Daf Ditty Succah 47: “regel bifnei atzmo.

"The Feast of the Rejoicing of the Law at the Synagogue in Leghorn"

(Solomon Alexander Hart/The Jewish Museum)

The 17th-century diarist Samuel Pepys famously visited the first synagogue
after the resettlement of the Jews in England on the night of Simchat Torah, on
14 October 1663 curious to know how these newcomers to the country
conducted themselves at prayer, and was appalled at the most un-Anglican
commotion. Only on Purim is the synagogue service more raucous.

1
With regard to whether or not to recite the blessing over residing in the sukka. According to the
one who says that the status of the eighth day is like that of the seventh day with regard to the
mitzva of sukka, we also recite the blessing: To reside in the sukka. However, according to the
one who says that its status is like that of the eighth day both with regard to this and to that, we
do not recite the blessing. Rav Yosef said: Take the statement of Rabbi Yoḥanan that on the
eighth day outside Eretz Yisrael one does not recite the blessing: To reside in the sukka, in your
hand, i.e., adopt it as your practice. As Rav Huna bar Bizna and all the prominent scholars of
the generation happened to visit a sukka on the eighth day, with regard to which there was
uncertainty that it might be the seventh day, and they were sitting in the sukka, but they did not
recite the blessing.

The Gemara suggests: And perhaps the reason they did not recite a blessing is that they hold in
accordance with the opinion of the one who said: Once he recited the blessing on the first
Festival day he does not recite it again on the subsequent days, and not because it was the eighth
day. The Gemara answers: That is not the reason that they did not recite the blessing, as the Sages

2
learned through tradition that these Sages were coming from the fields, where they had been
herding their flocks, and that was the first time during the Festival that they sat in a sukka.

§ Rabbi Yoḥanan said that one recites the blessing: Who has given us life, sustained us, and
brought us to this time, on the eighth day of the Festival, as the eighth day is a Festival distinct
from Sukkot, and one does not recite the blessing of time on the seventh day of Passover because
it is not a Festival distinct from Passover.

And Rabbi Levi bar Ḥama said, and some say it was Rabbi Ḥama bar Ḥanina who said:
Know that the eighth day of Sukkot is a Festival in and of itself and therefore requires its own
blessing, as it is distinct from the seven days of Sukkot with regard to three matters: With
regard to sukka, as one is not obligated to sit in the sukka on the eighth day; and with regard to
lulav, as one is not obligated to take the four species on the eighth day; and with regard to the
water libation, as one does not pour the water libation on the altar on the eighth day. The Gemara
notes: And according to Rabbi Yehuda, who said: With a vessel measuring one log the priest
pours the water libation all eight days, including the eighth day, the eighth day is nevertheless
distinct from the rest of the Festival with regard to the other two matters.

The Gemara asks: If so, the seventh day of Passover should be considered distinct as well, as it
is distinct from the first day in terms of the obligation of eating matza, as the Master said: On
the first night of Passover, it is an obligation to eat matza. From that point onward, it is
optional; if one chooses, he eats matza, and if he chooses not to eat matza, he need not, provided
that he does not eat leavened foods. The Gemara retorts: How can these cases be compared?
There, in the case of Passover, the halakha of the seventh day is distinct from the first night;
however, it is not distinct from the first day, as on the first day there is no obligation to eat matza.
Here, in the case of Sukkot, the eighth day of the Festival is distinct even from the first day.

3
What halakhic conclusion was reached concerning the blessing of time? Rav Naḥman said:
One recites the blessing of time on the eighth day of the festival of Sukkot. And Rav Sheshet
said: One does not recite the blessing of time on the eighth day of the Festival. The Gemara
concludes: And the halakha is that one recites the blessing of time on the eighth day of the
Festival.

The Gemara notes: It was taught in a baraita in accordance with the opinion of Rav Naḥman:
The eighth day

is a Festival in and of itself with regard to the matter of: Peh, zayin, reish; kuf, shin, beit. This
is an acronym for: A lottery [payis] in and of itself, i.e., a new lottery is performed on that day to
determine which priests will sacrifice the offerings that day, and the order established on Sukkot
does not continue; the blessing of time [zeman], i.e., Who has given us life, sustained us, and
brought us to this time, in and of itself, as it is recited just as it is recited at the start of each
Festival; a Festival [regel ] in and of itself, and there is no mitzva to sit in the sukka (see Tosafot);
an offering [korban] in and of itself, as the number of offerings sacrificed on the Eighth Day is
not a continuation of the number sacrificed on Sukkot but is part of a new calculation; a song
[shira] in and of itself, since the psalms recited by the Levites as the offerings are sacrificed on
the Eighth Day are not a continuation of those recited on Sukkot; a blessing [berakha] in and of
itself, as the addition to the third blessing of Grace after Meals and to the Amida prayer (see
Tosafot) is phrased in a manner different from that of the addition recited on Sukkot.

‫תוס' ד"ה רגל בפני עצמו‬

...‫דאין יושבין בסוכה‬

That one does not sit in the Sukah ...

...‫ היו בו ששה פרים‬,‫ דא"כ‬,‫שאינו בסדר פרי החג‬- ‫קרבן לעצמו‬

4
That it does not follow the same pattern as the bulls of Sukos, which ought to have numbered six
...
. '‫את יום שמיני חג העצרת הזה‬- ' ‫ברכה לעצמו‬

That one says 'Es Yom Shemini Chag ha'Atzeres ha'Zeh'.

"‫ שנאמר "ביום השמיני שלח את העם ויברכו את המלך‬,‫ 'ברכה לעצמו‬:‫דה"ג בה‬, ‫ובתוספתא משמע שמברכין את המלך‬
... '‫ 'כך פי' בקונט‬.

The Tosefta however, implies that one blesses the king (in the eighth year after Hakheil), when,
commenting on 'B'rachah le'Atzmo', it quotes the Pasuk (in Melachim 1, Chapter 8) "ba'Yom
ha'Shemini Shalach es ha'Am va'Yevorchu es ha'Melech" (Rashi).
‫ כך שמיני טעון קרבן שיר וברכה‬,‫ כשם שחג טעון שיר קרבן ברכה ולינה‬- '‫דאמרינן‬, ‫והשתא לא הוי כי ההוא דתניא לעיל‬
' .‫ולינה‬

In that case, it does not conform to the Beraisa earlier (Daf 46a), which says that 'Just as Sukos
requires Shir, Korban, B'rachah and Linah, so too, does Shemini Atzeres'.
...‫ כי ההיא דלעיל‬,‫ברכת המזון ותפלה‬- ‫ורבינו תם מפרש ברכה דהכא‬

Rabeinu Tam explains 'B'rachah' here with reference to Birchas ha'Mazon and Tefilah, like it does
earlier ...
.‫לענין שטעון לינה‬- ‫ורגל בפני עצמו‬

And 'Regel bi'Fenei Atzmo' with reference to Linah.

...‫ורבינו חננאל מפרש לענין ]שידחה[ אבילות‬

Whereas Rabeinu Chananel explains it with reference to it pushing off Aveilus ...
... '‫ בטלה ממנו גזרת שלשים‬,‫( ד'הקובר את מתו שבעה ימים קודם הרגל‬.‫משום דאמרי' פרק בתרא דמועד קטן )דף יט‬

Based on the Gemara in the last Perek of Moed Katan (Daf 19a) - 'If someone who buries his dead
seven days before Yom-Tov, the Din of Sheloshim is negated' ...
.‫ ואפ"ה בטלה הימנו גזרת ל' משום שמיני עצרת‬,‫וזימנין דליכא שבעה קודם לרגל‬

And there are times that, despite the fact that there are not seven days before Yom-Tov, of
Sheloshim is negated - on account of Shemini Atzeres.
. '‫ כאשר אבלים ינחם‬,‫ורבינו תם עצמו יסד במעריב של שמיני עצרת 'קודש ללינה ושלשים ידחם‬

In fact, Rabeinu Tam himself inserted in the Ma'ariv of Shemini Atzeres 'Sacrosanct regarding
Linah and it pushes away the Sheloshim, when one comforts the mourners'.
...‫ומיהו אי אפשר לומר שידחה לגמרי‬

One cannot, however, explain that it is totally negated ...

. '‫ ושם( אמרי' 'יום אחד לפני החג וחג ושמיני שלו הרי כאן עשרים ואחד יום‬:‫דהא פרק בתרא דמו"ק )דף כד‬

5
Since in the last Perek of Mo'ed Katan (Daf 24b & 25a) the Gemara rules that 'One day before
Sukos plus Sukos and Shemini Atzeres adds up to twenty-one days ... '.
.‫וברכת המלך לא בעי למיתני משום דצריך למיתני דומיא דברכה של ז' ימי החג‬

And he did not wish to learn that it refers to Birchas ha'Melech so that it should conform to the
Berachah of the seven days of Sukos.
‫ כך‬.‫ שלא היו אומרים מזמור שלם אלא חציו היום וחציו למחר‬,‫ משא"כ בשאר ימי החג‬,‫שהיו אומרים מזמור שלם‬- ‫שיר‬
...‫מפרש ר"ת‬

With regard to the fact that they sang a complete chapter (of Tehilim), which they did not do on
the other days of Sukos, when they sang, not a complete chapter, but half on one day, and half, on
the next (Rabeinu Tam) ...
... '‫( דמותיב בה סימנא 'הומבה"י‬.‫כדאיתא בשילהי החליל )לקמן דף נה‬

As the Gemara explains in Perek ha'Chalil (later on Daf 58a), where it gives the sign of 'Humbehi'
...
". ‫ולעיל פירשתי שהיו אומרים "למנצח על השמינית‬

And Tosfos already explained earlier (on Daf 47a, DH 'Shir') that they sang "Lemnatze'ach al
ha'Sheminis".

Summary
We focus on blessings in amud (a). Which blessings do we say when we are binding the
lulav? Entering the sukka? Entering an adjoining sukka? Why do we say each particular
blessing? Do we say blessings each day; each morning and each evening?1

A number of themes wind through these conversations. One regards rejoicing. When we celebrate
Sukkot, our primary experience is joy. If our thoughts or feelings are elsewhere, this will affect
the efficacy of our blessing and thus the fulfilment of that mitzvah. Another theme - which is
clearly related - is the attempt to understand what we are commanded to do and why (ie. what is
G-d's intention) we are intended to do those things. The rabbis wonder whether or not we should
state every blessing separately if we have a number of mitzvot to fulfil at the same time.

The rabbis compare the blessings of sukkot to other blessings. They speak about which prayers
are recited when Jews don tefillin. They speak about which prayers are recited when Jews witness
lit Chanukah candles. The rabbis present variations of these basic experiences and note which

1
http://dafyomibeginner.blogspot.com/2014/03/

6
prayers are recited in those situations. All of this allows them to feel more confident about their
numerous halachic decisions regarding the recitation of blessings on Sukkot.

Amud (b) looks at the timing of specific mitzvot: when we are allowed to use the etrog for anything
other than the mitzvah? We are told that the children eat this fruit following the holiday - when is
that? The eighth day? The ninth day if it follows Shabbat? Does this refer to both adults and
children? And what are we obliged to do (or to refrain from doing) during that time we call
twilight, between the sundown and the stars becoming visible?

