Aravah And Arev

The ushpiz of Hoshana Rabbah is Dovid. The day of Hashana Rabbah is the day of the aravah. What is the connection between Dovid and the aravah? Many of the Chassidik books explain that Dovid is associated with malchus which is in a complete state of nullification to Hashem as the Zohar says מלכות לית ליה מגרמיה כלום. In the same vein the aravah is bereft of any natural advantages - אין לה טעם וריח and therefore is totally negated. The Sfas Emes (5648) says they both embody the avodah of צפית לישועה and it is specifically the avodah of those who don't think they have any maalot and purely look to Hashem for salvation that receive salvation. The Shem MiShmuel (5671) adds that it through the aravah's recognition of its lack of any self redeeming qualities that it merits a special avodah. 

The Tiferes Shlomo (Mikatz) says כי שורש ענין הערבות לקבל על עצמו חוב זולתו ולסבול עבור חבירו זה הוא בבחי' המלכות כיל"ח. With this idea he explains why it is Yehuda, the father of malchus in Klal Yisrael is the first one to be an ערב, to take responsibility for someone else -when he guaranteed the return of Binyamin. It is all a reflection of this same middah, of a lack of self absorption that allows room for others. 

The ערבות share the same root as the word ערב, a guarantor. It is paradoxically the aravah's total devotion to the other species that allow it to merit its own special treatment.

The Garbage Is Worthy

The Gemarah says חל שם שמים על הסוכה. Why is it the mitzvah of sukkah that merits this מגרגה? Why is the mitzvah to be fulfilled with פסולת גורן ויקב? Why are the remains of the worn out בגדי כהונה used for the torches at the שמחת בית השואבה? The lesson is that even when a person is not at his best, not at a time of peak performance, still, even the leftovers the worn out last energy a person has should and can be used for the service of Hashem. 

Of course, when able, it is best to use one's best capabilities for the service of Hashem. However, at times, this is not possible and using whatever one's capabilities, as lowly as they may seem to be it is also desired by Hashem. This is why the שם שמים is present on the sukkah. When a person uses his own hands to build a sukkah when one uses their own כחות, no matter what state they are in, that merits that it brings the שם שמים on the sukkah. 

Rav Moshe Wolfson says the end of maseches Sukkah is about מרים בת בילגה or the delaying משמר to teach us even those that were not doing the right thing find a tikkun in the sukkah. Even the פסולת people can find meaning in the sukkah.

Different Types Of מצטער

The Rema (639:5) says one is obligated to eat the first night even in the rain. The Rema (640:4) says בלילה ראשונה אפי' מצטער חייב לאכול שם כזית in reference to the law that someone in pain is exempt from sukkah. Presumably this law is the same as the previous one, that the exemption of מצטער does not apply the first night. However, the sources listed as the source of the Rema are different, the law of rain is cited from Ran and Rosh and the law of  מצטער is cited from the Kol Bo. Why does he need a new source? The Sharey Teshuva cites from the Bircay Yosef and the Eliyahu Rabbah that the previous law of a sick person who is exempt may apply even on the first night. Why would it be different?

What we see are three different applications of the law of מצטער. The law of rain the Mishna describes as being like a master rejecting the service of his servant. There is room to argue that even when a person is not in a level of grave distress to the rain, he is exempt due to the siman that Hashme is not interested in his act of sitting in the sukkah (see Mishna Berurah 639:31) even if a person is not בצער if the food gets ruined one can go inside. That also explains why one doesn't have to go back out to the sukkah even if the rain stops (sif 7.) For the act of sitting in the sukkah is not desired. There, one could argue they must still eat in the sukkah on the first night when there is an obligation to eat in the sukkah. However, in a true state of צער on could have said there is an exemption even the first night. That is what the second Rema sees in the Kol Bo that there is an obligation even in that situation.   

The simple understanding from the Gemarah is that the reason מצטער is exempt from sukkah is due to the rule of תשבו כעין תדורו. However, the Ritva on daf 26 cites from the Ramban that the exemption is derived from the word אזרח that only one who is able to sit tranquility in the sukkah is called an אזרח. Based upon this we have two reasons to exempt someone who is מצטער from sukkah. One reason is from תשבו, that the sukkah itself is disqualified while the reason of the Ritva is an exemption on the גברא - that a person who is not settled is exempt from sukkah. 

The Taz (640:8) differentiates between one who is pain due to being in the sukkah who is only patur when his pain is alleviated by leaving the sukkah vs. someone who is in a constant state of pain such as a חולה who is exempt from sukkah even when being out of the sukkah will not help manage the pain at all. What is the difference? In the case of the the constant pain, there is the petur of תשבו, the person can't be in the proper state of mind to do an act of sitting in a sukkah. However, an external cause of distress and pain only exempts the person due to האזרח, since he can't be in a state of tranquility but it is an act of sitting in sukkah and the exemption only allows for one to find a better area to sit. 

