1)

(a)'Sheluchei Mitzvah' - e.g. someone who is traveling to study Torah, to greet his Rebbe or to redeem a captive - are Patur from Sukah ...

(b)... even at night-time, when they stop to rest (because building a Sukah at night-time will result in their being tired the next day, and will interfere with its execution).

(c)We learn from the Pasuk in va'Eschanan ...

1. ... "b'Shivtecha b'Veisecha" - that someone who is performing a Mitzvah, is Patur from reciting the Shema ('ha'Osek b'Mitzvah, Patur min ha'Mitzvah').

2. ... "u've'Lechtecha va'Derech - that even a Chasan, who is mulling the Mitzvah over in his mind, without actually performing it, is also Patur.

2)

(a)We refute the proposal basing the previous Derashah on the word "Derech", which, we think, implies that one is traveling on one's private business - on the grounds that the Pasuk may just as well be speaking about someone who is on his way to perform a Mitzvah.

(b)We learn that the Torah is referring to R'shus and not to Mitzvah - from "b'Shivte*cha*" and "u've'Lechte*cha*" - implying one's own private business (and not for a Mitzvah).

(c)Someone who marries a widow is not Patur from the Shema in the same way as someone who marries a virgin is - because he is not worried about the Be'ilas Mitzvah (i.e. about the problems that he might encounter on account of the Be'ilah) like he is by a virgin.

(d)True, it is the worry that exempts a person from reciting the Sh'ma, yet somebody whose ship is about to sink not Patur - because it is only the worry about a Mitzvah that exempts one from performing other Mitzvos, not worries that are purely mundane (such as someone whose close relative died).

3)

(a)Rebbi Aba bar Zavda Amar Rav ...

1. ... does not exempt an Avel from reciting the Shema - because his worry is not related to the Mitzvah of mourning, but is purely personal (in which case, he is obligated to control it in order to perform the Mitzvah on hand (as we just explained).

2. ... exempts him from Tefilin on the first day - based on the Pasuk in Yechezkel which refers to Tefilin as "Pe'er" (glory), which clashes with the pain of Aveilus (as we shall see later).

4)

(a)We query the earlier source for 'ha'Osek ba'Mitzvah, Ptur min ha'Mitzvah, from the Beraisa which discusses the Teme'ei Mes who approached Moshe about bringing the Korban Pesach. According to Rebbi Yosi Hagelili, they were the people who carried the coffin of Yosef. In Rebbi Akiva's opinion, they were Mishael and Eltzafan - cousins of Moshe and Aharon, whom Moshe designated to remove Nadav and Avihu's bodies from the Heichal after they died there.

(b)Rebbi Yitzchak disagrees with both opinions, due to what happened on the first of Nisan - when the Mishkan was erected, and the second of Nisan - when Elazar brought the first Parah Adumah ...

(c)... leaving both the Teme'ei Mes and Mishael and Elezafan ample time to purify themselves in good time for Pesach.

5)

(a)According to Rebbi Yitzchak - the men who approached Moshe were people who had buried their deceased relatives, and whose seventh day of mourning fell on Erev Pesach.

(b)He extrapolates from the Pasuk "v'Lo Yachlu La'asos ha'Pesach ba'Yom ha'Hu" - that had Pesach fallen on the following day, they would have been able to bring it (in other words, this episode took place on their seventh day of Tum'as Mes that fell on Erev Pesach).

(c)They could not send their Korban Pesach through a Shali'ach (seeing as they would anyway be fit to eat the Pesach after nightfall) - because Rebbi Yitzchak is of the opinion that 'Ein Shochtin v'Zorkin al Tamei Sheretz' (and this applies equally to a Tamei Mes on his seventh day).

6)

(a)The men buried their dead relative (or relatives), despite their knowledge that Pesach (a Mitzvah which carries with it a Chiyuv Kares) was imminent, and that, once they were Tamei, they would not be permitted to bring it - because of the principle 'ha'Osek ba'Mitzvah, Patur min ha'Mitzvah'.