Rabbi Zeira teaches two fascinating points. The first advises adults not to give their lulavim to
children on the first day of the Festival for reasons associated with legal acquisition. The second
reminds us not to promise something to a child and then break our word, for that teaches children
to lie, which is chastised in Jeremiah 9:4.

The daf ends with thoughts regarding Shemini Atzeret, otherwise thought of as the eighth day of
Sukkot. How does that day differ from the other days of Sukkot? Are we allowed to benefit from
the lulav on that day? We learn that Abaye teaches us to maintain the status of these ritual items
on a day that might be miscalculated and actually could be the seventh day of Sukkot.

Again and again I note that the rabbis are demonstrating their attempts to codify, restrict and
categorize human behaviour in a complex web of halachot. Even in a daf like Sukka 46, because
of which we are given numerous halachot, the rabbis' focus is as much on creating and
maintaining social norms as much as they are about these laws. Discussion followed by rules does
not mean that we follow the rules and forget the process. The bottom line is not necessarily the
bottom line.

Daf Shevui writes:2

R. Yoseph offers testimony that on the eighth day of Sukkot in the Diaspora one sits in the sukkah
but does not recite the blessing.

However, the Talmud points out that the fact that he saw these rabbis sit in the sukkah and not
recite a blessing is not proof that they hold that one doesn’t bless on the eighth day of Sukkot. It
could be that they hold that once one has recited a blessing on the first day, one doesn’t recite the
blessing on any of the subsequent days.

This possibility is negated when we learn that there is a tradition that they had just come from the
fields, meaning they had not yet sat in a sukkah for the whole festival! Since it was their first time
2
https://www.sefaria.org/Sukkah.47b.10?lang=bi&p2=Daf_Shevui_to_Sukkah.47a.1-47b.10&lang2=bi

7
in the sukkah, they certainly should have blessed. The fact that they did not do so was evidence
that they hold that one never recites a blessing over the sukkah on the eighth day.

This section opens with a reversal of the interpretation of the debate from the previous section.
Here we see that all amoraim agree that one does not bless over the sukkah on the eighth day in
the Diaspora. They disagree over whether one even sits there. Rav holds that one does, and R.
Yohanan holds that one does not.

R. Yoseph rules according to R. Yohanan, citing evidence that even R. Judah son of R. Shmuel b.
Shilat, the sage who transmitted Rav’s statement, did not sit in the sukkah on the eighth day.
Nevertheless, the sugya concludes by ruling that one does sit in the sukkah on the eighth day in
the Diaspora, but no blessing is recited.

Our sugya continues to deal with Shemini Atzeret and its status as an independent holiday.

R. Yohanan notes that the eighth day of Sukkot, Shemini Atzeret, is enough of a separate holiday
that one recites the blessing over time, what we call shehiyanu. This occurs at candle lighting and
kiddush. This distinguishes it from the seventh day of Pesah, which is not an independent holiday
at all.

R. Levi b. Hama notes that there are two or three ways in which the eighth day of Sukkot differs
from the other days. One does not sit in the sukkah or take the lulav on Shemini Atzeret and in the
Temple they did not perform the water libation (a topic to which we will return later). R. Judah
holds that the water libation was performed on Shemini Atzeret. So to him there are two
differences. In any case, this is enough to distinguish it from Sukkot.

The Talmud notes that the seventh day is in some ways different from the preceding days of Pesah.
One is obligated to eat matzah on the first night, but not on any of the subsequent nights.
But this argument really isn’t so strong. The seventh day of Pesah is different from the first night,
but not from the first day, because one is obligated to eat matzah only at night. But Shemini Atzeret
is different from the previous day as well.

These four amoraim now continue to explain why Shemini Atzeret is different from Sukkot, but
the seventh day of Pesah is not different from the rest of Pesah.

Ravina points out that the seventh day of Pesah is different from the first day, but it is the same as
the sixth day. Shemini Atzeret, the eighth day, is different from the seventh day of Sukkot.
R. Papa points out that there is a difference in the number of bullocks sacrificed. For most of
Sukkot each day has many bullocks sacrificed, starting from 13 and going down to 7. On Shemini
Atzeret there is only one.

8
R. Nahman b. Yitzchak notes that on all other days it is written, “And on the X day.” For Shemini
Atzeret the word “and” is missing. This signifies that it is a distinct day.
Finally R. Ashi notes that when it comes to Shemini Atzeret the Torah uses “their ordinance”
whereas for the preceding days the singular form was used.

This long baraita is brought as a support for R. Yohanan, but first we need to explain it. The baraita
deals with a case where some of the sacrifices are offered, but for some reason they cannot offer
them all. According to the first opinion, if any of the sacrifices are not offered, then they cannot
fulfill the mitzvah of the sacrifices that have been offered. But R. Judah says that if they don’t have
enough bulls then they can sacrifice a lesser number and at least partially fulfill the mitzvah. This
is because the number of bulls required is diminished every day of the festival (from 13-7).
Therefore, we can see that it is not essential to have the correct number.

The other sages point out that the same is true for the lambs and rams—there are fewer on Shemini
Atzeret than there were on the previous days. R. Judah defends his position by stating that Shemini
Atzeret is a separate festival. It has its own number of sacrifices, the Psalm (song) is different from
the other days, the blessing is different, and it too has a requirement to stay in Jerusalem overnight
after the festival is completed (this is true of other festivals as well). Therefore, since it is a separate
festival we don’t say that the number of lambs and rams is diminished from day seven today eight.
In any case, what is crucial to us is that R. Judah says that Shemini Atzeret has its own blessing.
At first, we assume that this means that one recites shehiyanu on Shemini Atzeret.

The Talmud corrects the previous understanding—Shemini Atzeret does require staying overnight;
only Pesah Sheni does not. The derashah excluded Pesah Sheni which is similar to the first Pesah.
It did not exclude Shavuot or Shemini Atzeret which are both one day holidays.

The Talmud now proves that R. Judah does hold that only Pesah Sheni does not require staying
overnight. Every other holiday, including one day holidays, does. They prove this by first citing a
baraita which states that when one brings his first fruit, the bikkurim, to the Temple, he must also
stay overnight. This opinion must belong to R. Judah for he is the sage who holds that one must
wave the first fruits. This is shown in a baraita which uses a midrashic technique focusing on the
repetition of the phrase “and he put it down” which appears twice in Deuteronomy. One time refers
to literally putting the basket of first fruits down, but the other time is interpreted as waving. Since
R. Judah is the one that holds that the bikkurim must be waved, he must also hold that one is
required to sleep overnight in Jerusalem when bringing the bikkurim, for both were mentioned in
the same baraita.

In the final section of the sugya two amoraim argue directly whether we say shehiyanu on Shemini
Atzeret. The ruling is that we do.

This baraita agrees with R. Nahman that Shemini Atzeret is a separate festival. It lists six ways in
which this halakhah is manifested. Some of these we have seen before, so I’ll explain only the two
that are new.

9
Rav Avrohom Adler writes:

Sukkah on the 8th day in exile

Rav Yehuda, the son of Rav Shmuel bar Shailas cited Rav saying that the 8th day of Sukkos in the
exile, which is treated as possibly the 8th or 7th, is considered the 7th for the purpose of sukkah,
and the 8th for the purpose of bracha, while Rabbi Yochanan says that it is considered the 8th for
both. The Gemora explains that both agree that one must sit in the sukkah on the 8th day, but they
differ on whether one must make a bracha on sitting in the sukkah. Rav says that it is considered
the 7th for the purpose of saying a bracha on sitting in the sukkah, while Rabbi Yochanan says that
it is considered the 8th, and no bracha is recited. The bracha they both refer to in their dispute is
the fact that the day is referred to in all tefillos as Shmini Atzeres. Rav Yosef says that one should
follow Rabbi Yochanan, as Rav Huna bar Bizna and all the Torah greats of the generation went to
the sukkah on the 8th day in the exile, and they sat in the sukkah without reciting a bracha. The
Gemora challenges this, as perhaps they were following the opinion that once one recited a bracha
on the sukkah on the first day, he doesn't recite it again, but answers that we know that they had
arrived on the 8th day from being out in the field, where they didn't sit in the sukkah. Some say
that both Rav and Rabbi Yochanan agree that one doesn't recite a bracha on sitting in the sukkah,
and their dispute is whether one must sit in the sukkah. Rav Yosef says that one should follow
Rabbi Yochanan, as Rav Yehuda, the son of Rav Shmuel bar Shaila, who was the source of Rav's
statement, himself sat outside the sukkah on the 8th day in the exile. The Gemora rules that we sit
in the sukkah, but do not recite a bracha.

Shehecheyanu on the 8th day

Rabbi Yochanan says that one says Shehecheyanu on the 8th day of sukkos, but not on the 7th day
of Pesach. Rabbi Levi bar Chama (or Rabbi Chama bar Chanina) supports this by noting that the
8th day of sukkos is different than the preceding days in three ways: we don't sit in the sukkah, we
don't take the lulav, and we don't do water libation. Even according to Rabbi Yehuda, who says
that water libation was done for all 8 days, it is different in the first two ways. The Gemora
challenges this, as the 7th day of Pesach is also different, in that there is no obligation to eat matza.
The Gemora offers the following answers:

1. The 7th of Pesach is different than the first night, but not different than the first day, as the only
obligation to eat matza is on the first night. The 8th of sukkos is different than the first day as well,
in these 3 (or 2) ways.

2. The 7th of Pesach is different from a day which was much before it, but not from the day
immediately preceding it, while the 8th of sukkos is different than the day immediately preceding
it. (Ravina)

3. The sacrifices of the first 7 days of sukkos include multiple bulls (in descending order), while
the 8th day includes only one bull. (Rav Pappa)

10
4. The sacrifices of the first 7 days of sukkos are introduced by ubayom – and on the day,
connecting each day to the one preceding it, while the sacrifice of the 8th day is introduced by
bayom – on the day, indicating that it is a new section of time. (Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak)

5. The sacrifice of the 7th day states that it be brought kemisphatam – like their rules, referring to
all the preceding days together, while the 8th day says kamisphat – like the rule, referring to it
alone. (Rav Ashi)

Shmini Atzeres

The Gemora rules that on the 8th day of sukkos in the exile, we sit in the sukkah, but don't make
a bracha. The Shulchan Aruch (OH 668:1) rules like this. The poskim debate to what extent is one
required – or even allowed – to use the sukkah on the 8th day. Although the Gemora says one must
sit in the sukkah, there is a concern that this will look like adding on to the mitzvah. The Gra says
that whatever requires a sukkah during sukkos (eating and sleeping) must be done in the sukkah,
and we are not concerned with an appearance of adding to the mitzvah, since people sometimes
eat and sleep outside for their own enjoyment.

The Darkai Moshe says that one may not sleep in the sukkah, since this would look like adding on
to the mitzvah. The Darkai Moshe implies that this is because people do not often sleep outside,
but they do often eat outside. The Mordechai, citing the Ra'avya, gives another reason for the
distinction. The fact that one doesn't say a bracha on eating a meal in the sukkah on the 8th day,
even though he did so on sukkos, is a clear indication that he is not sitting in the sukkah for the
purpose of the mitzvah. According to this reason, any act which wouldn't require a bracha on
sukkos (sleeping, eating fruits, etc.) would not be permitted on the 8th day.

