Daf Ditty Succah 55:70 Bulls, Tribalism vs Universalism?

According to the Hasidic master Rabbi Nachman of Breslov, a sense of unity is

at the heart of the mitzvah of sukkah.
Reb Nosson wrote in Likutei Halakhot that one should fulfill the mitzvah
of sukkah with the following kavanah:
"One should concentrate on being part of the entire people of Israel, with intense
love and peace, until it may be considered as if all of Israel dwells together in
one sukkah."

1
2
MISHNA: On the first Festival day of Sukkot there were thirteen bulls, two rams, and one
goat there. The mishna proceeds to discuss the division of labor for the Festival offerings among
the twenty-four priestly watches, all of which serve in the Temple on the pilgrimage Festivals. The
sixteen offerings mentioned above were divided among sixteen priestly watches, one offering per
watch. Fourteen sheep remained to be divided among the eight remaining watches. On the first
day of the Festival, six of the eight remaining watches sacrifice two sheep each for a total of
twelve, and the remaining two watches sacrifice one sheep each.

On the second day of the Festival, i.e., the first day of the intermediate days, when twelve bulls
were sacrificed, fifteen of the priestly watches sacrifice the bulls, rams, and goat, five of the
remaining watches sacrifice two sheep each, and the remaining four watches sacrifice one sheep
each. On the third day of the Festival, when eleven bulls were sacrificed, fourteen of the priestly
watches sacrifice the bulls, rams, and goat, four of the remaining watches sacrifice two sheep
each, and the remaining six watches sacrifice one sheep each.

3
On the fourth day of the Festival, when ten bulls were sacrificed, thirteen of the priestly watches
sacrifice the bulls, rams, and goat, three of the remaining watches sacrifice two sheep each, and
the remaining eight watches sacrifice one sheep each. On the fifth day, when nine bulls were
sacrificed, twelve watches sacrifice the bulls, rams, and goat, two of the twelve remaining watches
sacrifice two sheep each, and the remaining ten watches sacrifice one sheep each. On the sixth
day, when eight bulls were sacrificed, eleven watches sacrifice the bulls, rams, and goat, one of
the remaining watches sacrifices two sheep, and the remaining twelve watches sacrifice one
sheep each.

On the seventh day they are all equal and bring one offering each. On the eighth day, when
there was a completely different configuration of offerings, they returned to the standard lottery
system used to determine which of the priestly watches would sacrifice the offerings, as they did
on the other pilgrimage Festivals, which do not have as many offerings as does Sukkot. They
said about the ordering of the priestly watches: One who sacrificed bulls today will not sacrifice
bulls tomorrow; rather, they will sacrifice one of the other types of offerings. They rotate, so
that each of the watches will have the opportunity to sacrifice bulls as well as other animals.

4
GEMARA: The Gemara suggests: Let us say that the mishna that says that on the eighth day
they returned to the standard lottery of the other pilgrimage Festivals is according to Rabbi Yehuda
HaNasi and not according to the Rabbis. As it is taught in a baraita: To determine the priestly
watch that would sacrifice the bull that comes as an additional offering on the Eighth Day of
Assembly, they draw lots over it from the beginning; this is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda
HaNasi. And the Rabbis say: One of the two watches that did not sacrifice three bulls during
Sukkot sacrifices it. Only two of the twenty-four watches sacrifices two bulls over the course of
Sukkot. Each of the other watches sacrifices three bulls. Since the mishna mentions that a lottery
was held, apparently the mishna is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi.

Rabbi Elazar said: These seventy bulls that are sacrificed as additional offerings over the course
of the seven days of Sukkot, to what do they correspond? They correspond to the seventy
nations of the world, and are brought to atone for their sins and to hasten world peace. Why is a
single bull sacrificed on the Eighth Day of Assembly? It corresponds to the singular nation,
Israel.

The Gemara cites a parable about a king of flesh and blood who said to his servants: Prepare
me a great feast that will last for several days. When the feast concluded, on the last day, he said
to his beloved servant: Prepare me a small feast so that I can derive pleasure from you alone.

RASHI

5
Ben Yehoyada

Steinzaltz

Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Woe unto the nations of the world that lost something and do not know
what they lost. When the Temple is standing, the seventy bulls sacrificed on the altar during
the festival of Sukkot atones for them. And now that the Temple is destroyed, who atones for
them?

Summary

We listen to the voices of our rabbis as they determine which psalms are sung on which days of
Sukkot; when the trumpets are sounded. They use their voices to debate what is said and what is
sung and what is played. It would seem that the experience of rejoicing on Sukkot is facilitated
through sound.

6
The rabbis discuss differences in what should be read on intermediate days verses what should be
read on Shabbat. They wonder how to ensure that we are chanting the appropriate prayers when
we might not know which day is which.1

Amud (b) begins a new Mishna. It describes what animals are waiting to be sacrificed over the
holiday of Sukkot. Additionally it teaches us exactly which animals should be sacrificed on which
particular days. It focuses on the watch, the people who rotate shifts caring for and preparing the
animals for sacrifice. The rabbis would like to believe that the rabbis rotate their shifts so that
priests can witness different sacrifices. In particular, the rabbis speak about the sacrifice of bulls.

This conversation makes me wonder about the ease with which these offerings took place. Seventy
bulls are said to have been sacrificed in the Temple when it was standing. Seventy bulls! And
those are just one animal! How could this have been accomplished? Even for the korban Pesach,
how would that number of families bring their offerings to the Temple? Surely there would have
been chaos, disorder, and mistakes in halachic practice. Perhaps the notion of sacrifice has always
been an idea. Perhaps our history is not one of ubiquitous sacrifice.

Another Mishna is introduced, this time mentioning the 24 priests who rotate through the Temple
services over the course of Sukkot. It notes that the watch people might have been those who
distributed food, including the shewbread, over the course of the holiday. In the Gemara the rabbis
want to understand how the watch could be treated equally. They wonder whether all of the
holidays are treated in the same manner, as well.

Daf Shevui writes:2

The priests were divided into twenty-four watches, each watch serving for a week at the Temple.
During a watch’s week the priests of that watch kept all of the sacrificial meat and any other part
of the sacrifice that they were allowed to use. However, during pilgrimage festivals all twenty-four
watches equally divided the sacrifices that were offered on account of the festival. Our mishnah
teaches how the numerous Sukkot offerings were divvied up.

Section one: On the first day of Sukkot there were thirty animals sacrificed: thirteen bulls, two
rams, one goat (for a sin-offering) and fourteen lambs (Numbers 29:13-16). This means that 16
priestly watches could take one animal each, leaving fourteen animals for the other eight watches.

1
https://dafyomibeginner.blogspot.com/2014/03/
2
https://www.sefaria.org/Sukkah.55b.1?lang=bi&p2=Daf_Shevui_to_Sukkah.55b.2-9&lang2=bi

7
On the first day of the festival, six watches would sacrifice two lambs and the other two watches
would get one lamb each.

Section two: On the second day there was one less bull, so the total number of animals was only
29. Fifteen watches would take the fifteen non-lamb animals, leaving nine watches to split 14
lambs. Five would take two lambs, leaving four to each take one.

Section three: On the third day there were 11 bulls, for a total of 28 animals. Fourteen watches
would take the fourteen non-lamb animals, leaving ten watches to split 14 lambs. Four would take
two lambs, leaving six to each take one.

Section four: On the fourth day there were only 10 bulls, for a total of 27 animals. Thirteen
watches would take the thirteen non-lamb animals, leaving 11 watches to split 14 lambs. Three
would take two lambs, leaving eight to each take one.

Section five: On the fifth day there were only 9 bulls, for a total of 26 animals. Twelve watches
would take the twelve non-lamb animals, leaving 12 watches to split 14 lambs. Two would take
two lambs, leaving ten to each take one.

Section six: On the sixth day there were only 8 bulls, for a total of 25 animals. Eleven watches
would take the eleven non-lamb animals, leaving 13 watches to split 14 lambs. One would take
two lambs, leaving 12 to each take one.

Section seven: On the seventh day there were 24 animals for 24 watches—each watch got one.
Section eight: On Shmini Atzeret there were only 10 animals sacrificed, one bull, one ram, one
goat and seven lambs (Numbers 29:35-38). The watches would then cast lot to see who received
what (see Yoma 2:1).

The mishnah had stated that on the eighth day they returned to casting lots, as was done on the
first day. The Talmud now quotes a baraita which gives the impression that the opinion in the
mishnah accords with Rabbi [Judah Hanasi]. The other sages hold that the watches that didn’t get
to offer three bulls during Sukkot had the chance offer this bull.

The mishnah might even accord with the rabbis. The mishnah only says that they cast lots on the
eighth day to decide who would offer the bull. Even if only two watches were eligible to offer this
bull, they would still need to cast lots to decide which of them does so. Thus Rabbi would hold
that all watches cast lots, whereas the other rabbis would hold that only those lots that had not yet
offered two bulls could cast lots.

8
The Talmud now cites a baraita that states that all of the watches went through two full cycles of
sacrifices except for the last two. This again seems to follow Rabbi who said that on Shemini
Atzeret, they go back to a regular system of casting lots.

The Talmud resolves that even the other rabbis can agree with this baraita. The last two watches
do get a chance to participate in all three casting of lots. The only thing they don’t get is a certainty
about receiving a third bull.

What then does this baraita teach us? After all, we could do the count ourselves without the baraita
specifically telling us that one of the last two watches does not get a third bull?
The answer is that the baraita teaches that the watch that receives the meat of the bull this day, will
not receive the meat of a bull tomorrow.

During Sukkot 70 bulls are offered in total. These correspond to the 70 nations that there are in
Jewish lore. Each bull sacrificed offers atonement for one nation.

The final bull offered on Shemini Atzeret corresponds with Israel. Israel is that favored friend in
the parable, who God asks to stay on just one more day, so that God can enjoy our company.
R. Yohanan offers an expression of lament for the non-Jews who lost their mechanism for
atonement when the Temple was destroyed. It is as if he is saying, “Look, our Temple was not
only for the atonement or protection of the people of Israel. It was for the whole world, at least
on this most universalistic of holidays, Sukkot. You destroyed. This was your loss as well as
ours.”

Rav Avrohom Adler writes:3

On the first Yom Tov of Sukkos, thirteen bullocks were offered, two rams and one he-goat.
Fourteen he-lambs therefore remained for the other eight watches of Kohanim.

On the first day, six offered two each and the remaining two offered one each.

On the second day, five watches offered two each and the remaining four offered one each.

On the third day, four watches offered two each and the remaining six offered one each.

On the fourth day, three offered two each and the remaining eight offered one each.

On the fifth day, two offered two each and the remaining ten offered one each.

On the sixth day, one offered two and the remaining twelve offered one each.

On the seventh day, all were equal.

On the eighth day, they again cast lots, as on the other festivals.

3
http://dafnotes.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Sukkah_55.pdf

9
They said that the watches that offered bullocks on one day should not offer them on the morrow,
but that they should take their turns in rotation.

The Gemora asks: Must we say that our Mishnah represents the view of Rebbe, and not that of the
Rabbis, since it has been taught in a braisa: For the bull which is offered on the Eighth Day lots
are cast afresh; these are the words of Rebbe, but the Sages ruled: One of the two watches which
did not have a third turn in the bulls offered it?

The Gemora answers: You may even say that it represents the view of the Rabbis, for do not two
watches also require the casting of lots?

The Gemora asks: Whose view is followed in that which has been taught: All the watches repeated
a second and a third time, with the exception of two watches who repeated a second time but not
a third one? Must we say that it follows that of Rebbe, and not that of the Rabbis?

The Gemora answers: You may even say that it follows that of the Rabbis, but the statement that
they did not repeat a third time refers to the bulls of the Festival (although they did have a third
turn with the bulls of Shemini Atzeres).

The Gemora asks: What then does this teach us? The Gemora answers: It is this that we were
taught, that he who offered bulls on one day shall not offer them on the morrow, but they must all
take their turns in rotation.

Rabbi Elozar stated: To what do those seventy bulls hat were offered during the seven days of the
Festival correspond? It is to the seventy nations. To what does the single bull of Shemini Atzeres
correspond? It is to the singular nation of Israel.

This may be compared to a king of flesh and blood who said to his servants, “Prepare for me a
great banquet,” but on the last day he said to his beloved friend, “Prepare for me a small meal
that I may derive benefit from your company.”

Rabbi Yochanan said: Woe to the idolaters, for they had a loss (of something precious), and do not
know what they have lost. When the Temple was in existence the Altar atoned for them, but now,
who shall atone for them? At three periods in the year (the three pilgrimage festivals during the
year; Pesach, Shavuos and Sukkos), all the watches of the Kohanim shared equally in the festival
sacrifices and in the division of the lechem hapanim (the showbread).On Shavuos they used to say
to the Kohen: Here is matzah (lechem hapanim) for you, and here is chametz (the shtei halechem
that was offered on Shavuos). The watch whose period of service was fixed for that festival week
offered the tamid, vow offerings, voluntary offerings and all other communal offerings; and this
watch offered them all.

The Gemora asks: But don’t the sacrificial parts (emurim) belong to the Most High (so why does
the Mishna say that it is divided amongst the Kohanim)? Rav Chisda replied: The meaning is that
which is said (for ‘emurim’ has this connotation as well) to be offered on the festivals.

10
 THE "SONG OF THE DAY" ON SPECIAL DAYS

Rav Mordechai Kornfeld writes:4

The Beraisa discusses the various Shirim that are recited on the different days of Chol ha'Mo'ed
Sukos. RASHI writes that the Beraisa refers to the Shir that is recited at the time the Korban Musaf
is offered (as opposed to the Shir at the time the Korban Tamid is offered).

