Summary of first shiur in Masechet Sukkah

a) Amongst other הלכות, our mishna on 32b states that a Hadas which is נקטם ראשו is invalid for performance of the mitzvah on Succot.

b) The Gemara, at the top of 33a, brings a baraita, quoted by עולא בר חיננא that if a תמרה - a berry-like fruit the shape of a date - grows in the place of the blemish, the Hadas is once again valid for use.  We noted that had Ula not cited this baraita, we may have deduced that the problem of נקטם ראשו is irreversible.

c) R. Yirmiya, an Amora, raises the following question: What if the Hadas became נקטם prior to Yom Tov, and then the תמרה grew on Yom Tov.  The answer to the question hinges on a larger conceptual issue of whether we say יש דחוי אצל מצוות or not.  What this principle precisely means - see the most recent posting on this blog for a detailed explanation.  R. Yirmiya is attempting to define the parameters of the halacha quoted by Ula.  Does the baraita rule that the growth of such a fruit on the top unconditionally solves the problem of נקטם ראשו - or does the baraita hold that as long as the "repair" occurred prior to the onset of the Yom Tov - when a myrtle branch becomes a 'halachic hadas', then it's kosher....but if, when Succot entered, it was נקטם, the hadas cannot be "repaired"?

d) The Gemara seems puzzled by R. Yirmiya's question.  The phrase ותפשוט ליה מה דתנן... indicates that the answer to R. Yirmiya's question already appears in a mishna.  If so, R. Yirmiya, as an Amora, who is responsible for knowing all of the mishnayot, should have avoided asking the question....