Previous daf

1)

(a) 'Sheluchei Mitzvah' - e.g. someone who is traveling to study Torah, to greet his Rebbe or to redeem a captive - are Patur from Sukah.

(b) They remain Patur - even at night-time, when they stop to rest.

(c) We learn from the Pasuk in va'Eschanan ...

1. ... "be'Shivtecha be'Veisecha" - that someone who is performing a Mitzvah, is Patur from reciting the Shema ('ha'Osek be'Mitzvah, Patur min ha'Mitzvah').
2. ... "u've'Lechtecha va'Derech - that even a Chasan, who is not actually performing a Mitzvah (only preparing it in his mind), is also Patur.

(a) We try to base the previous Derashah on the word "Derech", which, we think, implies that one is traveling on one's private business - but who says that that is so? Maybe the Pasuk is speaking about someone who is on his way to perform a Mitzvah?

(b) We prove from the Pasuk itself that the Torah is referring to Reshus and not to Mitzvah - from "be'Shivte*cha*" and "u've'Lechte*cha*" - implying that one is traveling on one's own private business, and not for a Mitzvah.

(c) Someone who marries a widow is not Patur from the Shema in the same way as someone who marries a virgin is - because he is not worried about the Be'ilas Mitzvah (i.e. about the problems that he will encounter on account of the Be'ilah) like he is by a virgin.

(d) It is the worry that goes together with a Mitzvah that exempts from another Mitzvah - not other worries, such as someone whose ship is about to sink, or whose close relation died (those are worries that he is obligated to dismiss, in order to perform the Mitzvah on hand).

(a) An Aveil is not Patur from reciting the Shema - because his worry is not related to the Mitzvah of mourning, but is purely personal (in which case, it must be dismissed in order to perform the Mitzvah on hand, as we just explained).

(b) He is Patur from laying Tefilin - though only on the first day, because that is when the pain is the most bitter.

(c) Chazal explain that instead of "Pe'er" (glory), the Aveil sits in the ashes 'Eifer' (since both words contain the same letters).

4)

(a) According to Rebbi Yossi Hagelili, the Teme'ei Meis who approached Moshe about bringing the Korban Pesach were those who carried the coffin of Yosef. In Rebbi Akiva's opinion, they were Mishael and Eltzafan - cousins of Moshe and Aharon, whom Moshe designated to remove Nadav and Avihu's bodies from the Heichal after they had died.

(b) Rebbi Yitzchak disagrees with both opinions, due to what happened on the first of Nisan - when the Mishkan was erected, and second of Nisan - when Elazar brought the first Parah Adumah (leaving the Teme'ei Meis almost a fortnight to become Tahor).

(a) According to Rebbi Yitzchak - the men who approached Moshe were people who had buried their relatives, and whose seventh day of mourning fell on Erev Pesach.

(b) Rebbi Yitzchak learns from the Pasuk "ve'Lo Yachlu La'asos ha'Pesach *ba'Yom ha'Hu*" - that had Pesach fallen on the following day, they would have been able to bring it (his source for saying that their seventh day fell on Erev Pesach).

(c) Those men could not send their Korban Pesach through a Sheli'ach, seeing as they would anyway be fit to eat the Pesach after nightfall - because Rebbi Yitzchak is of the opinion that 'Ein Shochtin ve'Zorkin al Tamei Sheretz' (and this applies equally to a Tamei Meis on his seventh day).

(a) The men buried their dead relative (or relatives), despite their knowledge that Pesach (a Mitzvah which carries with it a Chiyuv Kares) was imminent, and that, once they were Tamei, they would not be permitted to bring it - because of the principle 'ha'Osek ba'Mitzvah, Patur min ha'Mitzvah'.

(b) Nevertheless, we need the Pasuk of "be'Shivtecha be'Veisecha" - to teach us that the principle applies even if the second Mitzvah has already fallen due (which was not the case by the Teme'ei Meis in the desert).

(c) And even though we have the Pasuk of "be'Shivtecha be'Veisecha", we still need the Parshah of the Teme'ei Meis - to teach us that, 'ha'Osek ba'Mitzvah ... ' applies even if the second Mitzvah is more stringent than the first (like the Korban Pesach, which carries with it the penalty of Kares, whereas burying a deceased relative is only an Asei).

(a) Hashem told Yechezkel that, although he was to behave like an Aveil, he should nevertheless continue to wear his Tefilin ("Pe'ercha Chavush Alecha"), from which we can infer that a regular Aveil is Patur from Tefilin.

(b) The reason that Hashem instructed Yechezkel to wear Tefilin - was as a sign that many people in Yisrael were destined to die, but there would there would be nobody to mourn for them.

(a) Rav Aba bar Zavda (the author of the previous Sugya) also obligates an Aveil to sit in a Sukah - although we might have thought that he is Patur, since he is in pain, and we have a principle 'ha'Mitzta'er Patur min ha'Sukah' - 'one who is in pain is Patur from the Sukah'.

(b) He is not Patur however - because the pain does not come from the Sukah (such as the heat, the cold or an unpleasant smell - from which he does not suffer in the house).

(a) Rav Aba bar Zavda also exempts a Chasan and his retinue from sitting in the Sukah - because he is obligated to rejoice.

(b) They cannot ...

1. ... eat in the Sukah and rejoice in the Sukah - because true rejoicing is only possible in the Chupah (the place which is designated for the Chasan and Kalah - see Tosfos DH 'Ein').
2. ... eat in the Sukah and rejoice in the Chupah - because one can only really rejoice there where one feasts.

(c) Abaye explains that they cannot arrange the Chupah in the Sukah because it may lead to Yichud (since normally, their Sukos were set up on the roof, and there was no easy access for most people. So it may just happen that the Chasan goes down to relieve himself and someone will be alone with the Kalah in the Sukah). According to Rava, it is due to the lack of space and to the openness of the Sukah, which distresses the Chasan and inhibits him.

(d) The difference between the two explanations will be - by a Sukah which is frequented by many guests (where there is no problem with Yichud, but where the Chasan is nevertheless distressed and inhibited).

(a) When Rebbi Zeira got married, he did not conform with the previous Sugya at all - he ate in the Sukah, but rejoiced in the Chupah, saying that he was exceptionally happy because he had performed two Mitzvos, that of Sukah and that of marriage.

(b) He must have got married before Yom-Tov - because, due to the principle of 'Ein Me'arvin Simchah be'Simchah', it is forbidden to get married on Yom- Tov (even on Chol ha'Mo'ed).