YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • SUKKOT TO-GO ... - YU Torah Online

1 

YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • SUKKOT TO-GO • TISHREI 5771

Richard M Joel, President, Yeshiva University 

Rabbi Kenneth Brander, The David Mitzner Dean, Center for the Jewish Future 

Rabbi Robert Shur, General Editor 

Rabbi Michael Dubitsky, Editor 

Copyright © 2010 

All rights reserved by Yeshiva University 

Yeshiva University Center for the Jewish Future 

500 West 185 th Street, Suite 413, New York, NY 10033 

office@yutorah.org • 212.960.5400 x 5313 

This publication contains words of Torah. Please treat it with appropriate respect. 

For sponsorship opportunities, please contact Andrew Goldsmith at 212.960.5852 or agoldsm1@yu.edu. 

2 


Table of Contents 

Sukkot 2010/5771 

Yom Kippur and Sukkos: Twin Symbols of Jewish Unity 

Rabbi Elchanan Adler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 5 

Travelers on Succot 

Rabbi Azarya Berzon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 10 

Scribing our Covenant: A Vision for Orthodoxy 

Rabbi Kenneth Brander . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 16 

The Transition from Yom Kippur to Sukkot 

Rabbi Joshua Flug . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 22 

Moshe Rabbeinu: An Angel Amongst Men 

Ms. Miriam Krupka . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 28 

Zman Simchateinu: Understanding 

the Happiness of Sukkot 

Mrs. Chaya Batya Neugrosch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 36 

The Season of Holidays and the 

Dedication of the Mikdash 

Mrs. Deena Rabinovich . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 39 

The Beauty and the Least 

Rabbi Moshe Taragin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 47 

Sukkot Insights from Members of the RIETS Kollel 

Elyon 

Rabbi Eli Belizon, Rabbi David Helman, Rabbi Rafi Rosenblum, 

Rabbi Yehuda Turetsky . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 55 

3 


Dear Friends, 

It is my sincere hope that the Torah found in this virtual רפס may serve to 

enhance your בוט םוי (holiday) and your דומיל (study). 

We have designed this project not only for the individual, studying alone, but 

perhaps even more for a אתורבח (a pair studying together) that wish to work 

through the study matter together, or a group engaged in facilitated study. 

With this material, we invite you to join our Beit Midrash, wherever you may 

be, הרות לידגהל הרידאהלו (to increase and enjoy the splendor of Torah) and to 

engage in discussing issues that touch on a most contemporary matter, and are 

rooted in the timeless arguments of our great sages from throughout the 

generations. 

Chag Sameiach, 

Rabbi Kenneth Brander 

The David Mitzner Dean 

Yeshiva University Center for the Jewish Future 

4 


Yom Kippur and Sukkos: 

Twin Symbols of Jewish Unity 

5 

YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • SUKKOT TO-GO • TISHREI 5771 

Rabbi Elchanan Adler 

Rosh Yeshiva, RIETS 

Motifs of Unity in Sukkos 

One of the central motifs of Sukkos is Jewish unity. The midrash depicts the arba’ah minim as 

representative of different categories of Jews. The esrog, which has a good taste along with a 

pleasant aroma, symbolizes the Jew who is brimming with Torah and maasim tovim [good 

deeds]. The lulav, which has a taste but no smell, typifies the Jew who is knowledgeable in Torah 

but deficient in maasim tovim. The hadas, which has a sweet aroma but lacks taste, corresponds 

to the Jew who excels in good deeds but is bereft of Torah knowledge. Lastly, the arava, which 

possesses neither taste nor smell, personifies the Jew who lacks both Torah and maasim tovim. 

Based on this typology, the midrash concludes: 

Said Hakadosh Baruch Hu: to destroy them is 

impossible; rather, let them come together as one 

group and they will atone for one another 

Vayikra Rabba 30:12 

ושעי אלא רשפא יא םדבאל אוה ךורב שודקה רמא 

ולא לע ולא ןירפכמ ןהו תחא הדוגא ןלוכ 

בי: 

ל הבר ארקיו 

The connection between Sukkos and Jewish unity is also alluded to in a Talmudic comment on 

the verse “Kol ha’ezrach be’Yisrael yeishvu ba’Sukkos” – “every native in Israel shall dwell in 

booths” (Vayikra 23:42). Chazal infer from the language of the verse that one sukkah 

theoretically suffices for all of Israel to discharge their individual obligations: 

This teaches that all Israel is worthy of dwelling 

in one sukkah 

Sukkah 27b 

תחא הכוסב בשיל םיואר לארשי לכש דמלמ 

: זכ הכוס 

While the halachic significance of this derivation is that one may dwell in a Sukkah that is owned 

by another, the hashkafic import of “all of Israel is worthy of dwelling in one Sukkah” points to a 

link between Sukkos and collective Jewish identity. Why does the theme of achdus figure so 

prominently in the holiday of Sukkos? 

Motifs of Unity in Yom Kippur 

The answer may lie in the nature of the relationship between Sukkos and Yom Kippur. Yom 

Kippur, like Sukkos, accentuates the theme of achdus. While to solicit forgiveness from 

someone we have wronged is desirable all year long, there is a specific mitzvah to do so on erev 

Yom Kippur, as codified in Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 606). Seemingly, the reason for

engaging in this practice is because receiving forgiveness from one another is indispensable to 

receiving Divine atonement (see Yoma 85b). However, a passage in the Yom Kippur machzor 

(found just after the Seder Avoda) suggests another dimension as well. After listing the various 

halachic restrictions which characterize Yom Kippur, the machzor includes two additional 

features: 

A day of establishing love and friendship; a day of 

abandoning jealousy and competition 

6 


תורחתו האנק תביזע םוי , תוערו הבהא תמיש םוי 

Apparently, Jewish unity is as defining an aspect of Yom Kippur as are the basic restrictions. It is 

no wonder, then, that our Yom Kippur preparations require us to make amends with those 

whom we have wronged. 

The heightened sense of achdus which characterizes Yom Kippur serves as a basis for equating 

the Jewish nation with the angels in heaven, as suggested by the following midrash: 

Just as amongst the angels there is peace, so the Jewish 

nation on Yom Kippur 

(Tur OC, 606, based on Pirkei de’Rebbi Eliezer). 

לארשי ךכ םהיניב םולש תרשה יכאלמ המ 

םירופיכה םויב 

( א" 

רד יקרפ םשב , ורת ןמיס , ח" 

וא רוט) 

Moreover, the Yom Kippur liturgy begins (just before commencing Kol Nidrei) with a 

declaration of license to pray along with the avaryanim – unrepentant sinners. 

Yom Kippur – “The Day of One” 

The centrality of Jewish harmony to Yom Kippur may be understood on a deeper level in light of 

the following midrash: 

R. Yanai said: From the beginning of creation Hashem foresaw 

the deeds of the righteous and the deeds of the wicked. “And the 

land was astonishingly empty” – refers to the deeds of the 

wicked; “And G-d said: ‘Let there be light’” – refers to the deeds 

of the righteous; “And G-d separated between the light and the 

darkness” – between the deeds of the righteous and those of the 

wicked; “And G-d called the light ‘day’” – refers to the deeds of 

the righteous; “And to the darkness He called ‘night’” – refers to 

the deeds of the wicked; “And it was evening” – refers to the 

deeds of the wicked; “And it was morning” – refers to the deeds 

of the righteous; “One day” – that Hashem gave them one day, 

which is Yom HaKippurim” 

Bereishis Rabba 3 

םלוע לש ותיירב תלחתמ יאני ר" 

א 

םיקידצ לש ןהישעמ ה" 

בקה הפצ 

התיה ץראהו , םיעשר לש םהישעמו 

רמאיו םיעשר לש םהישעמ ולא והת 

לש ןהישעמ ולא רוא יהי םיהלא 

ןיבו רואה ןיב םיהלא לדביו , םיקידצ 

םיקידצ לש ןהישעמ ןיב ךשוחה 

םיהלא ארקיו , םיעשר לש ןהישעמל 

, םיקידצ לש 

ןהישעמ ולא םוי רואל 

לש ןהישעמ ולא הליל ארק ךשוחלו 

לש ןהישעמ ולא ברע יהיו , םיעשר 

לש ןהישעמ ולא רקב יהיו , םיעשר 

ה" 

בקה םהל ןתנש , דחא םוי , םיקידצ 

םירופכה םוי הז הזיאו דחא םוי 

ג השרפ , הבר תישארב 

The midrash interprets the series of dichotomous expressions which appear in the pasuk as 

alternate references to the deeds of tzadikim and the deeds of resha’im. After a string of contrasts,

the verse concludes with an allusion to Yom Kippur, depicted as Yom Echad – the singular day of 

the year. 

The midrashic commentator, Maharzu (R. Zev Wolf Einhorn), explains the allusion to Yom 

Kippur in the following way: 

For it should have stated “the first day” [rather than “one 

day”], therefore he interpreted it as a reference to Yom 

Kippur through which Israel becomes one nation like the 

angels, bound together with harmony between them. And 

the wicked, through repentance, become righteous. 

7 


שרד ןכ לע .. . ןושאר םוי רמול ול היהש 

יוג לארשי םישענ ובש םירופיכה םוי לע 

םולשו תחא הדוגא תרשה יכאלמכ דחא 

םישענ הבושת ידי לע םיעשרהו , םהיניב 

. םיקידצ 

In other words, “one day” is interpreted as a “day of oneness” – an allusion to the angelic unity 

exemplified by the Jewish nation on Yom Kippur. The redemptive power of the day has the 

capacity to transform the iniquities of the wicked into merits. 

Jewish Unity as Emblematic of Hashem’s Unity 

On a deeper level, the unity of the Jewish nation, as well as the harmony of the angels, is meant 

to parallel the oneness of G-d Himself. The same midrash, a few lines later, cites an additional 

interpretation of “Yom Echad” – as a reference to G-d: 

R. Yudin said: for on it Hashem was a single 

entity in the world, because there was nothing in 

the world except for Him. 

היה אלש , ומלועב ידיחי ה" 

בקה היה ובש ןדוי ר" 

א 

אוה אלא ומלועב 

The link between the oneness of G-d and the unity of the Jewish people is also emphasized in 

our liturgy: 

Guard the one nation, guard the remnant of the 

one nation, let not perish the one nation that 

unifies your name [through declaring] Hashem is 

our G-d, Hashem is one 

Daily Tachanun prayer 

You are one; your name is one; and who is like your nation 

Israel, one nation in the land 

Amida for Shabbos Mincha 

יוג דבאי לאו דחא םע תיראש רומש דחא יוג רמוש 

דחא 'ה 

וניקלא 'ה 

ךמש םידחימה דחא 

ןונחת תלפת 

ךמעכ ימו דחא ךמשו דחא התא 

ץראב דחא יוג לארשי 

החנמ תבשל הדימע 

Yom Kippur is the day that epitomizes the unity of HaKadosh Baruch Hu - a day when the Satan 

is powerless and all barriers to G-d are removed. It is the quintessential “Yom Echad” – “the day 

of the One and Only [Hashem]”, Whose unity permeates all strata of creation – not merely the 

celestial realms but also the earth below via, first and foremost, His chosen nation Israel – the 

“goy echad” whose mandate is to serve as G-d’s ambassador to the world at large. It is thus 

axiomatic that the nation which bears witness to the Divine symphony should exude a spirit of 

internal harmony.

Sukkos: Harbinger of the Messianic Era 

Sukkos carries within it the theme of Jewish unity because, like Yom Kippur, it is representative 

of the oneness of G-d. Sukkos is replete with eschatological undertones, as evident, for example, 

in the first day’s haftara reading from the Prophet Zechariah, depicting the Messianic war of Gog 

u’Magog. While many of the finer details of the narrative remain shrouded in mystery, the 

outcome of the battle is unambiguous: 

Hashem will be the King over all the land; on that day 

Hashem will be One and His Name will be One 

Zechariah 14:9 

8 


היהי אוהה םויב ץראה לכ לע ךלמל 'ה 

היהו 

דחא ומשו דחא 'ה 

ט, 

די הירכז 

The sifrei kabbalah explain that the offering of 70 bullocks, in decreasing order, during the seven 

days of Sukkos, is symbolic of the ultimate triumph of good over evil (as symbolized by the 70 

nations), and the subsequent revelation of G-d’s Majesty in all of Its glory. Furthermore, it is 

explained that the unbridled sense of joy associated with the festival of Sukkos foreshadows the 

experience of “az yimalei sechok pinu” (Tehillim 126:2) – a state of ecstasy characteristic of the 

Messianic age (see Avoda Zara 3b). 

Vayakhel Moshe: Fusing Yom Kippur and Sukkos 

Perhaps there is an allusion in the Torah to this commonality of Yom Kippur and Sukkos. The 

opening verse in Parshas VaYakhel states: 

Moshe assembled the entire assembly of the children of Israel 

Shemos 35:1 

לארשי ינב תדע לכ תא השמ להקיו 

א, 

הל תומש 

The central purpose of this grand assembly was an appeal for materials needed for constructing 

the mishkan. (Indeed, the parsha goes on to describe the generous spirit in which the 

contributions were brought in the subsequent days.) Rashi notes the timing of this assembly: 

Motza’ai Yom HaKipurim - the morrow of Yom Kippur (when Moshe had descended with the 

second set of luchos). The Vilna Gaon explains that we celebrate Sukkos in Tishrei, rather than in 

Nisan, to commemorate the return of the ananei ha’kavod – pillars of glory - which departed as a 

result of the chet ha’eigel. Their restoration, according to the Vilna Gaon, coincided with the 

onset of construction of the mishkan, which was the fifteenth of Tishrei, a few days after Moshe’s 

appeal. In light of what we have seen, it is most apropos that the mass assembly of “Vayakhel 

Moshe” (“And Moshe gathered”) coincided with the morrow of Yom Kippur, the first of the days 

bridging Yom Kippur and Sukkos. It was none other than Moshe Rabbeinu who imbued these 

days with the spirit of Jewish unity that subsequently became their hallmark. 

Moreover, the first lesson taught by Moshe Rabbeinu at that historic assembly was the mitzvah of 

Shabbos, a weekly reminder of “Yom shekulo Shabbos” – the eschatological Sabbath where G-d 

will reign supreme in unparalleled glory. Next, Moshe singled out one of the 39 categories of 

prohibited labor – kindling a fire: 

You shall not kindle fire in any of your dwellings 

on the Sabbath day. 

תבשה םויב םכיתובשומ לכב שא ורעבת אל

The sefer Beer Moshe, and other Hassidic works, interpret this prohibition as a metaphoric 

warning against kindling the flame of machlokes - divisiveness and inter-personal strife. Indeed, 

as implied by the traditional Shabbos greeting “Shabbat Shalom”, the Sabbath is a day which 

bespeaks peace and harmony. How appropriate, then, that this message was conveyed on the 

calendar day marking the transition between Yom Kippur and Sukkos. 

Experiencing the Unity of Sukkos 

How do we internalize, in a practical sense, the concept of unity that permeates these days? For 

Yom Kippur, experiencing unity comes naturally. The somber crisis mode which casts its pall 

over the tense-filled days of the yamim noraim season, the quest to attain personal forgiveness, 

the withdrawal from physicality which is the hallmark of Yom Kippur, all condition us to feel 

kinship and solidarity with our fellow Jews. For Sukkos, however, whose overt emphasis is on 

festivity and material blessings, the challenge is far greater. What can be done to help us embrace 

the spirit of unity which is intrinsic to Sukkos? 

Perhaps the answer lies in appreciating the paradox inherent in the very holiday of Sukkos. On 

the one hand, Sukkos’ designation as a chag ha’asif – festival of the ingathering of the harvest – 

focuses on the worldly blessings associated with the agricultural bounty. On the other hand, the 

retreat to a temporary abode from the comfortable confines of one’s home suggests a 

trivialization of the material comforts afforded by the physical world. How are these 

dichotomous themes to be reconciled? 

Apparently, the message of the Sukkah serves as the ideal backdrop through which to experience 

the celebration associated with the harvest. Accentuating man’s fragility and ephemeral 

existence assures that rejoicing in the harvest stems from a heartfelt appreciation of G-d’s 

largesse rather than from a narcissistic smugness. The harvest ingathering, however much or 

meager, ought to be infused with the joy of one who is “samei’ach bechelko” – genuinely content 

with his lot. With such an attitude, it becomes relatively easy to include others in our circle of 

celebration, and to access the angelic unity that underlies this beautiful holiday. (For further 

elaboration, see Michtav Me’Eliyahu, Vol. 2. pp. 106-110.) 

9 


Travelers on Succot 

Rabbi Azarya Berzon 

Scholar in Residence, Zichron Dov Yeshiva University 

Kollel Mitziyon Toronto Community Beit Midrash 

Is the traveler obligated in the mitzvah of Succah when he’s on the road? Must he find a Succah 

to eat and sleep in when he arrives at his temporary quarters for the night? If he cannot find a 

Succah must he build one? These questions are addressed by the Gemorah in Succah (26a). The 

Meiri quotes a dispute about the nature and scope of the exemption from Succah granted to 

travelers, and adopts the view that the traveler enjoys a far-reaching exemption despite the fact 

that he is not on his way to do a mitzvah. We will attempt to understand the opinion of the Meiri. 

We will begin by analyzing the nature of mitzvah obligations in general and the mitzvah of 

Succah in particular. 

Many mitzvot require an object and an action performed with that object. Such mitzvot entail a 

dual obligation. First, one must do whatever necessary to obtain the object, be it the etrog, 

shofar, matzah, etc.; second, one must implement the mitzvah act with the object. 

The question arises: are these two obligations equal in status, or is the obligation to perform the 

mitzvah-act primary, whereas the obligation to acquire the object is secondary? To formulate the 

problem in conceptual terms, is the obligation to obtain the object an essential part of the 

obligation to perform the mitzvah and hence of equal weight, or is the essence of the mitzvah the 

action itself and the obligation to obtain the object of lesser status? 1 

We can answer this question by investigating the halachot that apply to situations of exemption. 

In the domain of mitzvot in general, halacha operates with a variety of exemption rules. How do 

these exemptions apply to the two obligations described above? Do they apply in the same way 

to both obligations, or is there a difference between the two? 2 

1 The Tzlach (Psachim 3b) claims that one who is “far away” before the obligation of Korban Pesach arrives is not 

required to “come close” before the moment of obligation. The Minchat Chinuch (Mitzva #5) disagrees and claims 

that certainly one is required, even before the obligation of Korban Pesach arrives, to “come close” so that he be 

included in Korban Pesach. He writes, “Would anyone entertain the possibility that one need not acquire a lulav or a 

shofar before the holiday so that he can perform the mitzvah in its proper time?” It is possible that the Tzlach would 

concede that one is absolutely obligated to acquire a lulav in advance of the Chag as an essential ingredient of the 

mitzvah of lulav. However “kiruv makom” in the case of Korban Pesach is a condition that produces this mitzvah and 

one is not required to actively guarantee that the condition necessary to generate a mitzvah-obligation be fulfilled. 

However both the Tzlach and the Minchat Chinuch might agree that the obligation to obtain a lulav is secondary to 

the primary obligation of “netilat lulav”. 

2 I believe we can demonstrate the difference between the two obligations with the following example. Insofar as the 

first obligation often involves financial expenses [i.e. “chovat mamon”], whereas the second involves a physical act 

[i.e. “chovat ha’guf”], a poor person may, under certain circumstances, be exempt from obligation to purchase the 

object – i.e. a lulav - but if he has one, he is obligated to implement the mitzvah act of “netilat lulav”. 

10 


It is this issue that lies at the heart of the matter regarding travelers on Succot. 

Travelers, “holchei drachim” who are on the road but not for the sake of a mitzvah, but rather for 

a “reshut”, are exempt from Succah while they are travelling. This is clear from the braita: 

The Rabbis taught: Those travelling during the day are exempt 

from Succah during the day and obligated at night; those 

travelling during the night are exempt during the night and 

obligated during the day. Those who are on their way to 

perform a mitzvah are exempt both during the day and at night. 

Sukkah 26a 

11 


רבדל] 

םיכרד יכלוה ןנבר ונת 

הכוסה ןמ ןירוטפ - םויב [ תושרה 

םיכרד יכלוה . הלילב ןיבייחו , םויב 

, הלילב הכוסה ןמ ןירוטפ - הלילב 

- הוצמ רבדל ןיכלוה . םויב ןיבייחו 

. הלילב ןיבו םויב ןיב ןירוטפ 

א דומע וכ ףד הכוס 

It is explicit in the braita that the traveler is exempt from dwelling in a Succah as long as he is on 

the road. But what is his status when he arrives at a way-station, say at an overnight inn? It is 

clear that he is required to dwell in a Succah, but how is he meant to find one? And if he cannot, 

must he build one? 

The mitzvah of Succah entails a dual obligation. First, one must build his own Succah or obtain 

permission from his friend to use his Succah; second, once he has a Succah, he must fulfill the 

mitzvah-act of dwelling in the Succah. If we grant the possibility suggested above, namely, that 

there is a difference between the primary obligation to perform the mitzvah-act and the 

secondary obligation to organize the object of the mitzvah, the law of the traveler – while resting 

at his way-station - may be understood in a new light. The Halacha establishes that the traveler is 

exempt from obtaining a Succah yet still remains obligated to dwell in one. What this means in 

practice is that the traveler would be required to dwell in the Succah if there was one 

immediately accessible to him, but would not be obligated to expend energy on finding a Succah 

or on building one himself. 

