one of your gates" meaning in one city. This is, at least idealistically, during one of the festivals. Thus they share the sacrifices only when all of Israel is gathered together in Jerusalem.

 

ובחילוק לחם הפנים כו’.

תנו רבנן: מנין שכל המשמרות שוות בחילוק לחם הפנים תלמוד לומר +דברים יח ח+ חלק כחלק יאכלו, כחלק עבודה כך חלק אכילה? ומאי אכילה? אילימא קרבנות – מהתם נפקא: +ויקרא ז ט+ לכהן המקריב אותה לו תהיה. אלא – לחם הפנים. יכול אף בחובות הבאות שלא מחמת הרגל ברגל – תלמוד לומר +דברים יח ח+ לבד ממכריו על האבות. מה מכרו האבות זה לזה – אני בשבתי ואתה בשבתך.

 

And in the division of the showbread.

Our Rabbis taught: From where do we know that all the watches share equally in the division of the showbread? Scripture says, "They shall receive equal portions to eat," (Deuteronomy 18:8) meaning, as the division of the service [is equal for all], so is the division of the food. Now what food [could this mean]? If you will say that it means the sacrifices, do we not deduce that from a different verse, "It shall be the

priest’s that offers it?" (Leviticus 7:9). Rather this must refer to the showbread. It might have been that the same applies also to obligatory offerings that are offered on the Festival, though not on account of the Festival, Scripture says, "Except for that which is sold according to the fathers houses" (Deuteronomy 18:8). Now what is it that the fathers have sold to each other? "I shall be in charge in my week and you in your week."

 

This baraita proves that the watches share the showbread on the festivals.

The Torah states that the priests shall receive equal portion of their dues, meaning of the sacrificial food. This means that since they offer the sacrifices equally, they share the proceeds. The question is to what does this refer? We already know from Leviticus that when a priest offers a sacrifice, it is his right to eat it. So what more could we learn from the verse in Deuteronomy. The answer is that it refers to the showbread.

Now the showbread is a weekly offering. It is not connected to the festival at all. We might have thought that just as all priests share the showbread during the festival, so too they share all offerings that are offered on the festivals, even those that are not connected to the festivals. This would include voluntary offerings that people happen to bring during that week. The answer is midrashically derived from the next verse. The Torah says that all of the priests share only to that which has been sold according to their fathers’ houses. What they sold to the other is basically the system of watches, whereby one watch serves this week, receives all of the sacrifices, and in return, allows the other watches to serve in other weeks and receive all of the sacrifices then. This means that any sacrifice except for the showbread that does not come because of the festival, is taken by that week’s watch.

 

Sukkah, Daf Nun Heh, Part 5

 

Introduction

Today’s section is a mishnah. My commentary is from Mishnah Yomit.

 

משנה.

1)     בשלשה פרקים בשנה היו כל משמרות שוות: באימורי הרגלים, ובחילוק לחם הפנים.

2)     בעצרת אומר לו: הילך מצה הילך חמץ.

3)     משמר שזמנו קבוע הוא מקריב תמידין נדרים ונדבות ושאר קרבנות צבור – ומקריב את הכל.

 

1)     At three periods in the year all the priestly watches shared equally in the festival sacrifices and in the division of the showbread.

2)     On Shavuot they used to say to the priest, Here is matzah for you, here is chametz for you.

3)     A watch whose period of service was fixed [for that festival week] offered the tamid, vow-offerings and freewill-offerings and all other public offerings; and it offered them all.

 

Section one: This is a reference to the previous mishnah. On all three festivals all of the watches shared equally in all of the sacrifices that came on account of the festival. This would include the musafim mentioned yesterday, but also the hagigah and other special sacrifices that individuals would bring on account of the festival. They also divided the showbread equally, despite the fact that the showbread is not really a sacrifice that comes on account of the festival.

Section two: On Shavuot there were both the matzot of the showbread and leavened bread (chametz) from the two special loaves on Shavuot. Therefore they could amusingly say to the priest coming to take his share: here s your matzah, here s your chametz.

Section three: The watch whose week fell on the week upon which there was a festival would get the offerings that were brought not on account of the festival. They would get the tamid, the daily offerings. They also received the individual voluntary offerings vow offerings and free-will offerings. They also received other public offerings not listed in the previous mishnah. This would include the Shabbat musaf offerings. Finally, they would get any offering that was brought for some reason other than the festival. This would include first-born animals and tithes. We should note that despite the fact that the festival offerings were divided up equally among the different watches, it surely would have been a bonus to have one s watch fall on the festival for the simple reason that more people came to the Temple at these times. It was at these times of the year that people would have brought their voluntary offerings, their first-born animals, their animal tithes and other offerings. Hence, it was probably quite lucrative to have your watch fall during the festival.

