Vol 19.47 - Chag HaSukkot 2 Spanish French Audio Video
(5740) "As a reward for the observance of the three 'firsts'1 they Israel merited three firsts: to destroy the seed of Esau; the building of the Temple; and the name of the Messiah."(Tal. Pes 5a)
The difference between the unity of the Sukkah to that of the Four Species
1) The 'first' of Passover, the 'first' of Tabernacles, and the taking of the four species on the 'first' day of Tabernacles.
1. In the Parsha where it speaks about Chag HaSukkot, the phrase “on the first day” (ביום הראשון) is mentioned twice:
“On the first day there shall be a holy assembly; you shall not do any work of labor. (Lev 23:35)”
“You shall take for yourselves, on the first day, the fruit of the beautiful tree (Esrog), (ibid. 40).
The Talmud states on this (Pes 5a): “As a reward for the observance of the two ‘firsts’:
(“On the first day there shall be a holy assembly and taking the Lulav “You shall take for yourselves, on the first day) -
we merited “the building of the Temple and the name of the Messiah” which is called ‘first’
(as it states: “A glorious throne, set on high from the first is the place of our sanctuary etc.” and regarding the name of Messiah: “For it is written, First unto Zion, behold, behold them”)
The Maharsha explains that the reason for the holiday of Sukkot is because: “So that your generations will know that I caused Bnei Yisroel to dwell in Sukkot when I took them out from the land of Egypt. And through dwelling in Sukkot we will merit the Beit HaMikdash which states: “And His tabernacle was in (yeru) Shalem”. And since the taking of the Arba Minim is connected with Simcha as it states: “You shall take for yourselves etc and you shall rejoice etc”. Therefore, one merits through this, the Future Simcha with the coming of Moshiach.
Through this, the precise wording: “the name of Moshiach”, is understood. Because the aspect of Simcha with the coming of Moshiach is alluded to in the name of Moshiach -
‘For his name is Menachem – for he will comfort us and make us happy as it is written: ‘Make us happy like the days of our affliction’”
One must understand – the emphasis of the sages in the word “first” (ראשון).
Since the connection between Sukkot and the Beis HaMikdash is because of the verse: “His tabernacle was in Shalem” which refers to the Beis HaMikdash, it should have concluded that the Mitzvah through which one merits the building the Temple should be the Mitzvah of dwelling in the Sukkah (and therefore - all) seven days which is the actual aspect of the Sukkah, and not from the Mitzvah of resting on the holiday of the Festival (שביתת הרגל דתג) which is an additional Mitzvah in “His Sukkah” (טוכו) (and which only applies to the Regel , on the first day)?
So too, also regarding the name of Moshiach:
Why is the Mitzvah through which we merit name of Moshiach, who will make us happy - the Mitzvah of “You shall take for yourselves, on the first day“ which is only associated with Simcha (in general) and not the actual Mitzvah of happiness, itself - (which is derived from the verse: “And you shall be happy on the festival” (ושמחת בחגר)?
2. The explanation of this is:
In the Mitzvah of Sukkah one finds an (innovation) and virtue compared to the other Mitzvot in respect to its effect on physical objects (the Schach/covering and the walls) with which the Mitzvah is performed.
When one performs a Mitzvah with a physical object, the Mitzvah effects a refinement in the physicality of the object. So much so that even after performing the Mitzvah the physical objects have the status of ritual implements (Tashmishei Mitzvah/ תשמישי מצוה). An example is the Mitzvah of Tzitzis. As long as the Tzitzis are attached to the Talit, “one is forbidden from utilizing them for any mundane purpose . . . because of disrespect for the Mitzvah”. And according to many opinions, “even after that have become detached one should not treat them with disrespect.”