The Meiri addresses this issue: 

Some say that those travelling for a purpose other than a mitzvah are 

obligated in the mitzvah of Succah when they retire at night even to build 

a Succah, for [if one would argue that they are only obligated to sit in a 

Succah] if one is accessible to them, then even one who is on his way to 

perform a mitzvah is obligated since dwelling in a Succah which is 

accessible will not undermine the fulfillment of the mitzvah he is on the 

way to perform. 

םיכרד יכלוהש םירמוא שי 

תעשב םיבייח תושרה רבדל 

הכוס תושעל ףא םתיינח 

היוצמ הכוסב םאש הליחתמ 

ןיאש לכ ןכ הוצמ רבדל ףא 

. ךכב הוצמה לצא לוטב 

The logic of this opinion is clear. The braita distinguishes between the traveler and one who is 

on his way to perform a mitzvah and presents a sliding scale. Whereas the traveler has a limited 

exemption which only applies as long as he is on the road, the “mitzvah-traveler” enjoys a total 

exemption that applies even when he settles down for the night. But clearly even the “mitzvahtraveler” 

is not exempt from the second obligation, i.e., the act of dwelling in the Succah if doing 

so entails no effort on his behalf and will not detract from the performance of his mitzvah. The 

principle which states that “one who is involved in a mitzvah is exempt from a second mitzvah” 

does not negate the second obligation entirely but rather establishes a priority for the complete

fulfillment of the first mitzvah. Granted we cannot require that the “mitzvah-traveler” run 

around trying to find a Succah, nor that he expend the major effort necessary in building a 

Succah. That would impinge on his ability to fulfill his mitzvah. But if there is a Succah there in 

front of him, surely he would be obligated to dwell therein. Conceptually, we can say that while 

he has the obligation of the mitzvah-act of dwelling in the Succah (to the extent that doing so will 

not interfere with the performance of his mitzvah), he is exempt from the obligation to obtain a 

Succah. The non-mitzvah traveler on the other hand, with his limited exemption, is obligated to 

obtain a Succah when off the road and at rest, which will likely mean that he must build one. 

The Meiri disagrees with that opinion, and presents a different opinion: 

In our opinion one who is on his way to perform a mitzvah is exempt 

from the act of dwelling in the Succah even if doing so entails no effort 

on his behalf, i.e. even if he has simple access to a Succah. The traveler, 

on the other hand, although obligated to dwell in a Succah if he has 

access to one there at his inn, is not required to expend energy to try to 

find a Succah and certainly is exempt from making the effort of building 

a Succah. 

12 


הוצמ רבדלש םישרפמ ונא 

ןכ םהל תנמוזמ הכוסב ףא 

בויח םש ןיא תושרה רבדלו 

םוקמב הכוס םש שישב אלא 

םיבייח והיש אל םתיינח 

הלחתמ התושעל 

Thus with regard to the non-mitzvah traveler, the Meiri establishes a difference between 

obligation a) to “obtain” the mitzvah object, i.e. the Succah, and obligation b) to implement the 

mitzvah-act, in this case the act of dwelling in the Succah. The traveler is exempt from a) but not 

from b). By contrast, one who is on the way to perform a mitzvah is exempt from both a) and b). 

Therefore even if he has simple access to a Succah he need not dwell there. 

In sum, the Meiri, like the anonymous first opinion, is operating with a sliding scale. Since the 

mitzvah-traveler is exempt from both obligations, the non-mitzvah traveler must be exempt from 

one of the two obligations, namely the obligation to build a Succah. 

Why does the Meiri exempt the mitzvah-traveler from dwelling in the Succah even if a Succah is 

easily accessible? Apparently the Meiri operates with a different definition of the rule that “one 

who is involved in a mitzvah is exempt from another mitzvah.” This rule is more than just a 

technical one designed to grant priority for the first mitzvah. A rule of this nature can be derived 

from svara (logic) and needs no scriptural source. Yet the Gemorah (Succah 25a) derives this 

principle from the passage in the parsha of Kriat Shma “and when you go on your way”- this 

exempts one who is on the way to perform a mitzvah. This rule establishes a new halachic 

exemption (“p’tur”) that completely suspends the obligation of the second mitzvah as long as 

one is involved in the first. Hence it matters not whether the second mitzvah will interfere with 

the first. 

It would seem, however, that this interpretation of the Meiri is incorrect. In an earlier paragraph, 

the Meiri defines the nature and scope of the principle that “one who is involved in a mitzvah is 

exempt from another mitzvah”. He writes: 

The principle that “one who is involved in a mitzvah is 

exempt from another mitzvah” only applies if engaging 

ןמ רוטפש הוצמב קסועב ונראיבש לכ 

וא הב קסוע אוהש דועבש השוריפ הוצמה 

יאש 

ול תנמדזמה תרחא הוצממ רוטפ הב דורט

himself in the second mitzvah will undermine the 

fulfillment of the first mitzvah or impede its execution. 

But if one can fulfill the second without hindering the 

first, the principle does not apply. 

Meiri Succah 25a 

13 


וא וז לש התעינמב כ" 

אא התושעל ול רשפא 

המויקבו הוצמ םייקמ אוהש לכ לבא הבוכעב 

בייח אוהש ול תנמדזמה תרחא תושעל לוכי 

הילע רוטפש וזב רמאנ אל הב 

. הכ הכוס תכסמ יריאמל 

הריחבה תיב 

It is explicit in the words of the Meiri that he accepts the anonymous first opinion with regard to 

the definition of the principle of “one who is involved in a mitzvah is exempt from another 

mitzvah”, namely, that this is a rule of priority and not a new Halacha of exemption from the 

second mitzvah. How then can the Meiri say that one who is on the way to perform a mitzvah is 

exempt from Succah even if he has easy access to a Succah? 

We conclude, therefore, that the exemption from the mitzvah of Succah of one who is on the 

way to perform a mitzvah is not merely an application of the general rule that “one who is 

involved in a mitzvah is exempt from another mitzvah”, but rather is a special halacha with 

regards to the mitzvah of Succah. This is based on the principle of ורודת ןיעכ ובשת, namely, that 

“one dwells in his Succah just as he would dwell in his home”. Indeed in his interpretation of the 

braita quoted above, Rashi writes: 

Travelers are exempt from Succah because one dwells in 

his Succah just as he would dwell in his home, hence just 

as he would not hesitate to leave his home to travel for 

business, so too during the days of Succot he is not 

required to restrain himself from travelling. 

- םויב הכוסה ןמ ןירוטפ םויב םיכרד יכלוה 

, ותיב תבישי ןיעכ - ובשת תוכוסב ביתכד 

ךרדב תכלמ ענמנ וניא הנשה לכש םשכ 

אל בוט םוי וניאש גחה תומי לכ ךכ - הרוחסב 

. עונמל בותכה וכירצה 

The Meiri does not limit the principle that “one is required to dwell in his Succah just as he 

would dwell in his home” to the nature of the act of “dwelling” excluding situations of rain in the 

Succah, extreme cold, etc., but rather expands it to produce a ארבג רוטפ, an exemption status for 

the individual. This exemption applies to one who is on his way to perform a mitzvah and 

extends beyond the scope of the universal principle that “one who is involved in a mitzvah is 

exempt from another mitzvah”, applying even when dwelling in the Succah will not undermine 

the fulfillment of the first mitzvah or impede its execution 3 . 

Although the ארבג רוטפ that applies to one who is on his way to perform a mitzvah does not 

apply to the non-mitzvah traveler, nevertheless he still enjoys a new status of exemption. This 

exemption applies to the obligation to obtain the object, i.e. to find a Succah or build one. As we 

have suggested, the obligation to perform the mitzvah-act is primary and cannot be relieved 

without a complete ארבג רוטפ, whereas the obligation to obtain the object is of a lesser status and 

more disposed to exemption. The Meiri postulates a sliding scale. Anyone on the road – for 

whatever purpose - is subject to the exemption of “one dwells in his Succah just as he would 

dwell in his home”. In the case of one who is on his way to perform a mitzvah, where the רוטפ 

ארבג applies, the exemption is complete and extends even to the act of dwelling in the Succah. In 

3 Compare this approach of the view of the Meiri to the Rav’s analysis of the position of the Rambam as presented in 

Ha’rerei Kedem, Vol. I, page 177, par. הזב ע " צד אלא.

the case of a traveler for a “reshut” where the complete ארבג רוטפ is lacking, the exemption is 

limited to the obligation to obtain the object of the mitzvah, but does not extend to the act of 

dwelling in the Succah. Hence, the non-mitzvah traveler will only be required to dwell in the 

Succah should he find one readily accessible 4 . 

The principle that “one dwells in his Succah just as he would dwell in his home” applies to the 

non-mitzvah traveler on the road. This principle applies whenever the individual would 

normally leave his home to embark on a journey for whatever the purpose. The strict opinion 

taken by a number of Poskim [see Shut Yechaveh Da’at, 3:47] with regards to tourists, who travel 

on Chol HaMoed for pleasure, is not reflected in the approach we have taken in the 

understanding of this sugya. 

Succah and Yishuv Eretz Yisrael 

We find two mitzvot in the Torah which are defined by the act of dwelling (“yeshiva”), dwelling 

in the Land of Israel (yeshiva b’Eretz Yisrael), and dwelling in the Succah (yeshiva b’succah). 

The similarity between the two extends beyond the basic obligation of an act of dwelling; a 

certain quality of “yeshiva” is required. 

As a general rule, we are obligated in mitzvot despite the difficulties and hardships one must face 

in their fulfillment. Yet, in the case of the obligation to live in Eretz Yisrael, we find a number of 

exemptions that result from adverse conditions, such as eking out a living, finding a marriage 

partner or a Torah teacher, and the inability to honor one’s elderly parents who cannot settle in 

Israel. It seems that the mere act of dwelling in the Land is insufficient to fulfill this 

commandment. A particular quality of “yeshiva” is necessary. The dwelling must lend itself to 

joy and contentment. 

With regard to the command to dwell in a Succah, we find a similar phenomenon. רוטפ רעטצמה 

הכוסה ןמ. One who suffers from discomfiture is exempt from this mitzvah. Apparently the quality 

of “yeshiva” required is one of contentment conducive to joy. 

Both these mitzvot of dwelling require joy and contentment not merely to beautify the mitzvah, 

but as part of their very nature. We would suggest that in both cases the essence and goal of the 

mitzvah is a close relationship to Shechina. The Land of Israel is the Land of Shechina. And the 

schach under which one dwells in his Succah represents the protection of the Shechina. It is for 

this reason that the Zohar calls the shade provided by the schach אתונמיהמד אליצ, symbolic of the 

clouds of honor that protected the people of Israel in the wilderness. 

4 The Levush (Levush HaChur, OC 640:8) rules that travelers are only obligated at night if they reach a place where 

a succah already stands. According to the Levush the traveler need not build a succah, "because there is no greater 

trouble and pain than this, to obligate him to build a succah in the field or amongst the gentiles." The view of the 

Levush should not be identified with that of the Meiri. Whereas the Levush is operating with the concept of 

"mitzta'er," the discomfort exemption, the Meiri is not. The Meiri integrates the Halacha of the traveler with that of 

one who is on his way to perform a mitzvah and compares the two “peturim”. For the Levush, the question will be 

“what constitutes "mitzta'er"? This question is irrelevant to the Meiri. 

14 


As the Rav zt”l pointed out, whenever we find the concept of “simcha” in the Torah it is always 

associated with “lifne HaShem” (standing before God). One who dwells in the presence of 

HaShem experiences genuine joy. 

It is for this reason that a traveler is exempt from “yeshiva b’succah”. Had the halacha prohibited 

him from leaving the Succah to embark on his journey, he would feel confined by the walls of the 

Succah and would be lacking the sense of joy which is conditional to the fulfillment of this 

commandment. 

15 


Scribing our Covenant: 

A Vision for Orthodoxy5 

Rabbi Kenneth Brander 

David Mitzner Dean, Yeshiva University’s Center for the Jewish Future 

This summer is the fifth consecutive summer in which twenty-two students traveled to the 

impoverished community of Dimona in Israel. These students participated in Yeshiva 

University’s Center for the Jewish Future Counterpoint Summer Program. Through this 

program Yeshiva University college students have the opportunity to work with children and 

teenagers in the development town of Dimona, where many of the children live beneath the 

poverty level and many would be hanging out on the streets if not for the summer program that 

we run. Most of the students are recruited from the Otzma classes, special classes for teens in the 

Dimona public schools who have behavioral issues. One of the goals of the summer camp 

includes helping develop the campers’ self esteem by teaching various skills, including a better 

knowledge of English. Each day, the counselors teach the children fifteen new vocabulary words. 

These words are then communicated in the various sessions and activities that take place 

throughout the day. 

Last year, one teenager who was part of the summer program had a severe stutter. At the same 

time, there was a YU counselor who also spoke with a stutter. We asked the counselor if he 

would work with the boy and show him that it is possible to overcome this challenge. When the 

counselor met the camper for the first time and explained that he also faced challenges from 

stuttering, the camper ran away from the counselor. The boy was angry to meet another person 

who stutters. 

A few days later, the camper began to form a connection with the counselor and did not leave his 

side until the end of camp. He literally followed the counselor around everywhere, not only 

during camp, but also on Shabbat, and every night after camp was over. At the end of the 

summer, the boy gave the YU counselor a beautiful thank you note written in Hebrew. With the 

exception of two lines, each line of the note was composed of three vocabulary words that he had 

learned that summer. The first line read: silence, past, fear. The second line read: future, courage, 

5 This drasha was delivered, on Parshat Eikev, as part of the Yeshiva University ChampionsGate Weekend 

Leadership Conference. The conference was attended by lay and rabbinic leaders from 80 communities across 

North America as well as leaders from Israel and South America. Due to numerous requests for the drasha, Rabbi 

Brander has written it as an essay. A complete list of the sources used to develop the ideas of the drasha can be 

obtained by emailing Rabbi.Brander@yu.edu 

16 


hope. This letter sits on the counselor’s desk at YU so he can be reminded each day of his 

capacity to change the world around him. 

This summer, several Yeshiva University RIETS Roshei Yeshiva, Rabbi Zvi Sobolofsky, Rabbi 

Herschel Reichman, and Rabbi Assaf Bednarsh, spent time in Dimona working with our Yeshiva 

University students. While they came to inspire others, they themselves were inspired. Rabbi 

Sobolofsky had a wonderful conversation with a group of teenagers who had never before 

interacted with a Rabbi. Rabbi Reichman had a beautiful kumzits with our young men and 

women from YU. They were unexpectedly joined by 100 of the campers; and when the kumzitz 

was over, a 14 year old girl, approached Rabbi Reichman and asked if he was the Rav of these 

madrichim (advisors). When he responded in the affirmative she said ‘If you’re the Rav of these 

madrichim then I’d like a bracha (blessing) from you,’ and as her friends saw that he was giving 

her a blessing, 15 more lined up for a blessing from Rabbi Reichman. 

Why are these stories important? Because we find ourselves today reading from the book of 

Devarim. Over a dozen sources in early Rabbinic literature call Sefer Devarim by another name, 

Mishneh Torah. The Talmud states: 

Mishneh Torah (Deuteronomy) is meant to amplify 

Chulin 63b 

17 


אתאד אוה יפוסואל הרות הנשמ ידכמ 

: גס ןילוח 

Yet, we struggle to understand the unique features of Devarim in virtue of which it is called 

Mishneh Torah? The Ramban, writes: 

This book (Devraim) its purpose is known, it is [called] 

Mishneh Torah; Moshe our teacher explains, to the 

generation entering the land [of Israel] the 

commandments which are pertinent to the land of Israel 

Introduction to the Book of Devarim 

הנשמ אוהש עודי ונינע הזה רפסה 

רודל וניבר השמ וב ראבי הרות 

הרותה תוצמ בור ץראב סנכנה 

לארשיל תוכירצה 

םירבד רפסל המדקה 

The Ramban suggests that the structure of Mishneh Torah is organized around Moshe’s 

preparing the Jews to enter the land of Israel. It is the repetition of many of the laws found in this 

book that gives it the name Mishneh Torah. Yet Ramban must deal with the fact that many of the 

commandments in Devarim are new commandments, and quite a number of them have nothing 

to do with laws specifically pertaining to the land of Israel, but are focused on personal 

observance. 

Abarbanel dedicates pages in his introduction to the book of Devarim challenging the thesis that 

the Ramban puts forth. 

And [I question] with wonderment the wisdom of the 

Torah commentators how they did not alert us [about the 

challenges to Ramban’s approach] 

ךיא הרותה ישרפמ 

Yet neither does he really offer a better definition of what Mishneh Torah means. 

תמכחמ יתהמתו 

הז לע וריעה אל

There are dialogues in the Talmud that suggests a fascinating understanding of Mishneh Torah. 

The texts are extremely exciting and thoughtful, even while theologically challenging. 

And R. Levi says: Come and see that the attributes of God are 

not the attributes of man. God blessed Israel [in Vayikra] with 

twenty two verses and cursed them with eight [verses]. And 

Moshe our teacher [a man] blessed Israel [in Devraim] with 

eight verses and cursed them with twenty two [verses]. 

Baba Batra 88b 

Abaya says: [interrupting the Torah reading of the 

admonitions by adding an aliyah is forbidden] in the Book of 

the Priests (Vayikra); but [during the reading of] the 

admonitions in Mishneh Torah (Devarim) [it is permitted] to 

interrupt. Why is there a difference? Those [in Vayikra] were 

said in the plural and Moshe recited them exactly as God 

stated. And those [in Devarim] are expressed in the singular 

and Moshe stated them himself. 

Megillah 31b 

18 


אלש הארו אוב : יול יבר רמאו 

; םדו רשב תדמ ה" 

בקה תדמכ 

םירשעב לארשי ךרב ה" 

בקה 

… הנומשב ןללקו םיתשו 

ןכרב וניבר השמ וליאו 

םירשעב ןללקו הנומשב 

םיתשו 

: חפ ארתב אבב 

אלא ונש אל : ייבא רמא 

לבא , םינהכ תרותבש תוללקב 

. קסופ הרות הנשמבש תוללק 

ןושלב - וללה ? אמעט יאמ 

יפמ השמו , תורומא םיבר 

ןושלב - וללהו . ןרמא הרובגה 

ומצע יפמ השמו , תורומא דיחי 

ןרמא 

: אל הליגמ 

According to the Talmud the reason that the book of Devarim is called Mishneh Torah is that 

Mishneh Torah means it is a Second Torah. The book of Devarim is written by Moshe. In fact, 

the Zohar treats it the same way: 

This book [of Devarim] is called Mishneh Torah 

because Moshe said it by himself. 

Va'etchanan no. 22 

ןרמא ומצע יפמ השמ הרות הנשמ ירקאד 

יאה 

בכ ןנחתאו 

What are the Talmud and Zohar trying to communicate? It seems that there are two models of 

“God Speak.” The first four books of the Torah are spoken by God and written by Moshe, and 

therefore the Torah is communicated in the third person. However, in the fifth book of the 

Torah, Sefer Devarim is spoken by Moshe, approved by God, and written by Moshe. Thus while 

Sefer Devarim is still choreographed by God, the role that Moshe plays is so much more 

significant. If the Torah is to be the eternal book that celebrates the covenantal relationship 

between God and the Jewish people, both participants must play active roles for the relationship 

to succeed. 

This lesson is not confined to Devarim. It is taught in the very first chapters of the Torah. When 

God creates the world and puts Adam and Chava into the Garden of Eden, Adam and Chava live 

passive existences and the relationship between man and God falters and flounders. The 

Garden’s existence leads man and woman to rebellion. Only later, when Adam and Chava are 

banished from the “idyllic environment” of Eden and are forced to struggle, do they attain a 

connection with God.

By the sweat of your brow you shall eat bread 

Genesis 3:19 

19 


םֶחֶל לַכאתּ ךיֶפּאַ תַעֵזְבּ 

טי: 

ג תישארב 

It is only when they are fully engaged, when they need to struggle, that they create the first entity 

in partnership with God- light. Every Motzei Shabbat in the act of Havdala, we remember when 

Adam and Chava were banished from the Garden of Eden and that in exile is the first time that 

they are able to create an entity that dispels darkness from the world. 

When God fashions the luchot, they are fashioned from a backdrop of Kolot U’vrakim (thunder 

and lighting), with tremendous pomp and circumstance. Yet these first luchot fail. Moshe, 

representing humankind, ascends the mountain a second time and is told by God to fashion a 

second set of tablets—on his own, by his own hand. There is a struggle to connect to God, and 

only from that struggle is Moshe able to establish an everlasting connection with God. 

The idea of a Mishneh Torah, spoken by Moshe, approved and edited by God, and written by 

Moshe, is a recognition that within the parameters set by God there needs to be “human elbow 

grease” to guarantee the immortality of the covenantal commitment. That is why every Jewish 

king must write his own Mishneh Torah. Anyone who understands that a person’s role is to 

partner with God, to create out of the darkness of this world a luminous Beit Elokim—any such 

individual must be willing to scribe his or her own Mishneh Torah. 

