Daf Ditty Succah 27: The First Night

A Complex Building Project1

A glass and steel construction completed in September 2007 encloses the 670-
square-meter courtyard of the baroque eighteenth-century Old Building. The
Glass Courtyard is an atrium built according to the “Sukkah” (Hebrew
“booth”) design plans of architect Daniel Libeskind.

1
https://www.jmberlin.de/en/glass-courtyard

1
The design refers to Sukkot, the Jewish Feast of Booths or Tabernacles, a
harvest festival remembering the huts the Israelites lived in as they wandered
the desert after escaping slavery in Egypt.

The glass roof is supported by four freestanding bundles of steel pillars. Their
form calls to mind the branches of a tree, extending under the roof in a steel
network. The glass façade looks out onto the spacious Museum Garden.

The Glass Courtyard was a complex building project, unconventional in both

its form and materials. The intricate steel branches and treetops represent one
of the most unusual uses of steel in contemporary architecture.

The glass façade consists of nine different types of pane, mirroring the
Libeskind building and the trees in the Museum Garden. The result is a
transparent space full of reflections and flooded with light.

2
MISHNA: Rabbi Eliezer says: A person is obligated to eat fourteen meals in the sukka over
the course of the seven days of the festival of Sukkot, one during the day each day and one at
night each night. And the Rabbis say: There is no quota for the number of meals, and one may
choose whether or not to eat any of the meals except for the meal on the evening of the first
Festival day of Sukkot, which one is required to eat in the sukka.

And furthermore, Rabbi Eliezer said: One who did not eat a meal on the evening of the first
day of the Festival should compensate with a meal on the evening of the last day of the Festival,
on the Eighth Day of Assembly, despite the fact that he will not eat it in the sukka. And the Rabbis
say: There is no compensation for this matter, and with regard to similar cases where it is
impossible to rectify failure to fulfill a positive mitzva, it is stated:

3
 ;‫ִלְתֹקן‬ ‫יוַּכל‬-‫ל ֹא‬ ,‫טו ְמֻﬠָוּת‬ 15 That which is crooked cannot be made straight; and that
.‫יוַּכל ְלִהָמּנוֹת‬-‫ ל ֹא‬,‫ְוֶחְסרוֹן‬ which is wanting cannot be numbered.
Eccl 1:15
“That which is crooked cannot be made straight; and that which is wanting cannot be
numbered”

4
GEMARA: The Gemara asks: What is the rationale for the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer, who
mandates eating fourteen meals in the sukka? The Gemara answers that he derives his opinion
from the verse:

,‫ָהֶאְזָרח‬-‫ ִשְׁבַﬠת ָיִמים; ָכּל‬,‫מב ַבֻּסֹּכּת ֵתְּשׁבוּ‬ 42 Ye shall dwell in booths seven days; all that are home-
.‫ ַבֻּסֹּכּת‬,‫ ֵיְשׁבוּ‬,‫ְבּ ִיְשָׂרֵאל‬ born in Israel shall dwell in booths;
Lev 23:42

“In sukkot shall you reside”, which the Sages interpreted to mean: Reside as you dwell in your
permanent home. Therefore, just as in one’s dwelling one typically eats one meal during the day
and one meal at night, so too, in a sukka one eats one meal during the day and one meal at
night.

5
The Gemara asks: And how do the Rabbis interpret that verse? The Gemara answers: They
explain that a sukka is like a permanent dwelling. Just as in one’s dwelling, if one desires to eat,
he eats, and if one does not desire to do so, he does not eat, so too, in the sukka, if one desires
to eat, he eats, and if one does not desire to do so, he does not eat.

The Gemara asks: If so, then according to the Rabbis, even on the first Festival evening as well
one should not be required to eat in the sukka.

Rabbi Yoḥanan said in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak: There is a verbal analogy
between the festivals of Passover and Sukkot. It is stated here, with regard to Sukkot:

6
 ‫ ַבֲּחִמָשּׁה‬:‫ ֵלאֹמר‬,‫ְבֵּני ִיְשָׂרֵאל‬-‫לד ַדֵּבּר ֶאל‬ 34 Speak unto the children of Israel, saying: On the
‫ ַחג ַהֻסּכּוֹת‬,‫ ַלֹחֶדשׁ ַהְשִּׁביִﬠי ַהֶזּה‬,‫ָﬠָשׂר יוֹם‬ fifteenth day of this seventh month is the feast of
.‫ ַליהָוה‬,‫ִשְׁבַﬠת ָיִמים‬ tabernacles for seven days unto the LORD.
Lev 23:34

“On the fifteenth day of this seventh month is the festival of Sukkot for seven days unto the
Lord” And it is stated:

‫ ַחג‬,‫ו וַּבֲחִמָשּׁה ָﬠָשׂר יוֹם ַלֹחֶדשׁ ַהֶזּה‬ 6 And on the fifteenth day of the same month is the feast
‫ ַמצּוֹת‬,‫ ִשְׁבַﬠת ָיִמים‬:‫ַהַמּצּוֹת ַליהָוה‬ of unleavened bread unto the LORD; seven days ye shall
.‫תּ ֹאֵכלוּ‬ eat unleavened bread.
Lev 23:6

“And on the fifteenth day of the same month is the festival of matzot unto the Lord” with regard
to the festival of Passover. Just as there, with regard to Passover, on the first night there is an
obligation to eat matza and from that point onward it is optional, as from that point onward the
only obligation is to refrain from eating leaven, so too here, with regard to Sukkot, on the first
night there is an obligation to eat in the sukka and from that point onward it is optional.

The Gemara asks: And there, with regard to Passover, from where do we derive that there is an
obligation to eat matza on the first night? The Gemara answers that the verse says:

,‫שׁן ְבַּא ְרָבָּﬠה ָﬠָשׂר יוֹם ַלֹחֶדשׁ‬

ֹ ‫יח ָבּ ִרא‬ 18 In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the
‫ ַﬠד יוֹם ָהֶאָחד‬:‫ ַמֹצּת‬,‫ תּ ֹאְכלוּ‬,‫ָבֶּﬠ ֶרב‬ month at even, ye shall eat unleavened bread, until the
.‫ָבָּﬠ ֶרב‬--‫ ַלֹחֶדשׁ‬,‫ְוֶﬠְשׂ ִרים‬ one and twentieth day of the month at even.
Ex 12:18

“In the evening you shall eat matzot” The verse established it as an obligation.

7
§ The mishna continues: And furthermore, Rabbi Eliezer said that one who did not eat a meal
on the evening of the first day of the Festival should compensate with a meal on the evening of the

8
last day of the Festival. The Gemara asks: But didn’t Rabbi Eliezer say that a person is obligated
to eat fourteen meals in the sukka, one during the day and one at night?

However, the compensatory meal on the evening of the Eighth Day of Assembly is not eaten in
the sukka. Beira said that Rabbi Ami said: Rabbi Eliezer retracted his previous statement and
agrees with the Rabbis that there is no quota for the meals that one must eat in the sukka, and it is
only the meal on the first evening of the Festival that one must eat in the sukka. Their dispute is
with regard to compensation if one failed to eat the meal on the first evening.

9
§ The Sages taught: There was an incident involving Rabbi Elai, who went on Sukkot eve to
greet his teacher Rabbi Eliezer in Lod on the first day of the Festival. He said to him: Elai,
you are not among those who stay home on the Festival and therefore you have not fulfilled the
mitzva of the Festival, as Rabbi Eliezer would say: I praise the lazy, who, although they act no
differently than they do the entire year, are praiseworthy because they do not leave their houses
on the Festival, as it is written:

‫ְתַּאֶוּה‬-‫כו ְוָנַתָתּה ַהֶכֶּסף ְבֹּכל ֲאֶשׁר‬ 26 And thou shalt bestow the money for whatsoever thy
,‫ וַּבַיּ ִין וַּבֵשָּׁכר‬,‫ ַבָּבָּקר וַּבצּ ֹאן‬‰‫ַנְפְשׁ‬ soul desireth, for oxen, or for sheep, or for wine, or for
‫; ְוָאַכְלָתּ‬‰‫שׁ‬ֶ ‫ ַנְפ‬,‰‫וְּבֹכל ֲאֶשׁר ִתְּשָׁאְל‬ strong drink, or for whatsoever thy soul asketh of thee;
,‫ ְוָשַׂמְחָתּ‬,‰‫ֶהי‬Œ‫ ִלְפֵני ְיהָוה ֱא‬,‫ָשּׁם‬ and thou shalt eat there before the LORD thy God, and
.‰‫ַאָתּה וֵּביֶת‬ thou shalt rejoice, thou and thy household.
Deut 14:26

“You shall rejoice, you and your household” The term “your household” is interpreted as
referring to one’s wife. One who is not home cannot rejoice with his wife.

The Gemara asks: Is that so? Didn’t Rabbi Yitzḥak say: From where is it derived that one is
obligated to greet his teacher on the Festival? It is as it is stated that the husband of the
Shunamite woman asked his wife:

10
 (‫ ַמדּוַּﬠ אתי )ַאְתּ( הלכתי )ֹהֶלֶכת‬,‫כג ַויּ ֹאֶמר‬ 23 And he said: Wherefore wilt thou go to him today? it
,‫ ְול ֹא ַשָׁבּת; ַותּ ֹאֶמר‬,‫ֹחֶדשׁ‬-‫ל ֹא‬--‫ֵאָליו ַהיּוֹם‬ is neither new moon nor sabbath.' And she said: 'It shall
.‫ָשׁלוֹם‬ be well.'
II Kings 4:23

“Why are you going to him today? It is neither the New Moon nor Shabbat”. This proves by
inference that on the New Moon and Shabbat a person is obligated to greet his teacher.

The Gemara answers that this is not difficult: This statement of Rabbi Yitzḥak that one is
obligated to go and greet his teacher is referring to a case where he goes and returns on the same
day and can rejoice with his wife at night; and this statement of Rabbi Eliezer that one should
stay home is referring to a case where he goes and does not return on the same day and cannot
rejoice with his wife at night.

Summary

11
Daf Shevui writes:2

R. Eliezer says that your dwelling in the sukkah should be like your normal dwelling, when you
dwell in your house. In talmudic times it was normal to eat two meals a day, one midday meal and
one night meal (breakfast was not a real meal), so too you must have two meals in the sukkah per
day.

The rabbis agree that your dwelling in the sukkah should be like your dwelling in an abode.
However, this does not mean that one has to eat two meals a day. Just as in normal situations, one
eats only if one wants to eat, so too in the sukkah.

I think we can see that R. Eliezer imposes a rule on the sukkah—you have to dwell there, and that
entails eating two meals a day. The other rabbis understand the mitzvah differently. When you
dwell, i.e. eat, it must be there. But if you don’t want to dwell/eat, there is no mitzvah to do so.

The other rabbis agree that on the first night of Sukkot there is an obligation to eat in the Sukkah.
The rule is not that if one eats, one must do so in the sukkah; the rule is that one has to eat and do
so in the Sukkah. Where do the rabbis derive this obligation from?

The answer is that Sukkot is compared with Pesah. Just as on the first night of Pesah it is mandated
to eat matzah, and on the rest of the nights one can eat matzah but doesn’t have to (but of course,
no chametz!) so too on Sukkot which falls on the same day of the month. On the first night one
must eat in the Sukkah; on subsequent nights one can eat in the sukkah. If one doesn’t want to eat,
one need not do so (but no eating a meal outside of the sukkah)..

In the first part of the mishnah, R. Eliezer says that one must eat fourteen meals in a sukkah. But
in the second half he says that if he misses eating the first night, he can make it up on the last night.
The problem is that R. Eliezer seems to disagree with himself. If one is obligated for fourteen
meals, then he would have to make up any missed meal. [There are other interpretations of how
R. Eliezer contradicts himself.]

Bira agrees with the above assessment—the two statements of R. Eliezer do indeed contradict each
other. His answer is that R. Eliezer changed his mind. Originally, he did hold that one had to eat
fourteen meals in the sukkah. Later, he recanted and agreed with the sages—only the first night is
obligatory and so this is the only night that need be made up.

If one has to make up the meal, the question is how to do so? After all, if he eats an extra meal
involving bread how would one know that this meal is to make up the missed first meal? What
he’s really doing is just eating the meal that he has to anyway on that night.
The resolution is that he adds desserts to the meal he eats on the last night. He finishes his regular

2
https://www.sefaria.org/Sukkah.27a.3?lang=bi&p2=Daf_Shevui_to_Sukkah.27a.4-11&lang2=bi

12
meal and then clears the plates, and then eats foods that he would not have eaten had he not missed
the meal on the first night. This way he makes it clear that he is eating extra.

The Talmud supports this with a story about King Agrippa, a legendary Jewish king whom the
rabbis portray as a good king. The king’s assistant asks what he should do, since he eats only one
meal a day. For him it is regular to eat one meal, not two meals. R. Eliezer answers that since he
always adds a variety of appetizers to his meal, he should do so on Sukkot and that can be
considered his second meal. From here we can see that this meal need not consist of bread.
Note that this last baraita does not reflect the notion that R. Eliezer changed his mind about the
requirement to eat fourteen meals in the sukkah.

Rav Avrohom Adler writes:3

There is a dispute regarding how many meals one is required to eat in the Sukkah. Rabbi Eliezer
maintains that one is obligated to eat fourteen meals in the Sukkah, one by day and one by night
for each day of the seven days of Sukkos. The Chachamim, however, maintain that one is only
obligated to eat a meal in the Sukkah on the first night of Sukkos.

There is a dispute regarding one who did not eat the meal on the first night of Sukkos. Rabbi
Eliezer maintains that one can make up the meal on a different day of Sukkos or even on Shemini
Atzeres, the final day of the Sukkos festival. The Chachamim, however, maintain that one cannot
make up the meal at all. And regarding this it was said: A twisted thing cannot be straightened out,
and that which is missing cannot be counted.

The Gemora explains Rabbi Eliezer’s reasoning: [In Sukkos] you shall dwell; this implies that you
shall dwell just as you normally dwell. Just as in a normal dwelling, a man has one meal by day
and one by night, so too in the Sukkah, he must have one meal by day and one by night. The
Rabbis, however, derive as follows: Just as in a normal dwelling, a man eats if he desires and if he
does not so desire, he does not eat, so too with the Sukkah; if he desires, he eats, and if he does not
so desire, he does not eat.

The Gemora asks: But if so, why should he not have the option on the first night of the festival
also? Rabbi Yochanan answered in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak: With regard to
Sukkah, it says: “the fifteenth,” and with regard to the Festival of Pesach it says: “the fifteenth.”
Just as there the first night is obligatory (to eat matzah), but from then on it is optional, so here
too, the first night is obligatory, but from then on it is optional. The Gemora asks: And in the case
of Pesach, from where do we know? The Gemora answers: Since the verse says: In the evening
you shall eat matzos; the Torah establishes it as an obligation.

The Mishna had stated: Rabbi Eliezer maintains that one can make up the meal on a different day
of Sukkos or even on Shemini Atzeres, the final day of the Sukkos festival. The Gemora asks: But
didn’t Rabbi Eliezer say that one is obligated to eat fourteen meals in the Sukkah, one by day and
one by night for each day of the seven days of Sukkos (and the meal eaten on Shemini Atzeres

3
http://dafnotes.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Sukkah_27.pdf

13
cannot count for this, for that is eaten outside of the Sukkah)? Bira answered in the name of Rabbi
Ammi: Rabbi Eliezer recanted of his previous statement (and one is not required to eat fourteen
meals in the Sukkah).

The Gemora asks: With what does one make up for it? If you will say that it is with bread, isn’t
one merely eating the obligatory meal of the festival day (on account of Shemini Atzeres, and it is
not a “make up” meal)? The Gemora answers: Rather, “make up” means that one should make it
up with various kinds of refreshments. The Gemora notes: It has also been taught like that in a
braisa: If he made up for a meal he has missed with various kinds of refreshments, he has fulfilled
his obligation.

The overseer of the estate belonging to King Agrippas asked Rabbi Eliezer: For a person like
myself, who ordinarily eats only one meal a day, can I eat one meal in the Sukkah and be exempt
from eating anymore? Rabbi Eliezer responded to him: Just like you eat various delicacies every
day of the year, so too you shall eat various delicacies on Sukkos for the honor of your Maker.
Besides eating the one regular meal on every day of Sukkos, you should also eat some delicacies
in order to whet your appetite to eat another meal during the day.

Aravos for Less than a Nickel

The Gemara states that the Chachamim maintain that one can fulfill his obligation by dwelling in
his friend’s Sukkah, because it is said all the citizens in Israel shall dwell in Sukkos. This teaches
us that all the Jewish People are fit to dwell in one Sukkah. Rashi write that it is impossible for all
the Jews to collectively own one Sukkah, because each individual’s share in the Sukkah would be
less than a perutah.

The Minchas Chinuch (325:9) understands from the words of Rashi that whenever a mitzvah
performance requires that the article being used for the mitzvah belong to the person, if one’s
ownership in the article is less than the value of a perutah, he cannot fulfill the mitzvah. The
Minchas Chinuch questions this because if this is so, how one could fulfill the mitzvah of aravah
on Sukkos, as one is required to own the aravos, yet each one is worth less than a perutah. The
commentators answer that Rashi intended that one who is involved in a partnership must own at
least a perutah. With regard to an individual, however, he is deemed to be an owner even if he
owns less than a perutah. Proof to this can be found in the Ritva in Avodah Zarah and in the Sefer
Tal Torah.

14
 VISITING ONE'S REBBI DURING THE FESTIVAL

Rav Mordechai Kornfeld writes:4

A Beraisa relates that Rebbi Ila'i once went to greet his Rebbi, Rebbi Eliezer, during Sukos. Rebbi
Eliezer asked him why he left his home when the Torah requires that one stay home and rejoice
with one's wife during the festival.

The Gemara asks that the requirement to stay home with one's wife during the festival conflicts
with the requirement to travel to one's Rebbi on the festival. Rebbi Yitzchak says that the
requirement to visit one's Rebbi is learned from the words of the Shunamite woman's husband,
who asked his wife, "Why are you going to him (the prophet Elisha) today? Today is not Rosh
Chodesh and not Shabbos" (Melachim II 4:23). This verse teaches the requirement to visit one's
Rebbi on Rosh Chodesh and Shabbos. Accordingly, Rebbi Ila'i was justified in going to visit Rebbi
Eliezer during Sukos.

What is the Gemara's question? The verse from which the requirement to visit one's Rebbi is
derived mentions only Rosh Chodesh and Shabbos. It makes no mention of Yom Tov, and thus it
does not provide a source for the obligation to visit one's Rebbi on Yom Tov.

(a) The RITVA (here, and in Rosh Hashanah 16b) addresses this question. He says that the
Mitzvah to visit one's Rebbi includes three parts. First, when one's Rebbi is in the same town, he
is required to visit his Rebbi every day. Second, when one's Rebbi is outside of the town but within
the Techum Shabbos (2000 Amos), he is required to visit his Rebbi only on Shabbos and Rosh
Chodesh. Third, when one's Rebbi lives beyond the Techum Shabbos of one's town, he is required
to visit his Rebbi only on the festival (he travels before Yom Tov or during Chol ha'Mo'ed when
there is no prohibition of Techum).

In the case of the Shunamite woman, Elisha lived outside of the town but within the Techum
Shabbos, and thus her husband mentioned only Rosh Chodesh and Shabbos. When Rebbi Yitzchak
teaches this Halachah, he does not mention the requirement to visit one's Rebbi every day when
the Rebbi lives in the same town, because everyone is heedful of that requirement (since it requires
minimal effort). He mentions the Halachah only with regard to Rosh Chodesh and Shabbos,
because when the Rebbi lives in a different town, a person tends to neglect the requirement to visit
him.

(b) The MAHARSHA explains that if one is required to visit his Rebbi on Rosh Chodesh, then
certainly one is required to visit his Rebbi on Yom Tov, even though the verse does not specifically
mention Yom Tov. (The Maharsha does not address why Yom Tov is not mentioned in the verse.)

(c) The TUREI EVEN in Rosh Hashanah (16b) and the VILNA GA'ON (Seder Olam Rabah,
chapter 3; see also RAV REUVEN MARGOLIYOS in "Olelos," #13) point out that it is odd that

4
https://www.dafyomi.co.il/sukah/insites/su-dt-027.htm

15
the verse mentions Rosh Chodesh before Shabbos. It should mention Shabbos first, because
Shabbos comes more frequently than Rosh Chodesh. It must be that the word "Shabbos" in the
verse refers to Yom Tov (as the Torah itself refers to Yom Tov as "Shabbos," as in Vayikra 23:16).

