Sukkot
Sukkot 17 Tishrei 5772
This Month
Harav Daniel Mann
The Torah reading (Vayikra 22-23) for the first day(s) of Sukkot presents the mitzvot of Sukkot in an interesting
manner. It goes through the year’s holidays, of which Sukkot is the last, in order, focusing on the korbanot. After
summarizing the year of chagim, the Torah returns to say: “But on the fifteenth day of the seventh month…” (Vayikra
23:39) and details the non-Beit Hamikdash mitzvot: the four species and then sukka. A strange pasuk separates
between these latter elements: “You shall celebrate it as a festival seven days in the year; an eternal statute for your
generations, in the seventh month you will celebrate it” (ibid. 41). Why say that it will be celebrated in the seventh
month if it just said the holiday begins on the fifteenth of the seventh month? Also, why does this pasuk of summary
and/or introduction come in between the two mitzvot?
There are two overarching elements to Sukkot. One is the commemoration of a historical event: Hashem’s
sustaining of a new nation in the desert. The other is the idea of chag ha’asif, giving thanks to Hashem at harvest
time. Harvest is during a specific time of the year, and with our hybrid lunar/solar calendar it is always close to Sukkot,
but not always perfectly so. Unlike Pesach and Shavuot, where the holiday comes at the time of the event we
commemorate, our being sustained in the desert is not connected to a specific time of year. Therefore, it would be
logical if harvest time would be more important in setting the time of the holiday.
The Netziv points out that Yeravam, the first king of the Kingdom of Israel (The Ten Tribes) made this point and
actually patterned a holiday after Sukkot in the eighth month. The Netziv said that the harvest came out late that year,
and he decided to push off Sukkot. While Yeravam’s logic was reasonable, the Torah works on “eternal statutes,” not
human logic.
We can now explain the break in the p’sukim. The Torah talks about the four species, which are at the heart of
Sukkot’s harvest element. It reminds us not to celebrate at the most agriculturally appropriate “seven days in the year”
but specifically in the seventh month. The explanation follows. This holiday is linked to the element historical
commemoration, highlighted by the sukka. While this could in theory be done at any time, the Torah had its reasons to
put it in the seventh month, in the same month as Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur. This connection is hinted at earlier
when the time for Sukkot (and for Yom Kippur) is called “on this seventh month” (Vayikra 23:34). Would one think it is
a different seventh month? No, but the Torah is stressing that the same month that starts with Rosh Hashana
continues with Yom Kippur, and finishes with Sukkot. The agricultural element of the holiday is important. However,
the eternal timing of the holidays takes into the account the intertwined spiritual lessons of the season and uses that
to set the time of the agricultural festivities as well.
May we merit taking in all of the lessons at the right time and in the desired manner.
Hemdat Yamim
is endowed by
Les & Ethel Sutker
of Chicago, Illinois
in loving memory of
Max and Mary Sutker
and
Louis and Lillian Klein, z”l
This edition of
Hemdat Yamim
is dedicated to the memory of
Rabbi Shlomo Merzel o.b.m,
who passed away
on Iyar 10, 5771
This edition of
Hemdat Yamim
is dedicated
to the memory of
R' Meir
ben Yechezkel
Shraga Brachfeld o.b.m
Eretz Hemdah
Deans: Harav Yosef Carmel,
Harav Moshe Ehrenreich
2 Bruriya St. corner of Rav Chiya St. POB 8178 Jerusalem 91080
Tel: 972-2-5371485
Fax: 972-2-5379626
Email: [email protected]
web-site: www.eretzhemdah.org
Donations are tax deductable according to section 46 of the Israeli tax code
American Friends of Eretz Hemdah Institutions
c/o Olympian, 8 South Michigan Ave., Ste. 605, Chicago, IL 60603, USA
Our Taxpayer ID #: 36-4265359
In memory of
Harav
Chanan Porat, z"l
Torah scholar
Loved the Jewish
Land and Nation
Sukkot
by Rav Daniel Mann
Question: At “side minyanim” for laining on Simchat Torah (Ashkenazi shul), should hagbaha be done at the end,
before the sefer Torah is returned to the main shul?
Answer: Our impression is that there is not a clear minhag. Tracing the minhagim of hagbaha should provide a
little clarity.
The gemara (Megilla 32a) discusses the laws and importance of gelilla but does not mention hagbaha. Massechet
Sofrim (ch. 14) describes it as the opportunity before reading the Torah for everyone to see the Torah’s writing, bow,
and say several p’sukim in recognition of the Torah’s veracity and importance. The practice actually seems to first
have been recorded in connection to Ezra’s moving public reading of the Torah (Nechemia 8:5). There too, the lifting
of the Torah to show the people was apparently done before the reading. Many Sephardim point the yad at the place
in the Torah from which the reading will begin, further stressing the element of introducing the ensuing reading.
