It's apparently an oral tradition relating to one of the students of the Vilna Gaon, Rabbi Yisrael of Shklov. The more complete story is recounted here in Hebrew. It begins like this:
הגאון רבי ישראל משקלוב מספר, על תלמיד מתלמידי הגר"א, שבא לקבל פני רבו בחול המועד סוכות, וביקש מרבו כי יעמידו במבחן על כל מסכתא דסוכה על פה. היה זה אחר שקודם החג עורר הגאון ...
The source is Sukkah 52b:
אמר רב חנא בר אחא אמרי בי רב ארבעה מתחרט עליהן הקב"ה שבראם ואלו הן גלות כשדים וישמעאלים ויצר הרע ... ישמעאלים דכתיב ישליו אהלים לשודדים ובטוחות למרגיזי אל לאשר הביא אלוה בידו
Rav Chana Bar Acha said a saying of the school of Rav (it is debated what that is a reference to - see the link) The Holy One Blessed be He regrets four ...
Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chaim 658:5) rules explicitly that only if the last person returns the esrog is the first one (and all others) yotzei.
Interesting sidebar: The Biur Halacha is in doubt whether they were yotzei only if the last user returned the esrog on his own volition to the original owner or even if the original owner had to demand it back from the ...
The gemara in Bava Kamma 117b brings a machlokes between R' Elazar and the Sages.
If someone steals (gozel) a field, what happens if the field is then flooded? R' Elazar holds that the thief must replace the victim's loss by buying him another field elsewhere. The Sages say the thief merely says "Here is your land".
R' Elazar holds karka is nigzeles while ...
In your question you assume there was an eruv in Yerushalayim, and therefore find it difficult to understand why they would not carry the Korban Pesach home until night, and why they would bring the 4 minim before Shabbos.
However, it is clear from the Gemara Eruvin 101a that no eruv was made in the streets of Yerushalayim. Rav Moshe Feinstein [in Igros ...
Sukkah 43b does indeed briefly discuss it:
אינהו דידעי בקיבועא דירחא לידחי כי אתא בר הדיא אמר לא איקלע
They [in Eretz Yisrael] who know the establishment of the months, let [Aravah] push off [Shabbos]! When Bar Hedya came, he said, it does not fall out [on Shabbos].
As Rashi there explains:
לא איקלע - הם מעברים את אלול או אחד מן החדשים כשרואין ...
I think you are misunderstanding the line of דאורייתא תני פסולה מבוי דרבנן תני תקנתא.
Here is the passage in context:
תנן התם מבוי שהוא גבוה מעשרים אמה ימעט רבי יהודה אומר אינו צריך מאי
שנא גבי סוכה דתני פסולה ומאי שנא גבי מבוי דתני תקנתא סוכה דאורייתא תני
פסולה מבוי דרבנן תני תקנתא ואיבעית אימא בדאורייתא נמי תני תקנתא מיהו
סוכה (דנפישי ...
No, the Torah does not mention explicitly that the Jews built actual Succot. (If it had, there wouldn’t be an argument as to whether the Jews had real Sukkot or Sukkot made from the Ananei Hakavod). However, in Vayikra 23:43, HaShem mentions the fact that the Jews lived in Succot, as the reason to celebrate Sukkot:
לְמַעַן֮ יֵדְע֣וּ דֹרֹֽתֵיכֶם֒ כִּ֣י ...
This is a list of things which are Ossur behanaa (forbidden for benefit) for ever. in Talmud-Gemara Avoda zara 74a:
מתני' אלו אסורין ואוסרין בכל שהו יין נסך ועבודת כוכבים ועורות לבובין ושור הנסקל ועגלה ערופה וציפורי מצורע ושער נזיר ופטר חמור ובשר בחלב ושעיר המשתלח וחולין שנשחטו בעזרה הרי אלו אסורין ואוסרין בכל שהוא
Among the list: Eglah Arufa, the hair ...
According to Macabees 2 chapter 1 verse 21 it looks like that year they did not celebrate Sukkot on time until Kislev
כא) ועתה כי יש את נפשנו לחוג את יום חנוכת המזבח בעשרים וחמש לחודש
כסלו. לא חדלנו מהודיע אתכם לחוג אותו עמנו
כב) וחגותם אותו כימי חג הסוכות, וכיום אשר מצא בו נחמיה את אש הקודש
בשובו לבנות את המקדש ואת המזבח, ויקרב עליו עולות ...
Sukka (49a-b) describes this and mentions that the young Kohanim would clear out the congealed wine from the shitin (a large cavern beneath the altar, into which the libations would run, see Rashi 49a s.v. שיתין) every 70 years. In a b'raisa, Rabbi El'azar bar Tzadok describes the "congealed wine" as "similar in form to cakes of pressed figs":
אמר רבה בר ...
