Greetings. We find that the Yerushalmi establishes a prohibition to blow shofar on Shabbos (outside the Temple) because of "Zecher truah". It is said that the tanna R. Yochanan ben Zakkai was gozer to do so in places with a Beis Din. But I have not seen the possible rationale that he simply did not accept the drash from the posuk, but established an exception to the prohibition of the Bavli based on Gezeyra de Rabba (which is why the Bavli does not include the Yerushalmi's position).
Besides, the gezeyra de Rabba does not make sense in any way since there is no such thing truly as a reshus harabbim anyway. Plus, if they held that there was an issue of carrying into a reshus harabbim, what difference would it make that there was a local beis din??
Second, I don't understand why the gemara in Megillah has to try to find a rationale for reading the megillah on Thursday when Purim is on Shabbos with a discussion of the Anshei Knesses Hagedolah. We don't always find that the amoraim always have to seek the underlying reason for a halacha in the mishna. And isn't it possible that the prohibition of reading it on Thursday was simply because of matanos le'evyonim or tsedaka in general that would be available in shuls on Thursday, so the original decision of the Anshei Knesses Hagedolah took this into consideration, and since the Megillah is not the Torah, there is no need to specifically require the megillah to be read on Purim on Shabbos.
Finally, I don't understand why it hasn't been made clear that taking the lulav on Shabbos-first day is not a problem nowadays since we have a fixed calendar and should not have to abandon the d'oraisa, or even the takkana for a Shabbos chol hamo'ed. In this case the requirement of the Gezeyra de Rabba is also problematic on its own.
Thanks,
David Goldman
1)
(a) It seems to me that one cannot say that Rebbi Yochanan ben Zakai disagreed with the Derashah of the Yerushalmi, because the Mishnah states that it was only after the destruction of the Beis ha'Mikdash that he made his Takanah. If the dispute was about the Derashah, this could have come to the surface in the time of the Beis ha'Mikdash as well.
(b) It seems that since, when the Beis ha'Mikdash was standing, the Yerushalmi learned from the words "on the first of the month" that one may blow the Shofar in the Beis ha'Mikdash on Shabbos, what happened after the destruction was that Rebbi Yochanan ben Zakai extended this Limud, from "on the first of the month," to teach that not only in the Beis ha'Mikdash may one blow on Shabbos, but also in any palce where there is a Beis Din.
2)
(a) The Gemara states (Eruvin 6b) that if not for the fact that the doors of Yerushalayim were closed at night, one would be liable for carrying inside the city because it is a Reshus ha'Rabim. We learn from this that another city of the same size as Yerushalayim, where the doors are not closed every night, would indeed be considered a Reshus ha'Rabim d'Oraisa.
(b) If there is a Beis Din there, the Beis Din will warn the person blowing the Shofar that even though he is not sufficiently expert on the blowing, he must not carry the Shofar in Reshus ha'Rabim to request lessons from an expert, because this would constutute a Torah prohibition.
3)
(a) We often find that the Gemara provides the rationale for the Mishnah. In fact, on the very first Mishnah in Shas, which asks, "When do we start saying Shema at night," the Gemara asks, how do we know that one must read Shema every night? The Gemara answers that we learn this from the verse, "When you lie down and when you get up." We see right from the beginning of Shas that we are looking for the source of the Mishnah.
(b) Actually, the Chasam Sofer to Megilah 6b, printed at the back of the Gemara, writes that the basic obligation of Purim is a Torah obligation. He learns this from the Gemara in Megilah 14a which learns that we must sing to Hash-m on Purim from a Kal va'Chomer. If we sang to Hash-m when we went out of Egypt, where our physical lives were not in danger but only our freedom, then Kal va'Chomer we must sing to Hash-m when our lives were in danger in Shushan. A Kal va'Chomer is one of the ways that the Torah teaches Halachos, so it transpires that reading the Megilah is similar to a Torah Mitzvah.
(c) There is the opinion of Rav Yosef (end of 4b), who maintains that the reason why we do not read the Megilah on Shabbos is because "the eyes of the poor are raised" to the reading of the Megilah. Since one cannot give charity on Shabbos, the reading of the Megilah would be a disappointment for the poor, which is the exact opposite of what we want to achieve on Purim, where the aim is to make the unfortunate happy.
4) Even though we know for sure when the first day of Sukos is, and that it falls on Shabbos, the Chachamim still have the power to override holding the Lulav, because the Gemara (Yevamos 89b) states that they have the power to abolish a Torah Mitzvah in a passive way. The Chachamim saw how important it is to protect the sanctity of Shabbos, which is the cornerstone of Judaism.
Kol Tuv,
Dovid Bloom
Thank you. I should have been clearer about the Mishna. I meant to comment that the gemara goes into such lengthy discussion about the megillah of the Mishna instead of just accepting the decision of the Anshei Knesses Hagedola which factored in any number of possibilities for a takkana, which would seem unnecessary in the case of a takkana.
If even outside of Yerushalayim were a reshus harabbim then why do poskim debate so strenuously about 600,000 being required? Presumably there would be no doubt on the issue.
I am not sure I understand the circumstances whereby R. Yochanan would make an exception to "zecher truah" of the Yerushalmi for shabbos with a Beis Din as an equivalent to the Mikdash especially if there was the Gezeyra de Rabba.
1)
(a) The Gemara (Megilah 2a) states that the Anshei Keneses ha'Gedolah made a Takanah concerning all of the dates (11, 12, 13, 14, and 15th of Adar) that the Megilah may be read on any of these dates under certain circumstances. The Chidush of the Gemara on 2a is that the Anshei Keneses ha'Gedolah did not make only the Takanah about the 14th and 15th.