The Mishna Berura (6) rules that one may eat such foods in the sukkah. The Gemora concludes
with the braisa which lists six ways in which Shmini Atzeres is its own holiday. The Rishonim
differ on the explanation of two of these ways. The braisa says it is its own regel – holiday. Rashi
explains that this means that one doesn't sit in the sukkah. Tosfos (48a Regel) cites Rabbenu Tam
who says that it refers to the requirement to stay overnight, and Rabbenu Chananel who says it
refers to the fact that it stops mourning. The braisa says it is different in bracha. Rashi says this
can mean that it is referred to differently in davening or that the king would bless the people on
Shmini Atzeres. Rabbenu Tam agrees with the first explanation, as this would align with the earlier
braisa, which used bracha to refer to the different mention in davening.

A Difficult Departure

The Gemara concludes that the halacha regarding Shemini Atzeres is meisav yasvinan beruchei
lo mevarchinan, we dwell in the Sukkah but we do not recite a blessing for the mitzvah of dwelling
in the Sukkah.

11
The Medrash states that the reason why we celebrate Shemini Atzeres is because HaShem declares,
“you, the Jewish People have been with Me now for seven days. It is very difficult to have you
part from Me. Please, stay with me another day.” We find that the word yeshiva in certain
contexts means to tarry or to remain behind. Perhaps the Gemara is alluding to this idea that we
tarry in the Sukkah because it is difficult for HaShem that we leave Him, but we do not recite a
blessing, because HaShem has never left us.

THE BLESSING OF "LEISHEV BA'SUKAH"

Rav Mordechai Kornfeld writes:3

The Beraisa says that when one "enters to sit in the Sukah," he recites the blessing of "Leishev
ba'Sukah." This implies that as soon as he enters the Sukah, even before he sits down, he recites
the blessing.
At exactly what moment is one supposed to recite the blessing for the Mitzvah of dwelling in the
Sukah?

(a) The RAMBAM (Hilchos Sukah 6:12) and RAV HAI GA'ON cited by the ROSH (4:3) rule
that one should recite the blessing immediately upon entering the Sukah, even before he sits down.
Rav Hai Ga'on adds that even if one enters the Sukah with no intention to eat there (for example,
he enters his friend's Sukah only with intent to visit his friend), he also recites the blessing. The
Rambam, too, makes no mention of a requirement to eat in order to recite the blessing.
(b) The RA'AVAD (Hilchos Sukah 6:12) writes that one may recite the blessing for the Mitzvah
of dwelling in the Sukah after he sits down with intent to eat. The blessing is recited upon the act
of eating that he will do in the Sukah. Nevertheless, one recites the blessing when he sits down,
because the act of sitting is preparatory to the act of eating. The Rosh points out that this was the
practice of RABEINU MEIR, who would recite the blessing after he sat down in the Sukah, and
before he ate.

(c) The ROSH writes that the universal practice is to recite the blessing for sitting in the Sukah
immediately before one eats, after one recites the blessing "ha'Motzi." (This is not like the view of
the Ra'avad, who says that one recites the blessing when he sits down to eat, even though he will
not eat until later.)

SHULCHAN ARUCH (OC 639:8) rules like the Rosh, that the blessing is recited only when one
actually eats in the Sukah. The MISHNAH BERURAH there (639:46) adds that it is best to be
stringent and attempt to fulfill all of the opinions: every time one enters the Sukah, he should take

3
https://www.dafyomi.co.il/sukah/insites/su-dt-046.htm

12
a "Mezonos" food item (at least a k'Beitzah in size), sit down, and recite the blessings of "Leishev
ba'Sukah" and "Borei Minei Mezonos" and eat.

The Mishnah Berurah (639:48) also adds that if one has no intention to eat bread at all that day, he
should recite a blessing as soon as he enters the Sukah, even though he is not going to eat. The
only reason why the blessing is delayed until the time one eats in the Sukah is because it is
preferable to recite the blessing on the primary use of the Sukah (eating) instead of on the
secondary use (sitting in the Sukah). When one has no intention to eat, he must recite the blessing
upon entering the Sukah. The Mishnah Berurah, in the name of the CHAYEI ADAM, points out
that even if a person did eat in the Sukah that day but he left the Sukah and later returned with
intention to sit in the Sukah but not to eat there, he must recite a blessing upon his return.4

(The MA'ASEH RAV (#18) records that the practice of the VILNA GA'ON was to recite a
blessing every time he entered the Sukah, even when he did not eat there.)

RECITING "SHEHECHEYANU" ON THE SECOND DAY OF YOM TOV

IN CHUTZ LA'ARETZ
The Gemara teaches that besides the blessing of Shehecheyanu that one recites upon the arrival of
Yom Tov, one also recites the blessing of Shehecheyanu when he performs the Mitzvos of the
Yom Tov (such as Sukah and Lulav) for the first time.

The Jews who live outside of Eretz Yisrael observe Yom Tov Sheni, a second day of Yom Tov
due to the original doubt about the exact date of Yom Tov. (During the times when the Beis Din
established the new month based on witnesses' sighting of the new moon, word of the
establishment of the new month would not reach the Jews who lived in far-away places, and thus
they observed two days of Yom Tov out of doubt. Even today, when a set calendar system is used,
the Rabanan decreed that the Jews in those places continue to observe two days of Yom Tov as if
they were in doubt.) The Rabanan enacted that all of the blessings that are recited on the first day
of Yom Tov be recited on the second day as well. Accordingly, the Jews who live in Chutz la'Aretz
recite the blessing of Shehecheyanu as part of Kidush on the second night of Yom Tov.

Does this requirement apply to the blessing of Shehecheyanu that is recited for the Mitzvos of
Sukah and Lulav as well? When one picks up the Lulav on the second day of Yom Tov in Chutz
la'Aretz, does he recite another Shehecheyanu?

Although the Beraisa states that one should recite Shehecheyanu upon completing the construction
of the Sukah (before Yom Tov), the Gemara concludes that the practice of the Amora'im was not
to recite Shehecheyanu at that time, but instead to include it in Kidush at the onset of Yom Tov.
Therefore, there is no question with regard to the blessing of Shehecheyanu that is recited for the
Mitzvah of Sukah, since it is included in the Shehecheyanu that is recited during Kidush on the
second night of Yom Tov. The question remains, though, with regard to the blessing of

4
Although his primary use of the Sukah earlier was to eat there, now his only use of the Sukah is to sit there, because he plans to
leave the Sukah again before he returns for the next meal. Therefore, when he re-enters the Sukah he recites the blessing even
though he is not going to eat there now.

13
Shehecheyanu for the Mitzvah of Lulav. Should one who lives in Chutz la'Aretz recite
Shehecheyanu again on the second day of Yom Tov when he picks up the Lulav?

(a) The ROSH (4:2) cites the BEHAG who rules that the blessing of Shehecheyanu that is recited
during Kidush of the second night applies to the Mitzvah of Lulav as well, even though that
Mitzvah will not be performed until the following day.
The Rosh writes that the Rishonim reject the Behag's ruling. Since the Mitzvah of Lulav does not
apply at night, how can the blessing of Shehecheyanu that is recited at night apply to the Mitzvah
of Lulav?5
(b) The Rishonim explain instead that there is another reason why one should not recite
Shehecheyanu for the Mitzvah of Lulav on the second day of Yom Tov. The Beraisa states that
one recites Shehecheyanu on the Lulav before Sukos, when he finishes preparing the Lulav for
use. Accordingly, it is obvious that the blessing of Shehecheyanu that one recites on the first day
of Yom Tov covers the Lulav, since a blessing of Shehecheyanu covers the Lulav even when one
recites it before the first day of Yom Tov.

However, RABEINU SHMUEL of Evreux (cited by the Rosh) rejects this logic. There are only
two times at which one may recite Shehecheyanu on the Lulav: when one finishes preparing the
Lulav (before Sukos), or when one performs the Mitzvah (on Sukos). The Shehecheyanu on the
first day of Yom Tov is recited, out of doubt, on the making of the Lulav, and thus it does not cover
the Mitzvah of Lulav on the second day of Yom Tov, which requires that Shehecheyanu be recited
on the performance of the Mitzvah.

The Rosh counters that even if Rabeinu Shmuel's logic is correct, the Shehecheyanu recited on the
first night certainly is just as valid for the Mitzvah of Lulav as the Shehecheyanu recited when one
prepares the Lulav. This Shehecheyanu, recited on the first day of Yom Tov (which might not be
Yom Tov), is clearly recited for the performance of the Mitzvah. Even if the day is really not Yom
Tov, since he must pick up the Lulav anyway because of the doubt, that obligation is enough to
make his Shehecheyanu relate to the performance of the Mitzvah. The Rosh concludes, based on
his reasoning, that it is not necessary to recite a second Shehecheyanu on the Mitzvah of Lulav on
the second day of Yom Tov in Chutz la'Aretz.

(c) RABEINU MANO'ACH (Hilchos Sukah 6:12), however, proposes the opposite logic. Even
if one may recite Shehecheyanu for the Lulav before Yom Tov, that is only when he knows why
he is reciting the blessing. When he recites the blessing because he has finished preparing the
Mitzvah, the blessing is valid. However, when he recites Shehecheyanu because he thinks that
today is the first day of Yom Tov and is the correct time for the actual performance of the Mitzvah
(and not just the time to prepare), when in reality it is an ordinary day and is not time to perform
the Mitzvah, the blessing is ineffectual and is not related to the Mitzvah, because it is based on an
error. (Rabeinu Mano'ach writes this with regard to the blessing of Shehecheyanu recited for the

5
This presumably is the reason why the Behag agrees that the Shehecheyanu recited on the first night of Sukos does not cover the
Mitzvah of Lulav that will be performed the next day. The Behag apparently understands that once the obligation of the Mitzvah
of Lulav takes effect on the first day, it continues uninterrupted for the next seven days, and thus the obligation applies even at
night. Before the first day of Sukos (i.e. the first night, during Kidush), the obligation has not yet taken effect, since it takes effect
only when one can fulfill the Mitzvah in practice. It remains in effect once it has already taken effect, even when one cannot fulfill
the Mitzvah in practice.

14
Mitzvah of Sukah, but the same logic should apply to the Shehecheyanu recited for the Mitzvah
of Lulav.)

The Halachah follows the opinion of the Rosh, and thus no Shehecheyanu is recited on the Lulav
on the second day of Yom Tov in Chutz la'Aretz (SHULCHAN ARUCH OC 662:2). Of course,
if the first day of Sukos occurs on Shabbos, or one is unable to hold the Lulav on the first day for
some other reason, one recites Shehecheyanu on the second day (or whenever he fulfills the
Mitzvah of Lulav for the first time).6

ONE WHO GIVES HIS LULAV TO A CHILD ON THE FIRST DAY OF

YOM TOV

Rebbi Zeira states that one should not give his Lulav to a child on the first day of Yom Tov. A
child has the ability to acquire (Koneh) an object from others, but he cannot transfer ownership
(Makneh) to others. If an adult gives his Lulav to a child, the adult cannot fulfill the Mitzvah with
it, because it belongs to the child and not to him.