What type of book are we, this community, scribing? What does our Mishneh Torah include? 

Whose vision illuminates our quill? Whose ideals soften our hearts and sharpen our minds so 

that we can work the parchment? Who serves as the empowering guide and the one who 

validates the Mishneh Torah we wish to scribe? I believe the answer to that question is Rav 

Soloveitchik. It is the Rov, who tells us in Halakhic Man: 

When God created the world, He provided an opportunity for the work of His handsman-to 

participate in His creation. (101). 

The Creator, as it were, impaired reality in order that mortal man could repair its 

flaws and perfect it… (ibid.) 

Man’s task is to “fashion, engrave, attach, and create,” and transform the emptiness in 

being into a perfect and holy existence, bearing the imprint of the divine name. (ibid.) 

The principle of “and thou shalt walk in His ways” (imitatio Dei) flows from 

halakhic man’s normative relationship with the world. We can know God’s ways only 

through studying the cosmos, for it is in the cosmos that there stand revealed before us 

the glorious and resplendent attributes of action. (64) 

This is our vision of the world and our Torah. For us, wholeness is achieved when we are able to 

merge the ethereal and the mundane. We are part of a community that does not believe in the 

bifurcation of Kodesh (sacred) and Chol (everyday). For us, Shleimut is achieved in the synthesis 

of the spiritual and the physical. It is the Pesukim in this week’s Torah portion that remind us of 

our mission in life: ויָכָרְדּ לָכְבּ תֶכֶלָל , “To walk in God’s ways”, Imitatio Dei. The verses of Ekev 

reminds us that holiness is found in the material world, and that the God-given bounty of this 

world enables us to be conduits of change. Our Promised Land is referred to by the seven

material species found in this world. We must realize that our approach, our Mishneh Torah, is 

not a compromise, but a true Torah perspective. 

For our approach to work in the real world, our students must be taught that Ve’halachta 

B’drachav entails that there is no such thing in our Yeshiva day school vocabulary as Jewish “vs.” 

secular studies. There are Jewish studies of Talmud, Tanach, Halacha and Haskafah, and Jewish 

studies of literature, science, mathematics and history. College preparatory studies are not bitul 

(negation of) Torah when they are taught with rigor and not by rote. Rather, they are conduits 

of communicating rich Torah concepts often seen in world literature. Without math one cannot 

build an Eruv. Without understanding human physiology one dare not answer questions of 

Taharat Hamishpacha. But the study of science and math offers much more than that. Without 

the study of science and math one cannot appreciate the wonders of the world. 

It is the Rov too, who shares with us in Kol Dodi Dofek that we must be connected to the fate and 

destiny of our people. We must connect with all segments of our community irrespective of 

whether they embrace traditional values. It is why our students spent their winter break, this past 

year, in Israel interacting with the larger community in Israel, even with those who may not 

observe Shabbat the way we do. It is why they spent time with Dr. Ruth Gavison and Rabbi 

Yaakov Medan discussing a proposed social covenant which would allow Jews in Israel to 

interact with civility and respect toward one another. It is why we send the largest contingent of 

students to the GA and send our students to Limmud. For we believe we must engage with 

serious Jews who happen not to be Orthodox, and we must allow our students to recognize the 

role they can play in the larger Jewish community. 

As we scribe our Mishneh Torah and focus on our Avodat Hashem and Devekut ba-Shem, love of 

God and cleaving to God, recognizing that the dust has not settled on certain issues with which 

the Jewish community grapples; we have moved the bar in the area of women’s learning. Many 

of our students spent this summer in a Beit Midrash for women, so they could grow in their 

knowledge of Talmud as well. Under the leadership of Dean Bacon and Rabbi Shmuel Hain, we 

are finding halakhically appropriate ways for women to play roles in the community in 

unprecedented ways, with synagogues accepting educational interns and hosting women as 

Scholars-in-Residence. This, too, expresses our vision. 

It is in our understanding of va-ahavtem et ha-ger, “you shall love the stranger,” that we 

recognize the responsibility not to ignore the plight of any human being. This is what moved our 

students to raise money for Haiti, and this is why our students accompanied our Mashgiach 

Ruchani (spiritual advisor) Rabbi Blau, to El Salvador to work in a small village installing 

outdoor plumbing. And this is why our students are not just concerned with non-Jews around 

the world, but people around the corner as our students tutor in the local Washington Heights 

public schools. 

It is our recognition not just of the centrality of Eretz Yisrael, the land of Israel, but of Medinat 

Yisrael, the Jewish State, that an alumnus of Yeshiva University, Rabbi Yehoshua Fass, was 

inspired to begin Nefesh b’Nefesh and for our community to produce the largest number of Olim. 

20 


These ideals are found in Mishneh Torah. It is the way Sefer Devarim is written and the vivid, 

central role of Moshe that compels us to recognize our responsibility to be involved in the 

scribing of our covenantal relationship. 

Yet, there are real concerns about the future of our vision. My primary concern is not the limited 

numbers in our community. My chief concern is the fragility of our approach. As Rav Aaron 

Lichtenstein has pointed out; our challenge is not in the values of our vision, but in our fidelity 

to its observance. To employ Brisker terminology: our challenge is not in the Cheftza of our 

vision, but with the Gavrah that wishes to scribe this as an appropriate Torah perspective. Our 

embrace of these ideals is more often than not driven by pragmatism, reflecting a tepid 

commitment, instead of being energized by passion and exuberance. Our vision demands that 

the community institutions that celebrate the above ideals be strongly supported with both time 

and money – yet often they are not. Our vision demands that our intellectual mother ship, 

Yeshiva University, without which the scribing of this Mishneh Torah is impossible, not be 

viewed as a commodity that we can casually choose to purchase or forgo, but as a precious and 

critical institution worthy of our warm and enthusiastic support. It should be the presumed 

choice of where our children will be nurtured as they actualize their potential to be agents of 

change and scribes of a covenant. 

When we decide to live this complicated lifestyle, it demands of us that we determine which 

parts of society we will embrace and which we will filter out. How can we expect to create a new 

generation that celebrates these ideals when the Beatles trump Bereshiet, when Bekius 

[knowledge of] in Miley Cyrus is superior to acquaintance with Mishnayot, when Justin Bieber is 

better known than Joseph Soloveitchik, and when Lady Gaga is often heard more than Nehama 

Leibowitz. We need to make our heroes—and many of them roshei yeshiva, rabbanim, 

community professionals, and lay kodesh (leaders) who are in this room- the champions of the 

next generation. Our vision of Orthodoxy cannot be Orthodox lite, where we as a community are 

willing to accept as a norm the observance of some commandments and the negation of others. 

We believe in a nuanced, textured vision, one that creates life in multi-color. The question we 

need to ask ourselves is this: Are we willing to engage in scribing this type of covenant together? 

21 


The Transition from 

Yom Kippur to Sukkot 

Rabbi Joshua Flug 

Director of Torah Research, Yeshiva University’s Center for the Jewish Future 

There are only four days from the end of Yom Kippur until the beginning of Sukkot. While the 

Torah provides no explicit connection between the two holidays, one cannot ignore the close 

proximity of the two holidays. There is a well known tradition that connects Yom Kippur and 

Sukkot recorded by R. Moshe Isserles (Rama, 1520-1572): 

Those who are meticulous begin building the sukkah 

immediately after the conclusion of Yom Kippur in order to go 

from mitzvah to mitzvah. 

Rama, Orach Chaim 624:5 

22 


כ" 

י יאצומב דימ םיליחתמ םיקדקדמהו 

לא הוצממ תאצל ידכ הכוסה תיישעב 

. הוצמ 

ה: 

דכרת םייח חרוא א" 

מר 

Rama's comments are found at the end of his glosses on the laws of Yom Kippur. He repeats this 

idea in his first gloss on the laws of sukkah with one slight variation: 

There is a mitzvah to fix the sukkah immediately after Yom Kippur 

because once a mitzvah becomes available one should not let it spoil. 

Rama, Orach Chaim 625:1 

רחאל דימ הכוסה ןקתל הוצמו 

לא ודיל האבה הוצמד רופכ םוי 

. הנצימחי 

א: 

הכרת םייח חרוא א" 

מר 

In his glosses on the laws of Yom Kippur, Rama states that one should begin construction of the 

sukkah immediately after Yom Kippur so that one can go from mitzvah to mitzvah. In his glosses 

on the laws of sukkah, the reason is so that one should not let the mitzvah opportunity spoil. In 

this article, we will present an approach to the relationship between Yom Kippur and Sukkot 

that explains Rama's rationale for providing two different reasons for the practice of beginning 

the Sukkah-building process immediately after Yom Kippur. 

The Themes of Yom Kippur 

Let's begin by discussing the themes of Yom Kippur and Sukkot. Regarding Yom Kippur, the 

Torah states: 

However, on the tenth day of this seventh month is the day of 

atonement; there shall be a holy convocation unto you, and you 

shall afflict your souls; and you shall bring an offering made by fire 

unto the Lord. 

Vayikra 23:27 (adapted from JPS translation) 

םוי הזה יעיבשה 

שדחל רושעב ךא 

םכל היהי שדק ארקמ אוה םירפכה 

םתברקהו םכיתשפנ תא םתינעו 

: 'הל 

השא 

זכ: 

גכ ארקיו

One of the themes of Yom Kippur is inui (affliction). Yom Kippur is the archetypal fast day. It is 

a complete refrain from the physical. We recite the phrase "Baruch Shem K'vod Malchuto etc. 

(Blessed is the name of His glorious kingdom)" aloud because on Yom Kippur, we consider 

ourselves to be similar to angels. 6 Yom Kippur can be categorized as a day that is purely spiritual. 

By contrast, Sukkot is a holiday that involves many physical activities. The Torah, in describing 

Sukkot, highlights the physical elements of the holiday: 

39 However, on the fifteenth day of the seventh month, when 

you have gathered in the fruits of the land, you shall keep the 

feast of the Lord seven days; on the first day shall be a solemn 

rest, and on the eighth day shall be a solemn rest. 40 And you 

shall take for yourselves on the first day the fruit of goodly trees, 

branches of palm-trees, and boughs of thick trees, and willows of 

the brook, and you shall rejoice before the Lord your God seven 

days. 41 And you shall keep it a feast unto the Lord seven days 

in the year; it is a statute forever in your generations; you shall 

keep it in the seventh month. 42 You shall dwell in booths seven 

days; all that are home-born in Israel shall dwell in booths; 43 

That your generations may know that I made the children of 

Israel to dwell in booths, when I brought them out of the land of 

Egypt: I am the Lord your God. 

Vayikra 23:39-43 (adapted from JPS translation) 

23 


שדחל םוי רשע השמחב ךא ( טל) 

ץראה תאובת תא םכפסאב יעיבשה 

םויב םימי תעבש 'ה 

גח תא וגחת 

: ןותבש ינימשה םויבו ןותבש ןושארה 

ירפ ןושארה םויב םכל םתחקלו ( מ) 

תבע ץע ףנעו םירמת תפכ רדה ץע 

םכיהלא 'ה 

ינפל םתחמשו לחנ יברעו 

'הל 

גח ותא םתגחו ( אמ) 

: םימי תעבש 

םלוע תקח הנשב םימי תעבש 

: ותא וגחת יעיבשה שדחב םכיתרדל 

לכ םימי תעבש ובשת תכסב ( במ) 

( גמ) 

: תכסב ובשי לארשיב חרזאה 

יתבשוה תוכסב יכ םכיתרד ועדי ןעמל 

ץראמ םתוא יאיצוהב לארשי ינב תא 

: םכיהלא 'ה 

ינא םירצמ 

גמ-טל: 

גכ ארקיו 

The two most prominent mitzvot of Sukkot are the mitzvah of dwelling in the sukkah and the 

mitzvah of taking the four species. The mitzvah of sukkah is not merely a mitzvah that involves 

use of a physical object. The mitzvah redefines one's physical way of life by requiring one to live 

in a temporary dwelling. Similarly, the Torah assigns special significance to the mitzvah of taking 

the four species in stating that those species are used to rejoice before G-d. 

The Torah also highlights the physical elements of Sukkot by introducing it as a time when one 

is gathering the fruit of the land. Why isn't Yom Kippur also introduced as a time when one is 

gathering the fruit of the land? Aren't they only five days apart? On a simple level, one can 

suggest that Yom Kippur is a completely spiritual day and the fact that it occurs at a time when 

one is gathering the fruit of the land is irrelevant to the day. Sukkot involves physical elements 

and there is significance in the fact that it occurs at a time when one is gathering the fruit of the 

land. 7 

6 R. Ya'akov ben Asher, Tur, O.C. no 619, writes that throughout the year we recite this phrase silently because this 

phrase was borrowed from the angels. On Yom Kippur, when we are considered angels, we may recite it aloud. 

7 Ramban (1194-1270), Vayikra 23:39, notes that Sukkot is a celebration of thanksgiving for all of the produce that 

one will collect. This is why the theme of simcha is highlighted on Sukkot.

The Torah also declares that the seven days of Sukkot are days of feast (chag). This command to 

feast is presented twice in the section dealing with Sukkot (verses 39 and 41) and does not 

appear at all regarding the other holidays. This highlights the physical nature of the holiday. 

There is another practice that exhibits the physical nature of the holiday: 

He who has not seen the rejoicing at the place of the waterdrawing 

has never seen rejoicing in his life. At the conclusion of 

the first festival day of tabernacles they descended to the court 

of the women where they had made a great enactment. There 

were golden candlesticks with four golden bowls on the top of 

each of them and four ladders to each, and four youths drawn 

from the priestly stock in whose hands were held jars of oil 

containing one hundred and twenty log which they poured into 

the bowls. From the worn-out drawers and girdles of the priests 

they made wicks and with them they kindled the lamps; and 

there was not a courtyard in Jerusalem that was not illumined 

by the light of the place of the water-drawing. Men of piety and 

good deeds used to dance before them with lighted torches in 

their hands, and sing songs and praises. 

Mishna Sukkah Chapter 5 (Soncino Translation) 

24 


, הבאושה תיב תחמש האר אלש ימ לכ 

בוט םוי יאצומב 

. וימימ החמש האר אל 

, םישנ תרזעל ודרי , גח לש ןושארה 

לש תורונמו . לודג ןוקת םש ןינקתמו 

בהז לש םילפס העבראו , םש ויה בהז 

דחא לכל תומלס העבראו ןהישארב 

הנהכ יחרפמ םידלי העבראו , דחאו 

האמ לש ןמש לש םידכ םהידיבו 

לפס לכל ןיליטמ ןהש , גל םירשעו 

ןהינימהמו 

םינהכ יסנכמ יאלבמ . לפסו 

, ןיקילדמ ויה ןהבו , ןיעיקפמ ויה ןהמ 

הניאש םילשוריב רצח התיה אלו 

םידיסח . הבאושה תיב רואמ הריאמ 

םהינפל םידקרמ ויה השעמ ישנאו 

םירמואו , ןהידיבש רוא לש תוקובאב 

. תוחבשתו תוריש ירבד ןהינפל 

'ה 

קרפ הכוס הנשמ 

The celebration that took place in the Beit HaMikdash on Sukkot was an elaborate celebration. 

Rambam explains why there such an elaborate celebration: 

Even though there is a mitzvah to rejoice on all of 

the festivals, on Sukkot, there was added joy in the 

Temple as it states "You shall rejoice before the 

Lord your God seven days." 

Rambam, Hilchot Lulav 8:12 

גחב ןהב חומשל הוצמ תודעומה לכש יפ לע ףא 

רמאנש הריתי החמש םוי שדקמב התיה תוכוסה 

. םימי תעבש םכיקלא 'ה 

ינפל םתחמשו 

בי: 

ח בלול 'לה 

ם" 

במר 

Sukkot is not merely a holiday of indulgence in the physical. Sukkot is a holiday of extreme 

simcha (rejoice). There are many physical attributes of Sukkot and they are all channeled 

through our obligation of rejoicing before G-d. 

Affliction and Rejoicing: Polar Opposites 

Affliction and rejoicing seem to be at opposite ends of the spectrum. Affliction involves 

shunning the physical world, whereas rejoicing involves embracing the physical world. Which 

approach is more effective in pursuing our spiritual goals? 

The Gemara quotes a Beraita that shunning the physical can constitute a transgression: 

R. Eleazar ha-Kappar Berabbi, as it was taught: And he [the nazir] 

shall make atonement for him, for that he sinned against a soul. 

Against which ‘soul’ then has he sinned? But it is because he afflicted 

רמוא יברב רפקה רזעלא 'ר 

לע אטח רשאמ וילע רפכו 

הז אטח שפנ וזיאב יכו שפנה 

ןייה 

ןמ ומצע רעיצש אלא

himself through abstention from wine. Now, does not this afford an 

argument from the minor to the major? If one, who afflicted himself 

only in respect of wine, is called a sinner: how much more so one who 

ascetically refrains from everything. Hence, one who fasts is called a 

sinner. 

Nedarim 10a (Soncino Translation) 

25 


אלש הז המו ו" 

ק םירבד אלהו 

ארקנ ןייה ןמ אלא ומצע רעיצ 

רבד לכמ ומצע רעצמה אטוח 

לכ ןאכמ המכו המכ תחא לע 

. אטוח ארקנ תינעתב בשויה 

. י םירדנ 

Judaism is not a religion that embraces asceticism. The Torah brands the nazir as a sinner for 

shunning one physical item 8 and this is certainly true for one who shuns all foods. Therefore, one 

who fasts unnecessarily is considered a sinner. How then does Judaism view the physical? 

In fine, Holiness consists in one's clinging so closely to his God 

that in any deed he might perform he does not depart or 

move from the Blessed one, until the physical objects of which 

he makes use become more elevated because of his having 

used them than he descends from his communion and from 

his high plane because of his having occupied himself with 

them. 

Mesillat Yesharim Chap. 26 (Feldheim Translation) 

היהיש אוה השודקה ןינע , רבד לש וללכ 

םושבש דע ויקלאב ךכ לכ קבד םדאה 

ונממ 

זוזי אלו דרפי אל השעי רשא השעמ 

םירבדה ולעתי רתויש דע ךרבתי 

וישימשתמ דחאל ושמשי רשא םימשגה 

דרויש הממ םהב שמתשמ אוהש המב 

ושמתשהב ותלעמו ותוקיבדמ אוה 

. םיימשג םירבדמ 

וכ קרפ םירשי תליסמ 

According to R. Moshe Chaim Luzzatto (Ramchal, 1707-1746), one of the highest spiritual 

levels one can attain is the ability to sanctify the physical items in this world without the physical 

having a negative impact on oneself. We live in a physical world and many of the mitzvot are 

physical in nature. Our response to the physical world is not to shun it but to sanctify it. 

The concept of simcha on Yom Tov epitomizes this idea. It is arguable that one who reflects on 

the blessings that one has received can achieve a state of rejoice without the use of any physical 

items. Yet, the Beraita states that such a reflection is insufficient: 

Our Rabbis taught: A man is in duty bound to make his children 

and his household rejoice on a Festival, for it is said, And you shall 

rejoice on your festival, [you and your son, and your daughter, etc.] 

With what does he make them rejoice? With wine. R. Yehudah said: 

Men with what is suitable for them, and women with, what is 

suitable for them. ‘Men with what is suitable for them’: with wine. 

And women with what? R. Yoseph recited: in Babylonia, with 

colored garments; in Eretz Yisrael, with ironed lined garments. It 

was taught, R. Yehudah b. Beteyra said: When the Temple was in 

existence there could be no rejoicing except with meat, as it is said, 

And you shall sacrifice peace-offerings, and shall eat there; and you 

וינב חמשל םדא בייח ןנבר ונת 

תחמשו רמאנש לגרב ותיב ינבו 

יבר ןייב םחמשמ המב ךגחב 

םהל יוארב םישנא רמוא הדוהי 

יוארב םישנא ןהל יוארב םישנו 

בר ינת יאמב םישנו ןייב םהל 

ץראב ןינועבצ ידגבב לבבב ףסוי 

ןיצהוגמ ןתשפ ידגבב לארשי 

רמוא אריתב ןב הדוהי יבר אינת 

ןיא םייק שדקמה 

תיבש ןמזב 

תחבזו רמאנש רשבב אלא החמש 

ינפל תחמשו םש תלכאו םימלש 

8 See R. Ya'akov Etlinger (1798-1871), Aruch LaNer, Keritut 25b, who notes that only a nazir who became impure is 

considered a sinner. He explains that a nazir has an opportunity to become holy and that outweighs the 

consideration that he is shunning wine. If he becomes impure, the opportunity to become holy no longer exists and 

all that remains is his affliction from wine. Therefore, he is considered a sinner.

shall rejoice before the Lord your God. But now that the Temple is 

no longer in existence, there is no rejoicing except with wine, as it is 

said, and wine that makes glad the heart of man. 

Pesachim 109a (adapted from Soncino Translation) 

26 


תיב ןיאש וישכעו ךיקלא 'ה 

ןייב אלא החמש ןיא םייק שדקמה 

. שונא בבל חמשי ןייו רמאנש 

. טק םיחספ 

Simcha requires one to sanctify the physical. It is only through the sanctification of physical that 

one can achieve the proper state of simcha. 