(b) It is only in Megilah 4b that the Gemara discusses reading the Megilah on Shabbos. It states here that everyone agrees that one may not do so and it asks how we know this. The Gemara gives the answer of Rabah about his Gezeirah, and also the answer of Rav Yosef, that the poor are waiting "with expecting eyes" for the money that comes every year together with the reading of the Megilah, so if one reads it on Shabbos this will disappoint them since obviously one cannot give them money on Shabbos.
(c) Tosfos (4b, DH v'Rav) writes that Rav Yosef agrees with Rabah that there is a Gezeirah lest one carry the Megilah four Amos in Reshus ha'Rabim. However, the Turei Even suggests that Rav Yosef does not agree with the Gezeirah of Rabah when it comes to Megilah. The Turei Even writes that Rav Yosef agrees with the Gezeirah of Rabah concerning Shofar and Lulav, but he disagrees concerning Megilah. This is because Mikra Megilah is a Mitzvah d'Rabanan, so a person will not panic so much if he does not know how to read the Megilah and will not carry the Megilah four Amos in Reshus ha'Rabim to ask an expert to teach him how to read. Since Megilah is "only" a Mitzvh d'Rabanan, a person's psychology will be that clearly there is no point transgressing a Torah prohibition merely in order to fufil a Rabbinical Mitzvah. This, according to the Turei Even, is why Rav Yosef has to take resort to a different reason to that of Rabah to explain why one may not read the Megilah on Shabbos.
2) Cities with 600,000 inhabitants:-
(a) David, I think you have touched on the argument of the Mishnah Berurah in the Bi'ur Halachah (OC 345:7, DH v'Y'A). This is the famous Bi'ur Halachah which cites many Rishonim on each side of the question of whether 600,000 inhabitants is a necessary condition for a Reshus ha'Rabim mid'Oraisa. One of the arguments that the Bi'ur Halachah cites against the opinion that it is not Reshus ha'Rabim without 600,000 is the fact that Chazal made a Gezeirah not to blow the Shofar or read the Megilah when Rosh Hashanah or Purim falls on Shabbos. Chazal abolished a Torah Mitzvah (in the case of Shofar) and a Mitzvah d'Rabanan (in the case of Megilah) because of the concern that one might carry the Shofar or Megilah in Reshus ha'Rabim. The Bi'ur Halachah asks that if it is not Reshus ha'Rabim without 600,000, why would Chazal make a Takanah for such an usual city? (The Bi'ur Halachah writes that there is just one single city in the world with so many inhabitants!)
(b) I do not understand well the argument of the Bi'ur Halachah. It may be that the one city in the world with 600,000 that he refers to is Alexandria in Egypt, which the Gemara (Sukah 51b) says contained double the amount of Bnei Yisrael who came out of Mitzrayim. The Gemara (Gitin 57a) also tells us that King Yanai possessed cities with 600,000. Ancient Rome was also a massive city. It seems that there were cities in the time of Chazal with 600,000, not only Yerushalayim, so it does make sense to make a Gezeirah to prevent the Shofar from being carried on Shabbos in such cities.
3) The opinion of Raban Yochanan ben Zakai:
I will try and explain, bs'd, why Raban Yochanan ben Zakai permitted blowing the shofar on Shabbos, after the destruction of the Beis ha'Mikdash, in a place where there was a Beis Din.
(a) The first Mishnah in the fourth chapter of Rosh Hashanah states that when Rosh Hashanah fell on Shabbos they would blow the Shofar in the Beis ha'Mikdash but not outside the Beis ha'Mikdash. The Mishnah continues and says that after the destruction, Raban Yochanan ben Zakai made a Takanah that they should blow on Shabbos in any place where there is a Beis Din.
(b) The Talmud Yerushalmi, in Rosh Hashanah, explains the ruling that was made before the destruction on the basis of two seemingly contradictory verses. The first verse is in Bamidbar 29:1; it says that Rosh Hashanah is a "day of blowing." The second verse is in Vayikra 23:24 and states that Rosh Hashanah is a "rememberance of blowing." The Yerushalmi explains that when Rosh Hashanah falls on a weekday, it is a day of blowing. When it falls on Shabbos, it is a rememberance of blowing. On Shabbos we mention the blowing in our prayers but we do not actually blow.
(c) The Yerushalmi then asks that according to this we should say that in the Beis ha'Mikdash also on Shabbos it should only be a rememberance of the Shofar, not an actual blowing. The Yerushalmi answers that we learn from the verse "on the first of the month" (Vayikra 23:24) that in the Beis ha'Mikdash one blows even on Shabbos.
(d) It seems that "on the first of the month" is an extra verse which teaches that in the Beis ha'Mikdash one blows even on Shabbos. I want to suggest that Raban Yochanan ben Zakai learned that this extra verse applies not only to the Beis ha'Mikdash itself, but that after the destruction any place with a Beis Din was equivalent to the Beis ha'Mikdash, and therefore one may blow Shofar there.
(This answer is only a suggestion for the moment and needs further thought.)
(e) The Gezeirah of Rabah does not apply wherever there is a Beis Din, because the Beis Din will warn people that when Rosh Hashanah falls on Shabbos one may never carry the Shofar in the street. People have respect for the Beis Din and there is no reason to be worried that people will carry the Shofar in a place where there is respect for the learned.
Kol Tuv,
Dovid Bloom