More Discussions for this daf
1. Remove the inner walls 2. Shitufei Mevo'os with Chatzer Less Than 4 x 4 Amos 3. Pesulah
4. Rambam's Take on Beis Shamai 5. Rabanan Preventing us From Being Yotzei mid'Oraisa 6. Beis Midrash of Rav Ashi?
7. Rosho v'Rubo Sukah As An Eiruv On Sukos 8. k'Chatzer or b'Chatzer 9. Shema Yimashech Achar Shulchano
10. Eruv Chatzeros
DAF DISCUSSIONS - SUKAH 3

Menachem Weiman asks:

Tosafos on amud alef says that acc to Beis Shammai a person is not yotzei d'oraisa if they violate the derabbanan gezeirah of not eating in a sukkah when the table is inside the house.

Is there an acharon who explains how it is the rabbanan can uproot the d'oraisa in this way? Why doesn't Tosafos understand that you violate the d'rabbanan but you're still yotze the d'oraisa?

Menachem Weiman, St. Louis, MO usa

The Kollel replies:

(Please forgive the delay in response. Technical problems prevented the mailing of a number of responses.)

1) Rav Elchanan Wasserman zt'l Hy'd (in Kovetz He'aros, Yevamos 69:7) cites Tosfos here as one of the examples of the principle (see Yevamos 90a-b) that Chazal have the power to uproot a Din of the Torah in a passive way ("Yesh Ko'ach b'Yad Chachamim la'Akor Davar Min ha'Torah b'Shev v'Al Ta'aseh"). Rashi in Berachos (20a, DH Shev) writes that this is why Chazal had the power to say that one may not blow the Shofar when Rosh Hashanah falls on Shabbos, even though this means not fulfilling a Torah Mitzvah. Since they were concerned that people might carry the Shofar in the public domain, they enacted that the Shofar not be blown on Shabbos. In a similar way, Rav Elchanan understands that if one sits in his Sukah with his table in his house, Tosfos say that since Chazal are concerned that if a person does this he may come as a result to eat entirely in his house, they therefore utilized their power to annul the act of the Mitzvah of Sukah that the person did.

2) Rav Elchanan cites another example of this idea from Rabeinu Yonah in the beginning of Berachos (1a of the pages of the Rif, DH v'Yesh). The opinion of Chachamim in the first Mishnah in Berachos is that even though mid'Oraisa it is possible to recite Shema any time during the entire night, nevertheless mid'Rabanan one should say it before midnight. If one does not, the opinion of Rabeinu Yonah is that one lost the Mitzvah entirely, even mid'Oraisa, because Chazal have the power to uproot the Mitzvah in a passive way and say that if one reads Shema after midnight it is considered that one has achieved nothing.

3) However, it should be pointed out that other Rishonim disagree with Tosfos and maintain that mid'Oraisa one did perform the Mitzvah of Sukah even though the table is inside the house. The Ran (end of 12b in the pages of the Rif) writes that when Beis Shamai said to Beis Hillel in the Mishnah (28a) that "you never fulfilled the Mitzvah of Sukah," this does not mean literally that they never performed the Mitzvah, because this is only a d'Rabanan shortcoming. Instead, Beis Shamai meant to say that Beis Hillel did not perform the Mitzvah of Sukah in the correct way according to the desire of the Sages.

4) Here is another insight into the above concept, that Chazal have the power to suspend a Mitzvah d'Praisa. The Shitah Mekubetzes (written by Rav Betzalel Ashkenazi, one of the very earliest Acharonim) on Maseches Berachos (11a, DH Rav Yosef) comments on the Gemara in Berachos 11a. The Mishnah there (10b) tells us that Beis Shamai maintains that in the evening one should recline when reciting the Shema, while in the morning one must stand. Beis Hillel disagrees and maintains that one may recite Shema in any position. The Gemara (11a) quotes Rav Yosef who says that if one did like Beis Shamai, he fulfilled no Mitzvah whatsoever. Rav Yosef cites as support for this the Mishnah in Sukah and the dispute between Beis Shamai and Beis Hillel, where Beis Shamai said to Beis Hillel that they had performed no Mitzvah at all. The Shitah Mekubetzes explains that Rav Yosef is teaching that Beis Hillel in Berachos maintains that if one does something to make it apparent that one is following Beis Shamai, one is given a "Kenas," a fine, so to speak, and is not considered to have performed the Mitzvah.