Yom Kippur and Sukkot seem to be holidays with opposing themes. Why then is Sukkot 

observed immediately after Yom Kippur? R. Yitzchak Abuhab (14 th century) provides the 

following suggestion 9 : 

God commanded rejoicing on Sukkot after the days of 

repentance to teach us that He does not desire that we afflict 

our bodies throughout the year, only when there is a need for 

us to subdue our hearts and return to the righteous path, and 

even then [on condition] that we return to rejoicing in our 

hearts and [cause] our family [to rejoice] for the observance of 

mitzvot … Do not think in your hearts that I gave you this 

festival [of Sukkot] to fast like Yom Kippur. Rather you should 

eat, drink, offer peace offerings and voluntary offerings in order 

to rejoice for seven days. In order that nobody think that this is 

[merely] a celebration of gluttony, it states "The festival of 

Sukkot is seven days for God," meaning that the entire 

celebration should be for the sake of heaven. 

Menorat HaMaor no. 146 

וב חומשל ה" 

בקה הוצ תוכוסה גחו 

ץפח וניאש ונדמלל הבושתה ימי רחאל 

היהשכ אלא םימיה לכ ונפוג תונעל 

הרשי ךרדל בושל ונבבל ענכהל ךרוצ 

ישנאלו ונבבל חמשל בושנש הז לכ םעו 

ובשחת לא ... הוצמ רבדל ונתיב 

וב תונעתהל הז גח םכל יתתנש םכבבלב 

ותשתו ולכאתש אלא 

ה" 

יב ומכ 

תעבש חומשל תובדנו םימלש ובירקתו 

תאזש םדא םוש בושחי אלש יפלו . םימי 

ביתכ כ" 

ע סרכ יולימ לש איה החמשה 

לכ רמולכ 'הל 

םימי תעבש תוכוסה גח 

. םימש םשל אלא אהת אל החמש תאז 

ומק 'ס 

רואמה תרונמ 

Yom Kippur provides one with an opportunity to reach great spiritual heights. One might 

erroneously conclude that Yom Kippur is the only way to achieve those great spiritual heights 

and that living a life of asceticism is the ideal. Therefore, Sukkot comes as a counterbalance to 

Yom Kippur where one has the opportunity of reaching great spiritual heights by sanctifying the 

physical. 

Now that we understand the themes of Yom Kippur and Sukkot, we can resolve the apparent 

discrepancy in Rama's writings. Rama's statement in the laws of Yom Kippur was intended for 

someone studying the laws of Yom Kippur in preparation for the day. It was written for someone 

with a Yom Kippur mindset. As such, Rama's focus is on the purely spiritual aspects of the 

mitzvot. Therefore, one should build a sukkah immediately after Yom Kippur simply because it 

is an additional opportunity to be involved in a mitzvah. By contrast, the laws of Sukkot were 

written for someone with a Sukkot mindset. As such, the language reflects the need to sanctify 

the physical. For this reason, Rama stresses that one should begin building the sukkah 

immediately following Yom Kippur because one should not allow a mitzvah opportunity to 

spoil. This indicates that the mitzvah of sukkah is something special and that there is great 

9 R. Simcha Zissel Ziv (1824-1898), Ohr Rashaz no. 443, presents a similar idea.

excitement about the upcoming holiday. It is not merely another opportunity to perform a 

mitzvah but rather an opportunity to become physically involved in a mitzvah and reach the 

same great spiritual heights that one reached on Yom Kippur. 

27 


Moshe Rabbeinu: An 

Angel Amongst Men10 

28 


Ms. Miriam Krupka 

Faculty, The Ramaz Upper School 

Simchat Torah is arguably one of the happiest days of the Jewish calendar. It would seem to be 

incongruous, therefore, with the joy of the day, to be discussing issues of death and mourning. 

However, the central Torah reading of Simchat Torah, more specifically the final eight pesukim 

of Parshat VeZot Habracha, and thus, of the Torah itself, are a description of the death of (34:5- 

7), mourning for (8-9) and eulogy of (10-12), Moshe Rabbeinu. In fact, many of the piyyutim 

composed for the day of Simchat Torah are, in essence, hespedim for Moshe. 11 

Of course, reflections upon Moshe’s death on Simchat Torah are quite appropriate. Historians 

refer to the time period that the Jews spent in the desert as the “Mosaic period”, for after all, 

Moshe is the key element in the Torah’s revelation and the ubiquitous protagonist of 4/5 of the 

Torah. 12 In fact, God Himself declares that the Torah will be known for eternity by Moshe’s 

name, as Torat Moshe. 13 It is fitting that the text of the Torah should end with his death and in 

essence, by doing so, Moshe’s personal narrative is tied to that of the Torah itself. The question, 

therefore, is not why Simchat Torah is an appropriate day to celebrate the life and mourn the 

death of our great liberator, leader and lawgiver. What is compelling, however, is the way in 

which the Torah, and the various canons of aggadot treat the personhood of Moshe. 

The Issue of Moshe’s Celestial Status 

By ending chamisha chumshai Torah with Moshe’s death, the text strongly implies that the life 

and death of a single human being is the center or paradigm of the nation’s revelatory experience 

10 I would like to thank my colleagues at the Ramaz Upper School for their insightful comments on the earlier drafts 

of this article. In addition, I would specifically like to thank my friend Sefi Kraut for her astute and comprehensive 

review of the ideas contained herein. 

11 Hundreds of these piyyutim have been written across history and geography. One of the more renowned ones is 

the piyut written by Avraham Ibn Ezra, entited “Ashrecha”. It can be found in the Artscroll Sukkot machzor on page 

1347. For a comprehensive compendium and analysis of these piyyutim, see Leon Weinberger’s “The Death of 

Moses in the Synagogue Liturgy” (Brandeis University Ph.D, 1963) 

12 On a purely nominal level, his name appears over 600 times throughout Tanach. No other biblical figure has that 

much exposure, with the possible exception of King David. In addition, with Sefer Devarim, Moshe has more actual 

speaking time than any other figure in Tanach. 

13 Malachi 3:22, see Talmud Bavli, Masechet Shabbat 89a for the verse’s background.

and relationship with God as a whole. 14 In fact, the Torah explicitly refers to Moshe’s uniqueness 

in numerous places. Moshe had a prophetic status like no other, 15 he was able to experience the 

Heavenly spheres, 16 and somehow, his very physical existence was changed by that experience. 17 

In fact, these descriptions hint to an almost transcendental image of Moshe, an elevation of a 

human being to a status that borders on metaphysical. Along these lines, the Rambam states in 

Hilchot Yesodei HaTorah 7:6 regarding Moshe, that “His mind was [always] connected to God, 

and God's glory never left him at all; light emanated from his face, and he was holy like an angel.” 

On the other hand, the Tanach constantly refers to Moshe as השמ שיאה18 and as ' ה דבע. 

19 These 

descriptions highlight his frailty; the first emphasizes that he is a human being and the latter, that 

he is a man who serves a greater power. 20 There are numerous examples which illustrate that 

Moshe also clearly views himself as a tool of Hashem. Moshe’s speeches and prayers throughout 

the Torah leave no doubt that he is a mere emissary of the Creator and in no way acting on any 

sort of independent spiritual power. However, emissary status not-withstanding, this two-fold 

image of Moshe as, on the one hand, a Godly being, and on the other hand, clearly of flesh and 

blood, creates a theologically grey area; was Moshe more than human? 21 

The ambiguity surrounding Moshe’s humanity is most especially apparent in the last eight 

pesukim of Devarim: on the one hand, Moshe the man clearly experiences death (verse 5), but 

on the other hand, his burial place is concealed from human knowledge and contact (v.6), which 

insinuates a divine sort of demise. 22 He is the paradigmatic mortal23 in the fact that he dies at the 

age of 120 (v7), yet he is more than human in that his “eyes never dimmed nor his natural 

strength abated” (ibid) – an implication that Moshe didn’t age. The miracles he accomplished in 

his lifetime and the occurrence of his death are tied, respectively, to the fact that “ ' ה וחלש” 

and 

that they occurred “ ' ה יפ לע”. 

These two phrases clearly tie all that Moshe accomplished to God’s 

influence and decree. Yet he experienced God face-to-face, 24 which connotes a relationship with 

the Ribono Shel Olam that was certainly supra-human. 25 

14 In fact, it would seem to be more appropriate to end the Torah with Moshe’s blessings to the tribes in Devarim, 

Perek 33, as they are an inspirational tribute to the nation’s individual strengths and communal unity (and include a 

distinct eye to the future). 

15 

Devarim 34:10 םינפ לא םינפ 'ה 

ועדי רשא השמכ לארשיב דוע איבנ םק אלו 

16 Shemot 19:3 

17 Shemot 34:29 ותא ורבדב וינפ רוע ןרק ... יניס רהמ השמ תדרב יהיו 

18 Shemot 11:2, Devarim 33:1 

19 Devarim 34:5, Yehoshua 1:1 and 12, and 8:31 

20 Such as in our pesukim in 34:11. 

21 This is a tension or confusion that has the potential to lead to practical religious consequences. Perhaps the most 

telling example lies within the story of the Golden Calf. According to many commentators, the people were 

motivated to create the calf because without Moshe as God’s stand-in, they could not imagine a relationship with 

God. Here, it is Moshe’s enhanced prophetic leadership that allows them, mistaken as they were, to almost 

substitute him in their minds for a relationship with God. See Shemot 37:1 where the nation’s request for a new 

God is necessary because Moshe is gone. 

22 In addition, the word “רבקיו” in the singular, as Rashi points out, signifies burial by the hands of God Himself. 

23 See Bereishit 6:3 – the mortality of man is described as “his years are 120”. 

24 

Devarim 34:10 : 

םינפ לא םינפ 'ה 

ועדי רשא השמכ לארשיב דוע איבנ םק אלו 

29 


Though the text of the Torah represents both aspects of Moshe, the aggadot take this 

“divine/human” tension within Moshe and intensely emphasize the incorporeal side of him, 

unabashedly raising him to an almost angelic, or celestial, rank. There is a well-known midrash 

that states that Moshe did not eat or drink for the full forty days that he spent in the heavenly 

court, as he took on the status of angels who have no bodily needs. 26 Along these lines, Moshe 

consistently interacts and argues with, often besting, the angels. For example, just as he struggled 

with the angels before they enable him to pass to give the Torah to Yisrael, 27 so too he defeats 

the Angel of Death when the angel comes to take his soul. 28 There is a powerful midrash that 

paints a picture of the angels all refusing to be involved in taking Moshe’s soul because they see 

him as their superior. 29 Even more spectacularly, there are aggadot that discuss the question of 

Moshe’s general immortality, 30 and how he lost his humanity when he ascended to Har Sinai, 31 

and even how he had the status of “spouse” to the Shechina, allowing him to annul the vows of 

God and change His decree. 32 He is “larger than life” in his height of ten cubits 33 and in the fact 

that he was created from separate material than the rest of mankind. 34 There is much discussion 

of nature itself being subordinate to Moshe; the sun refuses to set on the day of his death, the 

dust refuses to cover his body and the heavens and earth themselves beg God to spare his life. 35 

However ambiguous the Biblical text may be regarding Moshe’s status, the aggadot leave us with 

no doubt; Moshe was distinctly transcendental. 

In his Iggeret haNechamah to the Jews of Fez, 36 R’ Maimon ben Joseph, the father of the 

Rambam, echoes these aggadot. He writes that upon Moshe’s death, his soul was “united with 

the angels on high and entered the body of an angel…this was not something new for him 

25 An interesting example of this tension is the term “םיקלאה שיא”, which is often used to describe Moshe (Yehoshu 

14:6, Ezra 3:2). On the one hand, man. On the other hand, one with an atypical relationship with the Divine. 

26 Shemot Rabbah 47:5. See also Shir haShirim Rabba 8:11 in which God argues with the angels about the logic of 

giving the Torah to humankind. God’s argument is that the Torah is meant for mortal man who eats and drinks. It is 

interesting, therefore, that for Moshe to ascend to the Heavens to bring the Torah down to mankind, he must, at 

least temporarily, almost lose his human status. 

27 Shabbat 88b 

28 Pesikhta De’rav Kahana S1:10, Sifre on Devarim 305, Bava Batra 17a and Midrash Petirat Moshe Rabbeinu 

29 Midrash Petirat Moshe Rabbeinu 

30 Sotah 13b - “Others declare that Moshe never died; it is written here, “So Moshe died there (Devarim 34:5)” and 

elsewhere it is written, “And he was there with the Lord (Exodus 34:28)”. As in the latter passage it means standing 

and ministering, so also in the former it means standing and ministering.” In other words, Moshe’s burial spot is 

unknown because he never died. Rather, he rose to Heaven to serve God as one of the ministering angels. 

31 Shemot Rabbah 28:1 

32 Pesikhta de’Rav Kahana S1:9 

33 Berachot 54b 

34 Zohar 21b 

35 Many of these aggadot have been incorporated into the piyyutim of Simchat Torah that eulogize Moshe’s death. 

36 In 1159, Maimon emigrated with his family to Fez, then under Almohad Muslim rulership. The letter was written 

as encouragement to the Jews of Fez who were not only under severe religious persecution, but were being 

persuaded that Islam was God’s substitute for Judaism and that Mohammed was God’s replacement for Moshe. 

Hence, the emphasis in the letter on Moshe’s exceptional and everlasting holiness. 

30 


ecause when he was still living in the body of a human being, he was active among the 

angels…” 37 

While this is not the forum for a full-length discussion on the glaringly polemic issue of human 

beings having a divine status, 38 it is worthwhile to contemplate why it is that these sources 

accentuate Moshe’s holiness so emphatically. The Torah explicitly states that as a man, Moshe 

was the greatest prophet who ever lived. Are these aggadot simply using spiritual superlatives to 

confirm Moshe’s holiness as a leader and prophet? Or are the angelic descriptions of Moshe 

intended to add a substantive additional dimension to the image and personality of Moshe 

Rabbeinu? 

Of Angels and Prophets 

To encounter this issue, we must contrast two concepts that at first blush, seem glaringly 

distinct; the prophet and the angel. The initial comparison seems obvious; they are both agents 

of God but one is a man of flesh and blood and the other is celestial. But at a deeper glance, 

neither of these assumptions is perfectly true. Let us deal firstly with the issue of their respective 

missions. True, they are both agents of God, but they function very differently in that capacity. 

The prophet experiences the words and “desires” of God and then communicates them to the 

people. (If and how the people change their actions as a result is the hoped for next step – but is 

independent of the job the prophet himself must do.) The prophet fulfills his duty by 

communicating the message. The angel’s mission, however, is only fulfilled when he 

accomplishes a set objective, when he achieves a definite practical outcome. Whether it’s the 

destruction of a city (the angel sent to destroy Sodom,) a punishment (the angel sent to afflict 

Avimelech for his kidnapping of Sarah,) the extrication of someone from a physically harmful 

situation (Daniel was protected from the lions by the angel Gavriel, as were Chananya, Mishael 

and Azaryah) or an actual “push” in a certain direction (Yosef was told by an angel to follow his 

brothers,) the angel has a “job” to get done. That is his purpose; he acts upon something. 39 As a 

shaliach, his job is to change something so that it creates a different reality. He fulfills his 

mission only when that change occurs. The prophet, on the other hand, cautions, cries, 

cajoles, and convinces, with the hope of effecting change, but whether or not that change occurs 

is then dependent on his audience; will they listen to God’s word or will they ignore it? 

This essential difference can possibly explain Moshe’s elevation to “angel” in the aggadah. It is a 

reflection of the events and work of his lifetime and of how he fulfilled his mission as God’s 

agent. The people responded to his prophecy so well, the Torah and its mitzvot were practically 

incorporated into our lifestyle; we were transformed from a slave people to a Godly one so 

effectively that it’s as if Moshe acted as an angel; the practical outcomes of his work were 

readily apparent. Reality was changed. 

37 Similar descriptions appear in Avot de’Rabi Natan 157 and Sotah 13b. 

38 It seems that R’ Maimon is trying to solve a theological difficulty (the struggle against Mohammed’s legitimacy) 

by referencing a theological enigma of our own – did Moshe have a status that was more than human? 

39 To highlight this, the famous statement that “One angel does not perform two missions” (Bereishit Rabbah 3:2), 

is a reflection of the idea that the ultimate identity of the angel is the fulfillment of the job that he has been charged 

with. 

31 


This can be understood on a deeper level when one takes into account the Rambam’s definitions 

of the “angel” and the “prophet.” 40 According to the Rambam, angels do not exist as celestial 

beings at all; they are incorporeal or “intelligences without matter.” 41 More simply, an “angel” is 

the way in which we refer to the will of God to change something in this world. The term “ךאלמ” 

is essentially a metaphor for Divine Providence. When God sends forth a “force” to put His will 

into effect, that force is an “angel.” 42 It is God’s will, something incorporeal, taking place in and 

acting upon the world of nature and physicality. Compare this to the Rambam’s definition of the 

prophet. A prophet is someone who achieves a level of intellectual and imaginative perfection 

that is so elevated, that he can begin to reach an “understanding” of God. In other words, a 

prophet is a man of flesh and blood, of the natural world, who is able to ascend to God and 

“touch” the heavens. 43 Herein lies the intrinsic similarity: the angel and the prophet are both 

representative of a bridging of the gap between the Heavens and the Earth. They differ on 

the point of departure. One is the Heavens itself reaching downward to change our earthly 

reality and one is a material human being who “touches” the Heavens. 

The Rambam’s definitions now become the key to our understanding of Moshe Rabbeinu. 

Moshe was the greatest prophet who ever lived. 44 The aggadot raise him to the status of an angel. 

By doing so, they are adding to his exalted prophetic status. What these aggadot are depicting for 

us is that in his journey to fulfill the role of prophet, he played into the role of an angel by 

effectively fulfilling a mission for God. After all, the corporeal world was forever changed by the 

nation he liberated, the Torah he introduced to them and the forty-year journey he led them on. 

While the prophet is on a level in which he can offer the possibility of change; the angel is 

change itself. The prophet is the impetus for an act; the angel accomplishes the act itself. 

Moshe Rabbeinu was both. The descriptions of Moshe as “angelic” are not mere accolades or 

just testaments to his status as a holy, righteous person. 45 They are a description of the very 

unique spiritual footprint he left on this physical world, on how the gap between heaven and 

earth was bridged in his time. 

Rav Soloveitchik describes Moshe’s personhood using a very similar analysis. In The Emergence 

of Ethical Man, in discussing the different classifications of prophets, he states that Moshe is 

unique in that he “…introduces a new motif into the God-man fellowship, namely that of 

shelihut - agency. He becomes the divine angel who acts on behalf of God and represents Him. 

40 The Rambam discusses the nature of the prophet in Moreh Nevuchim II:32 and in Hilchot Yesodei Hatorah 7. 

41 Moreh Nevuchim I:49 – angels can appear as physical forms in a vision, but they are not, in reality, physical 

beings. In the Moreh II:6, the Rambam elaborates on the idea of angels as Godly “forces”, like the forces of nature, 

for example. 

42 For instance, the Rambam explains that images of angels “flying” or possessing wings, are allusions to a mission 

being set into motion or happening quickly. (Moreh Nevuchim 2:4) 

43 And is, therefore, able to help humanity to understand God’s will. 

44 According to the Rambam in Hilchot Yesodei Hatorah 7:6, part of Moshe’s uniqueness as a prophet was in his 

ability to comprehend his prophecies not only while awake and with absolute clarity, but as if he was a “friend” or 

“confidant” of God; i.e. without fear and at any time. 

45 By the Rambam’s definition of the angel as a force, and not a formed celestial being, they are certainly not 

theologically problematic descriptions either. 

32 


‘...and sent an angel, and brought us out of Egypt’ (Num. 20:16). 46 The angelic role - that is to 

say, the role of agent - of the charismatic personality was assigned for the first time to 

47 48 

Moses….” 

This helps us to more clearly understand the seder hayom of the Torah readings on Simchat 

Torah. We read the portion of VeZot Habrachah and then we loop back to the story of creation. 

What better way to celebrate the “angelic” accomplishments of Moshe Rabbeinu and his effect 

on this world, than to start again with the story of creation; the story of the beginning of 

physicality, of the natural world! Maaseh Bereishit is a story of raw material being created. In 

addition, it is the story of the separation of the heavens and the earth, for on the second day of 

creation " ַעיִקָרָל לַעֵמ םִיַמַּה ןיֵבוּ ַעיִקָרָל תַחַתִּמ רֶשֲׁא םִיַמַּה ןיֵבּ לֵדְּבַיַּו " . According to the Kli Yakar, both 

physically, and metaphorically, God created a gap between the physical world and the Heavenly 

spheres. 49 The Talmud in Shabbat 88b tells us that when Moshe “went up to the heavens to 

bring the Torah down,” Moshe acted as the agent who began to make that gap a bit more 

narrow. He did so prophetically by reaching a level in which he could comprehend God 

and His will, and he did so angelically, by his ability to fulfill his mission of bringing God’s 

Presence down to our world. 50 Interestingly enough, Bereishit Rabbah 1:3 tells us that on the 

second day of creation, the angels were created as well. In other words, on the same day that 

God separated between heaven and earth, He also created the “agents” that would reach down 

to connect the two. 

