Parallel
סוכה 38
Soncino English Talmud · Berean Standard Bible
that even the dispensable parts of a commandment prevent calamities; for the waving is obviously a dispensable part of the commandment, and yet it shuts out harmful winds and harmful dews. In connection with this Raba remarked, And so with the lulab. R. Aha b. Jacob used to wave it to and fro, saying, ‘This is an arrow in the eye of Satan’. This, however, is not a proper thing [for a man to do] since [Satan] might in consequence be provoked [to let temptation loose] against him. MISHNAH. IF A MAN WAS ON A JOURNEY AND HAD NO LULAB WHEREWITH TO PERFORM THE PRESCRIBED COMMANDMENT, WHEN HE COMES HOME HE SHOULD TAKE IT [EVEN IF HE IS] AT TABLE. IF HE DID NOT TAKE THE LULAB IN THE MORNING, HE SHOULD TAKE IT AT ANY TIME BEFORE DUSK, SINCE THE WHOLE DAY IS VALID FOR [TAKING] THE LULAB. GEMARA. You said that he should take it [even if he is] AT TABLE. This then means that he must interrupt [his meal for the purpose]. But is not this in contradiction with the ruling, If they have begun they need not interrupt [it]? — R. Safra replied, There is no contradiction: The latter statement refers to where there is still time [to perform the commandment] during the day, while the former refers to where there is [otherwise] no time. Raba retorted, What difficulty is this? Is it not possible [that the difference in ruling is due to the fact that] the former is a Pentateuchal commandment while the latter is only Rabbinical? Rather, said Raba, if a difficulty at all exists, it is this: [The ruling] HE SHOULD TAKE IT WHEN HE COMES HOME [EVEN IF HE IS] AT TABLE, clearly shows that he must interrupt [his meal], while [the ruling] subsequently taught, IF HE DID NOT TAKE IT DURING THE MORNING HE SHOULD TAKE IT AT ANY TIME BEFORE DUSK shows, [does it not], that he need not interrupt [his meal]? [To this] R. Safra might well reply, There is no difficulty: The latter refers to where there is still time during the day, the former where there is [otherwise] no time. R. Zera retorted, What difficulty is this? Perhaps it is a religious duty to interrupt [one's meal for the purpose of taking the lulab] but if one did not interrupt it one should take [the lulab] at any time before dusk, since the whole day is valid for the taking of the lulab? Rather, said R. Zera, [The incongruity] indeed is as we said previously; and with regard to your difficulty [why the reply was not given that] the former was a Pentateuchal commandment while the latter was only Rabbinical, the fact is that here we are dealing with the second day of the Festival [the obligation of taking the lulab on] which is only Rabbinical. A deduction [from the wording of our Mishnah] also [shows that this is so], since it teaches IF A MAN WAS ON A JOURNEY AND HAD NO LULAB WHEREWITH TO PERFORM THE PRESCRIBED COMMANDMENT. Now if it could possibly have been assumed to refer to the first day of the Festival, [the difficulty would arise] is it permitted [to travel on that day]? MISHNAH. IF A SLAVE, A WOMAN, OR A MINOR RECITED [THE HALLEL] TO HIM, HE MUST REPEAT AFTER THEM WHAT THEY SAY, (AND A CURSE BE UPON HIM).’ IF A MAJOR RECITED TO HIM, HE REPEATS AFTER HIM [ONLY] HALLELUJAH. WHERE THE CUSTOM OBTAINS TO REPEAT [THE VERSES], HE SHOULD REPEAT; [WHERE THE CUSTOM IS] TO SAY THEM ONLY ONCE, HE SHOULD SAY THEM ONCE; [WHERE THE CUSTOM OBTAINS] TO RECITE THE BENEDICTION, HE SHOULD RECITE THE BENEDICTION. EVERYTHING IS DEPENDENT ON LOCAL CUSTOM. GEMARA. Our Rabbis have taught, It has truly been laid down that a [minor] son may recite [the Grace after meals] for his father, a slave may recite it for his master, and a wife for her husband; but the Sages said, May a curse come upon that man whose wife and [minor] sons have to recite the benediction for him! Raba observed,
—
One can deduce important decisions from the [present] custom of [reciting the] Hallel. [Thus], since he says Hallelujah and they respond Hallelujah, it may be inferred that it is a religious duty to answer Hallelujah. Since he says, Praise Him, ye servants of the Lord, and they [again] respond Hallelujah, it may be deduced that if a major recites [the Hallel] for one the latter responds Hallelujah. Since he says, Give thanks unto the Lord, and they respond, Give thanks unto the Lord, it may be inferred that it is a religious duty to make a response of the beginning of the sections. (So it was also stated; R. Hanan b. Raba ruled, It is a religious duty to make a response of the beginning of the sections.) Since he says, Save now, we beseech Thee, O Lord, and they answer, Save now, we beseech Thee, O Lord, it may be inferred that if a minor was reciting it for him, the latter answers after him what he says. Since he says, O Lord, we beseech Thee, send now prosperity, and they respond O, Lord we beseech Thee, send now prosperity, it may be inferred that if a man wishes to double [the verses] he may. Since he says, Blessed be he that cometh, and they answer, In the name of the Lord, it may be inferred that he who hearkens is as though he responded. They enquired of R. Hiyya b. Abba, If one listened but did not make the responses — what is the law? — He answered them, The Sages, the Scribes, the leaders of the people and the expounders laid down that if a man listened though he did not make the responses he has fulfilled his obligation. So it was also stated: R. Simeon b. Pazzi citing R. Joshua b. Levi who had it from Bar Kappara stated, Whence do we know that he who listens is as though he responds? From what is written, Even all the words of the book which the King of Judah hath read. For was it Josiah that read them? Was it not, in fact Shaphan who read them, as it is written, And Shaphan read it before the king. Consequently it may be inferred that he who listens is as though he responds. But perhaps Josiah read it after Shaphan had read it? — R. Aha b. Jacob replied, This cannot be thought of, since it is written, Because thy heart was tender, and thou didst humble thyself before the Lord, when thou heardest what I spake; "When thou heardest’, not ‘when thou didst read’. Raba ruled, One should not say Blessed be he that cometh’ and then [pause and] say ‘in the name of the Lord,’ but ‘Blessed be he that cometh in the name of the Lord’ all together. (R. Safra said to him,
—