United We Stand

Although the main reason we do Mitzvos is because we are Metzuveh to do so, we are supposed to be affected by our performance as well. As we do each Mitzvah, we are meant to think about what we are doing, and why, and that is supposed to shape us in a way that lasts well beyond the moment of the Mtizvah itself. On a Yom Tov like Sukkos, with so many Mitzvos to do, it is sometimes difficult to take the time to do so, but the results are well worth the effort. With that in mind, let us examine an aspect of one of the Mitzvos Hayom in the hopes that of discovering its message.

As we of course know, the Torah tells us that we are Mechayav to take the Daled Minim on Sukkos: “U’Lekatchtem LAchem B’Yom HaRishon Pri Etz Hadar, Kappos Temarim V’Anaf Etz Avos V’Arvei Nachal.” The Gemarah in Menachos tells us that these Minim are Meakev on another—if one does not have all four, he is not Yotzei even if he takes the remaining Minim, indicating that we learn this Halacha from the word “U’Lekatchtem.”

The Gemarah then suggests that this only applies if you have all four and choose not to take one of them, but if, for example, one did not have Aravos, he could still be Yotzei with the other three. The Gemara seeks to prove that this is not the case based on a Braisa which points that two of the Daled Minim—the Esrog and Lulav—produce fruit, and two—the Haddasim and Aravos—do not, and concludes: “HaOsin Peiros Yihiyu Zikukin L’Shain Osin, V’Shain Osin Peiros Yihiyu Zikukin L’Osin Peiros, V’Ain Adam Yotzeh Yidei Chovaso Bahen Ad SheYeihyu B’Agudah Achas.” The Minim that bear fruit, says the Braisa, need the ones that don’t and visa versa, and therefore one is not Yotzei his Chiyuv until they are all tied together.

While the Halacha brought in the Briasa—that the Daled Minim must all be taken or one is not Yotzeh—is clear, the reasoning is not immediately apparent. How does the fact that some of the Minim bear fruit and some do not impact the way in which the Mitzvah is done? Further, what is meant by the words “HaOsin Peiros Yihiyu Zikukin L’Shain Osin, V’Shain Osin Peiros Yihiyu Zikukin L’Osin Peiros”? How and why do these two categories of Minim form such a symbiotic relationship?

We can perhaps begin to understand the meaning of “Osin Peiros” and “Ain Osin Peiros” based on the final words of the Breisa which applies these words to Klal Yisroel as well: when we are in an Eis Tzara, says the Braisa, we are not answered unless we are all B’Agudah Achas—the “Osin Peiros” together with the “Ain Osin Peiros. Rashi explains the connection between the two parts of the Briasa: the Tzaddikim in Klal Yisroel are like the Esrog and Lulav—they are Oseh Peiros—and the Reshaim are not Oseh Peiros. When all parts of Klal Yisroel band together, however, our Teffilos are more likely to be answered.

With this understanding of the second half of the Braisa, it seems that the first half, the part which speaks about the Lulav and Esrog, is reminiscent of a Medresh that is a bit more familiar.

The Medrash in Vayikra Rabba speaks about the Daled Minim in terms of Ta’am, taste, and Re’ach, scent, which are compared to Torah and Maasim Tovim, respectively. Some of the Minim have one of these qualities and not the other, the Esrog has both and the Aravos have neither. So too, explains the Medrash, there are members of Klal Yisroel who are notable for their Torah, some for their Ma’asim Tovim, some for both, and unfortunately, some whom have nothing to boast of. The Medrash concludes that all members of Klal Yisroel are vital to our survival, and only when we are B’Agudah Achas can we survive. This Medrash is better known, but seems to have a similar message to the Braisa in Menachos. In fact, the Medrash ends with a Passuk, “HaBoneh Shamayim Maalosav A’gudaso Al Eretz Yesodah” that is also the Passuk used by the Briasa to prove its point.

It seems clear, then, that the words “Osin Peiros” and “Ain Osin Peiros” in both halves of the Braisa refer to Tzaddikim and Reashim, and, as it relates to the Daled Minim, the lesson of the Briasa and the Medrash Rabba are the same: the Daled Minim teach us about the importance of uniting Klal Yisroel, B’Agudah Achas, as an integral key to our survival. It is important to note, however, that the Braisa clearly states “HaOsin Peiros Yihiyu Zikukin L’Shain Osin”, which we now understand to mean that the Tzaddikim need the Reshaim. The idea of Achdus promoted by this Braisa is not to be “Mevatel”, so to speak, the Reshaim but for each member of Klal Yisroel to rely on one another.

The question, of course, is: why? Why is the Mitzvah of Daled Minim suffused with this message about Achdus, about the relationship between the “Osin Peiros” and “Ain Osin Peiros”? There are many Mitzvos done throughout the year that can serve a basis for a similar lesson. Why does the Torah specifically send us this message now, on Sukkos?

