[Avodah] “Timtum Ha-Lev” Redux

[Michael Poppers]

In Avodah V35n121, R'Micha wrote:
> Tangent: The Gra said that "vehayisa akh sameiach" is the hardest mitzvah
in the Torah. "Veyahisa sameiach" is one thing, but "akh sameiach"? To be
nothing but happy, with no other moods ambivalently mixed in for 8 days
(9 in chu"l) straight? <
Tangents to the tangent:
(a) Perhaps someone can quote "Ma'asei Rav" or the like, but what I've seen
quoted *b'sheim GRA* is that the "ach" *d'rasha* in BT Sukka means that on
Shmini Chag haAtzeres we're *b'simcha* with H' w/out any *cheftza shel
mitzva*, e.g. see here
<http://www.mishpacha.com/Browse/Article/8939/The-Glatt-Life>:

Perhaps the answer lies in a comment from the Vilna Gaon on the pasuk of
“v’hayisa ach sameiach.” The Gemara (Succah 48a) derives from this pasuk
that Shemini Atzeres is included in the mitzvah of simchah. But the word
ach generally limits what is being discussed. What are we limiting with ach
sameiach?

The Gaon explains that whereas Succos requires many mitzvah objects — a
succah, lulav and esrog, hoshanas — Shemini Atzeres does not require any
physical items. We only need to be sameiach.

This is the inherent gift of the last day of the Yom Tov. We can’t take the
succah and lulav with us after Yom Tov. But the simchah that comes from
dveikus with Hashem requires nothing but ourselves, and it is something we
can take along with us.

(b) Translating "ach" as "nothing but" doesn't explain the YhK "ach"
(P'Emor).
(c) Another thought on "v'samachta b'chagecha...v'hayisa ach sameach" is
that the latter mandate of *simcha* ("ach" or no "ach") seems superfluous
and can be considered as a mandate for the entire year (i.e. not just
"b'chagecha").

All the best from
*Michael Poppers* * Elizabeth, NJ, USA
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20171015/3fe2705c/attachment.html>