Rashi explains that the Beraisa cannot refer to the Shir of the Korban Tamid, because if the Beraisa
refers to that Shir, then the Gemara has no proof from the Beraisa that on Shabbos Chol ha'Mo'ed
only one Shir is recited during Musaf: when the Beraisa says that on Shabbos Chol ha'Mo'ed only
one Shir is recited, it refers only to the Shir of the Tamid, but at the time of the Musaf two Shirim
are sung. It must be that the Beraisa refers to the Shir of the Korban Musaf, and it teaches that only
one Shir is sung for the two Musafim.

How, though, does the Gemara know that the Beraisa refers to the Shir of the Korban Musaf? It
seems that the Gemara takes for granted that there is no special Shir for the Tamid on Chol
ha'Mo'ed. The only unique Shir on Chol ha'Mo'ed is the one recited at the time of the Korban
Musaf.

However, this contradicts the Gemara in Rosh Hashanah (30b and 31a). The Gemara there states
that it happened once, at the end of the month of Elul, that witnesses who came to testify about the
sighting of the new moon arrived late in the day, after the afternoon Tamid had been offered. The
Leviyim, unaware that the day was going to be declared Rosh Hashanah, mistakenly sang the
weekday Shir at the time of the Tamid and not the special Shir for Rosh Hashanah which they
were supposed to sing. The Gemara there then lists the unique Shirim of Rosh Hashanah and of
Shabbos which are recited with "each of the three Korbanos" -- the two Temidim and the Musaf!
The Gemara there clearly says that the Shir of the Korban Tamid on the festival differs from the
Shir on a weekday. How is the Gemara there to be reconciled with the Gemara here which implies
that the Shir of the Korban Tamid does not change on the festival? (MINCHAS CHINUCH #312)

The MINCHAS CHINUCH explains that the Shir of the Korban Tamid differs only on a day that
is sanctified and on which Melachah is forbidden, such as Rosh Hashanah, Shabbos, and Yom
Tov. In contrast, on Chol ha'Mo'ed and Rosh Chodesh, days on which Melachah is permitted, the
normal Shir of the Tamid is recited. Since the Beraisa here refers only to Chol ha'Mo'ed, the special
Shir that it discusses must be the Shir of the Korban Musaf.

The TUREI EVEN (Rosh Hashanah 30b) seems to follow the same logic as the Minchas Chinuch,
because he says that on Rosh Chodesh there is no special Shir for the Korban Tamid.
The Minchas Chinuch cites the RAMA MI'PANO (in Asarah Ma'amaros, Ma'amar "Em Kol Chai"
2:19), who says that the Shir of the Tamid differs only on Rosh Chodesh and Rosh Hashanah. He

4
https://www.dafyomi.co.il/sukah/insites/su-dt-055.htm

11
gives the same reason that the Gemara (54b) gives to explain why the Shir of the Korban Musaf
of Rosh Chodesh that occurs on Shabbos takes precedence over the Shir of the Musaf of Shabbos:
it is to publicly affirm that Beis Din is correct in their determination of the date of Rosh Chodesh.
Similarly, on Rosh Chodesh the Shir of the Tamid is changed to show the people that the Beis Din
is correct in their declaration of the day as Rosh Chodesh. On Rosh Hashanah, too, the Rabanan
enacted that a special Shir be recited at the time of the Tamid in order to publicize that Beis Din is
correct in their establishment of the new month.5

RAV YOSEF SHALOM ELYASHIV shlit'a (quoted in He'oros b'Maseches Sukah) suggests that
Rosh Hashanah is unique among all the festivals. The Rabanan instituted that a special Shir be
recited on Rosh Hashanah at the time the Korban Tamid is offered due to the day's special status
as the Day of Judgment. That Shir (Tehilim 29), which mentions Matan Torah, was instituted "in
order to mention the merit of the Shofar blasts of Matan Torah" (Rashi to Rosh Hashanah 30b, DH
Kol). The Rabanan did not establish a special Shir for the Korban Tamid of any other festivals.

Although Shabbos also has a special Shir for the afternoon Tamid (as the Gemara says in Rosh
Hashanah 30a), that Shir is recited because Shabbos is separate from the other days of the week,
and thus it deserves its own Shirim for both the morning Tamid and the afternoon Tamid.

It is interesting to note that the TUR (OC 133) and ORCHOS CHAYIM (cited by the BEIS
YOSEF OC 133) write that we do not recite the daily Shir Shel Yom after Minchah, because no
Shir was recited at the time of the afternoon Tamid. Support for their words is found in
the HAGAHAOS MAIMONIYOS (Hilchos Tefilah 3:5). He proves that the Shir said with the
Korban Tamid was said only during the day and not at night from the fact that "no Shir was said
after the afternoon Tamid, even though some time remained before nightfall." (No Shir was said
at that time presumably because it was so close to nightfall.)

Their view is clearly contradicted by the Gemara in Rosh Hashanah cited above, which states that
a Shir is recited for the afternoon Tamid. The RAMBAM (Hilchos Temidim u'Musafim 6:9, 11)
also writes that the procedure done for the afternoon Tamid is the same as the procedure done for
the morning Tamid, which implies that the same Shir is recited for the afternoon Tamid.6

The MAGEN AVRAHAM (OC 132:4) cites the ALSHICH who explains that the Tur agrees that
a Shir is recited in the afternoon. When the Tur says that there is no Shir, he means that the Shir is
not "Me'akev" -- the service is valid even without the Shir. The PRI MEGADIM challenges this
answer. There is no basis to suggest that the morning Tamid would be invalid without the Shir,
such that the Tur would need to teach that the afternoon service would be valid without the Shir.
The PERISHAH (133:9) suggests that perhaps the Tur understands that the Shir of the afternoon
Tamid was entirely voluntary. However, the Gemara in Rosh Hashanah seems to refute this

5
This might be the intention of the RE'AH in Beitzah (4b) and the RAMBAM (Hilchos Kidush ha'Chodesh 3:5) as well. They
write that the same mishap that occurred on Rosh Hashanah (when the witnesses came late in the afternoon of Rosh Hashanah and
the Leviyim sang the wrong Shir for the afternoon Tamid) could occur on any Rosh Chodesh, "since every Rosh Chodesh has not
only a Korban Musaf, but a special Shir [for the afternoon Tamid]."
6
The SEDER OLAM (ch. 14) also mentions which Shir was recited in the morning and which Shir in the afternoon during the
period in which the Aron ha'Kodesh was in Ir David, before the Beis ha'Mikdash was built.

12
suggestion as well, because the Gemara says that it would have been improper (a "Kilkul") to offer
the afternoon Tamid without singing any Shir.

The Magen Avraham himself suggests that the Tur means only that at times no Shir was said with
the afternoon Tamid, such as when the Nesachim were offered after nightfall (the Shir is said when
the Nesachim are offered, but the Shir may not be said at night), as TOSFOS in Rosh Hashanah
(30b, DH v'Niskalkelu) writes.

SEVENTY COWS, SEVENTY NATIONS, AND ONE GOAT

The Mishnah discusses the number of Parim (cows) that were brought as a Korban Olah each day
of Sukos. The VILNA GA'ON (Kol Eliyahu #100) points out that the difference in the number of
Parim brought each day sheds light on a discrepancy in the verses in the Torah (Bamidbar 29:16-
34) that describe the Se'ir (goat) that was brought as a Korban Chatas each day of Sukos.

The verses which refer to days one, two, and four of Sukos describe the goat as a "Se'ir Izim." In
contrast, the verses which refer to days three, five, six, and seven refer to the goat merely as a
"Se'ir." What is the reason for this strange difference?

The Zohar (Tikunei Zohar) teaches that the seventy nations of the world are under the authority of
either Yishmael or Esav. There are 35 nations under the authority of Yishmael, and 35 nations
under Esav.

In addition, the Zohar teaches that the term "Se'ir Izim" alludes to Yishmael, who was "Az"
(brazen), and the word "Se'ir" alone alludes to Esav, who was an "Ish Sa'ir" (Bereishis 27:11).7

The Korbanos of Sukos atone for the seventy nations, 35 of which are under the dominion of
Yishmael and 35 of which are under the dominion of Esav. The Korbanos of the first day are
brought for the nations under the dominion of Yishmael, who was the older of the two. On the first
and second days, when the cows that are offered atone for the nations under Yishmael's dominion,
the Chatas-offering is also brought for those nations. Since the Chatas-offering of the first two
days are brought for the nations under Yishmael, the verse which describes that offering calls it
"Se'ir Izim," an allusion to Yishmael.

In contrast, the verse that describes the offerings of the third day does not say "Se'ir Izim." This is
because that day's offerings are not brought for the nations under Yishmael (because if they were,
there would be too many offerings for Yishmael's nations -- 13 are brought on the first day, 12 on
the second day, and 11 on the third day, for a total of 36). The rest of the Korbanos for the nations
under Yishmael are brought on the fourth day, when 10 Parim are offered, which brings the total
number to 35 Parim for the 35 nations (13 on the first day, 12 on the second day, and 10 on the
fourth day).

7
Reference is also made in the Selichos of the Seventeenth of Tamuz to the "Tzefir" -- which is always used by the verse with the
modifying word "Izim," as in "Tzefir Izim" -- and to the "Se'ir," which refer to Yishmael and Esav, respectively.

13
The Korbanos of the other days -- the third, fifth, sixth, and seventh -- total 35 Parim (11, 9, 8, 7),
which correspond to the 35 nations under Esav's dominion. For that reason, the verses which
describe the Korbanos of those days say only "Se'ir," an allusion to Esav.

Steinsaltz (OBM) writes:8

We traditionally close our daily morning prayers with one of the mizmorei Tehillim – Psalms.
This mizmor is taken from the daily Psalm sung when the morning sacrifice – the tamid shel
shachar – was brought. Our Gemara quotes a baraita that describes how, in the Bet ha-Mikdash,
a special mizmor was sung in connection with the Mussaf sacrifice on each day of Sukkot. It is
interesting to note that only the mizmorim for hol ha-mo’ed – the intermediary days – are
enumerated in the baraita, while the holidays themselves are not explained. Although it does not
appear in our Gemara, Masechet Soferim does offer Psalms for the holidays, as well; mizmor 76,
which refers to God’s sukkah (see verse 3) is mentioned as the mizmor sung on the first day,
and mizmor 12, entitled lamenatze’ah al ha-sheminit was the Psalm of Shemini Atzeret, the eighth
day of the Sukkot celebrations.

There are a number of explanations given for the choice of particular mizmorim for each day of
Sukkot. The Me’iri summarizes them as follows:

• Day one (as referred to by the Gemara, but is actually the second day of Sukkot): Mizmor
29, which includes “the voice of God over the waters” and is understood as referring
to nisukh ha-mayim – the water libation.
• Day two (third day): Mizmor 50, which mentions the obligation to fulfill the vows that
were made to God (see verse 14), something that was traditionally taken care of while
in Jerusalem for the holiday.
• Day three and Day four (fourth and fifth days): Mizmor 94, whose focus is on God taking
vengeance against the enemies of the Jewish people. During second Temple times, when
the Jews were subject to oppression by outside forces, this would have been an appropriate
Psalm to say in prayer.
• Day five (sixth day): Mizmor 81, whose closing passage discusses the generous produce
yielded by the Land of Israel (see verse 17).
• Day six (Hoshana Rabbah – the seventh day): Mizmor 82, whose focus is on God sitting in
judgment. This is appropriate, for the last day of Chol HaMoed Sukkot – Hoshana Rabbah
– is traditionally seen as a day of judgment for the year’s supply of water.

According to Rashi, aside from days three and four (when a single mizmor was split in half), the
entire psalm was sung together with the Mussaf sacrifice. The Ritva argues that only a selection of
the mizmor was chosen to accompany the korban.

8
https://www.ou.org/life/torah/masechet_sukkah5556/

14
Tosafos (‫) אתקין ה”ד‬cites the explanation of Rashi. In ‫ לארץ חוץ‬,the ‫ דיומא ספיקא‬introduces an element
of uncertainty regarding which day of Sukkos is being celebrated.9

The Gemara deals with how the readings of the Musaf offerings are arranged, because all of the
days of Sukkos differ in terms of the number of bulls that are brought. Therefore, Ameimar
established a system of ‫ דלוג‬,where on any particular day, we read the Musaf verses representing
both possibilities of the accurate Musaf.

For example, on the first day of Chol HaMoed we read the pesukim for both the second and third
day of Sukkos. Rashi adds that just as we read these additional verses in our Musaf prayer, the
reading of the Torah also reflects this doubt. The fourth aliyah is the most important aliyah, because
it is the one we add for Chol HaMoed, and in this aliyah we read the Musaf offering for both the
second and third day of Sukkos. The first three aliyos read the second day, the third day, and the
reading of the Musaf of the next day—the fourth day.

This system is continued throughout the holiday. Following this pattern, on Hoshana Rabbah, the
fifth day of Chol HaMoed, the four aliyos would respectively be the Musaf for day 6,7,8 and 6
plus 7. Tosafos objects and notes that it is unreasonable to read the pesukim for Musaf for the
eighth day, for Shemini Atzeres, which is not part of Sukkos.

As Tosafos notes, “It is not proper to read on Sukkos a portion which is not related to that
holiday.” Tosafos suggests an alternative pattern for the Torah reading on Chol HaMoed. All four
aliyos should read only from the “doubtful” days. For example, on the first day of Chol HaMoed,
the first aliyah should read “Day 2,” and the second aliyah should read “Day 3.” The next two
aliyos should again repeat this same pattern.

