12th CYCLE DEDICATIONS
 
ROSH HASHANAH 26-30 - Dedicated Dr. Shalom Kelman of Baltimore, MD. May the Zechus of helping thousands study the Torah provide a Refu'ah Sheleimah for his father, Dr. Herbert (Isser Chayim ben Itta Fruma) Kelman.

1)

(a)What does Rav Huna mean when he adds, with regard to the 'Amru Lo', who permit blowing in any town with a fixed Beis Din, 've'Im Beis Din'?

(b)Rav Huna queries Rav Huna from our Mishnah 've'Od Zos Hayesah Yerushalayim Yeseirah al Yavneh', suggesting an extra leniency (over and above the fact that Yavneh requires a Beis Din). Why could he not possibly have meant that, whereas in Yerushalayim, every individual had to blow, in Yavneh, the Beis Din blew for everyone? Did Rav Yitzchak bar Yosef say?

(c)How does Rava therefore explain our Mishnah, in a way that will disprove Rav Huna's ruling?

(d)How do we reconcile Rav Huna with the Mishnah? What might the Tana mean that conforms with his ruling?

1)

(a)When, with regard to the 'Amru Lo', who permit blowing in any town with a fixed Beis Din, Rav Huna adds 've'Im Beis Din' - he means that they must blow in front of Beis Din.

(b)Rav Huna queries Rav Huna from our Mishnah 've'Od Zos Hayesah Yerushalayim Yeseirah al Yavneh', suggesting an extra leniency (over and above the fact that Yavneh requires a Beis Din). He could not possibly have meant that, whereas in Yerushalayim, every individual had to blow (on Shabbos), in Yavneh, the Beis Din blew for everyone - because of the testimony of Rav Yitzchak bar Yosef, who described how so many people blew after the Shali'ach Tzibur had blown, that one could not hear oneself breathing. Clearly then, every individual was obligated to blow in Yavneh, too.

(c)Rava therefore explains the Tana to mean that, whereas in Yerushalayim, they blew at any time of day, in Yavneh they only blew when Beis Din was in session (from which we can infer 'but not necessarily in front of Beis Din' [a Kashya on Rav Huna]).

(d)We reconcile Rav Huna with the Mishnah however - by explaining it to mean that, whereas in Yerushalayim they could blow anywhere (even not in front of Beis Din), in Yavneh they had to blow in front of Beis Din (conforming with the statement of Rav Huna).

2)

(a)Others quote Rav Huna in connection with the Beraisa which, commenting on the Pasuk "b'Yom ha'Kipurim Ta'aviru Shofar b'Chol Artzechem", explains that it is 'to teach us that every individual is obligated to blow Shofar on Yom Kippur of the Yovel'; to which Rav Huna adds 've'Im Beis Din'. What does Rav Huna mean by that?

(b)The Tana of the Beraisa obligates blowing the Shofar on Shabbos Yom Kippur of the Yovel, adding 'Ish u'Veiso'. Why can this not mean that his wife is obligated to blow too?

(c)Then what does it mean? How do we therefore emend the phrase?

(d)Does this also incorporate times when Beis Din are not in session?

2)

(a)Others quote Rav Huna in connection with the Beraisa which, commenting on the Pasuk "b'Yom ha'Kipurim Ta'aviru Shofar b'Chol Artzechem", explains that it is 'to teach us that every individual is obligated to blow Shofar on Yom Kippur of the Yovel'; to which Rav Huna adds 've'Im Beis Din'- by which he means at the time when Beis Din are in session (but not necessarily in front of Beis Din).

(b)The Tana of the Beraisa obligates blowing the Shofar on Shabbos Yom Kippur of the Yovel, adding 'Ish u'Veiso'. This cannot mean that his wife is obligated to blow too - because women are not obligated to observe the Mitzvos that are time-related.

(c)'We therefore emend the phrase 'Ish u'Veiso' to read 'Ish b'Veiso' - meaning that it is not necessary to blow in front of Beis Din.

(d)This does not incorporate times when Beis Din are not in session - when one is not permitted to blow on Shabbos in the Yovel.