Why do Ashkenazim do hagbaha at the end of the laining, and what impact does this have on the way we view
the process? The change took place some time in the period of the Rishonim, as the Maharik (54) assumes that
hagbaha is done after laining. The most authoritative source on the change is actually Sephardic. The Shiyarei
Knesset Hagedola (17th century, Turkey) praises the change, saying that is worthwhile because people get more
excited about hagbaha than about Kri’at Hatorah, and putting hagbaha at the end makes it more likely that people will
remain in shul during laining.
This is a technical reason to do hagbaha after laining, but even if it is correct, it still seems that along with it, the
nature of the hagbaha has developed in the following direction. For Ashkenazim, hagbaha has become the major
focus of the gelilla process (Rama, Orach Chayim 147:4 and Mishna Berura ad loc. 19). As we complete the Torah
reading, we honor it by enabling the congregation to properly “take leave” of it along with readying it for proper
storage. The Rashba already was cognizant of the fact that minhagim were going in the direction of showing more
kavod to the Torah during hagbaha than was halachically necessary (his context is standing when the sefer Torah is
in a different domain – the bima).
Let us go back to your question of whether it is necessary or preferred to do hagbaha after even a semi-formal
Torah reading or only in the classical, assigned places. That which is taken for granted by Ashkenazim, that on
“multiple sefer Torah” days each sefer Torah gets hagbaha, is actually the subject of varied minhagim for Sephardim.
Furthermore, at least some Sephardim who do hagbaha for each sefer Torah lift all of them (which are already open)
before reading from the first one (Rav Eliyahu). On one hand, we can learn from them that it is more basic that the
people be exposed to hagbaha than for there to be a set procedure of lifting a sefer Torah before reading. However, if
we are correct, that for Ashkenazim hagbaha has become the honorable way to finish up using the sefer Torah and
preparing it to be put away, then it should be done any time the tzibbur has finished reading from a given sefer, no
matter how many sefarim are used.
Practically, we would say the following. It is hard to prove whether or not there must be hagbaha at the end of
laining at side minyanim on Simchat Torah. Regarding sefarim that will be used shortly as one of the three sefarim in
the main minyan, we can view its closing as a pause, and the later hagbaha suffices. However, it appears correct that
for sifrei Torah whose use is over, this should be accompanied with hagbaha. On a day in which we dance with and
around the sefarim it does not make sense to be stingy regarding a classic way to show our reverence for them.
However, it is hard to call this an absolute requirement, and, for example, if there is no one left at the minyan who is
strong enough to lift it reliably, hagbaha can be skipped.
“Living the Halachic Process”
We proudly announce the publication of our second book in English.
“Living the Halachic Process volume II” a selection of answers to questions from our Ask the Rabbi
project. A companion CD containing source sheets for the questions is also available.
In honor of the book’s debut, we offer it at the special rate of $25
Special offer: buy both volumes for the price of $40.
Contact us at [email protected]
Have a question?..... E-mail us at
[email protected]
Sukkot
The Lessons of Our Treatment of Bread
(condensed from Ein Ayah, Berachot 7:41)
Gemara:
Four things were said about bread: one should not leave raw meat on bread; one should not pass a full cup over
bread; one should not throw bread; one should not rest a full tray on bread.
Ein Ayah: The dignity with which we treat bread is an indication of our treating life as holy and worthy of honor.
Since human life has a lofty purpose, it is proper to show respect to life, including by showing respect to that which is
the main sustainer of life, namely, bread. Bread also deserves extra respect in that it is a sign of mankind’s advantage
over other species. Firstly, man’s wisdom increases when he eats bread, as Chazal said: “A baby does not learn to
call, ‘father’ and ‘mother’ before he has tasted grain” (Berachot 40a). From the perspective of man’s wild side, he is
willing to eat meat like carnivores, and we even find cannibalism amongst primitive tribes. One sign of wildness is
eating raw meat, and we find that Chazal lambasted the Babylonians for this (Menachot 99b).
Eating bread is a sign that man has raised himself above carnivorous animals, by recognizing our higher innate
level of being formed in the image of Hashem and being similar to Him in that we are able to do that which is straight
and good. That is why we chose our main sustenance to be from the vegetable realm. If one is not fully sustained by
eating raw vegetables, then he is smart enough to know how to turn grain into bread, about which it is said that it
“satiates the heart of man” (Tehillim 104:15). When mankind is fully healed of the damage inflicted by the snake, we
will not need to eat meat anymore.
Eating meat was reluctantly permitted because of the weakness of the body, which came from the weakness of
the soul that arose when man lost his morality and closeness to his Maker. The Torah describes eating meat as
something that comes when “one’s spirit lusts for meat” (Devarim 11:20). Chazal further looked down upon ignorant
people who eat meat, as it was permitted for scholars who need the nourishment to have the strength to seek Torah
knowledge. Since that brings light to the world, it is proper that animals do their part towards that lofty goal. Animals’
sacrifice is reminiscent of soldiers’ self-sacrifice at war for their countries and those who undergo punishment so that
people’s hearts will be straightened out. When this will not be necessary, scholars will not eat meat either, and the
pasuk, “You will eat your bread to satiation” (Vayikra 26:5) will be practiced.