In Sefer Devarim, Moshe tells B’nei Yisrael the following: 

11 For this commandment which I command you on this day, it 

is not too hard for you, neither is it far off. 12 It is not in heaven, 

that you should say: 'Who shall go up for us to heaven, and 

bring it unto us, and make us to hear it, that we may do it?' 13 

33 


ךוצמ יכנא רשא תאזה הוצמה יכ ( אי) 

הקחר אלו 

ךממ אוה תאלפנ אל םויה 

ימ רמאל אוה םימשב אל ( בי) 

: אוה 

ונעמשיו ונל החקיו המימשה ונל הלעי 

46 In translating this use of the term “angel” as a reference to Moshe, the Rav is echoing the Abarbanel, as well as 

various other commentators. 

47 “The Emergence of Ethical Man”, Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik, ed: Michael Berger, KTAV Publishing House, Inc. 

Jersey City 2005, p183-184. The Rav goes on to compare Moshe to Avraham Avinu, explaining that Avraham may 

have discovered an intimacy with God but that “whatever he preached he did on his own. He never represented 

God as his emissary.” 

48 Note the polemic footnote on p184 - "Christianity could not solve the meaning of divine agency and converted 

God's apostle into a deity. We, however, refused to do so. Moses remained a human figure in all his idiosyncrasies. 

The angelic task is human through and through.” This footnote is directly in line with the Rambam’s view of Moshe 

as well; Moshe never transcends his human body. He is unique in that he uses his humanity to forge a more 

powerful relationship between God and His people. 

49 It is for this reason that the command to create the עיקר to separate heaven and earth is not followed by its 

fulfillment ( עיקר יהיו... 

עיקר יהי) 

in the same way that the creation of light was followed by its fulfillment. The Kli 

Yakar explains that the events of day two did not occur immediately upon God’s command because הערה םגתפ ןיא" 

" הרהמ השענ – Statements or commands that contain negative consequence (i.e. the separation of the heavens from 

the earth), do not happen expeditiously. 

50 In fact, Moshe is credited completely with the completion of the Mishkan (rather than its architect, Bezalel ben 

Uri) because it was through his efforts and merit that the Shechinah could dwell within the Mishkan. See Bamidbar 

7:1 – “ןָכְּשִׁמַּה תֶא םיִקָהְל הֶשֹׁמ תוֹלַּכּ םוֹיְבּ יִהְיַו” : “And it was on the day that Moshe finished erecting the Mishkan…”. 

See Pesikta De’Rav Kahana for this interpretation of this attribution.

Neither is it beyond the sea, that you should say: 'Who shall go 

over the sea for us, and bring it unto us, and make us to hear it, 

that we may do it?' 14 But the word is very close to you, in your 

mouth, and in your heart, that you may do it. 

Devarim 30:11-14 

34 


אוה םיל רבעמ אלו ( גי) 

: הנשענו התא 

החקיו םיה רבע לא ונל רבעי ימ רמאל 

יכ ( די) 

: הנשענו התא ונעמשיו ונל 

ךבבלבו ךיפב דאמ רבדה ךילא בורק 

: ותשעל 

ל קרפ םירבד 

In the weeks before his death, Moshe encourages his people to continue in his prophetic and 

angelic path, to endeavor to close that gap, and not to see the heavens as something distant and 

unattainable. Corporeal nature can become divine; Torah can descend upon the earth. The last 

two pesukim of the Torah, Devarim 34: 11-12, are a testament to the man who was able to do 

just that, who was “וּנָלּ הֶלֲעַי הָמְיַמָשַּׁה”, who reached the Heavens and brought it down to us… and 

then we turn back the pages to where it all began, to remind ourselves that we must continue to 

accomplish God’s mission for us, by putting His will into effect on the blank slate that is the 

physical world. 

The text itself links Moshe’s death at the end of Chamishah Chumshei Torah with its opening 

episode of Maaseh Bereishit, the creation story. In these last two pesukim of VeZot Habrachah, 

the verb “השע” is used twice to describe Moshe’s leadership. It appears in pasuk 11, “ ה וֹחָלְשׁ רֶשֲׁא 

םִיָרְצִמ ץֶרֶאְבּ תוֹשֲׂעַל”, and then again in pasuk 12 “ -לָכּ 

יֵניֵעְלה ֶשֹׁמ הָשָׂע רֶשֲׁא לוֹדָגַּה אָרוֹמַּה לֹכְלוּ 

לֵאָרְשִׂי”. The verb “השע” also appears numerous times in the description of Briyat Ha’olam – 

appearing for the first time in 1:7 - “עיקרה תא םיקלא שעיו”. In differentiating between the verbs 

“השע”, “רצי” and “ארב”, the Ramban51 states that “רצי” is creation ex nihilo, “ארב” is the 

structuring of that initial matter into actual forms, and “השע” is the taking of the finished creation 

and establishing it in its place, or fixing and preparing it, for its proper role. Moshe was in no way 

a creator – but his status as “angel” implies that he was someone who took God’s creations and 

“prepared them” for their role by pushing, pulling and prodding his people towards a closer 

relationship with their Creator through fulfillment of His will. He is leaving them now, but he is 

leaving them with the tools and experiences that they will need to encounter their future. Hence, 

we move from the end of the story, i.e. the accomplished, perfected “השוע” by Moshe at the end 

of Devarim, to the initial “השוע” of God’s will in creation. The verbal connection is as follows; in 

Bereishit, God creates the natural world and equips it for its future role, and in Devarim, Moshe 

has done the same for Klal Yisrael. In truth, both are examples of God’s desires impacting the 

physical world. In other words, both are examples of “angels.” God creates from scratch, and it is 

then our job to “השענ”, to transform that creation and develop it towards perfection. 

Moshe’s prophetic greatness was his ability to understand that the purpose of mankind lay in 

fulfilling God’s will. But as every prophet quickly discovered, there is only “so much” one can do 

in effecting actual change. The prophet may receive the message, but establishing that message 

depends on numerous factors of his audience; emotional reactions, physical desires and external 

events to name a few. Moshe the prophet, as we know, encountered quite often in the Jewish 

51 See the Ramban on Bereishit 1:7 and 1:26 as well as here in Devarim 34:12. The Ramban’s final comment in 

Devarim is on the words “השמ השע רשא” in which he explains “השע” as “םתוא ןיכה קר” – “he had merely made them 

ready”.

people, the obstacles of human obstinacy to the will of God. His angelic greatness lay in the fact 

that despite these obstacles, God’s will took place. The Heavens touched the earth. 52 Man acted 

as agent, as God’s shaliach, on this world. 53 

Moshe is granted angelic status by the aggadot, not because he was superhuman, but 

because as a human being, he was able to wholly accomplish a shlichut of the Divine will. It 

is no wonder then that the Torah ends on the words “לארשי לכ יניעל”. As a prophet, he 

experienced God’s presence “םינפ לא םינפ”; but as an angel, he was able to bring that contact 

down so that humankind could experience it. He may have been a prophet like none other, but 

“לארשי לכ יניעל” is the testament to how he was able to use his greatness to activate God’s will by 

effecting an entire society. For through Moshe’s agency, Am Yisrael saw and experienced God’s 

Presence, and was changed, transformed and renewed by it. And if each angel exists only to fulfill 

its particular mission, then Moshe’s death at the end of our parsha is a significant symbol that his 

mission was complete and that his people were ready for their future. 

“ ... ץראה תאו םימשה תא םיקלא ארב תישארב... 

לארשי לכ יניעל השמ השע רשא לודגה ארומה לכלו” 

– 

what better way to celebrate the joy of the day than to pay tribute to the life and death of Moshe 

Rabbeinu… and then to flip the pages back to the renewal of his mission, and of our mission; to 

close the gap between heaven and earth by, as prophets, working to recognize God, and as 

angels, striving to do His will. 

52 In fact, Am Yisrael too experienced the roles of both angel and prophet. At the splitting of the Red Sea, all of Klal 

Yisrael became prophets (Mechilta, Beshalach 3), and at Har Sinai, the nation was considered to be on the level of 

the angels. To be termed prophet, one must have an elevated understanding of God. To be termed angel, one is 

playing an all-encompassing part in accomplishing a mission, a shlichut, of Hashem. At the sea, the nation “saw” 

God, they experienced Him, and they understood that He was their Father, their Savior and their Creator. They 

reached the level of prophets. At Har Sinai, however, they are described as angels, because as we accepted the ol of 

Torah, each Jew became an agent, sent on a mission. 

53 Or, as Rav Soloveitchik (Ethical Man, p184) points out, that in reality, this is a new aspect of the covenant 

introduced at Har Sinai; the fact that “…the covenant not only involves God in the human historical occurrence of 

His chosen people, but draws man into the historical divine performance. God wanders with His chosen friend or 

friends, and shares in their destiny. Man coordinates his activities with divine planning and co-participates in 

the realization of great promise.” 

35 


Zman Simchateinu: 

Understanding the 

Happiness of Sukkot 

Mrs. Chaya Batya Neugroschl 

Head of School, Yeshiva University High School for Girls 

While the common rabbinic names associated with the Shalosh Regalim are usually clearly 

connected to the events they commemorate, with regard to the common name of Sukkot, 

referred to as Zman Simchateinu, the connection is less apparent. In addition to the practical 

mitzvoth which are unique to Sukkot we have an additional command of Visamachta “and you 

shall rejoice.” When it comes to Sukkot we need to wonder, what are the particular roots of this 

simcha? How is simcha linked to the events of Sukkot? What joy are we commemorating and 

revisiting in our observance of Sukkot? And in turn, how is it that we are able to achieve this 

component of the Chag – what does it look like? 

Indeed the peshat of the pesukim (Devarim 16:13-16) indicates a very reasonable and natural 

explanation for the emphasis on joy during Sukkot. Visamachta can be understood as an 

expression of our gratitude for the abundance of our crops and harvest. Although the agricultural 

cycle is often connected to the commemorations of the Shalosh Regalim, alone, this does not 

characterize the chag and must not be the sole source of Visamachta. An examination of the 

meaning of zman simchateinu should, however, include an historical and philosophical 

foundation for this aspect of Chag HaSukkot. 

The holiday of Sukkot is also characterized by a number of unique commandments, 

commemorating the experiences of Klal Yisrael in the midbar. The primary mitzvah is that of 

dwelling in Sukkot - temporary dwellings, as mentioned in Vayikra (23: 42-43 ) "In booths you 

are to dwell for seven days ...so that your generations will know that I caused the children of 

Israel to dwell in booths when I took them from the land of Egypt...." The two components of 

the mitzvah are significant to note. Sukkot have a particular form and the chag has a unique 

teleological purpose. The Sukkot we build and move into each year are intended to connect us 

to a specific period in our nation’s history, when in the desert as a newly liberated nation we 

lived in Sukkot. 

What these “booths” are referring to is, however, debated in the tractate of Sukkah (11b). 

According to Rabbi Eliezer these booths are a reference to the miraculous "Ananai HaKavod," 

36 


the "Clouds of Glory," with which God surrounded the Israelites throughout their forty year 

journey in the desert after having left Egypt. These clouds represent the miraculous shield that 

protected the Israelites from the elements and guided them through the desert. Rabbi Akiva 

maintains, however, that these "booths" refer to the actual booths or temporary houses that the 

Israelites built while in the desert. 

The Aruch HaShulchan (Orech Chayim 625) wonders about the vast difference in these 

interpretations and its significance for our understanding of the Chag. Since Rabbi Eliezer's 

booths were manifestations of God’s protection and the miracles performed for the Jews in the 

desert, they certainly merit commemoration. However, Rabbi Akiva's interpretation is most 

puzzling in light of the commandment to dwell in the Sukkah. What is the significance of the 

huts that the Jews lived in while in the desert? 

The Aruch HaShulchan suggests that the differing opinions are actually united in the way they 

understand the significance of commemorating the “booths.” While Rabbi Eliezer focuses on the 

greatness of God and his miraculous protection of Am Yisrael, according to Rabbi Akiva, the 

Sukkah commemorates the greatness of the Jewish people and their enduring faith. Although 

beset with struggles, they traveled into the uninhabitable desert following God's command. The 

booths of Sukkot represent the faithful efforts of Am Yisrael in the face of great vulnerability and 

physical deprivation. Under these conditions, their dependence upon God was complete and 

their commitment was immeasurable. In this light, both Rabbi Eliezer's and Rabbi Akiva's 

interpretation of the "booths" whether physical or metaphorical, point us towards the 

impermanence of our dwelling in this world and the dependence upon our relationship with 

God. Thus, our observance of the commandment of Sukkot is connected to God's miraculous 

protection of the Jews during their forty year sojourn through the desert on route to the land of 

Israel. Is this the source of Zman Simchateinu? Wouldn’t Hoda’a (gratitude) be just as 

appropriate an association to commemorate the miracles of God and the faith of the Am? 

According to Maimonides, in Hilkhot Yom Tov, the simcha of simkhat Yom Tov is not about an 

individual’s emotions. Instead, what emerges from the Rambam’s directives is that simcha shel 

mitzvah is a state of being; a mindset that emerges when there is an alignment of the individual’s 

performance of a mitzva and divine command. The requirement of this form of simcha is 

fulfilled when the experience of simcha is essentially a transformative occurrence. In the 

fulfillment of a mitzvah with intentionality, a sense of purpose, and a clarity of priorities, the 

individual becomes more than the sum total of himself and his actions; he joins a divine 

collectivity. Therefore, according to Rambam, simcha shel mitzvah is only possible as a 

community based experience. Simcha shel mitzvah is achieved only when a family rejoices 

together and extends their celebration of the chag to include others in need. (Hilkhot Yom Tov 

10:16-18) 

Consider how this understanding of simcha impacts our appreciation of the events we are 

commemorating on Sukkot. It isn’t merely celebrating our individual relationship with God, our 

heightened appreciation of God’s protection, guidance and blessings that we are 

commemorating. Instead it is a simcha that is rooted in the covenantal community. Our simcha 

is fulfilled only as an expression of our connection to the destiny of Knesset Yisrael. 

37 


The Vilna Gaon supports this understanding of the significance of simcha on Sukkot. He 

suggests that the simcha of Sukkot is not only connected to the dependence of Knesset Yisrael 

on Hashem. Instead, Sukkot has an enhanced element of Simcha because the Anenei Hakavod 

were actually returned, for the first time since the sin of the Golden Calf, precisely on the 15 th of 

Tishrei. On this date, when the construction of the Mishkan began, we have an added degree of 

simcha. The Gaon concludes that this is why the 15 th of Tishrei was designated for Sukkot, 

Zman Simchateinu. Only then did the community recognize that they had returned to a status 

deserving the divine presence of the Ananei Hakavod. That confirmation of their identity as a 

covenantal community is the source of the Visamachta of Sukkot. 

As we construct our Sukkot and commemorate our continual dependence on God let our 

celebrations center around the bounty and blessings of belonging to a covenantal community 

that is guided and protected by the “Clouds of Glory.” 

38 


The Season of Holidays 

and the Dedication of 

the Mikdash 

39 


Mrs. Deena Rabinovich 

Faculty, Stern College for Women 

The narrative arc that culminates in the dedication of the Beit Hamikdash by Shlomo ha-Melekh 

begins with the expression of intent by his father David to build a permanent abode for the Aron 

Elokim. David felt blessed by all that God had granted him and deemed it inappropriate for the 

king of Benai Yisrael to live in a magnificent palace while the Holy Ark rested in a rustic tent. 

The king said unto Nathan the prophet: 'See 

now, I dwell in a house of cedar, but the ark 

of God dwelleth within curtains.' 

Shmuel II 7:2 

תיבב בשוי יכנא אנ האר איבנה ןתנ לא ךלמה רמאיו 

: העיריה ךותב בשי םיהלאה ןוראו םיזרא 

ב: 

ז ב לאומש 

As was his custom before undertaking any important venture, David consulted with the court 

prophet to secure God’s approval and receives a positive reaction from Natan: 

And Nathan said to the king: 'Go, do all that is 

in thy heart; for the Lord is with thee.' 

Shmuel II 7:3 

יכ השע ךל ךבבלב רשא לכ ךלמה לא ןתנ רמאיו 

: ךמע 'ה 

ג: 


It would seem, however, that Natan misspoke, and God directs Natan that very night to correct 

his error 54 . 

4 And it came to pass the same night that the word of the 

Lord came unto Nathan, saying: 5 'Go and tell My servant 

David: Thus saith the Lord: Shalt thou build Me a house 

for Me to dwell in? … 12 … I will set up thy seed after 

thee, that shall proceed out of thy body, and I will establish 

his kingdom. 13 He shall build a house for My name, and I 

לא 'ה 

רבד יהיו אוהה הלילב יהיו ( ד) 

ידבע לא תרמאו ךל ( ה) 

: רמאל ןתנ 

יל הנבת התאה 'ה 

רמא הכ דוד לא 

תא יתמיקהו ... ( בי) 

... יתבשל תיב 

ךיעממ אצי רשא ךירחא ךערז 

הנבי אוה ( גי) 

: ותכלממ תא יתניכהו 

54 Why the rush? Rashi and Radak (I Samuel 7:4) quote a midrash that emphasizes David’s alacrity. Unless he is 

called off at once, he may utter a vow such as not to eat or drink until the Temple is built. Or perhaps he will hire 

contractors to build the Temple and will need to pay them even if the project is called off. To prevent either of these 

scenarios, Natan must return to David at once, and tell him that the project must be deferred.

will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever. 

Shmuel II 7:4-13 

40 


ותכלממ אסכ תא יתננכו ימשל תיב 

: םלוע דע 

גי-ד: 


While David is denied permission to build the Mikdash, he is promised that his son and 

successor will be the one to do so. Overcoming or suppressing any feelings of disappointment, 

David responds to Natan’s message by thanking God for continuing to shower him with 

kindness. 

18 Then David the king went in, and sat before the Lord; and 

he said: 'Who am I, O Lord God, and what is my house that 

Thou hast brought me thus far? 19 And this was yet a small 

thing in Thine eyes, O Lord God; but Thou hast spoken also of 

Thy servant's house for a great while to come; and this too after 

the manner of great men, O Lord God. 20 And what can David 

say more unto Thee? For Thou knowest Thy servant, O Lord 

God. 21 For Thy word's sake, and according to Thine own 

heart, hast Thou wrought all this greatness, to make Thy 

servant know it. 22 Therefore Thou art great, O Lord God; for 

there is none like Thee, neither is there any God beside Thee, 

according to all that we have heard with our ears. 23 And who 

is like Thy people, like Israel, a nation one in the earth, whom 

God went to redeem unto Himself for a people, and to make 

Him a name, and to do for Thy land great things and 

tremendous, even for you, (in driving out) from before Thy 

people, whom Thou didst redeem to Thee out of Egypt, the 

nations and their gods? 24 And Thou didst establish to Thyself 

Thy people Israel to be a people unto Thee for ever; and Thou, 

Lord, becamest their God. 

Shmuel II 7:18-24 

ינפל בשיו דוד ךלמה אביו ( חי) 

ימו 'ה 

ינדא יכנא ימ רמאיו 'ה 

( טי) 

: םלה דע ינתאיבה יכ יתיב 

'ה 

ינדא ךיניעב תאז דוע ןטקתו 

קוחרמל ךדבע תיב לא םג רבדתו 

( כ) 

: 'ה 

ינדא םדאה תרות תאזו 

ךילא רבדל דוע דוד ףיסוי המו 

: 'ה 

ינדא ךדבע תא תעדי התאו 

תישע ךבלכו ךרבד רובעב ( אכ) 

תא עידוהל תאזה הלודגה לכ תא 

'ה 

ינדא תלדג ןכ לע ( בכ) 

: ךדבע 

ךתלוז םיהלא ןיאו ךומכ ןיא יכ 

( גכ) 

: ונינזאב ונעמש רשא לכב 

דחא יוג לארשיכ ךמעכ ימו 

תודפל םיהלא וכלה רשא ץראב 

תושעלו םש ול םושלו םעל ול 

ךצראל תוארנו הלודגה םכל 

ךל תידפ רשא ךמע ינפמ 

( דכ): 

ויהלאו םיוג םירצממ 

ךל לארשי ךמע תא ךל ןנוכתו 

םהל תייה 'ה 

התאו םלוע דע םעל 

: םיהלאל 

דכ-חי: 


David, craving some involvement in the process, raises funds and gathers raw materials for 

the Mikdash. 