In order for a child to fulfill the Mitzvah of Lulav for the sake of Chinuch, he must do the Mitzvah
in the same manner in which he will do it when he becomes an adult (see Insights to Sukah 42:1).
For that reason, on the first day of Sukos it does not suffice for an adult merely to lend his Lulav
to the child; one must own the Lulav with which he performs the Mitzvah ("Lachem"). On the
other hand, the adult cannot give (Makneh) it to the child, because the child will not be able to be
Makneh it back to him.

Why does the Gemara not suggest that the adult give the Lulav to the child as a "Matanah l'Zman"
(a "temporary gift"), whereby he stipulates that he fully gives the Lulav to the child for a limited
period of time (five minutes)? When that time passes, the Lulav returns to its original owner and
there is no need for the child to be Makneh it to him.
Alternatively, the adult should be able to give the Lulav to the child in the same way that he can
give it to another adult on the first day of Yom Tov, as a "Matanah Al Menas l'Hachzir" (41b).

In such a case, the gift takes effect, but only if the recipient eventually returns the object to the
original owner. If the recipient does not return the object, then retroactively the original gift does
not take effect and the recipient never acquired it in the first place. In the case of the Lulav, the
adult should give the Lulav to the child on condition that he return it.

Since the child cannot be Makneh it back to the adult, the condition is not fulfilled and it never
became the child's Lulav in the first place. In that manner, the adult is able to fulfill the obligation
of Chinuch for the child by allowing the child to perform the Mitzvah in the exact manner in which
he will perform the Mitzvah as an adult (that is, by receiving a Lulav as a "Matanah Al Menas
l'Hachzir"), and the adult does not lose possession of the Lulav and thus is able to fulfill the
Mitzvah himself.

6
If, however, one held the Lulav on the first day but merely forgot to recite Shehecheyanu at that time, there is a doubt whether
he must recite Shehecheyanu on the second day. See SHA'AR HA'TZIYUN 662:4.

15
(a)The ROSH (3:30) writes that it is evident from the Gemara here that when one acquires an
object as a "Matanah l'Zman" or a "Kinyan l'Zman," a temporary gift or acquisition, that object is
not considered fully owned by the recipient. His limited "ownership" of the object does not fulfill
the condition of "Lachem," which is necessary in order to fulfill the Mitzvah of Lulav. Therefore,
nothing is gained if the adult gives the Lulav to the child as a "Matanah l'Zman," because it is the
same as merely lending it to him (which is also not considered "Lachem").

With regard to why the adult does not give the Lulav to the child as a "Matanah Al Menas
l'Hachzir," the RITVA here explains that such a gift will have the opposite effect: Since the adult
knows, in advance, that the child will be unable to be Makneh the Lulav back to the original owner,
his stipulation is one which is impossible to fulfill. Consequently, the stipulation becomes voided
and the action is fully binding ("Tenai Batel u'Ma'aseh Kayam"), and thus the child takes full
possession of the Lulav and the adult cannot acquire it back from him.

(b) The KETZOS HA'CHOSHEN (241:4) points out that a number of Rishonim disagree with
the Rosh. They maintain that a "Kinyan l'Zman" is considered an absolute Kinyan and it does
fulfill the condition of "Lachem." Moreover, they maintain that a "Matanah Al Menas l'Hachzir"
itself is actually a "Kinyan l'Zman" (TOSFOS to Erchin 30a, DH v'Lo; Teshuvos ha'Rosh 35:2, in
the name of RABEINU AVIGDOR KOHEN TZEDEK (see Insights to Bava Basra 136:2:c:2);
this also appears to be the opinion of the RID as cited by the Rosh 3:30).

Rather, the Ketzos ha'Choshen says that one indeed may give the Lulav to a child with a "Kinyan
l'Zman" and then fulfill the Mitzvah himself afterwards when the child gives it back. The Gemara
does not make this suggestion because it merely wants to teach that one should not give the Lulav
to a child in such a way that it will be a "Kinyan Gamur," an absolute acquisition.

Steinzaltz (OBM) writes:7

In the Land of Israel, the holiday of Sukkot is seven days long and the “eighth day” of the holiday
is Shemini Atzeret, which is a separate holiday, as indicated by the fact that it does not have
the mitzvot of lulav, of sukkah or of the water libation. The situation outside of Israel is more
complicated, since during the time of the Mishnah when the announcement of the new month was
made by the bet din ha-gadol in Jerusalem, it was sent by messenger. Therefore, places outside of
Israel could not be sure when the holiday actually began, and because of this uncertainty, they kept
two days of Yom Tov. Diaspora communities continue keeping this tradition to this day, even
though we now operate with a set calendar and all communities know when the new month and
the holidays fall out based on the calendar.

Based on this, the “eighth day of Sukkot” presents something of a problem. Should we treat it as a
separate holiday or is it still considered part of Sukkot?

Two versions of a disagreement between Rav and Rabbi Yochanan are presented by the Gemara.
According to the first version, all agree that Diaspora Jews are obligated to sit in the sukkah on the
eighth day; the disagreement is whether they make a blessing on the mitzvah of sukkah. According
7
https://www.ou.org/life/torah/masechet_sukkah4147/

16
to the second version, everyone agrees that a blessing is not made on the sukkah; the disagreement
is whether people should be sitting in the sukkah on that day at all.

The Sefat Emet explains that all opinions in the first version assume that there cannot be any
problem with sitting in the sukkah. Even the concern of bal tosif – that a person is not allowed to
add to the mitzvot of the Torah – does not apply in this case, because no clear act of mitzvah is
being done in this case. Therefore you cannot lose anything by sitting there. This may help explain
why none of the Amoraim suggest that we should continue taking the lulav and etrog on the eighth
day in the Diaspora. The Ran adds that as we have learned, taking the lulav and etrog after the first
day of Sukkot is a Rabbinic obligation, and there is no reason to extend that Rabbinic obligation to
a day that is, itself, considered Sukkot only from a Rabbinic perspective.

The rishonim grapple with the second version, however. Why should one of the Amoraim rule that
we not be obligated to sit in the sukkah on a day that might be considered Sukkot? The Ran and
the Ritva explain that this is only true because of the present day situation when we really do know
the correct day of the holiday, and the people in the Diaspora keep two days of Yom Tov only out
of respect for the traditions of their forefathers. Thus there is room to be lenient when the two
holidays would end up in conflict with one-another.

Our daf analyzes various options regarding dwelling in a sukkah on Shemini Atzeres.8 On the one
hand, Sukkos is over and the mitzvah of dwelling in a sukkah is no longer in effect. In fact, if a
person enters a sukkah and pronounces a brachah, he would be in violation of ‫ תוסיף בל‬.On the
other hand, we observe each day of Sukkos with a degree of uncertainty of the calendar— ‫דיומא‬
‫ ספיקא‬.Shemini Atzeres must be treated as if it was possibly the seventh day, which is still Sukkos.
Accordingly, sitting in a sukkah is appropriate.

The conclusion of the Gemara is that we sit in a sukkah, but no brachah upon the mitzvah is said.
Rosh (‘‫ ה סימן‬,end) writes that we do not pronounce a brachah upon entering a sukkah on Shemini
Atzeres because doing so would be a demonstration of contradictory behavior. If we are declaring
our being in a sukkah as a mitzvah, it cannot be Shemini Atzeres. And if it is Shemini Atzeres, and
Sukkos is over, then our entering into a sukkah cannot be a mitzvah. Simply entering a sukkah
without reciting a brachah is not inconsistent with it being Shemini Atzeres, because people
occasionally eat outdoors if they feel that it is pleasant for them.

Our sages did not enact to take lulav on Shemini Atzeres without a brachah, because this is not an
activity which people do on their own, and taking it would be an overt sign of our denying that the
day is Shemini Atzeres. Tosafos (‫ ) מיתב ה”ד‬adds that taking lulav would involve handling what

8
https://dafdigest.org/masechtos/Sukkah%20047.pdf

17
may be muktzah on Yom Tov. Ritva points out that not only can entering a sukkah be interpreted
as an elective activity, rather than a violation of Shemini Atzeres, but the fact that we do not recite
a brachah is also a demonstration that we are only dwelling in the sukkah due to our uncertainty
about the calendar date, and it therefore does not undermine the kedushah of the Yom Tov. Ksav
Sofer (‘‫ ) י’ סי ח”או ת”שו‬asks that according to Ritva, we should don Tefillin on the second day of
Yom Tov in ‫ חוץ לארץ‬and not recite a brachah.

Our omitting the brachah would indicate that we are doing so due to our doubt, and it would not
violate the kedushah of the Yom Tov. According to Rosh this is not a problem, because donning
Tefillin is in and of itself a weekday activity, and it is not allowed. Ksav Sofer answers that even
Ritva agrees we do not wear Tefillin on ‫ שני טוב יום‬,because people would view the second day of
observance cheaply, which would be in contrast to the first day Yom Tov when we do not wear
Tefillin.

Although the Gemara uses language that indicates that one should eat and sleep in the sukkah on
Shmini Atzeres, nonetheless, Maharil (1) rules that eating should be in the sukkah but one sleeping
should be in the house. The reason for this ruling is that normally one makes a brachah when eating
in the sukkah, and by not making a brachah on Shmini Atzeres one demonstrates, in a discernable
way, that one does not intend to add to the mitzvah.

On the other hand, people do not make a brachah for sleeping in the sukkah, therefore, if one were
to sleep in the sukkah on Shemini Atzeres it would not be discernable that one does not intend to
add to the mitzvah. Shulchan Aruch (2) records the ruling of the Gemara that one should eat the
meals in the sukkah on Shemini Atzeres without reciting the brachah and Mishnah Berurah (3)
records the qualification of Maharil that one should not sleep in the sukkah on Shemini Atzeres.

Notwithstanding the above there are many people, most prominently Chassidim, who have
alternative customs regarding the use of the sukkah on Shmini Atzeres. Some do not sit in the
sukkah at all, others eat only lunch in the sukkah and some would only make Kiddush and eat
some cake in the sukkah during the day and eat the remainder of the meal inside. Many
explanations have been suggested to explain the different customs and in fact, Rav Tzadok
HaKohen of Lublin wrote an entire sefer (‫ ) צדק משיב‬on the topic.

Rav Yechiel Michal Epstein (4) offers the following explanation to explain, in general terms, this
custom. The reason it is permitted to sit in the sukkah on Shmini Atzeres without regard to the
prohibition against adding to the Torah is that people occasionally eat outside simply because it is
pleasant to sit outside. In cold countries, however, this claim does not stand because it is too cold
to eat outside comfortably. Thus, different practices developed to avoid the appearance of adding
to the Torah.

18
We find on today’s daf a discussion relating to sitting in the sukkah on Shemini Atzeres. Once, the
disciples of the Yehudi HaKadosh, zt”l, (who had himself been a disciple of the Chozeh of Lublin,
zt”l) and the followers of the Chozeh of Lublin engaged in a similar dispute.

