holds that which is placed within it, while a full vessel does not hold it. However, the attribute of the Holy One, Blessed be He, is: If God adds to someone who is a full vessel in terms of knowledge or good attributes, he holds it; a person who is an empty vessel will not hold it. This is alluded to by the verse where it is stated: “And it shall come to pass, if you will hearken diligently [shamoa tishma] unto the voice of the Lord your God, to observe to do all his commandments” (Deuteronomy 28:1). This verse is interpreted homiletically: If you hearken [shamoa] in the present, you will hearken [tishma] in the future as well; and if not, you will not hearken. Alternatively: If you hearkened to the old, i.e., if you review what you already learned, you will hearken to the new as well. “But if your heart turns away” (Deuteronomy 30:17), you will no longer be able to hearken.

§ The mishna continues: Immediately after fulfilling the mitzva of taking the four species on the seventh day of Sukkot, children remove their lulavim from the binding and eat their etrogim in an expression of extreme joy. Rabbi Yoḥanan said: It is prohibited to derive benefit from the etrog on the seventh day of the festival of Sukkot; however, on the eighth day it is permitted. It is prohibited to derive benefit from the sukka even on the eighth day. And Reish Lakish said: It is permitted to derive benefit from the etrog even on the seventh day, once the mitzva has been fulfilled.

The Gemara asks: With regard to what do they disagree? One Sage, Reish Lakish, holds that the etrog was set aside for its mitzva; once the mitzva has been fulfilled there is no legal barrier to eating the etrog on the seventh day. And one Sage, Rabbi Yoḥanan, holds that the etrog was set aside for the entire day. Therefore, one may not derive benefit from it even after he fulfills the mitzva.

Reish Lakish raised an objection to the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan from the mishna: Immediately after fulfilling the mitzva, children remove their lulavim from the binding and eat their etrogim. What, is it not that the same is true for etrogim belonging to adults, and it would be permitted to eat those as well? Apparently, it is permitted to derive benefit from the etrog immediately after the mitzva is performed. Rabbi Yoḥanan rejected this: No, the mishna is referring to children specifically, who are not obligated by Torah law to fulfill the mitzva. However, etrogim belonging to adults were set aside for the entire day.

Some say another version of the exchange between Rabbi Yoḥanan and Reish Lakish. Rabbi Yoḥanan raised an objection to the opinion of Reish Lakish from mishna: Immediately after fulfilling the mitzva, children remove their lulavim from the binding and eat their etrogim. One can conclude by inference: Etrogim belonging to children, yes, they may be eaten; etrogim belonging to adults, no, they may not be eaten until the conclusion of the Festival. Reish Lakish responded: The same is true for etrogim belonging to adults, i.e., it would be permitted to eat those as well, and the reason that the mishna is teaching specifically about etrogim belonging to children is that it is teaching the manner in which the matter typically occurs, because children are entertained by eating the etrogim.

Rav Pappa said to Abaye: According to Rabbi Yoḥanan, who holds that an object set aside for a mitzva is set aside for the entire day, what is different with regard to a sukka such that it is prohibited even on the eighth day, and what is different with regard to an etrog?

Abaye said to him: With regard to a sukka, it is suitable for use even during twilight at the end of the seventh day, as, if a meal happens to present itself to him at that time, he is required to sit in the sukka and eat in the sukka. Therefore, the sukka is set aside for the mitzva for the twilight period, and since it is set aside for the twilight period, it is set aside for the entire eighth day. Since the status of the twilight period is uncertain, it may be the evening of the eighth day, and once it is set aside for the potential start of the eighth day, it is set aside for the entire eighth day. However, with regard to an etrog, which, once the mitzva has been fulfilled, is not suitable for use during the twilight period, it is not set aside during the twilight period. Since it was not set aside then, it is not set aside for the entire eighth day.

And Levi said: It is prohibited to use the etrog even on the eighth day. The father of Shmuel said: It is prohibited to use the etrog on the seventh day, and it is permitted on the eighth day. The Gemara notes that ultimately, the father of Shmuel reconsidered his opinion and assumed the opinion of Levi. Rabbi Zeira, however, assumed the opinion of the father of Shmuel, as Rabbi Zeira said: With regard to an etrog that was rendered unfit for any reason, it is prohibited to eat it all seven days, as it was set aside for the mitzva until the end of the Festival.

Rabbi Zeira said: A person should not transfer ownership of the four species to a child by means of a gift on the first day of the Festival. What is the rationale for this halakha? It is due to the fact with regard to acquisition, a child is able to acquire objects; however, with regard to transferring ownership, he is not able to transfer ownership to others. In other words, a child is legally able to acquire an item given to him, but he does not have the legal cognizance to transfer ownership of an item to another. In this case, if an adult gives the child the four species as a gift before having fulfilled the mitzva himself, the child will be unable to effect the transfer of ownership back to the adult. And in that case, a situation will result where the adult is seeking to fulfill his obligation with a lulav that is not his.

And Rabbi Zeira said: A person should not say to a child: I will give you something, and then not give it to him, because he thereby comes to teach him about lying, as it is stated: “They have taught their tongues to speak lies” (Jeremiah 9:4). One must not accustom a child to fail to honor commitments.

The Gemara notes: And other amora’im disagree with regard to the matter of the dispute of Rabbi Yoḥanan and Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish, as it was stated: If one designated seven etrogim for the seven days of the Festival. Rav said: With each and every one, he fulfills his obligation with it and he may then eat it immediately. And Rav Asi said: With each and every one, he fulfills his obligation with it and he may then eat it the following day. With regard to what principle do they disagree? One Sage, Rav, holds: The etrog was set aside for the mitzva; once the mitzva has been fulfilled it is no longer prohibited to derive benefit from the item. The other Sage, Rav Asi, holds: It was set aside for the entire day. Deriving benefit from the etrog remains prohibited until the end of the day, even after one has fulfilled the mitzva.

The Gemara asks: And we, who live outside of Eretz Yisrael, who have two days of the Festival due to uncertainty whether the eighth day is actually the seventh day of Sukkot, how do we act with regard to deriving benefit from the four species? Abaye said: On the eighth day, with regard to which there is uncertainty that it might be the seventh day, it is prohibited, as due to that uncertainty, the day retains the sanctity of Sukkot. However, on the ninth day, with regard to which there is uncertainty as it might be the eighth day, it is certainly permitted. Mareimar said: Even on the eighth day, with regard to which there is uncertainty that it might be the seventh day, it is permitted. Since that is also the first day of the Eighth Day of Assembly, no vestige of the sanctity of the festival of Sukkot is attached to it.

The Gemara notes: In Sura they acted in accordance with the opinion of Mareimar and derived benefit from the etrog on the eighth day. Rav Sheisha, son of Rav Idi, acted in accordance with the opinion of Abaye. The Gemara notes: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Abaye.

§ Apropos the matter of the Eighth Day of Assembly in the Diaspora, the Gemara notes: Rav Yehuda, son of Rav Shmuel bar Sheilat, said in the name of Rav: Outside of Eretz Yisrael, on the eighth day, with regard to which there is uncertainty that it might be the seventh day of Sukkot, its status is like that of the seventh day with regard to the mitzva of sukka and like that of the eighth day with regard to the blessing, i.e., in Grace after Meals, in kiddush, and in the Amida prayer, the Eighth Day of Assembly is mentioned. Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Its status is like that of the eighth day both with regard to this, the mitzva of sukka, and to that, the blessing. The Gemara explains: Everyone, even Rabbi Yoḥanan, agrees that we reside in the sukka on the eighth day, with regard to which there is uncertainty that it might be the seventh day. When they disagree is