14 Now, behold, in my straits I have prepared for the house of 

the Lord a hundred thousand talents of gold, and a thousand 

thousand talents of silver; and of brass and iron without weight, 

for it is in abundance; timber also and stone have I prepared; 

and thou mayest add thereto. 15 Moreover there are workmen 

with thee in abundance, hewers and workers of stone and 

timber, and all men that are skilful in any manner of work; 16 

of the gold, the silver, and the brass, and the iron, there is no 

number. Arise and be doing, and the Lord be with thee.' 17 

David also commanded all the princes of Israel to help Solomon 

his son: 18 'Is not the Lord your God with you? And hath He 

'ה 

תיבל יתוניכה יינעב הנהו ( די) 

ףלא ףסכו ףלא האמ םירככ בהז 

לזרבלו תשחנלו םירככ םיפלא 

םיצעו היה ברל יכ לקשמ ןיא 

: ףיסות םהילעו יתוניכה םינבאו 

הכאלמ ישע ברל ךמעו ( וט) 

םכח לכו ץעו ןבא ישרחו םיבצח 

ףסכל 

בהזל ( זט) 

: הכאלמ לכב 

םוק רפסמ ןיא לזרבלו תשחנלו 

דיוד וציו ( זי) 

: ךמע 'ה 

יהיו השעו 

המלשל רזעל לארשי ירש לכל 

םכמע 

םכיהלא 'ה 

אלה ( חי) 

: ונב

not given you rest on every side? For He hath delivered the 

inhabitants of the land into my hand; and the land is subdued 

before the Lord, and before His people. 19 Now set your heart 

and your soul to seek after the Lord your God; arise therefore, 

and build ye the sanctuary of the Lord God, to bring the ark of 

the covenant of the Lord, and the holy vessels of God, into the 

house that is to be built to the name of the Lord.' 

Divrei Hayamim II 22:14-19 

41 


תא ידיב ןתנ יכ ביבסמ םכל חינהו 

ינפל ץראה השבכנו ץראה יבשי 

ונת התע ( טי) 

: ומע ינפלו 'ה 

'הל 

שורדל םכשפנו םכבבל 

'ה 

שדקמ תא ונבו ומוקו םכיהלא 

'ה 

תירב ןורא תא איבהל םיהלאה 

הנבנה תיבל םיהלאה שדק ילכו 

: 'ה 

םשל 

טי-די: 

בכ א םימיה ירבד 

Talents of gold and silver, immeasurable quantities of copper and iron, wood and stone: David 

even lines up the masons, stone cutters and other artisans qualified to construct the Temple and 

instructs the leaders of the nation to assist the new king. Like Moshe Rabbeinu on the summit of 

Har Nebo looking out over the Holy Land in which he will not set foot, David strains to see into 

the future Temple. 

During the month of Ziv (Iyar), in the fourth year of Shlomo’s reign, construction began on 

what would become the Beit Hamikdash (1 Kings 6:1). Seven years later, during the month of 

Bul (Cheshvan) the building is complete (1 Kings 6:38) 55 . Shlomo contracts with Hiram, king of 

Tyre, for raw materials and for artisans. Only with the completion of the building does Shlomo 

send for the spoils of war gathered by his father, David, which David had presented to his son for 

the purpose of building the Temple. 56 

The time had come to put the finishing touch on the Beit Hamikdash, to move the Ark from the 

City of David to its final resting place in the Kodesh Kedoshim of the new Beit Hamikdash. 

Shlomo invites the elders, he invites the heads of the tribes, and he invites the entire Jewish 

people, to watch as the kohanim carry the Aron Kodesh. The event, described in Chapter Eight 

of Kings 1, takes place during the month of Eitanim, the seventh month, and lasts for seven days. 

65 So Solomon held the feast at that time, and all Israel 

with him, a great congregation, from the entrance Hamath 

unto the Brook of Egypt, before the Lord our God, seven 

days and seven days, even fourteen days. 66 On the eighth 

day he sent the people away, and they blessed the king, and 

גחה תא איהה תעב המלש שעיו ( הס) 

אובלמ לודג להק ומע לארשי לכו 

וניהלא 'ה 

ינפל םירצמ לחנ דע תמח 

העברא םימי תעבשו םימי תעבש 

תא חלש ינימשה םויב ( וס) 

: םוי רשע 

וכליו ךלמה תא וכרביו םעה 

55 Radak I Kings 6:38 

לבנ הלעה ובש לוב חריב ל" 

זר ירבדבו לובמ ןינע וב ןיליחתמש םימשגה ינפמ ןכ ארקנו ינימשה שדחה אוה רמאש ומכ ןושחרמ אוה 

םגרתש הזב ןתנוי תעדו הדשה ןמ הלכ 

המהבה לכאמש רמולכ תיבה ךותמ המהבל ןיללוב ובש חריו תולוב תולוב היושע ץראהו 

: איבבא ףסומ חריב 

The names familiar to us for the months are, of course, post-exilic and are not found in the Torah, nor in the early 

prophets. Thus “Nissan” is employed only in Esther 3:7 and Nehemiah 2:1. Since we now equate Pesach with the 

month of Nissan and Tishrei with the Yamim Noraim and Sukkot, I have utilized those names in what follows and 

the reader, I trust, will forgive my anachronisms. 

56 I Kings 7:51 

-תֶאְו 

בָהָזַּה -תֶאְו 

ףֶסֶכַּה -תֶא 

, ויִבאָ דִוָדּ יֵשְׁדָק -תֶא 

הֹמֹל ְשׁ אֵבָיַּו ; ’ ה תיֵבּ , הֹמֹל ְשׁ ְךֶלֶמַּה הָשָׂע רֶשֲׁא , הָכאָלְמַּה -לָכּ 

, םַלְשִׁתַּו אנ, 

ז א 

. ’ ה תיֵבּ תוֹרְצֹאְבּ , ןַתָנ --םיִלֵכַּה 

The Midrash Pesikta Rabbati suggests that Shlomo was reluctant to use these spoils, a reading that intrigued many 

of the rishonim such as Rashi, Radak and Abravanel.

went unto their tents joyful and glad of heart for all the 

goodness that the Lord had shown unto David His servant, 

and to Israel His people. 

Melachim I 8:65-66 

42 


לכ לע בל יבוטו םיחמש םהילהאל 

ודבע דודל 'ה 

השע רשא הבוטה 

: ומע לארשילו 

וס-הס: 

ח א םיכלמ 

We are not given the date on which the dedicatory ceremonies opened, but we are given a strong 

hint: immediately following the week of dedication of the Mikdash, Bnai Yisrael begin to 

celebrate the holiday of Sukkot. As we know Sukkot begins on the fifteenth day of the month; if 

the dedication began seven days earlier that brings us to the eighth of Tishrei. That means that 

from the eighth day of Tishrei, through the fourteenth, Bnai Yisrael were eating and drinking 

and celebrating the opening of the Beit Hamikdash. This included, as Rashi notes, the Tenth of 

Tishrei, otherwise known to us as Yom Kippur. 

We find that that year they ate and drank 

on Yom Kippur. 

Rashi Melachim I 8:65 

ותשו ולכאש אצמנ תוכוסה גח - םימי תעבש 

: םירופיכה םויב 

הס: 

ח א םיכלמ י" 

שר 

What, we wonder, could have given Shlomo an incentive to select, of all weeks, one that included 

Yom Kippur? Work had been essentially completed eleven months earlier. Why the long delay 

and why arrange for the Mikdash to open just in time for the festival of Sukkot? What 

justification, moreover, could there have been for overriding the proscriptions associated with 

Yom Kippur? 

In fact, there was precedent for Shlomo’s decision. Radak, citing chazal, suggests that Shlomo 

based this on the week-long dedication of the Mishkan in the desert during which time peaceofferings 

(shelamim) were brought daily, even on Shabbat, in spite of the fact that this would 

normally constitute a stoning offense. (Certain sacrifices are, of course, to be brought on 

Shabbat in the normal course, but not these.) 

Chazal understood that they did in fact eat on Yom Hakippurim 

that year, for it was within the days of rejoicing, and they based it 

on the case of the dedication of the Mishkan, for in that case they 

brought shelamim sacrifices on Shabbat, even though normally 

that would carry a penalty of stoning, so Yom Hakippurim, 

which carries a [lighter] penalty of karet, certainly it would be be 

permissible to bring shelamim sacrifices. And Chazal questioned 

that while they may have sacrificed the shelamim on Yom 

Hakippurim, perhaps they didn’t eat the meat, and they 

answered that there is no true rejoicing without eating and 

drinking, and that is what is meant by the passuk “and they went 

to their tents happy and glad of heart. 

Radak Melachim I 8:65 

ל" 

ז וניתובר לבא... 

- גחה תא 

םוי ותוא ולכא יכ ורמא 

החמשה ימי ללכב יכ םירופכה 

ןכשמה תכונחמ הז ודמלו היה 

ףא תבשב םימלש ושע םש המ 

םוי הליקס רוסאב אוהש יפ לע 

אל תרכ רוסא אוהש םירופכה 

אמשו ורמאו ושקהו... 

ןכש לכ 

םימלש הז םירופכה םויב ושע 

תחמש ןיא וצרתו ולכא אלו 

והזו היתשו הליכאב אלא ףוגה 

םהילהאל וכליו בותכה רמאש 

. בל יבוטו יחמש 

הס: 

ח א םיכלמ ק" 

דר

If one may bring a peace offering on Shabbat ha-Miluim, Shlomo reasoned, one may 

certainly eat and drink on Yom Kippur that falls during the dedication week for the 

Mikdash (the penalty for this is “karet,” formally a lighter penalty than stoning). 

Strikingly, there is a second parallel between the two dedications that Chazal noticed. Just as 

Shlomo delayed the dedication for nearly a year after the primary construction was completed, 

Moshe delayed the dedication of the Mishkan. In both cases, Bnai Yisrael are concerned with the 

delay and suspect a defect- either in the building (with the Mishkan) or in the builder (with the 

Temple). And in both cases, God had to “compensate” the original month with another holiday. 

Rabbi Chanina said: “On the twenty-fifth day of Kislev 

the construction of the component parts of the Mishkan 

was concluded and it remained disassembled until the 

first day of the month of Nissan… and during the 

entire time the Mishkan was disassembled, Bnai Yisrael 

were muttering about Moshe, suggesting that perhaps 

Moshe had not erected the Mishkan due to a defect. But 

Moshe wished to connect the happiness of the Mishkan 

with the month in which Yitzchak had been born, for 

Yitzchak was born in Nissan. How do we know this? 

For when the angels came to Avraham, Avraham 

instructs Sarah to knead the cakes, and the angels 

inform Avraham that “I will return the same time “. 

What is “ke’et chayah?” Rav Zavdi ben Levi says that 

they scratched a mark onto the wall and said that 

“ke’et chayah” will be when the sun will return to cast 

its mark on the same place. Once the Mishkan was 

erected the muttering ceased. Since Kislev lost out on 

the dedication of the work that was completed in its 

month, God said it behooves on Me to repay it. How 

did God repay the month of Kislev? The Chanukah 

(dedication) celebration of the Hasmoneans. Similarly, 

Shlomo finished the work in the month of Marchesvan 

… Why is the month called Bul? It is the month in 

which God brought the mabul (the flood). The Temple 

remained locked for twelve months and everyone was 

muttering about Shlomo to say that he was not the son 

of Batsheva, and therefore how could God agree to rest 

His Presence on the Temple that he (Shlomo) had 

constructed. 

Psikta Rabti 6 

43 


יבר רמא... 

-הכאלמה 

לכ םלשתו 

וילסכב השמחו םירשעב אנינח 

לפוקמ השעו ןכשמה תכאלמ הרמגנ 

היהש ןמז לכו ... ןסינב דחא דע 

השמ לע ןיאלמלמ לארשי ויה לפוקמ 

יפוד אמש דימ םקוה אל המל רמול 

תחמש ברעל בשחש , וב עריא 

, קחצי וב דלונש 

שדוחב ןכשמה 

אלא ןיינמו , קחצי דלונ ןסינבש 

והמ םהרבא לצא םיאב םיכאלמהשכ 

ח" 

י תישארב) 

תוגע ישעו ישול רמוא 

בושא בוש ול ורמאו חספ היהש ( 'ו 

הרשל ןב הנהו היח תעכ ךילא 

והמ ( 'י 

/ ח" 

י תישארב/ 

םש) 

ךתשא 

הטירס יול ןב ידבז 'ר 

רמא היח תעכ 

שמשה אבתשכ לתוכ לע ול וטרס 

ןסינ אבש ןויכ אלא השע אל , ןאכל 

םדא םלמיל אל דוע ןכשמה םקוהו 

וילסכ דיספה התעמו , השמ רחא 

והמ , ואל , וב הכאלמ הרמגנש 

ילע אוה ךורב שודקה רמא םלשתו 

ךורב שודקה ול םליש המ , ול םלשל 

המלש ףא , יאנמשח תיב תכונח אוה 

ןושחרמ שדוחב שדקמה תכאלמ רמג 

הלכ לוב חריב הרשע תחא הנשבו 

חריב והמ , ( ח" 

ל 'ו 

'א 

םיכלמ) 

תיבה 

אוה ךורב שודקה איבהש חריב לוב 

רשע םינש לוענ השענו , לובמה תא 

המלש לע ןיאלמלמ לכה ויהו , שדוח 

ךאיה אוה עבש תב לש הנב אל רמול 

ותניכש הרשמ אוה ךורב שודקה 

( שדקמה תיב) 

וידי השעמ ךותל 

ו אקסיפ ( םולש שיא) 

יתבר אתקיספ 

The dedication of the Mishkan took place in Nissan, months after the building of the 

components had been completed, for symbolic reasons – perhaps the anniversary of the birth of

Isaac, perhaps to connect the Mishkan to the symbols of freedom, represented by the month in 

which we were released from bondage in Egypt. 

If Shlomo was following Moshe’s lead, though, why did he not also select Nissan as the 

appropriate month to dedicate the Mikdash? Why choose Tishrei, a month already chock full of 

Moadim? Part of the answer is hinted at in the continuation of the midrash. 

(Just as God wanted to connect the inauguration of the 

Mishkan with Yitzchak,) He wished to connect the 

inauguration of the Mikdash with Avraham and the 

month in which he has born, the month of Eitanim, 

which is the month of Tishrei. 

Psikta Rabti 6 

44 


םיקלאהו... 

-הכאלמה 

לכ םלשתו 

שדקמה תיב תחמש ברעל בשחש 

חריב םהרבא וב דלונש שדוחב 

שדוח הז ( 'ב 

'ח 

'א 

םיכלמ) 

םינתאה 

. ירשת 

ו אקסיפ ( םולש שיא) 

יתבר אתקיספ 

There are fundamental differences between the two months and the two holidays. If Nissan, 

with the holiday of Pesach, represents both the release of the Hebrews from slavery and the 

molding of the nation, Tishrei, with the holiday of Sukkot, reflects a more universalistic set of 

concerns. We celebrate the holiday of Pesach behind close doors. We celebrate the holiday of 

Sukkot outside where all can see. We bring the same number of korbanot every day of Pesach. 

On Sukkot, the number of bull offerings varies daily and, as Chazal stress, the sum total over the 

course of seven days is seventy, representing the seventy nations of the world and our 

responsibility to them. This comparison extends to the fundamental difference between 

Yitzchak and Avraham. Yitzchak, offered as a sacrifice on Har HaMoriah, remained in the Land 

of Israel and his focus remained inward. While he has some interactions with Avimelech, by and 

large his influence does not extend to the surrounding nations. Avraham, on the other hand, the 

father of many nations, interacts constantly with the outside world and dedicates his life to the 

spreading of God’s word. 

This helps to characterize the fundamental difference between the Mishkan and the Mikdash. 

To be sure, both the Mikdash and the Mishkan serve as symbols of the covenantal agreement 

executed by God and Bnai Yisrael at Har Sinai, as noted by the Ramban. 

After God had given the Ten Commandments directly 

to Yisrael and instructed them with a sampling of the 

mitzvot (i.e. Parashat Mishpatim)... and Bnai Yisrael 

accepted these laws and entered a covenant (24:1- 

11)... behold they became His nation and He became 

their God, as was originally stipulated (with brit mila 

and at Har Sinai)... Now "they are worthy to have a 

house - His dwelling - in their midst dedicated to His 

Name, and there He will speak with Moshe and 

command Bnai Yisrael... Now the 'secret' ('sod') of the 

mishkan is that God's glory ('kavod') which dwelled 

on Har Sinai will now dwell (instead) on the mishkan 

'be-nistar' (in a more hidden manner, in contrast to 

םינפ לארשי םע םשה רבד רשאכ 

םתוא הוצו , תורבדה תרשע םינפב 

ומכ םהש תוצמ תצק השמ ידי לע 

... הרות לש היתוצמל תובא 

לכ תושעל םהילע ולבק לארשיו 

תרכו , השמ לש ודי לע םוציש המ 

הנה התעמ , הז לכ לע תירב םהמע 

םיקלאל םהל אוהו םעל ול םה 

... הלחתמ םהמע הנתה רשאכ 

היהיש םיואר םישודק 

םה הנהו 

ותניכש תורשהל שדקמ םהב 

רבד לע הלחת הוצ ןכלו . םהיניב 

םכותב תיב ול היהיש ןכשמה 

השמ 

םע רבדי םשו , ומשל שדוקמ

Har Sinai)..." 

Ramban Shemot 25:2 

45 


. לארשי ינב תא הוציו 

ב: 

הכ תומש ן" 

במר 

But the Mishkan, given to Bnai Yisrael during their sojourn in the desert, remains the 

provenance of Bnai Yisrael and reflects their personal quest to communicate with God. The 

Mikdash, given to Bnai Yisrael once they have conquered the Land of Israel and made a mark for 

themselves amongst the other nations, reflects the their mission to spread the Name of God to 

the world at large. The Mishkan embodies the month of Nissan and the personality of Yitzchak, 

the Mikdash personifies the month of Tishrei and the personality of Avraham. 

Shlomo does not rely on subtle hints. He explicitly states this message when delivering the tefila 

at the Chanuka HaBayit. 

22 And Solomon stood before the altar of the Lord in the 

presence of all the congregation of Israel, and spread forth 

his hands toward heaven; 23 and he said: 'O Lord, the 

God of Israel, there is no God like Thee, in heaven above, 

or on earth beneath; who keepest covenant and mercy with 

Thy servants, that walk before Thee with all their heart; 

… 30 And hearken Thou to the supplication of Thy 

servant, and of Thy people Israel, when they shall pray 

toward this place; yea, hear Thou in heaven Thy dwellingplace; 

and when Thou hearest, forgive. 31 If a man sin 

against his neighbour, and an oath be exacted of him to 

cause him to swear, and he come and swear before Thine 

altar in this house; …. 33 When Thy people Israel are 

smitten down before the enemy, when they do sin against 

Thee, if they turn again to Thee, and confess Thy name, 

and pray and make supplication unto Thee in this house; 

… 35 When heaven is shut up, and there is no rain, when 

they do sin against Thee; if they pray toward this place, 

and confess Thy name, and turn from their sin, when Thou 

dost afflict them; … 37 If there be in the land famine, if 

there be pestilence, if there be blasting or mildew, locust or 

caterpillar; if their enemy besiege them in the land of their 

cities; whatsoever plague, whatsoever sickness there be; … 

41 Moreover concerning the stranger that is not of Thy 

people Israel, when he shall come out of a far country for 

Thy name's sake-- … 44 If Thy people go out to battle 

against their enemy, by whatsoever way Thou shalt send 

them, and they pray unto the Lord toward the city which 

Thou hast chosen, and toward the house which I have built 

for Thy name; … 46 If they sin against Thee--for there is 

no man that sinneth not--and Thou be angry with them, 

'ה 

חבזמ ינפל המלש דמעיו ( בכ) 

ויפכ שרפיו לארשי להק לכ דגנ 

יהלא 'ה 

רמאיו ( גכ) 

: םימשה 

םימשב םיהלא ךומכ ןיא לארשי 

רמש תחתמ ץראה לעו לעממ 

םיכלהה ךידבעל דסחהו תירבה 

תעמשו ( ל) 

... : םבל לכב ךינפל 

לארשי ךמעו ךדבע תנחת לא 

הזה םוקמה לא וללפתי רשא 

לא ךתבש 

םוקמ לא עמשת התאו 

תא ( אל) 

: תחלסו תעמשו םימשה 

וב אשנו והערל שיא אטחי רשא 

ינפל הלא אבו ותלאהל הלא 

ףגנהב ( גל) 

... : הזה תיבב ךחבזמ 

רשא ביוא ינפל לארשי ךמע 

תא ודוהו ךילא ובשו ךל ואטחי 

ךילא וננחתהו וללפתהו ךמש 

םימש רצעהב ( הל) 

... : הזה תיבב 

ךל ואטחי יכ רטמ היהי אלו 

ודוהו הזה םוקמה לא וללפתהו 

יכ ןובושי םתאטחמו ךמש תא 

היהי יכ בער ( זל) 

... : םנעת 

ןוקרי ןופדש היהי יכ רבד ץראב 

ול רצי יכ היהי יכ ליסח הברא 

לכ עגנ לכ וירעש ץראב וביא 

ירכנה לא םגו ( אמ) 

... : הלחמ 

אבו אוה לארשי ךמעמ אל רשא 

... : ךמש ןעמל הקוחר ץראמ 

לע 

המחלמל ךמע אצי יכ ( דמ) 

םחלשת רשא ךרדב וביא 

רשא ריעה ךרד 'ה 

לא וללפתהו 

יתנב רשא תיבהו הב תרחב 

יכ ךל ואטחי יכ ( ומ) 

... : ךמשל 

םב 

תפנאו אטחי אל רשא םדא ןיא

and deliver them to the enemy, so that they carry them 

away captive unto the land of the enemy, far off or near; 

Melachim I 8:22-46 

46 


םהיבש םובשו ביוא ינפל םתתנו 

: הבורק וא הקוחר ביואה ץרא לא 

ומ- 

בכ: 

ח א םיכלמ 

Shlomo tells Bnai Yisrael, you will come here when you have sinned and need to bring a korban 

… when you are being attacked by an enemy … when there is a drought or a hunger... and even 

before you go out to war. But also, adds Shlomo, you will not be the only ones to use this house. 