In light of this, there may be room to differentiate between the exemption of the מצטער which a personal feeling, and the exemption is due to אזרח, which will not be applied the first night when one is obligated to eat in a sukkah even in a situation of pain. However, a sick person is exempt due to תשבו for their sitting in sukkah is not an act of ישיבת סוכה since people in constant pain can not have an experience of כעין תדורו and one might say since it is not an act of ישיבת סוכה, the exemption would apply even on the first night (Birchas Mordechai.) 

Day Of Fasting Day Of Holiness

R' Akiva Eger (teshuva #24) raises the issue can someone not fasting receive an aliyah on Yom Kippur at mincha - is the reading a kedushat hayom Yom Kippur reading or a fast day reading? The Marcheshes siman 14 says that issue is the root of the machlokes between the Mechabar and Remah (622:2) if the bracha of the haftorah ends מגן דוד or continues with על התורה ועל העבודה like a holiday. the Rema that ends מגן דוד  holds that the reading is that of a fast day so we don't mention the day but the Mechaber holds we do since it is the reading of a holiday. This understanding of the Rema is explicit in the Gr"a who says that the reading and haftorah are due to the day being a fast day. However, the Levush, MG"A and Alter Rebbe explain the Rema differently. They explain that the avodah of the day is already complete before mincha therefore we don't say על התורה ועל העבודה. 

A parallel inquiry applies to the ne'ilah prayer, which conceptually exists for any public fast day Is the נעילה on Yom Kippur a YK prayer or that of a taanis? R' Zvi Ryzman raises the question regarding a kohan that is not fasting can he do נשיאת כפים by ne'ilah? If ne'ilah is fundamentally a fast-day prayer, a non-fasting kohan would be disqualified; however, if it is defined by the kedushat hayom of Yom Kippur, he may be permitted to recite the blessing.

In Kol Brisk he explains why in the ne'ilah prayer we only say the short viduy of אשמנו  and not the longer על חטא recitation. He says that the על חטא prayers acknowledge wrongdoings but don't describe the person himself as a bad person, just that he has strayed in various aspects. אשמנו is a description of the person as affected by sin. On a fast day we reflect on our sad state as sinners. We do not say words of request for forgiveness. On YK however the viduy is the long one. we insert requests for forgiveness for our focus is לפני ה תטהרו how we remain connected to Hashem and just have to mend our ways. When it comes to נעילה we are davening a prayer of a taanis and hence we omit the long viduy.

On the other hand, the Chiunuch (#433) views the ne'ilah prayer as a YM prayer- וְעוֹד תִּקְּנוּ תְּפִלָּה חֲמִישִׁית בְּיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים לְבַד, לְרֹב קְדֻשַּׁת הַיּוֹם, וּבַעֲבוּר הֱיוֹתוֹ יוֹם סְלִיחָה וְכַפָּרָה לַכֹּל, וְהִיא הַנִּקְרֵאת תְּפִלַּת נְעִילָה. For more discussion about this topic see תפילת נעילה ביום הכיפורים. 

Ultimately, Yom Kippur shares the element of a standard fast day and is viewd as an עת צרה. Yet through its unique sanctity, we are granted the capacity for purification before Hashem, לפני ה תטהרו,  transforming צרה, into צהר, a window of illumination, as an opportunity to begin anew with a new light unto our lives.

Reading Of The Kohan Gadol

The Mishna Yoma (68b) says that the Kohan Gadol would be informed when the שעיר עזעזל reached the midbar and then he would read the Torah. Why the need to know the שעיר already reached the midbar? Rashi says based upon pessukim that the Kohan Gadol can't start another avodah until the previous one is completed. The Sfas Emes challenges Rashi and assumes it is just a Rabbinic law to ensure one mitzvah is done before completing another. The way the Mahar"i Korkus understands the Rambam, this is not a general law that the Kohan must wait before starting another avodah but this is a unique law for the reading of the Torah that the Kohan must wait until the preceding avodah is done. However, this is very hard to understand why would the reading of the Torah be different than other avodah? The Briskors (Rav first letter in back of sefer, Grac"h on Shas, Harraray Kedem #77) say that the Rambam holds there is a general law for the kohan to remain in the place of the avodah until it is completed. Therefore, the Kohan must remain in his place before moving to the Ezras Nashim to read the Torah. It is hard to hard why there would be such a law and why if the שיער it sent out anyway can't the Kohan Gadol leave?