3)

(a)In listing the differences between Yovel and Rosh Hashanah, the Tana writes that, whereas in Yovel, even the individuals had to blow, on Rosh Hashanah, they did not. Why can this statement not be understood literally?

(b)So how do we initially explain the Beraisa (resulting in a Kashya on Rav Huna)?

(c)How do we finally interpret it, to vindicate both versions of Rav Huna's statement?

3)

(a)In listing the differences between Yovel and Rosh Hashanah, the Tana writes that, whereas in Yovel, even the individuals had to blow, on Rosh Hashanah, they did not. This statement cannot be understood literally - because of the same episode (of Rav Yitzchak bar Yosef's testimony) that we mentioned earlier, where many individuals blew in Yavneh.

(b)So we initially explain the Beraisa to mean - that in Yovel, the individuals would blow even when Beis Din was not in session (a Kashya on Rav Huna), whereas on Rosh Hashanah (in Yavneh) they would blow only when they were.

(c)We finally interpret it to mean - that whereas in the Yovel, individuals would blow whether they were in front of Beis Din or not (though Beis Din did have to be in session), on Rosh Hashanah, they would only blow in front of Beis Din (vindicating both versions of Rav Huna).

4)

(a)Rebbi Zeira asks whether one will be Yotzei if he blows in Yavneh on Shabbos (either on Rosh Hashanah or on Yom Kippur of the Yovel) after the Beis Din have already closed court and are preparing to get up and leave. What are the two sides of the unresolved She'eilah?

4)

(a)Rebbi Zeira asks whether one will be Yotzei if he blows in Yavneh on Shabbos (either on Rosh Hashanah or on Yom Kippur of the Yovel) after the Beis Din have already closed court and are preparing to get up and leave - since on the one hand, Beis Din are still sitting, but on the other, they have already closed court.

5)

(a)What is the Torah's time-frame regarding ...

1. ... the Mitzvah of Lulav?

2. ... the prohibition of rating Chadash, when there is no Beis Hamikdash?

(b)What Takanah did Raban Yochanan ben Zakai institute with regard to ...

1. ... the Mitzvah of Lulav?

2. ... Chadash (new crops)?

(c)What do we learn from the Pasuk in Yirmeyahu "Ki A'aleh Aruchah Lach ... Tziyon Hi Doresh Ein Lah"?

(d)For which of the above does this serve as a source?

5)

(a)The Torah's time-frame regarding ...

1. ... the Mitzvah of Lulav - is seven days (until Hosha'ana Rabah) in the Beis Hamidkash and one day (the first day of Sukos) outside the Beis Hamikdash.

2. ... the prohibition of rating Chadash, when there is no Beis Hamikdash is - until dawn-break of the sixteenth of Nisan (the day when the Omer was brought in the Beis Hamikdash).

(b)Raban Yochanan ben Zakai instituted that ...

1. ... one should take Lulav - all seven days even when there is no Beis Hamikdash.

2. ... one may not eat Chadash until the seventeenth of Nisan (although min ha'Torah, when the Beis Hamikdash is not standing, it is already permitted on the morning of the sixteenth).

(c)We learn from the Pasuk in Yirmeyahu "Ki A'a'leh Aruchah Lach ... Tziyon Hi Doresh Ein Lah" - that one needs to do things to commemorate the Beis Hamikdash.

(d)This serves as a source - for the first Takanah (i.e. to take Lulav all seven days even when there is no Beis Hamikdash)).

6)

(a)Why did Raban Yochanan ben Zakai forbid eating Chadash on the sixteenth of Nisan?

(b)Why can his concern not have been that the Beis Hamikdash will be built ...

1. ... on the sixteenth of Nisan?

2. ... on or before the fifteenth?

(c)Then what is his concern? When might it be built?

(d)How can we contend with the possibility that the Beis Hamikdash might be built on Shabbos or at night-time, seeing as we are not permitted to build it on Shabbos or at night-time?