(d) Although ideally one should visit his Rebbi every day (in order to learn Torah from him), it is
not always possible to do so, because a person is occupied with his work throughout the week.
Therefore, the Mitzvah to visit one's Rebbi requires that he visit him only when he is not working.
This is evident from the verse in Melachim. The husband of the Shunamite woman mentioned
specifically Shabbos and Rosh Chodesh, days on which a woman does not perform Melachah
(Shabbos, because of the prohibition of Melachah, and Rosh Chodesh, because of the custom for
women to refrain from Melachah on that day), because only on those days would she be obligated
to visit Elisha. This implies that on days on which a man does not perform Melachah (Shabbos
and Yom Tov), he should visit his Rebbi. A woman, however, is not free to visit the Rebbi during
Yom Tov, because on Yom Tov she is occupied with cooking and other responsibilities. A woman
has time to visit the Rebbi only on Shabbos and Rosh Chodesh. (ETZ YOSEF, in the name of
the IYEI HA'YAM)

(e) The CHANUKAS HA'TORAH (Rosh Hashanah 16b) explains that since it is inappropriate
for a woman to visit the Rebbi when his Talmidim are there (see Kidushin 81a), the only time she
would be obligated to visit him is when the Talmidim are not there. Thus, the husband of the
Shunamite woman asked her why she was going to the prophet when it was not Rosh Chodesh or
Shabbos -- days on which the Talmidim are not with their Rebbi, but are home. The verse implies
that she has no obligation to visit the Rebbi on the festival, which must be due to the fact that on
the festival, his Talmidim visit him. Hence, the verse indeed teaches that one is obligated to visit
his Rebbi on the festival!

(f) RAV YONASAN EIBESHITZ (Ya'aros Devash 1:12 and elsewhere) explains that during the
times of the Beis ha'Mikdash (when Elisha lived), everyone would go to greet the presence of the
Shechinah in Yerushalayim. They would visit the Rebbi only on Shabbos and Rosh Chodesh, when
there was no requirement to go to Yerushalayim. After the Churban, the practice was instituted to
visit the Rebbi in place of going to Yerushalayim, because a Talmid Chacham reflects the presence
of the Shechinah.5

(g) The NODA B'YEHUDAH (OC 2:94) suggests the opposite approach. When the verse
mentions Rosh Chodesh and Shabbos, it includes Yom Tov as well. It refers to all days that have
additional Kedushah, days on which an additional Korban (the Korban Musaf) is offered. Due to
the holiness of those days, the Rebbi has a heightened ability to influence his Talmidim, and his
Talmidim are more receptive to his influence. Hence, a Talmid should visit his Rebbi on those
days. However, a Talmid is not obligated to visit his Rebbi on all of those days, lest he give more
honor to his Rebbi than he gives to the Shechinah (which he visits only on the three festivals). The
Gemara in Kidushin (33b) teaches that it is not proper for the honor of the Shechinah to be less
than the honor of one's Rebbi, and thus the obligation to visit one's Rebbi can apply only as much
as, but not more than, one is obligated to visit the Shechinah. Therefore, the Gemara says that one
is obligated to visit his Rebbi on each of the three festivals.

5
See also ARUCH LA'NER, and MALBIM to Melachim II 4:23, who give similar explanations.

16
Based on this, the Noda b'Yehudah explains that today, when the Beis ha'Mikdash has not yet been
rebuilt, there is no obligation to visit one's Rebbi during the festival (unless, of course, one goes
with intent to learn Torah from him), since there is no obligation to visit the Shechinah at the Beis
ha'Mikdash. The honor given to one's Rebbi should not be greater than the honor given to the
Shechinah.

Accordingly, The TUR and the SHULCHAN ARUCH -- who record only the Halachos that are
relevant in practice in when the Beis ha'Mikdash is not standing -- omit this Halachah.
The RAMBAM, though, mentions this Halachah (Hilchos Talmud Torah 5:7), because he includes
all of the Halachos that are relevant when the Beis ha'Mikdash is standing.6

Steinzaltz (OBM) writes:7

The Mishnah brings the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer, who says that over the course of Sukkot, a person
is obligated to eat two meals per day in the sukkah, i.e. one should eat 14 meals in the sukkah over
the course of the Biblically mandated seven-day holiday. According to the Chachamim, however,
there is only an obligation to eat in the sukkah on the first night of the holiday. From then on, a
person can choose to eat food that does not obligate him to sit in the sukkah, and he will not be
obligated to do so.

Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanus was also known as Rabbi Eliezer ha-Gadol. He lived during the time
of the destruction of the second Temple and in the period following the destruction. Although
Rabbi Eliezer came from a wealthy family that could trace its roots back to Moshe Rabbenu, he
did not begin to study Torah until he was 20 years old, when he traveled to Jerusalem to study
with Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai. Rabbi Eliezer so impressed his teacher that Rabban Yochanan
ben Zakkai considered him to be the best of all his students and, indeed, the equal of all the Sages.
His knowledge and leadership abilities were already recognized before the destruction of
the Temple, and he is one of the Sages who established the great yeshiva in Yavneh together with
Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai after the destruction.

We find recorded in Pirkei Avot that Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai described Rabbi Eliezer as a
“well plastered cistern that never loses a drop of water,” whose teachings were based almost
entirely on traditions that he received from his teachers. Nevertheless, we find that, in contrast to
his teachers and peers, Rabbi Eliezer was inclined to follow the opinions of Bet Shammai.

Rabbi Akiva was his main student, although virtually all of the Sages of that generation learned
from him. His own son, Hyrcanus, was accepted as one of the leading Sages of his generation.

6
See also MAHARATZ CHAYOS to Rosh Hashanah 16b, CHIDUSHEI GE'ONIM in the Ein Yakov, and EINEI
SHMUEL for other approaches. See also DIVREI SHALOM 2:25.
7
https://www.ou.org/life/torah/masechet_sukkah2733/

17
Shulchan Aruch (O.C. A9:3) rules that a person only has an obligation to eat a k’zayis of bread in
the sukkah on the first night of Sukkos.8 After the first night, there is no longer an obligation to eat
bread at all, but if one chooses to eat bread, he must eat it in the sukkah.

This would then be a fulfillment of the mitzvah of ‫ ימי שבעת תשבו בסוכות‬, and before partaking of
the bread the person would have to recite the of brachah .‫לישב בסוכה‬
Sefer ‫ מרפס איגרא‬asks that this halachic condition is also found by Pesach. There is a mitzvah to
eat matzah on Pesach, but there is only an obligation to do so on the first night of the holiday. After
the first night, a person may choose to not eat matzah at all, but if he does eat “bread,” any time
during the week of Pesach it must be matzah and not chometz, and he fulfills the mitzvah of

Why is it, he asks, that when a person does eat matzah during the week of Pesach he does not recite
the brachah of ‫מצה אכילת על‬whereas we find that a person does recite the brachah of ‫לישב בסוכה‬
when he elects to eat in a sukkah throughout the week of Sukkos?

Harav Aharon Leib Shteinman, ‫ א”שליט‬cites the ‫ בעל המאור‬in Pesachim and explains. The truth is
that there is no obligation to eat matzah after the first night of Pesach, nor is there an obligation to
eat bread in a sukkah after the first night of Sukkos. Yet on Sukkos it is impossible to avoid a
Torah obligation which applies to sleeping, which cannot be avoided for seven days (the Gemara
says that a person cannot go without sleep for three days).

Therefore, when a person chooses to eat bread, he recites the brachah when he eats, and this
brachah applies to his sleeping in the sukkah as well.

Our Daf clearly indicates that other than the first night there is no obligation to eat bread on
Sukkos. Tosafos notes that the Gemara in Brachos (1), which indicates that there is an obligation
to eat bread on Yom Tov, contradicts this. Tosafos answers (2) that the Gemara in Brachos which
implied that there is an obligation to eat bread on Yom Tov is limited to the first night of Pesach
and Sukkos where there is an obligation to eat bread. The rest of Yom Tov, however, there is no

8
https://www.dafdigest.org/masechtos/Sukkah%20027.pdf

18
obligation to eat bread. On the other hand, Tosafos in Brachos (3) writes that there is an obligation
to eat bread at every meal on Yom Tov, as implied by the Gemara there.

The Gemara in Sukkah should be understood to rule that although there is certainly an obligation
to eat bread, nonetheless, there is no obligation to eat a quantity that would obligate one to eat in
the sukkah. This issue has ramifications beyond the question of whether there is an obligation to
eat bread on Yom Tov. For example, if one recited ‫ המזו ברכת‬on Yom Tov during the day and
forgot to include ‫ ויבוא יעלה‬,is he obligated to repeat ‫? ברכת המזו‬

The general guideline is that one must repeat ‫ ברכת המזו‬if the meal was obligatory, e.g. Shabbos.
However, one is not obligated to repeat ‫ המזו ברכת‬for meals that are optional, e.g. Rosh Chodesh
(4). According to Tosafos in Sukkah since there is no obligation to eat bread on Yom Tov during
the day one would not have to repeat ‫ המזו ברכת‬,but according to Tosafos in Brachos ‫המזו ברכת‬
would have to be repeated since there is an obligation to eat bread at those meals. Mishnah
Berurah5 rules that one who forgot ‫ ויבוא יעלה‬on Yom Tov must repeat ‫ המזו ברכת‬,and Rav Ovadiah
Yosef6 ruled that for Sephardim, since this question involves a dispute, we apply the rule ‫להקל‬
‫ ברכות ספק‬and ‫ המזו ברכת‬should not be repeated.

The Yismach Yisroel, zt”l, writes in the name of the holy Zohar that while matzah is the food of
faith, the sukkah is the shade of faith.

On our daf we find a clear parallel drawn between the two festivals. “Just as it is a duty to eat
matzah on the first night of Pesach which begins of the fifteenth of the month, so too is it a duty
to eat in the sukkah on the first night of Sukkos which begins on the fifteenth of the month.”
Faith is mainly developed during the “nights,” in the darkness of mental obscurity. As the verse
says, “Your faith is in the nights.” (Tehillim 92:3)

What one grasps with the light of one’s intellect is not faith, ‫; אמונה‬it is knowledge, or ‫ ידיעה‬.

19
Faith is that which transcends what one can grasp at the present time. During Sukkos, ‫אמונה‬
surrounds us, and on Pesach we absorb in into our innermost being. This process must be reflected
in our actions—if not, the emunah is not really genuine.

David Ben Gurion went to meet with the Chazon Ish, zt”l, and tried to convince the gadol to
overturn his adamant opposition to the draft of religious girls into the Israeli army. During the
presentation of his case, Ben Gurion said to the Chazon Ish, “I am also a believer!” “Really,”
replied the gadol. “And how does that obligate you?” he asked. “This does not obligate me in any
way whatsoever,” responded the Prime Minister. “It would be interesting to know which
philosopher asserts that belief in something does not obligate one to do anything,” chided the
Chazon Ish. Ben Gurion was silent as the gadol concluded, “If you find any truly deep thinker who
does make this claim, let me know. I find the concept very interesting!”