The nachri, the non Jews, will also come here when they hear of the greatness of God and come 

to pay homage to God. 

Avraham, too, never ceased his efforts to teach all of mankind of the greatness of God. He was 

born in Tishrei and during that month we constantly beseech God to remember the merits of 

the Avot and forgive us for our sins. During that month we look beyond our society to the world 

at large. That broader perspective was what motivated Shlomo to select that month to dedicate 

the mikdash closing the book, we might say, on the Exodus from Egypt that occurred 480 years 

earlier. 

Just as Sukkot concludes the circular cycle of pilgrim holidays and relates back to Pesach, the 

dedication of the Mikdash caps the linear history leading back to the events of the Exodus.

The Beauty and the 

Least Rabbi Moshe Taragin 

Ra”m, Yeshivat Har Etzion 

Most chagim are defined by a primary mitzvah – a central mitzvah that both anchors the halachik 

experience and infuses the day with its primary symbolism. It is difficult to overstate the central 

role of shofar on Rosh Hashana just as it is impossible to ignore the heavy impact of chametz and 

matzah upon Pesach. Though admittedly, most chagim carry ancillary mitzvoth, such as 

korbanot and tefilot, it is usually the one central mitzvah which captures the theme of the day. 

More often than not this central and dominant mitzvah lends the chag its Biblical name. Rosh 

Hashanah is referred to by the Torah as Yom Hazikaron because of the effect of the shofar which 

elicits the merciful attention of the Ribbono Shel Olam. Similarly, Pesach is referred to by the 

Torah as Chag Hamatzot in recognition of the matzah and chametz experience which lies at this 

core of this experience symbolizing the rapid exodus from Egyptian bondage. 

In this respect the chag of Sukkot is a bit unusual in that it spotlights two seemingly equal 

mitzvoth. The mitzvah of the arba minnim and the mitzvah of sitting in a Sukkah appear to play 

equivalent roles in the experience of the holiday of Sukkot. Each is mentioned once and only 

once (in Parshat Emor) and each applies m’doraita. To be sure there is a fundamental inequality 

in the “range” of the mitzvah; the mitzvah of sitting in the sukkah extends throughout the 

entirety of Yom Tov whereas the mitzvah of daled minim only applies – at least from the Torah - 

to the first day. Originally, the daled minim were only taken on the first day, except in the Beit 

HaMikdash, where they were taken all seven days. After the Mikdash was destroyed, Rebbi 

Yochanan ben Zakkai extended the mitzvah of daled minim to the entire seven days thereby 

equalizing it to the range of the mitzvah of Sukkah. 57 However, even though the mitzvah of 

Sukkah is more time-extensive than the mitzvah of daled minim, they would appear to be 

equivalent in their functionality and impact; they each brace the experience of the chag of 

Sukkot. A second difference of scope pertains to whether the respective mitzvoth apply at night; 

the mitzvah of Sukkah applies during evening whereas the mitvah of daled minim is limited to 

the daytime. But again it would seem that this difference is incidental. In as much as the mitzvah 

of daled minim is a formal act, it is framed within daytime hours, as most acts of mitzvoth are 

(tefilin, shofar etc.) The mitzvah of Sukkah is not a formal act but a comprehensive experience of 

living in the Sukkah; as such it extends to evening hours as well. Once again this difference seems 

57 Succah 41a 

47 


incidental to the actual relationship between the two miztvot. Fundamentally the two mitzvoth 

appear to be equal factors in the fabric of Chag Sukkot. 

Though daled minim and the mitzvah of sukkah appear to play equal roles they emit very 

different messages about the religious experience. The mitzvah of daled minim is described in 

elegant and stylish terms. 58 The first min is described as רדה ץע ירפ, with the accent upon the 

aesthetic beauty of the fruit. The gemara in the 3 rd perek of Sukkah carefully catalogs the 

parameters of hadar, setting requirements about the color, moistness and shape of the etrog. 

Though the Torah applies the hadar clause solely to etrog, the Gemara unanimously extends the 

requirement to all the minim. 59 Though the other minim do not exhibit the same aesthetic 

sensitivity as etrog, it is clear that each must be beautiful and experientially pleasing in their own 

fashion. For example, the Gemara disqualifies a particular branch as an arava since it is 

poisonous and thereby defies the concept of םענ יכרד היכרד, that mitzvoth should be forces of 

peace and supporters of life. 60 Though this concept that mitzvoth cannot be poisonous seems to 

be a general clause and is applied globally, it is difficult to ignore the particular relevance to the 

daled minim. By nestling the word hadar within the description of etrog the Torah demands 

ornate and pleasing species for all the minim, underscoring the role of aesthetics and style in the 

performance of the mitzvah of daled minim. 

Beyond the inclusion of the word hadar, the overall textual description of the daled minim is 

very stylish and ‘floral’ from a purely semantic standpoint. The Torah uncharacteristically 

describes each of the species, affording botanical and geographical tags to ‘help’ us identify the 

individual specie. The overall flavor of the pasuk is very lavish and even luxurious. The etrog is 

described as רדה ץע ירפ, while the lulav, effectively the top leaf of a tree, is presented as תופכ 

םירמת. Simple branches of shrubbery or riverbed reeds are described in colorful and stylistic 

fashion, לחנ יברעו תובא ץע ףנע. Ironically, the effusive description of the daled minim actually 

partially disguises their identity forcing the Gemara to labor in deciphering the exact botanical 

specie from the coded textual description. 61 This effort is so strained that the Rambam suggests 

that the true identity of the daled minim is in reality a non-textual halacha l’Moshe m’Sinai and 

the textual tags are merely asmachtot, textual allusions which affirm an already established 

halachik fact. 62 Be that as it may, there is no question that the Torah uncharacteristically 

indulged in the description of these minim even at the expense of ‘clarity’. The grand shofar of 

Rosh Hashanah isn’t even mentioned (instead its identity is derived from comparisons to Yovel) 

yet the garden samples of daled minim are enumerated in almost flamboyant manner. 

Not surprisingly, the execution of the mitzvah is also described in eminent fashion. When 

describing the mitzvah of daled minim the Torah commands v’lakachtem, in the plural, rather 

than v’lakacht, in the singular, which would have been more appropriate given the individual 

58 Vayikra 23:40 

59 Succah 31(a) 


61 See for example Succah (35a) regarding Etrog 

62 Rambam in his introduction to תוינשמה שוריפ 

48 


nature of the mitzvah. The Gemara 63 (see Sukkah 37a and Menachot 27a) expands this term to 

require המת החיקל, a full and complete discharge of the mitzvah. For example, the Gemara 

disqualifies taking a lulav while wearing a glove since the barrier separating your hand from the 

lulav compromises the integrity of the mitzvah and renders a flawed taking. Evidently, not only 

must the daled minim be aesthetically pleasing but the action of the mitzvah must be executed in 

full and complete fashion. 

To summarize, the Torah casts the mitzvah of daled minim as an experience of luxury, beauty 

and style. The species are characterized as “beautiful” and “elegant” and they are described in 

floral and lavish language. The actual raising of the daled species, a seemingly banal activity, is 

described in a manner which implies a superior form of hoisting. 

Apparently, the mitzvah of daled minim highlights the importance of beauty and splendor within 

avodas Hashem. A person who approaches Hakadosh Baruch Hu must do so with a sense of the 

grandeur of the encounter with the Other. A human being who encounters the Divine must raise 

the level of experience as he expands his level of consciousness, This encounter demands 

upgrading the overall environment and in the case of daled minim clutching the most comely 

and attractive items from our gardens. The daled minim are not indigenous to most northern 

hemisphere communities and historically their acquisition was associated with hardship and 

struggle. In Eretz Yisrael, however, they are all quite abundant (though not necessarily under 

modern conditions) and represent the choicest produce of human gardening. Their beauty and 

elegance mediates the rendezvous between human and Divine. It reflects the ascent of a human 

to higher ground so that he may encounter a Higher Being. 

Though the beauty of a mitzvah object is necessary to launch the religious encounter in general 

avodas Hashem, it certainly has particular relevance to the experience of daled minim. Beyond 

the mechanical aspect of the mitzvah, the daled minim formulate a non-verbal form of praised to 

Hakadosh Baruch Hu. The Rav zt”l commented on the importance of acknowledging the futility 

of any attempts to capture the Ribbono shel Olam with human tongue. Aware of our limited 

capacity to glorify Hakadosh Baruch Hu we employ alternate media to facilitate and 

intermediate our praise. Offering praise and more so thanksgiving on Sukkot is particularly 

poignant as the harvest season has concluded and financial gains are assessed and enjoyed. The 

beauty of the daled minim is absolutely vital in lending splendor and resonance to our praise 

during Sukkot. 

In fact, several halachot demonstrate the hallel function latent within the performance of daled 

minim. The integration of the daled minim with the mitzvah of hallel is only the most striking 

manifestation of the role of the daled minim in sounding praise and thanksgiving to Hashem. 

The application of the principle of הריבעב האבה הוצמ, the disqualification of a mitzvah object 

that is aquired through an act of sin, 64 to daled minim may also reflect the unique hallel 

component of the daled minim. According to several baalei haTosfos the הריבעב האבה הוצמ 

disqualification only applies to korbanot or to mitzvoth which serve to sound hallel. Evidently, if 

63 Succah(37a), Menachot (27a) 

64 Succah (30a) 

49 


הריבעב האבה הוצמ applies to daled minim, it represents a form of hallel. Finally, the requirement 

that all daled minim be alive rather than desiccated and dead may also be based upon the need to 

utilize these species to recite a wordless hallel. Based upon a verse in Tehilim 115, the dead can 

[no longer] praise G-d, we can infer that only live species are viable for daled minim and for the 

hallel it induces. 65 These major halachot, along with more minor issues all underline the function 

of daled minim in assisting man to utter the unutterable - praise and glory for the King of kings. 

Recognizing the ineffectiveness of capturing the Almighty through human tongue we replace 

words with symbols from nature. As the Midrash Tanchuma notes - רעיה יצע וננרי זא Nature in 

all its glory exclaims the beauty and majesty of its Creator. 66 By seizing the choicest of these 

objects we harness that streaming praise and incorporate it into our Divine encounter. It is 

obvious that the quality of this praise is highly dependent upon the caliber of these minim. 

Selecting elegant and beautiful species assures that the current of our praise is both potent and 

eloquent. 

However, to fully appreciate the function of beauty and elegance within the mitzvah of daled 

minim a global view of Sukkot must be taken. Indeed, these qualities of beauty and style are vital 

to avodas Hashem in general and to hallel and praise in particular. Beyond these general 

functions though, beauty and splendor possess specific relevance to the holiday of Sukkot. The 

Midrash contrasts the hoisting of the daled minim and a very different “lifting” – a lifting 

performed once in history by an impoverished nation on the cusp of redemption. That first night 

in Egypt, on the verge of liberation, the still enslaved Jews selected simple reeds (בוזא תדוגא) and 

painted their doorposts with a very visible sign of faith. 67 Financially challenged, they could 

barely afford the splendor and elegance of daled minim and their mitzvah was capped at the 

more affordable level of reeds harvested from the banks of the Nile. The Midrash notes the 

impressive development of the Jewish people since those initial moments. With maturation and 

liberation came financial potency – the ability to upgrade their mitzvah performance with 

greater affluence and aesthetic. This financial maturity is “indexed” by the transformation of 

בוזא תחיקל to םכל םתחקלו! The elegance of the daled minim showcase the prosperity of the 

Jewish people and the rewards of being G-d’s chosen people. The splendor of these minim both 

celebrates our freedom and additionally provides a nostalgic recall of that magical night of faith, 

when we couldn’t afford the magnificence we currently display. 

In addition to announcing our newfound prosperity, the elegance of the daled minim serve as a 

triumphant coda to the awe and fury of the High Holidays. A very well known Midrash portrays 

a scene of several subjects emerging from court with each being handed a verdict. The victorious 

are identified by their swords raised to heaven in obvious demonstration of triumph. Similarly, 

the Midrash reasons, all of humanity is judged during the Days of Judgment. By raising the daled 

minim the Jewish people are expressing their confidence in their national vindication. The 

magnificence and regality of the daled minim clearly accentuates the sign of victory and national 

confidence. It is clear that a “pure” taking, unobstructed by intervening materials, indicates this 

65 Yerushalmi Succah (3:1) 

66 Vayikra Rabbah 30:4 

67 Vayikra Rabbah 30;1 

50 


triumph more effectively. 68 Effectively, the elegance of the daled minim reflects our national 

transformation from slavery to nobility while also finalizing a successful experience of the Day of 

Judgment. 

To summarize, the first mitzvah of Sukkot, the mitzvah of the daled minim, is characterized by 

elegance and aesthetics, both in form and function. The required species emit beauty and style 

and the manner of performing the mitzvah is equally superior. Without question the mitzvah of 

daled minim stresses the importance of beauty and elegance in enriching religion and capturing 

the grand encounter between man and G-d. If we hope to even partially praise the Ribbono shel 

Olam we must significantly transform our base human voice with a more torrential voice of 

nature. The lavishness of this bouquet of garden flowers reminds us of where we began the 

Jewish journey and how far we have come. Finally, the hoisting of aromatic and attractive minim 

is a show of confidence that – at least as a people- we have successfully navigated the terror-filled 

experience of Divine judgment. 

In steep contrast to the mitzvah of daled minim , the complementary mitzvah of Sukkot, sitting 

in the Sukkah, is described in diametrically opposed terminology. Unlike the lavish and 

indulgent description of the daled minim, the structure of the Sukkah is barely described. In fact, 

the Torah merely states םימי תעבש ובשת תוכוסב and expects us to decipher the halachik 

guidelines of a Sukkah. The Gemara in Sukkah is even uncertain about the number of walls 

necessary to construct a halachik Sukkah. 69 Even the most basic parameter of this structure is 

omitted from the textual description! This vacuum leads to a well known debate about a detail 

which if not unanimous should at least be addressed. Based on different strategies for reading 

the word " תוכוס" 

we may require four walls or might suffice with three. Either way the Torah’s 

modest description opens the door for dispute. Notably no similar dispute ever occurred 

regarding the number of minim necessary; the Torah was quite specific in enumerating each 

one. 

The vacuum of information about a Sukkah is filled by a series of halachot l’Moshe m’Sinai. 

Without question the laws of Sukkah construction exhibit the greatest assortment of halachot 

l’Moshe m’Sinai of any halachik area. Invariably, these halachot l’Moshe m’Sinai all reduce the 

requirements of the Sukkah architecture. One halacha l’Moshe m’Sinai – perhaps the most basic 

one – reduces the requisite number of Sukkah walls from three to effectively two (actually two 

complete walls and a miniscule projection in place of a complete third wall). Another halacha 

l’Moshe m’Sinai allow gaps between the walls and the connecting sechach (dofan akuma) to be 

filled by non-sechach material. Effectively the sechach and walls do not have to intersect 

perpendicularly. Yet a different halacha l’Moshe m’Sinai allows four corners bracketing an area 

to serve in place of walls (pasei bira’ot). Basically a Sukkah must encompass a designated space, 

even if that space designation isn’t accomplished through actual walls! Walls may be vertically 

raised (gud asik) or lowered (gud achit); a person doesn’t have to actually sit within a wall-space 

as long as he sits within the overall vector which protrudes from the wall. Finally the Gemara 

68 Vayikra Rabbah 30;2 

69 Succah 6(b) 

51 


even considers the possibility that the edge of a beam can be extended downward to form a wall 

(pi tikrah yored v’sotem). 

This concentration of Sukkah leniencies, sponsored by the halacha l’Moshe m’Sinai, produces 

varieties of Sukkah structures which barely resemble an actual residence. At several points the 

Gemara questions the validity of these virtual structures built with halachik duct tape! 70 Without 

question the halachik Sukkah is quite “diminished”. The description is ‘bare-bones’, the base 

amount of walls isn’t clearly articulated and the series of halachot l’Moshe m’Sinai further 

dismantle this structure by granting unprecedented leniencies! If daled minim exhibit 

maximalist demands, the Sukkah is quite minimalist. 

Perhaps the most compelling contrast between the lavishness of daled minim and the 

minimalism of the Sukkah is detected by a phrase describing the timing of Sukkot but one which 

Chazal decipher as a reference to the materials qualified to serve as sechach. In parshat Re’eh the 

Torah describes the holiday of Sukkot as occurring ךבקימו ךנרגמ ךפסאב, when the grains and 

vineyards are harvested. 71 The terms ךפסאב is phonetically and semantically related to the term 

תלספ - wastes or leftovers. Consequently, Chazal claim that sechach must be formed from 

‘wastes’ rather than from edible or usable items. 72 Hence, sechach may not be composed of 

edible materials (ochel) or objects of utility (utensils which are candidates for tumah 

conveyance). Effectively, the Torah envisions a Sukkah being crafted from leftover wastes of the 

harvest. From this standpoint the Sukkah is the diametric opposite of the daled minim. The 

daled minim are supplied by the choice species of the garden while the Sukkah is a mere hut 

fashioned from otherwise wasted material taken from the harvest of the wheat fields. The 

holiday of Sukkot is a hybrid of the grand and the elegant alongside mitzvoth fashioned from 

leftovers! 

Without question, the mitzvah of Sukkah serves to correct against the possible excesses of the 

mitzvah of daled minim. Beauty and design can greatly enrich avodas Hashem. However they 

can also distract a person from religious focus, fixing his eye solely upon flair and externals. Art 

and aesthetic may enhance religion just as they may overwhelm it. Instead of mediating a 

glorious encounter with an invisible G-d, beauty can fasten the human mind to the fleeting and 

ephemeral; infinity and transcendence is replaced by vanity and transience. The more reductive 

mitzvah of sitting in a understated Sukkah affirms that the essence of a mitzvah – or for that 

matter of religion - has little to do with external appearance and more to do with the ‘raw’ 

experience of Divine encounter. A temporary house of G-d can be fashioned from unattractive 

materials as long as a religious spirit infuses that location. In fact, often the humble and the 

ordinary allows for a purer religious interaction, unadulterated by the excesses of human conceit. 

The token description of the Sukkah coupled with the further diminishing of a Sukkah by 

halachot l’Moshe m’Sinai affirm that the spirit of G-d doesn’t require vaunted or elite settings. 

The Divine presence can be infused in the ordinary and the common. If anything, those settings 

are sometimes more uncontaminated or uncorrupted by human vanity. At a different stage the 

70 See for example Succah 3(b) 

71 Devarim 16:13 


52 


Gemara 73 derives laws governing sechach material from a pasuk describing a primordial fog 

which lifted from the ground and irrigated the earth: המדאה ינפ לכ תא הקשהו ץראה ןמ הלעי דאו. 

This watering of land ‘fertilizes’ the earth from which Human beings are created. The Gemara 

reasons that just as this fog wasn’t edible or an item of human utility, so must sechach be nonochel 

and non-keilim. The roof of a Sukkah is cast as a pre-human material, a primal and 

primitive mass which is fresh and untainted by the excesses of humanity and human history. 

Withdrawing into the Sukkah is an escape into a refuge of purity bristling with the Divine spirit. 

If the daled minim celebrates the grandeur of man and channels that grandeur toward religion, 

the mitzvah of Sukkah divests human artifice and yields a purer religious moment. 

In fact, the contrast between the beauty of the daled minim and the simplicity of the Sukkah 

corresponds to very different features of the religious cycle. The daled minim remind us of 

exalted moments of higher religious ground when man approaches Hakadosh Baruch Hu. 

Without question these moments must be enhanced by the best of the human realm and the 

beauty of human elegance. Anything less would be insulting and even bordering upon the 

heretical. When a human being steps out of their routine and approaches Hakadosh Baruch Hu 

the choicest and grandest features of the human environment must accompany that journey. 

The daled minim are a geographically independent mitzvah, but without question the primary 

mitzvah is rooted to the Mikdash. As stated earlier, according to the Torah the seven day 

mitzvah only applies within the Mikdash. The Mikdash is the site to where a human being travels 

when he steps out of his daily shell to encounter Hakadosh Baruch Hu. That journey is only 

possible if some tribute is offered. Whether in the form of a sacrifice or daled minim, the entry 

into the realm of G-d must elicit some resonant human response. The absence of some higher 

medium would empty this encounter of its nascent glory and awe. 

However, religion must also extend beyond the grand moments of higher consciousness. It must 

innervate the entirety of the human condition – both the spectacular and the routine. It must be 

an all encompassing experience which percolates through the totality of the human condition; 

the spirit of Hashem must be sewn into the fabric of day-to-day experience. If the experience 

becomes too ‘special’ and too vaunted it can become isolated from the human routine and 

insulated from human experience. As my Rebbe, Harav Yehuda Amital zt”l always cautioned us, 

religion cannot become autistic. Unlike daled minim which is an entry into a different realm, the 

mitzvah of Sukkah is merely a gloss to the day-to day. As the Gemara 74 constantly affirms, ובשת 

ורודת ןיעכ, experience the Sukkah as you would experience the average routine. Unlike walking 

into the Mikdash with daled minim , the mitzvah of Sukkah directs man to walk into his own 

crafted home and realize the spirit of Hashem within the human structure. It is not a special or 

unique activity but rather a continuum of the overall human routine lived in the presence of G-d. 