 

Sukkah, Daf Nun Heh, Part 4

 

Introduction

This section deals with the issue of which watch (mishmar) offers the bull sacrifices on Shemini Atzeret, an issue addressed by the mishnah from yesterday.

 

גמרא. נימא מתניתין רבי היא ולא רבנן, דתניא: פר הבא בשמיני – בתחילה מפיסין עליו, דברי רבי. וחכמים אומרים: אחת משתי משמרות דלא שלשו בפרים עושה אותו! –

 

Gemara. Shall we say that our mishnah represents the view of Rabbi [Judah Hanasi], and not that of the other rabbis, since it has been taught: For the bull which is offered on the Eighth Day lots are cast as at first, the words of Rabbi. But the sages say: One of the two watches which did not have a third turn in the bulls offered it.

 

The mishnah had stated that on the eighth day they returned to casting lots, as was done on the first day. The Talmud now quotes a baraita which gives the impression that the opinion in the mishnah accords with Rabbi [Judah Hanasi]. The other sages hold that the watches that didn’t get to offer three bulls during Sukkot had the chance offer this bull.

אפילו תימא רבנן, אטו שתי משמרות לא אפוסי בעי?

 

You may even say that it represents the view of the Rabbis, for do not two watches still require the casting of lots?

 

The mishnah might even accord with the rabbis. The mishnah only says that they cast lots on the eighth day to decide who would offer the bull. Even if only two watches were eligible to offer this bull, they would still need to cast lots to decide which of them does so. Thus Rabbi would hold that all watches cast lots, whereas the other rabbis would hold that only those lots that had not yet offered two bulls could cast lots.

כמאן אזלא הא דתניא: כל המשמרות שונות ומשלשות, חוץ משני משמרות, ששונות ואין משלשות.

נימא רבי ולא רבנן!

 

Whose view is followed in that which has been taught: All the watches repeated a second and a third time, except for two who repeated a second time but not a third one?

Must we say that it follows that of Rabbi, and not that of the Rabbis?

 

The Talmud now cites a baraita that states that all of the watches went through two full cycles of sacrifices except for the last two. This again seems to follow Rabbi who said that on Shemini Atzeret, they go back to a regular system of casting lots.

 

אפילו תימא רבנן, מאי לא שלשו – בפרי החג.

 

The Talmud resolves that even the other rabbis can agree with this baraita. The last two watches do get a chance to participate in all three casting of lots. The only thing they don’t get is a certainty about receiving a third bull.

 

ומאי קא משמע לן? – הא קא משמע לן; מי שהקריב פרים היום לא יקריב למחר, אלא חוזרין חלילה.

 

What then does this teach us? It is this that it teaches us: He who offered bulls on one day shall not offer them the next, but they must all take their turns in rotation.

 

What then does this baraita teach us? After all, we could do the count ourselves without the baraita specifically telling us that one of the last two watches does not get a third bull?

The answer is that the baraita teaches that the watch that receives the meat of the bull this day, will not receive the meat of a bull tomorrow.

 

אמר רבי (אליעזר) +מסורת הש"ס: [אלעזר]+ הני שבעים פרים כנגד מי – כנגד שבעים אומות. פר יחידי למה – כנגד אומה יחידה. משל למלך בשר ודם שאמר לעבדיו: עשו לי סעודה גדולה. ליום אחרון אמר לאוהבו: עשה לי סעודה קטנה, כדי שאהנה ממך.

אמר רבי יוחנן: אוי להם לגויים שאבדו ואין יודעין מה שאבדו, בזמן שבית המקדש קיים – מזבח מכפר עליהן, ועכשיו מי מכפר עליהן?

 

R. Elazar stated: These seventy bulls [that were offered during the seven days of the Festival], to what do they correspond? To the seventy nations.

To what does the single bull [of the Eighth Day] correspond? To the unique nation. This may be compared to a flesh and blood king who said to his servants, "Prepare for me a great banquet"; but on the last day he said to his beloved friend, "Prepare for me a simple meal that I may have the pleasure of being with you."

R. Yohanan said: Woe to the idolaters, for they had a loss and do not know what they have lost. When the Temple was in existence the altar atoned for them, but now who shall atone for them?

 

During Sukkot 70 bulls are offered in total. These correspond to the 70 nations that there are in Jewish lore. Each bull sacrificed offers atonement for one nation.