The possuk Rashi cites is שנאמר ושלח את השעיר במדבר ואחר כך ואת חלב החטאת יקטיר המזבחה. How does Rashi derive from here that reading the Torah which is Rabbinic and not an avodah must be delayed as well? The simple answer is that Rashi will reject the assumption of the question. 

Rashi may indeed hold that the reading of the Kohan Gadol is the a Torah law that is considered bound by the laws of the avodah. In the very next Mishna, in the opening of the next perek, Rashi says that the reading of the Kohan Gadol is derived from the מילואים. The Sfas Emes disagrees and assumes it is a Rabbinic law. However, Rashi is clear it is a Torah obligation. 

The Mishna says that the Kohan Gadol may read the Torah either in a white cloak of his own or the בגדי כהונה. The Gemarah refers to the reading not as an avodah itself but as a צורך עבודה. The Rambam in Perush HaMishna says it is not an avodah and the proof is that it does not require בגדי כהונה. The Netziv says that Rashi holds since the reading is considered צורך עבודה it also needs the previous step to be finished. The Mishna says there are 8 berachot recited by the Kohan Gadol. Rashi says all the berachot are recited after the reading but the Rambam holds that the regular berachot before reading the Torah are recited. The Gevorot Ari wonders why Rashi doesn't hold that there is a beracha beforehand like any other Torah reading? However, if this is a reading not done as a chovas hayom like other reading but is viewed as part of the avodah service and hence it does not have the rules of regular reading.

Rosh Hashana Thoughts

1. The Radak on Tehillim (81:4)  ונראה כי זה הוא טעם מצות התרועה בראש השנה לפי שבטלו אבותינו מעבודתם ונחו מיגיעם ביום זה והתרועה הוא סימן שלוח עבדים וצאתם מרשות אדניהם וכן צוה הקב״ה תקיעת שופר ביום הכפורים של יובל שהיה סימן לשילוח עבדים וצאתם מרשות אדוניהם כן צוה הקב״ה לתקוע בראש השנה לזכר כי ביום זה בטלה העבדה והיה תחלת חירותנו. According to Radak we blow shofar to remind ourself that it is the day the servitude in Egypt ceased. 

2. Midrash Emor (29:1) בשנים עשר יצא בדימוס אמר הקדוש ברוך הוא לאדם זה סימן לבניך כשם שעמדת לפני בדין היום הזה ויצאת בדימוס כך עתידין בניך לעמוד לפני בדין ביום זה ויוצאין לפני בדימוס אימתי "בחדש השביעי באחד לחדש. How was Adam vindicated he was cursed and thrown out of Gan Eden? Furthermore, not everyone comes out of the din vindicated? 

The Sharay Hamoadim says Chazal mean that the din is an opportunity for tikkun. Without the din on Adam he would have been stuck with his sins, the judgement allowed him the opportunity to obtain a tikkun for himself. So too, the judgement on Rosh Hashana allows us to refocus to find our proper path. 

The Tur says that we prepare as a festival for RH since we know that Hashem will do for us a נס and we will come out vindicated. Why does he say it is a נס, why does he not say we are confident in emerging righteous in the judgement? It may be that it requires a נס to emerge indicated in judgement. In light of the above idea, one can translate נס as raising up as in נתת ליראיך נס להתנוסס for the judgement is a way to elevate ourselves.  

3. The Ran cites the opinion of the Geonim that when Shabbos is Rosh Hashana since we do not say hallel we don't say צדקתך. What is the connection? I would presume the Geonim are of the opinion that we don't say צדקתך only when there is hallel said. The Ran cites those that disagree for it is no worse than any other Rosh Chodesh. But there is no hallel on this Rosh Chodesh? Presumably they hold like the practice that any day without tachnun has no צדקתך. This is the custom of the Shulchan Aruch yet he still rules to say צדקתך on Rosh Hashana? The Besi Yosef has another severah that since it is a day of judgement it makes sense to say צידוק הדין on Rosh Hashana. 

4. Tosfos (32a) asks why why we say the pessukim from כתובים before נביאם in the מלכיות זכרורת שופרות? The pessukim from נביאים that we recite discuss the future days and hence we put them at the end. 

5. Tosfos (16b) cites Beha"g that if a tzibbur has an אונס and can't blow shofar it is considered a year that shofar was not blown but that does not apply on Shabbos. why is Shabbos different from an אונס? See Meshech Chachma Emor. According to the explanation of Chassidus that on Shabbos the idea of shofar is accomplished even without the actual shofar it is different from a regular ones where you are still missing the shofar.  

