Kislev 19, 5780. December 17, 2019
1- We created a chart to understand the 3 reasons and the three scenarios concerning the opinion of the Chachomim that a Sukkah that is 20 Amos plus is Posul.
2- Tosfos seems to imply that there is a fourth reason. That of Rav Chanan. A small Sukkah measuring only 7 by 7 Tefachim when it is over 20 Amos high is more like a chicken coop than a house. Even a temporary house.
3- We mentioned the two opinions as to why (according to Rav Yoshia) when the wall(s) of a 20 Amos + Suka reach the Schach it is Kosher. Rashi says that one’s eyes roll up to the Schach and thus is aware of it. The Ritvah says that it is because of the ‘cozyness’ one feels in an enclosed Suka.
The difference between these two reasoning is when only one wall reaches the Schach.
According to Rashi it would seem that it is sufficient. According to the Ritva one full wall does not create a closed environment.
4- Yosi Greenberg sent this PDF in regard to the question we posted last week of how it it possible that the Schach would not create a shade in a tall Suka at 12 PM.
5- The story of Hilna haMalka (Queen Helena) and her tall Sukkah she shared with her children. The Sukkah was more than 20 Amos high, which would be Posul according to the Chachamim in our Mishnah.
There are many big topics here and we just touched on one of them. We will BL”N discuss other topics in the next shiur.
~ Hilni was being מחנך her children that were under Bar Mitzvah.
We mentioned an original חידוש from the Rebbe on the topic of חינוך בקטן.
How does the Torah expect a young boy to begin to observe Mitzvos properly if מן התורה neither the father nor the son have a chiyuv to train prior to his Bar Mitzvah?
The Rebbe discusses the various opinions.
Of course there is the chiyuv מן התורה for a father to teach Torah to his son, but the training of a קטן in the practice of Mitzvos, that is only חינוך מדרבנן.
To teach a child to be in the position upon his Bar Mitzvah to be observe Mitzvos properly is not Biblical. The training is something that was instituted by the רבנן.
So how does the Torah expect a 13 year old to be proficient enough to be fully observant? Surely he will transgress due to his lack of knowledge and training.
One can perhaps say that it’s on the father to train him as part of the chiyuv to teach him Torah.
Or perhaps that’s it’s logical for him to train his son to be able to observe Mitzvos properly.
That would make it דאורייתא. [in footnote (26) he brings the famous פני יהושע that things that are logical are מן התורה, even if it is not written in the Torah! see here]
All the above is problematic as it would imply that Chinuch in Mitzvos [in addition to the teaching him Torah] is also מן התורה. We do not find any opinion that Chinuch is De’Oraiso.
So again, how does the Torah expect a 13 year old to be proficient enough to be fully observant? There is no way one can learn everything on the first day!
The Rebbe tries another approach. He quotes the various opinions about the chiyuv of a person to place himself in a position (prior to the זמן קיום המצוה ) that when the time of a Mitzvah arrives he is able to be מקיים the Mitzvah. [such as ensuring that when Pesach arrives one has Matzah]
The צל”ח ,ומנחת חינוך and more. See footnote 32.
So perhaps the same would apply to a קטן while he is still under the age of Mitzvos. A child is obligated to ‘be in the position to observe all Mitzvos’. Meaning that he needs to learn and practice before his Bar Mitzvah.
But that would imply that the chiyuv is on the minor, [such as הכשר מצוה] before his Bar Mitzvah. But that is also problematic since הכשר מצוה cannot apply on a non בר חיובא, such as the קטן.
The Rebbe concludes that (despite him not finding any precedent for this idea) one must say that indeed there is no chiyuv מן התורה prior to his בר מצוה to train himself!
The קטן, only upon reaching Bar Mitzvah is obligated to learn and train himself to be able to observe Mitzvos properly. And if that causes any transgression, the Torah accepts it as part of the learning process.
ואף כי זהו חידוש גדול בהלכה, מ”מ נראה דמסברא מוכרח הוא, דאיך יחול איזה חיוב באופן שמעצם טבעו א”א לקיימו, ומכיון שהאפשריות של קיום המצוה כדבעי אינה אלא ע”י הקדמה של לימוד וחינוך הדורש זמן מסויים, לכן צ”ל דכל זה נכלל בעצם החיוב. ולכן אין סברא שהתורה תחייב לחנכו בעודו בקטנותו כדי שיוכל לקיים כל המצוות כשיגדיל, ואדרבה, התחלת חלות החיוב אינה אלא ברגע שנתגדל, ואם צריך זמן
של חינוך והכשרה, הרי זה כלול בעצם חלות החיוב שחלים אחרי שנתגדל.
The Rebbe compares this to the Giyur process where we do not find any obligation for a Ger prior to his conversion to be בקי בכל המצוות.
Here is a link to the entire piece.
6- We tied what the Pnei Yohoshua says to Yud Tes Kislev. The Sicha of Tof Shin Beis. Page 52.
At the first celebration of Yud Tes Kislev (which occurred three years after the year of the imprisonment and release) the Alter Rebbe said in the name of the Ba’al Shem Tov: “To be a fool, sadness and the feeling of self importance are by Chassidim an Issur m’De’Oraisa!
Conversely, being smart, being happy by emphasizing the joy found everything and acting tactfully are by Chassidim a Mitzvah De’Oraisa!
Now, obvious question: We only have 613 Mitzvos. Is this a new mitzvah? Or, to which one of the 613 Mitzvos is this directive associated with?
With what the Pnei Yohoshua writes it is quite easily understood:
Such obvious and logical ideas (such as not to be a fool and to be smart and happy) need not be written in the Torah to be דאורייתא!