Yet, nevertheless, the Tzitzis, (even when they are attached to the Talit), are only ritual implements (Tashmishei Mitzvah), and not “Tashmishei Kedusha” (accoutrements of holy objects – (Note: which contain an “inherent sanctity”)
(Therefore if not for the aspect of “disrespect for the Mitzvah” (Bizui Mitzvah) the Tzitzis would be able to be used for mundane purposes (Tashmish shel Chol)
However, regarding fulfilling the Mitzvah of dwelling in the Sukkah, a sanctity also resides in the material of the Schach/covering
(and Rabbinically, even in the Dafnot/walls)
As it states:
“Just as the ‘Name of Heaven ‘(Sanctity) resides on the Kadoshim (offerings) . . so too the ‘Name of Heaven‘ resides on the Sukkah”.
And because of this inherent sanctity within them, one is forbidden from utilizing them (during the days of Sukkot).
[And although even the Sukkah is ‘Tashmishei Mitzvah’ and not ‘Tashmishei Kedusha’ – this only applies after the holiday has passed, and their Mitzvah has been completed – for then one may use the Schach/covering.
(There is just the opinion that: “It is proper that one should be careful not to use not to treat them with disrespect.”)
However during the seven days of Sukkot, sanctity does reside within them]
This innovation of the sanctity of the Sukkah, that it also has the status of ‘Tashmishei Mitzvah’ (like other Mitzvot) (Also) pertains to the effect of the Mitzvah in the physical object.
The scope of ‘Tashmishei Mitzvah’ is that “one may utilize them for the purpose of the Mitzvah (לשם מצוה)”
(But no sanctity resides in them)
However, the ‘sanctity of the Sukkah’ (Kedushas HaSukkah) means that the Sukkah itself (the Schach and the walls) become holy, (as it states) “Just as the ‘Name of Heaven‘resides on the Kadoshim (offerings) ... so too the ‘Name of Heaven‘ resides on the Sukkah”.
3. The same thing applies to the Mitzvah of taking the Arba Minim, where the relationship between the physical Arba Minim, with the Mitzvah with which they are performed, is much more emphasized than with other Mitzvot.
The relation of a physical object, to the Mitzvah with which one performs the Mitzvah, is not just that, in, fulfilling the Mitzvah with them
(or by just designating the object for a Mitzvah),
a refinement is effected in them (as above).
But also in their inherent existence (even before the fulfillment of the Mitzvah and even before designating them for a Mitzvah), this itself, that the physical object is fitting to be used for a Mitzvah
(for example: wool which is fitting to be used for the Mitzvah of Tzitzis)
shows that it is more refined and ‘higher’ than other physical objects (even than that of permissible objects) which are not fitting for a Mitzvah.
And in this, the virtue of the Arba Minim is emphasized over other objects that are fitting for a Mitzvah. For the refinement and quality of the Arba Minim (which makes them fitting to perform this Mitzvah) is in a revealed manner (as will be explained).
4. It is explained in Chassidus that the reason that specifically these four types were chosen for the Mitzvah of “and You shall take for yourselves etc.” - is because they possess the element of unity:
And since worldly entities, in general, - are separate and divisive, it is proof that, that the reason these four kinds possess a property of unity, is because a weakness for their ‘worldliness’ is felt in them. (תלישות אין זייער וועלט׳ישקייט) And this is connected with Bittul, nullification to G-d.
It is understood from this, that even though in all Mitzvot, there is a refinement and elevation in the physical objects which are suited to be used for Mitzvot. (as above Par. 3). Nevertheless, they do not reach the refinement and elevation of the Arba Minim which are suited to the Mitzvah of “You shall take for yourselves” – because in the Arba Minim’s refinement and elevation, the aspect of unity is manifestly recognizable, over that of the normal objects.
5. And this is one of the aspects in which we see the commonality in the above two Mitzvot (Sukkah and the Arba Minim) and also the difference between them.
The commonality is expressed in that, in both of them, the connection of the physicality (of the Schach and walls of the Sukkah and the Arba Minim) to the Mitzvot is more apparent than with other Mitzvot.
And the difference between them is, that the relation of the schach of the sukkah with the mitzvah of dwelling in the sukkah is through the effect (פעולה) in the physical object - through the fulfillment of the Mitzvah. And the connection between the arba minim to the mitzvah of “and you shall take for youselves” is through their virtue (in their nature) that makes them fitting for the Mitzvah.