The clear practice of the Chozeh of Lublin was to return inside his house on Shemini Atzeres, and
his students therefore felt justified in doing the same. The Yehudi HaKadosh, on the other hand,
always ate in the sukkah on Shemini Atzeres, but his practice was open to different interpretations.
Because the Yehudi HaKadosh took his meals in an enclosed porch all year long which served as
his sukkah during the holiday after the roof was removed, it could not be said with great certainty
whether he really meant to eat in the sukkah on Shemini Atzeres, or was simply eating in the room
of the house where he normally ate.

The students of the Chozeh were indignant that the Yehudi meant to eat in the sukkah and was
departing from his own, and their, Rebbe’s custom, while the Yehudi’s own followers maintained
that he meant to eat in the house, and did not disagree with his own Rebbe at all. But the Chozeh’s
students pursued the conflict and reasoned, “If he really wanted to ‘return to the house’ he should
have ordered the roof closed!”

Rav Chaim Meir Yechiel Shapira of Mogelnitz, zt”l, once commented on this particular
machlokes: “Whatever they do has a halachic basis, so the main thing in such an instance is to
avoid the fruitless arguing that leads to ‫“ חנם שנאת‬.

The Vilna Gaon, zt”l, held that our Gemara is conclusive regarding dwelling (and sleeping) in the
sukkah on Shemini Atzeres. Once, it turned bitterly cold on Shemini Atzeres, but the Gaon insisted
on proper fulfillment of the halachah. He said, “Although it is extremely cold and we are not
obligated to sleep in the sukkah, let us bundle up very well to make sure that we will not feel
discomfort and we can sleep there anyway. That way, we will provide a living example that one is
also obligated to sleep in the sukkah on Shemini Atzeres in ‫לארץ חוץ‬.

R. Shuli Passow writes:9

Poor Shemini Atzeret. The last of the biblical holidays to take place in the month of Tishrei, it’s
the hardest both to pronounce and to explain.
9
Myjewishlearning.com

19
The Torah simply states that after seven days of Sukkot, we are to observe an eighth (shemini) day
of atzeret, a word which means either stopping (work) or a solemn occasion. Why? Because it is
a day of complete rest. Why? Because it is a solemn occasion. Why? Because it is the eighth day
of a seven-day festival. Huh?

Shemini Atzeret sounds like a holiday that a Jewish version of Bart Simpson would invent to get
out of taking an exam.

The ambiguity over the nature and purpose of the day raised a number of questions for the rabbis,
several of which are addressed on today’s daf.

When we left off yesterday, the Gemara was beginning to address the question of how to observe
the eighth day of the festival in the Diaspora, where the eighth day is treated as though it might
really be the seventh day of Sukkot.

Here’s the problem: If it’s actually the seventh day of Sukkot, then a) there would be an obligation
to dwell in the sukkah and b) it would not be Shemini Atzeret, so certain liturgical additions
specific to the holiday should not be said. But if it’s actually the eighth day, then it is truly Shemini
Atzeret and a) there is no obligation to dwell in the sukkah, b) reciting a blessing over dwelling in
the sukkah would constitute a blessing made for no purpose (a big no no for the sages!) and c) the
special additions would be said.

The Gemara then records the following dispute:

According to [Rav Yehudah in the name of Rav], who says that the status of the eighth day is
like that of the seventh day with regard to the mitzvah of sukkah, we also recite the blessing: To
dwell in the sukkah. But according to [Rabbi Yohanan], who says that its status is like that of
the eighth day, we do not recite the blessing (for dwelling in the sukkah).

Rabbi Yohanan’s logic is sound: If we affirm the day’s status as Shemini Atzeret, it would be
inconsistent to say the blessing over dwelling in the sukkah, because that is a mitzvah for the seven
days of Sukkot only. After some back and forth, the Gemara agrees with Rabbi Yohanan, stating
that the law is to dwell in the sukkah without saying the blessing.

The Gemara then cites another of Rabbi Yohanan’s statements:

Rabbi Yoḥanan said: One recites z’man (the Shehechiyanu blessing) on the eighth day of the
festival (i.e. Shemini Atzeret) and one does not recite the blessing of z’man on the seventh day
of Passover.

The Shehechiyanu blessing, which celebrates firsts, is customarily recited only on the first day of
a holiday. By drawing a distinction between the seventh day of Passover — which is obviously
part of the Passover holiday — and Shemini Atzeret, Rabbi Yohanan teaches that even though it
is called “the eighth day,” Shemini Atzeret is not a continuation of Sukkot, but rather a holiday in
its own right and therefore warrants the Shehechiyanu blessing. After some discussion, the Gemara

20
again concludes that the law follows Rabbi Yohanan: We say the Shehechiyanu on Shemini
Atzeret.

What does all this mean for us today? On a practical level, it means exactly what the Gemara
teaches: We recite the Shehechiyanu on Shemini Atzeret. We make special insertions in certain
prayers. And most Diaspora communities follow the practice of sitting in the sukkah, but without
making a blessing.

On a spiritual level, perhaps the Talmud is pushing us to find meaning in a festival that doesn’t
seem to have much meaning ascribed to it by the Torah. After a month of holidays that take us on
a guided spiritual journey, it would be easy to shrug off Shemini Atzeret as not all that important,
to say that our spiritual work is done.

But by affirming that Shemini Atzeret is a distinct holiday in every way, I’d like to think that the
Talmud is asking us to take one more step on the path — even if it’s not so obvious what that step
is. It reminds us that the Torah need not articulate a holiday’s sacred purpose for it to be sacred.
Sometimes, finding that sacred purpose, and making meaning of it, is up to us.

Rabbi Johnny Solomon writes:

In the midst of a detailed halachic discussion in our daf (Sukkah 47a) concerning the possible
necessity of reciting the bracha on dwelling in a Sukkah on Shemini Atzeret in the diaspora, we
are told that ‘Rav Huna bar Bizma and all the great men of the generation visited a sukkah’ on
that day and, though they dwelt in a sukkah, they did not recite a bracha. The Gemara then asks
that ‘perhaps those Sages were of the opinion that once someone has recited the bracha on the
first day of Sukkot, they need not do so again?’, to which it responds, ‫ – גמירי דמאפר אתו‬which is
generally translated as meaning: ‘[this is not the reason that they did not recite the bracha].
Instead, I received a tradition [that these Sages] had [just] come from the fields/meadows.’ As
Rashi explains, ‘they came in from the fields/meadows where their animals had been grazing
and therefore had not dwelt in a sukkah throughout all the days of the Chag.’

What this means, according to Rashi, is that some of our great Sages were so busy during the week
of sukkot grazing their animals that they were therefore exempt from the mitzvah of sukkah.
However, many commentaries struggle to accept this explanation on face value. Not only does it
not make sense that this group of rabbis were together grazing animals, but also, how was it not
possible for them to construct a sukkah while the animals were grazing?

These questions prompted Rabbi Menachem Mendel Kasher (Divrei Menachem Vol. 4 p. 113) to
revisit the way in which the word ‫ דמאפר‬is translated, and though it does often mean a field or
meadow, it can also occasionally refer to a riverbank or a sea shore (see Targum Yerushalmi to
Shemot 2:3). On this basis, Rabbi Kasher asserts that these Sages were not busy grazing animals,
but instead, had been overseas.

Moreover, he then explains that the word ‫ דמאפר‬may even allude to where these Sages were,
because the root ‫ אפר‬may be hinting to ‫( אפריקא‬Africa) where, to quote Rabbi Kasher, ‘already by

21
that time there was a settlement of Jews there [in Africa] who were in contact with the Jews of
the Land of Israel’ - although he then concludes that these Sages may not have necessarily been
visiting Jewish communities in Africa, but may have been grazing their flocks in North Africa.

On the basis of Rabbi Kasher’s commentary, this group of Rabbis either went on a mission to help
Jews in Africa, or were in Africa look after their flock. However, since the Torah refers to leaders
as shepherds who tend to their flock (see Bemidbar 27:17), perhaps these two suggestions are not
mutually exclusive. Instead, extending the interpretations offered by Rabbi Kasher, I would like
to suggest that these Sages went to Africa to visit with and tend to the needs of Jews - just like a
shepherd travel to tend to the needs of their flock.

Explained this way, it is now understandable which mitzvah these Rabbis were involved with that
exempted them from the mitzvah of Sukkah. Yet beyond this explanation is also a powerful
message – that instead of great leaders staying at home and enjoying their sukkah experience, they
travelled far and gave up on their personal spiritual comforts to show their care and concern for
their fellow Jews.

Today, there are still many Jews in far flung places – including parts of Africa - whose physical
and spiritual needs require support and attention. Baruch Hashem, in addition to Chabad Shluchim,
there are also a number of people who invest time and energy to support those people and those
communities – although considerably more could be done for at least some of those communities.

Yet, with the advent of the internet - which became publicly accessible 30 years ago - we’ve now
got digital networks that means that no Jew – anywhere in the world – who is looking for chizuk,
learning and guidance should feel that they are like a sheep without a shepherd. Yet, unfortunately,
that is not the case, and there are many Jews who feel alone and – as a result of their aloneness –
slowly ebb away from their Judaism.

Ultimately, if our Sages were prepared to ‘give up’ on their sukkot experience to assist other Jews,
we too should be prepared to ‘give up’ on some of the things we do to assist and connect with
other Jews (as Rav Moshe Feinstein rules, just as we must give ma’aser, 10%, of our money to
charity, so too, we should give 10% of our time), and we should do so in order that no Jew –
anywhere in the world – who is looking for chizuk, learning and guidance should feel that they are
like a sheep without a shepherd.

22
 Lulav and Sukkah on Shemini Atzeret

Rabbi Chaim Jachter writes:10

There is considerable confusion in relation to the practice of Galut Jewry regarding Lulav and
Sukkah on Shemini Atzeret. In this essay, we seek to eliminate the confusion and shed some
light on practices that might seem to contradict specific passages in the Gemara.

Gemara Background and Tosafot’s Explanation

We are familiar with the phenomenon of Galut Jews observing two days of Yom Tov. For
example, in the Galut we observe Pesach for eight days instead of the seven days that residents
of Israel observe. This is because of the doubt our ancestors had regarding the calendar, whether
the previous month was twenty-nine or thirty days. Although we have not harbored such doubts

10
https://www.koltorah.org/halachah/lulav-and-sukkah-on-shemini-atzeret-by-rabbi-chaim-jachter

23
since the fixed calendar was established during the time of the Gemara, we still maintain the
practice of our ancestors and act as if we are in doubt (see Baitza 4b).

When we observe the Mitzvot that are performed on the second day of Yom Tov we recite a
Beracha in order to preserve the integrity of the day (see Shabbat 23a and Rambam Hilchot
Chanukah 3:5). For example, we recite Hallel with a Beracha on the eighth day of Pesach
because our ancestors were in doubt perhaps this day was actually the seventh day of
Pesach. Accordingly, we would expect to recite a Beracha on the Mitzvot of Sukkah and Lulav
on Shemini Atzeret, since our ancestors experienced a doubt regarding the eighth day of Sukkot,
concerned that it was actually the seventh day of Sukkot. Yet, the Gemara (Sukkah 47a) presents
a debate among the Amoraim regarding how residents of the Galut should conduct themselves
in relation to Sukkah on Shemini Atzeret. The Gemara concludes that the proper practice is to
sit in the Sukkah on Shemini Atzeret but omit the Beracha. The Gemara indicates that we do
not take the Lulav on Shemini Atzeret.