Raphael Magarik writes:9

Sukkot, apparently, is a difficult festival for the bigamous. At least, that is what Rabbi Eliezer
thinks. On today’s daf, he receives two questions from the steward of King Agrippas. Here is the
second:

And the steward further asked Rabbi Eliezer: For someone like me who has two wives, one
in Tiberias and one in Tzippori, and has two sukkahs, one in Tiberias and one in Tzippori,
what is the halakhah? Can I depart from one sukkah to another sukkah and exempt myself
from the obligation?

Rabbi Eliezer said to him: No, as I say that anyone who departs from one sukkah to another
sukkah has negated the mitzvah of the first.

The steward is asking about a particularly intense form of what we today call “sukkah hopping.”
One is obliged to live for seven days in a sukkah — normally one’s family structure. But the
steward has two families and wants to split his festival between his two sukkahs, and two wives.
He will still dwell in a sukkah for seven days, but he will not dwell for seven full days in either
one. Rabbi Eliezer reacts harshly: Not only is this itinerary prohibited, but the steward will
retroactively lose credit for his first days.

At the turn of the last millennium, Rabbeinu Gershom outlawed polygamy for Jews. But there’s
no evidence here that Rabbi Eliezer has a problem with the steward’s plural marriage.

As we discover in the daf’s continuation, Rabbi Eliezer is constitutionally a homebody. He

believes that when the Torah commands, “You shall rejoice, you and your
household” (Deuteronomy 14:26) it means something like, “in your household” — that is, stay in
one sukkah for the whole holiday. He has other, related opinions: that it is generally forbidden to
construct a sukkah during the intermediate days (hol hamoed) of Sukkot and that the lazy are
praiseworthy because they remain at home during a festival.

9 Myjewishlearning.com

20
Speaking narrowly, I feel a sense of relief that Rabbi Eliezer’s positions did not become religiously
normative. I do not have two spouses, but nor do I always have a singular, stable sukkah in which
to hunker down: I have often needed to craft a makeshift sukkah mid-holiday (even using car doors
for walls) or crash at friends’ sukkahs. The royal steward’s unusual lifestyle captures something
of a modern life, lived in transit and uncertainty, and surely that’s part of what this holiday
— designed to evoke the Israelites’ temporary dwellings in the wilderness— is about.

Perhaps Rabbi Eliezer’s position is better motivated if we contemplate the steward’s wives. The
steward casually assumes, after all, that they will remain anchored to their homes even as he frolics
back and forth through the Galilee. You imagine he would be upset to return from Tzippori only
to discover that his wife in Tiberias had skipped town. As fun as sukkah hopping is, it does depend
parasitically on people, usually women, doing domestic labor and, well, staying in their places. In
that sense, as unyielding as Rabbi Eliezer seems, I like to think he is usefully pushing the steward
to live, at least for a week, the way one of his wives does — and perhaps to reckon with who
exactly makes his peripatetic lifestyle possible.

Rabbi Johnny Solomon writes:10

Our daf (Sukkah 27b) informs us that there is a duty ‫ – להקביל פני רבו ברגל‬literally, ‘to greet the
face of one’s teacher on the festival’, but understood to mean that one should visit one’s teacher
on the festival. As the Gemara explains, this duty is derived from Melachim II 4:23, and it is also
illustrated with a story in today’s daf where Rabbi Ilai went to visit his teacher Rabbi Eliezer on
the festival.

Sadly, my (primary) teacher Dayan Gershon Lopian* zt’l passed away 7 years ago, and for those
who were blessed to know him, his absence continues to be sharply felt. Still, as I wrote some
years ago, notwithstanding his petira (death) I believe that I am still able to fulfil the mitzvah of
‫ להקביל פני רבו ברגל‬towards this great teacher of mine and of so many others.

Dr. Haym Soloveitchik famously observed in his essay titled ‘Rupture and Reconstruction: The
Transformation of Contemporary Orthodoxy’ that there are two sources of Jewish practice – a
textual tradition (ie. one that originates from books), and a mimetic tradition (ie. one that originates
from modelling what one observes from parents and teachers), and while prior generations relied
more heavily on mimetic traditions, much of contemporary orthodoxy relies almost exclusively on
textual traditions.

Personally, there are things that I do based on the texts I have studied, but there are also things that
I do based on the practices I have observed, and among these is how I shake the Arba Minim (Four
Species) on Sukkot. This is because, as a teenager, I would watch Dayan Lopian zt’l as he shook
his Arba Minim during Hallel on Sukkot and I would model what he did, and like so many things
that we wish to remember, I stored a mental video of his actions for ‘future viewing’. And the
reason why I mention this is in relation to today’s daf is because whenever Sukkot comes around

10 www.rabbijohnnysolomon.com

21
and I shake my Arba Minim, this video is replayed in my mind, I see the face of my teacher, and
when I do, I ‘greet the face of my teacher on the festival’.

Significantly, this is not limited to Sukkot, and when it comes to other Chagim, I often review the
shiurim which he delivered from the handouts that I still have in my possession, and when I do so,
I not only hear his voice but also – in some way or another - greet his face.

As we know, the teacher-student relationship is a major running theme in the Gemara, yet today,
fewer and fewer people have these deep and rich relationships with teachers who have been a
regular presence in their lives over many years. For some, this is because they have made the
choice to prioritize learning from books over learning from people, while for others, it is because
they never even had the chance to have such a relationship with a teacher.

But what we learn from today’s daf is that we all need teachers, and that the teacher-student
relationship is strengthened through teachers being present for their students, and by students being
present around their teachers.

Eating in The Succah on The First Night Sukkos

Rabbi Doniel Neustadt

You should dwell in a Succah (Emor 23:42)

Every adult male is Biblically obligated to eat a k’zayis of bread in a succah on the first night of
Succos. The Talmud (1) derives this obligation from the similar obligation of eating a k’zayis of
matzah on the first night of Pesach. Since these two obligations are closely related, their halachos
are similar in many respects. Like all mitzvos, this mitzvah, too, can only be properly fulfilled if
there is prior planning and clear knowledge of all the requirements. Let us review the pertinent
halachos:

WHEN IS IT EATEN?

In the late afternoon of Erev Succos, one should not fill himself with food or wine so that he will
be able to eat the k’zayis of bread with a good appetite (2).

The k’zayis of bread [and the Kiddush that precedes it (3)] may not be eaten until it is definitely
night (4), no earlier than 50 minutes after sundown (5). If one ate before that time, he must eat
another k’zayis of bread in order to fulfill the mitzvah (6).

The k’zayis of bread may not be eaten after midnight (7). B’Di’eved, though, one who did not eat
before midnight should do so after midnight and recite the proper blessing (8).

22
Preferably, one should sit down to eat the k’zayis of bread immediately after coming home from
Ma’ariv. Unnecessary delays should be avoided (9).

HOW MUCH MUST BE EATEN

There are various views in the poskim about the exact measurement of a k’zayis. Since this is a
Biblical obligation, it is proper to be stringent and eat at least 1.75 fl. oz. of bread, though one who
eats 1 oz. of bread fulfills his obligation.

There is a view in the Rishonim (10) that holds that the minimum amount of bread one is obligated
to eat in the succah on the first night is a k’beitzah, not merely a k’zayis. Although the basic
halachah does not require the larger amount (11), still it is proper to satisfy that view as well (12).
The amount to be eaten [to satisfy all views], therefore, is 3.5 oz. of bread (13).

The bread which is eaten [whether it is a k’zayis or a k’beitzah (14)] must be eaten within a time-
span of 3 to 4 minutes (15). No talking may take place until the full amount is chewed and
swallowed (16). L’chatchilah, it is proper to chew and then swallow the bread in its entirety (17).
THE BASIC PROCEDURE

One is obligated to eat the minimum amount of bread even if he does not enjoy it and even if it
causes him distress (18). Even a person who is classified as a choleh sh’ein bo sakanah is
obligated to eat a k’zayis of bread (19).

Before eating the bread, one must have in mind that he is about to fulfill the Biblical mitzvah of
eating bread on the first night of Succos (20). If one fails to have this intent and eats the piece of
bread as he normally does every Shabbos or Yom Tov, it is questionable if he has fulfilled the
mitzvah (21). In any case, he should eat another portion of bread with the proper intent (22).

One does not fulfill his obligation by eating cake, etc. (23) Only bread made out of one of the five
species of grain is valid.

Women are exempt from this mitzvah, but if they do eat the required amount of bread in the succah,
it is considered a mitzvah and they may recite the blessing (24).

There are some who maintain that the bread should be eaten without being dipped in honey (25),
etc. Most poskim are not particular about this stringency (26).

ARE WE REQUIRED TO FULFILL THIS MITZVAH WHEN IT IS

RAINING?
There are many discussions in the poskim concerning the obligation to eat in the succah on the
first night of Succos if it is raining. The following points are raised:
• If rain is falling, is one obligated to eat in the succah or not?
• If it is raining, is one obligated to wait and see if the rain will stop so that he can eat in a
rain-free succah?

23
 • If one does eat in the succah while it is raining, can a blessing be recited?
• If a person ate in the succah while it was raining and then the rain stopped, is he required
to eat in the succah again?
• If a person ate in the succah while it was raining and then went to sleep, is he obligated to
get out of bed to eat again once the rain has stopped?

Since there are different rulings on all of these issues, the following, then, is a summary of the
majority opinion (27):

If it is raining steadily and there is a reliable weather forecast for rain all night, one should make
Kiddush [with shehecheyanu] and eat a k’zayis [or a k’beitzah (28)] in the succah. No blessing
over the succah is recited. The rest of the meal is eaten inside the house (29).

If there is no reliable weather forecast and there is a possibility that the rain will stop [e.g., it is
drizzling or it is raining on and off], it is proper to wait an hour or two for the rain to subside (30).
The poskim agree, however, that if the delay will disturb the dignity and pleasure of the Yom Tov,
or if the family is hungry and/or tired, there is no obligation to wait.

If the rain stops while the meal is being eaten inside the house or even after the meal has finished,
one is obligated to eat at least a beitzah (31) of bread in the succah. Even if the rain stops after
midnight, a beitzah of bread must be eaten in the succah. If one has already gone to bed and then
the rain stops, there is no obligation to get out of bed in order to eat in the succah (32).