The final bull offered on Shemini Atzeret corresponds with Israel. Israel is that favored friend in the parable, who God asks to stay on just one more day, so that God can enjoy our company.

R. Yohanan offers an expression of lament for the non-Jews who lost their mechanism for atonement when the Temple was destroyed. It is as if he is saying, "Look, our Temple was not only for the atonement or protection of the people of Israel. It was for the whole world, at least on this most universalistic of holidays, Sukkot. You destroyed. This was your loss as well as ours."

 

Sukkah, Daf Nun Heh, Part 3

 

Introduction

This section is a mishnah. My commentary here is taken from Mishnah Yomit.

The priests were divided into twenty-four watches, each watch serving for a week at the Temple. During a watch s week the priests of that watch kept all of the sacrificial meat and any other part of the sacrifice that they were allowed to use. However, during pilgrimage festivals all twenty-four watches equally divided the sacrifices that were offered on account of the festival. Our mishnah teaches how the numerous Sukkot offerings were divvied up.

 

משנה. יום טוב הראשון של חג היו שם שלשה עשר פרים, אילים שנים, ושעיר אחד. נשתיירו שם ארבעה עשר כבשים לשמונה משמרות.

1)     ביום ראשון – ששה מקריבין שנים שנים, והשאר אחד אחד.

2)     בשני – חמשה מקריבין שנים שנים, והשאר אחד אחד.

3)     בשלישי – ארבעה מקריבין שנים שנים, והשאר אחד אחד.

4)     ברביעי – שלשה מקריבין שנים שנים, והשאר אחד אחד.

5)     בחמישי – שנים מקריבין שנים שנים, והשאר אחד אחד.

6)     בששי – אחד מקריב שנים, והשאר אחד אחד.

7)     בשביעי – כולן שוין.

8)     בשמיני – חזרו לפייס כברגלים.

9)     אמרו – מי שהקריב פרים היום לא יקריב למחר, אלא חוזרין חלילה.

 

Mishnah

On the first festival day of Sukkot there were thirteen bulls, two rams and one goat.

Fourteen lambs remained for the other eight priestly watches.

1)     On the first day, six [watches] offered two each and the remaining [two] one each.

2)     On the second day five offered two each and the remaining [four] one each.

3)     On the third day four offered two each and the remaining [six] one each.

4)     On the fourth day three offered two each and the remaining [eight] one each.

5)     On the fifth day two offered two each and the remaining [ten] one each.

6)     On the sixth day one offered two and the remaining [twelve] one each.

7)     On the seventh day all were equal.

8)     On the eighth day they again cast lots as on the other festivals.

9)     They said: the [watch] that offered bulls on one day should not offer them on the next, but that they should take their turns in rotation.

 

Explanation

Section one: On the first day of Sukkot there were thirty animals sacrificed: thirteen bulls, two rams, one goat (for a sin-offering) and fourteen lambs (Numbers 29:13-16). This means that 16 priestly watches could take one animal each, leaving fourteen animals for the other eight watches. On the first day of the festival, six watches would sacrifice two lambs and the other two watches would get one lamb each.

Section two: On the second day there was one less bull, so the total number of animals was only 29. Fifteen watches would take the fifteen non-lamb animals, leaving nine watches to split 14 lambs. Five would take two lambs, leaving four to each take one.

Section three: On the third day there were 11 bulls, for a total of 28 animals. Fourteen watches would take the fourteen non-lamb animals, leaving ten watches to split 14 lambs. Four would take two lambs, leaving six to each take one.

Section four: On the fourth day there were only 10 bulls, for a total of 27 animals. Thirteen watches would take the thirteen non-lamb animals, leaving 11 watches to split 14 lambs. Three would take two lambs, leaving eight to each take one.

Section five: On the fifth day there were only 9 bulls, for a total of 26 animals. Twelve watches would take the twelve non-lamb animals, leaving 12 watches to split 14 lambs. Two would take two lambs, leaving ten to each take one.

Section six: On the sixth day there were only 8 bulls, for a total of 25 animals. Eleven watches would take the eleven non-lamb animals, leaving 13 watches to split 14 lambs. One would take two lambs, leaving 12 to each take one.

Section seven: On the seventh day there were 24 animals for 24 watches each watch got one.

Section eight: On Shmini Atzeret there were only 10 animals sacrificed, one bull, one ram, one goat and seven lambs (Numbers 29:35-38). The watches would then cast lot to see who received what (see Yoma 2:1).