Today’s learning sponsored by

KACH MAGI’IM (ad below)

Sponsor a day's learning (thousands of minutes!) for only $72 click here https://www.flipcause.com/secure/cause_pdetails/ODUwOTU

One way of explaining the debate between Rabbi Shimon bar Yehotzadak and the Chachomim is whether or not a lulav must be bound with the hadassim and aravos. This is called “tzarich agad”.

Summary

The debate about lulav tzarich agad:

Beraisa: “A lulav is kosher whether it’s bound or not. Rabbi Yehuda: A lulav is kosher if it’s bound and possul if unbound”.

Rabbi Yehuda learns a gezeirah shaveh; The word ‘lekicha’ is used regarding lulav and regarding the hyssop bundle [used in the preparation of the korban pesach in Mitzrayim]. The Chachomim do not learn the gezeirah shaveh.

Question: Whose opinion does this beraisa follow? “A lulav should be bound, but is kosher even if it remains unbound”?

Answer: It follows the Chachomim. Binding is not a requirement but it’s recommended so as to beautify Hashem’s mitzvos.

We learned in the mishna (9.3) “Anything that is mekabel tumah (capable of contracting ritual impurity) or doesn’t grow from the ground is possul for schach”.

Question: What is the source of this law?

Reish Lakish: [When we left Mitzrayim Hashem ‘caused us to dwell in sukkos’ - the clouds of glory (3.6). Clouds are not mekabel tumah and they come from the earth] As the possuk states “A cloud rose from the earth”.

Challenge: This is only in accordance with the opinion that ‘caused us to dwell in sukkos’ refers to the ananei hakavod. What about the opinion that it refers to actual sukkos?

Beraisa: “I caused them to dwell in sukkos”. This refers to the ananei kavod according to Rabbi Eliezer. Rabbi Akiva: it refers to actual sukkos.

The explanation of Reish Lakish works according to Rabbi Eliezer, but how would he explain this law according to Rabbi Akiva?