Let us analyze the gemara’s practices in this light. One may not place raw meat on top of bread because bread
represents cultured eating and raw meat represents primitivism. While it is cultured to use other foods to enhance the
bread, overdoing this can bring one to excesses, of which the Torah especially noted intoxication. That is why one
does not pass a full cup over bread, as being full is usually a sign of a drink drunk for enjoyment, not necessity.
In order to show respect to life, one should not throw bread, an act that represents disregard for that which is
necessary for life. However, the reason to live is to fill oneself with wisdom and knowledge of Hashem, not to enjoy
sensual pleasures. Therefore, one should not lean a full tray on bread. That act represents that life (=bread) is there
to support a life full of pleasures (the pot full of tasty foods). Rather, bread exists to enable one to base Torah and
wisdom on the strength it provides.
Responsa B'mareh Habazak, Volumes I, II, III, IV, V, VI and now VII:
Answers to questions from Diaspora rabbis. The questions give expression to the unique situation that
Jewish communities around the world are presently undergoing. The answers deal with a developing
modern world in the way of “deracheha, darchei noam”. The books deal with the four sections of the
Shulchan Aruch, while aiming to also take into consideration the “fifth section”
which makes the Torah a “Torah of life.”
Special Price: $15 for one book or
$90 for 7 volumes of Responsa Bemareh Habazak (does not including shipping)
Sukkot
Authority of Beit Din to Grant a Wife Living Rights in a Specific Home
(condensed from Shurat Hadin, vol. VIII, pp. 557-559)
[We will now see another issue that often is the source of friction between the batei mishpat (secular courts) and the
batei din (religious courts).]
Case: A married couple is separated. The husband (=pl) went to beit mishpat to order a division of property,
according to which, their joint home will be sold and the money divided between the sides. The wife (=def) sued in beit
din to protect her right to stay in the home for the indefinite future, to which beit din acquiesced. Pl appealed to the
Supreme Rabbinical Court with the claim that beit din is not authorized to stop the implementation of the ruling of the
beit mishpat.
.
Ruling: The ruling of the beit mishpat states that the sale is to be done only after a solution has been found for living
quarters for def and the couple’s daughters in the proper court. Since the beit mishpat did not determine that it is the
place to decide that matter, such questions related to the needs of a still married spouse are within beit din’s right and
obligation to handle. The Shulchan Aruch (Even Haezer 73:7) equates a wife’s needs in regard to living quarters to
her rights in regard to food. While it is possible to learn that equation in a limited manner, the more inclusive
interpretation of the Shulchan Aruch is correct, and therefore beit din must determine if pl’s proposals of living
quarters meet his obligations to def, who is still his wife.
One of pl’s suggestions is that def take her half of the future sales money and buy a small apartment for her and
the daughters. There is a general rule regarding the lifestyle of a wife that “she goes up with him, and does not go
down with him” (see Tur, EH 70). In other words, if she has gotten used to a certain standard of living while living with
her husband, he may not make her settle for a lower standard of living. That which it says that a woman can be given
tiny living quarters (Shulchan Aruch, EH 73:2) is true only in cases where the husband is impoverished (see Rambam,
Ishut 13:5).
Pl’s other suggestion, that def rent a nice-sized apartment with proceeds from the sale is not valid either. This is
because going from an owned home to a rented one is also taking a serious step down in standard of living. In a
rented apartment, a tenant has to live with the possibility that the landlord will require her to move out at the end of
some period of time. Even if the present home were to be totally under pl’s ownership, he could not require def to
leave and accept a worse living arrangement.
Therefore, the Supreme Rabbinical Court accepts both the jurisdiction and the content of the regional beit din’s
ruling.
Mishpetei Shaul
Unpublished rulings by our mentor, Maran Hagaon HaRav Shaul Yisraeli zt”l
in his capacity as dayan at the Israeli Supreme Rabbinical Court.
The book includes halachic discourse with some of our generation’s greatest poskim.
The special price in honor of the new publication is $20.
Do you want to sign your contract according to Halacha?
The Rabbinical Court, “ Eretz Hemdah - Gazit ”
Tel: (077) 215-8-215
[email protected]
Fax: (02) 537-9626
Eretz Hemdah - Gazit serves the public in the matter of dispute resolution
according to the Halacha in a manner that is accepted by the law of the land.
While drawing up a contract, one can include a provision which assigns
the court jurisdiction to serve as an agreed upon arbitrator.
Eretz Hemdah is the premier institution for training young rabbis to take the Israeli Rabbinate's
rigorous Yadin Yadin examinations. Eretz Hemdah, with its distinctive blend of Religious Zionist
philosophy and scholarship combined with community service, ensures that its graduates emerge with
the finest training, the noblest motivations resulting in an exceptionally strong connection to
Jewish communities worldwide.