6)

(a)Raban Yochanan ben Zakai forbade eating Chadash on the sixteenth of Nisan - in case the Beis Hamikdash will be rebuilt the following year, and people will say that, in the same way as they ate last year on the morning of the sixteenth, so too, will they be permitted to eat this year (without realizing that, this year, when there is a Beis Hamikdash, they are obligated to wait until the Korban Omer has been brought.

(b)Raban Yochanan cannot have been concerned that perhaps the Beis Hamikdash will be built ...

1. ... on the sixteenth of Nisan - because, in that case, what is the problem, seeing as Chadash will in fact have become permitted already from the morning.

2. ... on or before the fifteenth - because then, why would he have forbidden Chadash until the seventeenth? He should have permitted it already from mid-day of the sixteenth, from which time on, it is always permitted anyway (even when the Omer is brought) because we assume that, by then, the Kohanim (who are alert) will have already brought the Omer, permitting Chadash!?

(c)Raban Yochanan's concern is - that maybe it will be built some time between dusk of the night following the fifteenth up to the morning, delaying the cutting of the barley for the Omer, and forcing the Omer to be delayed, perhaps even until after mid-day (due to the lengthy processes connected with the reaping, heating, grinding, sifting and offering of the barley).

(d)We contend with the possibility that the Beis Hamikdash might be built on Shabbos or at night-time, despite the fact that we are not permitted to build it on Shabbos or at night-time - because that is confined to the previous Batei-Mikdash that were built by man, whereas the third Beis Hamikdash will come down already built (out of fire - as we say in 'Nachem' on Tish'ah b'Av) by Hash-m. That can take place even on Shabbos, and even at night-time.

30b----------------------------------------30b

7)

(a)According to Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak, Raban Yochanan ben Zakai forbids eating Chadash on the sixteenth of Nisan min ha'Torah, like (his grand-Talmid's Talmid) Rebbi Yehudah. From which Pasuk do they derive it?

(b)Upon which important principle does this interpretation of the Pasuk depend?

(c)But did Rebbi Yehudah himself not ask how, according to Raban Yochanan ben Zakai, the prohibition can be mid'Rabanan, when really it ought to be mid'Oraisa? Clearly then, the two opinions clash?

(d)Then why did the Tana of our Mishnah write 'Hiskin Raban Yochanan ben Zakai'? Does this not imply that it is only mid'Rabanan?

7)

(a)According to Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak, Raban Yochanan ben Zakai forbids eating Chadash on the sixteenth of Nisan min ha'Torah, like (his grand-Talmid's Talmid) Rebbi Yehudah - who learns this from the Pasuk in Emor (regarding the prohibition of Chadash) "ad Etzem ha'Yom ha'Zeh".

(b)This interpretation of the Pasuk depends upon the principle 'Ad v'ad bi'Ch'lal' - meaning that the word "Ad" is inclusive, and therefore includes the sixteenth in the prohibition.

(c)When Rebbi Yehudah himself asked how, according to Raban Yochanan ben Zakai, the prohibition can be mi'de'Rabanan, when really it ought to be mid'Oraisa, he did so - because he misunderstood Raban Yochanan ben Zakai, says Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak. The truth of the matter is, that Raban Yochanan meant to say exactly what Rebbi Yehudah is saying.

(d)And when the Tana of our Mishnah writes Hiskin Raban Yochanan ben Zakai - he does not mean literally 'Hiskin', (mid'Rabanan, as the term usually implies - which presumably, is also the source of Rebbi Yehudah's misunderstanding). What he means is that he Darshened the Pasuk, and instituted the Isur (since, until then, they had ruled that the Omer had permitted Chadash from mid-day onwards).

8)

(a)And which Takanah did Raban Yochanan institute with regard to receiving the witnesses all day (on Rosh Chodesh Tishrei)?

(b)What happened once when the witnesses came after Minchah?

(c)What Takanah had Chazal instituted until Raban Yochanan ben Zakai came and rescinded it after the Churban?

8)

(a)Raban Yochanan also instituted that Beis Din were permitted to receive the witnesses all day (on Rosh Chodesh Tishrei) - even after Minchah.