Art Scroll 6b2 goes into more detail.
All agree that the pronounced form has primacy so that of the 6 (3*2) we are left with four (2*2) allusions. The rabbanan then say that one of the four allusions is required for schach leaving three allusions. (note 23). The reason is that as once the two of the actual references are available for learning an allusion, ...
I think you're misinterpreting the waste of the threshing floor and of the winepress.
It's not referring to the left-over chaff and wine peels! If nothing else because they are unfit to cover a Sukka - the chaff would blow away and the wine peels would rot (assuming they're not already Mekabel Tumah, which they are from the moment they get wet).
Rav Hirsch states (on Noach 6:6) that this is not a matter or "regretting" a decision (as a man would regret a mistake), but that the expression of Man's free will caused an external series of events. An example that Rav Hirsch uses is Shaul Hamelech. That is, we cannot understand Hashem and we are attempting to explain what it is we see or that happens in ...
Rabbi Belovski has a shiur on this here. The Shem Mishmuel has a detailed explanation where I think the sugya is discussing the relationship between momentary joy and long term inculcated happiness, with the conclusion something like that neither is great without using them as part of a life of service and fear of God.
it seems prophecy is a higher level than ruach hakodesh as Rabbi Chaim Vital brings in gate 4 of shaarei kedusha
"After a man has merited to the deveikut, he will merit to the secret of 'equality' (hishtavut), and if he merits the secret of 'equality', he will merit to the secret of 'meditation', and after he has merited to the secret of 'meditation', he ...
Compare with the Rashi in proximity, which labels others as tzadikim. There are people who are included in these two lists, of shepherds and princes, for different reasons. Yishai, for instance, was a tzadik gamur. (See Shabbat 55b.)
Alternatively, it is seeking to explain why they are considered "princes". They are from among the prophets (rather than from ...
While this is a complex topic, here are the major details:
Can a mitzvah be called fulfilled even if it is built on an averah?
A stolen Lulav is invalid on the second day of Sukkot. The reason given on sukkah 30A is:
משום דהוה ליה מצוה הבאה בעבירה שנאמר (מלאכי א, יג) והבאתם גזול ואת הפסח ואת החולה גזול דומיא דפסח מה פסח לית ליה תקנתא אף גזול לית ליה ...
I am not sure I understood the deepness of the question. But the Rash quotes the Gemara Eruvin 27b in which the exclusion of water and salt for maaser sheni is learned from drashot. One of them is cited by the Rash, Klal Ufrat Uchlal. For maaser sheni the necessary conditions are not only gidule Karka, but Peri Miperi Ugidule Karka or, following another ...
You seem to have left out the key step in your summary of the story:
ולא אמרו לו דבר
And they didn't say anything to him.
Beit Hillel apparently did not know the end of the story (or disputed it); thus, they had a good proof against Beit Shammai. How can Beit Shammai maintain that this is not a valid form of eating in a Succah, when the very elders of Beit ...
That opinion in the gemara isn't telling us that a Sukkah "deserves" to be made out of waste; rather said drasha is being used to teach us the nature of what can serve as s'chach for a Sukkah. Namely, something that:
- a) grows from the ground
- b) isn't mekabel tumah
This isn't in conflict with the gemara you quote (Shabbos 133b) re: "zeh keili v'anveyhu." ...
Quite often, a min refers to an early Christian, who were initially Jews and considered themselves Jews.
At least in terms of Rabbi Abahu, the pasuk in Yeshaya 12 continues with the idea of salvation / Yeshuah.
וּשְׁאַבְתֶּם-מַיִם, בְּשָׂשׂוֹן, מִמַּעַיְנֵי, הַיְשׁוּעָה.
"Therefore with joy shall ye draw water out of the wells of salvation."
When she's mentioned in M. Sukka, her husband is NOT. B"SD
I think he was not alive during that incident recorded there (especially when they are discussing matters of education & her husband is not at all addressed).
The condition would not have been fulfilled, so the gift would have been retroactively invalid, so no one (other than Rabban Gamliel) would have been allowed to use the lulav, so no one would have been yotzei.
Avodah Zarah 26b:
המינין והמסורות והמומרים היו מורידין ולא מעלין
Heretics, informers, and sinners to anger Hashem - we kill them and do not save them.
As the Kohen showed that he's a Tzeduki, he qualifies as a heretic and therefore may be killed without a court case.
It's not a capital offense to perform a service in the temple incorrectly. So you don't have to assume that he was killed.
That said, the Mishna in Sanhedrin פרק ט - משנה ו mentions that if a Cohen performed the service while impure - the punishment for which is lashes by Bet Din - the Cohen Youth Movement would remove him from the temple and bash his head ...