FOOTNOTES

1 Succah 27a.
2 Mishnah Berurah 639:27.
3 Beiur Halachah 639:3.
4 Rama O.C. 639:3.
5 This is the generally accepted time for “night”. Under extenuating circumstances, there are those who permit eating the bread a
few minutes earlier. Since this is a Biblical mitzvah, it is proper – weather permitting – to wait for 72 minutes after sundown, to
satisfy the views of the Rishonim who hold that before that time it is not definitely night.
6 Mishnah Berurah 639:25. If, mistakenly, one ate the bread even earlier than sundown, not only must he eat another k’zayis but
he must also repeat the blessing of leishev basukah.
7 Rama 639:3.
8 Mishnah Berurah 639:26. In that case, though, at least a k’beitzah of bread should be eaten.
9 Mateh Efrayim 625:42, 44.
10 Quoted by the Ritva and Ran in Succah 27b.
11 O.C. 639:3.
12 Mateh Efrayim 625:51; Mishnah Berurah 639:22.
13 The amount of a beitzah according to the Chazon Ish.
14 Mateh Efrayim 625:52 and Eleff le-Mateh 87.
15 Mishnah Berurah 639:22. Children under bar mitzvah may take up to 9 minutes for the amount to be eaten–Harav S.Z. Auerbach
(Shemiras Shabbos K’hilchasah 54 note 130).
16 Kaf ha-Chayim 639:50.
17 Mateh Efrayim 625:52. Mishnah Berurah, though, does not mention this.
18 Beiur Halachah 639:3.
19 Bikurei Yaakov 639:6,24; Aruch ha-Shulchan 639:17.
20 Mateh Efrayim 625:51; Mishnah Berurah 625:1. In addition to this, one should bear in mind the reasons behind the mitzvah of
succah. According to some poskim (Bikurei Yaakov 625:3 based on Bach), failure to have this intent invalidates the mitzvah.

24
Mishnah Berurah, however, rules, that b’dieved one fulfills his obligation even if he does not have in mind the reasons for the
mitzvah.
21 See Chidah (Simchas ha-Regel, quoted in Mo’adim U’zmanim 6:69) who questions if one has fulfilled his obligation in this
case. See, however, Mishnah Berurah 60:10, quoting the Chayei Adam.
22 Mateh Efrayim 625:53.
23 Mishnah Berurah 639:21.
24 Sefaradic women, though should not recite the blessing on this mitzvah or on any mitzvah which they are not obligated to
perform, such as lulav, shofar, etc.
25 See Yechaveh Da’as 4:37 for the various views.
26 Harav S.Z. Auerbach (quoted in Nishmas Avraham O.C. pg. 320 and Harav O. Yosef (ibid. pg. 337). Tzitz Eliezer (15:32-14)
maintains that one should be stringent. See also Mo’adim U’zmanim 1:86.
27 Based on rulings of Mateh Efrayim and Mishnah Berurah.
28 Mateh Efrayim 625:51, 62 and Elef le-Mateh 84. See, however, Ktzei ha-Mateh who holds that when raining all agree that a
k’zayis is sufficient.
29 When reciting Hamotzi, one should have in mind that he will recite Birkas ha-Mazon inside the house.
30 Some poskim are more stringent and recommend waiting until midnight.
31 In this case, a k’zayis is not enough.
32 There is a minority opinion (Mo’adim U’zmanim 1:86, based on his understanding of the Gr”a; Harav M. Soloveitchik, quoted
in Reshimos Shiurim (Succah, pg. 92) and in Mesorah Torah Journal, vol. 14, pg. 57) which maintains that even after going to
sleep one is obligated to get out of bed in order to eat in the succah.

The Obligation of Eating in a Sukka on the First Night of Sukkot

Rav Shmuel Shimoni writes:11

Introduction

We are all familiar with the principle governing the mitzva of sukka, namely, that there is
no obligation to eat in a sukka, but rather that any regular meal (akhilat keva) of which we partake
must be eaten in a sukka. The Sages formulated this idea in the Mishna in Sukka as follows: "There
is no defined number" (27a).[1] This idea gave rise to various formulations of the essence of
the mitzva of sukka among the Acharonim. Some suggest that essentially the mitzva consists of a
prohibition to eat outside the sukka;[2] others define it as a "fulfillable" (kiyyumit) mitzva rather
than an obligatory one;[3] yet others argue that there is a positive mitzva upon each person to turn
the sukka into his house for the week's duration, the practical expression of which being that any
regular meal must be eaten therein.[4] In any event, practically speaking, eating in a sukka during
the week of Sukkot is optional, rather than obligatory.

As for the eating, it would be appear that we are not dealing with an act of eating in the
usual sense, but rather one of the practical expressions of a more general obligation of dwelling in
a sukka. A person is obligated to turn the sukka into his house; this has many expressions, as
explained in the Baraita:

"You shall dwell" – similar to [normal] residence. From here [the Sages] said: Throughout the
seven days [of the festival], the sukka must be regarded as one's principal abode, and the house
merely a temporary residence. How so? If a person has pretty dishes, he brings them up to
the sukka; attractive linens, he brings them up to the sukka; he eats, drinks, and enjoys himself in
the sukka, and he studies in the sukka. (Sukka 28b)

11
https://torah.etzion.org.il/en/obligation-eating-sukka-first-night-sukkot

25
 The main expressions of dwelling, those which may not be done outside the sukka, are
eating and sleeping. As Rashi puts it: "The essence of dwelling in a sukka involves eating,
drinking, and sleeping" (20b). But we are not talking about eating as eating per se, or about
sleeping as sleeping per se, but rather as expressions of dwelling.[5] Accordingly, the measure of
eating in this context is not the size of an olive, as in the rest of the Torah, but rather a larger
measure, as is discussed in the passage in Sukka 26a-27a. Here we require eating in the amount of
a regular meal, for it is only eating this amount outside the sukka that constitutes a violation of the
obligation to dwell in a sukka.[6]

As stated, the basic rule is that there is no obligation to eat in a sukka. In this shiur we shall
examine the first night of Sukkot, which constitutes an exception to this rule, and try to understand
its standing in light of the principles that we saw above.

THE FIRST NIGHT OF SUKKOT

Rabbi Eliezer says: A person is obligated to eat fourteen meals in the sukka, one during the day
and one at night. And the Sages say: There is no defined number, except for the first night of the
festival…
What is Rabbi Eliezer's reasoning? 'You shall dwell' – similar to [normal] residence. Just as
residence [in the house] – one [meal] during the day and one at night, so too in the sukka – one
[meal] during the day and one at night…
And the Sages’ [reasoning]: It is like residence; just as in his residence – if he wishes, he eats, if
he wishes, he does not eat, so too a sukka – if he wishes, he eats, if he wishes, he does not eat.
If so, even on the first night of the festival [he should not have to eat]! Rabbi Yochanan said in the
name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak: It says here "the fifteenth," and it says "the fifteenth"
regarding Pesach. Just as there – the first night is obligatory, from then on it is optional, so too
here – the first night is obligatory, from then on it is optional. And from where do we know [the
law] there? The verse states: "In the evening, you shall eat matzot" – Scripture established it as an
obligation [on the first night].

Many Rishonim were troubled by a question relating to the position of the Sages. The
Gemara in Berakhot 49b implies that there is an obligation to eat bread-based meals on Yom Tov:

Rav Idi bar Avin said in the name of Rav Amram quoting Rav Nachman who had it from Shemu'el:
If one by mistake omitted to mention Rosh Chodesh in the [Amida] prayer, he is made to begin
again; if in Birkat ha-Mazon, he is not made to begin again.
Rav Idi bar Avin said to Rav Amram: Why this difference between prayer and Birkat ha-Mazon?
He replied: I also had the same difficulty, and I asked Rav Nachman, and he said to me: From Mar
Shemu'el personally I have not heard anything on the subject, but let us see for ourselves. [I should
say that] in the case of prayer, which is obligatory, he is made to begin again, but in the case of a
meal, which he can eat or not eat as he pleases, he is not made to begin again. But if that is so [said
the other], in the case of Shabbat and festivals, on which it is not possible for him to abstain from

26
eating, I should also say that if he makes a mistake he must go back to the beginning? He replied:
That is so.

The Rishonim noted that even on Rosh Chodesh one is forbidden to fast, and so we are
forced to say that the threshold for the obligation to go back to the beginning regarding Birkat ha-
Mazon must be the obligation to eat bread, and thus to recite Birkat ha-Mazon. It follows then from
the Gemara that on Yom Tov one is obligated to eat bread-based meals. This, as stated above,
brought the Rishonim to raise an objection against the position of the Sages regarding the meals
that must be eaten in the sukka. There are various formulations of the objection, all of which are
directed at the same point:

1) What is meant by the assertion: "if he wishes, he eats, and if he wishes, he does not eat" –
surely there is an obligation to eat, based on the law of Yom Tov meals?

2) Why is a special derivation necessary for the obligation to eat in a sukka on the first night
of Sukkot? Surely there is an obligation to eat a Yom Tov meal on the first night of the festival, and
perforce it must be eaten in the sukka, in the framework of the "fulfillable" mitzva to eat in
a sukka all seven days of the festival!

To resolve these difficulties, the Rishonim adopted various approaches, which provide important
new understandings in a number of areas.

THE POSITION OF TOSAFOT IN SUKKA

Let us open with the resolution put forward by the Tosafot on our passage (s.v. iy), who
suggest an exceedingly novel position, not regarding the mitzva of sukka, but regarding the general
obligation of a Yom Tov meal:

"If he wishes, he eats, and if he wishes, he does not eat" – at all, for if he eats, he is obligated to
eat in a sukka, as was stated above. This implies that on Yom Tov, there is no obligation [to eat],
and if a person wishes, he does not eat at all, except for the first night of the festival. According to
this, if by mistake one omitted to mention Yom Tov in Birkat ha-Mazon, he is not made to begin
again. And that which is stated in chapter "Shelosha she-akhlu" (Berakhot 49b): "In the case
of Shabbat and festivals, on which it is not possible for him to abstain from eating, I should also
say that if he makes a mistake he must go back to the beginning" – this refers only to the first night
of the festival of Pesach and the first night of the festival of Sukkot.