(b)The problem this Beraisa now poses on the previous Beraisa is - why do we then need the Pasuk of "b'Shivtecha b'Veisecha" to teach us the principle of 'ha'Osek b'Mitzvah ... '?

(c)And we answer that even though we have ...

1. ... this latter Pasuk to teach us 'ha'Osek b'Mitzvah ... ', we still need the Pasuk of "b'Shivtecha b'Veisecha" - to teach us that he is Patur even if the second Mitzvah (Keri'as Shema) has already fallen due when he performs the first one (Chupah) is due at the time of [which was not the case by the Teme'ei Mes in the desert who became Tamei before the Korban Pesach fell due).

2. ... the Pasuk of "b'Shivtecha b'Veisecha", we still need the Pasuk in Beha'aloscha - to teach us that, 'ha'Osek ba'Mitzvah ... ' applies even if the second Mitzvah is more stringent than the first (like the Korban Pesach, which carries with it the penalty of Kares, whereas burying a deceased relative is only an Aseh).

7)

(a)We cited earlier, Rebbi Aba bar Zavda Amar Rav who exempts an Avel from Tefilin but not from the Shema. Hash-m told Yechezkel that - although he was to behave like an Avel, he should nevertheless continue to wear his Tefilin ("Pe'ercha Chavush Alecha"), from which we can infer that a regular Avel is Patur from Tefilin.

(b)The reason that Hash-m instructed Yechezkel to wear Tefilin - was as a sign that many people in Yisrael were destined to die, but there would be nobody to mourn for them.

(c)The source for Rav limiting the prohibition of an Avel to wear Tefilin to one day lies in the Pasuk in Amos - "v'Acharisah k'Yom Mar", indicating that the deepest pain of Aveilus lasts for one day.

8)

(a)Rav Aba bar Zavda also obligates an Avel to sit in a Sukah - even though we might have thought that he is Patur, since he is in pain, and we have a principle 'ha'Mitzta'er Patur min ha'Sukah' (One who is in pain is Patur from the Sukah).

(b)The reason that he is not Patur is - because the pain does not come from the Sukah (such as the heat, the cold or an unpleasant smell - from which he will no longer suffer when he moves to the house).

9)

(a)And he further exempts a Chasan and his retinue from sitting in the Sukah - because he is obligated to rejoice.

(b)They cannot ...

1. ... eat in the Sukah and rejoice in the Sukah - because true rejoicing is only possible in the Chupah (the place which is designated for the Chasan and Kalah - see Tosfos DH 'Ein').

2. ... eat in the Sukah and rejoice in the Chupah - because one can only really rejoice there where one feasts.

(c)Abaye explains that they cannot have the Chupah in the Sukah because it may lead to Yichud (since normally, their Sukos were set up on the roof, which were not easily accessible to most people, leaving open the possibility that the Chasan goes down to relieve himself and someone will be alone with the Kalah in the Sukah).

10)

(a)Rava ascribes the fact that they cannot both eat and rejoice in the Sukah - to the lack of space and to the openness of the Sukah, which distresses the Chasan and inhibits him.

(b)The difference between the two explanations will be - in the case of a Sukah which is frequented by many guests (where there is no problem with Yichud [and which Abaye will therefore permitted], but where the Chasan is nevertheless distressed and inhibited [which Rava will still forbid]).

11)

(a)When Rebbi Zeira got married, he did not conform with the previous Sugya at all - he ate in the Sukah, but rejoiced in the Chupah ...

(b)... because, he explained, he was exceptionally happy at having performed two Mitzvos simultaneously, that of Sukah and that of marriage.

(c)He must have got married before Yom-Tov - because, due to the principle of 'Ein Me'arvin Simchah b'Simchah', it is forbidden to get married on Yom-Tov (even on Chol ha'Mo'ed).