24.5 - Sukkah Daf 29 B (6 lines Up)

Today’s learning sponsored Sponsor a day's learning (thousands of minutes!) for only $72 click here https://www.flipcause.com/secure/cause_pdetails/ODUwOTU= Summary Gemara: The mishna does not differentiate between the first day and the rest of yom tov. Question: A dried out lulav which is possul because it is not hadar, is indeed possul for the entire yom tov. But if a lulav is only possul based on the possuk “v’lakachta lachem bayom harishon - take for yourselves on the first day” then it would only be possul on the first day. A stolen lulav is seemingly disqualified based on this verse, so why does the mishna lump it together with a dried out lulav? Response: Rabbi Yochanan quoting Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai: A stolen lulav is possul because it it a “mitzvah haba’ah b’aveirah - a mitzvah made possible by an aveirah”,* which is problematic based on the possuk “You bring stolen animals as well as lame animals” - just as a lame animal cannot be brought as a korban, a stolen animal cannot be brought as a korban either - even after yiush. However, it would seem that only before yiush a stolen korban would be problematic - as the possuk says “adam ki yakriv mikem”, but after yiush the thief has acquired ownership of the animal, so why is it rejected as a korban? It must be because it’s a mitzvah haba’ah b’aveirah. Click here to listen to the shiur with Tosfos: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1txAydtWGq14KQUlKDLRKuC9ranmLKWtq/view?usp=sharing _______ * Tosfos: Although this principle is learned from korban, it is applied to all mitzvos d’orayso as is evident from the gemara that one cannot make a bracha on the mitzvah of challah made from stolen wheat. Rashash: Why is it necessary to bring proof from another gemara, we have proof from our gemara too! Besides, from that gemara we only learn that a bracha cannot be made, but not that the mitzvah is disqualified? Tosfos: Mitzvah haba’ah b’aveirah only applies to a mitzvah that is made possible by an aveirah - such as a stolen lulav which the thief wouldn’t have, had he not stolen it. But this principle cannot be applied to an avodah zarah lulav since the sin of avodah zarah has no bearing on the mitzvah of lulav. However there’s a problem with this chiddush because in Pesachim Matzah from tevel is disqualified from a possuk when it can actually be classified as a mitzvah haba’ah b’aveirah. This podcast has been graciously sponsored by JewishPodcasts.fm. There is much overhead to maintain this service so please help us continue our goal of helping Jewish lecturers become podcasters and support us with a donation: https://thechesedfund.com/jewishpodcasts/donate