(All quotes are from Parshas Emor, Vayikra 23.)

In pesukim 33-36, the Mitzvah of the karbanos on Sukkos in mentioned. In verses 37-38, the Torah records the concluding line of Eileh Moadei... which sounds like a conclusion to the parshah (which also started with Eileh Moadei in verses 2 and 4). Yet the pesukim continue in verses 39-44 with the mitzvos of Sukkah, Dalet Minim, and Chagigah. I wondered why there is this break.

Artscroll quotes Rabbeinu Bachaye who explains that the pesukim are separating the karbanos from the unique mitzvos of the chag. But if that's the case, why are Matzah (passuk 6), Shofar (incidentally mentioned in passuk 24), and afflicting oneself on Yom Kippur (pesukim 27, 29, 32) included earlier? They, too, should be pushed off. (Please don't tell me that it's because Sukkos is at the end and the others aren't. Either split off mitzvos not related to the karbanos or don't do so - its position shouldn't make a difference.)

So what exactly is Rabbeinu Bachaye's understanding of the pesukim, why Sukkos should be split apart more so than the other Yomim Tovim?

  • Shofar is barely mentioned. – Double AA Oct 19 '16 at 15:44
  • possible dupe judaism.stackexchange.com/q/58976/759 – Double AA Oct 19 '16 at 15:45
  • 1
    Note the Sifrei has a Hava Amina that following seven days of a holiday of Sukkot comes seven days of a holiday of Lulav. – Double AA Oct 19 '16 at 15:46
  • @DoubleAA Certainly related, but not a dupe. My question is less broad - I'm asking specifically on Rabbeinu Bachaye's explanation. – DonielF Oct 19 '16 at 15:49
  • It doesn't sound like you are asking specifically on RB's explanation. You're asking in general and mention one solution that you don't find satisfying. – Double AA Oct 19 '16 at 15:50

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .