(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem

Previous daf

Sukah 55

SUKA 36-56 (End of Maseches) have been dedicated by the wife and daughters of the late Dr. Simcha Bekelnitzky (Simcha Gedalya ben Shraga Feibush) of Queens N.Y. Well known in the community for his Chesed and Tzedakah, he will long be remembered.



(a) The Beraisa (according to Abaye's interpretation) learns from "u've'Yom Simchaschem ... u've'Roshei *Chodsheichem*" - that the Teki'os on every Rosh Chodesh should be the same (i.e. always the same *one* set, and never *two*).

(b) Rav Ashi learns it from the plural form of "u've'*Roshei"* - implying that we are speaking about a day which is a double Head (of the month and of the year - i.e. Rosh Hashanah) and yet it is still called "Chodsheichem" (which is written without a 'Yud') - in the singular, to teach us that the Levi'im then sing only *one* Shir, and not *two*.

(c) Rav Acha bar Chanina is unable to reconcile this Beraisa with his opinion (that the Levi'im sung the specific Shiur of *each* Musaf that was brought). Consequently - the Levi'im always sang only *one* Shir, never *two*.

(a) Another Beraisa lists the Shir shel Yom that was sung on each day of Chol ha'Mo'ed Sukos. They sung ...
1. ... "Havu la'Hashem B'nei Eilim" (Kapitel 29) on the first day - because "Kavod va'Oz" hints at the Simchah of the Beis Hasho'eivah", and the Pasuk "Kol Hashem al ha'Mayim" is certainly a broad hint at the ceremony itself.
2. ... "ve'la'Rasha Amar, Mah Lecha le'Saper Chukai" on the second day - as a warning about the futility of coming to the house of Hashem to celebrate without having first done Teshuvah. "Z'vach l'Elokim Todah, *ve'Shalem* l'Elokim *Nedarecha*" - is a reminder that, since they are already in the Beis Hamikdash, they should not forget to bring the Nedarim and Nedavos that they promised to bring during the year.
3. ... "Mi Yakum Li im Merei'im" (the second half of Kapitel 94) on the third day - to demonstrate the greatness of the people in the second Beis Hamikdash, who, in spite of their subjugation to the kings of Persia, Medes, Greece and Rome, they nevertheless came to rejoice with the Simchah of their King, Hashem in His house.
4. ... "Binu Bo'arim ba'Am" (the first half of Kapitel 94) on the fourth day - to remind them that now was the season of Matnos Aniyim, and that they should not be lax in this Mitzvah, thinking that nobody knows anyway, because Hashem knows everything.
(b) They inverted the two halves of the Kapitel - because the first half hints at the Mitzvos of Matnos Aniyim (as we just explained), and the season of Matnos Aniyim falls due only *after* Sukos. Consequently, it made more sense to sing that section closer to the end of Yom-Tov.

(c) They sang ...

1. ... "Hasirosi mi'Sevel Shichmo" on the fifth day - because of the consolation that it contains in the phrase "ba'Tzarah Karasa va'Achaltzeka", meaning that if we behave as we should, Hashem will deliver us from all troubles. In addition, it hints there, at the water for which we pray on Sukos (in the Pasuk "Evchancha al Mei Merivah"), to assure us that if we stand up to Hashem's tests, He will answer our prayers and provide us with water. Finally, the chapter ends with an avalanche of Berachos, which acompanies a good rain-season.
2. ... "Yimotu Kol Mosdei Aretz" on the sixth day - because, as we have already explained, the season of Matnot Aniyim is imminent, and it is from the Pasuk in this chapter "Ani va'Rash Hatzdiku" that we derive the obligation to give the poor the benefit of the doubt in all areas of Matnos Aniyim. And then, from the continuation of the Pasuk, that those who are foolish and fail to do this are Chayav Misah bi'Yedei Shamayim.
(d) The Mishnah in Pirkei Avos says that - on every Motza'ei ha'Chag, there is an increase in people who die as a result of pestilence, because they stole (i.e. failed to give) Matnos Aniyim properly.
(a) Rav Safra's Si'man 'H.u.m.*be*.h.i' - follows the pattern that we just explained, where we postpone "Binu" (the first half of Kapitel 94) to the *fourth* day (after they have sung the second half of the Kapitel); whereas that of Rav Papa 'H.u.m.ha.*b*.i' - postpones "Binu" still further (to the *fifth* day).