9
https://www.dafdigest.org/masechtos/Sukkah%20055.pdf

15
It is evident from the Gemara that when a Song of the Day for Sukkos was skipped because the
Shabbos song was sung in its place the order of the songs is paused for that day and then resumed,
thus causing the song scheduled for the last day to be omitted entirely.

This seemingly establishes a general rule that when an order is interrupted it is resumed where it
left off rather than skipping a position. Rav Yosef Chaim of Baghdad (1) addressed the case of a
shul that read from the Torah donated by one family on the first day of Yom Tov and from another
Torah donated by a second family on the second day of Yom Tov. An additional custom said that
if the father of a child receiving his bris milah owned a Torah they would read from his Torah on
the day of the bris.

One year there was a bris on the first day of Yom Tov and the father of the child owned a Sefer
Torah so they read from his Torah on that day. On the second day they were uncertain whether
they should read from the Torah normally read on the first day or from the one normally read on
the second day. Based on our Gemara (2), Rav Yosef Chaim ruled that the Torah normally read
on the first day should be used because its position is not skipped altogether, rather it is merely
delayed for a day. Therefore, the Torah of the first day is read on the second day and the Sefer
Torah of the second day ends up not being used.

Rav Meir Eisenstadt (3) rules similarly regarding a shul in which one person blows the shofar on
the first day of Rosh HaShanah and another on the second day. When Shabbos occurs on the first
day, the person who was supposed to blow on the first day blows on the second day and the second
person is pushed off entirely.

Rav Amram Blum (4) , however, disagrees with the assertion that the second person always gets
pushed off. He explains that in our Gemara the last song was pushed off because it didn’t carry the
same significance as the others. Thus if something has to be pushed off the one with the least
significance is the obvious choice. On the other hand, if there is no difference between the one
scheduled to be first and the one scheduled to be second the second one is not automatically pushed
off simply because it is second.

16
During Sukkos, a total of seventy bulls were brought up on behalf of the nations of the world. But
on Shemini Atzeres, a single bull brought as an offering was meant to symbolize the unique nation,
the Jewish people, that exists in a unique relationship with Hashem.

“This could be compared to a mortal king who ordered his servants to prepare a massive feast.
On the last day, he told his dearly beloved to prepare a small meal so that he might enjoy his
beloved’s company.” The Maggid of Dubno, zt”l, asked: “Why should the King have us make a
small meal? Are we not his chosen nation? Wouldn’t it make more sense for this special
relationship to be solemnized by an even more extravagant sacrifice?”

He answered with a parable: “A wealthy man traveled abroad, and after a very long absence his
return was imminent. His family included both the children he shared in common with his wife,
plus the children she had from a prior marriage. Everyone, step-children included, awaited their
father’s return anxiously. When he arrived, however, he gave his step-children nicer gifts than he
gave his own children! One friend noticed this seemingly peculiar behavior and asked him about
it. “Could it be that you actually love your step-children more than your natural children?” The
wealthy man explained, “Heaven forbid! However, I do want everyone to be equally happy on my
arrival. This is why I give my step-children more extravagant gifts. My step-children’s joy comes
mainly from the gifts that I bring home for them, so they obviously need more extravagant gifts.
However, my own children are satisfied with just a trinket. Their main pleasure is in my presence!”

The Maggid concluded, “The chosen nation is like Hashem’s own children. The fact that He loves
us and takes joy in us is seen from the fact that he meets us ‘alone’ without many sacrifices!”

70 bulls.
S A R A R O N I S W R I T E S : 10

If you read the biblical description of the Sukkot sacrifices ( Numbers 29:12-34 ), you’ll notice
that the Israelites were commanded to sacrifice an awful lot of bulls on the holiday. On the first
day of the holiday, it was no less than 13 bulls, on the second day 12, on the third day 11 and so
on in descending order until the seventh and final day of the holiday on which they sacrificed seven
bulls. That’s a total of 70 bulls sacrificed throughout the course of Sukkot — on top of the usual
festive rams, lambs and goats.

Why so many bulls? our daf offers an explanation:

Rabbi Elazar said: These 70 bulls, to what do they correspond? They correspond to the 70
nations. And why is a single bull sacrificed on the Eighth Day of Assembly (Shemini Atzeret —
a one day holiday that immediately follows Sukkot)? It corresponds to the singular nation,
Israel.

10
https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/sukkah-55/

17
Rabbi Elazar tells us that one bull is sacrificed on Sukkot for each and every nation of the world.
The medieval commentator Rashi connects the 70 sacrifices for the nations of the world to another
major theme of the holiday — prayers for rain. He explains that the 70 bulls “atone for them (the
nations of the world) so that rain will fall across the world because we are judged on this holiday
for water.”

On Yom Kippur, God decides who will live and die in the coming year. In Tractate Rosh
Hashanah ( 16a ) , we will see a similar idea that on Sukkot God decides how much rain the world
will receive in the coming year. Here, Rashi is suggesting that because the whole world is
connected through God’s judgement on Sukkot, Israel spends the holiday atoning for the entire
world.

On Sukkah 35, we discussed how one of the four species — the etrog — was of foreign origins
but became a crucial symbol of Jewish identity. Today’s daf highlights another important way that
the holiday of Sukkot integrated the global community into the holiday.

But it also offers us an evocative challenge to this idea. The Gemara ends its discussion of the 70
sacrifices that correspond to the 70 nations with a lament:

Rabbi Yohanan said: Woe unto the nations of the world that lost something and do not know
what they lost. When the Temple is standing, the altar atones for them. And now that the Temple
is destroyed, who atones for them?

The irony is palpable. When Rome destroyed the Temple, they were destroying the very rituals
that ensured adequate rain and a healthy harvest. Their obliviousness to Israel’s vital role in in
securing the global weather ended up hurting them — and the whole world.

Whether we realize it or not, we are all part of many communities — familial communities, local
communities, religious communities, ethnic communities, national communities and global
communities. These communities are interconnected in ways that can work to provide health and
abundance for all, or not. Today’s daf challenges us to reflect on the kinds of communities we
might be a part of without even realizing it. And to think about what we might be losing because
we don’t.

Rabbi Johnny Solomon writes:11

We are taught in the Mishna (Sukkah 5:6) in our daf (Sukkah 55b) that a total of seventy bulls were

offered as sacrifices in the Temple over Sukkot, and this fact then prompted Rabbi Elazar to ask: ‘To

what do these seventy bulls correspond?’, which he then answers by explaining that they correspond

11
www.rabbijohnnysolomon.con

18
‘to the seventy nations.’ As Rashi explains, ‘seventy bulls were offered on Sukkot corresponding to

the seventy nations - to atone for them so that rain shall fall throughout the world. This is because it

is on Sukkot when we are judged for the water.’ Given this, Rabbi Yochanan then proceeds to observe,

‘woe to the idolators, for they had a loss and they do not know what they have lost. When the Temple

existed, the altar atoned for them; but now, who will atone for them?’.

Clearly, underpinning these observations is the sentiment that the Beit HaMikdash was not only the

beacon for the Jewish people but for all of humanity (as evident from Melachim I 8:45 & Yeshayah

56:7), and that it is specifically Sukkot that is the festival which affirms the universal message of the

Jewish people (as evident from Zechariah 14:16). But why specifically Sukkot?

This question is addressed by Rabbi Shimon Gershon Rosenberg (1949-2007), better known by the

acronym ‘Rabbi Shagar’, who explains that the festival of Sukkot contains two seemingly conflicting

messages: In terms of the Sukkah itself, it represents the structure in which we placed our trust in God

as we journeyed in the wilderness – outside of the land of Israel - for a period of forty years, while

Sukkot - as a festival - is also centred on the harvest and is a celebration of the bounty of the land of

Israel. Understood this way, the sukkah is ‘a diasporic, temporary dwelling that is also an expression of

the Land of Israel’s harvest festival’ which incorporated both ‘the exilic and the rooted’ (Faith Shattered

and Restored p. 184), and that it is from the lessons we can draw from Sukkot that we can understand

and find a healthy balance between nationalism and universalism.

As Rav Shagar proceeds to explain, ‘both nationalism and universalism are necessary. Nationalism

is rootedness in what one is, in an identity unique to the nation and the individual. However, if it is

19
not to turn rigid and callous, it must be tempered by universalism... [which] subverts the preference

for one national identity over another… This is because universalism is the shared dimension, the

common grounds for all of humankind. Put in religious terms, it is where we encounter the image of

God’ (ibid. pp. 185-6). See below p38 for more on Rav Shagar.

Understood this way, ‘it is precisely the diasporic nature of the sukkah – the very sukkah in which God

commanded us to dwell when we emerged from Egypt… where one surrenders one’s power and puts

his trust in God, that can facilitate an all-encompassing divine influx that includes the offering of seventy

bulls for the welfare of the world’s nations’ (ibid. p. 185).

Stay One More Day

Daniel Goldberg writes:12

The Torah tells us very little about Shemini Atzeret. We know that it is appended to Sukkot; the
very name reflects a continuation of the holiday. But it is also distinct. The Torah does not require
us to sit in a Sukkah or to wave the four species. Its sacrificial regime differs as well. Most notably,
over Sukkot multiple bulls are offered daily, descending from thirteen bulls on day one to seven
bulls on day seven (equaling a total of seventy). But on Shemini Atzeret, the pattern is broken,
with only one bull offered.

Beyond these important and somewhat conflicting data points, we know very little about the nature
of the holiday itself. There is no obvious agricultural or historical underpinning to the day. The
very meaning of “Atzeret” is a matter of debate. Does it reflect retention, that the Jewish people
are being asked to stay back and celebrate for one more day? Or does it simply reflect a prohibition
against melakhah (prohibited constructive activities)?

12
https://www.thelehrhaus.com/scholarship/stay-one-more-day/

20
A well-known Midrashic tradition addresses these questions and speaks to the character of the day.
The most familiar version of this Midrash to many is Rashi’s presentation in his commentary
on Leviticus 23:36. There he writes:

This is like a king who invited his sons to a banquet for a certain number of days. When it was
time for them to leave, the king said to them, “My sons, I beg of you, stay with me one more day.
Your departure is hard for me.”

This touching metaphor portrays God as a loving father to the Jewish people. Sukkot is a banquet
that God prepares for the Jewish people. Saddened by His children’s imminent departure, the King
begs His children to stay for one more day. In this account, Shemini Atzeret, that one extra day, is
simply a continuation of the prior seven day banquet. There is no substantive difference between
it and the preceding days.

But there are other presentations of the Midrash which yield a very different understanding of
Shemini Atzeret. In fact, even Rashi’s Talmudic source on our daf (Sukkah 55b) contains
substantive differences. The Gemara says:

Rabbi Elazar said: to what do these seventy cows correspond? They correspond to the seventy
nations of the world. And why is the single bull [of Shemini Atzeret] brought? It corresponds to
the unique nation [of Israel]. This is like a human king who said to his servants, “Prepare me
a banquet.” During the final day [of the banquet] he said to his beloved companion, “Prepare
me a small meal so I can enjoy your company.”

As the Gemara notes, the seventy bulls offered on Sukkot are offered on behalf of the seventy
nations of the world. Therefore, in this version of the metaphor, there is a third party which
corresponds to the nations of the world. This could either be the servants or the unmentioned guests
that attend the seven day banquet. By introducing this third character, the Gemara is not only
reflecting a more universalistic perspective than Rashi’s presentation in Leviticus, but also drawing
a wedge between Sukkot and Shemini Atzeret.

Sukkot is the banquet for everyone, but Shemini Atzeret, with its single bull offering, is just for
the Jewish people. And so there is a movement over these holidays from the universal to the
particular. In fact, it is a movement from the universal to the intimate. Unlike Rashi, the Gemara
does not portray God’s love for the Jewish people as paternal. Instead, it is the intense love of
kindred spirits that surpasses friendship. The Jewish people are God’s beloved, and God wants the
pleasure of their singular company. This last point may not be a significant substantive shift in the
way we think about Shemini Atzeret, but it is nonetheless a powerful one.

Midrash Tanhuma presents the following version of the midrash (Pinchas 16):

21
Here, the metaphor is framed by an important introduction. The Jewish people bemoan having to
offer sacrifices on Sukkot for the nations of the world who reciprocate only with enmity. God
responds by giving them Shemini Atzeret, which serves as a respite from the hard work.

The king’s language of “we have already fulfilled our obligations to all the people in the province”
suggests that God works together as a partner with the Jewish people, dutifully serving the needs
of the nations of the world during Sukkot. But Shemini Atzeret is when God and His beloved
people can close the door to all of the guests, exhale, relax, and enjoy the leftovers from the party.

This is quite different from Rashi’s presentation;

22
Shemini Atzeret is not just another day of the banquet. It is also unlike the Gemara in Sukkah which
casts Shemini Atzeret as an additional, albeit more intimate, party. In the Midrash Tanhuma’s
account, Shemini Atzeret is not really a party at all. Instead, it is that beautiful moment shared by
partners right after hosting guests for a meal, after spending hours tending to everyone’s needs and
being “on.” It is what happens when they close the door, unwind, and reflect on how the meal went
while picking at the leftovers. It is when they can just be their informal selves, unguarded and
calm.

The final presentation of this Midrash that we will consider appears in the Zohar. This version
makes the most radical claim about Shemini Atzeret of the four (Noah 108).

The novelty of this presentation lies in the primacy that it places on Shemini Atzeret vis-à-vis
Sukkot. The king’s primary desire is for the smaller party. The banquet, which is to say Sukkot, is
little more than a decoy! Additionally, this Midrash plays with the relationship between Sukkot
and the nations of the world. Their interests are not really being served at this banquet. They are
being fooled. The real banquet will happen once their stomachs are full and they have gone home.
At that point, the king will finally have what he always wanted: a private audience with his
beloved. And his beloved will have the generous ear of the king.

