REVIEW QUESTIONS ON GEMARA AND RASHI
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous dafSukah 43
SUKA 36-56 (End of Maseches) have been dedicated by the wife and daughters
of the late Dr. Simcha Bekelnitzky (Simcha Gedalya ben Shraga Feibush) of
Queens N.Y. Well known in the community for his Chesed and Tzedakah, he will
long be remembered.
(a) What is the only Isur Shabbos that one might contravene by taking a
Lulav on Shabbos?
(b) For that alone, Chazal would not have decreed not to take the Lulav on
Why *did* they issue such a decree?
(c) Why did Chazal express their concern that one may come to carry the
Lulav *four Amos in the street*, rather than that one may come to carry
*from one domain to another*?
(a) The Gemara initially explained that the *first* day that fell on Shabbos
is different, because Chazal decreed that one should take the Lulav at home
(see Tosfos DH 'Ha').
Why is this explanation inadequate?
(b) So we conclude that Chazal only decreed when Shabbos fell on the *other*
days, because then, taking the Lulav is less Chashuv.
Why is that?
(c) Then why do we not Bensch Lulav nowadays, when the first day falls on
(d) Eretz Yisrael is different, the Gemara contends, because there they know
exactly when it is the first day of Sukos (see Tosfos DH 'Inhu'). How does
the Gemara currently prove from two Mishnahs, that the decree not to take
the Lulav on the first day which fell on Shabbos, did not extend to Eretz
Yisrael, *even nowadays*?
(a) What does the Beraisa learn from ...
(b) Why do we need to establish this Beraisa according to Rebbi Eliezer?
What does Rebbi Eliezer say?
- ... "u'Lekachtem"?
- ... "Lachem"?
- ... "ba'Yom"? How does the Tana know that this refers even to the Gevulin (outside the Beis Hamikdash)?
- ... "*ha*Rishon"?
(c) Rebbi Eliezer learns that Machshirei Lulav override Shabbos, from
"ba'Yom" (as we just saw).
What do the Rabbanan learn from "ba'Yom"?
(d) Why do the Rabbanan not want to learn "Yamim" and not nights, from the
end of the Pasuk "u'Semachtem Lifnei Hashem ... Shiv'as Yamim" (like Rebbi
(a) We now know that "Yamim" by Lulav means *days* and not *nights*.
Answers to questions
in Tzav, Moshe told Aharon and his sons (regarding the Milu'im) to sit
inside the Mishkan "Shiv'as Yamim", what did he mean?
(b) Why might we prefer to learn the 'Gezeirah-Shavah' of "Yamim" "Yamim"
(by Sukah) ...
(c) What do we ultimately learn from the 'Gezeirah-Shavah' of "Teishvu"
- ... from the Milu'im rather than from Lulav?
- ... from Lulav rather than from the Milu'im?
(a) Why did Chazal institute that Aravah on the seventh day overrides
(b) Why did Chazal nevertheless decree not to take *Lulav* in the Beis
Hamikdash on the other days that fell on Shabbos (despite the fact that it
is not written *explicitly* in the Torah), declining to publicize there too
that it is min ha'Torah?
(c) Then why did they not issue the same decree regarding Aravah on the
(d) In that case, why did Chazal not allow *all* the days of Aravah (on
whichever day Shabbos fell) to override Shabbos?
(a) Why did Chazal not choose the *first* day of Aravah to override Shabbos?
(b) Then why just the *seventh* day? Why not any other day of Yom-Tov?
(c) Why does Aravah not override Shabbos nowadays in Chutz la'Aretz?
(d) What reason did Bar Hedya give for the Mitzvah of Aravah not overriding
Shabbos, even in Eretz Yisrael?
(a) Ravin and his associates disagree with Bar Hedya. According to them, the
seventh day of Sukos could indeed fall on Shabbos.
Then why did the
Mitzvah of Aravah not override Shabbos, according to them?
(b) How did Abaye try to disprove Ravin from our Mishnah, which mentions
Lulav and Aravah together? How do we answer his Kashya?
(c) Abaye then asks Ravin from the Mishnah later, which differentiates
between the last day, when they would go round the Mizbe'ach seven times,
and the first six days, when they would only go round it once.
Abaye trying to prove from there?
(d) How do we refute Abaye's proof?
(a) What did Ravin retort when Abaye told him that Rav Nachman quoting Rabah
bar Avuha established the Mishnah by Aravah (and not by Lulav)?
(b) Various Amora'im dispute whether the Mishnah is speaking about Lulav or
Aravah. Rava quotes Rabah bar Chanah, who quotes Rebbi Elazar, in whose
opinion the Tana is speaking about Lulav. We ask however on this, from a
Beraisa (to prove Abaye right). What happened once when the seventh day of
Sukos fell on Shabbos, and they deposited Aravah branches in the Azarah on
Erev Shabbos? What did the Baitusim (alias the Tzedokim) do?
(c) What did the Amei ha'Aretz (who sided with the Perushim) subsequently
(d) On what grounds did the Baytusim do what they did? How do we from here
that Abaye is right?
(a) Having proved conclusively that the Mitzvah of Aravah constituted
*taking it, why (assuming that the seventh day of Sukos *can* fall on
Shabbos), does the Mitzvah not override Shabbos?
Answers to questions
(b) Having just concluded that whatever does not override Shabbos in *Chutz
la'Aretz*, does not override it in *Eretz Yisrael* either, how will we
explain the two Mishnahs which permit Lulav to be taken on the first day
that fell on Shabbos, one in the Beis Hamikdash, and one, outside?