(b) The significance of the Si'man 'Amvuha de'Safra' (meaning groups of people walking in the alleyway where the children's Rebbe lives) - is to help us to remember that it is Rav Safra, who gives the Si'man 'H.u.m.be.h.i'.

(c) If Shabbos fell on one of these days - it was the last Shir, that of "Yimotu", that was omitted.

(d) We prove from this Beraisa too - that on a day when two Musafin were brought, they sang only *one* Shir, and not *two* (another disproof against Rav Acha bar Chanina.

4) Having conclusively proved Rav Acha bar Chanina wrong, we now have to explain his proof from the Pasuk and from the Beraisa (which says that the more Musafin that are brought, the more one adds to the Shir).
1. Ravina explains this to mean 'Ma'arichin bi'Teki'os' - that they extended the length of the Teki'os for each Musaf.
2. Rav Acha (quoted by the Rabbanan of Caesaria) explains it to mean 'Marbin be'Tok'in' - that they added trumpeters according to the number of Musafin.
(a) The Gemara queries the order of Leining on Chol ha'Mo'ed Sukos in Chutz la'Aretz, where the second day is a Safek - nevertheless, it is not possible to read on the second day "u'va'Yom ha'Sheini" (implying that it is Chol ha'Mo'ed), because it is degrading for Yom-Tov to call it Chol ha'Mo'ed.

(b) Abaye maintains that it is the *second* day that is omitted - meaning that on the first day of Chol ha'Mo'ed, one Leins "u'va'Yom ha'Shelishi" and so on, in which case, "u'va'Yom ha'Sheini" is *not* Leined at all (whereas "u'va'Yom ha'Shelishi" *is*).

(c) Rava says that - on the first day of Chol ha'Mo'ed, we Lein "u'va'Yom ha'Sheini". Consequently, on the *seventh* day, we will Lein "u'va'Yom ha'Shishi", and it is "u'va'Yom *ha'Shevi'i*" (which one cannot mention on Shemini Atzeres, because it is a degradation of Yom-Tov (as we explained above) which is omitted.

(d) We prove Rava's opinion from the Beraisa of the Shir that they sang on Chol ha'Mo'ed - where we saw that, when Shabbos fell on Chol ha'Mo'ed, it was "Yimotu" (the last Shir) which was omitted, and not whichever one Shabbos replaced.




(a) All twenty-four groups of Kohanim served in the Beis Hamikdash throughout Yom-Tov. They all participated in all the Avodos that were performed because of Yom-Tov.

(b) On the first day of Sukos, after the first sixteen groups had brought the thirteen bulls, the two rams and the goat, *six* of the eight remaining groups brought *two* lambs each, and the remaining *two*, one each.

(c) On the second day, after the first fifteen groups had distributed the twelve bulls, the two rams and the goat - of the nine remaining groups, *five* brought *two* lambs each, and the remaining *four*, *one*.

(d) On the seventh day of Sukos - there were seven bulls, two rams, one goat and fourteen lambs - twenty-four animals all in all, one animal per group.

(a) On Shemini Atzeres - they brought one bull, one ram and seven lambs.

(b) They determined who brought which animals then - by making a new Payas.

(c) All the groups vied with each other to bring - the bulls, because they were the biggest animals.

(d) Almost all the groups merited to bring a bull *three* times round during Sukos. Only *two* groups brought it only *twice*.

(a) According to Rebbi, all twenty-four groups participated in the Payas as to who should bring the bull on Shemini Atzeres; whereas according to the Rabbanan, it was one of the two groups who only brought the bulls twice during Sukos, who brought it.

(b) They determined which of those two groups should bring it - by means of a Payas.

