Page 131 - TzurbaFlipUSA_Neat

an integral part of the mitzvah. On the other hand, few distinctions between the two halachot. The first
we can deduce that indeed we have an obligation to is that the previous halacha is written as a description,
sleep in the Sukkah, but not as an essential part of the whilst the second halacha is written as a command.
mitzvah but rather for a different reason. We will see Why is this? The Tzofnat Pa’aneach explains that the
that this is in fact a dispute amongst the Rishonim. first halacha defines the object of the Mitzvah, and
therefore the Rambam brings down the actions that
The first approach is that of Rashi, the Tur, and the define the Sukkah as a person’s main dwelling . On
3
Rema. They hold that there is no difference between the other hand, the second halacha is the practical
eating and sleeping in the Sukkah, and that both are application of the mitzvah, and therefore it is written
part of the definition of “living” in the Sukkah.
as a command.
Rashi mentions this in a few places. For instance,
when the Mishnah (Sukkah 20b) says that whoever The Tzofant Pa’aneach further explains the second
sleeps under a bed in the Sukkah did not fulfill his difference between the halachot. Only in the second
obligation, Rashi explains that the fundamental halacha does the Rambam write that one must sleep in
parts of the mitzvah is eating, drinking and sleeping. the Sukkah. Why? Because sleeping is not an integral
Also Rashi referrs to the gemara (Eruvin 44a) that a part of the mitzvah! The Tzofnat Pa’aneach explains
person can function as a wall of the Sukkah (in certain that the main dwelling is determined according to the
situations) so that his friend may “eat drink and sleep”. eating place (see Eruvin 72b), and therefore in the
In essence Rashi writes that these three things are all first halacha the Rambam mentions mainly things that
an integral part of the Mitzvah of Sukkah. relate to eating – since that is what renders the Sukkah
as the permanent residence.
The Tur as well, when defining the mitzvah (OC 639) Once the Sukkah is defined as the main dwelling place,
brings down all of the things that are mentioned in then there is an obligation to dwell there, and that
the Gemara above (eating, drinking, dishes etc.) and includes also sleeping. In other words, the eating turns
he adds sleeping! Even though it was not mentioned the structure of the Sukkah from a plain structure into
the Tur added it. Obviously he holds like Rashi that a Kosher Sukkah (by making it the main dwelling
sleeping is a core part of the Mitzvah. The Rema (OC place), and the sleeping is a quasi-prohibition not
639) ruled like the Tur, so he too held this approach.
to sleep outside your main dwelling. Apparently, the
However, it seems that the Rambam and the Shulchan Shulchan Aruch also held like the Rambam, since he
Aruch held like the second option. The Rambam too wrote (OC 639:1-2) in a very similar fashion.
(Sukkah 6:5-6) has two separate Halachot. The first:
We see that the Rambam’s approach is that eating and
“How is the Mitzvah of sitting in the Sukkah fulfilled? sleeping are very different from each other, in contrast
By eating, drinking and dwelling in the Sukkah all to Rashi who understood that the nature of their
seven days, day and night, the way he dwells in his obligation is the same.
home all year long...”
The Nafka Mina (halachic ramification) between
Further on he mentions bringing nice dishes to the the two approaches is as follows: should one make
Sukkah, and that the Sukkah should be his main a blessing on sleeping in the Sukkah. According to
dwelling. In the next Halacha the Rambam states: Rashi and the Tur, since sleeping is part of the core
of the Mitzvah and no different than eating, then the
“One must eat, drink and sleep in the Sukkah all seven
days, day and night…” same way that we recite and bracha upon eating in
the Sukkah we should recite a bracha upon sleeping.
Did the Rambam repeat himself? It seems so at first, However, according to the Rambam’s approach there
but at a second glance the answer is no. There are a is no positive Mitzvah in sleeping in the Sukkah,

3 According to this the Rambam’s question in the first Halacha should be translated “What defines the Mitzvah of sitting in the Sukkah?”

ןנברמ אברוצ הכוס תוכלה · 129