Two Torah commandments of the festival of Sukkos are to dwell seven days in a Sukkah, and to take the "four kinds," the esrog, lulav, haddasim and aravos (the citron, palm-branch, myrtle and willow).
The latter commandment is in reality not to be considered a distinct act to be performed during the seven days of Sukkos. Rather, the taking of the "four kinds" is related to the mitzvah of Sukkah itself;[1] this also being the reason for the law that the best way of performing the mitzvah of the "four kinds" is within the Sukkah.[2]
The Sukkah encompasses a Jew and all his possessions with holiness. The taking of the "four kinds" has the additional benefit of drawing down this degree of G-dliness within the Jew - "You shall take unto yourselves a citron."
Indeed, this is why the four kinds are to be placed near the heart,[3] so that the effect will be felt within the seat of human emotions. From there it infuses all the other bodily organs, including the intellect.
In terms of man's spiritual service, the encompassing quality of the Sukkah is indicative of the transcendental quality of mesirus nefesh, total self-sacrifice for the sake of G-d - a level that surpasses all human powers, while taking the "four kinds" points to the individual's finite powers of intellect, emotion, etc.
This being so, it would seem that drawing down the infinite encompassing level of the Sukkah into the finite sense of self via the "four kinds" would be a step backward. Why then are we commanded to take the "four kinds" in order to draw down - and seemingly limit - this infinite level?
The reason is that complete mesirus nefesh only results when the attendant state of self-nullification permeates a person's intellect and emotions, so that they too desire this exalted state.
There are two reasons why this is so: a) Only when mesirus nefesh permeates the entire individual can it become a permanent part of his self; b) the permeation of all aspects of a person demonstrates the true power and scope of mesirus nefesh; every place within the individual has become permeated by its power.
The above helps clarify yet another matter: The festival of Sukkos is to be celebrated with joy, for it is one of the three pilgrim festivals - Pesach, Shavuos and Sukkos - concerning which G-d commands us: "You shall rejoice in your festival...."[4] Particularly so since Sukkos is referred to in the holiday prayers as the "Season of our Joy."
The particular mitzvah of Sukkos which the Torah associates with joy is the taking of the "four kinds," concerning which the verse states:[5] "On the first day you shall take unto yourselves a citron... and you shall rejoice before the L-rd your G-d for seven days."[6]
Why is the taking of the "four kinds" singled out for its connection to rejoicing, and not the commandment to dwell in a Sukkah? In light of the explanation given above, the reason becomes obvious:
If the full state of mesirus nefesh is realized specifically when it permeates a person's inner powers, then this is surely so with regard to joy. For joy must of course be actually felt, and true joy is not subject to limitations - the true joy of something transcends intellect, and can only be realized when it is assimilated in an inward manner.
True joy results when the encompassing level of the Sukkah is drawn down by the taking of the "four kinds" - "you shall take unto yourselves ... and you shall rejoice."
Based on Likkutei Sichos, Vol. XXIV, pp. 246-250
Notes:
- (Back to text) See Siddur Im Dach, 263c and onward; Hemshech VeKachah 5637 ch. 88; Hemshech 5666 p. 32. See also Likkutei Sichos, Vol. XXII, p. 124ff.
- (Back to text) "Laws concerning the taking of the Lulav," in Siddur Admur HaZakein, section preceding Hallel. See also Likkutei Sichos, ibid., fn. 19-21.
- (Back to text) "Laws concerning the taking of the Lulav" ibid.
- (Back to text) Devarim 16:14.
- (Back to text) Vayikra 23:40. See also Rambam, Hilchos Lulav 8:12; Likkutei Sichos, Vol. XVII, p. 267ff.
- (Back to text) See Yerushalmi, Rosh HaShanah 4:5, Sukkah 3:11.
There is a quality to the mitzvah of dwelling in a Sukkah that is not found in most other mitzvos, in that the physical objects with which the mitzvah is performed - the schach (the Sukkah covering) as well as the walls - become holy.
[1] In other words, not only are the schach (and Rabbinically, the walls as well) used for the purpose of a mitzvah, but they themselves become sacred during the festival of Sukkos.
With regard to the mitzvah of the "Four Kinds," we find that there is a more striking relationship with the physical objects with which the mitzvah is performed than is to be found regarding other mitzvos.
The physical objects with which all the various mitzvos are performed are more suited than other matter to being receptacles for G-dliness. Thus, for example, the fact that wool is to be used for the commandment of tzitzis demonstrates that wool is intrinsically loftier than those other objects with which the mitzvah cannot be performed.[2]
The physical objects involved in the "Four Kinds," however, not only possess this innate capacity to be used for a mitzvah, but clearly demonstrate this capacity.
Our Sages explain[3] that the esrog, lulav, haddasim and aravos were specifically included in the "Four Kinds" because they each reflect unity. The branches of the lulav are all attached; the hadas has three leaves growing out of the same stem; aravos grow together in clusters.
And surely this quality applies to the esrog, which is found on the tree for an entire year - thereby uniting the climates of Spring, Summer, Winter and Fall.
Most other worldly objects exist as separate entities unto themselves. The fact, then, that these "four kinds" share a connection to unity points to the fact that within them is to be found a lessening of corporeality - a byproduct of their abnegation to holiness and G-dliness.
Herein lies both the similarity and the disparity between the mitzvos of Sukkah and the "Four Kinds": Both mitzvos are alike in that they - more than other mitzvos - reveal the innate capacity of physical objects to be used in the performance of a mitzvah.
The difference, however, lies in the fact that the sanctity inherent within the Sukkah is directly related to the performance of the mitzvah, while the relationship of the "Four Kinds" to its commandment is to be seen in the inherent nature of these plants, which makes them uniquely suited for the performance of the mitzvah.
There is yet another similarity and difference regarding these two mitzvos: A Sukkah envelopes an entire person (indeed, many people), thus pointing to a degree of sanctity that transcends differences.
The "Four Kinds" also reflect unity; not merely by their very nature, as explained above, but also by the fact that they all join to bring about the actualization of one mitzvah.
But here too, a difference exists between these two mitzvos: With regard to Sukkah there is no disparity even at the outset, while the "Four Kinds" are indeed separate to begin with, albeit uniting for the sake of the mitzvah.
Thus, the unity of the "four kinds" - a unity such that even after the kinds unite they remain distinct from each other - emphasizes how the world itself, whose very nature is divergence, becomes united with G-dliness.
The transcendent unity of the Sukkah, however, points to a level of G-dliness at which divergence and separation simply do not exist.
Based on Likkutei Sichos, Vol. XIX, pp. 356-359
Notes:
- (Back to text) See Sukkah 9a; Shulchan Aruch Admur HaZakein, Orach Chayim 638.
- (Back to text) See Hemshech 5672, Vol. II, pp. 883, 961.
- (Back to text) Sefer HaMaamarim 5568, p. 447ff.; Siddur Im Dach 264ff.; Hemshech VeKachah chs. 87, 93ff.
Yom Kippur