(c) The Beraisa says that all the groups brought three bulls during Sukos, except for two, who only brought two. The author might be Rebbi, in which case, the Tana is implying that nobody received a third turn, but that they all participated in the new Payas on Shemini Atzeres. If the author is the Rabbanan - the Tana is coming to teach us that they brought the bulls in rotation i.e. no group that brought the bulls one day, would bring them the next.

(a) The seventy bulls on Sukos represent - the seventy nations of the world, and the one bull on Shemini Atzeres - K'lal Yisrael.

(b) Rebbi Elazar illustrates this with a parable - to a king, who asked his servents to prepare a big banquet. As the banquet was drawing to a close, he asked his son to pepare for him a small banquet, in order to enjoy the pleasure of his company (it appears that from the initial banquet, it was from the food that he derived pleasure, and not from the company of his servants, whereas by the second banquet, he derived pleasure from the company of his son, and not from the food). Note: The Medrash adds that the purpose of the diminishing bulls is to demonstrate that the nations of the world will diminish, until it is only Yisrael who remains (see Agados Maharsha).

(c) Rebbi Yochanan describes the stupidity of the Nochrim - who in destroying the Beis Hamikdash, cut their own nose to spite their face, since as long as it stood, it atoned for them, too (as is evident from this Sugya).

(a) Three times a year, all the groups of Kohanim received an equal portion in the Eimurim of the Korbanos, and of the Lechem ha'Panim - on Pesach, Shavu'os and Sukos (since that is when they were all expected to serve in the Beis Hamikdash).

(b) When Shavu'os fell on Shabbos, they would say to each Kohen 'Here is Matzah, here is Chametz' - referring to the Lechem ha'Panim (which was not permitted to be Chametz), and the Sh'tei ha'Lechem, respectively.

(c) They did this - to make it clear to each Kohen that he was receiving a piece of each 'Korban', since it is forbidden for a Kohen to exchange part of one Korban for another.

(d) The regular group of Kohanim whose week of duty fell due on Yom-Tov - merited all the regular Avodos that were not connected with Yom-Tov.

(a) 'Eimurei ha'Regalim' would usually refer to the various fat-pieces that went on the Mizbe'ach to be burned.

(b) It cannot mean that here - seeing as those Eimurin belong to Hashem, and would not go to the Kohanim.

(c) We learn from the Pasuk in Shoftim ...

1. ... "u'Va be'Chol Avas Nafsho" - that there are occasions when the Kohanim are permitted to serve, even when it is not the turn of their group to serve.
2. ... "me'Achad She'arecha" - that the previous Halachah is confined to those occasions when all Yisrael come into one gate (i.e. one town, Yerushalayim), and that is on Yom-Tov.
(d) We learn the Din of *Kehunah* from there, in spite of the fact that the Torah specifically writes "ve'Chi Yavo ha'*Levi*" - because this is one of the twenty-four places in Tenach where Kohanim are referred to a "Levi'im".
(a) We learn from the Pasuk "la'Kohen ha'Makriv Osah, Lo Sihyeh" - that any Kohen who is eligible to bring any Korban on the Mizbe'ach, receives a portion of that Korban when it is distributed (e.g. the goat of a Chatas, or the chest and the right calf of a Shelamim).

(b) We also need the Pasuk "Cheilek ke'Cheilek Yocheilu" - to teach us that any Kohen from any group (who is eligible to the Avodah) receives a portion of the Lechem ha'Panim on Yom-Tov (since it is written immediately after the pasuk "u'Va be'Chol Avas Nafsho, which we just established on Yom-Tov), even though no Avodah is performed with them (seeing as they were baked the week before).

(c) And we learn from the Pasuk there "Levad Mimkarav al ha'Avos" - that during the remainder of the year, when the Avos (David and Shmuel) organized that the groups sold to each other their rights in the other weeks that were *not* their's against the weeks that *were*, "Cheilek ke'Cheilek Yocheilun" did not apply (but only the Kohanim whose turn it was to serve would to receive a portion in the Lechem ha'Panim).

Next daf


For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,