Rabbi Michael RosensweigSimchat Sukkot: An Expression of Avodah and Hashra'at HaShechinah

The Torah presents the holiday of sukkot in parshat Emor in a most singular fashion. The Torah first (23:33-36) delineates sukkot in typical fashion (mikra kodesh etc.) as the chronological conclusion of the festival cycle. The comprehensive survey then (37-38) appears to terminate with an appropriate (albeit not necessarily anticipated) references to the musaf korbonot (detailed in parshat Pinchas) that are brought on every chag. However, the Torah then (39-44) surprisingly returns to the subject of Sukkot, initiating this supplementary section with the jarring word "ach" (used in parallel only with respect to Yom Kippur, the other equally exceptional presentation in the Emor survey), introducing the obligation of the four minim that was omitted in the previous section, and expanding on the obligation of simchah in the mikdash during this seven-day holiday: "u-semachtem lifnei Hashem Elokeichem shivat yamim". The striking omission of the ubiquitous "mikra kodesh" phrase that unifies the wide-ranging presentation of all the moadim in the main exposition reinforces the impression that this supplement is intended to accentuate a dimension that is unique to this holiday. The fact that Sukkot is the only one of the moadim that warrants a double treatment, sufficiently commands our attention. The other facets in this second rendition need to be accounted for as well.

Previously (Chag haSukkot: Avodat Hashem in the Aftermath of the Yamim Noraim and The Link Between Yom Kippur and Sukkot), we have addressed the link between Yom Kippur and Sukkot, and have proposed that this additional emphasis on Sukkot is related to the contrast-complement that Sukkot embodies in the aftermath of the inimitable, all-consuming Yom Kippur experience. We may further develop and apply this theme particularly in light of the Chatam Sofer's (parshat Haazinu, "le-chag ha- Sukkot") explication of the "ach" that introduces this section. He suggests that this exclusionary usage qualifies the previous verse which identifies avodot-korbonot beyond the festival musaf as only matanot, nedarim or nedavot. The Torah qualifies this characterization by declaring that the four minim, which registers as a central theme on Sukkot only in these added verses, is an exception to this rule, as it constitutes a kind of korbon-avodah celebrating the successful attainment of kapparah on Yom Kippur. He further proposes that the coveted teshuvah me-ahavah (Yyoma 85b) that transforms sins into merits, is actually attained in conjunction with the mitzvah-avodah of the four minim!

The notion that the mitzvah of lulav-four minim evokes avodah and korban is articulated by the midrash (Yalkut Shimoni, Emor) and by the Talmud. The gemara (Sukkah 45a) interprets the verse (Tehillim 118:27), "isru chag ba-avotim ad karnot ha-mizbeach" as a reference to the mitzvah of the four minim, which is equated with the construction of the mizbeach and the bringing of a korban: "kol ha-notel lulav ba-agudo ve-hadas ba-avuto maalah alav ha-katuv keilu banah mizbeach ve-hikriv alav korban".

This perspective certainly accounts for the additional dimension and experience of joy on Sukkot (u-semachtem), particularly in the mikdash (lifnei Hashem Elokeichem), and especially for the unusual 7-day celebration of the four minim specifically in the mikdash. Moreover, the fact that the mitzvah of four minim applies on the first day of sukkot even outside the precincts of the mikdash, even in the diaspora, assumes great significance.

In this respect, as well, Yom Kippur and Sukkot constitute an important-contrast-complement. It is evident that Yom Kippur is an extremely mikdash and avodah-centric moed. Although the kohen gadol is the almost exclusive participant in the intricate avodah, the gripping drama of the kohen gadol's odyssey into the kodesh ha-kadoshim (lifnai ve-lifnim) as the representative of Klal Yisrael dominates not only our musaf prayers, but actually embodies and crystalizes the central themes of this shabbat shabbaton, the most singular, most relevant ("achat ba-shanah", Vayikra 16:34, Shemot 30:10), and most sanctified day of the year. Indeed, the Rambam (Hilchos Avodat Yom haKippurim 1:1, Hilchos Klei haMikdash 5:10) feels the need to integrate the universal obligation to fast on this singular day into the avodah-mikdash structure by repeatedly referring to the day as "yom ha-zom". Certainly, the aspirations and attainments of the kohen gadol as the vehicle for Klal Yisrael are difficult to match, seemingly impossible to supersede.

Yet, sukkot is emphatically no spiritual derogation or compression. It is an authentic and spiritually ambitious successor to Yom haKippurim, as numerous meforshim discern from the otherwise superfluous emphasis of, "la-chodesh hashvii hazeh" (23:34). Indeed, some propose that Sukkot was integrated into the Tishrei cycle although it naturally should have been celebrated in the aftermath of yeziat Mitzrayim, not only because the miracle was more discernable during Tishrei, but because it is the appropriate continuation and complement to Yom Kippur and the yemei teshuvah of Tishrei.