Tosafot (ibid. s.v. Maitav) are puzzled by this phenomenon and wonder why the eighth day of
Sukkot differs from the eighth day of Pesach in this regard. They explain that the eighth day of
Sukkot differs from the eighth day of Pesach in that the eighth day of Sukkot is Shemini Atzeret,
which is a Yom Tov that in many ways enjoys a separate and distinct identity from Sukkot (see
Rosh Hashana 4b). Were we to observe the Mitzvot of the seventh day of Sukkot on Shemini
Atzeret, we would undermine the integrity of Shemini Atzeret. We do not take the Lulav on
Shemini Atzeret, because the Lulav is ordinarily Muktza. Thus, taking the Lulav on Shemini
Atzeret would make a blatant statement of concern that it is actually the seventh day of
Sukkot. However, sitting in the Sukkah on Shemini Atzeret, Tosafot explain, is not a blatant
expression of doubt whether the day is the seventh day of Sukkot, since many people eat their
meals outside in a hut on any Yom Tov simply because it is a pleasant experience. Finally, this
is the reason we omit the Beracha when we sit in the Sukkah on Shemini Atzeret. Reciting the
Beracha would undermine the status of Shemini Atzeret by blatantly demonstrating that we are
concerned perhaps the day is not truly Shemini Atzeret.

Alternate Explanations for Lulav – Kesef Mishna and Rav Soloveitchik

The Kesef Mishna (commenting on Rambam Hilchot Sukkah 6:13) offers a different explanation
for why we do not take a Lulav on Shemini Atzeret. He notes that it is only a rabbinical
obligation to take the Lulav on the seventh day of Sukkot. Biblically, we are only obligated to
take the Lulav on the first day of Sukkot if one is outside of the Bait Hamikdash and seven days
if one is inside the Bait Hamikdash (see Vayikra 23:40 and Sukkah 41a). The Kesef Mishna
argues that the obligations of Yom Tov Sheni do not apply to Lulav because the obligation is
only rabbinic in nature (there is a basis for this approach in Menachot 68b). One may add that
this explains why we do not observe Chanukah for nine days in the Galut.

Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik (Kovetz Chiddushei Torah Shel Hagrid Vehagram p.155) offers a
different explanation. He points out that Rabban Yochanan Ben Zakai instituted that we take
the Lulav during the last six days of Sukkot to commemorate the practice in the Bait Hamikdash
to take the Lulav for the seven days of Sukkot. Since this enactment is designed to commemorate

24
the practice of the Bait Hamikdash, there is no reason to take the Lulav on Yom Tov Sheni. This
is, Rav Soloveitchik argues, because the institution of Yom Tov Sheini had no relevance in the
context of the Bait Hamikdash and was never part of the Bait Hamikdash experience.

Sukkah on Shemini Atzeret – Defense of the Chassidic Practice – Aruch

Hashulchan, Sefat Emet, and Rav Soloveitchik

It is rather astonishing to find that many Chassidim and those who are of Chassidic background
essentially do not eat in the Sukkah on Shemini Atzeret, except for reciting Kiddush and eating
a snack (or some variation thereof). This practice is quite surprising in light of the fact that this
practice seems to contradict an explicit ruling of the Gemara (Sukkah 47a), Rambam (Hilchot
Sukkah 6:13), and Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chaim 668:1). We will present three defenses of this
seemingly odd practice. We should note that Reb Yankel Lichter, a prominent scribe who is a
member of the Skever Chassidic group in Borough Park of Brooklyn, emphasized in a
conversation with me that this practice is not the universally accepted practice of all
Chassidim. He emphasized that many Chassidim do eat all of their meals in the Sukkah on
Shemini Atzeret in accordance with the dictates of the Gemara and Shulchan Aruch. We should
note that Sephardim eat in the Sukkah on Shemini Atzeret outside of Israel, in accordance with
the straightforward reading of the Gemara, Rambam, and Shulchan Aruch (Rav Ovadia Yosef,
Teshuvot Yechaveh Daat 2:76).

The Aruch Hashulchan (O.C. 668:3-5) offers what appears to be the most straightforward
explanation of this practice. He notes the aforementioned explanation of Tosafot, that the reason
why sitting in the Sukkah on Shemini Atzeret is not a blatant declaration that we are uncertain
if it is Shemini Atzeret is that many people eat in a Sukkah merely for pleasure even if it is not
for the sake of the Mitzva. The Aruch Hashulchan argues that this applies only to Jews who
reside in reasonably warm climates where it is a pleasure to eat outside in the Sukkah. However,
it does not apply to the “Northern countries” (the Aruch Hashulchan resided in Lithuania) where
it is quite cold during Shemini Atzeret. Hardly anyone would eat in a Sukkah purely for pleasure
on Shemini Atzeret. Thus, in Lithuania eating a meal in the Sukkah on Shemini Atzeret would
constitute a blatant expression that we are not certain that the day is Shemini Atzeret. We should
note that it is highly questionable that this defense of the Chassidic practice is relevant for this
country, especially in warmer areas such as Florida and California. We should also note that a
similar approach is adopted by many Acharonim to explain the almost universally accepted
practice not to sleep in the Sukkah on the night of Shemini Atzeret (see Mishna Berura 668:6).

The Sefat Emet (commentary to Sukkah 47a) presents an interesting approach to this issue. He
writes that the Gemara (and, in turn, the Rambam and Shulchan Aruch) do not obligate us to eat
in the Sukkah on Shemini Atzeret. Rather, the Gemara permits us to eat in the Sukkah on
Shemini Atzeret (i.e. that one does not violate the prohibition of Bal Tosif in doing so). A proof
to his contention, writes the Sefat Emet, is the fact that Chazal did not institute a Beracha for
eating in the Sukkah on Shemini Atzeret, unlike eating Matza at the second Seder where we
recite Al Mitzvat Matza. This explanation, of course, transcends all climates and may be used
as a justification even for the practice in America.

25
Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik (cited in Rav Hershel Reichman’s Reshimot Shiurei Hagrid Al
Masechet Sukkah p.98) offers a highly creative approach to this issue. Rav Soloveitchik cites
the Raavad’s explanation for why a Chatan and his closest circle of friends are excused from
sitting in the Sukkah throughout the entire holiday of Sukkot (Sukkah 25b). The Raavad
explains that these people are classified as Mitztaer (experiencing significant discomfort, which
constitutes a legitimate excuse for not eating in the Sukkah) since they will not celebrate
appropriately if they are limited to the confines of a Sukkah. Similarly, argues Rav Soloveitchik,
Chassidim celebrate Shemini Atzeret very intensely to the extent that it may be compared to the
celebration of a wedding party. The bride and groom are the Jewish People and Hashem. Thus
Chassidim do not eat their Shemini Atzeret meal in the Sukkah on Shemini Atzeret, as it would
detract from the intensity of their celebration of Shemini Atzeret. We may observe that this
explanation seems to justify the practice only of “practicing Chassidim” and not merely those
who are of Chassidic descent. The explanation of the Sefat Emet, though, seems to transcend
these cultural borders.

Rav Aharon Lichtenstein told a group of Yeshivat Har Etzion alumni that if their family Minhag
is to eat outside the Sukkah on Shemini Atzeret they could maintain their family Minhag. He
explained that there is a basis for this practice and it even has roots reaching back to time of the
Rishonim (the Raavya). Interestingly, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Teshuvot Minchat
Shlomo 1:19:1) rules that a Galut resident who is visiting Israel for Shemini Atzeret does not
have to sit in the Sukkah on Shemini Atzeret even if he is fully observing the second day of Yom
Tov. Rav Ovadia Yosef (Teshuvot Yechaveh Daat 2:76) presents a compromise position on this
issue. He rules that a Galut resident who is visiting an Israeli at the latter’s home should eat
inside the house with his hosts. However, if the Galut resident spends Shemini Atzeret in a hotel
or his own apartment in Israel, he should eat his meals in the Sukkah.

Conclusion

Permit me to conclude this essay with a charming anecdote that Mr. Sheldon Chanales relates
about his interaction with Rav Soloveitchik in Boston one Simchat Torah. He asked Rav
Soloveitchik why Chassidim do not eat their meal in the Sukkah on Shemini Atzeret. The Rav
responded with the explanation that we cited above. In the course of his answer the Rav became
more and more enthralled in explaining the Chassidic experience of Shemini Atzeret and Hakafot
(which Chassidim conduct both on Shemini Atzeret and Simchat Torah). The Rav mentioned
that during the Hoshanot we circle the Sefer Torah but during the Hakafot we circle none other
than Hashem! Finally, Sheldon asked the Rav why then we do who are not members of a
Chassidic group, eat in the Sukkah on Shemini Atzeret. The Rav responded nonchalantly
“because that’s what the Gemara says to do.”

26
 Shemini Atzeret
Rav David Brofsky writes:11

Introduction

After celebrating the festival of Sukkot for seven days, dwelling in one’s sukka and taking
the arba minim each day, the Torah instructs that the eighth day, known as “Shemini Atzeret,"
should be observed as a Yom Tov:

On the eighth day you shall have a solemn assembly (atzeret): You shall do no manner
of servile work; but you shall present a burnt-offering, an offering made by fire, of a
sweet savor unto the Lord: one bullock, one ram, seven he-lambs of the first year without
blemish; their meal-offering and their drink-offerings for the bullock, for the ram, and
for the lambs, shall be according to their number, after the ordinance; and one he-goat
for a sin-offering; beside the continual burnt-offering, and the meal-offering thereof,
and the drink-offering thereof. (Bamidbar 29:35-38)

Unlike Pesach, which is celebrated for seven days, the festival of Sukkot is extended an
additional day, and Shemini Atzeret is observed on the eight day. Why is there an “extra” day of
Sukkot? What is the nature of this additional day? The Talmud explains:

11
https://torah.etzion.org.il/en/shemini-atzeret-1

27
 R. Elazar taught. The seventy cows [of Sukkot] correspond to the seventy nations of the
world. What is the purpose of the lone cow [of Shemini Atzeret]? It corresponds to the
lone nation. It is like a parable to a king who said to his servants, “Make for me a great
feast.” On the last day, he said to his lover, “Make for me a small feast so that I may
derive pleasure from you.” (Sukka 55b)

The Talmud contrasts the festivals of Sukkot and Shemini Atzeret. The “parei ha-chag," the
seventy bulls brought on Sukkot, which correspond to the seventy nations of the world, highlight
the universal theme of Sukkot. The prophet Zekharia also highlights the universal theme of Sukkot:

The Lord will be king over the whole earth. On that day the Lord will be one, and His
name the only name ... Then the survivors from all the nations that have attacked
Jerusalem will go up year after year to worship the King, the Lord Almighty, and to
celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles. If any of the peoples of the earth do not go up to
Jerusalem to worship the King, the Lord Almighty, they will have no rain. If the Egyptian
people do not go up and take part, they will have no rain. (Zekharia 14:9, 16-17)

In Zekharia’s eschatological vision, the nations of the world will one day celebrate the festival of
Sukkot and worship God in Jerusalem.