(b)It happened once when the witnesses came after Minchah - that the Leviyim did not sing the right Shir for the Tamid shel Bein ha'Arbayim.

(c)Chazal had instituted - that, if the witnesses arrived after the Korban Tamid shel Bein ha'Arbayim had been brought, they would not be accepted.

9)

(a)In Bavel, they explained the error that occurred that year, to have been the fact that the Leviyim did not sing Shirah at all. What does Rebbi Zeira say?

(b)Rebbi Zeira quoted a Beraisa, which he instructed his son Ahavah to show the Bnei Bavel: 'They instituted not to receive the witnesses after Minchah, in order that there should be sufficient time in the day to bring the Temidin, the Musafin and the drink-offerings without mishap'. What was Rebbi Zeira trying to prove from there?

(c)How do we refute his proof?

9)

(a)In Bavel, they explained the error that occurred that year, to have been the fact that the Leviyim did not sing Shirah at all. But according to Rebbi Zeira, based on the assumption that the witnesses would no longer arrive - they sang the regular weekday Shirah.

(b)Rebbi Zeira quoted a Beraisa, which he instructed his son Ahavah to show the Bnei Bavel: 'They instituted not to receive the witnesses after Minchah, in order that there should be sufficient time in the day to bring the Temidin, the Musafin and the drink-offerings without mishap'. The term "without mishap', he thought, implies that, unlike the Leviyim on that fateful day, who sang the wrong Shir, they took steps to ensure that they would in future, sing it without mishap!

(c)We refute his proof - by pointing out that there is no bigger mishap than not singing the Shir at all.

10)

(a)Which Shir would the Leviyim generally sing on the morning of the thirtieth of Elul? Why is that?

(b)What would they sing ...

1. ... for the Tamid shel Shachar of Rosh Hashanah (assuming it was Thursday morning and the witnesses had already arrived)?

2. ... for the Musaf of Rosh Hashanah?

3. ... for the Tamid shel Bein ha'Arbayim?

4. ... for the Tamid shel Shachar (assuming the witnesses had not yet arrived)?

(c)What is the reason for the first of these rulings?

(d)Then what is the reason for the last ruling?

10)

(a)On the morning of the thirtieth of Elul - the Leviyim would generally sing the regular Shir of whichever day it was, due to the fact that a. the witnesses had not usually arrived by then, and b. it may not even turn out to be Rosh Hashanah at all. Consequently, Chazal fixed the ordinary weekday Shir for then (as long as the witnesses did not in fact, arrive earlier).

(b)They would sing ...

1. ... for the Tamid shel Shachar of Rosh Hashanah (assuming it was Thursday morning and the witnesses had already arrived) - "Hasirosi".

2. ... for the Musaf of Rosh Hashanah - "Harninu" ().

3. ... for the Tamid shel Bein ha'Arbayim) - "Kol Hash-m Yachil Midbar" (i.e. "Mizmor l'David; Havu la'Hashem Bnei Eilim").

4. ... at Shacharis, if the witnesses and not yet arrived when they brought the Tamid shel Shachar, and it was a Thursday morning - "Harninu".

(c)The reason for the first ruling is - in order to avoid repeating the same Shir twice on the same day (once at Shacharis and once at Musaf), where it can be avoided.

(d)And the reason for the last ruling is - because it is unavoidable.

11)

(a)How do we attempt to prove Rebbi Zeira right from this Beraisa?

(b)How will the Bnei Bavel refute this proof?

11)

(a)We attempt to prove Rebbi Zeira right from this Beraisa - because we see (from the last case), that it is preferable to bring a Korban that might turn out to be the wrong one, rather than apply the principle 'Shev v'Al Ta'aseh Adif'?

(b)The Bnei Bavel will refute this proof however - based on the fact that the Shir that they actually sing on Thursday morning is appropriate even on Rosh Hashanah; whereas the Shir of the Tamid shel Bein ha'Arbayim of Chol is not. Consequently, maybe there, the Tana of the Beraisa will agree that it is better to remain silent.

OTHER D.A.F. RESOURCES
ON THIS DAF