6. Another common thread and difference between the two Mitzvot (above) is:
The Sukkah is above division. It is Makif (transcendent). It surrounds the entire person (his head and the majority of his body) as one. Moreover, not only is it above the division of mind, torso and foot, in the individual Yid, but it is also above the division between one Yid and another – so much so that – All Yisroel are fitting to dwell in one Sukkah.
And also the Arba Minim’s aspect is unity.
However also in the very aspect of unity, there is a difference between the Sukkah and the Arba Minim:
In the Sukkah, from the onset, there are no separate parts. Yet with the Arba Minim there are separate parts (the division between four different species and also the difference of properties in each kind itself). It is just that they are united.
7. One could say that these two differences between the Sukkah and the Arba Minim –
- are related to each other:
The nature of the world (the way it is of its own accord is) - is separateness and division. And the reason that many objects in the world possess (and recognizably display) unity is because they are illuminated with the unity that comes from the Creator, from G-dliness.
From this is understood, that the difference between the unity of the Sukkah (which is higher than the separateness of its parts) and the unity of the Arba Minim (which is just a unity of parts) corresponds to the difference of G-dliness that enlightens them:
The aspect of unity that is in the Arba Minim, (which is) a unity of parts,
(So much so that, even after their unity, they still remain separate parts)
depicts how the world (the aspect of division) stands in Bittul to G-dliness (Unity)
However, in the unity which is in the Sukkah, which negates, and is higher than division - depicts and shows the aspect of unity from G-dliness which is higher than the world.
According to this, it is understood, how the difference between the Sukkah and Arba Minim, in the aspect of their unity, correlate to the difference between them in the aspect of connection of physical objects (in general) to the aspect of Mitzvot.
Since the aspect of the Arba Minim –is, that the world stands in Bittul to G-dliness, - therefore, their emphasis is in the physical connection with the Mitzvot as they exist (as a part) of the world, to the physicality within them. Therefore it is recognizable, in their physical existence, how they are fitting for a Mitzvah.
However, since the aspect of the Sukkah is drawing down the unity if G-dliness, - therefore, the emphasis is the connection between the Mitzvah and physicality with regards to the Mitzvah.
Namely that the effluence of G-dliness through he Mitzvah of Sukkah is higher (also) than the difference in boundaries between spirituality and physicality. Therefore, holiness can also be drawn down into physicality, from the covering and walls.
8. Nevertheless, there is a quality in the unification of the parts of the Arba Minim over the unity of the Sukkah (which is higher than differences),
Because the power (source) of (the ability to) unifying parts (that even parts should be as one) comes from true Unity, which is higher than the boundaries of “unity” and “differentiation of parts”
The unity of the Sukkah comes from a place where multitude is a contradiction to unity. Therefore the unity is manifested in a manner that opposes division (of parts).
But in the unity which emanates from G-d, which is simple Unity (Achdus HaPeshuta), multitude is not a contradiction to Unity. On the contrary, multitude emanates from the simple Unity (Achdus HaPeshuta),
[So too is also regarding the unity of physicality with Mitzvot which are in the Sukkah and Arba Minim.
The Arba Minim have a quality over the unity of the Sukkah: Because the unity of physicality with Mitzvot (which is manifested in the) Mitzvah of Sukkah, and is accomplished through fulfilling the Mitzvah, and not due to the nature of the physicality (as above) – does not ultimately bring out the true Unity (Achdus)
However, in the Arba Minim, it is recognizable in them that physicality, by itself, is a receptacle to Mitzvot. True Unity (Achdus) is specifically brought out through them.]
However, since the aspect of unification of parts, outwardly, is only that the parts are Bittul to Unity,
(and not the parts are actually are one)
which is a lower (level) than unification which is above division –
in order to reveal the Pnimiyut (and root) of unification of parts,
So that the parts (in Pnimiyut) are totally unified which brings out the true Unity –
It (the unification of the parts) needs to come as a result of unity which is of a higher (level) than division.
Through the unity coming from a unification which is of a higher (level) than division – it becomes revealed, that, that which in the unification there are parts is
(Not because the level of unity which is above division has not yet enlightened them)
But from that which the parts themselves are one. The revelation and exhibition of true unity.