The single bull brought as a korban on Shemini Atzeret, however, points to a more
particular theme. This led the gemara to teach the parable of the king who wishes to spend quality
time with his lover.

Rashi offers a similar understands. He comments:

This is language of affection, like children departing from their father. He says, “Your
departure is difficult for me. Delay it one more day.” (Rashi, Bamidbar 29:36)

Shemini Atzeret emphasizes the specific, particular relationship between God and the Jewish
People, beyond the universal relationship between God and the nations of the world. Rashi portrays
Shemini Atzeret as a beautiful celebration of the loving relationship between God and Am Yisrael.

The Chizkuni (13th century) also views Shemini Atzeret as a celebration of the relationship
between God and the Jewish People, and adds:

This is a parable to a king whose children came to visit him. The first time the king asked,
“When will you return to me?” They told him, “In 50 days.” He said, “Go in peace.”
The second time he asked, “When will you return?” They said in four months, and he
told them, “Go in peace.” The third time, they told him, “We cannot return for seven
months.” The king said, “If that is the case, please stay with me one more day so I can
enjoy your company, since you will be so delayed for so long.” For this reason, there is
no atzeret for the Jews on Pesach, for they return on Shavuot. And there is no atzeret on
Shavuot, for they will return on Sukkot. But on Sukkot, when they will not return again
until Pesach, God delays them one day. (Chizkuni, Vayikra 23:36)

28
God wishes to spend one final day, before the long winter void of festivals, alone with his nation.

The Nature of Shemini Atzeret and its Relationship To Sukkot

The Talmud enumerates six ways in which Shemini Atzeret differs from the previous seven
days, the festival of Sukkot:

It has been taught in agreement with R. Nachman: Shemini Atzeret is a separate festival
(regel bifnei atzmo) with regard to PZ”R KSH”B – that is with regard to “payis”
(balloting) it is a separate festival, with regard to the “zeman” (birkat she-hechiyyanu)
it is a separate festival, with regard to “regel” (the nature of the festival) it is a separate
festival, with regard to “korban” (its sacrifice) it is a separate festival, with regard to
“shir” (its psalm) it is a separate festival, and with regard to its “berakha” it is a separate
festival. (Sukka 48a)

What are these six halakhot for which Shemini Atzeret deserves to be describes as a “regel bifnei
atzmo”?

Shemini Atzeret differs with regards to the “payyis;" the ballot was used in order to
determine which of the twenty-four “mishmarot ha-kehuna” received the korbanot on Shemini
Atzeret, as it is on other festivals. During the first seven days of the Festival, however, no ballot
was necessary, as the “parei ha-chag” were sufficient to provide for all of the kohanim. In addition,
on Shemini Atzeret, the She-hechiyanu blessing is recited, even though it was already said on the
first day of Sukkot.

Shemini Atzeret also differs regarding the birkat ha-zeman, as She-hechiyyanu is recited,
even though it was already recited o the first day of the Festival. This stands in contrast to Pesach,
when She-hechiyyanu is only recited once, on the first day.

The Rishonim disagree as to the implication of “regel bifnei atzmo.” Rashi (Sukka 48a,
s.v. regel) explains that Shemini Atzeret is separate in that one does not sit in a sukka. Elsewhere
(Rosh Ha-Shana 4b, s.v. pazar), Rashi writes that “ein shem chag ha-Sukkot alav” – the eight day
does not bear the name of the festival of Sukkot. Tosafot (Rosh Ha-Shana 4b, s.v. pazar) explain
that in Birkat Ha-Mazon and tefilla, one mentions “Shemini Atzeret," and not “Chag Ha-Sukkot.”
Rabbeinu Chananel (Sukka 48a) and the Rif (Sukka 23a) explain that Shemini Atzeret is a
“regel bifnei atzmno” in that if one buries a close relative, over whom he must mourn, before the
Festival, the first day of Sukkot cancels the shiva (seven days of mourning), and Shemini Atzeret
cancels another seven days of the period of mourning. Therefore, upon concluding the entire
festival, one has already counted twenty-one days (seven days before the beginning of the festival,
seven days of Chol Ha-Mo’ed, and Shemini Atzeret) of the thirty-day period of mourning
(Sheloshim). Rabbeinu Tam (Tosafot, Sukka 48a, s.v. regel) disagrees, and explains that “regel
bifnei atzmo” refers to the obligation to sleep in Jerusalem (lina) during the time of the Beit Ha-
Mikdash on the night of Shemini Atzeret.

29
 The Ramban (Sukka 48a) rejects these explanations and explains that Shemini Atzeret is a
“regel bifnei atzmo” in that one who exempt from bringing the olat re’iyya and the shalmei
chagiga on the first day of Sukkot – for example, one who converted during Chol Ha-Mo’ed or a
minor who became an adult during Chol Ha-Mo’ed – is obligated to bring these korbanot on
Shemini Atzeret. Furthermore, according to the opinion that maintains that one violates “bal
te’acher” (the prohibition of not fulfilling one’s vows) after three “regalim" have passed, one
would be in violation after two regalim and the seven days of Sukkot pass.

Regarding “korban," on Shemini Atzeret the descending pattern of bull offerings, from
thirteen to seven, stops, and only one bull is offered (Bamidbar 29:36). The psalm recited in
the Beit Ha-Mikdash by the Levi’im on Shemini Atzeret (Tehillim 12) also differed from the
pattern of songs recited by the Levi’im throughout the festival (see Sukka 55a).

Finally, the Rishonim differ as to whether “berakha” refers to the unique formula inserted
in one’s prayers (Rabbeinu Tam, Tosafot, Sukka 48a, s.v. regel), or to the blessing recited for the
“life of the King” at the end of the Festival (see Rashi Yoma 3a s.v. berakha le-atzmo; see also
Tosefta, Sukka 4:10 and Rashi, Sukka 48a, s.v. berakha).

The Acharonim discuss whether these differences imply that Shemini Atzeret should
actually be perceived as a separate festival, or simply as the eighth day of the Sukkot festival
whose halakhot differ somewhat from the seven previous days. Some attempt to relate this to an
interesting question regarding the proper formula for the Shemini Atzeret insertion in one’s
prayers.

The Rishonim (Rif, Sukka 23a; Rashi, Sukka 47b, s.v. birkat; Rosh, Sukka 4:5, et al.) write
that one inserts “yom shemini Chag Ha-Atzeret ha-zeh” into the Shemoneh Esrei and Birkat Ha-
Mazon, and the Shulchan Arukh (668:1) records this formula. Similarly, the Rambam (Seder
Tefillot; see also Tosafot Yeshanim, Yoma 3a) writes that one should insert “yom chag Shemini
Atzeret ha-zeh” in one’s Shemoneh Esrei.

The Rema (668:1) writes that it is customary to say “yom shemini ha-atzeret ha-zeh," and
not to mention the word “chag" at all, as “we do not find that [Shemini Atzeret] is called a chag.”
Although the Gra (Bi’ur Ha-Gra 668:2) notes that the Talmud does refer to Shemini Atzeret as a
“chag," the Ran (Nedarim 49a) cites the Yerushalmi, which implies that in the language of the
Torah, Shemini Atzeret is not referred to as a “chag.” The Maharshal (Responsa 64) and the Taz
(668:1) conclude that one should say “yom Shemini Atzeret ha-chag ha-zeh," as the “chag” refers
to Sukkot, and not to Shemini Atzeret. The Arukh Ha-Shulchan (668:1) records that this is the
“minhag ha-olam,” the accepted practice.

R. Chaim Yosef David Azulai (1724-1806), known as the Chida, in his Birkei Yosef (668),
insists that the majority of Rishonim and Acharonim held that one should insert “yom
shemini Chag Ha-Atzeret ha-zeh.”

What of one were to forget to mention Shemini Atzeret, and simply inserted “yom Chag
Ha-Sukkot ha-zeh," as he did for the previous seven days? The Sha’arei Teshuva (668:2) cites
numerous opinions on this matter. The Chayei Adam (28:15), Arukh Ha-Shulchan (668:1), and R.

30
Moshe Feinstein (Iggerot Moshe, Orach Chaim 3:97) rule that one should not repeat his prayer in
this case. The Birkei Yosef (ibid.), however, rules that if one has already taken three steps
backwards when he recalls his error, he should repeat his prayer (see also R. Ovadia Yosef, Yabi’a
Omer 4:51). Some (see Kaf Ha-Chaim 668:3, for example) suggest that on Shemini Atzeret outside
of Israel (that is, the eighth day, but not the ninth day), one need not repeat his prayer, as the eighth
days is considered to be a “doubt” if it is really the seventh day and therefore still Sukkot.

One might suggest that those who maintain that one must repeat his prayers must certainly
view Shemini Atzeret as a completely different festival, while those who say that one need not
repeat his prayer believe that Shemini Atzeret is fundamentally the eighth day of Sukkot, and not
a completely separate festival. R. Betzalel Zolty (Mishnat Ya’avaetz, Orach Chaim 71) discusses
this question at length, and suggests other issues that may be subject to this debate.

Accepting Shemini Atzeret Early

As mentioned above, Shemini Atzeret differs from Sukkot in that one does not dwell in
the sukka, nor does one take the arba minim. Therefore, in Israel, where there is no doubt regarding
the calendar, one does not eat in the sukka on the night of Shemini Atzeret. Furthermore, the
Talmud (see Eiruvin 96a) discusses whether one who sits in the sukka on Shemini Atzeret with the
intention of fulfilling a mitzva violates the prohibition of “bal tosef,” adding to the mitzvot of the
Torah.

Interestingly, the Acharonim debate whether one who accepts Shemini Atzeret early must
eat his evening meal in the sukka. On the one hand, as there is still light outside, one may argue
that it is still Sukkot, and that one must therefore still eat in the sukka. On the other hand, as one
has already accepted upon himself the new day of Shemini Atzeret, on which one does not sit in
the sukka, it seems that one need not eat in the sukka.

R. Shlomo Luria (Maharshal, Responsa 68) argues that one who accepts Shemini Atzeret
early should not eat before dark. He insists that although one may accept Shemini Atzeret early,
along with the laws related to kedushat Yom Tov, the day still formally remains Sukkot, and it is
therefore forbidden to eat outside of the sukka until dark. In order to avoid being required to eat in
the sukka and to recite the blessing of lesheiv ba-sukka, one should wait until dark before eating.
The Taz (678) disagrees and argues that tosefet Yom Tov, the time period added on to Yom Tov,
may actually uproot the previous day’s obligations as well; one who accepts Shemini Atzeret early
would therefore no longer be obligated to eat in the sukka. It is customary, however, to wait until
dark before eating on the evening of Shemini Atzeret.

31
 Sfas Emes, Zechuso Tagein Aleinu, Shemini Atzeres, 5632

Shemini Atzeres

Dr. Nosson Chayim Leff writes:12

Let us work with the Sfas Emes’s very first ma’amar in the section entitled “Lesukkos” (‘For
Sukkos’). This ma’amar has much to tell us both about Sukkos and about Shemini Atzeres.

