The Gem is mesupak if 30 people were needed in total for the 3 kitohs in total, or wether 30 people were needed for each kitah.
The Maharsha asks, that acc to Abaye the doors closed automatically to make sure that there would always be enough people left for 3 kitos, why is there a sofek of 30 in 1 or 30 in 3 acc.to how you learn the posuk. If it means 30 in 1 why would the doors ever close between the kitos?!
In other words, let the doors be moychiach the Gemorah's sofek!
But if the walls of the Beis Hamedrash could not be moychiach like R' Eliezer,-- are doors smarter than walls?!
Although the Maharsha doesn't answer his question; he does say "v'yesh Leyashev".
What would be the answer?
Alex lebovits, Toronto, canada
To answer your first question, the grounds for the Maharsha's question is a fundamental difference between what happened with R' Eliezer and the Gemara's Safek. In the case of R' Eliezer, the Halachah was clearly not like him based on the Pasuk of "Acharei Rabim l'Hatos." A Siman Min ha'Shamayim cannot change that Pasuk. In this case, the Maharsha's question is that if we are unsure of what the Halachah is and have no information one way or the other, let us use the Azarah doors to reveal the answer.
The answer to the Maharsha's question might be based on an answer I gave to a previous discussion list question on Pesachim (34). There I quoted Rashi's statement in Eiruvin (45a, DH "Harei Shmuel") that the Urim v'Tumim which were present in the Choshen (during the first Bayis) were not used to ask Halachic questions, but rather to give advice. The Tzoan Kodshim in Temurah (16a, see at length) explains that this is due to the concept of "Lo ba'Shamayim Hi." It seems that this was even in a case of pure Safek, and even so the Chachamim did not want to decide a Halchic question based on nothing less than the Urim v'Tumim. It is therefore possible that this would also be ruled out as concluding the Gemara's Safek. Although it is possible to differentiate between the two cases, this could be the angle of the Maharsha's "v'Yesh l'Yashev."
Chag Kasher v'Sameach,