And this is also one of the reasons that the best way of fulfilling the Mitzvah of taking the Arba Minim, is in the Sukkah. For since the unification of the parts, of taking the Arba Minim, follows the unification, which is above division, in the Sukkah, it brings out and reveals the Pnimiyut and root of the unification of the parts, true unity.
9. According to the aforementioned, that the unity of the Sukkah is higher than the division between spirituality and physicality – which therefore effects a holiness also in the physicality of the Sukkah (the covering and walls) - one can also understand the explanation in the holiness of Chag HaSukkot:
The holiness of each Yom Tov comes from the revelations which enlighten each Yom Tov.
This requires explanation:
Since the revelations of Sukkot (Clouds of Glory) are the level of Makif (transcendental light), how do they effect (an inner effect) on the day (that Sukkot falls out on) (which, in essence, is like any other day) that it should be holy?
One could say the explanation in this is.
Since the revelations of Sukkot are higher than the division between spirituality and physicality, they can therefore, effect holiness also in the time of Sukkot. This is analogous to holiness having an effect on the physicality of the Sukkah.
And since the time of Sukkot, is (outwardly) similar to the time of the entire year
– not like the physical Sukkah (the covering and walls) which also in physicality are Makif
(and specifically since the construction of the Sukkah must be for the sake of the Mitzvah of Sukkah)
It comes out that, that which the time of Sukkot becomes holy (with the holiness of the Chag HaSukkot), the revelation of Sukkot is expressed
(in a way that they are not limited in the boundary of spiritual and physical)
even more than in their effect on the physicality of the Sukkah
Nevertheless, since the holiness in the covering and walls, and even ion the time of Sukkot, become completed due to the revelations of the Sukkah (and not from themselves) it shows that, also the unity of the Sukkah is bound in the boundary of unity that is above division. It is only that the effluence of unity which is above division has no boundary, and it flows into every place.
However, the unity of the Arba Minim, since the unity within them is
(not only through he fulfillment of the Mitzvah and the effluence of Supernal light, but also from before)
Because of their own nature (properties) – Namely, that the parts are unified, not because unity is drawn into them from (from an outward source), but because the parts themselves are in a level of unity – this brings out the true unity.
10. According to the above, one can also understand the connection of the resting if the holiday to the building of the Beis HaMikdash (and the reason that this is prepared specifically through resting on the holiday and not on the fulfillment of the Mitzvah of Sukkah) and the connection between the taking of the Arba Minim to the name of Moshiach:
The achievement of “building the Beis HaMikdash” is that the revelation and purpose of the Beis HaMikdash, a Throne of Glory, exalted from the beginning” (Jer. 17:12) becomes drawn down and also has an effect over the “place of our Sanctuary” (ibid), which is an inherently mundane place in the world.
And therefore this is prepared mainly through the “On the first day it is a holy convocation”, where also the Supernal Clouds of Glory have an effect not just on the wood (the physical building) of the Sukkah but also in the time – it becomes a holiday which ‘rests’ (nullifies) the mundane (weekday)
(in reality and completely – ‘First’ – ‘you shall not perform any work’ through ‘convocation’ (calling and imbuing within it) holiness.
Nevertheless the effect is also on the “place of our Sanctuary”. Only because of the revelation from Above - “Throne of Glory, exalted from the beginning” – which is drawn down into place (area)
However the achievement of the “Name of Moshiach”
(Menachem – that he will bring comfort to Galut)
is that he will (not just draw down revelations from Above, but he will also) reveal the Pnimiyut of the aspect of Galut, such that Galut itself is the epitome(‘First’) of Good. As we will say: “I will praise G-d because he was wrought with me” – And this becomes prepared not through the Mitzvah of Simcha (happiness), in and of itself, but as it is connected with the taking of the Arba Minim, whose aspect is that the aspects of the world, should, from themselves, be receptacles to the unity of G-d.
m’Sichas Simchas Beis HaShoeva and Sinchas Torah
(Shabbos Bereshis Farbrengen 2) 5724
|Date Modified:||Date Reviewed:|