BS”D
Sukkah 27 a-b.
Cheshvon 6, 5782. October 12, 2021
1- Sholosh Se’Udos. We read the Tosfos that states unequivocally that one needs to eat bread for the third Shabbos meal. Fruits are insufficient to fulfill this obligation.
Minhag Chabad is explained at length in a Sicha of the Rebbe. See here. LS 21, page 84.
2- We began to delve into a deep and much written about topic in ראשונים and אחרונים.
Namely – how does one define the concept of ownership in Halachah.
As an introduction we mapped out the wide area of ‘ownership’ in הלכה.
Ranging from pure 100% ownership to the total opposite of non-ownership, like…. stealing.
Within this range, between these two pivots, are ‘other’ type of ownerships: Partnership, shares, temporary ownership, leasing, renting, borrowing, easements, right of first refusal etc.
3- For starters, 100% ownership is caused by either inheriting something or purchasing it.
The classic example where one needs 100% ownership is an Esrog. ולקחתם לכם ביום הראשון
Ownership of an Esrog needs to be, on the first day of Sukkos, 100%. Borrowing is less than 100% and therefore not sufficient. As it says ולקחתם לכם.
We will discuss an Esrog owned in a partnership and an Esrog that a Kehila purchases for all to use BLN next week.
We mentioned that buying an Esrog on credit, according to some, is a bit of a ‘defect’. We thus find the Minhag of many to pay for the Daled Minim before Sukkos. Minhag Chabad is not to be particular on this.
And here’s to you Mr. Rubinson…
4- We related the story of Mr. Rubinson who sponsored the printing of the שדי חמד.
At the special Farbrengen the Rebbe made upon its completion, Mr. Rubinson asked the Rebbe to say something about the שדי חמד.
One volume was brought to the Rebbe who opened it at random. The page opened was a discussion about this very topic – if it is necessary to pay for the Daled Minim before Sukos. See here.
יוסף חיים רבינסון
5- Continuing on this topic, ‘ownership from zero to 100’, we brought up מתנה על מנת להחזיר. Whereas the ,גמרא Kiddushin 6b, explicitly says that it is considered 100% ownership, we discussed if this can be understood in the modern world.
After all, how is it 100% yours if one must return it?
We suggested that this תנאי of returning can be viewed as an ‘outlier condition’ that does not affect the ownership. If the person did not return it then he must pay for something that was never his. If he does return it, as agreed, it retroactively places the object in his possession 100%.
So much for the Esrog.
We began the sugya of ownership of a Suka. The Gemara brings the two opinions regarding the ownership of a Sukkah. To be continued.
6- We discussed the opinion of Rebbi Elizezer that one cannot go Sukkah hopping on Sukkos. One must stay and use only his personal Sukkah all seven days. The reasons given are either it’s derived from the פסוק or as not to embarrass the Sukkah by leaving to another.