The Shitah Mekubetzes asserts that, in a similar way, Beis Shamai also used this argument against Beis Hillel. Even though the problem involved with a large Sukah is only a mere concern that one might be drawn after one's table inside the house, nevertheless Beis Shamai says that if one acts like Beis Hillel and has the table inside the house (even if one did not actually get drawn after the table), it is as if one has done nothing and he loses the Mitzvah entirely.

The Shitah Mekubetzes writes that in the case of Keri'as Shema, if we would say that one who followed Beis Shamai has fulfilled the Mitzvah, this might lead people to establish the Halachah according to Beis Shamai, which might mean that people who are not capable of leaning would not be able to perform the Mitzvah. This would be a big mistake. Therefore, to prevent this from happening, Chazal totally uprooted a Mitzvah performed according to Beis Shamai's opinion. In our Sugya in Sukah, the same logic applies, but merely in reverse. Since -- in the case of the table inside the house -- the Halacha follows Beis Shamai, we say that a penalty must be given to someone who follows Beis Hillel, because otherwise the Halachah might be fixed in accordance with the view of Beis Hillel, which in this case would be a big mistake.

Kol Tuv,

Dovid Bloom

The Kollel adds:

Here is another insight into the above concept :- that Chazal have the power to abolish a Mitzvah deoraisa, given by the Shitah Mekubetzes, written by Rav Bezalel Ashkenazi zt'l (who is considered one of the very early Acharonim) on Maseches Berachos 11a DH Rav Yosef.

1) He is commenting on the Gemara Berachos 11a. The Mishnah there 10b tells us that Beis Shamai maintain that in the evening one should lean on the side when reading the Shema whilst in the morning one has to stand. Beis Hillel disagree and maintain that one can recite Shema in any position. The Gemara 11a tells us that Rav Yosef said that if one did like Beis Shamai one performed no Mitzvah whatsoever. Rav Yosef cites as a support for this our Mishnah in Sukah concerning the dispute between Beis Shamai and Beis Hillel, where Beis Shamai said to Beis Hillel that they had performed no Mitzvah at all. Shitah Mekubetzes explains that Rav Yosef is teaching us that Beis Hillel in Berachos maintain that if one does something to make it apparent that one is following Beis Shamai, one is given a "knas", a fine, so that one has not performed the Mitzvah.

2) Shittah Mekubetzes asserts that in a similar way Beis Shamai also used this argument against Beis Hillel. Even though the problem involved with a large Sukah is only a mere concern that one might get drawn after one's table which is inside the house, nevertheless Beis Shamai say that if one does like Beis Hillel and has the table inside the house (even if one did not actually get drawn after the table) it is as if one has done nothing and one loses the Mitzvah entirely.

3) Shittah Mekubetzes writes that in the case of reading Shema, if we would say that someone who followed Beis Shamai has fulfilled the Mitzvah, this might lead people to fix the Halacha according to Beis Shamai, which might mean that people who are not capable of leaning would not be able to perform the Mitzvah. This would be a big mistake. Therefore to prevent this happening Chazal totally uprooted a Mitzvah performed according to Beis Shamai's opinion. In our Sugya in Sukah the same logic applies, but merely in reverse. Since in the case of the table inside the house the Halacha follows Beis Shamai, we say that a penalty must be given to someone who follows Beis Hillel, because otherwise the Halacha might come to fixed according to Beis Hillel, which in this case would be a big mistake.

KOL TUV

Dovid Bloom

The Kollel adds:

I posed your question to a Gadol and he replied that the inference of Tosfos is from one word in the Mishnah later, 28a.

This is the word "mi'Yamecha."

We learn later (28a) that Beis Shamai said that when their elders visited Rebbi Yochanan ben ha'Choranis and found him sitting in a Sukah with the table inside the house, they said to him, "If this is the way you have conducted yourself, you have never fulfilled the Mitzvah of Sukah mi'Yamecha -- in all your days."

From this extra word "mi'Yamecha" we learn that Beis Shamai maintains that somebody whose table is inside the house has fulfilled absolutely nothing, he has never in his life done the Mitzvah of Sukah even mid'Oraisa.

Dovid Bloom