In fact, it seems that this is quite a vital lesson for this time of year. It is clear from the continuation of the discussion in the Gemarah that this Braisa is one of the sources for those that hold that the Daled Minim must be tied together. The Psak in the Shulchan Aruch, as well as the prevalent Minhag, is to follow this Shita: we tie three of the Minim together and take all four at the same time. The aspect of Daled Minim which is related to Achdus is thus so important that it is Meakev in the Mitzvah, L’Halacha. This is no “cute vort”, but seemingly a truly important Chelek in the Mitzvah. Why?

Perhaps to better understand this part of the Mitzvah of Lulav and Esrog, we can look to another Mitzvah that is also connected to our Yom Tov.

The Passuk in Parshas Vayelech tells us: “Miketz Sheva Shamim B’Moed Shnas HaShemitta B’Chag HaSukkos…Tikra Es HaTorah HaZos Neged Kol Yisroel B’Aznehem…Hakel Es HaAm HaAnashim V’HaNashim V’HaTAf…” This is the Mitzvah of Hakel, which was done once every seven years, on the Sukkos of the first year in the Shemittah cycle. At that time, all members of Klal Yisroel—men, women and children alike—would come to Yerushalayim and the Melech would read to them from Sefer Devarim.

Without wading too deep into the details of this Mitzvah, there are a few important points to be made. First, why does the Torah require all members of Klal Yisroel to be present at this Mitzvah? The Gemarah in Chagigah notes that the men come to learn, the women to hear, and the children “Lases Schar L’Miviehem”, to give reward to those who bring them. The Kli Yakar, and others, however point out that this leaves something to be desired—why would the Torah require us to bring children just so we could get Schar? We don’t see such an idea related to other Mitzvos, giving rise to the notion that the main purpose of this particular Mitzvah is “Hakel Es Ha’Am”, to have every member of Klal Yisroel present.

This being the case, one may also wonder why this Mitzvah is done on Sukkos specifically. The men of Klal Yisroel come to Yerushalayim three times a year for the Regalim, but the women and children generally stay home—they would have to come specially for Hakel. The Sefer HaChinuch on the Mitzvah of Aliyah L’Regel explains why the year following Shemitta is an opportune time for the women to come to Yerushalayim as well, but this seems like a point of practicality. In fact, the Ba’al Akeida notes that if it weren’t such a Tircha, the Mitzvah of Hakel would apply every year. That is to say, this Mitzvah, which by its very nature requires all of Klal Yisroel to join together, is really tied to Moed Chag HaSukkos and occurs only once every Shemita cycle because the Torah does not want to make it difficult. We must understand why this is true—how and why is the Mitzvah of Hakel, which is dependent on being Me’ached Klal Yisroel, so closely tied to this Yom Tov?

Perhaps we can develop an approach to the concept of Klal Yisroel as a unit, as it relates to the Yom Tov of Sukkos, based on a lengthy thought of the Shem M’Shmuel on Parshas Zochor.

The Pessukim at the end of Parshas Balak discuss the terrible Aveiros that Bnei Yisroel committed while encamped in Shittim. It was there that they became Nitzmad L’Baal Peor, and there that the Aveira of Zimri and Kazbi took place. The Shem M’Shmuel points out that Shitim was part of Arvos Moav, the final stop in the Midbar, and asks: how could it be that Klal Yisroel, now on the cusp of entering Eretz Yisroel could fall to a such a low level and commit these Aveiros?

He answers with an astounding insight.

As we know, at the time of Mattan Torah, Klal Yisroel found itself on the level of K’Ish Echad B’Lev Echad, united as one. Rashi there, in Parshas Yisro, adds a less well known line, however: “Aval Shar Kol Hachaniyos B’Tarumos U’Machlokes”. The feeling of K’Ish Echad B’Lev Echad did not last, and the rest of our encampments in the Midbar were fraught with argument and discord. The Shem M’Shmuel cites a Maharal, in Be’er HaGolah, who explains that Pirud in Klal Yisroel, was not due to a Chisaron, but to a Ma’alah: because we are all Ba’alei Da’as, and not willing to be flexible when it comes to the Emes. That said, the Pirud that was found in Klal Yisroel in the Midbar, regardless of its source, presented a problem as we were about to enter Eretz Yisroel: because “Kivush Yachid Lo Shmei Kivush”, an individual’s annexation of land in Eretz Yisroel is not effective, we had to be united as a Klal in order to be properly Kovesh the Land.

It was for this reason, explains the Shem M’Shmuel, that Hakadosh Baruch Hu allowed, and even arranged, for the Avieros in Shittim to occur. The Maharal explains that because our Daas is the source of our Pirud, it is only when we are Machniah ourselves to the Ribbono Shel Olam and his Ratzon, like at Har Sinai, that Achdus can truly be found. This also occurs after Chet, explains the Shem M’Shmuel. After Shittim, when were forced to examine our flaws and shortcomings, and come to the realization that Hashem wishes to dwell amongst us despite these defects, that he is the “Shochen Itam B’Soch Tumasam.” This feeling is accompanied by the realization that Hashem does so only because we are the Am Nivchar, a recognition that itself leads to Achdus. Thus, at the time when we were to enter Eretz Yisroel, the Aveiros of Shittim, and the introspection that followed, were an impetus to the Achdus so integral to our next steps.

