Shofar on Shabbat

Rosh Hashanah (4:1) | Yisrael Bankier | 8 months ago

The Mishnah (4:1) teaches that if Rosh Hashanah coincided with Shabbat, then they would only blow the shofar in the "mikdash", but not elsewhere. We shall try to understand this Mishnah.

The Bartenura explains that blowing the shofar is not a melacha. Nonetheless the Chachamim forbade it out of concern that one might end up carrying it in the public domain, thereby desecrating Shabbat. In the Beit HaMikdash however, such rabbinic prohibitions (shevutim) do not apply. This explanation is consistent with Rashi's understanding that the Mishnah is understood simply, and it was only in the Beit HaMikdash that the shofar was blow on Shabbat.

Interestingly, the Rambam however maintains that not only in the Beit HaMikdash was it permitted, but also throughout Yerushalaim. The Tifferet Yisrael (Yachin 2) explains that even in Yerushalim it is only permitted at the time the Sanhedrin was seated -- until midday. In other words, it was only when the fear of the Beit HaMikdash and Sanhedrin were present that the gezeira would not apply. Importantly, according to this understanding, it is the content that allays the concerns underpinning the gezeira, rather than a general rule that shevutim do not apply in the Beit HaMikdash.

The Tifferet Yisrael continues (Boaz 2) that we find this logic that a gezeira does not apply when there is fear present that will alleviate the concern, in other contexts also. For example, we learnt that one is not allowed to read by the light of an oil lamp, out of concern that they might tip it, thereby increasing the fuel to the wick. Doing so would increase the flame and violate the prohibition against kindling on Shabbat. However, if students are learning by their teacher or one is reading by the lamp on Yom Kippur, one is allowed due to the additional fear in that context.

The Tifferet Yisrael continues by addressing another question. Why only find this gezeira applies to the mitzvah of Shofar. Even for the mitzvah of lulav, the comparable gezeira was only after the time of the Beit HaMikdash. When it was standing however, the lulav was taken everywhere on the first day even if it coincided with Shabbat.

The Tifferet Yisrael explains that there was more of a reason to make the gezeira by shofar. Not everyone knows how to blow the shofar. Therefore the Chachamim's concern that a person would take it in order to be taught by someone else is real. This is somewhat similar to the explanation of the Tosfot (Rosh Hashanah 29b, s.v. aval) who explains that lulav is "tiltul be'alma" (simple handling) whereas shofar is a "maaseh chochma" (more skilled). The Tifferet Yisrael continues that a brit millah for example, is a case where very few people know how to perform the mitzvah, yet it can be performed on Shabbat. He provides two answers. One is that shofar is different since everyone is preoccupied with the mitzvah. Consequently, we cannot assumed that someone else will stop him from desecrating Shabbat. Alternatively, with respect to brit millah, those that perform the mitzvah are well trained, so there is no reason to make the gezeira.

After the destruction however, we find that shofar is more lenient than lulav. In other words, while lulav is not taken at all, the Mishnah teaches that the shofar was blown in a place that had a Beit Din. The Tosfot explain that since the shofar is effective in raising the merits of Yisrael before Hashem, the Chachamim did not want to completely forbid blowing the shofar.

Based on this, perhaps we can suggest another explanation why this gezeira only applied to the mitzvah of shofar. Considering the importance of Rosh Hashanah and the role of the shofar, the concern that one would desperately try and fulfill the mitzvah while running the risk of desecrating Shabbat is heightened. That is of course unless, as the Tifferet Yisrael explained, one is not in the context to ensure that their actions are kept in check.¹

¹ One could suggest that this is also why the concern regarding lulav is heightened after the destruction. As we have learnt, it is during sukkot that we are judged for rain. Also, we know that there is an association between shaking the lulav and rain (see Sukkah 37b). Perhaps then, it is after the destruction, when there is no longer the nissuch ha'mayim, that one may feel more desperate to full the mitzvah of lulav that the concern is heightened and the gezeira preventing fulfilling the mitzvah would apply.

Download