6. The Ramban (cited in Ritva RH 26 and in his derasha on Rosh Hashana) says that a shofar by definition is the horn detached from the animals after the marrow bone is removed. All horns in their attached stage are called קרן and are called shofar when detached from the animal and fit for blowing. What emerges from the Ramban is that a shofar is something totally detached and removed from the live animal. The lesson here is that the the shofar must be removed from the physical being. This may be why the shofar blowing is the symbol of freedom for the Maharal explains freedom as being removed from physical boundaries (Z'eav Yitraf Ch. 35.)

7. The Gra says that the Hallel of Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur is made up on Chanukah. We see that RH and YK are not excluded from Hallel but the Hallel in moved to Chanukah. In other words, on RH and YK it is impossible to recite the Hallel because of ספרי חיים ומתים פתוחין but there is an obligation of Hallel. How does Chanukah serve as a makeup time? Chanukah celebrates out victory over יון. Chazal equate יון with חושך. The opposite is RH which is called אורי. This is because on RH we focus on the clarity of Hashem's kingship and dominion over everything. יון attempted to take G-d out of the picture of the world and the victory of Chanukah attested to a return of the light. Hence, Chanukah is the makeup for the Hallah of the Yomin Noraim.  

9. In a letter, the Rebbe's father points out a connection between the three woman who were נפקדה on RH, שרה רחל חנה and the unique letter of each name, ש, ל, נ being the same as the dimensions of the תיבה. He points to a Zohar to make a connection between the תיבה and RH. It is noteworthy as the Berditchever points out that these letters spell the word לשן, speech. These great woman used their power of speech to cry to Hashem to merit children.  

Rosh Hashana On Shabbos

 The Minchas Ani on Ha'azenu (translation from Gemini AI) says: Although regarding a good year, it must be analyzed whether Rosh Hashanah falling on Shabbat is a good sign. Regarding this, we find that the worst years and the best years both had Rosh Hashanah on Shabbat.

For the two years in which the Holy Temple was destroyed, Rosh Hashanah fell on Shabbat, as stated in the Jerusalem Talmud (Taanit, Chapter 4): the day the First Temple was destroyed was the 1st of Av, and it was the first day of the week (Sunday); and the Second Temple was also destroyed on the 9th of Av on the first day of the week, and both were at the conclusion of a Sabbatical year (Moztzei Shevi'it), as stated in the Babylonian Talmud.

According to this calculation, for the First Temple, if the 1st of Av was Sunday (Day 1), then the 1st of Tammuz was Saturday (Day 7) or Friday (Day 6); 1st of Sivan was Thursday (Day 5); 1st of Iyar was Wednesday/Tuesday (Days 3–4); 1st of Nisan was Monday (Day 2); 1st of Adar was Sunday/Saturday (Days 7–1); 1st of Shevat was Friday (Day 6); 1st of Tevet was Wednesday/Thursday (Days 4–5); 1st of Kislev was Tuesday (Day 3); 1st of Marcheshvan was Sunday/Monday (Days 1–2); and 1st of Tishrei was Saturday (Day 7).

Similarly, regarding the Second Temple, which was destroyed on the 9th of Av on Sunday, the 1st of Av was Saturday (Day 7). According to this calculation, Rosh Hashanah would have fallen on Friday (Day 6). However, this is impossible, as stated in Rosh Hashanah (page 20b), because if so, Yom Kippur would fall directly after Shabbat (on Sunday). Therefore, they must have made two months deficient (29 days) so that Rosh Hashanah would fall on Sunday (Day 1). (And we cannot resolve this by assuming it was a leap year, because the year after a Sabbatical year is not made into a leap year).

Conversely, regarding the best years, we find that the forgiveness for the sin of the Golden Calf occurred in a year where Rosh Hashanah fell on Shabbat, as did the inauguration of the Tabernacle (Mishkan)—since Israel left Egypt on a Thursday, as derived in Shabbat (Chapter 9)—as Tosafot wrote in Mekhilta / Kamma (page 82b; see there). Likewise, the year they entered the Land of Israel also had Rosh Hashanah on Shabbat, since Moses died on Shabbat, the 7th of Adar, meaning the 1st of Adar was on Sunday (see Tosafot in Menachot, page 30b, and the Rosh in Arvei Pesachim).

He explains this phenomenon that when RH falls on Shabbos and we don't have shofar, the Shabbos is our zechus. However, it can only be our zechus if we keep Shabbos properly, if not, then it can't be a merit for us. It is the degree of shmerus shabbos in general which justifies canceling the shofar in order to avoid chillul Shabbos, עיי"ש a mashal to explain this concept.