According to the Tosafot, there is no obligation whatsoever to eat a bread-based meal

on Yom Tov, and the aforementioned words of the Gemara must be limited to the first night of
Pesach and Sukkot. What is the basis for this difference between Shabbat, which requires bread-
based meals, and Yom Tov, which does not? The Rashba in Berakhot, who shares the view of
our Tosafot, related to this question, writing:

All other Yom Tov meals, even on the first day of the festival, he is not made to begin again
[in Birkat ha-Mazon], for if he wishes, he does not eat bread, as it is also stated in tractate Sukka…

27
From this we also learn that on Shabbat he perforce eats bread, and this is because it says "oneg"
["delight"], and there is no delight without eating bread.

In other words, the obligation of oneg is unique to Shabbat, and that is what obligates
bread-based meals. Against this, stand the words of the Rambam (Hilkhot Yom Tov 6:15):

The commandment to honor Shabbat and make it a delight applies equally to all the festivals. For
Scripture says: "And call … the holy of the Lord clothed with honor" (Yeshayanu 58:13),

and to each of the festivals it applies the term, "a holy convocation"

(Vayikra 23:2, passim; Bamidbar 28:18, passim)

We have explained the meaning of "honor" and "delight" in the laws concerning Shabbat.[7]

It should be noted that the approach of the Tosafot on our passage and the Rashba
in Berakhot is relatively exceptional among the Rishonim. Elsewhere, even the Tosafot (see, for
example, Berakhot 49b, s.v. iy) assume that eating a bread-based meal on Yom Tov is
obligatory. The Meiri on our passage and in Berakhot 49b proposes several more moderate
versions of the Tosafot's approach:

1) The obligation to eat a bread-based meal on Yom Tov, other than on the first night of Sukkot
and Pesach, is merely by rabbinic law.

2) "Perhaps, based on the law of Yom Tov, one is merely obligated not to spend the Yom
Tov in a fast. But if a person ate his fill on Erev Yom Tov, he is not obligated to eat on the night
of Yom Tov until the next day. Because of the law of sukka and matza, however, he is obligated to
eat at night."

3) "Some explain that on Shabbat and Yom Tov it suffices to eat fruit. And even though they
do not require Birkat ha-Mazon, it is possible with fruit included among the seven species that
require the me'ein shalosh blessing. And according to the Yerushalmi, mention is made therein of
the day. And on Rosh Chodesh, one is not even required to eat fruit, for the only thing that is
forbidden is fasting due to grief and sorrow. On Shabbat, however, all agree that one must eat
bread, for 'oneg' is mentioned in its regard, and there is no 'oneg' without bread."

THE POSITION OF THE BA'AL HA-MA'OR

The Ba'al ha-Ma'or in Pesachim adopted a different approach:

If he wishes, he eats nothing at all during the day, for the Yom Tov of Sukkot is different than
other Yomim Tovim. For the Torah likens it to residence: If he wishes, he eats, and if he wishes, he
does not eat. And just as Rabbi Eliezer made it different to be stringent, so too the Sages make it
different to be lenient. (18b in Alfasi, s.v. ve-rabbi)

28
 This position assumes that the Tosafot's general understanding of Yom Tov is mistaken – it
goes without saying that Yom Tov requires two bread-based meals. They are right, however,
specifically about Sukkot, for there is a special scriptural decree that exempts Sukkot from the
general obligation of Yom Tov meals.[8]

The scriptural decree, as the Ba'al ha-Ma'or understands it, is exceedingly interesting. He
draws an analogy between Rabbi Eliezer (who learns from the rule of "'You shall dwell' – similar
to [normal] residence," an obligation to eat fourteen meals over the seven days of the festival – a
clear obligation of dwelling in the sukka), and the Sages (who from the same rule derive an
exemption from the Yom Tov meal). In other words, in order to give the mitzva of sukka the proper
character, according to the Sages, the meals must be defined as optional, for only then would
the sukka have the defining characteristic of a house, and the need to give the mitzva of sukka the
proper character supersedes the general obligation of Yom Tov.

Now, we must ask: Is it possible that according to the Ba'al ha-Ma'or, on the Shabbat of Sukkot
there is no obligation to eat three meals? If we answer in the affirmative, we must understand that
despite the fact that there is a conflict here, the mitzva of sukka supersedes the obligations of Yom
Tov and Shabbat. Assuming, however, that this conclusion regarding Shabbat is unreasonable, and
in the words of the Ba'al ha-Ma'or there is no hint to this halakhic novelty regarding Shabbat, but
only with respect to the Yom Tov of Sukkot, we must accept one of the following alternatives:

1) The mitzva of sukka is strong enough to cancel the laws of Yom Tov, but the laws
of Shabbat are more important and not so easily canceled. This understanding is difficult – from
where do we derive such a distinction?

2) We are not dealing here with one halakhic realm superseding another. The Shabbat of
Sukkot has a certain sanctity of its own, and this sanctity obligates certain laws that are not related
in any way to the sanctity of the festival of Sukkot. The Yom Tov of Sukkot, in contrast, is a day
the entire sanctity of which is the sanctity of the festival of Sukkot, and therefore its laws are
determined in light of the nature of the mitzva of sukka. Thus, there is room to say that its laws are
different from those of the other Yomim Tovim. It is, of course, possible that the Rishonim who
disagree with the Ba'al ha-Ma'or reject this understanding, and think that the sanctity of Yom
Tov is an independent factor, and while in this case we are dealing with the Yom Tov of Sukkot,
the sanctity of the day does not rest on its being Sukkot.

The position of the Ran and other rishonim

The prevalent position among the Rishonim assumes that there is an obligation to eat a
bread-based meal on the night of Yom Tov and during the day, and this includes Sukkot. The
expression, "if he wishes, he eats," does not relate to other halakhic obligations such as the
obligation to eat a Yom Tov meal. When the Torah commands that one must eat in the sukka on
the first night of Sukka, it has ramifications beyond the obligation to eat a Yom Tov meal together
with the law that a regular meal on Sukkot must be eaten in a sukka.

These ramifications require examination, but before doing so, let us consider a question, or
more precisely two questions, that arise regarding the basic nature of the obligation of eating a

29
meal on the first night of Sukkot. As we have seen, according to the Tosafot, the Rashba and
the Ba'al ha-Ma'or, the very existence of an obligation to eat a meal on this night is a novelty. This
allows us to propose that we are not dealing with an obligation that stems from the mitzva of sukka,
but rather that the Torah imposed the obligation of a meal, which because it is eaten on the festival
of Sukkot, must be eaten in a sukka. According to this understanding, were a person to eat outside
of a sukka, e.g. where he falls into the category of mitzta'er (a person who would suffer distress
were he to eat in a sukka), and later the cause of the distress was removed, he would not be
obligated to eat another meal in the sukka. While this understanding may seem surprising, it finds
support in the words of the Rishonim and Acharonim in various contexts.

Even if we assume that we are dealing with an obligation that stems from
the mitzva of sukka, there is room for two different understandings:

1) As we have emphasized above, the mitzva on the seven days of the festival is not to eat and
sleep in the sukka, but to dwell in the sukka, that is, to reside in it, the primary practical expressions
of which are eating and sleeping. It is, therefore, reasonable to understand that even when we
encounter the obligatory mitzva to eat on the first night of the festival, it is not essentially an
obligation of eating, as in the case of matza, but rather an obligation to fulfill in a practical manner
one of the primary expressions of dwelling – eating a regular meal in the sukka.

2) The obligation to eat a meal on the first night of the festival is different in its very essence,
and not only in the level of obligation, from the obligation of eating on the other days. On the first
night, we are not dealing with an obligation of dwelling, but with an obligation analogous to that
of matza, which imposes a special duty of eating on the first night in the sukka.

Of course, if we understand that we are not dealing with an obligation that stems from
the mitzva of sukka, but rather with an obligation to eat a meal, which by chance must be eaten in
the sukka, it is then clear that the nature of the obligation is not one of dwelling, but rather of
eating.

Let us now examine the first direction taken by the Ran to explain the contribution of the first
derivation that obligates us in a meal on the first night of Sukkot:

And regarding the first day of the festival of Sukkot, we also learn that one is obligated to eat
an amount that obligates eating in the sukka. For based on the law of Yom Tov, it would suffice
to eat the quantity of an egg in a haphazard manner outside the sukka. And we learn also from
the festival of Pesach that one is obligated to eat an amount that obligates eating in the sukka. It
seems, therefore, that one is obligated to eat more than the amount of an egg. (Ran, 12b in Alfasi,
s.v. matni)

According to this approach, it stands to reason that on the first night of Sukkot there is an
obligatory mitzva to dwell in a sukka, which is expressed through eating. In order to fulfill
the mitzva of eating, it suffices to eat the amount of an olive, as in the case of matza, for eating the
amount of an olive is regarded as eating. Since, however, the mitzva is dwelling in a sukka, it is
necessary to partake of a regular meal, and therefore one must eat more than the amount of an egg
(the precise amount is discussed later in the tractate, pp. 26a-27a).

30
 In the continuation, the Ran changes direction:

But there are those who say as follows: Since we learn from the festival of Pesach, we learn
entirely from it: Just as there the size of an olive, so too here the size of an olive. And even
though on the other days of the festival [of Sukkot] the size of an olive is regarded as haphazard
[eating], and it may be eaten outside a sukka, nevertheless on the first night, since Scripture
established it as an obligation to eat in the sukka, it is regarded as a regular meal.

It is possible to understand that this opinion radically disagrees with the previous view.
There is no obligation to eat the amount of a regular meal, and therefore this is not an obligation
of dwelling, but rather of eating. Moreover, this is not an obligation stemming from
the mitzva of sukka, but rather an obligation to eat a meal on the fifteenth of Tishrei. But since
Scripture established it as obligatory, it is regarded as a regular meal, and thus it must be eaten in
a sukka, based on the "fulfillable" mitzva of eating in a sukka all seven days of the festival.

Upon careful examination of the Ran's wording, however, we see that the obligation is to
eat in the sukka: "Since Scripture established it as an obligation to eat in the sukka." Thus, we are
dealing with an obligation that stems from the mitzva of sukka; and this is not a mitzva of eating,
but rather of dwelling, for it is necessary to note that because Scripture established it as obligatory,
this turns the eating into a regular meal. This being the case, it seems that even according to this
view, we are dealing with the obligatory mitzva of dwelling in a sukka. A certain lack of clarity
remains, however, for if Scripture established it as obligatory to eat in the sukka, why do we need
the added element that therefore it is regarded as a regular meal? In any event, Scripture required
that the meal be eaten in a sukka!

