Resources for Rosh Hashana daf 28

Daf A Week

Rabbi Yitzchok Gutterman

  1. The משנה says that if a person heard the שופר from outside a pit while the blower was inside the pit, he is not יוצא if he also heard a קול הברה. The גמרא asks why the person wasn’t יוצא with the קול heard before the sound got נתערב, and proceeds to prove from there that one must always hear the entire קול. See the רמב"ן here quoted by the ריטב"א who asks why the גמרא assumes there was a שיעור תקיעה before the קול was נתערב? He answers by saying קים להו לחז"ל that a person will always hear a שיעור תקיעה before the sound gets mixed up. See the רשב"א who disagrees and says that although the sound was too short with which to be יוצא, since there was in fact a valid שיעור תקיעה for those in the pit, it is enough to only hear part of it בהכשר. The נ"מ between these two approaches is that למסקנא, according to the רמב"ן, even when you hear a full שיעור תקיעה, if the שופר blower is still being מאריך for whatever reason and you leave before he finishes, you are not יוצא. According to the רשב"א, you are יוצא as long as you heard a שיעור תקיעה. These two opinions are brought in שו"ע סימן תקפּ"ז סעיף א. This may also be connected to the general concept discussed in העמק שאלה פּרשת יתרו of “מצוות expanding”. In other words, if a person did more than the minimum for a מצוה, such as eating more than a כזית of matzah on פּסח, does the entire אכילה have a status of מעשה מצוה or just the first כזית? The above מחלוקת ראשונים may be related to that discussion.

 

  1. The גמרא discusses the concept of מצוות לאו ליהנות ניתנו. רש"י explains that מצוות were given to be a burden (עול) and not for pleasure. See the ריטב"א who explains that although we receive reward for מצוות, the mitzvah is only a גורם for pleasure, but one does not derive pleasure from the גוף המצוה This is clear from the case of the person who becomes טהור with water from which he can’t benefit, whereas during the summer he can’t use that water to be טובל since he would get pleasure from the water itself. Yet, during the winter he can use the water although it makes him טהור since he will not enjoy the cold water. What seems clear from the ריטב"א and the גמרא itself is that if you get physical pleasure from doing a מצוה, מצוות לאו ליהנות נתנו will not help. However, see the שער המלך הלכות לולב, פּרק ח who proves that the רשב"א disagrees and holds you can even get physical pleasure from doing a מצוה that is אסור בהנאה. As far as our גמרא, he explains the issue is because the person will continue to get pleasure from the water even after the מצוה is completed. As far as why physical benefit should be allowed just because it’s also a מצוה, see the חידושי רב שמעון שקאפּ בנדרים סימן י"ב who says a יסוד that theאיסור of איסורי הנאה is not the הנאה it self, but rather the השתמשות להנאה. Therefore, if we can define this השתמשות as something you are compelled to do because of the מצוה and not a השתמשות להנאה, then the הנאה that comes ממילא is not a problem.

 

  1. The גמרא discusses the concept of מצוות צריכות כוונה. See the ריטב"א here who says that if we hold מצוות אין צריכות כוונה, then even if one yells and screams that he doesn’t want to be יוצא the מצוה, he is יוצא However, see the ר"ן דף ז: ד"ה אמנם who disagrees and says that even according to those who hold מצוות אין צריכות כוונה, if you have specific intent not to be יוצא, you are not יוצא. This is also the opinion of תוספות סוכה דף ל"ט ד"ה עובר who says that when you pick up the לולב to make a ברכה on it, it is still considerd עובר לעשייתן since you had in mind to not be יוצא until you made the ברכה.

*******************************

Click here to download daf summary by Rabbi Chaim Smulowitz (in PDF)

Click here to download Shaklya v'Tarya Summary by Rabbi Yaakov Blumenfeld (in PDF)