These four iterations of this Midrash represent only a slice of the extant versions of this aggadic
tradition. And yet, among these four alone one finds dramatically distinct frameworks for
understanding the essence of Shemini Atzeret and its relationship to Sukkot. The common thread
throughout, however, is love. Whether viewed as parental or platonic, it is a passionate love
between God and the Jewish people that characterizes this special holiday. It should be savored
accordingly.

23
 ISMAR SCHORSCH WRITES:13

Sukkot is the most joyous and universal of the three harvest festivals ordained by the Torah. It
marks the end of the agricultural year as well as the summer harvest, and we are explicitly
instructed by the Torah to rejoice with our family and community (Deuteronomy 16:17). In that
spirit, the Rabbis turned the common noun, hag (festival), into the proper name of the holiday, he-
Hag (the festival par excellence). They also designated Sukkot as "the season of our joy" in the
prayers for the festival.

Most interesting is the unexpected manner in which the Torah gives expression to our collective
joy and gratitude. The number of sacrifices to be offered at the official cult for Sukkot far exceeds
the number sacrificed at any other time of the year. On each of the seven days of Sukkot the number
of lambs brought to the altar was twice the complement of other festivals, fourteen rather than
seven. Similarly, the profusion of bulls dwarfed the token fare for the rest of the year. No more
than one bull was offered for Rosh Hashana or Yom Kippur and only two for Pesah, Shavuot and
the new moon festival. In contrast, the schedule for Sukkot called for thirteen on the first day, and
thereafter one less for each succeeding day down to seven on the seventh and last day.

Without a doubt, the sacrificial largess connoted the generous mood of thanksgiving at the bounty
of the earth. At the close of the most crucial harvest of the year and with a welcome respite from
the rigors of farming, ancient Israelites swarmed to Jerusalem to celebrate at the Temple. Once in

13
https://www.jtsa.edu/the-seventy-bulls-of-sukkot

24
seven years on Sukkot, they were even to be treated to a public reading of the book of
Deuteronomy, an act of leisure as well as fealty (Deut. 31:10-13).

But no one could have been oblivious to the precariousness of it all. The abundance of one harvest
did not guarantee the bountifulness of the next. Everything in Israel depended on the quantity of
the intervening winter rains. And so the Rabbis turned a presentiment into prayers for rain,
tempering the joy of the festival. Janus-like, Sukkot came to face backward and forward, to mix
jubilation with foreboding. In the theology of the Rabbis, Sukkot embodied a period when God
would determine the rainfall humanity merited in the year to come. Long before, the Prophet
Zechariah had already alluded to the connection. In his final apocalyptic message, chosen by the
Rabbis as the haftarah for the first day of Sukkot, the Prophet threatened those nations that would
fail to make a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each year on Sukkot with drought (Zechariah 14:16-17).

In this new web of meaning, the rabbinic imagination boldly recast the significance of the festival's
sacrificial menu. Never prone to gloss over details, the Talmud noticed that the strangely
decreasing number of bulls added up to a total of 70, or the equivalent, in rabbinic parlance, to the
number of gentile nations on earth. For the Rabbis, henceforth, the profusion of bulls constituted
a fervent prayer in behalf of the non-Jewish world. It too stood in the dock on Sukkot. The bulls
were meant to atone for gentile malfeasance. Jew and gentile lived on the same planet. Jewish
virtue alone would never be sufficient to assure next year's rainfall. A common fate dictated a
universal outlook, in which the Temple was the venue for an elaborate ritual not for the conversion
of the gentiles but for their welfare. Thus its destruction by the Romans in the eyes of the Rabbis
was a calamity for Jews and gentiles alike, except that the latter had no idea of the protection they
lost (BT Sukkah 55b).

Over time the universal sentiment of Sukkot fell victim to Jewish history. The insecurity of exile
darkened the midrash on the number of bulls. By the ninth century, the midrashic collection known
as the Tanhuma gave the talmudic interpretation a bitter twist. The gentiles were ingrates. Instead
of loving us for the seventy sacrifices offered on their behalf, they responded with hatred, an
experience foreshadowed by the psalmist when he inveighed against his enemies: "They answer
my love with hatred (Psalm 109:7; Tanhuma, Pinhas 15)."

And by the end of the eleventh century, Rashi, who had witnessed the eruption of the First Crusade
in 1096, turned the midrash on its head. In his commentary to the Torah, he notes, in accord with
the Talmud, that the number of bulls for Sukkot adds up to seventy. However, what is of import to
Rashi is not the total but rather the descending order which he chooses to read as a symbol of

25
diminution and destruction. True, the total of seventy refers to the gentiles of the world. But the
pattern of daily reduction implies their eventual departure from the human stage. Under the
pressure of persecution, Rashi replaced a universal theme with a particular one. The seventy bulls
now yielded a bit of midrashic consolation for a tiny European Jewish community inundated by a
surge of Christian fanaticism (Rashi on Numbers 29:18). Though fully understandable, the shift
left Judaism diminished.

But the older texts were never discarded. They always remained part of the unending dialogue. In
light of the stark tragedy engulfing our brethren in Israel at this moment, I prefer a third-or fourth-
century midrash which retained the universal thrust of the Sukkot sacrifices. The seventy bulls
were indeed meant for the nations of the world that they too might dwell in peace (Pesikta de-Rav
Kahna, ed. by Mandelbaum, p. 421). For peace is indivisible. If not shared by all, it will not be
enjoyed by anyone.

Rabbi Yirmiyahu Ullman writes:14

The Torah prescribes special sacrifices for each of the days of Succot. On the first day, 13 oxen
were offered. The number was reduced by one each day of the festival such that on the seventh
day, 7 oxen were offered. The total number of these sacrifices was thus 70
(13+12+11+10+9+8+7=70).

These seventy oxen correspond to the original seventy nations of the world enumerated in the
Torah who descended from the sons of Noah, and are the ancestors of all of the nations till this
day. Israel brought these sacrifices as atonement for the nations of the world, and in prayer for
their well-being; as well as for universal peace and harmony between them.

Thus our Sages taught, "You find that during the Festival [Succot], Israel offers seventy oxen for
the seventy nations. Israel says: Master of the Universe, behold we offer You seventy oxen in their
behalf, and they should have loved us. Instead, in the place of my love, they hate me (Psalms 109)."
Further, they remarked: "If the nations of the world would have known the value of the Temple
14
https://ohr.edu/2349

26
for them, they would have surrounded it with a fortress in order to protect it. For it was of greater
value to them than for Israel [instead, they destroyed it]" (Bamidbar Rabba 1).

The power that was given to Noah’s sons to become the founders of the seventy original nations
was later vested in the descendants of Abraham, of whom it is written, "For I have made you the
father of a multitude of nations." From then on, all the seventy nations were to draw their
sustenance through Abrahams descendants. First, Ishmael was made head of the seventy nations,
but after the birth of Esau to Isaac, the flow of Divine sustenance for the nations was divided
between Ishmael and Esau. Each of whom became the head of thirty-five of the nations.

G-d appointed Israel a kingdom of priests to atone for all these nations, and appointed Jerusalem
a house of prayer for all the peoples. Therefore, when Israel came to sacrifice seventy oxen during
the seven days of Succot as an atonement for the seventy nations of the world, they sacrificed
thirty-five oxen in behalf of the nations under Ishmaels dominion, and thirty-five in behalf of those
under Esau’s dominion.

The Vilna Gaon discovered this secret hidden in the Torah itself. In the verses describing the
number of oxen each day, he noticed that the accompanying sin offering is sometimes referred to
as a kid of goats and sometimes as just a kid. Based on the tradition that kid of goats refers to
Ishmael, he determined that some of the oxen and their respective sin offering correspond to
Ishmael, and the others correspond to Esau. Amazingly, the oxen offered on the days whose sin
offering is slated as kid of goats [days 1,2,4] equals 35 [13+12+10]. Similarly, those offered on
the days noted only by kid [days 3,5,6,7] also equal 35 [11+9+8+7].

27
 rendition of the inner courtyard at the Temple in Jerusalem during Sukkot;
circa 1804.

The 70 Bulls of Sukkot: punishment or protection?

Rabbi Avraham Gordimer writes:15

During the seven days of Sukkot, when there is a Beit Ha-Mikdash (Holy Temple), a total of 70
bulls are offered as korbonos (sacrifices). (Bamidbar/Numbers 29:13-32) Rashi (on v. 18 ibid.),
invoking the Midrash, explains that these bulls are offered in descending number over the course
of Sukkot in order to signify the future diminution and downfall of the 70 nations of the world.
Rashi adds, based on the Gemara (Sukkah 55b), that during the time of the Beit Ha-Mikdash, the
Sukkot korbonot of 70 bulls would serve to protect these nations.

15
https://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/21099

28
These two concepts – that the 70 bulls of Sukkot represent the diminution and downfall of the 70
nations, and that the 70 bulls also protect the 70 nations – appear to be quite contradictory. Do the
70 bulls symbolize punishment or protection? How can they symbolize both? Furthermore, what
does the downfall or protection of the 70 nations have to do with Sukkot?

We experience Sukkot as the Yom Tov (Festival) of nature. We sit in outdoor huts, roofed with
foliage; we wave the Arba’ah Minim (Four Species), portraying various components of the world
of flora; we are enveloped by these mitzvot of nature at the climax of nature’s annual cycle.

Nature can be beheld in two ways. One way is to accept and evaluate nature at face value; this is
the approach of Naturalism, which presumes nature to be the sum factor of disparate sets of
calculations and random objects. Another way is that of Avraham Avinu (Abraham, our Father),
who, as the Rambam (Maimonides) describes, realized that nature is the incredible handiwork of
a Singular Creator, and that nature is how the Creator is revealed to us on a regular basis. The
wondrous and ultra-complex mechanisms of nature, which scientists cannot replicate; the
purposefully planned and harmonized functions and cycles of nature, which attest to grand purpose
and stunning intelligence; the unparalleled and resplendent beauty of nature, which inspires and
bedazzles mankind to no end – these are the fingerprints of nature’s Master Creator. Avrohom
Avinu realized this truth and acted upon it in his quest to draw close to God, while others remained
oblivious.

Sukkot is the time when we confront nature through its mitzvos and we proceed go to beyond it,
being invited into the realm of the Shechinah(Divine Presence), as God tells us that once we
perceive Him through nature, we can go much further and enter the inner sanctums to be in His
Presence. This is why the sukkah symbolizes the Beit Ha-Mikdash in our liturgy, for on Sukkot,
we are invited to go deep and closer and to experience Hashem more intimately. This is likewise
why the Simchat BeitHa-Sho’eivah in the Beit Ha-Mikdash is referred to as the occasion when the
Divine Presence would be drawn forth (“sho’avin”), as we go beyond the natural and unrevealed
realm of holiness to encounter the revealed Shechinah.

Based on this, we can better understand the Gemara (Sukkah 37b) which describes waving the
Arba’ah Minim in all four directions and up and down as testament to “Him to Whom the four
winds belong… and Him to Whom are the heavens and the earth", or as a supplication “to prevent
bad winds and… to prevent bad precipitation”. The idea is that on Sukkot, we peer more
profoundly into and beyond nature and relate through nature to its Master, viewing nature as a
manifestation of His involvement and immanence. We are welcomed behind the veil of nature,
where we meet its Master Controller.

This concept resolves the apparent paradox of the 70 bulls of Sukkos symbolizing both punishment
as well as protection for the 70 nations. Unless one pursues the path of Avraham Avinu, the norm
is to take nature at face value. This position is wrong and invites rebuke. However, by sacrificing
the 70 bulls in the Beit Ha-Mikdash, the protection of Shechinah is brought into the world, for the
Beit Ha-Mikdash serves to connect the natural universe to the Divine and to assure that Hashem’s

29
Presence is felt in the natural order. The special protection granted to the world when the Shechinah
is part of it is inclusive of the 70 nations.

Sukkos is the period when we draw near to God and affirm that beyond the physical reality lies a
spiritual reality, such that nature is the entrance and curtain of this spiritual reality. This is the
message of Avraham Avinu, and it is the message of all Jews for eternity.

“Sukkot and its universal meaning”

30
Rabbi Daniela Szuster writes:16

The sages give to Sukkot and the Sukkah different kinds of meanings. Here I would like to
highlight the universal meaning of the Festival of Sukkot.

In the Torah, in the Book of B’midvar (chapter 29), you can find a description of all the offerings
that the people of Israel had to bring every day during Sukkot. A total of 70 bullocks were offered
to God. Why were 70 offerings brought?

It is written in the Talmud Babli, Masechet Sukkah 55b: “Rabbi Eliezer said, ‘Why are 70
offerings brought on Sukkot? For the merit of the 70 nations of the world.”

In this passage we can find a universal application. During this festival, people dedicated the
offerings in honor of all the nations.

Rashi explains this directive by saying that the goal for these offerings is to bring forgiveness for
the 70 nations, which comprised the all of humankind, so that rain shall fall all over the earth.
Rashi connects the 70 offerings to the falling of the rains. Why? Because it is written in the
Mishnah: “On Sukkot the World is judged for Water” (Mishnah Masechet Rosh Hashana 1:2).

In other words, during this festival, God decides how much rain we will have this year according
to the deeds of all the nations of the world. Thus, according to Rashi, the people of Israel wanted
to give offerings on behalf of other nations in order to be sure that all of us get rain.

One of the things that all human beings need to live is water. It is something that unites and
concerns all of us.

