By Rabbi Yair Hoffman

Some people do it.  Some people bedavka do not.  What is the story with washing netilas yadayim in the Sukkah itself?

The immediate issue is called tashmish bezu’yah a “disrespectful use.”  To understand the application of the halacha we go to an island in the Mediterranean sea.  It is, Majorca, the seventh largest Island in the Mediterranean.  Why are we here?

The instigator of the event is responsible for both how the issue ended up in the Bais Yoseph as well as the demise of the Knights Templar.

The Knights Templar were those crusaders who had not only built a network of castles and fortifications throughout Eretz Yisroel to protect Christians coming to visit and to launch attacks against the Muslims, but also built a Templar castle on Har HaBayis itself, r”l.

In 1306 King Philip IV was short of money due to a war with the Flemish and a complex currency revaluation problem. He owed money to Jews and to the Knights Templar. In January of that year, the king came up with a secret plan to expel the Jews of France and confiscate and sell off their property.

It was the day after Tisha B’Av and 100,000 Jews of France were arrested on July 22^nd, 1306. The arrests were made in one day because it was kept a secret.

Only when they were in prison the Jews were informed of their fate.  They were sentenced to exile and had one month to leave.  They could only leave with the clothing on their backs and a small sum of money – 12 sous each.

Among those who had to leave was Rav Aharon Hakohen of Lunel who lived in Provence.  Where could he go?  He chose to move to the Island of Majorca off the eastern coast of Spain. Majorca had an established Jewish community and was a place of refuge for Jews fleeing the Almohad persecutions in Spain almost 200 years earlier.

In the meantime, Philip the IV also went after the Knights Templar because they were wealthy and he had owed them vast sums of money.  Somehow, he had Pope Clement declare them heretics and they were burned at the stake after a series of trials.

In the meantime, Rav Aharon HaKohen notes a number of minhagim of Sukkah observance.  Twenty years after he settled in Majorca he composed his famous and classic work, “Orchos Chaim.” In Hilchos Sukkah Siman 34 he writes not to wash pots and bowls in the Sukkah so as not to have Mitzvos (that of Sukkah) be disrespected in our eyes.  Rav Yoseph Karo cites this ruling of the Orchos Chaim in his Bais Yoseph commentary on the Tur. [Perhaps the Beis Yoseph chose the wording of the Orchos Chaim as opposed to other Rishonim because he seems to be the first to mention the practical implementation of the Minhag]

The Sfas Emes (Sukkos 5660) explains at great length the parallels between the Beis HaMikdash and the Sukkah.

Perhaps we can suggest that the despicable actions of Phillip the 4^th, possibly resulted in two conversely  opposing repercussions:

1] It served as the catalyst for the manifestation of punishment for those who were mevazeh the makom haMikdash by building an Avodah Zarah edifice on Har HaBayis and

2] It possibly provided for a means for Klal Yisroel to be mechabaid the Mikdash and hence perhaps bring the Ge’ulah a bit closer.

Practical Applications

But now let’s discuss some of the more practical applications of this concept:

The Gemorah in Sukkah 29a cites Rava who states: mahnei mishtiya – bimtalalta mahnei michla bar mimtalta – items of drinking can remain in the Sukkah – items of eating are taken out of the Sukkah Chatzbah v’shachail earthenware jugs and wicker baskets are taken out of the Sukkah.

The Rishonim debate both the meaning of these terms and the underlying rationale as to why they are taken out. (As far as the meaning of the terms – there are variations in the Girsah, so we will skip that.)

• The BaHaG and Rabbeinu Tam (Sefer HaYashar 367) understand the Gemorah’s prohibition as dealing with the idea of “Taishvu k’ain taduru” that we would not have these items in our fanciest dining area, so too must we not have them our Sukkah because we must reside in the Sukkah as we do in our homes.  (The BaHaG indicates that the prohibition is not while one is actually eating.)
• Rashi, Tosfos, the Rosh and the SmaG understand the prohibition as being based on the fact that these items are miyus – gross.

The Mishna Brurah and other acharonim tell us to be stringent in accordance with both views.

As far as actual netilas yadayim washing goes, the Aruch haShulchan writes that one does not do so, but some contemporary Poskim write that if one has a Netilas Yadayim sink in their dining room then it would be okay.  However, this may not necessarily address the miyus factor.

What might be the reason to have the sink nearer to or in the Sukkah?

The Shulchan Aruch (Orech Chaim 166:1) states as follows: Some say that there is no need to be careful in avoiding a hefsek between washing and Hamotzi [blessing]. Others say that one must be careful. And it is proper to be careful. The Ramah adds if it is the amount of a walk of 22 amos, then it is a hefsek.

The Mishna Brurah there explains that this is only ideally, but if there was such a delay, there is no need to rewash. We see that, ideally, there should not be a delay of the amount of time that it takes to walk the amount of 22 amos, or approximately 33 feet.

Why 22 Amos?

The Taz explains that this is the distance in the Beis HaMikdash between Shaar Niknor and Bais HaMitbachaim. The Gemorah in Zvachim 33 deals with the idea of a hefsek between the Semicha and the Shechita of the Korban Asham of a Metzorah. It is a problem of it no longer being Tekef – immediate – since the Metzorah is not permitted in the Azarah. Tosfos in Sotah 39a (Kol) proves from this Gemorah that a distance of 22 amos would be a problem of hefsek [See Vilna Gaon Siman 166].

In many homes, the distance between the dining room and the kitchen sink exceeds 33 feet. One may argue that most people do not keep to this ideal because they wait that time anyway as to allow everyone to wash. The other people would be unable to keep it because it is unseemly to make a Hamotzi before the Baal HaBayis. The Baal HaBayis, on the other hand, would be able to wash last and thus observe this halacha in its ideal form.

When using the amah according to Rav Chaim No’eh and Rav Ovadiah Yoseph we get 33 feet. For those who wish to have a longer calculation for the 22 Amos, they could use Rav Moshe Feinstein zatzal’s figure of 21.25 inches per amah thus giving us slightly less than 39 feet. According to the Chazon Ish, it would be about 42 feet.

One way more people would be able to achieve this halachic ideal is to conduct the drying part of netilas yadaim within the Sukkah itself. This, according to many Poskim, would adequately address the underlying issue.

Healthier Meals?

There may be another halachic angle too. The Tur cites the Talmud Yerushalmi that states: Whoever places his Hamotzi immediately after his Netilas Yadayim will not be harmed that entire meal. This author, however, could not find that Yerushalmi. There is a Yerushalmi (Brachos 1:1) that states that the Satan will not be mekatreg in that meal. Perhaps the version found in the Tur could indicate that one will avoid a choking hazard, but it could also perhaps indicate that there will be cardiovascular damage from that meal either.

The author can be reached at [email protected]