|
Shavua Tov Chevra,
The perek continues with a debate (Mishna 6) as to whether there is a Biblical mandate to eat meals in the Sukkah throughout the chag, or only on the first night(s) similar to the mandate to eat matzah on Pesach. In a certain way this debate is of one piece with two items I'd like to quickly highlight, one from Mishna 8 and one from Mishna 9.
Mishna 8 describes Shamai the Elder (i.e. Shamai) as doing something that not only seems a little extreme, but which also appears to be contraindicated by the Mishna itself. A newborn would certainly be classified as a child who is dependent on his mother, making Shamai's decision to turn an indoor ceiling into a sukkah roof rather curious. So curious in fact that one commentator (Maharshal) posits somewhat improbably that the child for whom Shamai did this was another, older child altogether who happened to have been clinging to his newly post-partum mother.
The more likely explanation is that Shamai simply had a passion and zeal for the Mitzvah of Sukkah, that led him to go beyond the letter of the law. This special passion for Sukkah is, I think, a normative one in our experience as well. Despite the exemptions of which we learned earlier in the Perek, we routinely go beyond the letter of the law to fulfill the Mitzvah of Sukkah. The East Coasters among us can remember bundling up in order to eat in the Sukkah in October. As the Kotzker once said (in Poland), "Jews who leave the Sukkah because of the cold aren't worthy of the Sukkah". We're passionate about this Mitzvah.
Which may also explain the final teaching of the perek. It's a theological stretch to assign rain on Sukkot to God's displeasure. Perhaps what the Mishna is describing is not the inner landscape of the Divine mind, rather the inner landscape of our human experience. Rain feels to us like a rejection, because we invest so much into this Mitzvah.
And so too with the number of mandated meals (back in Mishna 6). The Halacha may only require one (two in Diaspora). But we go out of our way to have more than that, because we have a special passion, a special love for this Mitzvah.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
As we begin the Mishnayot of Chapter 3, I'll just point out two things:
(1) The interesting mix of ethical, halachik, and esthetic considerations that can each serve to disqualify the 4 species.
(2) That much of what is being discussed only applies to the first day. Though ultimately things are a little more complicated than this, the Shulchan Aruch simply states (649:5), "Whenever we said that they were invalid due to defects or because they were stolen or robbed, this only applies on the first day of the holiday, but they are valid on the other days. RAMA: Some prohibit the stolen [lulav] for all seven days, and this is the practice."
| 