Regarding this topic, there is a very nice story in Midrash Rabbah 13:6:

“A certain gentile asked Rabbi Joshua, observing to him: ‘you have festivals and we have
festivals; we do not rejoice when you do and you do not rejoice when we do. When then do we
both rejoice together? When the rain descends.’”

I think it is a very interesting story that has a deep message. Maybe it is the key for success of
interreligious meetings. Every faith has its values, customs, practices, holidays, etc. However, what
unites all of us are the basic things that contribute to the welfare of society.

We should respect each other’s’ beliefs and practices and be able to sit together and talk about the
things and concerns that we have in common as human beings.

“When then do we both rejoice together? When the rain descends.”

16
https://www.tbelancaster.org/torah-thoughts-shabbat-chol-hamoed-sukkot-5778/

31
All human beings depend on water. This is a universal need that we have, including during Sukkot.
Without a doubt, the equal distribution of water to all the inhabitants of this planet is a very
important concern in our time.

Some scholars say that in the future there will be wars between the countries in order to get water.
It is such a basic need. We should prepare and take actions to avoid this problematic situation that
people are predicting. We need to sit together and work out the things we have in common.

Of course, regarding water, one practical thing that we should do is try not to waste the water we
have. We must be aware of the importance of water, protecting it and understanding that needing
it unites us with all the people in the world.

Another reason that we can affirm that Sukkot has a universal meaning is that the sukkah is
portrayed in the liturgy as a symbol of peace, known in Hebrew as sukkat shalom.

For instance, in the prayer Hashkeevaynu, which is the second blessing after Shema Israel that we
pray during evening Shabbat or Holiday services, we pray that God will “Ufros aleinu sukkat
shloemcha,” “spread over us the shelter of Your peace.”

Here the word “sukkah” means protection and peace, and the sukkah’s doors are always open,
showing that we love to welcome everybody in peace.

In the book of the prophet Zechariah, you can find the message that, in the future, all the nations
will go to Jerusalem to celebrate sukkot (Zechariah 14:16).

Therefore, the festival of Sukkot, with its universal meanings, teaches us that all humanity should
live in peace, sharing water and all natural resources together, respecting each other’s differences,
under the same roof of God’s protection.

May the festival of Sukkot enable us to reflect upon the universal aspect of this festival and to
search for ways to create better relationships with other faiths and groups.

32
 Olelot Efrayim, R. Ephraim Solomon Luntshits, Amsterdam 1779

Rabbi David Horwitz writes:17

Rashi in Parashat Pinchas (Numbers, 29:18) notes the fact that a decreasing number of bulls that
are sacrificed in the Temple each day as the holiday of Sukkot goes on. He writes that the 70 bulls
(the sum total of bulls sacrificed throughout the seven days) correspond to the 70 nations of the
world, and just as the number of bulls diminishes with every passing day, these nations themselves
will eventually become extinguished.

In his work ‘Olelot Ephraim (Ma’amar Gimel), R. Solomon Ephraim Luntshitz18 (1550-1619)
gives a different, striking interpretation. His point of departure is a passage in Massekhet Shabbat
(152a), which reads as follows:

R. Ishmael son of R. Jose said: As for scholars, the older they grow the more wisdom they
acquire, for it is said, With aged men is wisdom, and in length of days understanding (Job

17
https://www.yutorah.org/rabbi-david-horwitz/
18
Shlomo Ephraim ben Aaron Luntschitz (1550 – 1619) was a rabbi and Torah commentator, best known for his Torah
commentary Keli Yekar. He served as the Rabbi of Prague from 1604-1619.

33
12:12). But the ignorant, as they wax older, become more foolish, for it is said, He removes the
speech of the trusty, and takes away the understanding of the elders (Ibid., 12:20).

The Keli Yaqar contrasts the wise and the ignorant as follows: the wise develop their form, that is,
the intellect (cf. Rambam in Guide to the Perplexed, Part I, Chapter 1), which gains strength as
they age. The ignorant, however, develop their matter, that is, the body, which is ultimately
worthless and which diminishes with age. He further makes an interesting contrast between Bet
Hillel’s shitah regarding the manner in which we light Hanukkah candles: according to this view,
we add a candle every night. On the other hand, with respect to the seventy bulls that are sacrificed
on Sukkot, we diminish the number of bulls every day. Why the contrast?

(Of course, it must be noted that according Bet Shammai, the pattern of Hanukkah, in which we
decrease the number of candles lit, fits exactly the biblical pattern of Sukkot. (keneged parei ha-
hag). Indeed, for over a hundred years, scholars have pointed out that Bet Shammai’s reason also
matches the description of Hanukkah in the apocryphal Book of Maccabees, where the
rededication of the Temple was presented as a substitution for Hag Ha-Sukkot. In any, event, as
the Halakhah follows Bet Hillel, the question of the resultant distinction between Hanukkah and
Sukkot must be addressed.)

Keli Yaqar suggests that the bulls represent the physical component of man. The number seventy
represents the average length of a man’s years (see Psalm 90). From the time a person is born, the
time his physical being has on this earth gradually decreases, until he dies and is no more. This is
the point of the decreasing sacrifices offered on Sukkot.

On the other hand, the candles of Hanukkah represent the intellectual/ spiritual component of man
“The spirit of man is the candle of the L-rd” (Proverbs 20:27). The older one becomes, if he spends
his life in the world of Torah/Hokmah, his intellect gets stronger and stronger. And from a spiritual
point of view, as man approaches death, his soul draws ever closer to its Divine source, and gains
in intensity. This is the point of the increasing lights of Hanukkah.

And this is the point, concludes Keli Yaqar of the Gemara in Massekhet Shabbat contrasting the
elderly talmid hakham and the elderly am ha-aretz. The difference between the two is itself the
difference between finite, perishable, ever-decreasing matter and spiritual, ever increasing light.

34
 The Sukkah of Israel and Diaspora
Josh writes:19

Yom Kippur has come and gone, we’ve deprived ourselves, fasted, and done tshuvah for our sins.
Now it is time to rejoice. If there was ever a time for rejoicing and happiness it is after the most
serious and somber days of the year (which also does not require deprivation from joy). The Rabbis
actually nicknamed Sukkot, Z’man Simchatenu, the Season of Happiness. The Sukkah itself
creates the most natural reason for families and friends to invite and visit each other for festive
meals within that dwelling.

In fact, the mitzvah of welcoming guests or Ushpizin is one of the greatest mitzvot one can do, as
one is reminded of the teaching of the Vilna Gaon, who taught that there are only two mitzvot that
one can enter with one’s entire body: residing in the Land of Israel and dwelling in a Sukkah.

But while we’re busy rejoicing, making paper chains, shaking our lulavs and etrog, and hanging
out in these temporary booths, there may be a deeper meaning for us a people to the holiday of
Sukkot.

Rabbi Shimon Gershom Rosenberg (1949-2007, known popularly as Rav ShaGaR) was a
trailblazing Israeli thinker, rabbi, and Rosh Yeshiva who wrote prolifically and taught on Judaism,
halakha, and philosophy.

19
https://arza.org/the-sukkah-of-israel-and-diaspora/

35
In a posthumously published book of his essays called “Faith Shattered and Restored: Judaism in
the Postmodern Age,”20 Rav Shagar attempts to deal with one of the great divides among the
Jewish people, those who live in the Land of Israel and those who remain in the Diaspora for which
he sees the holiday of Sukkot as a quintessential example and metaphor for our split existence.

“The path from exile to redemption in the Land is expressed by way of the mitzvah of Sukkah.
The Sukkah, a temporary dwelling that parallels the temporary exile, is also compared to the Land
of Israel,” he writes. In his essay “Seventy Bullocks and One Sukkah: The Land of Israel,
Nationalism, and Diaspora,” Rav Shagar tries to go beyond the classic Religious Zionist narrative
and implicitly acknowledges the failure of Religious Zionism to recognize the religious
significance of Exile and universalism.

The classical Zionist narrative (based on the teachings of Rav Kook and Ahad Ha’am, among
others) explicitly positions the Land of Israel is at the center of our existence. However, the
dissolution of grand narratives enables Rav Shagar to see a more complex picture in which the

20
Maggid Publishing 2017

36
Diaspora is also an authentic expression of Jewish existence. In doing so, he offers an interpretation
that may be appealing to Zionists who live in North America and have no plans to make aliyah.

Basing himself on the Maharal of Prague (d.1609), he explains that the Jewish people
unquestionably have an essential connection with the Land of Israel, yet the fact that they were
able to sustain themselves through two thousand years of dispersion across the world indicates that
universalism is also part of their nature. Rav Shagar further explains that “Indeed, the entire world
is their place, they are cosmopolitan, and their state of dispersion is a function of their virtue …
Its place is beyond geography, and its identity transcends the constricted boundaries of
nationhood” (p.181).

The sukkah is a unique symbol that demonstrates the ways in which Diaspora and the Land of
Israel must dwell together along with universalism and nationalism. The sukkah is a symbol of
exile because it requires us to leave our secure home and all that is comfortable.

However, it is also a profound symbol of the Land of Israel because it is deeply connected with
the agricultural cycle which informed the pilgrimage holidays to Jerusalem, for which many
Diaspora Jews are sadly disconnected.

Rav Shagar writes that:

“The insecurity of the Diaspora must deeply inform our confidence as the inheritors of the
Land. Otherwise, confidence will degenerate into hubris, into the sense that all is due to ‘my
power and the might of my hand.’” It is essential for nationalism “if it is not to turn rigid and
callous, it must be tempered by universalism.” The same is also true in reverse for, without
nationalism, universalism can be dangerous. It can turn into “an abstraction in that it “makes”
all human beings identical, effacing the very real differences between people” (p. 186).

Sukkot is a holiday that brings all these contradictions together and shows the potential for their
resolution. It is both true that the Jews are a nation that dwells apart and that all nations still come
to Jerusalem in order to worship God on Sukkot.

As the majority of Diaspora Jews neither see ourselves as living in Exile and [possibly
correlatively] do not have any intention of uprooting our lives to live in Israel. So, the Sukkah can
give us the simultaneous experience of celebrating both the harvest season of the Land of Israel
and the sense of Exile.

On Sukkot, we can embrace both nationalism and universalism. Nationalism – despite its
somewhat negative perception in the current political atmosphere – is essential as it is rootedness
in what one is, in an identity unique to the nation and the individual. But, in order for it not to turn
callous or even racist, it must embrace universalism which, according to Rav Shagar, subverts the
preference for one nation over another, and in religious terms is the place where we encounter the
image of God.

37
On Sukkot we present this dichotomy between Diaspora and homeland. It is quite remarkable to
imagine that those who live far away from Israel still celebrate its harvest festival and that those
living in Israel take a week to internalize the concept of exile.

When you enter your Sukkot this year, may you rejoice in this happiest of times and catch a try to
get a sense of both Israel and Diaspora.

Sukkot's Seventy Bulls21

Dr. Noga Ayali-Darshan writes:22

21
Ayali-Darshan, N. (2015). The Seventy Bulls Sacrificed at Sukkot (Num 29:12-34) in Light of a Ritual Text from Emar (Emar
6, 373), Vetus Testamentum, 65(1), 9-19. doi: https://doi.org/10.1163/15685330-12341185
22
https://www.thetorah.com/article/sukkots-seventy-bulls

38
 ‘Bull’ is a suite of eleven lithographs by Pablo Picasso, that have become a
master class in how to develop an artwork from a realistic image to an
abstract form.

The Striking Quantity of Sukkot Sacrifices

The Torah’s adaptation of a polytheistic ancient West-Semitic custom of sacrificing to seventy

gods.[1]

In describing the offerings for Sukkot, the holiday offering section in Parashat Pinchas stipulates
the sacrifice of a total of seventy bulls as burnt offerings spread over the seven-day autumn
pilgrimage festival (Numbers 29:12-34), in addition to the other sacrifices of the day. This huge
number of offerings is striking, especially in comparison with other Pentateuchal festivals, none
of which requires more than two bulls per day.

39
For illustration, see the chart below compares the offerings of Sukkot, and Matzot, the spring New
Year festival:

Scholars have suggested that the double number of rams and lambs on Sukkot relative to Matzot,
and the unparalleled seventy bulls sacrificed during the seven-day autumnal festival, highlight its
importance in the Israelite calendar.[2] It is, indeed, referred to as “the Festival” (‫—)החג‬without any
further identification in the description of Solomon’s dedication of the temple (1Kings 8:65), in
the law of Ezekiel (45:25), and Tannaitic texts (cf. m. Rosh Hashanah 1:2).

Moreover, several verses imply that the autumnal festival falls at the completion of the yearly
cycle, namely from this date onward, a new year begins:

40
These texts, according to many scholars, suggest the existence of an alternative Israelite calendar
that commenced in the autumn. It corresponds with the ancient Canaanite Gezer calendar fragment,
which starts in the harvest months—the time of Sukkot—and ends with the month of the summer
fruit.[3] A similar Jewish calendrical tradition is known from the Second Temple period onwards.

Why Seventy Bulls?

While the suggestion that Sukkot was the autumnal New Year festival may explain the double
number of rams and lambs offered in relation to other festivals, it does not explain the additional
sacrificing of seventy bulls.

