Halakhah su Deuteronomio 16:13

Judah the Persian¹⁹ Mentioned by Ibn Ezra in his Commentary to the Pentateuch and elsewhere. Nothing is known of this scholar. (See Encyclopedia Judaica, second edition, vol. 11, p. 505.) said that the years used by Israel were solar years, because he found the festivals were on fixed dates: Passover when the barley ripens (Exodus 34:18), Pentacost at reaping time (ibid. 34:22), and Tabernacles at harvest time (Deuteronomy 16:13). However, what can be done since Moses did not specify the length of a year?²⁰ Since the Bible does not specify the exact length of a solar year, the Karites are left with the matter being undecided. This will also affect determination of the festivals. Also, how will he explain the use of the Hebrew term “hodesh” (new) for “month,” for what is renewed relative to the sun? The uncircumcised (Christians), because their years are solar years and they found that a full year contains twelve lunations, divided the days of the year into twelve parts, for this number is closest to the number of lunar months. The result is that some months are 30 days and some months are 31 days.²¹ Here Ibn Ezra accounts for the division of a year into twelve parts, even if one uses a solar calendar. However, the term “hodesh” would not be appropriate for such solar months.

Binyan Ẓion includes another noteworthy objection to Kalisher's proposal. R. Ya'akov Ettlinger's major contention is based upon the verse "And I will bring your sanctuaries unto destruction, and I will not smell the savor of your sweet odors" (Lev. 26:31). The Gemara prescribes that each sacrifice be offered with six "intentions" (Zevaḥim 46a); among these are le-shem reaḥ and le-shem niḥoaḥ. Ettlinger argues that since God says He will not smell "the savor of your sweet odors" while the Temple lies desolate we cannot offer the sacrifice with such an intention. A similar concept is expressed independently in Emek Berakhah (Jerusalem, 5708), p. 66, by R. Aryeh Pomeranchik, a distinguished disciple of the late Brisker Rav. Quoting an oral tradition related in the name of R. Naftali Zevi Judah Berlin, Rosh Yeshivah of Volozin,³⁶This view is, in fact, expressed by R. Berlin in his Teshuvot Meshiv Davar, Kuntres Dvar ha-Shmittah, no. 56, and in his Ha‘amek Davar, Lev. 26:31 and Deut. 16:13. See also a hitherto unpublished letter written by R. Berlin, Ha-Ma‘ayan, Nisan 5734, pp. 9–10, and R. Menachem Gerlitz, Mara de-Ar‘a Yisra’el (Jerusalem, 5734), II, 16. Ḥazon Ish, Ohalot 30:5, expresses a similar but different concept in stating, on the basis of the same verse, that sacrifices are precluded as one of the manifestations of exile. See R. Kalman Kahana, Ha-Ma‘ayan, Tevet 5731, p. 31, n. 12. Rabbi Pomeranchik asserts that while ordinarily a sacrifice in which these intentions are absent remains valid, nevertheless, in instances when these intentions are impossible, the sacrifice is rendered invalid. The sole exception is the paschal sacrifice which the Torah never refers to as being offered for purposes of "a sweet odor." Rabbi Pomeranchik explains the difficult phrase in the Haggadah, "May we partake there of the sacrifices and of the paschal offerings, whose blood shall be sprinkled upon Thine altar for acceptance," in light of this novel interpretation. The term le-razon expresses our prayer that we shall be able to offer the pesaḥ in a rebuilt Temple in a perfect manner, so that it will also be accepted as "a sweet odor," although this is not strictly required in the case of the paschal sacrifice.

If you build a sukkah underneath the branches of a tree¹¹This rule applies only when the branches of the tree actually overhang the sukkah itself, but if the branches are adjacent to the sukkah, even though they provide the shade for the sukkah, the sukkah is valid. (Ibid 626:1, see Biur Halachah) it is invalid. Even if the branches alone would have allowed more sun than shade, and consequently, by placing the sechach on the sukkah, you, in fact, made it into a sukkah [by providing the required shade], it is, nevertheless, invalid. Even if you cut off the branches of the tree afterwards, the sukkah still remains invalid, for it is written, "Make [ta'aseh] the festival of Sukkos for yourself" (Deuteronomy 16:13), and it is expounded, "A sukkah must be made, and not come into being by itself." (see chapter 9:6 above) Therefore, after cutting the branches of the tree, you must pick up each branch of the sechach and a new act of placing it down must be performed, for the purpose of fulfilling the mitzvah of sukkah.¹²Mishnah Berurah writes that the sechach must be placed down for the sake of providing shade but not necessarily for the mitzvah of sukkah. (Ibid 626:14) It is also forbidden to lay down the sechach before making the walls for it is required that with the laying of the sechach the sukkah should become valid for use.