It is precisely for this reason that the mitzvah of Sukkah is not limited to day as is the mitzvah of 

daled minim. The mitzvah of daled minim is a unique moment, punctuated by a specific action. 

That action occurs once and is framed within the daytime hours – the primary framework for 

mitzvah performance. Sukkah is not a specific action but rather an overarching identification. 

73 Succah 11(b) 


53 


There can be no difference between night and day regarding this mitzvah. This experience 

cannot be characterized by the ornate or the spectacular; it must be simple and ordinary, but also 

common and constant. 

Ultimately it is the stark contrast between daled minim and Sukkah which lends this chag so 

much energy. Both as a summation to the Day of Judgment as well as a climax of the Three 

Festivals, it offers final commentary on the religious identity which has been quietly brewing as 

these dual processes have unfurled. As the religious experience is complex, so is the religious 

summary of Sukkot. As our encounter with Hakadosh Baruch Hu cannot be reduced to one 

modality so the symbolism of this holiday cannot be monochromatic. It takes two mitzvoth and 

the dynamic of their contrasting styles to encapsulate this final moment of standing before G-d. 

54 


Sukkot Insights from 

Members of the RIETS 

Kollel Elyon 

The Tent in the Middle of Two Worlds 

Rabbi Eli Belizon 

Wexner Kollel Elyon Fellow, RIETS 

Every time the Torah refers to the holidays of Pesach, Shavuot and Sukkot, it groups them 

together. Although there is much similarity amongst the psukim which refer to these holidays, 

the Torah differentiates between them in a few subtle ways. The first of the discrepancies is 

found in Parshat Emor. Both Shavuot and Pesach are called a "chag la'Hashem" whereas 

Sukkos is coined as "chag Hashem." It sounds as if Sukkos is the holiday that Hashem 

celebrates whereas Pesach and Shavuous are holidays for Klal Yisrael to celebrate by 

sanctifying and focusing the holiday towards Hashem. Additionally, the Meshech Chachma 

points out that when discussing the holiday sacrifices of Shavuot and Pesach, the Torah states 

that they should be brought "bamakom asher yivchar Hashem lishakein shmo sham," in the 

chosen home of Hashem where his shechinah resides. However, with regards to Sukkot the 

passuk states bamakom asher yivchar and omits leshaken shmo sham. Does the Bais Hamikdash 

lose its unique status on the regel of Sukkot? What is the basis of the differentiation in the 

psukim between Sukkos and the other holidays? 

To explain these discrepancies one needs to understand the essence of Sukkos. The Alshich 

understands that the laws, structure and dimensions of the Sukkah all symbolize lessons that 

show the way we must lead our lives. The sukkah must consist of two complete walls and a 

third which only needs to be the length of a tefach. These three walls form the shape of the 

letter heh, ה. The Alshich explains that this is based on the Gemara in menachot 29b which 

states 75 that this world was created with the letter heh. The Sukkah enables us to reflect on our 

perspective on this world. The Gemara writes that on sukkot we leave our dirras kevvah, our 

permanent dwelling, and enter into a diraas aray, a temporary dwelling. The Sukkah reminds 

us that this world is a temporary dwelling place and a pathway leading towards the ultimate 

75 

.[ 

ד" 

ויב אבה םלועהו , י" 

הב הזה םלועה : רמוא יוה] 

, םארב י" 

הב אלא םארבהב ירקת לא , םארבהב ץראהו םימשה תודלות הלא 

55 


dwelling in the world to come. The walls, which symbolize olam hazeh, have no restrictions as 

to which materials they are permitted to be created from. This represents the fact that this 

world is a physical entity made up of various materials. The dwelling in the sukkah for seven 

days is tantamount to the seventy years of man's life in this world. On the eighth day, on 

Shemini Atzeres, Hashem requests from us to stay with him one more day. This alludes to the 

afterlife after the seventy years when we will merit to dwell in Hashem's presence. 

The roof of the sukkah, the schach, symbolizes our connection in this world to the spiritual 

world above us. The schach cannot be created from something which is susceptible to 

impurity. A schach which carries impurity represents a life of sin which creates a barrier and 

separation between this world and the spiritual world. The halacha dictates that there should 

not be spaces of over three tefachim between pieces of schach. This hints to a sin which was 

transgressed three times. A transgression committed once or twice does not break the overall 

tent of merits which influences our lives. However, once a person commits the same 

transgression three times, he becomes accustomed to that transgression and it creates a 

leakage and break in the positive shade on our lives. The schach that influences our lives 

should not be mechubar lekarka, connected to the ground. This reminds us that we should not 

allow materialism and physicality to be the focal points of our lives. Additionally, the schach 

must be created from gedulei karka, a substance that grows from the ground. Such is our 

spiritual journey in this world, a journey which is laden with potential to grow. The height of 

the succah is limited to twenty amos. The Gemara explains that 'lo shalta bah ainah,' one's eye 

can only see up to twenty amos and thus we must make sure that these messages are 

recognizable to man. On a deeper level, one should not wait and begin his spiritual journey at 

the age of twenty, once he is responsible and punishable for his actions, but rather one should 

begin his journey from an earlier stage as the succah is valid from a mere ten tefachim. Chazal 

dictate that the width of a Sukkah must provide sufficient space for a table. The shulchan, 

table, symbolizes wealth. Chazal wanted to ensure that everything, including our pursuit for 

livelihood and wealth, fit under the umbrella of spirituality. 

This world creates a constant struggle between physicality and spirituality, between the body 

and the soul, the walls of the sukkah and the schach. The Avnei Nezer explains that this 

struggle takes place six days a week. Our body pulls us downward toward the physical and 

mundane parts of the world whereas the soul tries to pull upwards, towards shamayim; each 

side tries to influence the other. When Shabbos comes, this struggle ends peacefully and the 

body is influenced by the spiritual neshama. It is because of the sense of shalom between the 

body an soul that we sing "barchuni l'shalom," bless me for peace, on Friday night. The 

description of shalom is also used by the concept of sukkah. In tefilas Maariv we ask that G-d 

should spread upon us His peaceful sukkah, "ufros succat shlomecha." The sukkah generates a 

similar ability to create a state of shalom in this world by allowing the schach, the spirituality to 

influence the walls, the physicality. 

The Ribono shel Olam searches for a resting place in this world. It is only when we internalize 

the message of the sukkah and create this state of shalom that He can reside in this world. It is 

based on this that we can now understand the difference between Sukkot and the other 

regalim. Sukkot is actually a "chag Hashem" because it is through the experiences of Sukkot 

56 


that Hashem finds an area in this world to dwell in. Based on this we can understand why 

Sukkot is the only holiday that the Torah does not specify that G-d rests his shechina 

"bamokom asher yivchar leshaken shemo sham." It is during this uniques chag that Hashem not 

only rests His presence in the makkom hamikdash but also in each one of our dwellings, our 

personal sukkahs. It is through understanding and internalizing these messages of the sukkah 

that we can achieve shalom in our sukkah and invite Hashem to reside with us. 

The Joy of Drawing Water 

Rabbi David Hellman 


The Rambam (Lulav 8:12) writes that in the days of the Beit HaMikdash, the joy and 

celebrations of Sukkot surpassed those of the other chagim. The highpoint of these 

celebrations was the simchat beit hasho’eiva, the grand celebration on the grounds of the Beit 

HaMikdash. The Mishnayot (Sukka, fifth perek) describe in detail the many golden menorahs 

that would light up the courtyards of all of Jerusalem, the instruments of the levi’im that were 

too numerous to count, and the singing, dancing, and juggling of the great sages and tzaddkim 

that the crowds watched in rapture. The Mishna unequivocally states that “someone who 

hasn’t witnessed the simchat beit hasho’evia hasn’t seen joy in his lifetime.” Rashi (Sukka 51a) 

writes that this unique celebration surrounded the nisuch hamayim, the special water libation 

on the mizbeach that occurred at no other time of the year. In fact, the Gemara says that the 

source of the name “simchat beit hasho’eiva” is the pasuk “ushe’avtem mayim b’sason,” “and you 

will draw water with joy” (Yeshayahu 12:3). 

While at first glance this name seems very appropriate, after giving it some more thought it is 

very strange indeed. The drawing of the water was merely a practical necessity, but was 

seemingly not part of the mitzvah at all. The event that everyone joyously anticipated was the 

pouring of the water on the mizbeach in this once a year mitzvah. Wouldn’t it have made a lot 

more sense for the celebration to be called the “simchat beit hanisuch” or “simchat beit 

hash’ficha,” “the celebration of the libation” or “the celebration of the pouring”? Why would 

chazal name the celebration after the drawing of the water? 

Sukkot focuses on the simcha that should pervade the performance of our mitzvoth and the 

Torah lives we lead. The name “simchat beit hashoeiva” teaches us a fundamental idea 

regarding this simcha. True joy in serving Hashem is not found in the results or the outcomes. 

Our spiritual satisfaction should not be dependant or commensurate with simply the total 

number of dapim we learn, or perakim of tehillim we recite, or acts of kindness we perform. 

Rather, the profound simcha of avodat Hashem stems from the time and effort we pour into 

our commitment to the Torah and its mitzvoth. It is the process of preparation and 

anticipation that makes the fulfillment of a mitzvah a moment of happiness. Studying the laws 

and ideas of the mitzvah beforehand, taking the time and mental energy to ensure the mitzvah 

will be without blemish, and spending extra money to perform the mitzvah in a more beautiful 

manner all add to the preciousness and simcha of a mitzvah. 

57 


In other words, a person cannot expect to find fulfillment or joy by doing nothing more than 

the required performance of the mitzvoth, “the pouring of the water;” rather, a person will find 

a wellspring of happiness and inspiration in the time and effort he commits to the preparation 

and anticipation of the mitzvoth, ”the drawing of the water.” Chazal chose the name simchat 

beit hasho’eiva to teach us this most critical lesson: it is the drawing of the water, not the 

pouring, that is the true source of our simcha. May we all merit to achieve the level of “ivdu et 

Hashem b’simcha,” serving Hashem in joy on this Sukkot and beyond. 

Sitting in the Succah on Shmini Atzeres 

Rabbi Rafi Rosenblum 


The Gemara (Succah 47a) clearly states that on Shmini Atzeres in chutz l’aretz one should sit 

in the succah, but not make a bracha. While the Rishonim deal with this strange dichotomy, 76 

it doesn’t appear that there is any discussion about the obligation to sit in the succah. This 

makes the custom of many not to sit in the succah all the more intriguing. In the subsequent 

paragraphs, I hope to bring a number of reasons that will hopefully explain the basis for this 

somewhat prevalent yet perplexing minhag. 77 

Tosfos in Succah (ibid. s.v. Misav) ask the following question. Why is it that we sit in the 

succah on Shmini Atzeres, because of sfeka d’yoma, but we don’t take the lulav and esrog for 

the same reason? They answer that since the daled minim are muktzah on Shabbos and Yom 

Tov, the only reason that we can take them on Yom Tov is because we are obligated in the 

mitzvah of taking them. If we would take them on Shmini Atzeres, it would be obvious that we 

are doing so due to the safek, and it would look like a violation of baal tosef, the prohibition of 

adding on to a mitzvah. However, when it comes to the succah, there are many times that we 

enjoy sitting outside on the porch. Therefore, it isn’t obvious why we are sitting there, and we 

are therefore obligated to do so because of the safeka d’yoma. The Tosfos Rabbenu Peretz 

writes that there was a custom for people to eat in the succah only during the day on Shmini 

Atzeres, but not at night. The reason for this may be because at night it is very cold and it is 

obvious to all why they are sitting in the succah, whereas during the day it could just be that 

they enjoy eating outdoors. This is echoed by the Korban Nisanel (4:7), who writes that if it is 

a cold or windy day, one should refrain from eating in the succah on Shmini Atzeres. It is for 

this reason that R’ Yaakov Kamanetsky rules in the Emes L’Yaakov on Shulchan Aruch, that if 

someone forgot to leave a light on in the succah on Shmini Atzeres which falls out on 

76 See the explanation of the Ritva and the Ran in Succah ibid. in the opinion of the Rif. Also, see the Mordechai 

(772), the Meiri, and the Rambam (Teshuvas P’eir Hador siman 26) where these Rishonim offer different answers 

to the question. 

77 Note: this article is not meant to condone the practice of eating outside of the succah on Shmini Atzeres. Rather, 

the purpose is to gain an understanding to why the minhag exists, and what it is based on. 

58 


Shabbos, 78 he should eat his meal in the house, because otherwise it would be obvious that he 

is eating outside to fulfill his obligation. 

Another line of reasoning not to require eating in the succah on Shmini Atzeres comes from 

the reading of the Gemara that the obligation is based on. The Yichusai Hatanaim V’Amoraim 

says that there are those who say to follow the second opinion of the Gemara like we do in 

most instances in Shas. The second opinon states that there is a machlokes if you should sit in 

the succah on Shmini Atzeres, and we paskin that you don’t need to sit in the succah. These 

people hold like the second opinion in the Gemara, even though the Gemara clearly writes 

that the halacha is that you should sit in the succah and not make a bracha, because they 

understand that line to have been added by the Baal Halachos Gedolos, and they disagree with 

it. Another defense of this practice which is based on the reading of the Gemara is found in the 

S’fas Emes. He writes that when the Gemara writes that one should sit in the succah on Shmini 

Atzeres, it doesn’t mean that he has to eat in the succah, rather, he is allowed to sit there. Since 

there is no obligation to sit in the succah, the Gemara says that you sit there, but don’t make a 

bracha. Accordingly, someone who doesn’t want to sit in the succah, doesn’t need to. 

The minhag of eating inside for both meals is but one of the minhagim that we have nowadays. 

There are those who eat inside only at night, and those who eat in the succah only at night. 

The important thing for us to remember is that like the minhag of eating inside for both meals, 

these minhagim are based on credible sources in the Rishonim and Achronim. 79 By recalling 

this, it will be easier for us to accept and relate to people whose minhagim are different than 

ours. 

Sukkot – Can We Really Handle Another Holiday? 

Rabbi Yehuda Turetsky 

Beren Kollel Elyon Fellow, RIETS 

Sukkot’s place in the Jewish calendar raises a basic question, one many explicitly articulate and 

others intuitively feel. Is there really a need for another holiday after Rosh Hashana and Yom 

Kippur? After ten days dedicated to repentance and growth, a grueling time period where we 

strive for greater spiritual heights, is it really necessary to have another holiday so close to the 

days of awe? 

The question is even stronger according to the Tur. He writes (O.C. 625) that a more natural 

time to observe Sukkot is the spring, the time when we initially left Egypt. The only reason 

why Sukkot is observed in the fall is to show that our true intention for sitting in the Sukkah is 

to fulfill God’s command and not because it provides us with shade on a hot day. For him, 

there appears to be no reason why Sukkot needs to be kept specifically when it is; any time 

78 Presumably in a manner that he would be required to eat in the succah during Succos, because if he wouldn’t need 

to eat there on Succos, like the Rama (siman 640 seif 4) paskins, then of course he wouldn’t need to eat there on 

Shmini Atzeres. 

79 See the Tur (siman 668) and the Bais Yosef and Bach (ibid.) who discuss the minhag of eating in the succah for 

the day and not the night. See the Taz (siman 668) where he talks about sitting in the succah only at night. 

59 


outside the summer months would be appropriate. If so, why keep Sukkot now? Is there a 

lesson we can learn from its peculiar placement in the Jewish calendar? 80 

Moreover, there are so many beautiful themes and ideas related to Sukkot. It is a time when we 

recall God’s love for us, and it is when we contemplate our relationship with nature. Would 

not a longer break enable us to better prepare for and gain from Sukkot? The Talmud even 

implies that one should begin preparing for an upcoming holiday thirty days before it begins. 81 

But how is that possible when the sheer physical exhaustion of these three weeks is so great, 

the spiritual toll so demanding, that adequate preparation seems unfeasible? Indeed, Rama 

(O.C.624:5, 625:1) even instructs us to begin building our Sukkah on the very night Yom 

Kippur ends. Is that really necessary, and what do we gain from it? 

A variety of answers have been offered to this general question, many of which highlight the 

special and complimentary connection between Sukkot and the days of awe. 82 It seems 

possible, though, to suggest an additional perspective. Maybe one idea derived from Sukkot’s 

placement in the Jewish calendar, even if it is not the primary motivating factor, is what all of 

these holidays teach us about ourselves. 

The three weeks from Rosh HaShana through Sukkot are not, nor are they intended to be, 

easy. They test us physically, teach us what we can achieve, and inspire us to new heights. We 

learn how much we are capable of doing. We see that we are able to set aside time despite our 

busy schedule, and push ourselves in the face of fatigue. We realize how committed we are to 

the Jewish tradition and how much we are willing and able to sacrifice – physically and 

emotionally – for its ideals. 

We do not, though, only learn about the limits of our physical strength; we also learn about 

our spiritual stamina. 83 We gain insight into our ability to balance the seriousness and at times 

fear of the days of awe with the happiness and joy of Sukkot. We balance different emotions 

and different ways of connecting with God, and in the process we cultivate a more complete 

religious personality. Despite the feelings of exhaustion, the Torah wants us to continue to 

push ourselves, to gain from each holiday without it coming at the expense of the other, and to 

better understand what it means to be a complete Jew. 

In truth, Sukkot’s placement on the Jewish calendar may seem a bit out of place. It is, though, 

through observing Sukkot immediately after the days of awe that we gain so much. We learn 

about our ability to push ourselves for that which we value, to invest physically and thereby 

benefit spiritually. As a result of the Jewish calendar, we begin to build the ideal religious 

personality, with the desire to invest all of one’s strengths for God. Through juxtaposing 

80 There are those that question Tur’s logic and assume that Sukkot needed to be celebrated when it is. See Vilna 

Gaon, commentary to Shir haShirim (1:4). Accordingly, Sukkot needed to be observed directly after Yom Kippur, 

regardless of the difficulty involved. 

81 See Talmud Pesachim (6a) and Beit Yosef (O.C. 429) for a discussion of the precise impact and scope of this law. 

82 See, for example, Aruch HaShulchan (O.C. 625:5). 

83 See the article by Rav Michael Rosensweig on torahweb.org about the relationship between Yom Kippur and 

Sukkot for a similar idea. 

60 


Sukkot to the days of awe, the Torah teaches us to connect to our creator through love and 

fear, through fasting and feasting. 

At the end of these three weeks, we may feel tired and exhausted, but we leave inspired and 

exalted. We now know what we are capable of and how great we are. ךיקלח ירשאו לארשי ךירשא, 

praiseworthy are you Israel and praiseworthy is your portion. 

61 


The Aaron and Blanche Schreiber Torah Tours 

Simchat Torah 

A Project of Yeshiva University’s Center for the Jewish Future 

The Aaron and Blanche Schreiber Torah Tours, currently in its third decade, shares the Torah 

knowledge and enthusiasm of Yeshiva University and RIETS students with Jewish communities 

throughout the world. This year teams of 4 to 6 young men and women will be spending Simchat Torah 

in over 80 communities across North America. The 400 plus students participating on Torah Tours will 

teach classes, lead singing and dancing, meet with synagogue youth, and create a fun and spirited Yom 

Tov experience. For more information about the Aaron and Blanche Schreiber Torah Tours program 

please visit www.cjfapps.com/torahtours 

Participating Communities 

Allentown, PA • Baltimore, MD • Bayside, NY • Binghamton, NY • Bloomington, IN 

Boynton Beach, FL • Brookline, MA • Buffalo Grove, IL • Buffalo, NY • Charleston, SC 

Cincinnati, OH. • Columbus, OH • Cote St-Luc, QC • Dallas, TX • Denver, Co • Dewitt, NY 

East Brunswick, NJ • East Windsor, NJ • Edison, NJ • Elizabeth, NJ • Elkins Park, PA 

Ellenville, NY • Fair Lawn, NJ • Flushing, NY • Forest Hills, NY • Great Neck, NY 

Houston, TX • Las Vegas, NV • Lido Beach, New York • Linden NJ • Livingston, NJ 

Long Branch, NJ • Lowell, MA • Mamaroneck, NY • Memphis, TN • Merrick, NY 

Milwaukee, WI • Montreal, QC • Mt. Kisco, NY • New Haven, Connecticut 

New Rochelle, NY • Newton Centre, MA • Newton, MA • Overland Park, KS 

Palm Beach, FL • Palo Alto, CA • Parsippany, NJ • Passaic, NJ • Philadelphia, PA 

Pittsburgh, PA • Poughkeepsie, NY • Providence, RI • Richmond, VA 

Roslyn Heights, NY • San Francisco, CA • Savannah, GA • Schenectady, NY 

Silver Spring, MD • Skokie, IL • Springfield, NJ • Stamford, CT • Staten Island, NY 

Toronto, ON • Washington, DC • Wesley Hills, NY • West Hartford, CT 

West Hempstead, NY • Westmount, QC • Westport, CT • Wilkes Barre, PA • Williamsville, NY

62 


63

YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • SUKKOT TO-GO ... - YU Torah Online

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?