The rabbinic tradition, the first to note explicitly that the number of offerings was seventy, links
the seventy offerings offered at Sukkot with the seventy nations our daf (b. Sukkah 55b):

…‫אמר רבי ]אלעזר[ הני שבעים פרים כנגד מי – כנגד שבעים אומות‬

R. [Elazar] stated: “To what do those seventy bullocks [that were offered during the seven days
of the Festival] correspond? To the seventy nations…”
Modern scholars have offered additional explanations; here are some of them:

The Number Seven – George Gray and Christophe Nihan contend that it reflects the
significance of the number seven: seventy bulls are offered on the seven days of the festival, which
is celebrated during the seventh month.[4] This explanation, however, fits the law as described in
Ezekiel, which commands the sacrifice of seven bulls each day of the spring and autumnal
festivals, but does not fit the decreasing number of bulls each day (13, 12, 11, etc.).

Needed for Rain – Jacob Licht suggested that the largess expressed in the number of offerings
is a function of the significance of the people’s entreaty for rain, which is made during the festival
(see Zechariah 14 and m. Rosh Hashanah 1:2).[5] He supports this suggestion with Mal 3:10, which

41
intimates that great numbers of tithes are necessary to induce God to give rain. Nevertheless, the
verse in Malachi refers neither to burnt offerings nor the number seventy.

Seventy Nations – Jacob Milgrom turns to the midrashic tradition cited above, relating the
seventy bulls to the seventy nations of the world who appeal for a good harvest.[6] A critical
explanation for this linkage is missing, however.

None of these suggestions are persuasive, and I would like to suggest a new explanation based on
a ritual text from the ancient city of Emar.

The Zukru Festival in Emar

The city of Emar from the Late Bronze age, was located on the wide bend of the Euphrates River
in north-eastern modern Syria. Populated by Hurrian and Semitic peoples under the hegemony of

42
Hittite rulers, its cultic texts preserved age-old local West Semitic cultural traditions.[7] Among the
tablets found in Emar, is a description of the zukru-festival (Emar 6, 373),[8] a festival that is also
attested in the ancient Syrian city of Mari (destroyed mid-18th century BCE), thus testifying its
prevalence among the ancient West Semitic cultures.[9]

View from the Byzantine Tower at Meskene, ancient Barbalissos

Two different versions of the Zukru festival are attested at Emar: an annual festival and one in the
seventh year of a seven-year cycle, reminiscent of the biblical shemitah cycle (Lev 25:8; Deut
15:1, 31:10). On both occasions, the Zukru was celebrated over seven days on the first month of
the year, called SAG.MU namely, ‫ראש השנה‬, “the head of the year.”[10] (Here the “head of the year”
refers to the month rather than the day.)

The seventh-year festival is elaborated in much more detail: On the first day of the festival, when
the moon is full (i.e. the fifteenth),[11] the god Dagan—the supreme god of Syria—and all the other

43
gods in the pantheon were taken outside the temple and city in the presence of the citizens to a
shrine of stones called sikkānu. This cultic object— also known in other cities with West Semitic
population, such as Ugarit and Mari—is best described as a “betyl” stele, i.e., a standing stone
anointed with oil and blood,[12] likely the equivalent of the biblical ‫מצבה‬. At the culmination of the
ceremony, the gods were returned to the city. On the seventh and final day (a kind of Chag Sheni),
Dagan and all the gods of Emar were brought out again to the sikkānu, where a similar ceremony
was performed.

The Sacrifices of the Zukru-festival

Over the course of the seven days of the festival, numerous offerings—more than any other
documented festivals—were given to all the gods, attesting to the significance of this feast in the
city’s religious calendar.[13] The first offerings of the zukru-festival were sacrificed a day before,
on the fourteenth of the month of “the head of the year”, as is documented (ll. 36-38):

On the month of “head of the year”, on the fourteenth day, they offer seventy pure lambs provided
by the king … for all the seventy gods [of the city of] Emar.

The seventy lambs are clearly said to be sacrificed to each of the seventy gods of Emar, yet we
know from the following lines of the tablet (76-162) that there were much more than seventy gods
at Emar.[14] That the number seventy is not an error is clear from another Emarite cultic text
(Emar 6, 463:6) that orders seventy doves to be distributed between the gods.[15] It seems,
therefore, that the reference to the number seventy reflects the idealized expression “seventy gods”
prevalent in West Semitic literature, rather than the accurate number of the Emarite gods. This
suggestion is confirmed by the following occurrences:

• In Ugaritic literature the expression “seventy children of Aṯirat”[16] (the Ugarit name for
the goddess Asherah) signifies all the gods who were born to El and Aṯirat, the ancestors
of the gods.

44
 • In a Hurro-Hittite work (the Song of Ullikummi) that contains typical West-Semitic
motifs,[17] the same expression, “seventy gods”[18] occurs in parallel with “all the gods”.

• In another Emarite text which deals with the kissu-festival (Emar 6, 385:34), seventy
portions of bread and meat are ordered to be set “before them”—presumably the same
seventy gods.[19]

It is commonly suggested that the 77 // 88 sons of Ashertu in the West Semitic Elkunirsamyth
written in Hittite and the 77//88 siblings of Baal referred to in a Ugaritic text (KTU31.12:48-49)
are variant forms of the “seventy gods” theme, stylized in a graded numerical pattern.[20]

For obvious reasons, the seventy gods do not appear in the Bible, but this concept continued to be
developed, appearing again in a monotheistic form in the Second Temple Pseudepigraphal
literature, as seventy angels. A clear expression of this notion appears in the animal allegory (2nd
cent.) of 1 Enoch (89:59, cf. 90:22-25):

“And he called seventy shepherds and cast off those sheep that they might pasture them, and he
said to the shepherds and to their companions: ‘Each one of you from now on is to pasture the
sheep and do whatever I command you…'” (Brand trans., Outside the Bible).
These examples indicate that not only the expression “seventy gods” was well known in the West
Semitic cultures from at least the Late-Bronze age onwards, but also that the number seventy in
fact expressed the concept of totality, namely – the whole pantheon. This meaning of seventy
appears not only in the heavenly world, but in other literary fields. Here are two examples among
many:

1. Political Coups

Descriptions of political coups often describe seventy of the usurper’s opponents having been
killed, in order to indicate that they were all eliminated.

45
 • The Aramaean inscription of Bir-Rakib from Zinjirly notes that a usurper killed his father
Panamuwa and his seventy brothers (KAI 215:3).

• The Tel-Dan Inscription (line 6) notes that King Hazael slew seventy kings.

• In Judges, Abimelech slaughters Gideon’s seventy sons (Judg 9:5-6).

• In Kings, Yehu slaughtered Ahab’s seventy sons (2Kings 10:6-7).

In all these instances, the number seventy is symbolic of complete destruction, without anyone
escaping.[21]

2. Families and Nations

The number seventy plays a similar role in the biblical descriptions of families.

• The biblical author describes Jacob’s seventy sons—i.e., all the Israelites—that went down
to Egypt, leaving no one behind in Canaan (Gen 46:8-27; Exod 1:1-5).[22]

• The biblical compositor of the Table of Nations in Genesis 10 states that seventy nations
descended from Noah’s three sons, thereby indicating that the total population of the world
came from Noah’s seed.[23] Later Jewish sources use the same concept in their description
of the gentile world as “the seventy nations.”[24]

Shared West Semitic Traditions

In light of this, it is suggested that the original meaning of the offering of seventy bulls on Sukkot
echoed the old West Semitic custom of offering seventy sacrifices to the seventy gods – i.e., the
whole pantheon – at the grand festival celebrating the New Year. Over time, the polytheistic traces
of this ancient custom disappeared, the decreasing number of bulls each day helped to blur this
precise number, which is not referenced in the biblical text.[25]

In addition, the autumnal New Year festival lost its significance with the Priestly Torah’s adoption
of the spring New Year. Yet, the seventy sacrifices were preserved in the text, the sole remnant of

46
the ancient local tradition of sacrificing seventy offerings to the seventy gods at the New Year
festival.

Were the Seventy Gods Replaced by Seventy Nations?

As was mentioned above, the rabbinic texts were the first to note explicitly that the number of
offerings was seventy. While the correspondence between bulls and nations has no earlier
antecedent, it might be understood in light of the fact that several biblical passages turn gods into
nations.

The idea that each nation has its own high god or patron deity was common in the Ancient Near
East, including ancient Israel. Thus, it is found in Jephthah’s speech to the king of Ammon:

Over time, when the gods have been reduced to the rank of angels, leaving YHWH as the sole god,
each nation received its own guardian angel (instead of god). In addition to Enoch cited above,
this concept appears in the apocalyptic section of Daniel (2nd cent. BCE), in which the man Daniel
sees in his vision explains that he has been delayed because Persia’s guardian angel (=the prince
of Persia) was protecting his people by trying to stop him from delivering his message to Daniel:

47
Perhaps the most explicit expression of nations having guardian angels comes from Jubilees (2nd
cent. BCE), in the explanation for God’s commanding the Israelites to circumcise (15:31-32):

And He sanctified them and gathered them from all of the sons of man because (there are) many
nations and many people, and they all belong to Him, but over all of them He caused spirits to rule
so that they might lead them astray from following Him. But over Israel He did not cause any
angel or spirit to rule because He alone is their ruler… (Outside the Bible, Kugel trans.).
The connection between a god and a nation, each of the former are worshipped by the latter – thus
both are seventy in number – may have inspired later biblical scribes to replace the gods with the
nations themselves due to theological reasons.[26] For example:

In addition to gods, other groups of seventy were used to correct henotheistic references in the
Hebrew Bible.[29] Thus, certain LXX manuscripts as well as in a Qumran (4QDeutj) version of
Haazinu (Deut 32:8) state:

.‫בהנחל עליון גוים בהפרידו בני אדם יצב גבלת עמים למספר בני אלהים‬

When the Most High gave nations their homes and set the divisions of man, he fixed the
boundaries of peoples in relation to the numbers of gods.

48
The idea here is that the Most High God divides the amount of nations according to the number of
gods so that each nation has a god – the same idea that is expressed in Judg 11, Dan 10, 1 Enoch
89, 90 and Jub 15, cited above. In this case, however, the Masoretic Text (MT) adjusted the term
“sons of god” (‫ )בני אלהים‬to “sons of Israel” (‫)בני ישראל‬, implying the MT’s tradition of Jacob’s
seventy sons (cf. above: Gen 46:8-27; Exod 1:1-5).

In light of these theological corrections, it might be suggested that like their scribal predecessors,
the Rabbinic Sages also replaced the non-monotheistic concept of seventy gods with the seventy
nations who worshiped them; in other words, R. Elazar is recalling the idea that the seventy bulls
reflect the seventy deities of these nations. The rabbinic tradition may thus in fact represent another
echo of the ancient West Semitic custom of sacrificing to the seventy gods.

Footnotes

1. This piece is an adaptation of my academic article, which also includes fuller references and further discussion of certain

points. Noga Ayali-Darshan, “The Seventy Bulls Sacrificed at Sukkot (Num 29:12-34) in Light of a Ritual Text from

Emar (Emar 6, 373),” Vetus Testamentum 65 (2015): 1-11. I would like to thank TheTorah.com’s editors for helping me

recast the piece to fit this forum.

2. Cf. M. Noth, Numbers: A Commentary (OTL; trans. J.D. Martin; London, 1968), p. 223; H. Ulfgard, The Story of Sukkot:

The Setting, Shaping, and Sequel of the Biblical Feast of Tabernacles (Tübingen, 1998), p. 90; A. Rofé, Introduction to

the Literature of the Hebrew Bible (trans. H.N. Bock; Jerusalem, 2009), p. 475.

3. In 1908, the Irish archaeologist R. A. Stuart Macalister, in his excavations of the city of Gezer, discovered what appears

to be a Canaanite calendar likely dating to the 10th century BCE. The purpose of this calendar is unknown but it lists

eight distinct periods during the year of either one or two months, based on the agricultural activities of the period. The

calendar begins with (two) gathering/harvest months (‫ )ירחו אסף‬and ends with the month of the summer fruit (‫)ירח קץ‬.

4. G.B. Gray, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Numbers (ICC; Edinburgh, 1903), pp. 406-407. Cf. C. Nihan,

“Israel’s Festival Calendars in Leviticus 23, Numbers 28-29 and the Formation of ‘Priestly’ Literature,” in The Books of

Leviticus and Numbers (ed. Thomas Römer; Leuven, 2008), pp. 185-186.

49
5. Jacob Licht, A Commentary on the Book of Numbers [XXII-XXXVI] (ed. Shmuel Aḥituv; Jerusalem, 1995), pp. 82-83

(Hebrew). For a survey of Sukkot in Deutero-Zechariah and the antiquity of rain-making rituals in the autumnal festival,

see J. Rubenstein, The History of Sukkot in the Second Temple and Rabbinic Periods (Atlanta: SBL, 1995), pp. 45-50

and n. 38. See also the discussion of Sukkot as a rain making festival in Rabbinic Tradition in, Zev Farber, “Water

Libation (‫)ניסוך המים‬: A Sukkot Rain-Making Ritual,” TheTorah (2015).

6. J. Milgrom, Numbers (Philadelphia, 1990), p. 247; cf. Ulfgard, The Story of Sukkot, p. 90.

7. For more on Emar, see M.W. Chavalas (ed.), Emar: The History, Religion, and Culture of a Syrian Town in the Late

Bronze Age (Bethesda, 1996). The Akkadian cultic texts discovered in the city were first published in the 1980s by Daniel

Arnaud with French translation. Daniel Fleming later republished some of these texts with an English translation,

clarifying their content and West Semitic context. See D.E. Fleming, Time at Emar: The Cultic Calendar and the Rituals

from the Diviner’s Archive (Winona Lake, IN, 2000).

8. Fleming, Time at Emar, pp. 234-257.

9. For the Mari tablet see J.-M. Durand, FM 7: Le Culte d’Addu d’Alep et l’affaire d’Alahtum, (Mémoires de NABU 3;

Paris, 2002, no. 39 (A.1121+A.2731), ll. 3-12.