Practically speaking, according to the prevalent opinion, eating the amount of an olive
suffices.[9] Thus rules also the Rambam: "Eating on the first night of the festival in a sukka is
obligatory. Even if he eats the amount of an olive, he has fulfilled his obligation. From then on, it
is optional" (Hilkhot Sukka 6:7). We are still left with an open question. The wording of the
Rambam suggests that just as on the other days of the festival one is permitted to eat food in the
amount of an olive outside the sukka, so too on the first night of the festival, but on that night, one
is obligated to eat the size of an olive inside a sukka. The Tur, however, states otherwise:

Once he eats in [the sukka] grain in the amount of an olive, he has fulfilled his obligation, even
though the measure regarding [the prohibition] of eating outside a sukka is the amount of an
egg. The first night is different, because the obligation is greater, so that even if he wishes to eat
only the amount of an olive, he is forbidden to do so outside the sukka. Therefore, he fulfills
therewith also the obligation of sukka. (Tur, 639)

There are two novelties in the Tur's position:

1) In addition to the obligatory mitzva of the first night, the regulations of the
"fulfillable" mitzva are different on the first night than on the other days of the festival, so that on
the first night one is forbidden to eat bread in the amount of an olive outside the sukka.

31
2) This itself bestows importance upon eating in the amount of an olive on the first night, so
that it is regarded as a regular meal, with which one can fulfill the obligatory mitzva. It is clear that
even according to the Tur, the mitzva is dwelling, but the parameters of dwelling are different on
the first night than on the other days of the festival, both regarding the "fulfillable" mitzva and the
obligatory mitzva.

The Ran in the continuation cites another opinion:

Others say that for this reason we learn the first night of the festival of Sukkot from the festival
of Pesach, to teach us that even if it is raining, one is obligated to eat in the sukka, even though
he is exempt on the other days.

Here we have a clear expression of the understanding that the obligation on the first night
of Sukkot is not one of dwelling, but rather of eating. The exemption from sukka granted to one
who would suffer distress therefrom is derived from the rule of "'You shall dwell' – similar to
[normal] residence," this not being the type of dwelling that the Torah commanded about. On the
first night of the festival, the obligation is one of eating, and not of dwelling, and this obligation is
not impaired if it is accompanied by distress. This, of course, assumes that the sukka is a sukka that
is fit for the mitzva in all ways, and the deficiency in the law of distress is in the act of dwelling,
so that if we are not dealing with an act of dwelling, but rather an act of eating, the obligation
remains in place.

A more moderate position in this context is found in the Tosafot in Berakhot:

If you say: What is the difference whether he is required to eat because of Yom Tov or because
of Sukkot? Rabbenu Yehuda says that there is a practical ramification in a case where it was
raining and he ate outside the sukka. Now if because of the honor of Yom Tov, this is good. But
if for sukka on the first day of the festival, he must eat again in the sukka after it stops raining,
for we learn "fifteenth" - "fifteenth" from Pesach. But on the other days this is not necessary.

(Tosafot, Berakhot 49b, s.v. iy)

According to this view, there is no reason to eat in the sukka while it is raining, for this is
not considered dwelling in a sukka. But the exemption of mitzta'er regarding excessive effort that
need not be invested in order to reach a sukka does not apply on the first night of Sukkot.
According to this, it is clear that we are dealing with an obligation of dwelling, to which some of
the leniencies applying the rest of the week do not apply.

The Rashba in a responsum (IV, no. 78) disagrees with both of these views. He understands that
we are dealing with dwelling that is no different than the dwelling of the rest of the week, except
for the fact that on the first night it is obligatory, while on the other days it is optional:

It seems to me that if one suffers distress and it rains upon him, he is not required to eat in
a sukka once it has reached the stage that "a stiff dish is spoiled." For we say "'You shall dwell'
– similar to [normal] residence." And the Torah only obligated one to eat in a sukka in the
manner that he eats in his house. For were this the case, it is impossible that the Gemara would

32
not say so. And that which the Sages learned "fifteenth" - "fifteenth" from the festival of
Pesach, this is not to teach you that he is obligated in any event to eat in a sukka on the first
night, even in a situation of distress, for one who suffers distress is exempt. But only that where
he does not suffer distress, he is obligated to eat [in a sukka] on the first night, but more than
that he is not obligated, against Rabbi Eliezer. Know that this is true, for according to Rabbi
Eliezer, a person is obligated to eat fourteen meals in the sukka. And both according to him and
according to the Sages, day-time travelers are exempt during the day, and night-time travelers
are exempt at night. And we do not find that they distinguish between the first night and the rest
of the days and nights. And were this the case, they would surely say: When does this apply? On
the other days. But on the first night he is obligated, for Scripture has established it as an
obligation. Rather, he is certainly not obligated at all, for Scripture exempted him, from that
which it states: "You shall dwell," from which we derive: "'You shall dwell' – similar to
[normal] residence." And even night-watchmen over gardens and orchards are exempt
from sukka at night. He who says they are obligated must bring proof. We have not heard or
seen anything.

The Ritva brings another important position in this context. The prevalent position is that
the special obligation on this night relates specifically to eating, and in this context, we raised the
question whether we are dealing with eating as eating, or with eating as an expression of dwelling.
But in any event, it is clear that there is no special law governing the first night of Sukkot regarding
the other aspects of dwelling. The Ritva, however, brings an interesting dispute in this context:

I heard in the name of one of the leading authorities of the generation in France that he
requires a person to sleep in the sukka on the first night of Sukkot, even if it is raining. And [the
Sages] only permitted a person to leave the sukka on the other days [of Sukkot] when it is [only]
optional. But on the first night, Scripture established it as an obligation by way of a gezera
shava of "fifteenth" – "fifteenth" from the festival of Pesach. But this is not correct at all
according to what we have written that the obligation of the first night relates exclusively to
eating, similar to the first night of Pesach, for the obligation regarding sleeping is not derived
from there.

It is clear that according to the leading authority of the generation cited by the Ritva, the
obligatory mitzva of the fifteenth relates to the mitzva of dwelling in the sukka in its entirety, to the
point that it may be applied even to realms that have no parallel on the night of Pesach.

We shall conclude by relating to the customary practice of Chabad and other Chassidic
sects, to continue eating in the sukka even when it is raining all seven days of the holiday. We shall
try to defend this practice, by means of an argument developed in Responsa Eretz Tzvi (no. 98).
As we have seen, eating in a sukka while it is raining cannot be seen as a fulfillment of dwelling,
but there is room to see it as a fulfillment of eating. Thus, there are those who obligate doing so
on the first night of Sukkot. Let us now refer back to the talmudic passage with which we opened
this shiur. There is a certain redundancy in the sources for the Sages' position, regarding the nature
of the mitzva of sukka all seven days: "'You shall dwell' – similar to normal residence," and the
analogy to matza. It may be suggested that there are two separate obligating factors during the
seven days of the festival. One is learned from "'You shall dwell' – similar to [normal residence],"
which means that a person must turn his sukka into his dwelling place, and the practical expression

33
of this is that if he eats, he must do so in the sukka. The second is derived by way of a gezera
shava from matza, and it obligates eating, similar to matza. This obligation is at the level of an
obligatory mitzva on the first night, and it may be suggested that similar to matza – according to
the views of the Ba'al ha-Ma'or and the Vilna Gaon – it exists also on the rest of the days of the
festival at the level of a "fulfillable" mitzva. According to this explanation, if on Chol ha-Mo'ed
Sukkot a person eats in the sukka in the rain, while he does not fulfill thereby the mitzva of
dwelling in a sukka, for this is not "similar to normal residence," he does fulfill the
"fulfillable" mitzva of eating. It this context it is appropriate to cite the words of the Mishna
Berura:

I have my doubts according to the known position of the Vilna Gaon that there is a mitzva to
eat matza all seven days of Pesach, as is implied by the plain sense of the verse: "Seven days
shall you eat matza," only that the positive commandment is only on the [first] night, but later
it is just a plain ["fulfillable"] mitzva. It is possible that the same applies here that there is
a mitzva lekhatchila to eat bread all seven days and to recite the blessing "to dwell in
the sukka."
(Mishna Berura 639:24)

The Mishna Berura implies that he is not dealing with a lekhatchila obligation to try to
fulfill the mitzva of dwelling in a sukka, but rather that he is raising the possibility that there exists
a "fulfillable" mitzva of eating, similar to that of matza.12

NOTES
[1] Unless otherwise specified references in this shiur to talmudic passages relate to tractate Sukka; and references to the Rambam
and his super commentaries relate to Hilkhot Shofar, Sukka and Lulav.
[2] Avnei Nezer, Orach Chayyim, no. 481.
[3] Minchat Chinukh, commandment 325, note 10.
[4] Atvan de-Orayta, rule 11.
[5] An interesting practical ramification was suggested by R. Chayyim Brisker. The Gemara in Sanhedrin 62b states that when one
is mitasek be-chalavim ve-arayot – mistakenly eating forbidden fats (intending to take a permitted piece) or mistakenly engaging
in an incestuous relationship (by mistaking the person) - he must bring a sin-offering, because he derives pleasure from his mistaken
action. That is to say, there are certain laws which do not require the action of a person as a gavra, but rather they relate to his body
as a cheftza. They are not subject to the law of mit'asek, which involves a severance between a person and his body (see Beit Yishai,
no. 23. There are other explanations of this law as well.) The Rishonim (Rashi, Rosh ha-Shana 28a, and elsewhere) applied this
law also to mitzvot, that one who eats matza as a mit'asek fulfills his obligation. Rav Chayyim suggested that this is not true about
eating in a sukka, for we are not dealing with eating as eating, but rather as part of the act of dwelling – an act that clearly requires
a person's involvement as a gavra.
[6] Regarding sleep, even irregular sleep is forbidden outside the sukka, though the Gemara explains this as stemming from a
concern for a transition to regular sleep, or that "there is no regularity regarding sleep," that is to say, that "there is no difference
between regular and irregular [sleep] regarding the sukka, for a peson does not regulate his sleep, for sometimes he merely dozes
off a little and that suffices. Therefore this is his sleep" (Rashi, 26a). From here there is room to object to what the Rosh says
in Berakhot: "Sleeping is more severe than eating, for one is permitted to eat an irregular meal outside a sukka, but irregular sleep
outside a sukka is forbidden" (1, 13), for it would seem that this is not an expression of the severity of sleeping vis-a-vis eating.
[7] One possible practical ramification of this disagreement is whether or not there is an obligation to eat a bread-based meal
on Yom Tov. Another possible ramification is whether or not there is an obligation to eat a third meal on Yom Tov. This is based
on the words of the Or Zaru'a (II, 52), who writes: "The reason for [eating] three meals is 'oneg.'" The Ritva on our passage, who
disagrees with the Rashba and the Tosafot, writes: "Shabbat and Yom Tov are the same regarding the obligation to eat an olive-
sized portion of bread in three meals." The Tur (Orach Chayyim 529), however, cites a disagreement on the issue: "And some say
that one must eat [on Yom Tov] three meals. Thus writes the Rambam, of blessed memory, but my father the Rosh did not act in
this manner." The rulings of the Shulchan Arukh, however, do not show consistency on these two points: "And one must honor and