This certainly is acutely manifest in the yirah-simchah dialectic (see The Link Between Yom Kippur and Sukkot)), but it also is exhibited in the respective manifestations of avodah-mikdash. In the aftermath of structured and kohen-gadol-focused avodat ha-yom, Sukkot involves all of Klal Yisrael, and even simulates a quasi-avodah in the form of the simchah of the four-minim obligation. It is noteworthy that some tosafists (see Tosafot Rabbeinu Peretz and Ramban, Pesachim 36a; Ritva Sukkah 9a, 30a) argue that the Talmud Bavli disqualifies only the mitzvot of lulav and korban on the basis of mizvah ha-baah be-aveirah (mitzvah enabled by an illegal transgression), as ritzui, an idealistic korbon-esque requirement that is indispensable to both, cannot abide this offensive taint. While the Talmud Bavli (Arachin 10a) identifies ribui korbonot (distinctive korbonot configurations each day of the festival) as the basis for an independent obligation to recite hallel each day of Sukkot (in contrast to Pesach), it is interesting that the Yerushalmi (Sukkot 5:1) attributes this phenomenon to the obligation to rejoice with the four-minim in the mikdash each of the seven days. Numerous other sources reinforce the notion that the mitzvah of lulav parallels or is perceived as a dimension of avodah-korban.

The korbon-avodah-mikdash motif is equally evident with respect to the other prominent mitzvah that defines this chag, sukkah. The dimensions of the sukkah are linked to the dimensions of the mishkan in the first chapter of tractate sukkah. The sukkah is designated and defined in the Sifrei as an entity that is consequentially invested and suffused with the stature of Hashem's Divine name (sheim shamayim chal alehah) stemming from the sanctity and hashraat haShechinah that models the mikdash. Indeed, the geonim discuss whether the prohibition of kapandarya (use as a short-cut) that originates in the sanctified status of the mikdash applies also to the sukkah. Poskim debate the parameters of appropriate conduct in the sukkah in light of the dialectic of sanctity, on the one hand, and ubiquitous presence and familiar use based on the principle of teishvu ke-ein taduru, on the other.

It is perhaps consistent with this perspective on the symmetrical relationship between Yom Kippur and Sukkot that the Rambam, who was impelled to reiterate the tzom motif in the avodat Yom haKippurim, also strikingly identifies and projects the mikdash experience as an integral part of Hilchot Lulav and Sukkah. In the koteret to Hilchot Lulav and in his Sefer haMitzvot he emphasizes the seven day mikdash obligation of lulav, although most of the Jewish world only fulfill this biblical obligation on the first day! It is evident that he perceives the extended obligation not as an independent kiyum in the mikdash, but as the most ideal expression of the core one-day mitzvah, as well. [This may be the case notwithstanding some differences in the details of implementation, an issue that is debated by the rishonim, I hope to address this in an expanded treatment of these topics.] This position underscores the singular character of sukkot as a manifestation of hashraat haShechinah, and an outpost of the mikdash and avodah. The very existence of a form of ritzui and avodah outside of the typical formal confines and structures is a remarkable phenomenon and reflection of the singular character this mitzvah, albeit one that is even more powerfully expressed in the mikdash itself.

Toward the conclusion of Hilchot Lulav (8:12), the Rambam invokes the verse that is the focal point of the second presentation of Sukkot and the source of the mikdash extension of the mitzvah of lulav (that he cites as relevant in the koteret and Sefer haMizvot, as noted) - "usemachtem lifnei Hashem Elokeichem shivat yamim"- to support his view that the nightly mikdash celebrations of simchat beit ha-shoeivah distinguish Sukkot as a unique festival of "simchah yeteirah". Rav Soloveitchik zt"l (Kovetz Chidushei Torah) notes that the Rambam evidently does not associate simchat beit hashoevah as a special mikdash manifestation of nisuch ha-mayim. Had this been the case, he would have codified these halachot in Sefer Avodah in that alternative context. He concludes that the Rambam believed that simchat beit ha-shoevah, and the charge of "usmahtem" was a singular expression of simchat yom tov that was reserved for and confined to the celebration of yom tov in the mikdash.

However, the fact is that the Rambam formulates this position in Hilchot Lulav. Moreover, he cites simchat beit ha-shoieivah in his Sefer haMitzvot (aseh 55) in a broader discussion of simchat yom tov. In light of his integration of the mikdash celebration of lulav, based on the same verse, as a more intense application of the more universal lulav obligation, we might modify this conclusion. Near the conclusion of his discussion of sukkot, the Rambam articulated the idea that the Torah itself subtly formulated by adding a supplementary treatment of this remarkable hag, the idea that unique among the chagim, and possibly against the backdrop of the Yom Kippur experience, the intense mikdash motifs of Sukkot highlight the capacity to bring even some dimensions of ritzui, avodah and hashraat haShechinah into our sukkot-homes. This capacity and its expression within the framework of yom tov is, indeed, worthy of "simchah yeteirah".