Interestingly, the Shem M’Shmuel points out that we were not to remain on this level.

The Gemarah in Sanhedrin tells us that there were three special Mitzvos that Bnei Yisroel had when they entered Eretz Yisroel: to appoint a Melech, to destroy Amalek, and to build the Bais Hamikdash. It seems from the Gemarah that these were interdependent: they had to all occur in that order. Asks the Shem M’Shmuel: why did they have to wait for the Melech to be appointed in order to destroy Amalek? Why not take the earliest opportunity to do this important Mitzvah?

Based on Pessukim and Chazal, it seems that the feelings that followed the Aveiros in Shittim did not dissipate quickly, and we were subject to a relationship that was based on the knowledge of “Shochen Itam B’Soch Tumasam” during the entire period of the Shoftim. The purpose of a Melech, however, was to raise Klal Yisroel, to spur us toward new heights in our Avodas Hashem and propel us to a closer and more direct connection to Hakadosh Baruch Hu. It was only once this took place that we could turn to the Mitzvah of Mechias Amalek, which is so closely related to a being Mevatel feelings of distance from Hakadosh Baruch Hu, and then to Binyan Bais Hamikdash.

It seems natural to take the ideas expressed by the Shem M’Shmuel and apply them to the Mitzvah of Hakel on Sukkos.

As we noted, the Torah may well have instructed us to do Hakel each year on this Yom Tov, were it not for the difficulty involved, indicating that Sukkos is the prime time to gather Klal Yisroel together. Now we can understand why: during the Yomim Noraim we make a Cheshbon Hanefesh and come face to face with our own deficiencies, so to speak. But, we also undergo the bliss of Kapara on Yom Kippur, and understand that our relationship with Hashem endures: he is the “Shochen Itam B’Soch Tumasam”. It is on Sukkos then, fresh with these realizations, that true Achdus can occur. It is during this time that we can be Machniah our Daas to the Daas Elyon, realzing that our connection to Hashem comes only because we are members of the Am Hanivchar. It is at this time that Hashem says: “Hakel Es HaAm.”

But, we know that we are not meant to subsist on this type of relationship alone, so the one who reads the Torah is not the Kohen Gadol or the Rosh HaSanhedrin—it is the Melech. The king, who is the one who leads us to higher planes in Ruchnias, is the one given the job of speaking to us at Hakel, ensuring that we do not remain satisfied with a relationship of Shochen Itam B’Soch Tumasam, but instead yearn for a closer, more direct connection.

U’Mipnei Chataeinu Galinu M’Artzenu, and we no longer have the ability to do the Mitzvah of Hakel, though we long for the day when we once again will. Perhaps this is why the Mitzvah of Arba Minim has a message of Ichud Klal Yisroel as well.

We take the Lulav and Esrog, the “Osin Peiros” together with the Hadasim and Aravos, the “Ain Osin Peiros” and the Briasa tells us they all need each other, so to speak and so their unity is Meakev. This is because at this time of year, when we are all keenly aware of our own shortcomings, we know that our relationship with Hashem endures because we are members of the Am Hanivchar, about whom it says “HaShochen Itam B’Soch Tumasam.” It is during this Yom Tov specifically that the message of Agudah Achas resonates—for we know that we rely on this status to remain connected to Avinu Shebashamayim.

That said—as in the case of Klal Yisroel during the time of the Shoftim, and as the Mitzvah of Hakel teaches us—we are not meant to be content with this type of relationship. Yet we have no Melech, and it may therefore seem like we lack the tools to propel ourselves to greater heights. Perhaps we can use the Yom Tov to the same affect, however. The close relationship felt by one and all as we leave our own homes to live B’Tzilah D’Miheminusah can allow us to move beyond a connection limited to Shochen Itam B’Soch Tumasam, and toward a more direct connection with the Borei Olam.

This idea may be borne out by another connection between Sukkos and a Melech. The Passuk in Sefer Shmuel, in describing the appointment of Shaul as the first Melech tells us: “Vayismach Sham Shaul V’Chol Anshei Yisroel Ad Meod.” The appointment of a Melech, which marked the dawn of a new type of relationship with Hashem brought great Simcha to Klal Yisroel.

Perhaps it is from this awareness that the feelings of Zman Simchosenu emanate as well. when we experience the Yom Tov of Sukkos as we are meant to, we can develop a new relationship with Hakadosh Baruch Hu, and go, B’Simcha, into a year in which we raise ourselves to the level of “Osin Peiros” and grow in our own production of the Ta’am V’Reach of Torah and Ma’asim Tovim.