10. The text was written in Akkadian, integrating Sumerian logograms that would have been read as Akkadian words.

Assyriologists use capital letters to distinguish logograms from Akkadian signs in Akkadian texts. The phrase SAG.MU

should be read in Akkadian as rēš šattim. However, we don’t know how the Emarite people themselves called this month

in their West Semitic language.

11. Editor’s note: For more on full-moon holidays in biblical times, see: Jacob Wright, “Shabbat of the Full

Moon,” TheTorah (2015); “How and When the Seventh Day Became Shabbat,” TheTorah (2015).

12. For the textual and archaeological sikkānu-stones in the Syrian cultures, see T.N.D. Mettinger, “No Graven Image?”:

Israelite Aniconism in its Ancient Near Eastern Context (OTS 42; Stockholm, 1995), pp. 115-134.

13. For a detailed discussion of the seven-year cycle zukru-festival, see Fleming, Time at Emar, pp. 48-140. For the annual

version (Emar 6, 375), see ibid. Cf also P. Altman, Festive Meals in Ancient Israel: Deuteronomy’s Identity Politics in

Their Ancient Near Eastern Context (BZAW 424; Göttingen, 2011), pp. 136-147.

14. Therefore Arnaud suggested that the larger number includes the consorts of the seventy. D. Arnaud, “Les texts suméro-

accadiens de Meskéné (Syrie) et l’Ancien Testament,” Revue de l’histoire des religions 197 (1980), 117. However, this

proposal does not match the evidence.

15. Fleming, Time at Emar, pp. 290-291; cf. p. 194, n. 235.

16. šbʿm bn Aʾṯrt (‫ ;שבעם בנ את’רת‬KTU3 1.4 VI 46).

50
17. CTH 345.I.3:3-19; cf. V. Haas, Die hethitische Literatur: Texte, Stilistik, Motive (Berlin, 2006), p. 167; N. Ayali-

Darshan, “The Role of Aštabi in the Song of Ullikummi and the ‘Failed God’ Stories Prevalent in the East

Mediterranean”, JNES 73 (2014), pp. 95-103.

18. 70 DINGIRMEŠ .

19. D. E. Fleming, The Installayion of Baal’s High Priestess at Emar (HSS 42; Atlanta, 1992), p. 73.

20. see E. Otto, “šeḇa´”, TDOT 14:350; M. Haran “The Graded Numerical Sequence and the Phenomenon of “Autonatism”

in Biblical Poetry”, in Congress Volume, Uppsala 1971 (VTSupp 22; Leiden, 1972), pp. 238-267.

21. This subject has received extensive treatment: see, for example, U. Cassuto, A Commentary on the Book of Genesis (trans.

I. Abrahams; Jerusalem, 1961-1964), 175-177; F.C. Fensham, “The Numeral Seventy in the Old Testament and the

Family of Jerubbaal, Ahab, Panammuwa and Athirat”, PEQ 109 (1977), 113-115;

22. Thus the MT. The LXX and two Qumran fragments read 75. For more on this, see: Marc Zvi Brettler “The Opening of

Exodus in the Dead Sea Scrolls,” TheTorah (2015). For a discussion of how 75 became 70, see: Itamar Kislev, “Jacob’s

Descendants who go to Egypt: The MT Versus the LXX,” TheTorah (2015).

23. Cf. Cassuto, A Commentary on the Book of Genesis, pp. 175-177.

24. Cf. m. Soṭ. 7:5; t. Soṭ. 8:5; b. Šabb. 88b; b. Sanh. 17a; b. Meg 13b; b. Soṭ. 36b; b. Men.65a; Exod. Rab. 5:9; Tanh. Shmot

25; Tanh. Dev. 2; Ps.-Clem. Hom. 18.4. For other occurrences see L. Ginzberg, The Legends of the Jews, V (Philadelphia,

1947), pp. 194-195. The same idea is found in the notion that the Torah has “seventy faces”—i.e., entire modes of

expounding it: cf. Num. Rab. 13:15.

25. Cf. Noth’s note (Numbers, p. 223): “Why … the sacrifice is diminished by one each day can no longer be explained with

any certainty”; Ashley (Numbers, p. 571): “Scholars have attempted several explanations of this phenomenon, none of

them convincing”. Late Jewish midrashim interpret the decrease as a symbol of the nations’ vanishing from the world:

cf. Mid. Agg. (ed. Buber), Num. 28, p. 156; Pesikta Zutreta Phinehas (Venice, 1546), p. 61b.

26. See A. Rofé, Deuteronomy: Issues and Interpretation (London, 2002), pp. 47-54 and the bibliography cited therein.

27. Cf. H.L. Ginsberg, “A Strand in the Cord of Hebraic Hymnody”, EI 9 (1969), pp. 45-46.

28. Cf. I.L. Seeligmann, “Researches into the Criticism of the Masoretic Text of the Bible”, Tarbiz 25 (1956), pp. 136-137

(Hebrew).

29. Henotheism means loyalty to one particular deity without denying the existence of other deities.

30. Rabbi Yakov Haber

51
 Chanukah: The Sukkos Connection
Rabbi Yakov Haber writes:23

One of the most widely known observances of the festival of Chanukah is the lighting of the
same number of candles in the menorah as the current day of the holiday: one light on the first
night, two on the second, etc. This is in accordance with the view
of Beis Hillel (Shabbos 21b).

Indeed, Avudraham writes that this ruling is alluded to in the very name ‫ חנוכה‬which can be
read to spell out, " ‫ח' נרות והלכה כבית הלל‬- Eight Candles and the Halacha follows Beis Hillel."
In explaining this accepted view, the Talmud presents two reasons. The first is that Beis Hillel
structure the lighting around the days which have already passed; the second is that " ‫מעלין‬
‫בקודש ואין מורידין‬- we elevate in sanctity and do not descend."

Famously, Beis Shammai dispute this view and rule that we should follow a descending order:
on the first night, eight candles, seven on the second, etc. Parallel to Beis Hillel's two reasons,
two reasons are offered for Beis Shammai's view as well. The first is that the lighting
represents the days yet to come; the second is "‫"כנגד פרי החג‬- that just as the bulls offered for
the additional offering (musaf) on Sukkos descend in number each day from 13 through 7, so
too should the neiros Chanukah. What is the connection between the menorah lighting of
Chanukah and the musaf of Sukkos? Many diverse approaches have been offered, ranging

23
https://torahweb.org/torah/2018/moadim/rhab_chanukah.html

52
from halachic, hashkafic, Chasidic, and kabbalistic in explanation of this enigmatic passage.
Here, we present some of the explanations with some elaborations.

Maharsha explains that the link to parei hachag is not a conceptual one.
Rather, Beis Shammai are merely countering Beis Hillel's argument of ma'alin bakodesh by
demonstrating that this principle is not always applicable as evidenced by the decreasing
number of the bulls of Sukkos. The reason that the neiros Chanukah decrease though is
unrelated to the reason for the decrease with regard to Sukkos. (See a similar approach
in Hearos al Maseches Shabbos.)

Shibbolei HaLeket (Chanukah 185) quotes Rav Yehuda HeChasid who notes that the fact that
the mitzvah of lighting the menorah in the mikdash is placed in the Torah immediately after
the presentation of the festivals, the last of which is Sukkos, alludes to the festival of Chanukah
which would be ordained in the future after Sukkos in the Jewish calendar. (Also see Ba'al
HaTurim to Bamidbar 24:2.) Hence Beis Shammai maintain that there should be a halachic
parallel as well.

Aruch HaShulchan (680:5) suggests that the reason the festival was established for eight days
- even though the miracle of the oil was only for seven additional days beyond the one-day
supply they had - was to commemorate the missed festival of Sukkos which they had just
recently spent hiding in the hills away from Jersualem and the Mikdash as recorded in
Maccabees II (10:6). An article in Or HaMizrach (38, p. 118, by Dr. Nachum Brunsnick)
suggests that this same connection can be utilized to explain the parallel Beis Shammai draw
to parei hachag.[1]

Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv (He'aros, ibid.) explains that the total number of parei hachag is
70, parallel to the nations of the world. (See Sukka 55b and Rashi ibid. that the korbanos are
brought on their behalf so they should have rain that year.) The daily decrease in the bulls
symbolizes the ultimate decline of the power of the nations of the world (see Rashi
on Bamidbar 29:18). Since the power of one of the greatest kingdoms with international
dominion, the Syrian-Greek Empire, diminished through the great miracles of Chanukah, it is
appropriate to forge a parallel in the central mitzvah of Chanukah and the bulls
of Sukkos. Sefas Emes (5642-3) accepts this basic approach as well and adds that it is likely
that the Chasmonaim felt that their avodas Tishrei - culminating with Sukkos which
symbolizes the downfall of the power of the nations of the world - was accepted by Hashem
giving them the motivation to boldly attack the Greeks and ultimately chase them out of
the Mikdash and Eretz Yisrael.[2]

On a broader level, Sefas Emes (5641) elsewhere explains that each Torah festival provides
illumination (he'ara - similar to the relationship between the sun and the moon) for a parallel
Rabbinic festival. Chanukah, parallel to Sukkos as explained above, is eight days. The one day
holiday of Purim is parallel to Shavuos (presumably as both are days of kabbalas haTorah,
see Shabbos 88a).[3] After the future redemption, a Rabbinic festival will be established
parallel to Pesach, the first Festival of Freedom.[4]

53
 The aforementioned article in Or HaMizrach quotes She'iltos DeRav Achai Gaon (27,
Mirsky, it does not appear in other editions) that the Greeks, based on the advice of an apostate
Jew, wished to abolish the lighting of the seven branches of the menorah and the eight days
of Sukkos. Consequently, they were delivered into the hands of the seven sons of
Chashmona'i, and Hillel and Shammai established a new eight-day holiday. Dr. Brunsnick
suggests why the Greeks specifically wanted to abolish Sukkos because it represents Bnei
Yisrael's faith and reliance on Hashem.

In a similar vein, I heard recently in the name of Rav Aharon Yehuda Leib
Shteinman zt"l (whose first yahrzeit was just observed on Erev Chanukah) a fascinating
explanation of the puzzling decree of the Greeks that the Jews should inscribe on the horn of
an ox, "You have no share in the G-d of Israel" (Bereishis Rabba 2:5). The ox was the
"workhorse" of antiquity; with its power, fields were plowed, and other machinery was pulled.
In a word, it represented human endeavor. This was exactly what Greek philosophy
represented. Only human intelligence and effort can accomplish anything.[5] Certainly, no
all-encompassing Divine being was necessary to save us or to bless human efforts with
success. The Greeks pressured the Jews - who also worked their fields and, more generally,
engaged the world - to embrace their philosophy as well. Sukkos, represents the opposite of
this philosophy. We leave our permanent homes to dwell in a temporary one to remind us that
without Divine protection, assistance and intervention we are lost. The victory over the false,
damaging "Western" philosophy is celebrated by Chanukah as a direct parallel to the message
of Sukkos.[6]

May this Chanukah with its multi-faceted messages inherent in all of its observances
illuminate our lives throughout the whole year!

NOTES

[1] See Sefas Emes (5740) who lists other parallels between Sukkos and Chanukahh: 1) the concept of hidur-
mehadrin prominent in both festivals and 2) the miracle of the Clouds of Glory in the merit of Aharon HaKohein, and
Chanukah brought about by kohanim.

[2] Based on this, Sefas Emes explains the meaning of the passage in Ma'oz Tzur: " ‫בני בינה ימי שמנה קבעו שיר ורננים‬- those of
insight established eight days of song and jubilation." They realized that the miracle occurred as a result of the
previous avoda of Sukkos and therefore established a holiday of eight days parallel to Sukkos.

[3] Sefas Emes does not write explicitly concerning the number of days, but this seems to directly follow from what he wrote
in the previously-quoted teaching.

[4] See also Chanukah: The Power of the Light of Torah and Chachmei haTorah. Based on the teaching of Rav C. Y.
Goldwicht presented there, it is quite understandable why Chanukah should serve as an example of a Rabbinic holiday
directly parallel to a Biblical one.

[5] See Wisdom for a Purpose for another understanding of this Greek decree.

[6] Many other explanations of the Sukkos connection have been offered. See Imrei Emes, Peri Tzaddik, Sheim
MiShmuel, Avodas Yisrael, and Mishneh Sachir among others.

54
 Rav Kook Torah24

Channan Morrison writes:25

Chanukah: The Highest Love26

Is there something idealistic and holy in loving the Jewish people? Or is this just another form of
nationalism, an emotion far less noble than a universal love for all peoples?

Chanukah Lights
The minimal obligation during Chanukah is to light one candle each night of the holiday. The
academies of Hillel and Shamai, however, disagreed as to the optimal way to light:
“The school of Shamai ruled that the most punctilious individuals (Mehadrin min HaMehadrin)
light eight lights on the first day, and the number of lights decreases each day. But the school
of Hillel ruled that they should light one light on the first day, and the number of lights increases
with each passing day.” (Shabbat 21b)

What is the reasoning behind each opinion? The Talmud explains that Beit Shamai compared the
Chanukah lights to the bull offerings on Succoth, which decrease in number on each successive
day of the holiday. Beit Hillel, on the hand, followed the dictum that “In holy matters, one should
increase and not detract.”
Is there a deeper philosophical basis for this disagreement? And what is the connection between
Chanukah and the Succoth offerings?

The Jewish Home

The conflict between the Maccabees and the Hellenists was not just a military struggle for political
independence. The essence of the conflict was ideological, a clash between widely divergent
cultures. Greek culture emphasized the joys of life, physical pleasures, and the uninhibited
expression of human imagination in art and literature. As a result, the Hellenists fought against the
Torah of Israel, with its focus on purity and sanctity.