12
Translated by David Strauss

34
delight in it as on Shabbat… and one is obligated to break bread with two loaves and establish each meal over wine… But it is not
customary to eat a third meal" (Orach Chayyim 529:1). It is possible that he understood that the obligation to eat a third meal is not
based on "oneg," but rather a reminder of the manna, a double portion of which would fall on Friday. On Yom Tov, however, the
manna would fall on the festival itself (see Beitza 2b, Tosafot, s.v. ve-haya). See also Rav Mosheh Lichtenstein's article in Alon
Shevut 166, p. 11, who develops a different approach to this issue.
[8] The Meiri on our passage cites the view of the Ba'al ha-Ma'or in the name of the "one of the great Rishonim," and comments:
"Nevertheless, regarding matza they offer no resolution." It stands to reason that regarding matza, the Ba'al ha-Ma'or would accept
one of the other resolutions offered by the Rishonim, e.g., that indeed there is an obligation to eat a meal even during the day on
the first day of Pesach and similarly at night and during the day on the seventh day of Pesach, but the Torah had to obligate the
eating of matza on the first night of the festival so that we should eat matza that is shemura and not ashira.
[9] The Yerushalmi raises a question about this matter: "Rabbi Ze'ira asked: Do we say that just like there until he eats a matza in
the amount of an olive, here too until he eats a grain product in a sukka in the amount of an olive."

What If It Rains on The First Night of Sukkos?

Eating in the Sukkah on the First Night of Sukkot13

The Torah (Vayikra 23:42) states "basukkos teishvu shivas yamim," one must dwell in a sukkah for
the seven days of Sukkot. This mitzvah includes eating, drinking and sleeping in
the sukkah. Additionally, the Gemara (Sukkah 27a) derives from a gezeirah shava (a method of
biblical interpretation) that the first night of Sukkot is equated to the first night of Pesach. Just as
there is an obligation to eat (matzah) on the first night of Pesach, so too there is a specific obligation
to eat bread in the sukkah on the first night of Sukkot.

The Question of the Rishonim

Many Rishonim ask the following question regarding the obligation of eating in the sukkah on the
first night of Sukkot: At every Yom Tov meal there is an obligation to eat bread. Accordingly,
there is an obligation to eat bread on the first night of Sukkot. The mitzvah of dwelling in
the sukkah requires that one eat that Yom Tov meal in the sukkah. If so, why is there a need for a
separate obligation to eat the in the sukkah on the FIRST night of Sukkot if every Yom Tov meal
on Sukkot must be eaten in the sukkah?

Tosafos, (Berachos 49b s.v. Ee Ba'i) explain that this special obligation is necessary for a situation
where it rains for part of the first night of Sukkos. If it is raining when one is ready to start one's
Yom Tov meal, there is no obligation to eat the Yom Tov meal in the sukkah. If however, it stops
raining, the obligation to eat in the sukkah on the first night of Sukkot would require one to eat
bread in the sukkah after the rain stops.

13
https://www.adathisraelshul.org/e-torah/yomtov/50-succos-78371/141-if-it-rains-on-the-first-night-of-sukkos

35
It is clear from the comments of Tosafos that there is no obligation to eat in the rain even on the
first night of Sukkos. According to Tosafos, if it rains the entire first night of Sukkos, one is
exempt from this obligation. However, the Rosh, (Berachos 7:23), is of the opinion that the
obligation to eat in the sukkah is necessary for a situation where it rains the entire night. Although
one would normally not be obligated to eat the Yom Tov meal in the rain, on the first night of
Sukkot one must eat a k'zayit (the size of an olive) of bread in the sukkah, even if it must be done
in the rain.

The Ran (Sukkah 12b, s.v. Matnitin), offers a different explanation to this problem. The Mishna
(Sukkah 26b) states that one is permitted to eat less than a k'beitza (the size of an egg) outside of
the sukkah. A k'beitza is much larger than the k'zayis that is normally required for the Yom Tov
meal. The Ran suggests that in theory, one is not obligated to eat the Yom Tov meal in
the sukkah provided that he only eats a k'zayis of bread. Therefore, there is a necessity for a special
obligation to eat bread in the sukkah on the first night of Sukkot. Furthermore, the Ran suggests
that one is required to eat a k'beitza in the sukkah on the first night. However, he does admit that
one can argue that eating a k'zayis in the sukkah is sufficient in order to fulfill this special
obligation.

An Analysis of the Opinions

Ostensibly, the question of whether one must eat in the sukkah on the first night of Sukkot while
it is raining is contingent on the nature of the obligation of the mitzvah of the first night. Tosafos
and Ran are of the opinion that the mitzvah of the first night is reflective of the obligation to eat in
the sukkah throughout Sukkot. Therefore, when it is raining, the exemption from eating in
the sukkah that exists throughout Sukkot will exempt one on the first night as well. Rabbeinu
Asher - who holds that one should eat in the sukkah on the first night even if it is raining - is of the
opinion that the mitzvah of the first night is independent of the obligation to eat in
the sukkah throughout Sukkot.

Nevertheless, the Vilna Gaon, Biur HaGra, Orach Chaim 639:5, offers a different explanation for
the opinion of Tosafos. He explains that Tosafos are of the opinion that while it is raining,
the sukkah is considered an invalid sukkah and there can be no fulfillment of the mitzvah while it
is raining. The implication is that the Tosafos are of the opinion that one is obligated to eat in
the sukkah on the first night of Sukkot regardless of whether the situation would exempt one from
eating in the sukkah throughout Sukkot. The only reason why one does not eat in the rain on the
first night of Sukkot is a technical one; a sukkah in the rain is an invalid sukkah and it is impossible
to fulfill the mitzvah in such a situation.

36
Perhaps what motivated the Vilna Gaon to provide a novel explanation of the opinion of Tosafos
is a ruling of the Tosefta. The Tosefta, (Sukkah 2:5), states that if one starts a meal indoors due to
the rain and then the rain stops, one is not required to conclude the meal in the sukkah. This ruling
is codified in Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chaim 639:6). The reason why one is not required to
conclude the meal in the sukkah is based on the principle of taishvu k'ein taduru, the principle
mentioned by the Gemara (see for example Sukkah 27a) that the obligation to dwell in
the sukkah is reflective of the normal way to live in a home. Just as one who starts a meal outside
of his home (due to the inability to eat in his home) will not return to his home mid-meal (when it
becomes available), so too one who cannot eat in the sukkah is not required to return to
the sukkah mid-meal when it becomes available. If one assumes that according to Tosafos, the
principle of taishvu k'ein taduru applies on the first night, one would not be obligated to eat in
the sukkah on the first night even after the rain stops. However, Tosafos state explicitly that a
special mitzvah of eating in the sukkah on the first night of Sukkot is only necessitated in a case
where it rains for part of the night. Clearly Tosafos are of the opinion that one is obligated to move
mid-meal from the house to the sukkah. How can there be such an obligation if throughout Sukkot
one is actually exempt from eating in the sukkah in such a situation? This question may be what
compels the Vilna Gaon to understand that the opinion of Tosafos is not based on taishvu k'ein
taduru. Rather, Tosafos are of the opinion that while it is raining, the sukkah is considered an
invalid sukkah and there can be no fulfillment of the mitzvah.

Nevertheless, the Ran - who holds that one must eat a k'beitza in the sukkah on the first night - is
clearly of the opinion that the mitzvah of the first night is based on the obligation to eat in
the sukkah throughout Sukkos. According to the Ran, the mitzvah of the first night requires that
one put himself in a situation where he would be obligated to eat in the sukkah throughout
Sukkos. If it raining there is no way to obligate oneself to eat in the sukkah and therefore, one is
exempt even on the first night.
The Ruling of Rama
The Rema, (Orach Chaim 639:5), rules in accordance with the opinion of Rabbeinu Asher that if
it is raining on the first night of Sukkot, one should eat a k'zayis of bread in the sukkah. The
Mishna Berurah (639:35), notes that although Rema does seem to rule conclusively on the matter,
one should be concerned for the many Rishonim who maintain that one cannot fulfill the mitzvah
of the first night while it is raining. Therefore, one should not recite the beracha of leishev
basukkah if it is raining because according to these Rishonim there is absolutely no fulfillment of
any mitzvah. Furthermore, it is preferable to wait until midnight (and if that is not possible, at
least one or two hours) for the rain to stop in order to fulfill the mitzvah according to all
opinions. [Mishna Berurah, Sha'ar HaTziyun 639:67, rules that if there are those who are too
hungry or tired to wait, one is not required to wait.] Mishna Berurah also notes that if one follows
the ruling of Rema by eating a k'zayis of bread in the rain and then it stops raining, one should
return to the sukkah and eat a k'beitza of bread in the sukkah in order to satisfy the opinions of
Tosafot and the Ran. Upon returning to the sukkah one may recite the beracha of leishev
basukkah.
So bottom line:
Here are the basic guidelines regarding what to do if it rains on the first night of Sukkos:

37
1) If it is raining steadily and there is a reliable weather forecast for the rain to continue all night
(Psak of Rav E.M. Teitz Shlita based on Psak of Rav Pinchas Teitz ztl.), one should put on his/her
rain-coat, make Kiddush (with the Shehecheyanu blessing), and eat an olive's volume of bread in
the Sukkah. No blessing of Le'sheiv Ba-Sukkah is recited. The rest of the meal should be eaten
indoors.

2) If there is a possibility that the rain will stop (e.g., it is drizzling or raining on and off), it is
proper to wait an hour or two for the rain to subside before doing anything. However, if this delay
will disturb the dignity and pleasure of one's Yom Tov, or if one's family/guests are hungry and/or
tired, there is no obligation to wait, and one should follow the instructions above in note 1).

3) If the rain stops while the meal is being eaten in the house or even after the meal is finished,
one is obligated to go to back out to the Sukkah, recite the Leishev Ba-Sukkah blessing, and eat an
egg's volume of bread there. Even if the rain stops after midnight, that amount of bread should be
eaten in the Sukkah. However, if one has already gone to bed by the time the rain stops, there is no
obligation to get out of bed in order to go outside and eat in the Sukkah.

38