The Sfas Emes begins by telling us that the eight days of Sukkos give the world its life for the
entire year. That is, on Rosh Hashana, HaShem decides the measure of chiyus (vibrancy, vitality)
for the world in the year to come. But it is on Sukkos that the chiyus actually flows out to give life
to all creation. The Torah provides a unique mitzva as a metaphor for this feature of reality. That
mitzva is nisuch hamayim, the ceremonial offering of waters poured over the mizbei’ach (altar),
on Sukkos (and only on Sukkos).

The chiyus that flows to the world on Sukkos is a life-force for olam hazeh (literally, “this world”).
But the Sfas Emes is probably using the term to refer to physical/material existence in general).
Obviously, non-Jews also participate in olam hazeh. For this reason, the fact that Sukkos is the
time when chiyus flows out to the physical/material world has an important implication . It implies
that non-Jews, too, have access to this life-force. The Torah provides a metaphor to express the
connection linking the nations of the world to HaShem on Sukkos. That metaphor is the korban
(sacrificial offering) of 70 bulls that we bring over the course of Sukkos. The format of this korban
reflects the notion that 70 nations comprise all humankind. Thus, as we see, the Torah provides a
place for all nations to participate in the celebration of Sukkos.

By contrast, the chiyus that flows out to the world on Shemini Atzeres is for the life of olam habba
(literally, the “world to come,” but again, probably intended by the Sfas Emes more generally to
refer to the life of ruchniyus — spirituality). That life is uniquely for Bnei Yisroel. Why? Because

12
https://torah.org/torah-portion/sfas-emes-5765-sheminiatzeres/

32
this chiyus hapenimiyus (inner life-force) is expressed through Torah, and Torah is the central
feature of our lives.

But there is a major problem. In olam hazeh, we can perceive only the world’s external appearance.
Thus we see nature, but not HaShem, Who is behind nature. Because our perception of the world
is misleading, we are at risk. For, as we know, bad metaphysics leads to bad physics, Fortunately,
the Sfas Emes tells us, we also have available protection in our exposed, dangerous situation. The
mitzva of sukka can provide the protection we need in order to live our lives with an accurate
picture of reality.

How can a sukka provide that protection? The sukka is HaShem’s testimony that even in this
physical/material world, the central feature of our life is Torah. How does that work? To address
that critical question, the Sfas Emes cites the term that the Zohar uses to refer to the sukka. This
term is crucial for our understanding of the mitzva and by extension, the yom tov of Sukkos. The
term that the Zohar uses for the sukka is: “tzila di’meheimenusa”.

Let us see what these words mean and what they tell us. “Tzila” is “shade” — the sekhach which
shields us from the sun’s blazing heat. “Di’meheimenusa” means “of emuna”. I translate “emuna”
as “affirmation”. That is, by dwelling in the sukka, we affirm. HaShem’s Omnipresence, shielding
us from harm.

Summing up, the Sfas Emes has told us that Sukkos is oriented to the physical/material world, a
world to which non-Jews also have access. A key feature of that world is the misleading impression
it conveys of reality. Hence, on Sukkos we need protection, as provided by our dwelling in the
sukka. By contrast, Shemini Atzeres is purely Torah and ruchniyus. Consequently, on Shemini
Atzeres, there is no need for the protection afforded by a sukka. For, being pure ruchniyus, Shemini
Atzeres is, in effect, its own sukka.

(I suggest that you pause and take a deep breath before proceeding. Why? Because what comes
next shows the Sfas Emes in an amazing, breath-taking light: being both the Gerer Rebbe and a
Gaon Olam; both the Sfas Emes on Shas and the Sfas Emes on the Torah.) Return to what was
said earlier: that being pure ruchniyus, Shemini Atzreres does not need the protection of a sukka.
For, being pure ruchniyus Shmini Atzeres is, in effect, its own Sukka.

Now the Sfas Emes continues: perhaps this is what Chazal had in mind when they said (Sukka,
47,a) that on Shemini Atzeres, we dwell in the sukka — even though, in fact, we do not!

"Mystical Purpose of the Festivals" 13

"On the eighth day shall be a solemn assembly for you." [29:35]14

13
http://ascentofsafed.com/cgi-bin/ascent.cgi?Name=sa-st7571666562#CK
14
The Torah Commentary of Rebbeinu Bachya, as translated and annotated by Eliyahu Munk.

33
According to the plain meaning of the text the word atzeret means: "to be prevented from
performing one's regular work."

A kabbalistic approach: The word atzeret is a term describing the Knesset Yisrael, the spiritual
concept known as 'Israel." (In colloquial parlance: 'this people is where the buck stops.') In other
words, were it not for the concept represented by the Jewish people, the whole universe would lack
meaning and purpose. It is also an expression denoting malchut, authority, dominion. For the
above-mentioned reasons Shemini Atzeret is a festival all by itself. Among the four species, it
corresponds to the etrog which represents the Jewish people and which is held separately, in a
different hand than the other three.

The Shemini Atzeret festival is related to the festival of the giving of the Torah, meaning the
festival of Shavuot, which the Talmud always refers to as atzeret. We find the name atzeret also
applied by the torah to the Seventh day of Passover (Deut. 16:6), although that day is an integral
part of the festival. Thus, the term appears in connection with all three pilgrimage holidays.

What does all this mean? Just as the word Shabbat is applied by the Torah to the various festivals
on various occasions to show that the Knesset Yisrael is the "bride" of the Shabbat, so the
word atzeret when used in connection with the festival conveys the idea that the Jewish people,
spiritually speaking, are the purpose of all these festivals. In kabbalistic terms, they are
the yesod [borrowed from the emanation by that name], the "foundation," without which the entire
legislation of the festivals would lack meaning.

34
 "DIFFERENT HEADS, SAME FEET"

YERACHMIEL TILLES WRITES: 15

One Simchas Torah the wife of the Baal Shem Tov saw that his chief disciples were rejoicing and
dancing, and drinking a great deal of wine. Worrying for Kiddush and Havdalah she said to her
husband: "Tell them please to stop dancing and drinking, for otherwise you won't have enough wine
left."

The tzaddik smiled and said: "Good point. Go along and tell them to stop, and they'll go home." The
rebbitzin opened the door and saw the disciples dancing in a circle, while over their heads hovered a
canopy of fire. Thereupon she herself went down to the cellar, and brought them as much wine as was
needed.

Sometimes a sliver of anguish assails me during the tumultous joy of Simchat Torah. It happens
whenever I become too aware of Jewish men standing on the sidelines, passively watching the
traditional lively dancing, resisting all polite invitations and rough arm-jerkings to join in. I am not
talking about the ones that may have tried participating, but for whatever reason enjoy it more as
spectators. Although I sometimes feel sorry that they are passing up a special opportunity, at least I
can assume that they are clear about their options.

What makes me wince is people sitting it out because of a simple, yet profound miscomprehension. "I
don't study the Torah the rest of the year," they say, "so how can I presume to dance with it now. I
don't deserve the privilege." And it is not only the three-times-a-year attendees I hear this from. My
attempts to explain the fallacy in their assumption while the dancing is going on are too often
skeptically viewed as yet another, albeit subtle, ploy to draft some more dancers, so here is a bid to
head off the problem this year by addressing it comfortably in advance.

In one respect they are right: Jews are supposed to energetically study the Torah throughout the year.
And in that context perhaps it is possible to distinguish between Jews according to the effort they make,
the depth of their understanding, and the knowledge they accumulate. It could even be that some Jews
at the top of this list will feel more joy during the dancing on Simchat Torah than others who have
made less of an investment. But that is far from the whole story.

The name Simchat Torah is usually understood to refer to the joy we have in dancing with the Torah.
An equally valid explanation, however--and one which is emphasized by the Sisu v'simchu prayer after
the dancing--is the joy that the Torah has from us. That is, we do not dance for our own pleasure, we
dance to honor the Torah.

Every other time of the year we have the opportunity to honor the Torah by studying it. On Simchat
Torah, however, the Torah scroll remains covered! It is not available for intellectual study, only for
being rejoiced through our dancing. And while we each attain our own unique personal level in Torah-
study, when it comes to circling around the Torah together, we are all equal--two feet each! Distinctions

15
http://ascentofsafed.com/cgi-bin/ascent.cgi?Name=sa-st7571666562#CK

35
based on level of intellect or even commitment are irrelevant. We just dance. Then the Torah is
"happy," G-d is happy, and we have a good time too. Afterwards, we should find that the dancing itself
arouses us to increase our Torah study efforts throughout the new year. Shanah Tovah!

Samuel Pepys and the Jews

Esor Ben-Sorek writes:16

I do not think that many Jews have ever heard the name of England’s most famous diarist, Samuel
Pepys, born in London in 1633 and died there in 1703.

He was a Member of the British Parliament and Administrator of the British Royal Navy and Chief
Secretary to the Admiralty under the reign of King Charles II and King James II.

He is famous in British history for the diaries which he kept, an important source for the English
Restoration period. It contains his eye-witness accounts of the London Great Plague, the second

16
https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/samuel-pepys-and-the-jews/

36
Dutch war, the Great Fire of London, and his personal account of attending the execution of King
Charles I in 1649.

Jews had been expelled from England in 1290. In 1656, Rabbi Menasseh ben Israel in Portugal
petitioned the British Parliament to permit the re-admission of the Jews to allow for the re-
establishment of a Jewish community in England.

His petition was granted in 1656 by Oliver Cromwell, Lord Protector of the British
Commonwealth. The first Jew to enter England was a Sephardic merchant from Portugal, Antonio
Fernandedz Carvajal.

Now enters the famous diarist, Samuel Pepys.

On Wednesday, 14 October 1663 he wrote a lengthy account of the visit he and his wife Elizabeth,
whom he married when she was fourteen years old, to the Bevis Marks synagogue, Congregation
Shaar Hashamayim. It was the evening of Simchat Torah.

This is what he wrote in his diary:

“My wife and I were conducted to the Jewish Synagogue: where the men and boys in their vayles
(prayer-shawls), and the women behind a lattice out of sight; and some things stand up, which
I believe is their Law, in a press (holy Ark) containing the Pentateuch (Greek for the first five
books of the Torah) to which all coming in do bow; and at the putting on their vayles do say
something, to which others that hear him do cry Amen, and the party do kiss his vayle. Their
service all in a singing way, and in Hebrew. And anon their Laws that they take out of the press
are carried by several men, four or five several burthens in all, and they do relieve one another;
and whether it is that everyone desires to have the carrying of it, I cannot tell, thus they carried
it round about the room while such a service is singing. And in the end they had a prayer for
the King, which they pronounced his name in Portugall. (Portugese), but the prayer like the
rest, in Hebrew. But Lord ! to see the disorder, laughing, sporting, and no attention, but
confusion and noise in all their service, more like brutes than people knowing the true God,
would make a man forswear ever seeing them more and indeed I never did see so much, or could
have imagined there had been any religion in the whole world so absurdly performed as this”.

Well, Mr. Pepys. You should visit an orthodox synagogue in the 21st century. Nothing much has
changed since you visited in the 17th century !

37