24
http://ravkooktorah.org/HANUKA68.htm
25
https://www.amazon.com/Chanan-Morrison/e/B003PI4D98/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&linkCode=sl2&tag=ravkookonthew-
20&linkId=824b52a115af441072274bd22800d03e
26
Silver from the Land of Israel. pp. 120-125. Adapted from Ein Eyah vol. III on Shabbat 21b (2:7).

55
One aspect of the mitzvah of lighting Chanukah lights is quite unusual. Unlike most mitzvot, the
obligation to light is not on the individual but on the home (ish uveito). Only if one wishes to fulfill
the mitzvah more fully does every member of the household light. Why is this?
The average Jew may not exemplify the ideals and beliefs of the Torah in his everyday life. But in
his family life, one may sense the special light of Israel. Purity, modesty, and other holy traits are
manifest in every Jewish home faithful to a Torah lifestyle. Therefore, the basic obligation of
Chanukah lights — which represent Judaism’s victory over the corrupting influences of Greek
culture — is not on the individual, but the home: ish uveito.

The Mehadrin
There are, however, righteous individuals whose personal life does in fact exemplify the sanctity
of Torah. They are suitable to be Mehadrin, each one lighting his own Chanukah light, since the
light of Torah accompanies them in all of their actions. It is about these holy individuals and the
spiritual light they project that the Torah writes, “And all the peoples of the world will realize that
God’s Name is called upon you and they will be in awe of you” (Deut. 28:10).
Finally, there is a third level, even higher — the Mehadrin min HaMehadrin. These are selfless
individuals whose efforts are not for their own personal welfare, not even for their own spiritual
elevation. Rather, they aspire to fulfill God’s Will in the world. The miracle of Chanukah inspires
these elevated individuals to pursue their lofty goal, and they light accordingly, increasing (or
decreasing, according to Beit Shamai) the number of lights each day.

The Universalistic Approach

Yet we may ask: what is God’s Will? What is the ultimate goal of creation? This question is at the
heart of the disagreement between the schools of Hillel and Shamai.
The Mehadrin min HaMehadrin may follow one of two paths. The first is to meditate on God’s
Will by considering the multitudes of peoples and nations that God created. For what purpose did
God create all of these souls stamped in His Divine image? Surely God intended that ultimately
they will be elevated, raised from the depths of ignorance and brought to the level of the righteous
who delight in God and His goodness.
According to this view, the mission of the Jewish people is to inspire all nations to strive for Divine
enlightenment and a life of holiness. The ultimate purpose in keeping the Torah and its mitzvot is
not to elevate the Jewish people, but for the more universal goal of benefiting all of humanity. The
focus of one’s life should not be love of one’s people but love of God and His Torah, for the Torah
encompasses the true goal of elevating all of humanity, and love of Israel is merely a means to this
end.

Love for the Nation

The second approach agrees that any form of self-love is unsuitable to be one’s highest goal, even
if it is love of one’s own people. Rather, we should love that which is good for its own sake. We
should strive to advance that which is the highest and loftiest. Since the Jewish people are blessed
with a special segulah, an intrinsic quality of holiness, they have the potential to attain the highest

56
state, and they will remain the focus of all spiritual life even after the elevation of the other nations
of the world.
Love of Israel is thus a true value of Torah, since the ultimate goal will always be the elevation of
Israel. The purpose of creation is not measured in quantity but in quality, and the Jewish people
will always retain a unique advantage due to their segulah quality.

The School of Shamai

How do these two approaches relate to the disagreement between Beit Hillel and Beit Shamai?
The universalistic outlook sees Israel’s mission as an agent of change, inspiring all peoples to form
a harmonious society living a life of righteousness and sanctity. Over time, the plurality of diverse
national characteristics will diminish as they absorb the ever-brighter light of truth. As the nations
are drawn to the holiness of Torah, their unique ideologies and traits will become less distinct.
This is the approach of Beit Shamai, who taught to progressively reduce the number of Chanukah
lights until there remains but a single resplendent light.
This view sees the story of Chanukah as a milestone in a long historical process. The confrontation
with Greek culture and the subsequent victory of Israel brought about a greater interaction and
influence of Israel upon the nations. The struggle with Hellenism significantly increased the
world’s familiarity with the Torah’s teachings. Thus it is fitting that the lights of Chanukah should
reflect the historical process of the world’s progressive elevation and unification.

The Opinion of Beit Hillel

Beit Hillel certainly concurred with this universal mission of the Jewish people. But is Israel
merely a tool to elevate the rest of the world? The true goal of the Torah is to establish the highest
level of sanctified life possible — and that can only be attained through the
intrinsic segulah quality of Israel.
While the Jewish people appear to suffer from spiritual decline over time, the inner holiness of
Israel can only be properly measured if we take into account all the generations over time. Every
generation that affirms Israel’s special covenant with God, despite the pressures of persecution
and exile, contributes to the overall segulah of this unique people.
The many nations of the world are certainly numerically superior. Yet Israel is not just a vehicle
for their spiritual elevation. On the contrary, their elevation is a means that facilitates the
emergence of a loftier sanctity of Israel. The nations will enable the unique segulah that will crown
the world in the end of days — an entire people prepared to live life on the highest level of holiness.
This is the ultimate goal of the world, as the Sages taught, “The idea of Israel preceded all of
creation” (Breishit Rabbah 1:4).
How does this outlook see the lights of Chanukah? Despite the importance of the Hasmonean
victory and the resulting increase in Israel’s influence on the world, the quantitative advance is
still secondary in importance to the qualitative goal. Therefore on each night we add an additional
Chanukah light, to symbolize the increased light of Israel. The focus is not on the gradual
unification and elevation of the nations of the world, but on the increasing light emanating from

57
Israel, as it intensifies in brightness and diversity, reaching out to each nation according to its
special characteristics and needs.
We may now better understand the Talmud’s explanation for the opinions of Beit Shamai and Beit
Hillel. Beit Shamai, who stressed the universalistic aspect of Israel’s influence on the world,
compared the Chanukah lights to the bull offerings of Succoth. What is special about these
offerings?
The Sages on our daf (Sukkah 55b) noted that the total number of bull offerings was seventy.
These seventy offerings were brought for the spiritual benefit of the seventy nations of the
world.
Beit Hillel, on the other hand, taught that “in holy matters, one should increase and not detract.”
The reason why love for the Jewish people is an authentic goal of the Torah is due to the
special segulah of Israel. Its existence is a goal even higher than the elevation of all of humanity.
Love of the Jewish people is rightfully considered a holy matter, as it fully appreciates the unique
role of Israel in the universe.

Jewish Nationalism
To question whether Jewish nationalism is a genuine Torah value reveals a superficial knowledge
of Torah. The real question is whether the ultimate Divine goal is quantitative — the elevation of
all of humanity through Israel and its Torah — or qualitative — the incomparable segulah quality
of Israel. To use Rabbi Yehudah HaLevi’s metaphor of Israel as the “heart among the nations,”
the disagreement between Beit Hillel and Beit Shamai may be presented as follows: Is the heart
subservient to the other organs of the body, as it provides them with life-giving blood? Or is the
heart the central organ, protected and sustained by the rest of the body? Both of these positions are
legitimate; “Both views are the words of the Living God” (Eiruvin 13b).
This is the basis for a true understanding of nationalism in Israel. It transcends the usual form of
nationalism as it is found among other nations. This unique national love is based on the ultimate
Divine goal that can only be fulfilled through the Jewish people. While Jewish nationalism
contains elements common to regular nationalism, it is of a completely different order.

Sukkot: A Paradox Resolved

Rabbi Dr. Shlomo Riskin writes:27

For some, the very idea of religion is paradoxical. On the one hand, we want to experience G-d, to
soar to great spiritual heights. But on the other hand, we are often taken aback by the seemingly
picayune details of our rituals: the precise quantity of wine necessary for the kiddush cup; the exact
phrase to be substituted in our prayers during

We are often taken aback by the seemingly picayune details of our rituals.

27
https://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/7444

58
he Ten Days of Repentance - thousands of laws affecting every aspect of our lives. On the festival
of Sukkot, the most universal of all Jewish celebrations, this paradox is muted, if not totally
resolved.

The Bible commands us to take "four species" on Sukkot, which the midrash classifies as to their
taste and fragrance attributes. The etrog has both good taste and fragrance (Torah and good deeds),
while the lulav's fruits, dates, have taste, but no fragrance (just Torah). The hadas (myrtle) has an
excellent aroma (good deeds), but no taste at all. And the arava, the weeping willow, has neither
taste nor fragrance.

When we make our blessing over them, these species are to be held together; even the weeping
willow-Jew is included, and given an honored place together with his siblings, in one bond, aguda
ahat. The commandment of the four species recognizes how all Jews, from the most learned to the
most ignorant, from the most pious to the most removed from traditions, are part of a fundamental,
and even halachic connection.

The physical structure of the sukkah itself reflects the same principle. Its walls may be comprised
of virtually any material - wood, metal, brick - objects that can become ritually defiled. But the
roof may consist of only vegetation, matter which can never become ritually impure; an innate
holiness, so to speak.

Thus, in the sukkah's construction, we see the necessity of relying on two different elements
working together, those born into holiness who are never defiled, and the more common reality of
those whose lives risk potential defilement.

The story is told that Rebbe Levi Yitzchak of Berdichev would invite all types of Jews into
his sukkah, simple people, beggars, even scoundrels. But the more established members of the
community, the learned and the wealthy, felt uncomfortable around this motley crew. Rebbe Levi
Yitzchok explained that Jewish tradition records that in the World to Come, the holy Jews of all
the generations would be gathering inside the sukkah of Leviathan, led by Abraham, Isaac and
Jacob. Moses would be speaking words of Torah, Aaron would conduct the ritual and the songs of
praise would be sung by King David.

But if the doorkeeper would demand to know by what right Levi Yitzchok thought he could enter
(because, after all, he was hardly of the caliber of the aforementioned spiritual giants of our nation),
then he would answer that since he invited everyone, including the "lesser lights," into his sukkah,
wouldn't these true masters of our faith open their hearts and invite him into their sukkah?

On Sukkot, we include everyone because we want G-d to include us. In effect, just as we forgive
others (which is what placing all Jews in one bond means), G-d also forgives us. But there is
another, more profound dimension to Sukkot - a celebration of nature and all.

59
All Jews... are part of a fundamental, and even halachic connection.

Exposed to the elements, under the sky, a sukkah is a nomad's hut. For seven days, the Torah
commands us to leave our homes and enter the world of the ancient Israelites - a temporary
dwelling where we eat, study Torah and even sleep.

In giving up the comforts of home and shedding rigidity, we sense a different part of our being; in
a fragile hut, we become more fragile and see how everything in nature has its place and purpose.
Invariably, the perfection of creation helps us look differently upon those Jews who run from the
sight of a synagogue, universal spirits who often feel constrained by walls and pews. We
understand better Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook's teaching that the Messiah will come because of
Jews who may not keep the external details of the commandment, but who are nevertheless deeply
committed to the internal national bond of all Jews. (Letters, No. 555.)

Rabbi Kook exhorts us to learn from every human being, even those who look like sinners. In the
early years of this century, when faced with hard-working farmers freeing the soil, the Chief Rabbi
of Israel embraced them all into his concept of spirituality. In his work Arpelei Tohar ("Clouds of
Purity"), Rabbi Kook speaks of the highest sanctity being the "sanctity of silence," a sanctity that
transcends words (even the words of prayer), a sanctity that encompasses every aspect of life, from
the inanimate to the life that pulses through the veins of every human being. This sanctity reaches
into the depths of every creature, expressing the bond of all with, and within, all.

But a collision was inevitable. If the person who feels "this universality of holiness," Rabbi Kook
continues, "this sanctity of silence, the sanctity of universalism... will then descend into the narrow
service of the particular ritual, to prayer, to even a word of Torah, to any kind of narrow and
restricted emphasis on a detail of the law, he will suffer and become depressed; he'll feel that his
soul, which is filled with the sanctity of all existence, is being depressed by pincers... forced into
a certain narrow road at a time when all of the roads seem opened before him in the way of sanctity,
all of them filled with light."

Placing these non-observant pioneers on a pinnacle of spiritual excellence was revolutionary.

Obviously, Rabbi Kook saw a light that most observant people could not see. But on Sukkot, we
can all catch a glimpse of Rabbi Kook's vision. We understand that the Torah encompasses every
human being, every idea, every emotion.

This is the deepest joy of Torah, the Torah of Sukkot.

This is the deepest joy of Torah, the Torah of Sukkot, in which there is room for the pure and the
impure, the good and the not-so-good, from the smallest weeping willow-Jew to the greatest sages
of the age.

Still, what do we say to a great soul who cannot be burdened with 'bureaucratic' religious details?
The following analogy may help.

60
On a clear night, I can often manage to see stars hundreds of light years away, but on a cloudy
night I may not be able to see anything at all. However, if I learn the laws of optics and build a
telescope, I will see much further and clearer. But acquiring a telescope has its price. There are
many facts to learn regarding its proper use, and an object comprised of countless details is placed
between the eye and the world. But just look at the added vision it provides.

The laws of the Torah are like this telescope (or microscope) into reality. It seems constrictive, but
it's really liberating. On Sukkot, we embrace the stargazers who shun telescopes, we open our
hearts and invite them into the sukkah, but at the same time, we know how much sharper our vision
is when we look at the stars through the gaps (required by halacha) in the roof of the sukkah.

61